Evolution of the BRICS Platform of Shared Values
Oleg Barabanov
The Foundation for Development and Support of the Valdai Discussion Club, 2025.
ISBN 978-5-907845-28-2
(published in English)
URL: https://valdaiclub.com/a/reports/evolution-of-the-brics-platform-of-shared-values/
Dr. Oleg Barabanov’s Report “Evolution of the BRICS Platform of Shared Values”, made for Valdai Discussion Club and published on April 8, 2025, is an in-depth and thorough analysis of the evolution of the BRICS common values platform, demonstrating a confident understanding of the complex geopolitical situation and the BRICS’ ability to adapt to changing global realities.
The author is a program director of the Valdai Discussion Club, he is coordinating the professional programs on Global Commons, Global Alternatives; Academic Director of the European Studies Institute at MGIMO University; Professor of the Russian Academy of Sciences, known for his research in the field of international relations, successfully reveals the complex aspects of interaction between the members of this association, including Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa.
The paper is structured logically and consistently, which makes it accessible to a wide audience, including both specialists in the field of international relations and interested readers. Visual infographics about the principles of BRICS partnership, shared goals of BRICS, the description of zones of conflicts and emergencies in a specific paragraph in BRICS declarations, vision of future and BRICS tasks, voting at the UN General Assembly in 2014-2021 are given, which simplifies the perception and completeness of information about the association. Dr. Barabanov begins with the historical context of the creation of BRICS, emphasizing the importance of forming a platform of common values for strengthening cooperation between the participating countries. He highlights the key stages of the group’s development, including important summits and declarations that helped shape a unified agenda.
The professor divides the article into two logical sections, each of which is devoted to a specific aspect of the BRICS countries’ interaction. The first section examines the earliest summits and declarations, the core values that unite countries, such as multilateralism, sustainable development and the pursuit of justice in international affairs. The second section analyzes how these values have adapted to the changing global conditions and internal challenges of the participating countries.
The article examines in detail the first informal summit of the BRICS leaders in 2008 and the first full-fledged summit in Yekaterinburg in 2009. The author emphasizes that although the 2009 declaration was not revolutionary, it nevertheless emphasized the importance of protecting the interests of developing countries. This demonstrates the desire of the BRICS countries to assert their positions as representatives of the Global South and promote their interests in the international arena. An interesting point is the contrast between the main declaration of the summit and the joint statement on global food security. While the main declaration was formulated in neutral terms, the joint statement expressed a more radical and critical position towards developed countries. This difference in the tone of the documents may indicate internal disagreements and different approaches to international politics within the group.
In addition, Dr. Barabanov raises an interesting question about the cyclical emphasis in the BRICS declarations. Each participating country, assuming the chairmanship, forms a draft declaration with an emphasis on its priorities, which eventually leads to a change in the semantic content of the documents. This creates a certain dynamic and evolution of priorities, which can be analyzed through the prism of temporary changes.
The text illustrates the complexities of multilateral cooperation within BRICS, highlighting how geopolitical dynamics and internal priorities shape the group’s declarations and actions. The emphasis on mutual respect and shared aspirations reflects an understanding that cooperation must be built on strong foundational principles.
The differences in focus between various summits (e.g., Brazil’s emphasis on democracy versus China’s focus on security and development) suggest that member countries may prioritize different aspects of their partnership based on their national interests and regional contexts.
Furthermore, Dr. Barabanov uses a variety of sources and examples to support his arguments. He provides data on joint initiatives of the BRICS countries in such areas as economics and security. Special attention is paid to initiatives aimed at creating new financial mechanisms and infrastructure development, which underlines the importance of BRICS as an alternative center of power in the global order.
One of the strong points of the article is a critical approach to assessing the successes and failures of the BRICS. The author does not avoid discussing internal disagreements between the members of the group, such as differences in political systems and economic interests. This gives the peer-reviewed work objectivity and depth of analysis. Dr. Barabanov also examines the influence of external factors on the dynamics of interaction within the group, including geopolitical tensions and economic crises.
