The BRICS Alliance: A Comprehensive History, Challenges, and U.S. Relations

Introduction

The BRICS alliance, currently comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, the United Arab Emirates, and Indonesia, has become a significant force in global economics and geopolitics. As of June 26, 2025, BRICS accounts for approximately 46% of global GDP and 55% of the world’s population, including partner countries. Initially formed as BRIC in 2001 to highlight emerging economies, it evolved into BRICS with South Africa’s inclusion in 2010 and has since expanded to challenge Western-dominated institutions like the IMF and World Bank. Its growth has sparked tensions, notably with the United States, with claims of threats from the U.S. president. This article provides a detailed, chronological exploration of BRICS’ formation, expansion, leadership, challenges, and the context of alleged U.S. threats, addressing misconceptions about dissolution and leadership dynamics.

2001: The Genesis of BRIC

The BRICS story began in 2001 when Jim O’Neill, a Goldman Sachs economist, coined the term “BRIC” (Brazil, Russia, India, China) in his report Building Better Global Economic BRICs. O’Neill identified these four nations as emerging economic powerhouses, projecting they could surpass G7 economies by 2050 due to their large populations, resource wealth, and growth potential. At this stage, BRIC was an analytical concept, not a political alliance, but it resonated with policymakers, particularly in Russia, which saw an opportunity to formalize cooperation.

The report highlighted Brazil’s agricultural and mineral resources, Russia’s energy reserves, India’s demographic dividend and IT sector, and China’s manufacturing dominance. This conceptual framework laid the foundation for BRIC’s transformation into a geopolitical entity, emphasizing a shift in global economic power toward the Global South.

2006: Formalizing BRIC

In 2006, Russia spearheaded the transition of BRIC from an economic concept to an intergovernmental platform. During the G8 Outreach Summit in St. Petersburg, leaders of Brazil, Russia, India, and China held an informal meeting. Later that year, their foreign ministers met on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York, agreeing to establish BRIC as a forum for economic and diplomatic coordination. The group aimed to advocate for global governance reform, enhance trade, and challenge the dominance of Western-led institutions.

This formalization marked BRIC’s entry into geopolitics. The four nations shared a desire to amplify their global influence, but their diverse political systems—democratic Brazil and India, authoritarian Russia and China—foreshadowed challenges in aligning priorities. The absence of a formal treaty or secretariat gave BRIC flexibility but required consensus-based decision-making, a structure that persists in BRICS today.

2009: The First BRIC Summit

The first BRIC summit, held on June 16, 2009, in Yekaterinburg, Russia, solidified the group’s status as a geopolitical entity. Attended by Brazil’s President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, Russia’s President Dmitry Medvedev, India’s Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, and China’s President Hu Jintao, the summit addressed the 2008 financial crisis, climate change, and the need for reform in international financial institutions. A joint statement called for a more equitable global order, emphasizing greater representation for emerging economies.

The 2009 summit established annual summits with a rotating chairmanship, allowing each member to shape the agenda. It positioned BRIC as a counterweight to Western dominance, though internal differences, such as India’s preference for economic cooperation over anti-Western rhetoric, were evident. The summit marked BRIC’s ambition to reshape global governance.

2010: South Africa’s Inclusion, Forming BRICS

In September 2010, South Africa was invited to join BRIC during a foreign ministers’ meeting in New York. South Africa’s membership was formalized at the third summit in Sanya, China, in April 2011, officially renaming the group BRICS. The original five members—Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa—represented 42% of the global population and 26% of GDP, establishing BRICS as a voice for the Global South.

South Africa’s inclusion expanded BRICS’ reach to Africa, enhancing its legitimacy as a representative of developing nations. However, its smaller economy ($419 billion GDP in 2010 vs. China’s $6 trillion) sparked debates about its fit. Some argued South Africa was added to balance China’s influence and secure African representation. This expansion set a precedent for future growth, introducing new complexities in aligning priorities.

2014: Establishment of the New Development Bank

A pivotal achievement for BRICS occurred at the sixth summit in Fortaleza, Brazil, in July 2014, with the creation of the New Development Bank (NDB). Headquartered in Shanghai, the NDB was designed to finance infrastructure and sustainable development projects, offering an alternative to the IMF and World Bank. Each member contributed $10 billion to the initial $50 billion capital, with equal voting rights to prevent dominance, particularly by China.

The NDB has funded projects like solar energy in India, rail infrastructure in Brazil, and water management in South Africa. By 2025, it plans to disburse $15 billion in loans, reinforcing BRICS’ economic influence. The Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA), a $100 billion liquidity pool, supports members during financial crises. These institutions highlight BRICS’ ambition to build parallel financial systems, though their global reach remains limited compared to Western counterparts due to scale and bureaucratic delays.

