Why Did Pakistan Fail To Secure BRICS Membership At 2024 Summit?
Russian President Vladimir Putin hosted the first-ever summit of BRICS+ from October 22 to 24, 2024 in the Tatarstan city of Kazan. There, the founding members of BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) formally welcomed five new members — Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Putin also invited more than two dozen other countries that had applied for or were considering membership in the expanding club.
The 2024 BRICS+ Summit served as a powerful reminder of the growing influence of the BRICS bloc on the global stage. As BRICS expanded its membership and strengthened its goals for economic cooperation and global influence, one nation’s absence drew attention — Pakistan. Despite its geopolitical importance and interest in joining, Pakistan remained outside of BRICS+, while the organization included new members from the Middle East and other regions. Therefore, understanding the reasons behind this exclusion highlights both the priorities of BRICS and the strategic challenges Pakistan faces in meeting the bloc’s membership criteria.
One of the foremost reasons for Pakistan’s exclusion is its longstanding and complex relationship with India, a founding BRICS member. The two countries share decades of unresolved tensions that have frequently spilled into global forums. India’s influence within BRICS grants it significant power in shaping the bloc’s direction, and the organization operates on a consensus-driven model, meaning that each member has considerable say in decisions, including on expansion. Admitting Pakistan, with whom India has frequent diplomatic friction, would risk disrupting the unity and cohesion that BRICS members value. In recent years, BRICS has emphasized internal harmony, as well as shared goals for economic and strategic growth, making Pakistan’s entry a potential risk to this cohesion. Without a meaningful improvement in India-Pakistan relations, India’s position on Pakistan’s membership is unlikely to change soon, leaving the door to BRICS membership closed for now.
Another critical factor is Pakistan’s economic instability. BRICS has consistently prioritized members with emerging, stable economies capable of contributing to the organization’s goal of financial independence from Western influence, exemplified by its establishment of the New Development Bank and initiatives aimed at de-dollarization. Unfortunately, Pakistan’s economic challenges — including high inflation, debt dependence, and reliance on the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for stabilization funds contradict the BRICS model of financial sovereignty and resilience. Recent admissions to BRICS+, including economically strong and resource-rich nations like Saudi Arabia and the UAE, reflect BRICS’s preference for financially robust members who can bring stability and autonomy. Pakistan, in contrast, currently faces significant economic vulnerability, which does not align with BRICS’s economic priorities and could potentially introduce unwanted financial risks to the bloc.
BRICS’s choice to admit new members, such as Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Iran, is also indicative of the organization’s strategic orientation toward strengthening its influence in critical areas, such as energy and global trade. These recent members bring significant economic influence and energy resources, thereby supporting BRICS’s goals for self-sufficiency and a more substantial economic presence on the world stage. While Pakistan holds strategic importance in South Asia, it does not yet offer the same economic or energy-based leverage as the newly admitted members. Until Pakistan can more closely align its priorities and strategic alliances with BRICS’s goals, its application for membership will likely remain in question.
Domestic instability in Pakistan further compounds its membership challenges. BRICS members value political stability as a foundation for sustained cooperation and growth, and Pakistan’s political landscape has been marked by frequent upheaval, security concerns, and social unrest. These internal challenges present Pakistan as a country needing significant reform, and the image of political volatility contrasts with BRICS’s preference for stable, resilient partners. For Pakistan to gain serious consideration for BRICS membership, it would need to achieve greater stability, both politically and socially, and demonstrate sound governance capable of supporting international initiatives without domestic distractions.
While Pakistan’s current position may appear limiting, it is not without potential avenues to improve its prospects for future BRICS membership. First, better diplomatic relations with India could address a significant barrier. Confidence-building measures and regional dialogue could gradually improve Pakistan’s image and reduce the tension that currently restricts it from joining. Additionally, Pakistan’s economic model would benefit from addressing structural challenges to reduce its reliance on international bailouts, adopting fiscal policies that foster sustainability, and focusing on the development of domestic industries to align more closely with BRICS’s preference for financial independence.
Another possible step forward is for Pakistan to align its strategic policies with BRICS’s goals of global financial reform and reduced dependence on Western institutions. Aligning with the organization’s objectives in terms of trade and economic cooperation would enhance Pakistan’s appeal. Further, political stability is paramount, as domestic reforms in governance, security, and social structures could help Pakistan meet the expectations BRICS has for new members. By stabilizing its internal landscape, Pakistan could project itself as a reliable and cooperative partner that aligns with BRICS’s overarching goals of economic autonomy and political cohesion.
The 2024 BRICS+ Summit demonstrated the bloc’s commitment to cautious and strategic expansion, prioritizing members who reinforce its economic strength and geopolitical influence. For Pakistan, achieving BRICS membership is not simply a matter of interest; it requires a reorientation of both domestic and foreign policy. This includes not only improving relations with India and addressing economic vulnerabilities but also adopting a governance model that aligns with BRICS’s values of resilience and autonomy.
Pakistan’s path to BRICS membership is challenging but not impossible. With a concentrated focus on these areas, it could one day align itself with the organization’s priorities, potentially opening the door to membership in future summits. Until then, Pakistan’s exclusion underscores the high standards BRICS holds for its members as it continues to redefine the framework for global cooperation in the 21st century.
