New BRICS-Nigeria Partnership Highlights Developing World’s Growing Economic Influence

On January 17, Brazil announced that Nigeria would be joining as a partner with the intergovernmental organization BRICS. BRICS was formed in 2009 by Brazil, Russia, India, and China– with South Africa joining in 2010– to balance out the wealthy, developed nations making up the Group of 7 (G7). Iran, Egypt, Ethiopia and the United Arab Emirates were added later. Nigeria is the ninth partner country of BRICS along with Belarus, Bolivia, Cuba, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Thailand, Uganda, and Uzbekistan. This addition is significant because Nigeria is a world player, with the largest population and one of the largest economies in Africa. Many Nigerians are optimistic about the new opportunities BRICS will provide, such as economist Emeka Okengwu, who says it will help the country with “being able to meet global standards and being competitive.”
BRICS’s growing membership reveals a broader trend of Global South countries challenging the influence of the Western-dominated Bretton Woods system. This system, created after World War II, pegged all currencies to the U.S. dollar and formed several international financial institutions. Among these were the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, which were intended to stabilize global monetary exchange rates and promote economic development. However, both of these institutions have a weighted voting system, giving Western countries more votes because they can contribute more money. Additionally, the leaders of these institutions have always been from the West. This gives rich, developed countries significant power to make decisions in the international economy, allowing them to protect the wealth that they have acquired, often through generations of violence and colonialism.
BRICS is trying to take a stance against this hegemonic power in several ways. For one, it is an organization made up of members from the Global South, which means it can make its own rules and agreements without influence from Western member countries. According to a Global Political Economy article, in 2024, Russia proposed a new international financial system for BRICS that does not rely on the US dollar. The BRICS Cross-Border Payment Initiative (BCBPI) would use national currencies to trade instead of dollars. Russia also proposed to strengthen the organizations that are BRICS alternatives to the IMF and the World Bank; the Contingent Reserve Agreement and the New Development Bank (NDB). For example, the NDB provides loans from BRICS members for infrastructure projects in developing countries. Russia’s proposal seeks to increase funding for the NDB, which could make developing countries less reliant on aid from Western organizations like the World Bank.
BRICS members and their partner countries now represent 54.6% of the world’s population and 42.2% of world’s GDP. A recent report from the Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP) found that “the number of countries with significant influence in more than five other nations has almost tripled, rising from 13 at the end of the Cold War to 34 in 2024,” including countries like Türkiye, Vietnam, and the UAE. Clearly, the Global South’s economic power and influence has been growing in the last few decades, and will probably continue to do so.
Yet, this does not come without new challenges. According to AP News, last year, Trump “threatened 100% tariffs against BRICS if they act to undermine the U.S. dollar.” In addition, the IEP report cites data that the last ten years have shown more military spending around the world, more proxy wars and wars of influences, and more UN security council vetos. All of this indicates a growing rift among nations and further polarization, similar to the Cold War era. The IEP states that this paradox of economic interdependence among countries and political tensions could lead to a second Cold War. To avoid this, there are several responses that can be taken to help the Global South continue developing.
One approach is for the West to embrace institutions like BRICS rather than pushing back against them. In general, economists agree that tariffs tend to force people to pay higher taxes domestically, and decrease mutually beneficial exchanges for both countries. They are an attempt to hold onto economic power, but will not stop other countries from developing. A better approach would be to collaborate with these institutions so that economic gains can be achieved on all sides. BRICS’s growth does not deter countries like the U.S. from economic prosperity, but instead opens up more opportunities for specialization between countries. It allows trading partners to be on a level playing field rather than one country exploiting another. Overall, the rising power of institutions like BRICS should not be viewed as a threat, but a possibility of what can be achieved if trade relations are maintained.
Another approach would be to invest money into development rather than military spending. The IEP report showed that military spending worldwide has been steadily increasing in the last decade, and was much higher in 2024 than it was in the 1980s and 1990s. Meanwhile, foreign aid over that same time period also increased significantly, but bilateral aid has seen the majority of growth compared to multilateral aid. This shows that while countries are still interested in helping each other, they also want to maintain large military forces, which can often be taken as a threat by opponents. This has the potential to trigger a security dilemma or an arms race. Focusing more money on sustainable development, particularly in the Global South, can create camaraderie between the Global North and South rather than making it seem like everyone is fortifying against each other.
Finally, migration can be an approach to strengthening bonds between countries. Migration networks are crucial to the modern global economy because they provide labor to countries that need it and send money back to home countries to stimulate local economies. There has been a recent trend of nativist policies and ideas, particularly in the U.S. and Europe, where migrants are seen as problems and referred to as dangerous. Shifting the narrative towards accepting migration would be a way to maintain networks between those countries. It would help the economies of both countries, while also allowing for cultural exchange that encourages collaboration rather than conflict.
Multilateralism has succeeded in the past, such as the formation of the UN in the wake of World War II. Embracing the revival and expansion of intergovernmental organizations– such as BRICS accepting Nigeria as a partner– has numerous benefits. There are economic gains to be had for Global North and Global South organizations, but only if all sides choose cooperation rather than succumbing to protectionism.

Related

Leave a Reply