BRICS And The Ukraine Ceasefire: Reimagining Global Mediation In A Multipolar Order
BRICS And The Ukraine Ceasefire: Reimagining Global Mediation In A Multipolar Order
By Uriel Araujo
Moscow’s push for BRICS nations—China, India, Brazil, South Africa—and North Korea to join Ukraine ceasefire talks, alongside Belarus’s BRICS security summit proposal, underscores the bloc’s role in a multipolar world.
In a rather underreported development, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s call for North Korea and BRICS nations—China, India, Brazil, and South Africa—to join Ukraine ceasefire talks suggests a significant reimagining of global conflict resolution. Coupled with Belarus’s recent proposal to host a BRICS parliamentary security summit, these developments underscore the rising influence of the BRICS bloc as an alternative mechanism. Far from being a mere economic alliance, BRICS could be emerging as a platform for fostering a polycentric world.
Putin’s proposal, articulated in Murmansk in March 2025, reflects a growing frustration with Western-led negotiations, which he has described as inconsistent and deceptive. Whether one likes the Russian leader or not, Moscow’s suggestion to include diverse voices from the Global South, alongside North Korea, in ceasefire talks is not merely strategic but quite visionary in that it recognizes that the Ukraine conflict, while geographically European, has global ramifications that demand a broader coalition of stakeholders. Unlike Western frameworks, which often prioritize NATO’s interests, a BRICS-mediated process could emphasize mutual security and economic stability, drawing on the bloc’s commitment to non-interference and multilateralism.
Meanwhile, Belarus’s own proposal to host a BRICS parliamentary security summit further amplifies this vision. Proposed last week, the summit would aim to deepen cooperation across politics, security, economy, finance, culture, and humanitarian ties. By fostering dialogue among parliaments of BRICS nations, Belarus thus seeks to institutionalize the bloc’s role in addressing global challenges, from conflict resolution to economic resilience. This move aligns with BRICS’s broader ambition to help push a multipolar order where no single power dictates terms. The summit could also lay the groundwork for a new security architecture, one that prioritizes collective stability over hegemonic control.
The potential role of BRICS in fact extends beyond mediation to challenging the very economic foundations of Western dominance. The bloc’s push for de-dollarization, a key focus at recent summits, exemplifies its transformative potential. As Putin noted at the 2024 Kazan summit, the U.S. dollar’s weaponization through sanctions has alienated many nations, thereby prompting a shift toward local currency trade. Russia and China, for instance, have conducted up to 90% of their trade (in 2023, for instance) in national currencies, bypassing the dollar.
This trend, supported by initiatives like the BRICS New Development Bank and proposals for alternative payment systems, signals a seismic shift in global finance. By reducing reliance on the dollar, BRICS undermines Washington’s ability to impose punitive sanctions, empowering nations to pursue independent economic policies.
No wonder US President Donald Trump has repeatedly responded with threats. Tridivesh Singh Maini, a Policy Analyst associated with The Jindal School of International Affairs, argues that despite US President Trump’s threats of tariffs to counter this shift, BRICS is indeed expanding its influence, promoting local currency trade and multilateralism to challenge Western financial dominance, though a common BRICS currency remains unlikely
There are challenges, however. BRICS’s diversity, while a strength, can hinder cohesive action, as seen sometimes in India-China border tensions or differing economic priorities among members. Coordinating a unified mediation strategy for complex conflicts like Ukraine may prove difficult, given varying national interests and limited institutional frameworks. Additionally, the bloc’s financial initiatives, such as de-dollarization, face logistical hurdles and resistance from Western-dominated systems, potentially slowing progress.
However such diversity can also mean strength. Unlike the G7, which enforces ideological conformity, BRICS embraces a multiplicity of perspectives. India’s External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar for one has emphasized BRICS as a platform for enhancing global understanding, not confrontation.
In 2022, the May 20 BRICS virtual meeting, attended by foreign ministers from Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, and Global South nations like Egypt, Indonesia, and Saudi Arabia, agreed to expand BRICS+ cooperation. Amid rising commodity prices due to Western sanctions, BRICS was offering an alternative to Western financial systems, appealing to the Global South’s increasingly non-aligned and multi-aligned approaches, as I commented before.
In June 2022, rising commodity prices, largely attributed to Western sanctions, prompted Global South nations to seek alternative mechanisms to the US-led Western bloc. This spurred what could be described as a non-aligned movement, particularly among African leaders, and enhanced the BRICS group’s role (still under construction) in an emerging multipolar world.
The bloc’s expansion to include Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, and the UAE, with interest from nations like Turkey and Indonesia, reflects its growing appeal as a voice for the Global South. Such inclusivity places the BRICS group in a unique position to mediate conflicts like the one in Ukraine, where Western approaches have faltered. Whatever Trump may think, one cannot just force a conflict into ceasing to be.
Washington’s response to BRICS’s rise has been predictably dismissive, with U.S. officials downplaying its geopolitical clout. Yet, this arguably belies a deeper anxiety. The U.S. has long relied on its economic and military dominance to enforce a unipolar order, often through sanctions and interventions that destabilize sovereign nations.
The BRICS vision—rooted in multilateralism and economic cooperation—challenges such a model, offering a framework where nations can negotiate in a more balanced manner. The bloc’s economic weight, representing 45% of the world’s population and 37% of global GDP, certainly underscores its potential to reshape global governance.
This being so, could BRICS mediate the Ukraine conflict? The answer lies in its ability to transcend Western binaries of victory and defeat. Leaders like India’s Narendra Modi and South Africa’s Cyril Ramaphosa have already called for peaceful resolutions, reflecting the bloc’s consensus that prolonged attrition conflict serves no one. A BRICS-led process, potentially facilitated by neutral venues, could prioritize de-escalation and economic reconstruction over punitive measures.
Be it as it may, even taking all scepticism into consideration, BRICS should not be underestimated. Beyond the issue of Ukraine, merely by championing de-dollarization, fostering alternative financial systems, and amplifying the Global South, BRICS is not just mediating conflicts but is already redefining global priorities. The West, accustomed to dictating terms, may scoff, but its influence is waning.
Uriel Araujo is a Ph.D. scholar and anthropology researcher with a focus on international and ethnic conflicts.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Voice of East.
7 Courses in 1 – Diploma in Business Management
#Belarus #Brazil #BRICS #China #Geopolitics #GlobalSouth #India #NorthKorea #Russia #SouthAfrica #Ukraine
Thế Giới Trong Tầm Tay
Sankofab
kriykat
Gopi Adusumilli 
Yogthos
a̸m̵n̵e̴s̴i̶a̸c̷7̷
Luis Carrillo
Voice of East
