BRICS Summit should not become anti-West platform

The theme for India’s BRICS Chairship and the 18th BRICS Summit in 2026 is rather ambitious: “Building for Resilience, Innovation, Cooperation and Sustainability.” Comprising 11 major emerging markets and developing countries, the ambition, though, is not unrealistic. It will have the presence of Russian President Vladimir Putin, President Xi Jinping, and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian. Accounting for about half of the world’s population and about 40 per cent of global GDP (measured in purchasing power parity, or PPP), the BRICS group has the potential to enhance resilience, innovation, international cooperation, and sustainability.

At least in theory. Reality check offers sobering moderation. To begin with, major participants’ intentions are questionable, especially those of nations under dictatorships. China, for instance, is not interested in peaceful coexistence; it threatens and frets its neighbours, including India, even though we are a big country that also boasts of a strong military.

It stubbornly refuses to resolve the border issue with New Delhi. Beijing sticks to its old position that the McMahon Line is illegal. But, contradicting its own stand, it has resolved its boundary dispute with Myanmar based on the same Line. China has often weakened India’s fight against cross-border terrorism by blocking, delaying, or softening international sanctions against Pakistan-based terrorist leaders. Besides, China dumps its goods in India. Then there is Iran, which has been hitting Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates with missiles.

To expect such a grouping to come up with anything substantive is extremely difficult, though it is theoretically possible. In fact, there is a danger: China and Russia, which regard the United States as a rival global hegemon, will try to convince the other BRICS leaders to come up with a declaration that will have anti-US undertones.

This will be unfortunate, because we should not spoil our relations with Washington in the hope of chasing some nebulous goals. New Delhi should not become an instrument in great-power rivalry—certainly not an anti-Western platform. India’s interests are better served by maintaining strategic autonomy and keeping strong, mutually beneficial relations with Washington, while simultaneously engaging with Beijing, Moscow, Tehran, and other BRICS members.

The United States remains an important partner for India in areas such as defence, advanced technology, trade, investment, education, and cooperation in the Indo-Pacific. At the same time, India has legitimate reasons to work with Russia on energy, defence, and other strategic matters, and to engage with countries of the Global South through BRICS.

There is therefore no contradiction in participating actively in BRICS while maintaining close ties with the US and its allies. Indeed, India’s leadership of BRICS should be used to demonstrate that the grouping can contribute constructively to global governance without defining itself primarily in opposition to the West. New Delhi could push for practical cooperation on development finance, climate resilience, food and energy security, digital public infrastructure, healthcare, disaster management, and reform of international institutions.

Such an agenda would give BRICS tangible relevance without forcing India to endorse positions that undermine its wider diplomatic interests. India should resist attempts to turn the summit into a forum for rhetorical attacks on Washington or for legitimising a narrowly China-Russia-centred worldview. A mature Indian approach would be to build bridges rather than blocs. India’s chairship thus offers an opportunity to pursue an independent, pragmatic, and development-oriented agenda without souring ties with other powers.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

The Hans India