The research paper clearly identifies the main goals and principles formulated at the BRIC summits, such as increasing aid to developing countries, debt relief, easier market access, technology transfer, differentiated responsibilities in climate issues, and strengthening the voice of developing countries in the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
The author also correctly places the BRICS summits in the context of the global financial crisis and the transformation of the G20, emphasizing that the BRICS has become an alternative platform for dialogue. In addition to the description, he expresses his own assessment (“not revolutionary or destructive”, “not much different from the G20 declarations”), which makes the analysis more objective and interesting.
In the context of increasing multipolarity and the revision of existing world orders, the study of the value component of such a significant player as BRICS is extremely timely. The article responds to the processes of expansion of the BRICS and the complication of its internal dialogue.
Dr. Barabanov does not limit himself to a superficial enumeration of the declared values. He conducts a detailed analysis of how these values were formed and transformed, and what practical consequences their evolution has for the internal cohesion of the group and its foreign policy. The professor’s observations on how the various BRICS members interpret and prioritize common values are particularly valuable, which is the key to understanding potential challenges and opportunities.
The author skillfully fits the modern evolution of the platform of common values into the broader historical context of the BRICS development. This gives the reader an opportunity to understand how the need for a deeper unity of values crystallized from the initial economic considerations.
Analyzing current trends, the author makes reasonable predictions about the further development of the BRICS common values platform. This makes the article not only descriptive, but also instructive for understanding the future development trajectories of the association. Dr. Barabanov honestly points out the existing challenges and contradictions within the framework of the platform of common values. Of particular interest are his discussions about the balance between national interests and the pursuit of a common vision, as well as the potential impact of the expansion of BRICS on the unification of values.
The mention of the voting of the BRICS countries at the UN General Assembly in the period from 2014 to 2021 enriches the article and raises important questions about the internal political consolidation and foreign policy positions of these countries.
The author argues that the voting of countries in international organizations such as the United Nations can serve as an indicator of internal consolidation. The examples of voting by NATO and EU countries illustrate how common positions can strengthen political cohesion.
The text analyzes in detail how the BRICS countries voted on various anti-Russian resolutions related to the situation in Ukraine and human rights in Crimea. It is important to note that although Russia has always voted against these resolutions, other countries in the group have shown diversity in their positions.
The different voting approaches among the BRICS countries (for example, China votes against most resolutions, while Brazil prefers to abstain) emphasize the lack of a unified position within the group. This may cast doubt on the idea that BRICS represents a single bloc in the international arena.
The professor points out that the voting results do not always reflect the real willingness of countries to cooperate with Russia. This highlights the complexity of international politics and the need to take into account multiple factors influencing decision-making.
The diversity in votes may indicate potential tensions within the group. How will this affect the future of BRICS as a platform for collaboration? Perhaps it is worth asking whether the group can maintain unity in the presence of such differences.
Although the article contains examples, a more detailed examination of specific initiatives and projects aimed at strengthening common values (for example, educational programs, cultural exchanges, joint statements on global issues) could further strengthen the analytical component. It would be interesting to see a brief comparative analysis of the BRICS common values platform with similar associations (for example, the EU, ASEAN) in order to emphasize the uniqueness and specificity of the BRICS approach. Mentioning NATO and the EU as examples of consolidation may be useful, but it is also important to keep in mind that these groups have different historical contexts and goals. The comparison should be careful and take into account the unique circumstances of BRICS.
In conclusion, it is important to emphasize that Dr. Oleg Barabanov’s article “Evolution of the BRICS Platform of Shared Values” is a significant contribution to understanding the BRICS phenomenon. The author successfully demonstrates that the dynamic development of this association is based not only on economic and political cooperation, but also on a constantly evolving platform of shared values. Insightful analysis, historical depth and clear presentation make this article a must-read for anyone interested in international politics, geopolitics and developing countries. Dr. Barabanov’s work not only helps to understand the past and present of BRICS, but also provides valuable guidance for predicting its future. The research demonstrates the development of BRICS as a multilateral platform where countries strive to find common ground on important international issues, despite internal differences and global challenges. The discussion of topics such as poverty eradication, World Bank support and territorial integrity indicates the desire of the participating countries to strengthen their positions in the international arena and promote their interests through cooperation.
