Delhi Dilemma: Brics' Expansion Meets the Dollar's Shadow

The Brics summit convening in Delhi this weekend, bringing together leaders from 11 nations including host India, China, Russia, Brazil, South Africa, the UAE, and Iran, finds itself under an unusual but potent influence: the enduring shadow of US President Donald Trump. Despite the US not being a Brics member, Trump's policies, past pronouncements, and the looming threat of his future actions significantly shape the group's agenda, particularly its efforts towards de-dollarisation.

While Brics leaders are set to discuss a wide array of issues, few will command as much implicit attention as the impact of President Trump's aggressive trade postures and geopolitical maneuvers. The source highlights that the 'war in Iran' and the 'ever-present threat of White House tariffs' have already destabilised global energy markets, creating a volatile backdrop for the summit. This external pressure is further compounded by Trump's explicit warnings against Brics' ambition to reduce global trade's dependence on the US dollar, including a stark threat in November 2024 of '100% tariffs' if they backed an alternative currency.

The real challenge for Brics, however, lies not just in external pressures but in its own complex internal dynamics. The group is described as 'deeply divided over how far it should go in challenging Washington'. Michael Kugelman, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, starkly noted that 'India cannot afford to have a joint statement that rails against Washington,' expecting any criticism of US policies to be 'vague and indirect'. This pragmatism stems from India reportedly being in the 'final stages of a trade deal with the US', making it wary of upsetting the White House. Similarly, China may be hesitant to be seen using Brics to directly target Washington.

Adding to this intricate web of interests is the UAE, a Brics member that has experienced 'Iranian attack during Tehran's retaliation against US and Israeli strikes'. As a Gulf state that hosts US military bases, the UAE is unlikely to support any statement perceived to aid Tehran's cause. This demonstrates the inherent difficulty in forging a unified stance, especially as Brics has grown. Kugelman observed that while the expansion has made Brics 'more significant', it has simultaneously made 'consensus harder', noting the addition of members that 'don't get along' and hold a 'wide array of views and positions on the global order'.

This confluence of external threats and internal fragmentation exposes the practical limits of multilateral cooperation, particularly when confronted by a dominant global power's direct economic and geopolitical leverage. The Brics bloc, despite its 'geopolitical and economic heft grown substantially over the past decade', finds itself navigating a landscape where the aspiration for a unified stance on de-dollarisation and US policy clashes with the individual national interests and vulnerabilities of its diverse members. The Delhi summit, therefore, is less a platform for bold declarations and more a delicate balancing act, illustrating the complex trade-offs nations make to preserve their economic and security interests in a volatile world.