2015-2021: Deepening Cooperation

From 2015 to 2021, BRICS strengthened its economic and diplomatic ties through annual summits, addressing trade, technology, and global governance. Key milestones included:

• 2015 (Ufa, Russia): Focus on digital economy and cybersecurity, reflecting Russia’s priorities.
• 2017 (Xiamen, China): China introduced “BRICS Plus,” inviting non-members to summits to expand influence.
• 2020 (Virtual, Russia): Coordination on COVID-19, including vaccine development and economic recovery.

Intra-BRICS trade surged 56% from 2017 to 2022, reaching $1.2 trillion annually. The group advocated for local currency trade to reduce U.S. dollar reliance, though efforts like India-Russia rupee-ruble trade faced currency conversion challenges. Diplomatic initiatives included calls for UN Security Council reform, with India and Brazil seeking permanent seats, though China’s reluctance created tensions.

Internal challenges emerged, notably the 2020 China-India border clash in Ladakh, which killed 20 Indian and four Chinese soldiers. This strained relations, with India resisting China’s dominance in BRICS initiatives like the NDB. Brazil and South Africa prioritized economic benefits over geopolitical alignment, highlighting the group’s diversity.

2022: Ukraine Invasion and BRICS Unity

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 tested BRICS’ cohesion. Western sanctions, including Russia’s exclusion from the SWIFT financial system, isolated Moscow. BRICS members responded differently:

• China boosted trade with Russia, reaching $190 billion in 2022, up 30% from 2021.
• India remained neutral, increasing Russian oil imports (from 2% to 20% of its supply) while deepening Western ties via the Quad.
• Brazil and South Africa avoided condemning Russia but faced U.S. and EU pressure to align with sanctions.

The invasion exposed BRICS’ limitations as a unified bloc. The International Criminal Court’s (ICC) March 2023 arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin complicated his attendance at the 2023 Johannesburg summit, hosted by South Africa, an ICC member. South Africa allowed virtual participation, navigating diplomatic tensions. This episode underscored the geopolitical balancing act BRICS members undertake.

2023: Expansion and Argentina’s Withdrawal

The 15th BRICS summit in Johannesburg, South Africa, from August 22-24, 2023, hosted by President Cyril Ramaphosa, marked a significant expansion. Six countries were invited to join: Argentina, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. The decision aimed to bolster BRICS’ global clout, with new members adding 11% to its GDP and 9% to its population share.

In November 2023, Argentina, under President Javier Milei, withdrew its application. Milei’s government prioritized alignment with the U.S., aiming to reduce economic dependence on China and avoid cooperation with Russia due to ideological differences. Argentina’s exit highlighted geopolitical fault lines, with some nations wary of BRICS’ perceived anti-Western tilt.

The 2023 summit saw debates over China’s push for rapid expansion, with India and Brazil concerned about diluting cohesion. The inclusion of rival nations (Egypt-Ethiopia, Iran-UAE) prioritized economic unity over geopolitical harmony, setting the stage for future challenges.

2024: New Members and Partner Countries

On January 1, 2024, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, and the United Arab Emirates officially joined BRICS, increasing membership to nine. Saudi Arabia, invited in 2023, has not formalized membership as of June 2025, balancing U.S. security ties with BRICS engagement.

The 16th BRICS summit in Kazan, Russia, from October 22-24, 2024, hosted by President Vladimir Putin, introduced a “partner country” category. Thirteen nations—Algeria, Belarus, Bolivia, Cuba, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Nigeria, Thailand, Turkey, Uganda, Uzbekistan, and Vietnam—were invited to engage in BRICS initiatives without full membership. This expanded BRICS’ reach, with BRICS+ (members and partners) representing 55% of the global population and 46% of GDP, surpassing the G7’s 31%.

The Kazan summit focused on de-dollarization, NDB expansion, and global governance reform. Proposals for a BRICS currency and UN Security Council reform stalled due to disagreements, reflecting the challenge of consensus with a larger membership. Putin’s mediation of China-India talks underscored BRICS’ diplomatic role.

2025: Indonesia’s Membership and Brazil’s Presidency

On January 6, 2025, Indonesia, under President Prabowo Subianto, became the 10th full member, following its 2023 approval and post-2024 election finalization. Indonesia’s inclusion added a major Southeast Asian economy and the world’s third-largest democracy, strengthening BRICS’ global representation.

In 2025, Brazil, under President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, assumed the BRICS presidency, with the 17th summit planned for Rio de Janeiro in July. Lula’s agenda emphasizes Global South priorities: sustainable development, climate finance, and inclusive governance. Brazil aims to bridge divides between anti-Western members (Russia, China, Iran) and those favoring broader engagement (India, South Africa, UAE), reinforcing BRICS’ role as a dialogue platform.

