The emergence of BRICS as a major geopolitical force highlights the reality that the global order is no longer dominated by a singular power. Despite claims to the contrary, including recent statements from President Donald Trump that BRICS is "dead" due to his administration's threatened tariffs, the evidence suggests otherwise. With the addition of Indonesia as an official member and Malaysia as a partner country in January 2025, BRICS now represents over 50 percent of the world's population and approximately 45 percent of global GDP in nominal terms. Moreover, Brazil's launch of the BRICS 2025 website and vision statement underlines the group's forward momentum.

BRICS' model of consensus-based decision-making and its alignment with the United Nations and international law stands out in stark contrast to the United States' increasing preference for bilateralism, or, dealing with other nations one-on-one and avoiding multilateral institutions, which enable the US government to pursue a "divide and conquer" approach to achieve its "America First" goal. The BRICS approach, instead, offers a compelling framework for a stable multipolar world that amplifies the voices of smaller and developing nations while resisting the re-establishment of exploitative spheres of influence.

BRICS' expansion and continued institutional development affirm its role as a stabilizing force in the emerging multipolar world. The addition of new members enhances BRICS' geographic and economic diversity, reinforcing its legitimacy as one of the key representative bodies of the Global South. Furthermore, its growing network of "affiliated observer members "suggests an increasing alignment with a broader range of developing nations seeking an alternative to the traditional Western-led economic and political order.

Against an emerging US strategy of bilateralism and the reassertion of great power dominance, which seems to be the preferred model and approach of the new Trump administration and its Secretary of State Marco Rubio, BRICS emphasizes collective decision-making and multilateral governance. This commitment is reflected in initiatives such as BRICS Clear payment system, which aims not only to reduce dependence on Western-dominated financial systems and foster greater financial autonomy among member states, but to create a system that no single actor can capriciously dominate. Such projects underscore BRICS' dedication to reshaping global governance in ways that prioritize sovereignty, equity and cooperation.

At the Munich Security Conference in February, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi articulated a vision of multipolarity that is reflected in BRICS' operating principles. His emphasis on ensuring that "all countries, big or small, would be heard" and his advocacy for the centrality of the United Nations and international law reflect the core tenets of the BRICS diplomacy and international relations.

Interestingly, this vision directly contrasts with the transactional, power-centric model promoted by the Trump administration and its pursuit of great power dominance.

One of the defining characteristics of BRICS governance is its commitment to consensus-based decision-making. This model inherently values the voices of all member states, regardless of their relative size or economic power. In doing so, BRICS provides a platform where smaller and developing countries can contribute to the shaping of the agenda rather than being overshadowed by the ambitions of major powers.

This emphasis on consensus is not merely rhetorical but embedded in BRICS' institutional practices. Key decisions, whether concerning development financing through the New Development Bank or initiatives such as the BRICS Vaccine R&D Center, require agreement among all members. This structure ensures that no single nation can dominate the agenda, fostering an environment where diverse perspectives and priorities are respected.

For those more accustomed to a top-down approach in which "might is right", this consensus ethos is cumbersome and time-consuming. For those interested in empowerment of all, this bottoms-up approach is foundational.

In the face of recent US efforts to undermine BRICS and drive a wedge between Russia and other members — by offering to do bilateral package deals with Russia — this consensus-based approach acts as a bulwark against external manipulation. By fostering mutual trust and shared objectives, the BRICS members have demonstrated resilience against external pressures and a commitment to maintaining their collective autonomy.

BRICS' commitment to multilateralism and consensus also aligns closely with the principles of other regional organizations such as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. Both organizations prioritize noninterference, mutual respect and consensus-driven governance. This alignment creates opportunities for institutional collaboration that can reinforce global stability. BRICS and ASEAN share common interests in areas such as infrastructure development, trade facilitation and digital connectivity, further cementing cross-institutional linkages that support the development of a global fabric of multipolarity. Collaborative initiatives between these bodies could enhance regional economic resilience while reducing dependency on Western financial institutions. Furthermore, such cooperation strengthens the ability of developing nations to navigate global challenges on their own terms rather than being subject to the dictates of great powers.

The shared commitment to peaceful dispute resolution also positions BRICS and ASEAN as critical actors in preventing the emergence of multipolar chaos. Through joint forums and dialogue mechanisms, these organizations can mediate tensions and promote cooperative solutions, reducing the likelihood of conflict driven by great power competition.

The Trump administration's apparent disdain for multilateralism and its efforts to reassert great power dominance carry significant risks for US influence in the Global South. By prioritizing bilateralism and attempting to undermine BRICS, the US risks alienating a growing coalition of nations that view BRICS as a more equitable platform for global governance.

This alienation is already evident in the US' "go it alone" approach to discussions concerning the ongoing Ukraine crisis. Such unilateral approaches not only raise questions about the credibility of US commitments to its allies and its dependability within a multilateral environment, but also strengthen the perception that BRICS offers a more inclusive and balanced alternative.

Moreover, attempts to drive a wedge between Russia and BRICS are unlikely to succeed given the group's shared interest in advancing financial and political sovereignty.

Far from being "dead", BRICS represents a dynamic and evolving model of global governance that challenges the dominance of great power concert and promotes a more inclusive international order. Its consensus-based decision-making, alignment with international law, and collaboration with organizations such as ASEAN provide a robust framework for managing multipolarity in a peaceful and equitable manner.

As the world continues to move away from unipolar dominance, the BRICS model offers a compelling vision for the future — one where the voices of smaller and developing countries are not only heard but actively shape the global agenda. In resisting the pressures of bilateralism and great power politics, BRICS stands as a crucial counterbalance, ensuring that multipolarity leads to cooperative governance rather than exploitative division. This vision is not only alive and well; it is essential for a future in which all nations have a seat at the table, not just those with the loudest voices or the greatest military might.

The author is an adjunct professor at Queensland University of Technology and a senior fellow at the Taihe Institute. The author contributed this article to China Watch, a think tank powered by China Daily. The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.

Contact the editor at editor@chinawatch.cn.