BRICS Pushes Back on Trump, But India Keeps It Non-Western, Not Anti-US

The 18th BRICS Summit in New Delhi ended with a 45-page declaration that took a firm position against unilateral tariffs, economic coercion and weaknesses in the global trading system. But the document also stopped short of turning BRICS into an explicitly anti-US grouping.

That distinction is important for India.

The New Delhi Declaration, adopted unanimously on September 12, calls for reform of the World Trade Organization (WTO), restoration of its dispute settlement mechanism, greater use of local currencies in trade and investment and more efficient cross-border payment systems. It also criticises unilateral tariff and non-tariff measures and calls for greater representation of developing countries in global institutions.

At the same time, the declaration does not call for a BRICS currency or set out a formal programme to replace the dollar. Instead, it takes a more cautious approach to local-currency settlements, saying there is "no one-size-fits-all approach" and that national priorities should be respected.

For India, this has allowed the grouping to register its opposition to unilateral economic measures while keeping the focus on reform of the existing global system.

As Dhananjay Tripathi, Senior Associate Professor at the Department of International Relations at South Asian University, said, BRICS has not explicitly sought to create an alternative world order. Its focus, he said, has been to give the Global South greater representation in existing international institutions.

A Pushback On Tariffs, With The WTO At The Centre

The strongest economic message from the declaration is on trade.

BRICS expressed "serious concerns" over the rise of unilateral tariff and non-tariff measures, saying such steps distort trade and are inconsistent with WTO rules. The grouping also called for the restoration of the WTO's dispute settlement mechanism and broader reform of the organisation.

The language is significant in the current environment, particularly as US President Donald Trump has used tariffs extensively against trading partners and has threatened additional tariffs against countries that support what he calls the BRICS agenda.

But the declaration does not make the WTO secondary to a new BRICS-led trade system. Instead, it calls for the existing multilateral trading system to work better.

That is an important distinction.

Tripathi said the position reflects a concern among developing countries that global trade rules should be more inclusive and predictable instead of being shaped predominantly by Western preferences.

"The primary objective" of BRICS, he said, is to ensure that the concerns and interests of the Global South are not ignored and that these countries receive greater representation in the existing international order.

The declaration also takes aim at climate-linked trade measures. BRICS criticised unilateral environmental measures that it said could become discriminatory or protectionist, including measures affecting developing countries' trade competitiveness. The European Union's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism has been a particular concern for developing economies.

This means the trade message from Delhi was broader than opposition to US tariffs. BRICS also wants developing countries to have a greater say in how trade, climate and economic rules are designed.

BRICS vs The EU: A Shift In Economic Weight

The pushback from Delhi carries more weight than similar efforts in recent years because the economic balance has shifted.

In April 2025, the European Union approved its first package of retaliatory measures against Trump's tariffs, condemning the US duties as "unjustified and damaging." The retaliatory duties, set mostly at 25%, targeted around €22 billion worth of US imports including soybeans, poultry, tobacco, motorcycles and steel.

But the EU is no longer the largest economic counterweight to the United States. According to the IMF's April 2026 Global Economic Prospects report, the six official BRICS members—China, India, Russia, Brazil, Saudi Arabia and South Africa—accounted for approximately 35.4% of global GDP in purchasing power parity terms in 2025. The European Union's GDP accounted for approximately 14.7% of the global total, placing it third globally.

That makes BRICS, for the first time, the largest economic bloc to have collectively railed against American unilateralism. The Delhi declaration is not just another diplomatic statement; it represents a grouping whose combined economic weight now exceeds that of the EU.

The Quiet Shift In Trade Payments

The second part of the economic story is less dramatic but potentially more practical.

The declaration asks the BRICS Payment Task Force to continue work on cross-border payment mechanisms and interoperability between payment and messaging systems. It also supports discussions on using BRICS local currencies for trade settlements and investment. The stated objectives include making cross-border payments faster, cheaper, more accessible, efficient, transparent and safe.

Point to note: This is different from creating a common BRICS currency.

India has made clear that there is no proposal for such a currency at present. Sudhakar Dalela, Secretary, Economic Relations, in the Ministry of External Affairs, said the discussion on local-currency trade had been continuing for more than a decade and that there was no proposal for a BRICS currency "as of now".

Rajan Kumar, Professor at Jawaharlal Nehru University's School of International Studies, said local-currency trade is already taking place among some BRICS members.

He pointed to Russia-China trade, India-Russia trade and Brazil-China trade as examples, while noting that countries are also looking at linking payment systems to make transactions easier.

Kumar said the shift has also been influenced by the experience of Russia, which was removed from the SWIFT financial messaging system following the Ukraine crisis and saw Russian assets frozen by Western countries. That experience, he said, created concerns among other Global South countries about their own exposure to such measures.

But this does not mean the dollar is about to disappear from BRICS trade.

Kumar himself cautioned that the move would not have a large immediate impact on dollar trade because a substantial share of global trade continues to be conducted in dollars. Instead, he expects BRICS countries to gradually increase national-currency transactions among themselves.

That makes the Delhi approach more about diversifying payment options than replacing the dollar.

For India, that is a less disruptive proposition than a common BRICS currency or an explicit de-dollarisation campaign.

India's Diplomatic Balancing Act

The economic decisions were only one part of India's challenge.

BRICS now has 11 members: Brazil, China, Egypt, Ethiopia, India, Indonesia, Iran, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa and the UAE. The grouping therefore includes countries with sharply different economic interests and geopolitical alignments.

