BRICS Plus and Contested Multilateralism: Policy Coordination, Internal Tensions, and the Role of Emerging Middle Powers in Global Governance Reform

Authors: Kamatchi Devi S; Revanth Udutha; Vanshita Baid

Abstract:
Academic research has increased its focus on BRICS Plus expansion which occurred during the early 2020s because researchers want to determine whether this alliance serves as a counterforce against the Western-dominated liberal international order or operates mainly as a national interest-driven platform. The research investigates how BRICS Plus members coordinate their policies while assessing their global governance reform efforts and studying how the group handles internal conflicts which arise from the ongoing competition between India and China. The study uses qualitative research methods to analyze secondary data from BRICS summit declarations and institutional documents and existing academic literature. BRICS Plus shows increasing rhetorical unity and institutional governance reform collaboration but actual governance reform partnerships remain limited because of power imbalances and different national objectives and clashing leadership goals. Indian, Brazilian, and South African emerging middle powers use BRICS to improve their strategic independence and international recognition instead of establishing a unified movement against existing power structures. The research demonstrates that BRICS Plus functions as a contested multilateral system which permits international governance changes to proceed through minor adjustments that avoid major transformations of the current global system.

Key words: BRICS Plus Expansion, Contested Multilateralism, Global Governance Reform, Emerging Middle Powers, Policy Coordination and Power Asymmetries

Introduction:

The existing system of international relations is experiencing a slow process of change which brings new power to emerging economies in Asia and Africa and Latin America. The International Monetary Fund and World Bank and United Nations Security Council serve as global governance organizations that maintain power structures which originated after World War II. Rising states experience growing discontent because they believe they have insufficient power to influence decision-making processes. Emerging economies established new institutional platforms to express their shared interests which they need to strengthen their power in international relations.

The BRICS grouping comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa has emerged as one of the most prominent expressions of this trend. The BRICS group started as an economic system to classify countries but now functions as a political group that discusses development finance and trade coordination and diplomatic activities and international governance changes. Countries established the New Development Bank and Contingent Reserve Arrangement to create financial institutions that reduce Western financial system control while they maintain their international relationships. The BRICS group built its institutional framework through internal system changes that increased member representation and system adaptability.

The new members of BRICS Plus which joined the group recently have introduced fresh topics for discussion about its member states. The official statements of the organization state that South cooperation and multipolarity and global institutional reforms form the core of its mission, yet members still exhibit strong internal differences. The bloc faces challenges to its ability to function as a unified political entity because of its strategic conflicts between India and China and its unequal power distribution and its various member countries foreign policy differences. BRICS functions through a decision-making process which requires member states to reach common agreement, yet this system enables nations to work together while keeping their right to disagree.

The research investigates BRICS Plus as an intricate institutional system which combines elements of diplomatic cooperation and political conflict. The paper uses contested multilateralism as its framework to describe BRICS instead of characterizing it as either a counter hegemonic coalition or a symbolic forum. The approach demonstrates how states use multilateral institutions to challenge specific parts of the existing system while maintaining their operations within the system, which results in gradual rather than transformational changes.

Literature review:

Scholarly literature on BRICS produces multiple viewpoints about its institutional value and economic effects and political unity. Research studies examine how BRICS has established its institutional framework through increasing summit meetings and ministerial assemblies and specific working group sessions. The research which studies summit declarations together with compliance patterns demonstrates that BRICS has created structured connections between its members which operate differently from temporary diplomatic gatherings.

Another strand of literature emphasises the limitations of BRICS cooperation. Economic analyses show that member states develop different economic models which create multiple regulatory systems and result in unequal benefits distribution among them. The economic supremacy of China within BRICS has produced worries about China exercising excessive authority which makes scholars believe that BRICS exists to advance Chinese national interests instead of pursuing shared objectives. National interests usually take precedence over joint national responsibilities which prevent nations from achieving full unification.

The study of BRICS development finance shows its institutions implement reformative changes instead of creating completely new systems. The New Development Bank functions as a secondary financial body which provides developing nations additional funding sources while maintaining current financial systems. The perspective presents BRICS contribution to global governance as a dual process which maintains existing systems while introducing new elements. The patterns found in environmental governance literature demonstrate matching developments. The BRICS nations show unified international climate negotiation positions, but their distinct energy needs and industrial capabilities and development goals create challenges for joint efforts. Scholars argue that BRICS environmental cooperation remains largely rhetorical, shaped by defensive alignment against Western norms rather than proactive leadership.

BRICS research shows increasing interest in studying how countries within the group experience power differences and develop conflict relationships. The India China relationship has received particular attention, with studies highlighting how bilateral tensions shape multilateral behaviour. The BRICS design process which develops consensus among member states enables institutions to endure yet stops them from achieving major changes.

The existing body of literature shows numerous studies on the topic, but only a small number of research projects take an integrated view which studies policy coordination together with internal conflicts and middle power actions in the BRICS Plus expanded system. The recent expansion of BRICS needs better understanding through its multilateralism battle, but researchers have spent little time studying this issue. The study investigates these existing gaps through the examination of BRICS Plus, which develops as a dynamic institutional framework that exists between collaborative and competitive relationships.

Objectives of the Study:

The objectives of the study are as follows

1) To understand how emerging middle powers such as India, Brazil, and South Africa utilise the BRICS platform to advance national interests in a multipolar world

2) To examine the extent of policy coordination among BRICS Plus members on key global governance issues

3) To analyse the nature of BRICS reform agendas and their positioning relative to the Western led international order

4) To assess how BRICS manages internal tensions, particularly the India China rivalry, within a consensus based framework

Methodology and data sources:

The research uses a qualitative research methodology to study BRICS Plus as a political and institutional phenomenon. The research needs qualitative analysis because it studies policy discourse and institutional behavior and strategic interaction between organizations instead of measuring economic results. The research project does not require people participation, and it does not apply numerical data which results in the inapplicability of population and sample and sample size definitions.

The analysis requires secondary data sources which include official BRICS summit declarations and joint communiques and policy statements and institutional documents from the New Development Bank and related mechanisms. The database consists of peer reviewed academic journals and books on global governance and international political economy and policy reports from research institutions.

Documents were selected based on purposive selection to establish their connection to BRICS governance and expansion and policy coordination. The study used qualitative content analysis to find recurring themes that involved institutional reform and strategic autonomy and power asymmetry and internal contestation. The researchers used the theoretical framework of contested multilateralism to analyze the themes which shows how states use multilateral institutions to achieve their competing interests within a common system.

Analysis and Findings:

The study used qualitative methods to analyze BRICS Plus summit declarations and institutional records and academic research materials which showed that member countries used similar language but showed different conduct patterns. The official statements show unified dedication to carrying out Western institutional reforms which will create multiple power centers and enhance South-South collaboration. The New Development Bank and the Contingent Reserve Arrangement both start their operations which shows that member countries want to create financial systems that will help them reduce their need for Western financial systems. The analysis of policy language and implementation pathways shows that member states use normative frameworks to coordinate international activities while maintaining control over their domestic policy decisions.

Power disparities and strategic competition between countries serve as the main factors which determine how BRICS Plus countries interact with one another. China's control over both economic and political matters determines institutional changes while establishing new procedures which makes India and other countries approach China with caution. The three countries of India, Brazil and South Africa use the BRICS platform to raise their international presence and strengthen their negotiation power while keeping their right to choose foreign policy measures. The BRICS Plus organization operates as a political unit through its common activities which enable member states to work together while engaging in ongoing competitive struggles.

Results and discussion:

The study results show that BRICS Plus established itself as a legitimate reformist force which operates within current global governance systems instead of creating a new revolutionary system. The group advanced global governance through its joint diplomatic activities and its shared institutional systems by creating new development financing pathways which enhanced Global South representation. The achievements of the parties involved remain limited because the consensus- based institutional structure prevents them from executing major joint initiatives and developing permanent policy frameworks.

The discussion further shows that BRICS Plus operates as a form of contested multilateralism because its member states both reject and accept the dominant international system. Member states contest Western dominance rhetorically and institutionally while continuing to engage with existing global institutions for strategic and economic benefits. The two countries manage their internal disputes by using flexible rules and unclear boundaries which lets them keep their institutional structure but stops their full partnership with each other. This dual strategy explains both the resilience of BRICS Plus and its constrained transformative capacity within global governance.