Current Membership and Leadership (June 26, 2025)

• Full Members (10): Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, United Arab Emirates, Indonesia.
• Partner Countries (13): Algeria, Belarus, Bolivia, Cuba, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Nigeria, Thailand, Turkey, Uganda, Uzbekistan, Vietnam.
• Leadership: BRICS operates with a rotating chairmanship, with no permanent head. Current leaders are:
  • Brazil: President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (2025 chair)
  • Russia: President Vladimir Putin
  • India: Prime Minister Narendra Modi
  • China: President Xi Jinping
  • South Africa: President Cyril Ramaphosa
  • Egypt: President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi
  • Ethiopia: Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed
  • Iran: President Masoud Pezeshkian
  • United Arab Emirates: President Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan
  • Indonesia: President Prabowo Subianto

Challenges Facing BRICS

BRICS is not dissolving, but it faces internal and external challenges that test its effectiveness:

Internal Divisions

• Political Diversity: BRICS includes democracies (Brazil, India, South Africa, Indonesia) and authoritarian regimes (China, Russia, Iran), leading to divergent priorities. Brazil and India prioritize economic cooperation, while Russia, China, and Iran emphasize anti-Western policies.
• Geopolitical Rivalries: The China-India border dispute (ongoing since 2020) strains relations, with India resisting China’s dominance in the NDB and expansion decisions. Egypt and Ethiopia clash over the Nile River’s Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam, while Iran and the UAE have regional tensions.
• Consensus-Based Decision-Making: With 10 members and 13 partners, unanimous agreement is complex. The 2024 Kazan summit’s failure to advance a BRICS currency or UN Security Council reform illustrates this challenge.

External Pressures

• Western Engagement: The U.S. and EU engage BRICS members bilaterally, diluting unity. India’s Quad membership, Brazil’s U.S. trade ties, and the UAE’s Western security partnerships create competing alignments.
• Sanctions on Russia: Post-2022 Ukraine invasion sanctions isolate Russia, pressuring members like India and Brazil to balance relations. The ICC warrant for Putin complicated his 2023 summit participation.
• Dollar Dominance: BRICS’ local currency trade initiatives (e.g., rupee-ruble trade) face hurdles, with the U.S. dollar accounting for 88% of global transactions via SWIFT. A BRICS currency is deemed infeasible due to economic disparities.

Expansion Risks

Expansion enhances BRICS’ global reach but risks fragmentation. Iran strengthens the anti-Western faction, while Egypt, the UAE, and Indonesia maintain Western ties, creating a balancing act. Rivalries among members (e.g., China-India, Egypt-Ethiopia) prioritize economic unity over geopolitical cohesion, complicating consensus.

Addressing Dissolution Claims

Claims that BRICS is “demolishing” are unfounded. Evidence of its resilience includes:

• Membership Growth: From 5 members in 2010 to 10 in 2025, with 13 partners and over 30 countries expressing interest.
• Economic Weight: BRICS+ accounts for 46% of global GDP, surpassing the G7’s 31%, and 55% of the world’s population.
• Institutional Progress: The NDB’s $15 billion loan plan and 56% intra-BRICS trade growth (2017-2022) demonstrate economic vitality.
• Global Influence: The 2024 Kazan summit and Brazil’s 2025 presidency emphasize Global South leadership, with priorities like climate finance and inclusive governance.

Speculative dissolution narratives may stem from Western concerns or misinterpretations of internal debates. A 2023 Gallup poll showed polarized perceptions: Western nations (e.g., U.S., Sweden) view BRICS negatively, while Global South countries (e.g., Nigeria, Iran) are positive. These views exaggerate challenges as existential threats.

Are Leaders Surrendering?

There is no evidence of BRICS leaders “surrendering.” The term likely reflects misinterpretations of geopolitical shifts:

• Argentina’s Withdrawal (2023): President Javier Milei’s exit was a strategic realignment with the U.S., not surrender, aiming to reduce China’s influence and avoid Russia’s orbit.
• India Speculation: Unverified X posts in June 2025 claimed China and Russia discussed removing India, citing its Western ties (e.g., Quad). These lack credible sources and contradict India’s active role, including Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s 2024 Kazan summit participation and planned 2025 attendance.
• Unrelated Context: A 2023 Reuters article mentioned U.S. President Donald Trump’s call for Iran’s “unconditional surrender” in the Israel-Iran conflict, unrelated to BRICS but possibly misconstrued after Iran’s 2024 membership.

BRICS leaders navigate complex dynamics:

• China (Xi Jinping): Positions BRICS as a platform for Chinese leadership, facing resistance from India and Brazil.
• India (Modi): Balances BRICS with Western partnerships, maintaining strategic autonomy.
• Russia (Putin): Uses BRICS to counter Western isolation, mediating China-India talks in 2024.
• Brazil (Lula): Prioritizes Global South interests in 2025, fostering inclusivity.

