Last weekend, Brazil’s President Lula welcomed other leaders from the B.R.I.C.S. economic bloc to Rio de Janeiro, where the group’s 17th annual summit was held. This year’s agenda was focused on discussing global cooperation and promoting peace in the midst of several violent conflicts unfolding across the world.

At the summit, leaders indirectly addressed criticisms towards the United States and Israel, particularly by mentioning the harmful implications of tariffs on global trade as well as the escalatory consequences of launching preemptive strikes on peaceful, non-military infrastructure. Although leaders did not mention the United States or Israel by name, United States President Donald Trump acknowledged the sentiments and retaliated on Monday by threatening to implement an additional 10% tariff on any country who “aligns themselves with the Anti-American policies of B.R.I.C.S.”

President Trump did not specify which policies he was referring to as Anti-American. However, according to C.N.N., he is likely referring to an idea that has been hinted at amongst B.R.I.C.S. leaders: a currency alternative to the U.S. dollar (U.S.D.). Brazil’s President Lula spoke publicly about this idea in 2023, although the general consensus amongst international political economists was that this is a highly ambitious endeavor that is unlikely to provide a substantial alternative to the U.S.D. Although the plan to create an alternative B.R.I.C.S. currency has been slow to gain momentum, B.R.I.C.S. countries have begun to increase trade in their respective currencies rather than relying solely on the U.S.D. for trade.

Since its foundation in 2009, B.R.I.C.S. has expressed both implicitly and explicitly that a major goal of the economic bloc is to end the financial hegemony that the United States and its allies have enjoyed for the past century. However, the summit on July 6 was primarily focused on promoting cooperation and peace. Although B.R.I.C.S. leaders were not hesitant to indirectly acknowledge the escalatory actions taken by the United States, there was no mention of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine (except to condemn Ukrainian strikes into Russia) or Iran’s retaliatory attacks. N.P.R. points to the vastly different relationships that members of B.R.I.C.S. hold with the United States and its allies as the reason for indirect statements of criticism on one front and a choice to refrain from criticizing on the opposite front.

In response to President Trump’s tariff threats, Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Mao Ning reiterated China’s claim that B.R.I.C.S. is not seeking to engage in conflict with the United States, stating, “Regarding the imposition of tariffs, China has repeatedly stated its position that trade and tariff wars have no winners and protectionism offers no way forward” (Arab News). The threats levied against B.R.I.C.S. members are likely to strengthen their commitment to decentering the U.S.D. in international trade and finance. Additionally, increased tensions between the United States and members of B.R.I.C.S., such as Russia and Iran, will likely play a crucial role in paving the way for the bloc’s future relationship with the United States and its allies.