By Herman Tiu Laurel

 

In a world of 193 countries with major powers and regions with competing interests, 8.3 billion people growing by about 0.84% each year with mounting basic needs compounded by maldistribution of global resources and wars rampaging in several regions, and the world’s governing body, the United Nations, destabilized by the United States, a member of the Permanent Five of the Security Council, global governance urgently needs reform and redirection.

U.S. wrecking the World Order

            The U.S. under President Donald Trump has withdrawn from 31 UN-affiliated entities, including the UN Human Rights Council, the U.N. Women, the UNFCCC climate framework and the UNFPA, UNESCO and the Paris Agreement. It re-initiated withdrawal from the World Health Organization (WHO), but most damaging of all is its selective use of its veto power to serve its own national interests while violating UN rules of war with impunity. The Global Majority now seeks reforms in international governance for order and stability to be restored.

China’s Initiative to Restore Global Stability

            In September 2025, China President Xi Jinping presented the Global Governance Initiative (GGI) in a speech in Beijing during the Tianjin SCO summit to commemorate the 80th anniversary of the United Nations observance. It is a diplomatic initiative of China culminating a series of initiatives that describe China’s vision, principles and mechanisms for better global governance: the Global Security Initiative (GSI), the Global Development Initiative (GDI), and the Global Civilization Initiative (GCI).

            The GDI focuses on the implementation of the UN’s 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, green development, food security and digital economy. The GSI advocates for “indivisible security” where no nation should pursue its own security at the expense of others, supported by the “Center for Global Security Initiative Studies” training. The GCI seeks to intensify understanding and friendship among peoples through “Dialogue of Civilizations” in contrast to the “Clash of Civilizations” preached by some.

            The GGI aims to expand the voice of the Global South in international and UN affairs (IMF, WTO) based on sovereign equality of all nations and international rule of law (not “rules-based order of the U.S. and its exclusive allies), calling for a multipolar world and authentic multilateralism, people-centered approach, and action-oriented results. For BRICS, the GGI serves as a guideline with a parallel structure, the three other initiatives, to assist the BRICS collective efforts towards the same goals.

BRICS: Alternative for a Balanced World

            BRICS now represent 49% of the world’s population and accounts for 40% of the global GDP, accounting for 26% of international trade and producing about 30% of global oil output and 42% of global wheat production and 52% of global rice production. The weight of BRICS share in the world economy gives it significant leverage to pursue negotiations for global governance reforms in the U.N. and other international bodies, as well as in global geopolitical decision-making.

The emergence of BRICS today as a real international force for change in the world order is the fruition of a long-cherished dream and project of the Global South that arose in the post-colonial era after World War II when many colonies of the West in Asia, Africa, South America, and West Asia, declared independence. In 1955, the Bandung Conference was convened with 29 Asian and African nations with the vision of creating the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) – led by Indonesia, China, India and Egypt among others.

BRICS is the fulfillment of the NAM vision, conceived when foreign ministers of Brazil, Russia, India, and China (BRIC) held their first formal meeting in September 2006, and was officially established on June 16, 2009, a working multilateral project. South Africa joined in 2010, adding the “S” too the original BRIC. Since 2024 new members have joined, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Indonesia. Giving flesh to its vision, the BRICS established the New Development Bank to assist member countries in development projects.

BRICS has a host of partner countries participating without full obligations of membership: Belarus, Bolivia, Cuba, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Nigeria, Thailand, Uganda, Uzbekistan and Vietnam. Applicants to BRICS are: Turkey, Azerbaijan, Pakistan, Bangladesh. Countries that have expressed interest are Algeria, Bahrain, Kuwait, Sri Lanka, Venezuela, Senegal, Serbia, Syria, and Zimbabwe – encouraged by the vision, trade independence from the West, trade in local currencies and financial assistance from the New Development Bank.

BRICS Financial Alternatives

The New Development Bank (formerly called the BRICS Development Bank) agreement was signed by the five original BRICS nations in 2014 and entered into force in 2015 with an initial authorized capital of USD 100-billion. It has since founding lent out $ 42-billion for green energy programs, transport networks, affordable housing and solar lighting for countries such as India, Brazil, Egypt, South Africa and Bangladesh among others. It has become an alternative to the World Bank for lower-cost development loans.

