Just (Another) BRIC(S) on the Wall? Democracy, and Autocracy in a Context of Eroding Multilateralism

The acronym "BRIC" was coined in 2001 by Jim O'Neill of Goldman Sachs to designate four large, fast-growing emerging markets that were believed to be reshaping the global economic landscape (O'Neill, 2001). The primary rationale for forming the group was to aggregate the most-performing emerging economies at the time, given their strong economic growth and buoyant demographics. After twenty years, the initial group underwent a significant transformation. As it struggled to find ways to become significant in the new world order, it went from an economic powerhouse to an instrument of geopolitical confrontation towards the Western liberal order. As stated in the official documents, the goal of this geopolitical and geoeconomic alliance is to challenge the West's monopoly and regroup around major players in the Global South. These emergent economies sought to reform the world order toward more inclusive multilateralism. Among the BRICS countries, only three are fully democratic, and all maintain a clear hostile stance toward the Western order. The agenda has shifted from an initial objective of reforming multilateral institutions to developing alternative institutions and networks of influence, primarily in the financial, monetary, and infrastructure realms. In this context, we aim to ascertain the extent to which this new BRICS could lead to increased polarisation in the current world order and, at the same time, compromise the positions of the more moderate countries, Brazil, India, and South Africa. We use discourse and content analysis to examine the emergence of a more autocratic stance toward the world order amid deteriorating conditions in global trade and investment, the delusion of multilateralism, and growing disturbances to the globalised economy. We argue that BRICS has shifted from a discourse of reformist multilateralism to one increasingly opposed to the liberal democratic norms underpinning the current world order. Thus, this paper aims to determine whether the newly expanded BRICS bloc could serve as a vehicle for autocratic consolidation in international politics. Additionally, we also intend to shed some light on how member states like Brazil, India, and South Africa, the most moderate states, navigate this transformation, given their democratic credentials. Drawing on discourse and content analysis of official summit declarations and public speeches, this paper analyses the competing values of sovereignty and democracy within the group. By situating these developments within broader theories of norm diffusion and strategic hedging, we reflect on their implications for the future of global governance.