By John Helmer, Moscow
@bears_with
President Vladimir Putin’s speech to the BRICS summit session in Rio de Janeiro this week (July 6) was brief. Unusually so for Putin’s public speeches, but not so for his speeches to the BRICS summit in earlier years.
This time he took 810 words (Kremlin English version; 710 in the Russian). Leaving aside the 2024 summit when Putin hosted the BRICS meetings in Kazan, Putin took 635 words in 2023; 451 in 2022; and 683 in 2021.
In substance, Putin emphasized the positives on which all the attending states could agree in Rio – the four original members of 2006; the fifth in 2011; the four added in 2024; the fifth added in January 2025; and the ten partner states added in 2024 — and he avoided the negatives on which they don’t agree. The rule for the ten members for composing their final communiqué is that “the decision-making process is based on consensus.”
Accordingly, Putin emphasized how big BRICS is becoming: “not only a third of the Earth’s landmass and almost half the planet’s population, but also…40 percent of the global economy, while their combined GDP at purchasing power parity stands at $77 trillion…By the way, BRICS is substantially ahead of other groups in this parameter, including G7.”
Without naming the enemies in war of Russia, China, India, and Iran, the President emphasized the economic over the political and military, money over lethal force. “The unipolar system of international relations that once served the interests of the so-called golden billion, is losing its relevance, replaced by a more just multi-polar world…Everything indicates that the liberal globalization model is becoming obsolete while the centre of business activity is gravitating towards developing markets, launching a powerful growth wave.”
Putin was making a point which is not made in the final communiqué drafted by this year’s chairman, President Luis Lula da Silva, and his government. Titled “Rio de Janeiro Declaration — Strengthening Global South Cooperation for a More Inclusive and Sustainable Governance”, it runs in English for 31 pages. Not on a single one of these pages is there mention of the terms which Putin dismisses – unipolar, liberal, globalization.
The United Nations is mentioned 22 times in the Rio Declaration; there is no mention at all of the United States. “Hegemon”, the diplomatic euphemism for the US, is also absent.
This is the BRICS fudge – and it appears to have been largely the doing of Lula and the Brazilians.
Putin left it to Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov attending the summit in person to spell out or hint at the details of Russia’s differences with them.
If it was also understood by the Russians that Lula was attempting to pacify US President Donald Trump, Trump announced within 72 hours that Lula had failed. In a text posted by Trump, he has accused Lula of pursuing former president Jair Bolsonaro in a “witch hunt that should end IMMEDIATELY!” Trump also targeted “Brazil’s attacks on Free Elections and the fundamental Free Speech rights of Americans [social media platforms]”. Unless Lula stopped, Trump said he would impose a new Brazil-specific tariff penalty of 50%.
As Brazil’s currency dropped sharply, the Financial Times in London noted that Trump was acting on prompting from Elon Musk whose Twitter/X media platform was banned and fined in Brazil last year. “The US president’s intervention in favour of Bolsonaro will cheer Brazil’s far-right movement, which claims a judicial crackdown against digital misinformation unfairly targets conservatives,” the newspaper said.
Listen to the discussion of the BRICS summit results with Nima Alkhorshid starting at Minute 39.
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wuej555xllw
In a presentation and question-and-answer session with the press in Rio, immediately after the summit, Foreign Minister Lavrov took 4,300 careful words to explain the Russian interpretation of the summit outcome. Click to read his full text.
Source: https://mid.ru/en/foreign_policy/news/2034668/
Here are Lavrov’s main points:
Source: https://brics.br/en/documents/presidency-documents
Here are the main points on which there was consensus on the general language of the communiqué but disagreement on the particulars:
— IMF: “In the current context of uncertainty and volatility, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) must remain adequately resourced and agile, at the center of the global financial safety net (GFSN), to effectively support its members, particularly the most vulnerable countries. Despite the absence of quota realignment, we have provided consent to the proposed quota increase under the 16th General Review of Quotas (GRQ) and urge IMF members that have not yet done so to provide their consent and give effect to the quota increases under the 16th GRQ with no further delay. We urge the IMF Executive Board to fulfil the mandate set by the Board of Governors to develop approaches to quota share realignment…”
— World Bank. “We reaffirm that the 2025 World Bank Shareholding Review, co-chaired by Brazil, is a critical tool to strengthen multilateralism and enhance the legitimacy of the World Bank Group, as a better, bigger, and more effective development finance institution. In line with the Lima principles, we continue to advocate for the increased voice and representation of developing countries.”
— G20. “We underscore the key role of the G20 as the premier global forum for international economic cooperation that provides a platform for dialogue of both developed and emerging economies on an equal and mutually beneficial footing for jointly seeking shared solutions to global challenges and fostering multipolar world. We recognize the importance of the continued and productive functioning of the G20, based on consensus and with a focus on result-oriented outcomes. We reiterate our strong support to the South African presidency and look forward to the successful hosting of the G20 Leaders’ Summit in Johannesburg in November 2025 under the South African Presidency.”
