Chinese President Xi Jinping’s absence from the BRICS Summit in Brazil has sparked extensive analysis and speculation, with experts divided on the implications of his decision not to attend. This departure from the group of major emerging economies marks the first time the Chinese president has skipped the event, raising questions about both internal Chinese political dynamics and the potential fragmentation of BRICS as a cohesive bloc.
The Chinese government has explained Xi’s non-attendance as a scheduling conflict and, according to the South China Morning Post, citing that the leader had already met with Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva earlier this year. However, this rationalization has not satisfied many analysts, who have questioned its validity. For instance, Gordon Chang, an expert on U.S.-China relations, has highlighted the significance of Xi’s absence, which he interprets as a signal of instability within China, potentially indicating a loss of control over the military and a resurgence of civilian political power struggles.
Meanwhile, Bryan Burack of the Heritage Foundation has suggested that Xi’s absence is another indicator that BRICS might not serve as a vehicle for China to dominate the Global South as a vassal state. He pointed to recent actions by countries like Brazil and Indonesia, which have started imposing tariffs on China due to concerns over industrial overcapacity and trade practices. These measures suggest deepening rifts within the BRICS coalition.
Additionally, some analysts have linked the decision with the continuing tensions between China and India, which have persisted for decades. Burack noted that these fundamentally opposing interests make it unlikely that China will alter its behavior in the near future, thus maintaining a high level of tension. The potential leadership role of India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi in the summit further seems to deter Xi’s attendance.
Russian President Vladimir Putin, on the other hand, is expected to participate in the summit remotely, adding another layer of complexity to the group’s dynamics. Despite the challenges and contradictions, BRICS is seen as a growing force in the global economy, with members encompassing a significant portion of the world’s GDP and population. Christian Briggs, an economist, highlighted the substantial scale of the BRICS bloc, with a growing influence on global trade flows and natural resource management.
However, despite its economic size, the BRICS group continues to face internal challenges. Analysts like Burack have noted that while the group aims to challenge U.S. influence, its members remain ideologically and strategically fragmented. The prospect of a BRICS currency has gained media attention, but experts have expressed caution about overestimating its role in challenging the U.S. dollar, emphasizing that the internal interests of the group are largely divergent.
Still, some argue that BRICS members are already reshaping global currency flows. As Briggs pointed out, the movement away from the dollar into digital currencies such as the yuan, rupee, and ruble is already underway, with the Chinese SWIFT alternative being adopted by the Caribbean banking sector.
Ultimately, the BRICS Summit continues to evolve, with its internal conflicts as visible as its geopolitical ambitions. Whether Xi’s absence signifies a strategic retreat or a recalibration in the group’s approach remains a key question that hovers over the summit proceedings in Brazil.