Summary
An academic rebuttal to two prior editorials argues that BRICS's 2026 New Delhi Declaration diagnoses the flaws of the existing global order clearly but names no credible path to fixing them and that the India-China thaw at the summit reflects tariff-era strategic convenience more than BRICS diplomacy succeeding.
WHY IN NEWS FOR UPSC & STATE PCS
Aftab Alam, dean of the Faculty of International Studies at Aligarh Muslim University, wrote a "Dear Editor, I Disagree" column in the Indian Express challenging two earlier editorials that praised BRICS as a valuable diplomatic forum after the 2026 New Delhi Declaration, arguing instead that BRICS has yet to show it can become a genuine institutional alternative to the Western-led order it criticises.
Standard News
Is BRICS Diplomacy Being Mistaken for BRICS Success?
The Disagreement Two Indian
Express editorials praised the 2026 BRICS Summit and its New Delhi Declaration as proof the grouping remains a useful diplomatic forum in a fragmented world. Aftab Alam's rebuttal argues this sets the bar too low - dialogue and diplomacy are not the same achievement as building a credible alternative to the order BRICS criticises.
The Realist Reading -
States use forums, forums don't transcend states: Citing John Mearsheimer, Alam argues international institutions largely reflect the power and interests of their members rather than rising above them.
- The Modi-Xi thaw wasn't BRICS's doing: India and China had independent strategic reasons - chiefly managing pressure from tariff moves - to ease tensions, regardless of the summit's existence. >> A forum that successfully manages friction between rivals is not the same as a forum capable of replacing the order it criticises.
What The Declaration Actually Delivers - And Doesn't
- Clear diagnosis: The New Delhi Declaration names unilateral sanctions, coercive tariffs, protectionism and unequal representation in global institutions as real problems.
- No credible pathway: It calls for reform of global institutions without specifying how that reform would actually happen.
- Ikenberry's caution: The struggle may be less about the liberal order collapsing than about who gets to shape its next form - and BRICS hasn't said what shape it wants.
Why This Matters For UPSC This is a
sharp, theory-grounded example for GS2 International Relations answers on multilateral institutions, the Global South and global governance reform - showing how diplomatic success and institutional transformation are frequently conflated in public commentary and how realist and liberal-institutionalist lenses read the same summit differently.
Quick Facts
Key numbers & takeaways — revise these first
-
BRICS expanded its membership in 2024 to add Global South nations.
-
India hosted the 2026 BRICS Summit, producing the New Delhi Declaration.
-
Xi Jinping's visit to India for the summit was his first since October 2019.
-
John Mearsheimer and G.
-
John Ikenberry are the two IR theorists cited in the piece.
Connect the dots for your UPSC preparation.
Standard news covers the event. Log in to read our comprehensive analysis and uncover the hidden constitutional, structural, and ethical dimensions of this topic:
The full case for BRICS as a genuinely valuable diplomatic instrument, built at the same strength the two rebutted editorials gave it
TAN's own defended position on whether "forum for managing divergence" and "alternative to the order" are structurally incompatible goals
The specific limit in the realist critique itself - where Mearsheimer's framework understates what BRICS could still become
What would have to change for BRICS to cross from diplomatic utility into institutional alternative, according to TAN's own reasoning
Included in this analysis
Join thousands of aspirants analyzing the news deeply.
Unlock Premium — Rs.699 AnnuallyDon't have an account? Sign up for free