At BRICS Summit, China and India Vie for Influence

• China is using the BRICS summit to push a collective challenge to American dominance.
• India is urging the bloc to stay inclusive and not become a binary front.
• The rivalry shapes how the group will influence global governance after the summit.

The 2024 BRICS summit in Johannesburg saw Beijing and New Delhi jostle for leadership within the bloc, each with a different vision of its purpose. China framed the meeting as a platform to contest U.S. power, while India warned that the group must remain broad enough to avoid a de‑facto alignment against the West. Their clash matters because the bloc’s cohesion will affect trade, security and diplomatic coordination among emerging economies.

What drives China’s push to use BRICS against the United States?

Chinese officials have repeatedly described the BRICS association as a counterweight to the existing Western‑led order. By presenting the group as a united front, Beijing hopes to amplify its own diplomatic weight and create an alternative venue for financing, standards and political coordination. The narrative positions BRICS as a vehicle for challenging American influence in multilateral institutions, trade negotiations and security forums.

China’s strategy relies on leveraging the combined market size of member states. A larger bloc can negotiate better terms in global supply chains, push for reforms in institutions like the IMF, and promote alternative payment systems. If the bloc presents a coherent stance, it can force the United States to consider a broader set of interests in its policy calculations.

Critics argue that the approach risks turning BRICS into a rival bloc rather than a forum for cooperation. The more the group is seen as an anti‑U.S. coalition, the higher the chance that member states will be pressured to pick sides in geopolitical disputes, which could undermine the original intent of economic collaboration.

Why does India want the group to stay broad and non‑aligned?

India’s delegation emphasized inclusivity as a safeguard against the bloc becoming a binary bloc. New Delhi argues that a wide‑ranging membership keeps the group flexible and prevents it from being perceived as a direct challenger to the West. This stance reflects India’s broader foreign‑policy goal of maintaining strategic autonomy while engaging with multiple powers.

By keeping the group open, India hopes to preserve trade links with both Western and non‑Western partners. An overly politicised BRICS could force member states to curtail existing economic ties with the United States, Europe or other allies. India’s position therefore seeks to protect its own growth agenda and avoid being drawn into a Cold‑War‑style alignment.

India also points to the diversity of its BRICS partners as a source of strength. Different economic models, development stages and regional priorities can generate a richer dialogue on issues such as climate finance, technology transfer and infrastructure investment. A broad coalition can therefore serve as a platform for shared solutions rather than a tool for geopolitical confrontation.

How might the rivalry shape the future direction of BRICS?

The tension between Beijing’s confrontational framing and New Delhi’s inclusivity drive could dictate the bloc’s next steps. If China’s view gains traction, BRICS may adopt more coordinated positions on sanctions, trade barriers and security issues, effectively creating a parallel structure to existing Western institutions.

Conversely, if India’s call for openness prevails, the group may focus on pragmatic cooperation, such as joint infrastructure projects, research collaborations and the development of alternative financial mechanisms that do not explicitly target the United States.

Member states will watch closely how the summit’s declarations translate into concrete actions. The balance of influence will affect whether BRICS evolves into a cohesive political bloc or remains a loose association of economies with shared, but not identical, interests.

What comes next and what could change the trajectory?

The next phase will involve drafting the summit’s final communiqué and setting up working groups. How those documents phrase the bloc’s stance on global governance will reveal which narrative holds sway. A clear, collective challenge to U.S. policies would signal a shift toward a more confrontational BRICS, while language emphasizing cooperation and inclusivity would align with India’s vision.

External factors could also reshape the dynamic. Changes in U.S. foreign policy, shifts in global commodity markets or unexpected regional crises may force members to reassess their priorities. Any move that threatens the economic interests of either China or India could prompt a recalibration of their positions within the group.

Source: NYT World.