U.S. President’s Alleged Threats to BRICS

Claims that the U.S. president threatened BRICS nations lack direct evidence as of June 26, 2025, but U.S.-BRICS tensions are evident. Below, we analyze the context, potential sources, and implications.

Context of U.S.-BRICS Tensions

The U.S. views BRICS as a challenge to its global dominance, particularly due to Russia and China’s roles:

• Economic Competition: BRICS’ de-dollarization efforts and the NDB threaten the U.S. dollar’s 88% share of global transactions. A 2024 U.S. Treasury report noted potential long-term risks if BRICS scales these initiatives.
• Geopolitical Rivalry: Russia leverages BRICS to evade post-2022 sanctions, while China aligns it with its Belt and Road Initiative, particularly through Iran and Ethiopia.
• Global South Appeal: With 30+ countries seeking membership, BRICS challenges U.S. influence in Africa, Asia, and Latin America.

Potential Sources of “Threat” Claims

No official statement from President Donald Trump (re-elected in 2024) explicitly threatens BRICS collectively. Related incidents may fuel this perception:

• Howard Lutnick’s Statement (June 2025): U.S. official Howard Lutnick urged India to reconsider BRICS membership, citing misalignment with U.S.-India strategic goals. Reported by Bloomberg in June 2025, this was amplified on X, with some interpreting it as a veiled threat. Lutnick’s comments targeted India, not BRICS broadly, and were advisory.
• Sanctions and Trade Pressure: U.S. sanctions on Russia and secondary sanctions on firms dealing with Russia indirectly affect BRICS members. In 2024, the U.S. cautioned India against expanding Russia trade, which X posts framed as a “threat” to BRICS unity.
• Trump’s Iran Rhetoric (2023): A 2023 Reuters article quoted Trump calling for Iran’s “unconditional surrender” in the Israel-Iran conflict, unrelated to BRICS but possibly misconstrued after Iran’s 2024 membership.
• Speculative X Posts: June 2025 posts claimed U.S. threats over a BRICS currency, lacking credible sources and contradicting expert views that such a currency is impractical.

Why the U.S. Opposes BRICS

The U.S. counters BRICS due to:

• De-Dollarization: BRICS’ local currency trade (e.g., 5% of India-Russia trade in rupees) challenges the dollar’s dominance, though limited in scale.
• Russia and China’s Influence: BRICS serves as a platform for Russia to bypass sanctions and China to expand its BRI.
• Global Governance: BRICS’ push for UN Security Council reform threatens U.S. influence.
• Strategic Realignment: The U.S. engages India, Brazil, and the UAE bilaterally to dilute BRICS’ anti-Western tilt.

Analysis of “Threat” Claims

The lack of direct evidence suggests “threats” are exaggerated U.S. diplomatic and economic pressures. Lutnick’s statement was India-specific and advisory, not a threat to BRICS. Sanctions and trade warnings are standard U.S. tools, not unique to BRICS. Speculative X posts amplify these into hostility narratives, reflecting polarized perceptions.

U.S. actions indirectly pressure BRICS:

• Economic Leverage: Sanctions on Russia and Chinese firms signal consequences for anti-Western alignment.
• Diplomatic Efforts: U.S. critiques of the NDB at 2024 IMF meetings highlight its limited reach.
• Military Signaling: Indo-Pacific naval exercises targeting China indirectly signal resolve to BRICS members.

Implications

Perceived threats could:

• Unify Anti-Western Members: Strengthen Russia, China, and Iran’s resolve.
• Fragment BRICS: Push India, Brazil, and the UAE toward Western ties.
• Strain Relations: Risk alienating India, a key U.S. partner.

The U.S. should address Global South concerns (e.g., climate finance) to reduce BRICS’ appeal, rather than relying on pressure.

Critical Perspective

BRICS is a dialogue platform, not a cohesive anti-Western bloc. Its diversity enhances its Global South appeal but limits unity. Economic achievements (NDB, trade growth) are notable, but geopolitical goals (de-dollarization, UN reform) face barriers. Dissolution and “surrender” claims reflect Western fears, not reality. U.S. opposition, while not overt threats, requires diplomatic engagement to navigate BRICS’ rise.

Conclusion

From its 2001 BRIC origins to its 2025 status as a 10-member BRICS alliance with 13 partners, BRICS has reshaped global dynamics. Its expansions and institutions like the NDB reflect ambitions for a multipolar world. Challenges—rivalries, external pressures, and expansion risks—persist, but dissolution is not imminent. Alleged U.S. threats are likely misinterpretations of diplomatic pressure. As Brazil leads in 2025, BRICS must leverage its diversity, while the U.S. balances competition with cooperation.