Is China's BRICS Expansion a True Anti-West Alliance?

An analysis from the Council on oreign Relations argues that the 2024 expansion of BRICS, adding Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE, is primarily driven by a shared opposition to Western-led institutions rather than a positive vision for global governance. The report notes that while the bloc's members represent a significant share of global GDP and oil production, their internal rivalries (e.g., Iran vs. Saudi Arabia) and lack of institutional mechanisms make it a 'coalition of convenience' rather than a true alliance. It highlights that the bloc's primary unifying factor is a desire to reduce reliance on the US dollar and challenge Western sanctions, explicitly positioning it as a counterweight to the G7 and NATO-centric security models.

A peer-reviewed article in the academic journal 'Third World Quarterly' argues that Western media labeling of BRICS as an 'authoritarian axis' is a discursive strategy to delegitimize a genuine multipolar order. The paper provides data showing that BRICS nations, particularly via the New Development Bank, have approved over $30 billion in loans for infrastructure projects in the Global South without the 'colonial loan conditions' (e.g., austerity measures) imposed by the IM and World Bank. It cites expert testimony from Global South diplomats who view the bloc as a 'lifeline' against US sanctions and dollar hegemony, specifically referencing the seizure of Russian reserves as a catalyst for non-Western nations seeking alternative settlement systems (e.g., local currency swaps) to protect their sovereignty.

A detailed investigation by Human Rights Watch documents how BRICS membership has become a shield for member states to deflect international scrutiny. The report provides specific case studies: Saudi Arabia's continued execution of dissidents (including 81 in a single day in 2022) and Iran's suppression of the 'Woman, Life, reedom' protests, both of which received no formal criticism from the BRICS bloc. The report argues that the 'anti-West' label is used by these governments to reframe domestic repression as resistance to Western pressure, citing UAE's surveillance of activists as an example. It concludes that the bloc offers 'no path to democracy or rule of law' and functions as an oligarch club that trades legitimacy for oil and cash, effectively abandoning the Global South's poor who face famine and conflict without any BRICS intervention.

A strategic analysis by the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) argues that the BRICS expansion is a 'coalition of convenience' that will fracture under pressure. The report highlights the deep-seated rivalry between Iran and Saudi Arabia, who have fought proxy wars in Yemen and Syria for years, and notes that their seating together at the 2024 summit was a diplomatic gesture, not a security guarantee. It points out that BRICS has no military wing, no enforcement mechanism, and no shared political values beyond a 'vague anti-Western sentiment.' The analysis cites the bloc's silent response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine—which killed tens of thousands—as proof that it is not about justice or a new world order, but about power consolidation. It concludes that the 'anti-West' label is a shield for authoritarianism, allowing dictators to blame domestic failures on Washington while offering no protection to members like Sudan or Venezuela from coups or famine.