BRICS has also established the BRICS Pay to serve cross-border financial transactions, avoiding the U.S.-controlled SWIFT where the threat of sanctions on countries and banks is ever present. Its core infrastructure includes CIPS, China’s cross-border renminbi payment and clearing system; SPFS, Russia financial messaging system bypassing SWIFT UPI, India’s real-time payment system for local settlements; Pix, Brazil’s instant payment system integrated for cross-border transactions.

BRICS 2026 Declaration

BRICS 2026 signed a Declaration with the theme “Building for Resilience, Innovation, Cooperation and Sustainability,” with emphasis on the Global South’s representation, trade and regional conflicts. It calls for reform of the UN Security Council to be more representative, democratic and inclusive for the Global South; pushes for reform of the IMF and WTO to keep pace with 21^st-century economic developments; and emphasizes greater reliance on trade in local currencies and setting up efficient cross-border payment systems.

The Declaration urged restraint in the West Asia conflicts and laudably opposed displacement of Palestinians, condemned cross-border terrorism, and opposed unilateral trade restriction, unilateral sanctions and indiscriminate tariff hikes. It backed AI governance and highlighted the continued significance of fossil fuels for developing economies, and it launched several initiatives like the BRICS AGRIN network for agricultural cooperation and maritime safety coordination agency.

Xi Proposals: In the pioneering spirit of BRICS

Again, in the pioneering spirit of the of the originators of BRICS, China’s President Xi Jinping advanced several proposals to serve as beacons for the now expanded organization of the Global Majority, these are: focused on artificial intelligence, trade, digital development, manufacturing, and talent. In more detail below:

AI Open-Source Cooperation: China offered the establishment of an open AI ecosystem, promoting cooperation on large language models, AI training, and specialized research.

Special Economic Zones Partnership: to build a smart portal, align policies, and establish a center for open development to boost trade and investment facilitation.

Digital Ecosystem Cloud Platform: enhance digital industry cooperation, conduct technological exchanges, and support industrial alignment alongside digital skills training.

Smart Manufacturing Cooperation: help upgrade traditional industries, build innovation incubators, and develop emerging industries to stabilize supply chains.

Talent Development & Youth Exchange: creation of a BRICS engineer cultivation alliance and dedicated youth exchange programs focused on scientific and technological innovation.

Key Objectives of the Proposals:

Global South Integration: Xi seeks to situate the expanded BRICS bloc as a primary stabilizing force and practical platform for the collective upliftment of emerging markets.

Economic Stability: stressed the imperative of unimpeded industrial and supply chains and developing integrated markets across member nations.

Like many initiatives of China, it paves the way with practical guidelines to promote multilateralism, open knowledge exchange, economic backing, distribution of economic opportunities and put priority on development of people and youth.

The Philippines left behind.

            Among the major ASEAN countries, only Singapore and the Philippines remain outside the BRICS. Indonesia is a full member of BRICS, while Vietnam, Malaysia, Thailand are BRICS partner countries. Singapore not being part of BRICS, we can understand as it is a dynamic economy and can stand pretty well on its own. The Philippines wallowing in poverty and economic crisis is another story; it would do well to join BRICS and as Filipino China-expert Dr. Enrico Gloria said to the SCMP:

            “One weakness of Philippine foreign relations historically has been the concentration of our diplomatic emphasis and economic attention on a relatively small number of major partners. A more multipolar world requires the Philippines to develop a multipolar diplomatic portfolio as well…” President Bongbong Marcos attended the BRICS 2026 in India but represented ASEAN as this year’s chair, not the Philippines. In his intervention he even mentioned adherence to “… rules-based order,” which is the U.S. code for its rules.

            Writing is the Medium publication platform Christopher Paller Gerales, an international relations enthusiast focused on ASEAN, writes:

“’Why the Philippines Will Never Join BRICS – And Why That Says Everything’…” While BRICS grows and other ASEAN member states quietly expand their options, the Philippines remains frozen — talking big about sovereignty, while practicing dependence. Unless there is a radical shift in how the country sees itself — not as a junior partner, but as a capable actor in a crowded, complex world — it will stay on the outside looking in.

And when the new global order is finally written, Manila may realize too late that it declined a seat at the table — not because it was not welcome, but because it was too afraid to pull out the chair. Because make no mistake — joining BRICS, under its current configuration, is not a neutral economic choice. For the Philippines, it would be tantamount to fighting with the USA…” ###

   

Email: contact@asiancenturyph.com

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/asiancenturyph/

Twitter: https://twitter.com/AsianCenturyPH

Substack:

Also read: