Brazil hosted the 7th BRICS Summit 2025, which took place between July 6 and 7, 2025. The main theme of this year’s BRICS Summit was “Strengthening Global South Cooperation for Inclusive and Sustainable Governance.” The Summit represents an important step in addressing global challenges related to expanded BRICS boundaries and collective-inclusive governance.[1]
Chinese President Xi Jinping did not attend the summit for the first time, and Li Qiang, a member of the Standing Committee of the Communist Party of China (CPC) Politburo, attended in his place. In addition, Russian President Vladimir Putin did not attend the summit this year; Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov attended in his place.[2]
The BRICS 2025 Summit is seen as a critical turning point symbolizing the growing influence of developing countries in global governance at a time when the multipolar international order is taking shape. Hosted by Brazil this year, the summit contributes to the institutionalization of the expanding BRICS structure with new member countries and to making the interests of the Global South more visible. The multifaceted agenda items discussed at the summit are a direct response to the structural transformations taking place in the international system.
The health sector, one of the areas where global inequalities and prejudices have been most acutely felt in the aftermath of the Covid-19 pandemic, is among the priority issues on the BRICS agenda. At the summit, increasing cooperation to ensure equity in access to medicines and vaccines is seen as an important step toward giving developing countries a greater say in the global health architecture. This approach also reflects the search for an alternative structure to Western-centric health policies.
BRICS countries are bringing back discussions on a common currency with the aim of reducing their dependence on the US dollar. In this context, the pursuit of economic independence and financial sovereignty represents a critical stance towards the current global financial architecture. This trend is noteworthy in that it shows that the post-Bretton Woods order is not without alternatives.
In a joint statement released at the opening of the BRICS Summit, the increase in tariffs was cited as a threat to global trade, implicitly criticizing Trump’s policies. Trump, however, responded within hours by threatening to punish countries that show a tendency to participate in this structure. Following these statements, US President Donald Trump announced during the BRICS Summit in Brazil that an additional 10% customs duty would be imposed on any country supporting the BRICS bloc’s “anti-American policies.” Trump also emphasized that this policy would apply without exception.[3]
According to the BRICS 2025 Joint Statement:[4]
- Attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities were described as “violations of international law.”
- Israel’s attacks on Gaza and terrorist acts in Kashmir have been condemned,
- Iran and Ethiopia’s accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO) has been supported,
- A call has been made for the urgent strengthening of trade dispute resolution mechanisms.
Trump’s “America First” approach weakens the functionality of traditional international forums such as the G7 and G20, while the BRICS group presents itself as the new address for multipolar diplomacy in the face of global conflicts and trade wars.
Trump, who aims to finalize trade agreements with many countries by July 9, 2025, and plans to implement economic policies aimed at retaliation, has not explained exactly what he means by “anti-American” policies.
The BRICS Multilateral Guarantee Program proposed under the New Development Bank has also been brought to the agenda to reduce investment costs and increase financing capacity in member countries. The leaders issued a separate statement on artificial intelligence, advocating the development of protection mechanisms against data collection and unauthorized use of artificial intelligence.[5]
Although the military attacks against Iran during the summit were directly condemned within the framework of the international agenda, it was noteworthy that the names of the perpetrators of the attacks, the US and Israel, were not mentioned in the statement. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Arakchi, in his speech at the summit, called on all United Nations (UN) members to openly condemn Israel and emphasized that both Israel and the US had violated international law and human rights. Arakchi stated that the impact of the attacks would not be limited to Iran alone, but could destabilize the entire regional system.[6]
The BRICS joint statement expressed “deep concern” about the humanitarian situation in Gaza, emphasizing the release of hostages, a return to negotiations, and commitment to a two-state solution. However, Iran’s official statement on Telegram indicated that it maintained its reservations about the two-state solution proposal in light of historical failures. This situation reveals that there is no absolute consensus on Middle East policies even within BRICS.[7]
Although BRICS has considerable potential in theory to produce an alternative to the multipolar global governance system, the 2025 Summit shows that this potential has not been realized in practice and that international relations are increasingly descending into chaos. Three fundamental weaknesses observed at the Summit are noteworthy: (i) rhetorical inconsistency, (ii) lack of institutional coherence, and (iii) imbalance in political representation.
The absence of Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi and uncertainties regarding the level of representation of key actors such as Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) weaken BRICS’ goal of establishing a united and stable global leadership pole. This situation reveals that a common strategic orientation and foreign policy coordination within the group has not yet been institutionalized. While the “Abraham Accords” envisaged the establishment of diplomatic relations between Israel and countries such as the UAE, Bahrain, and later Sudan and Morocco, they have resulted in these countries deepening their security, trade, and defense relations with the US. In such a context, the effectiveness of BRICS is being questioned. Although Saudi Arabia is not a direct party to these agreements, it is known to have given distant support to this normalization process. Egypt, on the other hand, has been a party to a peace agreement with Israel since 1979 and represents the status quo in this equation.
Ultimately, the future impact of BRICS will depend on its criticism of the global system, its discursive alternatives to the US-centric order, and its ability to strengthen its internal consistency and coordination capacity in decision-making processes. Otherwise, BRICS’ counter-hegemonic claims are likely to remain limited in functionality, unable to transcend symbolic representation.
[1] “17th BRICS summit”, Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/17th_BRICS_summit, (Date of Access: 07.07.2025).
[2] Ibid.
[3] “Trump threatens extra 10% tariffs on BRICS as leaders meet in Brazil”, Reuters, https://www.reuters.com/world/china/leaders-growing-brics-group-gather-rio-summit-2025-07-06/, (Date of Access: 07.07.2025).
[4] “Strengthening Global South Cooperation for a More Inclusive and Sustainable Governance”, BRICS-Leaders Declaration – EN, No. 250705.
[5] “BRICS Summit 2025: Check Key Agenda, Summary and Highlights”, Jagran Josh, https://www.jagranjosh.com/us/trending/brics-2025-summit-key-agenda-summary-and-highlights-1860000224, (Date of Access: 07.07.2025).
[6] “BRICS group condemns increase of tariffs in summit overshadowed by Middle East tensions”, CNBC, https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/06/brics-summit-brazil-2025.html, (Date of Access: 07.07.2025).
[7] Ibid.
