Talk:BRICS

BRICS is often presented as a geopolitical and economic alliance of emerging economies—Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa—aimed at countering Western-dominated systems like the G7. However, its structure and financial mechanisms have also created opportunities for illicit activities and corruption, particularly benefiting authoritarian states like Russia and China.

Key Realities and Criminal Utility:

Circumventing Sanctions:

Russia, heavily sanctioned by Western nations, uses BRICS as a tool to establish alternative trade and financial networks, bypassing restrictions on dollar-based transactions.

The promotion of local currency trade within BRICS (e.g., the Chinese yuan or Russian ruble) weakens the effectiveness of Western sanctions, facilitating the flow of funds for potentially illicit purposes.

Lack of Transparency in Financial Institutions:

The New Development Bank (NDB), established by BRICS, lacks the rigorous oversight and transparency standards of institutions like the IMF or World Bank. This has created opportunities for money laundering, embezzlement, and financing questionable projects in member and partner countries.

Russian and Chinese influence within the NDB has raised concerns about its use to fund projects with geopolitical motives, potentially masking criminal activity under the guise of development.

Weaponization of Trade and Finance:

Russia and China, key BRICS members, are known for leveraging state-owned enterprises and trade agreements for geopolitical purposes. These mechanisms can serve as conduits for corrupt practices, including bribery, kickbacks, and resource smuggling.

The use of barter trade or non-dollar transactions within BRICS facilitates the illicit trade of sanctioned goods, such as Russian oil and arms.

Shielding Corrupt Practices:

BRICS nations, particularly Russia and South Africa, have faced domestic and international accusations of systemic corruption. The grouping provides a platform to legitimize financial transactions and trade relationships that may otherwise attract scrutiny from Western regulatory bodies.

South Africa’s inclusion in BRICS has been criticized for offering a veneer of legitimacy while its political elites have faced numerous corruption scandals, including those involving state capture.

Facilitating Illicit Technology Transfers:

BRICS collaboration on technology, particularly between Russia and China, has been criticized for enabling the transfer of sensitive technologies, some of which may bypass international export controls and find use in military or espionage contexts.

Global South’s Role in Illicit Economies:

BRICS' outreach to the Global South, particularly in Africa and Latin America, has created pathways for facilitating illegal mining, resource exploitation, and trade in conflict minerals under less scrutiny than through traditional Western-led systems.

Conclusion:

While BRICS is framed as a cooperative alternative to Western institutions, its structure and lack of transparency have made it a useful tool for circumventing international regulations, enabling corruption, and shielding illicit activities. Russia, in particular, has exploited BRICS to bypass sanctions and sustain economic and political operations despite Western isolation.

Why these edits are "heavy lifting":

Wikipedia, while celebrated as a free and open encyclopedia, faces significant criticism for systemic biases that allow antisemitic narratives, agents of despotic regimes, and ideologically motivated contributors, including those with socialist leanings, to dominate its content. Certain editor groups, particularly those sympathetic to authoritarian regimes or anti-Western ideologies, exert significant influence over politically sensitive articles, often manipulating language and framing to subtly promote their agendas. Topics such as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict or historical antisemitism frequently become battlegrounds where contributors downplay antisemitic actions or whitewash state-sponsored propaganda, making it nearly impossible for individuals to introduce alternative, well-sourced content. Wikipedia’s policies, such as its neutral point of view (NPOV) and reliable sources requirements, are often weaponized to present false equivalencies or exclude dissenting perspectives. Additionally, agents or sympathizers of regimes like Russia, China, and Iran exploit Wikipedia’s decentralized structure to whitewash human rights abuses, spread disinformation, and marginalize critical voices, often coordinating off-platform and using bureaucratic processes to maintain control. Editors who challenge these entrenched biases face reversion of their changes, endless debates on talk pages, and selective enforcement of rules, further entrenching problematic narratives. While Wikipedia’s open-edit model is revolutionary, its vulnerabilities have enabled antisemitic contributors, authoritarian actors, and politically naive "useful idiots" to dominate sensitive topics, leaving well-intentioned attempts at correction feeling futile due to entrenched editor groups and systemic obstacles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.185.77.31 (talk) 14:50, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