The challenge was particularly visible in West Asia.

Iran and the UAE are both BRICS members, while the United States and Iran remain involved in an ongoing conflict. The UAE has close security ties with Washington. Reaching consensus on the language around the conflict therefore required members to avoid formulations that could force the grouping to take sides. Reuters reported that the joint declaration called for maximum restraint and diplomacy while avoiding direct attribution of blame.

Ajay Srivastava, founder of the Global Trade Research Initiative, described the West Asia section as a diplomatic achievement for India. He said the declaration did not name the US, Israel or Iran but addressed the concerns of the different sides, including the protection of civilians, respect for sovereignty, dialogue and the uninterrupted flow of energy and trade.

The declaration's wording on West Asia is therefore important to the larger story.

India was hosting a grouping that included countries with competing interests in a live conflict. Yet, the members reached consensus on a joint document.

Tripathi said BRICS has never presented itself as an anti-Western organisation. For India, he said, the challenge is to maintain constructive relations with both the US and BRICS members while preserving strategic autonomy.

That is the diplomatic balance visible in the New Delhi Declaration.

The document criticises unilateral tariffs, sanctions and other forms of economic coercion, but its proposed response is not to create a separate political or economic bloc. Instead, it repeatedly returns to multilateralism, institutional reform and greater representation for developing countries.

A Formidable Show Of Strength, Without Thuggery

The Delhi summit demonstrated that BRICS is willing to push back against Trump's threats without resorting to the kind of confrontational rhetoric that would stoke a diplomatic crisis.

When Trump threatened a 10% tariff on countries backing BRICS, the bloc firmly rejected the warning. Brazilian President Lula da Silva stated, "It's not right for a president of a country the size of the US to threaten the world online."

Yet BRICS members simultaneously emphasised they are not anti-American. South Africa's Trade Ministry spokesman stated, "We are not anti-American." Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov added that cooperation within BRICS "has never been and will never be directed against any third-party countries."

The result is a significant collective pushback against unilateral economic pressure, but not an anti-US declaration. That distinction is important for India, which has sought to use BRICS to press for a more representative global economic order without turning the grouping into a platform for confrontation with Washington.

Consensus Despite Deep Divisions

The diplomatic tightrope was particularly difficult because of the deep splits within the grouping.

A previous foreign ministers' meeting in New Delhi had failed to produce a joint statement due to differences over the Middle East. Iran and the UAE arrived at the BRICS table with sharply divergent positions. Iran wanted stronger language on the US-Israeli war, while the UAE objected to positions it regarded as unacceptable, as per previous reports.

Yet on September 12, leaders adopted the New Delhi Declaration by consensus.

A major diplomatic win was turning New Delhi into a platform for diplomacy. The summit provided a setting for a meeting between Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian and Abu Dhabi's Crown Prince Sheikh Khaled bin Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, the highest-level meeting between the two countries since their conflict began.

In June 2025, BRICS had already issued a joint statement expressing “grave concern” over the military strikes against Iran and calling for restraint, de-escalation, dialogue and diplomacy to end the cycle of violence.

The summit's success was attributed to India's ability to steer a diverse grouping without letting differences derail the bloc. The focus remained on the Global South, preventing it from becoming an "explicitly anti-West platform."

The Global South Gets A Larger Institutional Voice

This is where the WTO discussion connects with the wider BRICS agenda.

The declaration calls for comprehensive reform of global governance institutions and supports greater representation for developing countries. It also backs reform of the United Nations Security Council, with China and Russia reiterating support for India and Brazil's aspirations for permanent membership.

Tripathi sees this as part of the same objective.

He said the declaration's positions on unilateral sanctions, UN reform, international peace and security show that BRICS is seeking greater political and institutional space for the Global South.

Kumar similarly described BRICS as a non-Western rather than anti-Western organisation. He identified three broad objectives: greater representation for developing countries in international institutions, a more multipolar global political order and a stronger multilateral platform for the Global South.

That distinction matters because BRICS' economic weight does not automatically translate into institutional power.

The Delhi summit has therefore put the emphasis on changing the rules and representation within existing institutions, while also building practical cooperation among its members.

What Delhi Actually Changed

The New Delhi Declaration does not create a new global trading system. It does not establish a BRICS currency. It does not remove the dollar from international trade. And it does not eliminate the economic and strategic differences between India, China, Russia, Iran, the Gulf states and other members.

What it does is put several existing discussions into one political document.

On trade, BRICS has objected to unilateral tariffs and called for WTO reform. On payments, it has backed continued work on interoperability and local-currency settlements. On global governance, it has demanded greater representation for developing countries. On West Asia, it has managed to adopt a common position despite competing interests among members.

For India, the significance of the summit therefore lies as much in how the consensus was achieved as in the individual commitments.

Trigunayat, former Ambassador of India to Jordan, Libya and Malta, described India's approach as strategic autonomy in practice, arguing that New Delhi has to maintain relationships with the US, Russia, Brazil, South Africa and other partners while calling out measures it considers harmful to the global interest.

The Delhi summit has also given China the next turn at the helm. Beijing will chair BRICS in 2027 and host the 19th summit.

That will provide the next test of whether the economic and institutional agenda advanced in Delhi can move from declarations to implementation.

For now, the New Delhi Declaration shows a BRICS that is willing to push back against unilateralism, but has chosen to do so through multilateral institutions, trade cooperation, payment infrastructure and incremental changes in economic relations rather than by declaring a new bloc against the United States.

That is the balance India managed to hold in Delhi.