Trump’s claim about ...
Page 1
Against this backdrop, Trump appears hell-bent on fueling his aggressive stance toward BRICS as an anti-Western coalition. However, as is often the case, he wraps his policy in his own brand of rhetoric. While China and Russia remain key BRICS members, others—such as India, South Africa, and Brazil—do not necessarily fall into the revisionist camp. On the contrary, these countries maintain strong trade ties with the West, particularly with the US. In fact, India has often been viewed as Washington’s strategic proxy in the Indian Ocean to counterbalance China.
Given these dynamics, a pressing question arises: Will pressure be applied to BRICS members that do not explicitly challenge the status quo? Recent developments offer some clues. Just days ago, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi met with Trump at the White House, where discussions kicked up a notch regarding military cooperation, technology transfers, and trade.
This sends a crystal-clear signal that Washington and New Delhi are drawing even closer, forming what appears to be a counterweight to the so-called China-Pakistan axis. If the US turns the screws on certain BRICS members—excluding China, Russia, and Iran—it is likely that, in the coming months and years, these states may start pulling away from BRICS, reducing their involvement to a mere formality or refraining from major strategic initiatives, such as the creation of a common reserve fund or a shared currency.
However, if India has managed to get the green light from the US to remain in BRICS, the bloc could well carry on business as usual. One thing is certain, though: as geostrategic rivalry between China, Russia, and the US heats up, tensions between these global heavyweights will only ratchet up further.
What is unfolding today reflects Trump’s commitment to a Jacksonian and Hamiltonian brand of foreign policy—one that zeroes in on US national interests. Unlike the Democratic approach, which saw Washington spread itself too thin across global affairs, Trump’s strategy is more hard-nosed and results-driven.
Given all this, Trump’s assertion about BRICS’ imminent collapse warrants closer scrutiny. For now, however, it is difficult to take such claims at face value. Writing off years of BRICS cooperation on the back of a statement from a newly elected president—one who has been in office for barely a month—would be a rash and premature conclusion.