The BRICS Summit held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, on July 6–7, 2025, under the theme “Strengthening Global South Cooperation for More Inclusive and Sustainable Governance,” addressed a number of key issues such as reforming global governance and multilateral institutions, promoting international peace and stability. The summit’s final statement also criticized global trade protectionism, emphasized the importance of combating climate change, deepening global health cooperation, and the governance of artificial intelligence (AI).
Despite BRICS’ efforts to strengthen its presence, the group faces major challenges including U.S. pressure, internal conflicts and disparities among member states, as well as difficulties in implementing and financing its initiatives.
Agenda Priorities
The BRICS summit agenda was dominated by several pivotal global issues on which the rising powers of the Global South sought to establish a unified position, as follows:
- Reforming Global Governance:
The final declaration of the BRICS summit emphasized the group’s central role in expressing the concerns and priorities of the Global South and in promoting “a more just, sustainable, inclusive, representative, and stable international system based on international law.” The group called for a “comprehensive reform of the United Nations, including the Security Council” to make it more reflective of contemporary realities. The declaration supported the aspirations of India and Brazil “to play a greater role in the United Nations, including the Security Council.” To avoid disagreements among African countries over their representative in the council, the Rio Declaration left open the question of which country should represent Africa’s interests. Similarly, BRICS finance ministers called for increased quotas for emerging and developing countries in the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and agreed to support their demands in the upcoming IMF review meeting in December. - Promoting Peace and International Stability:
BRICS countries stressed the need for peaceful solutions to conflicts and expressed concern “about ongoing conflicts in various parts of the world” and the “increase in global military spending.” The Rio Declaration called for “an immediate, permanent, and unconditional ceasefire in the Gaza Strip, the release of all hostages and detainees, and sustainable, unobstructed humanitarian access.” At the same time, the group condemned military attacks against Iran, a BRICS member, as violations of international law and the UN Charter. However, the declaration avoided directly condemning Israel and the United States, as Iran had urged. Regarding the war in Ukraine, the declaration refrained from criticizing Russia, a founding BRICS member, but praised efforts aimed at peaceful resolution. - Criticism of Trade Protectionism:
The summit statement stressed that “the spread of trade-restrictive measures, whether in the form of arbitrary tariff increases and non-tariff measures, or protectionism under the guise of environmental goals, threatens global trade.” However, there was no direct mention of U.S. President Donald Trump or the United States. There were also veiled criticisms of EU environmental policies that could limit trade in agricultural products from deforested regions. As such, the Rio Declaration rejected “unilateral, punitive, and discriminatory protectionist measures on environmental grounds, such as deforestation regulations.” In another move to avoid provoking Trump, the summit did not discuss the proposed BRICS common currency, but member states renewed their commitment to promoting trade in local currencies and deepening discussions on creating a “BRICS cross-border payment initiative.” - Combating Climate Change:
The summit represented a valuable opportunity for Brazil to advance climate negotiations and environmental commitments ahead of the upcoming COP30 UN Climate Conference in Belém, Brazil, in November. In a veiled criticism of the U.S. president’s denial of climate change and Washington’s withdrawal from the 2015 Paris Agreement, BRICS countries renewed their commitment to international environmental agreements and recognized their importance. The BRICS leaders’ statement affirmed that providing climate finance is “the responsibility of developed countries toward developing nations.” China and the United Arab Emirates, in meetings with Brazilian Finance Minister Fernando Haddad in Rio, indicated plans to invest in the Tropical Forest Facility — a Brazilian proposal to fund the conservation of endangered forests around the world. - AI Governance:
For the first time, artificial intelligence governance took center stage on the BRICS agenda. The group aimed to shape a joint Global South vision on this innovative technology, placing economic and developmental aspects at the core of the discussion. The countries acknowledged in the declaration that AI presents a unique opportunity to drive progress toward a more prosperous future. However, they emphasized the need for global AI governance to mitigate potential risks and meet the needs of all countries — including those in the Global South — with the United Nations playing a central role in these efforts.
Core Challenges
BRICS’ efforts to speak with a unified voice in international forums and defend the interests of its members face a set of challenges that could limit its effectiveness in the future, including:
- U.S. Pressure to Undermine BRICS Activities:
Donald Trump’s return to the U.S. presidency has complicated BRICS’ efforts to coordinate a unified response to American pressure. On July 7, 2025, Trump threatened to impose an additional 10% tariff on any country that aligns with “anti-U.S. BRICS policies,” as he put it. He had previously threatened a 100% tariff on BRICS exports if the group took steps to undermine the dominance of the U.S. dollar — a reference to the plan for a BRICS common currency. In response to these threats, several countries reiterated that BRICS does not target any third party but seeks to strengthen mutual cooperation based on national interests, not ideological alignment. Some members also emphasized their strong ties with Washington. - Internal Disputes and Disparities Among Member States:
Some BRICS countries have disagreements on a variety of issues. China, Russia, and Iran see BRICS as a counterweight to Western dominance, whereas India and Brazil prioritize economic cooperation over geopolitical confrontation, which could cause divisions within the bloc. Geopolitical tensions between China and India also have negative implications. Additionally, economic disparities between members present another challenge — China’s GDP significantly exceeds that of the other members, which risks skewing priorities toward Beijing’s interests. - Difficulty Achieving Internal Cohesion:
The BRICS bloc consists of countries with differing foreign policy orientations and national interests, which sometimes makes it hard to reach consensus — especially on sensitive issues like Ukraine and Middle East conflicts. For example, the April 2025 BRICS Foreign Ministers meeting ended without a final statement due to disagreements among African nations on Security Council reform, highlighting concerns that divergent visions could impede the group’s agenda for global governance reform. - Implementation and Financing Challenges for BRICS Initiatives:
Since its founding in 2009, BRICS has launched several pioneering initiatives, but some have faced implementation hurdles. For example, the Brazil summit launched frameworks for climate and AI, but execution details remained vague, and financial commitments were limited. Similarly, proposals for alternative financial systems — especially reducing dependence on the U.S. dollar — face both technical and political obstacles. The slow implementation of certain BRICS initiatives raises doubts about the group’s ability to evolve beyond a dialogue forum and translate its economic power into tangible political influence.
In light of the above, it can be said that Brazil’s presidency of the 2025 BRICS Summit, despite the many challenges it faced, succeeded in reconciling differing views among member states on some thorny issues. At the same time, it avoided direct confrontation with the United States by focusing on technical issues and adopting moderate, balanced language rooted in international law.
Amid current global instability, the summit provided an important opportunity for rising nations to defend their economic interests and demand better representation in international forums, while offering alternative visions on matters of war, peace, trade, and global governance.