— US sanctions, Trump’s tariff war. “We voice serious concerns about the rise of unilateral tariff and non-tariff measures which distort trade and are inconsistent with WTO rules. In this context, we reiterate our support for the rules based, open, transparent, fair, inclusive, equitable, non-discriminatory, consensus-based multilateral trading system with the World Trade Organization (WTO) at its core, with special and differential treatment (S&DT) for its developing members. We condemn the imposition of unilateral coercive measures that are contrary to international law, and reiterate that such measures, inter alia in the form of unilateral economic sanctions and secondary sanctions, have far-reaching negative implications for the human rights, including the rights to development, health and food security, of the general population of targeted states, disproportionally affecting the poor and people in vulnerable situations, deepening the digital divide and exacerbating environmental challenges. We call for the elimination of such unlawful measures, which undermine international law and the principles and purposes of the UN Charter. We reaffirm that BRICS member states do not impose or support non-UN Security Council authorized sanctions that are contrary to international law.”
— Israel. “We strongly condemn all violations of international humanitarian law [IHL], including deliberate attacks against civilians and civilian objects, including civilian infrastructure, as well as the denial or obstruction of humanitarian access and the targeting of humanitarian personnel. We underline the need to address accountability for all violations of international humanitarian law. We reiterate our grave concern about the situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, with the resumption of continuous Israeli attacks against Gaza and obstruction of the entry of humanitarian aid into the territory. We call for adherence to international law, in particular to international humanitarian law and international human rights law, and condemn all violations of IHL, including the use of starvation as a method of warfare. We also condemn attempts to politicize or militarize humanitarian assistance…We note, in this regard, the provisional measures of the International Court of Justice in the legal proceedings instituted by South Africa against Israel, which, inter alia, reaffirmed Israel’s legal obligation to ensure the provision of humanitarian aid in Gaza.”
— Palestine. “We recall that the Gaza Strip is an inseparable part of the Occupied Palestinian Territory. We underline, in this regard, the importance of unifying the West Bank and the Gaza Strip under the Palestinian Authority, and reaffirm the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, including the right to their independent State of Palestine. We call on the international community to support the Palestinian Authority in undergoing reforms to fulfill the Palestinians’ legitimate aspirations for independence and statehood, as well as the expeditious reconstruction of the civil infrastructure of the territory, with a central role by the Palestinians, as agreed in the Emergency Arab Summit on Palestine of 4 March 2025.”
— De-dollarization. “As the New Development Bank is set to embark on its second golden decade of high quality development, we recognize and support its growing role as a robust and strategic agent of development and modernization in the Global South. We welcome the Bank’s steady expansion of its capacity to mobilize resources, foster innovation, expand local currency financing, diversify funding sources, and support impactful projects that advance sustainable development, reduce inequality, and promote infrastructure investments and economic integration. We also acknowledge and encourage the ongoing expansion of its membership and the strengthening of its governance framework…We welcome the BRICS Interbank Cooperation Mechanism (ICM) focus on facilitating and expanding innovative financial practices and approaches for projects and programmes, including finding acceptable mechanisms of financing in local currencies. We welcome a continued dialogue between the ICM and the NDB. 50. We task our ministers of finance and central bank governors, as appropriate, to continue the discussion on the BRICS Cross-Border Payments Initiative, and acknowledge the progress made by the BRICS Payment Task Force (BPTF) in identifying possible pathways to support the continuation of discussions on the potential for greater interoperability of BRICS payment systems. We welcome the progress on the Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA), including the consensus reached by the Technical Team on the proposal for the revised Treaty and regulations. We support efforts to enhance the CRA’s flexibility and effectiveness, notably through the inclusion of eligible payment currencies and improved risk management. We also value the participation of new BRICS members who have expressed interest in joining the CRA and we are committed to onboarding them on a voluntary basis and according to country-specific circumstances.”
— Ukraine. “We recall our national positions concerning the conflict in Ukraine as expressed in the appropriate fora, including the UN Security Council and the UN General Assembly. We note with appreciation relevant proposals of mediation and good offices, including the creation of the African Peace Initiative and the Group of Friends for Peace, aimed at peaceful resolution of the conflict through dialogue and diplomacy. We expect that current efforts will lead to a sustainable peace settlement.”
— Colonialism, racism. “We reiterate the need to intensify the fight against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance as well as discrimination based on religion, faith or belief, and all their contemporary forms around the world, including the alarming trends of rising hate speech, disinformation and misinformation. We welcome the proclamation of a Second International Decade for People of African Descent (2025 – 2034), by the UN General Assembly. We welcome of the decision of the African Union to designate 2025 as the year for “Justice for Africans and People of African Descent Through Reparations” and recognize the efforts of the African Union to tackle the destructive legacy of colonialism and the slave trade…We stress the importance of the return of cultural property and heritage to their countries of origin and its potential for rebuilding international relations in a non hierarchical, cooperative basis, and we recognise the need for a more robust international framework on the matter; as a path for promoting social cohesion, cultural and historical justice, reconciliation, and collective memory.”
Leave a Reply