BRICS and the Sanctions Pushback: A New Non-Aligned Moment?
By Sanjeev Oak
In a striking rebuke to Western dominance, Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping’s opposition to “discriminatory sanctions” signals BRICS’ rising defiance—evoking memories of NAM and Bandung, while foreshadowing a future shaped by digital finance, energy alliances, and resilient supply chains.
Sanctions and Their Limits
For decades, sanctions have been the West’s preferred tool of coercion. From Cuba in the 1960s to Iran and Russia today, they are framed as bloodless instruments of pressure. But their effectiveness has steadily eroded. The emergence of parallel payment systems, local currency trade, and digital platforms has undercut the chokehold once wielded by the US dollar and SWIFT.
“BRICS is not merely protesting sanctions; it is building alternatives.”
When Putin invokes “discriminatory” sanctions, it is not just grievance politics. It is a claim that the rules of the global economic game are being rewritten.
Echoes of Bandung and NAM
This is not the first time nations outside the Western core have sought to carve space for themselves. In 1955, the Bandung Conference in Indonesia brought together newly independent Asian and African nations, wary of being forced into Cold War camps. That impulse birthed the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), which, though flawed, symbolised a refusal to be trapped in bipolar rivalries.
The 1970s oil embargoes, orchestrated by OPEC, similarly revealed how “peripheral” states could leverage economic tools against dominant powers. And the 1944 Bretton Woods system, though designed to stabilise global finance, also entrenched Western leadership in the IMF and World Bank — institutions now routinely criticised by BRICS leaders.
Today’s pushback by BRICS feels like a revival of those historical struggles, though with more economic weight and technological leverage.
China, Russia and the Strategic Bond
Beijing and Moscow have very different interests within BRICS. China views it as a platform to extend the yuan’s internationalisation and create parallel trade ecosystems. Russia sees it as an essential lifeline to circumvent Western isolation. Yet their convergence on sanctions opposition reflects a shared anxiety: that Western financial tools are now weapons of geopolitical punishment.
India, South Africa, and Brazil tread more carefully — keen to preserve Western markets while expanding their room for manoeuvre. But even their cautious stance benefits from the cover BRICS provides.
The Road Ahead: A Decade of Alternatives
The question is not whether BRICS will replace the West-led order. It is whether, over the next decade, it can build enough alternative mechanisms to reduce dependency. The signs are already visible:
-
Digital Finance: BRICS Pay, still in its infancy, signals the intent to develop a cross-border payment system that could rival SWIFT. Combined with central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), this could rewire financial flows.
-
Energy Alliances: With Russia’s hydrocarbons, Brazil’s biofuels, and South Africa’s minerals, BRICS has the raw material base to shape global energy markets. Add China’s solar and India’s renewables push, and an energy bloc is conceivable.
-
Supply-Chain Blocs: Western “de-risking” from China is pushing BRICS states to rethink their own supply chains. A BRICS-centred logistics corridor — linking Africa’s resources, South America’s agriculture, and Asia’s manufacturing — could emerge as an alternative trade geography.
“BRICS is not trying to be the new West. It is trying to be a club that makes Western dominance less absolute.”
The Risks of Fragmentation
Yet, unity is far from guaranteed. India-China border tensions, Brazil’s tilt towards the US, and South Africa’s economic fragility complicate coherence. BRICS lacks the institutional glue of NATO or the EU. For now, it remains more coalition than community.
Still, history teaches us that what begins as loose solidarity can harden into structure. NAM began as a moral declaration; OPEC began as a cartel; the EU began as a coal-and-steel pact.
Towards a Multipolar Economy
The decade ahead may not produce a single rival to the Bretton Woods system. But it could yield a multipolar economic landscape, where no single pole — Washington, Brussels, or Beijing — enjoys monopoly. For emerging economies like India, that very diffusion of power could prove to be the most valuable outcome.
In essence, Putin’s warning about sanctions is not just bluster. It is a reminder that the world’s financial arteries are being slowly re-routed. The global order is not collapsing, but its centre is shifting.