Conclusion:

The research findings show that BRICS Plus functions as an institutional arrangement which protects its members through their multimodal approach to international relations. The organization exists as an institutional framework which operates through its members who work together on specific matters relating to
development financing and governance reform while competing to establish them authority and power in the Global South.

BRICS Plus maintains its strength through its capacity to embrace diverse elements of existence. The multipolar world custodian system enables the bloc to maintain its presence, yet it limits their ability to execute major changes in international governance systems. The main results of BRICS participation include incremental changes and symbolic expansion of membership and partnerships based on specific themes.

The study works under a constraint because it depends on secondary sources which need qualitative analysis. The study cannot measure policy implementation results because it lacks primary interview data and quantitative assessment tools. Future research which combines comparative case studies with empirical research on institutional effectiveness will enhance our understanding of how BRICS Plus affects international governance systems.

References:

Yarygina, I. Z., Zhiglyaeva, A. V., Vershinina, O. V., & Kuvshinova, Y. A. (2020). Trade and Economic Cooperation of BRICS: Problems and prospects. Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 9(6), 89. https://doi.org/10.36941/ajis-2020-0114

Research collaboration among emerging economies: policy and economic implications for BRICS nations. (2016b). In University of Johannesburg & The British University in Dubai, Int. J. Economic Policy in Emerging Economies (Vol. 9, Issue 4, pp. 344–360).

Kirton, J., & Larionova, M. (2022b). The first fifteen years of the BRICS. International Organisations Research Journal, 17(2), 1. https://doi.org/10.17323/1996-7845-2022-02-01

Rahman, M. N., & Turay, A. M. (2018). Climate change issues in BRICS countries. Management and Economics Research Journal, 4(2), 174. https://doi.org/10.18639/merj.2018.04.678933

Beeson, M., & Zeng, J. (2018). The BRICS and global governance: China’s contradictory role. In Third World Quarterly (Vol. 2018, pp. 2–2) [Journal- article]. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2018.1438186

Vyas-Doorgapersad, S. (2022). The role of BRICS in global governance to promote economic development. Africa’s Public Service Delivery and Performance Review, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.4102/apsdpr.v10i1.633

Downie, C., & Williams, M. (2018). After the Paris Agreement: What role for the BRICS in global climate governance? Global Policy, 9(3), 398–407. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12550

Kumar, R., & Thomas, B. (2022). BRICS in Global Governance: A gradual but steady expansion. Governance and Politics, 100–113.

Haryono, Utari, W., Rahmawati, D. A., Endarto, B., & Sanusi, R. (2024). Evaluating the role of BRICS in shaping global economic governance: A comparative analysis of policy approaches and outcomes. The Es Economics and Entrepreneurship, 172–179. https://esj.eastasouth- institute.com/index.php/esee

MOUTCHOU, I. (2024). BRICS at the crossroads: creating a new world order by handling internal difficulties and global goals [Economic strategies]. African Scientific Journal, 22–22, 0256–0281. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10623069

Katoch, D. C. & India Foundation. (2025). From Bretton Woods to BRICS+: the evolving Global Order. In India Foundation Journal: Vol. Vol. VI (Issue Issue No. 1) [Journal-article]. https://indiafoundation.in/wp- content/uploads/2025/01/January-February-2025-IF-Journal.pdf

Armijo, L. E., & Roberts, C. (2014). The Emerging Powers and Global Governance: Why the BRICS matter. In Robert Looney (Ed.), Handbook of Emerging Economies. Routledge.

Cooper, A. F. & University of Waterloo. (2014). The G20 and contested global governance: BRICS, middle powers and small states. In Caribbean Journal of International Relations & Diplomacy: Vol. Vol. 2 (Issue No. 3, pp. 87–109).

Qobo, M., & Soko, M. (2015). The rise of emerging powers in the global development finance architecture: The case of the BRICS and the New Development Bank. South African Journal of International Affairs, 22(3), 277–288. https://doi.org/10.1080/10220461.2015.1089785