(Op-Ed Analysis) The idea of BRICS as a powerful economic bloc challenging Western dominance has long been promoted as a game-changer for emerging nations.
But recent events — like Donald Trump’s assertive tariff policies — have stripped away the illusion, revealing it as little more than a loose gathering where rhetoric outpaces action and members prioritize their own survival over collective strength.
Trump’s imposition of 50% tariffs on imports from Brazil and India in early August 2025 served as the group’s first major real-world test since its expansion.
The outcome was a resounding display of disunity, with silence, vague statements, and individual negotiations replacing any bold, coordinated response.
Originally formed in 2009 as BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, China) to give big emerging economies a louder voice in global institutions like the IMF and World Bank, the group added South Africa in 2010.
It started with promise: these countries represented over 40% of the world’s population and about 25% of global GDP by the mid-2010s.
Meetings focused on trade, development banks (like the New Development Bank established in 2014), and even talks of reducing reliance on the U.S. dollar.
China, as the economic heavyweight with a GDP exceeding $18 trillion in 2024, began using BRICS as a platform to expand its influence, often clashing with India’s ambitions.
India’s economy hit $3.7 trillion that year but remained wary of Beijing’s dominance in areas like border disputes and trade imbalances.
When Unity Falters: How Tariffs Unraveled the BRICS Dream
Russia, facing sanctions since 2014 over Ukraine, saw it as a geopolitical tool, while Brazil and South Africa struggled to assert equal footing.
The 2024 expansion added Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, and the UAE (Saudi Arabia joined in talks but held back), ballooning the group to nine members.
This move, pushed by China and Russia with Brazil’s approval under President Lula da Silva, was meant to boost clout but instead watered down cohesion.
The new mix included authoritarian regimes and diverse economies, turning BRICS into more of a forum for anti-Western grievances than a functional alliance.
Total combined GDP reached around $28 trillion by 2025, but that figure masks deep divisions: trade among members was only about 12% of their total global trade, far below blocs like the EU where intra-trade hits 60%.
Trump Calls BRICS a “Fading Group,” Says Rio Meeting Was Barely Attended
Trump’s tariffs hammered this home. Starting July 2025, he targeted over 60 countries with “reciprocal” duties, but BRICS nations bore the brunt.
Brazil faced 50% hikes on key exports like soy, steel, and beef—worth $30 billion annually to the U.S. market—also partly as punishment for aligning with China and Russia.
India got slapped with the same rate, including an extra 25% penalty for buying Russian oil amid the Ukraine conflict, affecting $50 billion in U.S.-bound goods like textiles and pharmaceuticals.
Trump’s rationale? BRICS’ “anti-American policies,” including de-dollarization talks that threatened the dollar’s role in 70% of global trade.
He warned of 100% tariffs if any alternative currency advanced, repositioning global trade from multilateral rules (like those from Bretton Woods in 1944) to bilateral arm-twisting.
The BRICS response? Crickets at first, then hesitation. At the July 2025 summit in Rio, leaders issued a statement slamming “unilateral trade restrictions” but avoided naming the U.S. or Trump directly, fearing escalation.
No joint countermeasures emerged—no shared tariffs on U.S. goods, no unified appeal to the WTO.
Every Country for Itself
Instead, it was every country for itself. China fired back rhetorically, with Xi Jinping declaring no nation would “oppress” Beijing, but pursued quiet deals to shield its $500 billion in U.S. exports.
India halted $20 billion in planned U.S. arms and aircraft buys as retaliation, while exploring direct talks with Washington to ease the pain—despite Modi’s public BRICS boosterism.
Brazil’s Lula called for a “joint evaluation” of impacts but admitted no point in humiliating himself by begging Trump for relief; he floated retaliatory 50% duties on U.S. imports but backed off amid domestic pushback from exporters.
Russia, already sanctioned, shrugged it off, while smaller members like Ethiopia stayed silent, offering nothing beyond resentment.
This disarray highlights BRICS’ core flaws: it’s not a true bloc like NATO or the EU, with binding treaties or shared military/economic policies.
It’s a club where China pulls strings for its Belt and Road ambitions, India hedges between Moscow and Washington (buying Russian oil at discounts while joining U.S.-led Quad), and others like Brazil get sidelined.
Lula’s foreign policy, rooted in anti-Americanism from advisor Celso Amorim’s doctrine, bet big on BRICS as a “Global South” counterweight since his 2023 return to power.
He hosted the 2025 summit amid fanfare, touting leadership, but the tariff fallout exposed isolation.
Meanwhile, flirting with autocrats like Putin and Xi—through public nods and de-dollarization chatter—only provoked Trump further, shrinking diplomatic room.
Why does this matter in simple terms? Imagine joining a team that’s supposed to back you up in a fight, but when trouble hits, everyone scatters to save themselves.
Ideological Postering We are Tired of
That’s BRICS. For everyday people, it means higher prices, job losses, and economic uncertainty—Brazilian farmers lose U.S. buyers, Indian factories face shutdowns, all because leaders chase grand visions over practical deals.
You should know this because global alliances shape your wallet and security. In a world where the U.S. market ($26 trillion GDP) still calls shots, betting on shaky groups like BRICS can backfire, leaving countries like Brazil as pawns.
True independence comes from smart, pragmatic ties—diversifying partners, building credibility, and defending national interests—not ideological posturing that turns diplomacy into a stage for personal ambitions.
📌 Read our complete guide: BRICS in 2026: Complete Guide to the 11-Nation Bloc Reshaping Global Trade