:Sources? ManyAreasExpert (talk) 14:52, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

::The source is Wikipedia itself - Criticism of Wikipedia. 14.2.207.148 (talk) 01:49, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

:Nice use of ChatGPT there. For someone complaining about Wikipedia, none of your claims are sourced, constituting original research. And this topic is about BRICS, not the violations of the individual member countries. And you think Western countries and pro-West editors aren't capable of promoting propaganda and disinformation, like whitewashing Israel's wars and promoting Islamophobic content? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.18.23.238 (talk) 07:26, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

• [https://www.rtve.es/noticias/20250121/trump-confunde-espana-pais-brics-amenaza-aranceles/16415439.shtml Trump confunde a España con un país miembro de los BRICS y la amenaza con "aranceles del 100%"], RTVE, 21/01/2025

• [https://edition.cnn.com/politics/fact-check-trump-inauguration/index.html Fact check: Trump made more than 20 false claims in his Inauguration Day remarks], CNN, Mon January 20, 2025: "Spain and BRICS: Trump falsely claimed in the Oval Office that Spain is a member of the international organization known as BRICS, telling a reporter, “They’re a BRICS nation, Spain. You know what a BRICS nation is? You’ll figure it out.” Spain is not a member of BRICS; the “S” is for South Africa, which joined the group previously known as BRIC — Brazil, Russia, India and China — in 2010."

80.29.73.40 (discusión) 11:06 21 ene 2025 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.29.73.40 (talk)

{{Edit semi-protected|BRICS|answered=yes}}

Reformat citation in beginning of summary. EarthGamerTheFirst (talk) 14:46, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

:File:Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. M.Bitton (talk) 13:03, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

@Sayurasem With respect to this [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=BRICS&diff=prev&oldid=1277745254 edit] of yours, how about adding the line to the end of the second paragraph of the introduction? EldenMacdonald (talk) 13:42, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Are these two references ([https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/as-donald-trump-boasts-brics-is-dead-new-de-dollarisation-call-comes-as-a-jolt-7817740 ref1], [https://www.livemint.com/news/world/brics-vows-wont-stop-de-dollarization-efforts-despite-donald-trumps-100-tariff-warning-11740667493970.html ref2]) reliable enough to use in the "Reception#Brazil" section? EldenMacdonald (talk) 13:20, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

Many of the cited references are merely opinions or wishfull thinking. Serious academics analyses and journalists opinons are mixed sensessly. The article badly needs an academic cleanup ignoring completely Wikipedia rules and recommendations. 178.221.157.162 (talk) 18:52, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

@Sreein Sreedhar Hi. What is the source for the BRICS population of 3.3 billion in the table you added in the statistics section? EldenMacdonald (talk) 15:18, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Why were links to the BRICS+ countries removed from the initial paragraphs? Not even the infobox survived the purge. The Last Scholar (talk) 20:58, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

:Justification for having them there?{{pb}}Btw. which one is not mentioned? ManyAreasExpert (talk) 22:50, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

The current map in this article inaccurately portrays Taiwan as a member state. I will assume good faith and not suggest that this is an attempt to portray Taiwan as a part of China. However this map is factually false. There is already a correctly marked member state map on the other wikipedia article "Member States of BRICS" (Member states of BRICS#/media/File:BRICS, partners and applicants (2025-01).svg) I can not update this due to it's Semi-Protected status. How can we go about fixing this? Eshku (talk) 02:44, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

{{edit semi-protected|BRICS|answered=yes}}

change "The original five members INCLUDING Indonesia are also part of the G20" to

- "The original five members PLUS Indonesia are also part of the G20", or

- "The original five members AND Indonesia are also part of the G20"

The current text indicates that Indonesia was one of the original five members, which it was not. 94.4.209.22 (talk) 22:42, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

:{{done}} Day Creature (talk) 02:37, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

{{edit semi-protected|BRICS|answered=yes}}

Spain is a BRICS nation (Source: President Trump 2003:E3:EF0F:B600:F05D:E570:764C:1401 (talk) 09:34, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

:{{Not done}}: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Day Creature (talk) 17:05, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

:MAGA? MyEnchantedLeader (talk) 11:22, 9 May 2025 (UTC)