The European Union and the BRICS
The European relationship with an organisation on the rise.
On 1 January 2024, the BRICS, an informal international organisation, expanded with the accession of five new members. Although it will probably not ring a bell for most readers, this event may well have a big impact on the world’s geopolitical situation, so let me explain it further. BRICS is an acronym and stands for Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. BRICS members have been meeting annually since 2009 at a summit where the countries’ heads of government meet.
At the 2023 BRICS summit, held in Johannesburg, South Africa, it was decided that Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) would be allowed to call themselves members of the BRICS from 2024 onwards. With the expansion, the BRICS now represents about 3.6 billion people worldwide – almost half of the entire global population. The BRICS has gained a lot of popularity in recent years. More than 20 countries, including Algeria, Bolivia, Indonesia and Kazakhstan, have expressed interest in membership as well.
Despite the BRICS gaining popularity over the years, the organisation still receives hardly any attention from the European Union (EU). Cooperation between the BRICS countries has never been considered seriously in Europe due to the vast differences between the members concerning their location, culture, economy and political situation. However, the increased interest in BRICS membership shows that countries in the ‘global south’, a term referring to non-Western countries, are looking for alternatives to existing international organisations such as the United Nations (UN).
A Brief History of the BRICS
BRICS – or BRIC initially, as South Africa was not a member at the time – was conceived in 2001 by Jim O’Neill, a US economic analyst working for Goldman Sachs. He noticed Brazil, Russia, India and China experienced similar economic development. O’Neill predicted that these and other developing countries would experience strong economic growth and play an increasingly important role on the global stage. Although the BRIC began as a simple acronym for economic analysis, much has changed in a short time. Back in 2006, an informal meeting was held with the foreign ministers of the BRIC countries at the 61st UN General Assembly. This eventually led to the first official BRIC summit held on 16 June 2009 in Yekaterinburg, Russia. The summit was attended by Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, President Dimitri Medvedev of Russia, India’s Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Chinese President Hu Jintao.
Since then, summits have been held every year in one of the member states. During these meetings, all kinds of topics are discussed, including economic cooperation. This has led to the creation of the New Development Bank. It acts as an alternative to the International Monetary Fund (IMF), where countries can borrow money for development projects. Political and security cooperation are on the agenda, as well as culture. Regarding the latter, a BRICS Film Festival and the annual BRICS Games are organised – a kind of Olympic Games for BRICS countries.
In 2010, South Africa was accepted as a new member. BRIC creator O’Neill thought this was an incomprehensible choice because South Africa has much less power on the world stage compared to the other countries. He believed that African countries, such as Kenya and Nigeria would have made more sense, because of larger populations and more economic power than South Africa. The accession of South Africa shows how the BRICS members embraced O’Neill’s idea that they could be grouped together, but put their own spin on it.
The BRICS has two main focal points. First, its members demand reform of international organisations – especially financial organisations such as the World Bank and the IMF. The BRICS argues that control of these institutions now lies mainly with Western countries. Thus, even though countries from the global south have become increasingly important, this is not reflected in the format of international organisations. A second issue is the emphasis on respecting the sovereignty of countries. According to the BRICS, Western countries pressure developing countries to turn into Western-style liberal democracies. The preference for the sovereignty of developing countries over intervention by Western countries is best seen in the attitude of BRICS members during the Arab Spring.
During the 2011 Libyan civil war, all BRICS countries were part of the UN Security Council and were allowed to vote on proposed resolutions. All members voted in favour of Resolution 1970 which imposed sanctions on Libya. However, the BRICS countries abstained on Resolution 1973. This resolution authorised the UN to protect the Libyan people from President Qadhafi’s regime through “all necessary means”, including NATO intervention. The BRICS considered this intervention a violation of Libyan sovereignty and therefore took a more critical stance during votes on interventions in Syria, as a result of which there has never been an intervention there similar to that in Libya.
The Expansion
At the 15th BRICS summit held in Johannesburg, South Africa, leaders agreed on BRICS expansion. They eventually chose Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia and the UAE. Initially, Argentina was also allowed to join, but new Argentine president Javier Milei refrained from joining the organisation. Why these countries were chosen remains one of the BRICS’ biggest mysteries. For instance, Egypt and Ethiopia are engaged in tense negotiations over the Great Renaissance Dam in the Ethiopian section of the Blue Nile which has caused Egyptian biodiversity to come under pressure.
