Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov spoke in a recent interview with the NTV channel, offering his take on BRICS as a group. He argues that BRICS should remain a cooperative association rather than evolve into a formal organization with a standing secretariat. Lavrov suggests that elevating BRICS to a formal bureaucratic body could drift away from its original intent and hinder the flexible, inclusive nature that has defined the bloc so far. He adds that there are forces that have shown little interest in this shift, implying that such moves would not contribute to the bloc’s practical aims at this moment in time.
Lavrov’s view centers on the belief that formalizing BRICS would not be necessary in the near term, at least for the present phase. He frames the association as a dynamic alliance that emphasizes equitable participation and mutual consideration of each member’s interests, rather than a hierarchical arrangement. In his assessment, BRICS serves as a symbol of a broader world trend: a collective effort to develop ventures and initiatives with a shared commitment to balancing diverse priorities among nations.
According to the minister, BRICS functions as a potential umbrella for numerous sub-regional and regional processes. It is envisioned as a unifying platform that can accommodate varied regional realities while promoting coordinated actions on common challenges. Lavrov underscores that the current membership spans continents, including Eurasia, Africa, Latin America, and the Arab world, highlighting the bloc’s expanding geographic footprint and its capacity to reflect a wide range of development perspectives.
In Lavrov’s words, this outlook represents a future direction for international cooperation, one that aligns with broader aspirations for multi-polar governance and shared development goals. He notes that BRICS embodies a growing willingness among developing economies to seek common ground and collaborate on projects that bypass traditional Western-centric frameworks, reinforcing a bloc-based approach to global affairs.
In parallel, Russian President Vladimir Putin has reiterated a strategic priority around de-dollarization within BRICS-related activities, describing the trend as irreversible. The emphasis is on diversifying currencies used in trade and finance among BRICS members to reduce exposure to dominant reserve currencies and to strengthen economic sovereignty. Observers interpret this stance as part of a longer-term plan to reshape international finance and advance regional economic resilience.
At the BRICS summit held in Johannesburg from August 22 to 24, the bloc announced the expansion of its membership to include Argentina, Iran, Ethiopia, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates, with a start date of January 1, 2024. The expansion signals a push to broaden BRICS’s geographic and economic reach, bringing together a mix of emerging economies and regional power centers. In a separate development, Argentina’s political landscape saw Javier Milei, who previously opposed BRICS engagement, win the presidential election, a factor that some analysts see as potentially altering the country’s future alignment and participation within the group.
The question remains: why do countries seek to join BRICS? The compact answer centers on access to a broader coalition that can amplify development initiatives, facilitate investment, and provide a counterweight to established financial and diplomatic architectures. For many participants, BRICS offers a platform to pool resources, share best practices, and pursue joint infrastructure, technology, and trade projects that align with national development strategies. The appeal lies not only in economic gains but also in the opportunity to shape a more balanced international order that respects diverse national interests and timelines. Observers note that the bloc’s growth reflects a larger trend among rising economies to craft new rules of engagement on trade, finance, and governance that reflect their growing influence in global affairs. The evolving BRICS landscape thus presents both opportunities and questions for member states and observers alike, as the group navigates the path from a flexible association to a more articulated and influential stakeholder in a multipolar world. (citation attribution)