The BRICS summit in New Delhi concluded with a joint declaration in which participants combined foreign-policy calls with an agenda for reforming international institutions. However, sources place different emphases: some speak primarily of countering sanctions and defending sovereignty, while others focus on the long-term architecture of development and the need to reach agreements within the grouping itself.

A Brazilian right-wing source highlights the condemnation of unilateral restrictive measures, including the tightening of the economic blockade of Cuba. According to its account, the BRICS countries believed that measures restricting oil supplies cause severe damage to the island’s economy and energy supply, and that Brazil had pushed for the issue to be included in the text. The report also mentions concern over escalation in the Middle East, calls for restraint, and rejection of strikes on civilian and peaceful nuclear infrastructure.¹

In this interpretation, the declaration serves as a signal against the use of economic pressure and military force, while reform of the UN Security Council is viewed as a way to increase the representation of Asia, Africa, and Latin America. The stated goal is a more multipolar order while preserving trade and the resilience of supply chains.

A left-wing Brazilian source sees a broader political program in the same decisions. It describes BRICS as a platform for turning the growing weight of the Global South into “the capacity to make decisions, finance, and coordinate international action” and links this to reform of the multilateral system.² At the same time, the author explicitly notes the downside of expansion: new members have strengthened the grouping’s economic and diplomatic potential, but have made internal negotiations more difficult. In this assessment, the bloc’s future depends on its ability to reconcile political differences with benefits for all members.

Particular emphasis is placed on the New Development Bank. In the joint statement, it was described as a “sustainable and strategic agent of development and modernization” for shareholder countries and the Global South; the bank is expected to support infrastructure and other priorities of developing economies.³ Thus, the declaration records convergence in criticism of the existing world order, but leaves open the main practical question—how far the diverse participants are prepared to go in joint action.