The relationship between Saudi Arabia and Iran is – to say the least – also tense. The reason for their accession, along with the UAE, is probably due to their large oil and gas reserves. In addition, Saudi Arabia is a member of the G20 (the world’s twenty largest economies), which may give the BRICS a stronger position during future G20 meetings. At the same time, membership of the BRICS provides an opportunity for oil states to diversify their trade relations. Block-building through the BRICS enables the countries to become less dependent on the West.
The expansion raises questions about the identity of the BRICS. China seems to envision a counterpart to the G7. However, Brazilian President Lula has openly stated that the BRICS is not a replacement for the G7 or the G20 but a way for members to come together. These differing views seem to be part of a larger dilemma about the relationship between the BRICS and Western countries. The expansion saw the inclusion of US allies such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE, joining countries like Brazil and India trying to maintain good relations with Western countries. On the other hand, the addition of Iran, combined with Russia and China, could indicate a more explicitly anti-Western orientation.
It looks like the BRICS expansion is not over yet. Thailand, for instance, has submitted a formal membership application, aiming to join the BRICS at the upcoming summit in late October 2024. Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim also shared his intentions to begin membership procedures. Also, countries closer to home are interested in joining the BRICS. Turkish foreign minister Hakan Fidan announced in June 2024 that Türkiye would like to join the BRICS. Should Türkiye become a member of the BRICS, this could affect Europe’s relationship with the country and the other BRICS member states. After all, Türkiye is still in the process of joining the EU and has also been a member of NATO for years.
The European stance regarding the BRICS
With the annual summit, the ever-expanding cooperation agenda and the addition of new countries, the BRICS increasingly resembles a serious international organisation. The EU has partnerships with several regional organisations such as Mercosur in South America and ASEAN in Southeast Asia. However, the BRICS is still ignored by European policymakers. There is only one resolution from the European Parliament that addresses the BRICS, combined with a handful of research papers by the European Parliamentary Research Service, the Parliament’s in-house think tank.
There seems to be some confusion within the EU about what the BRICS actually is. The parliamentary resolution, signed in 2012, uses the term ‘BRICS’ as an abbreviation, but also recognises that its members could work together as a kind of informal organisation. Over the years, there has been more recognition of the increasing extent to which the BRICS functions as an international organisation, but the EU still does not see the BRICS as a potential partner.
The main reason for the lack of cooperation between the EU and the BRICS is because of too large differences between the BRICS members. From a European perspective, these differences prevent the BRICS from developing coherent policies. This was underlined in April 2024 by former Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte, who called the BRICS a “very insignificant, messy little club” that we should not take too seriously. He said this partly because China and India have been embroiled in a border dispute for years.
If you are somewhat familiar with the history of Europe and the EU, the argument that the BRICS cannot be successful because of too many differences between its members does not seem very convincing. After all, it has also not always been sunshine and rainbows within the EU. Yet it would supposedly be different in the case of the BRICS countries, as they would only use the BRICS to pursue their own national interests, not to cooperate. In addition, it is argued that the BRICS countries are too different from each other because of geographical distances, and no shared history or cultural traditions connecting the countries. As a result of these differences, the consensus remains that the EU should not cooperate with the BRICS as a whole, but only with individual members.
A changing relationship with developing countries
The attraction of the BRICS to developing countries comes mainly from the emphasis on preserving state sovereignty, while the EU often pays attention to democracy and human rights in partnerships. Many developing countries have a history marked by a colonial period. An international partner like the BRICS that respects countries’ sovereignty and does not expect economic or political reforms is, therefore, an attractive alternative to cooperation with the EU. Even if the EU stands by its decision not to cooperate with the BRICS, it may still be necessary to reconsider the European relationship with developing countries and accept that these countries value their autonomy.
The situation surrounding the BRICS is evolving. From 22 to 24 October, the 16th BRICS summit will take place in Kazan, Russia, where leaders of the new members are also expected to show up. Several important international summits will also be held in BRICS countries. For instance, Brazil and South Africa are hosting the 2024 and 2025 G20 summits respectively. In addition, the 2025 UN climate summit will also be held in Brazil. It will be interesting to keep a close eye on whether BRICS members are able to act in unison during these upcoming international summits. In the coming months, we will see whether BRICS can become a successful international organisation influencing the world order and what impact this will have on European attitudes towards the alliance.
Sabine Herder holds a master’s degree in Crisis and Security Management from Leiden University and a master’s degree in European Policy from the University of Amsterdam. Before this, she did a bachelor’s degree in Liberal Arts and Sciences with a major in International Relations.
Image: Shutterstock