BRICS Economic Cooperation and the Risks of Aligning with Non-Democratic Regimes: Implications for Brazil and the Americas

Brazil’s increasing economic integration with the BRICS bloc (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) raises significant concerns about the alignment of national policies with international partners that do not share the same democratic values and commitments to human rights. Among the most pressing developments is the proposal for a supranational currency within the bloc—a move that, while intended to facilitate international transactions, may compromise national sovereignty and democratic governance.

One of the central risks lies in the asymmetry of power within the BRICS itself. China and Russia, with their economic and political weight, do not follow democratic systems aligned with Western liberal traditions and have well-documented records of human rights violations. Russia, in particular, is known for its institutionalized repression of LGBTQIA+ individuals and its suppression of civil liberties. Partnering with regimes that disregard such fundamental rights places democratic nations like Brazil in a precarious position, especially when collaboration involves deep financial and structural commitments, such as contributing national reserves or adopting shared monetary mechanisms.

The governance of a supranational currency demands transparent, collective decision-making mechanisms. In the presence of authoritarian regimes, there is a credible risk that such structures will be undemocratic, exclusionary, or even coercive, subjecting countries like Brazil to rules and policies inconsistent with its Constitution and the values it purports to uphold on the international stage.

This risk becomes even more pronounced when we examine the political mandate of Brazil’s current administration. The elected president secured office with just over 50% of the vote—an indication of a politically divided society—and the campaign platform did not explicitly include the proposal for a common BRICS currency or the financial transfer of Brazil’s international reserves to multilateral institutions controlled by the bloc. Therefore, any strategic decision of this magnitude—especially one involving sovereignty over national monetary resources—should be the subject of public debate, transparency, and possibly a plebiscite.

The official campaign plan of the “Brasil da Esperança” coalition (which elected the current president) affirms its commitment to democracy, human dignity, inclusion, and social justice. It explicitly champions pluralism and human rights and commits to international leadership based on peace, development, and the self-determination of peoples. Accordingly, any initiative that involves deeper economic integration must align with these democratic pillars and be supported by the public.

The potential erosion of democracy in Brazil would not be an isolated national issue—it would resonate throughout the Americas. As the largest country in Latin America, Brazil plays a pivotal role in regional stability. Should Brazil drift away from democratic norms, the consequences could destabilize trade, international cooperation, and human rights across the continent. Countries in the Americas would face a weakened democratic ally and potential shifts in regional alignments toward authoritarian blocs.

To mitigate these risks, Brazil must implement legal and institutional safeguards in any international agreement it signs. These should include clauses that protect sovereignty, human rights, and the democratic rule of law. Furthermore, civil society, academia, and social movements must have a seat at the table before any strategic decision is finalized.

Finally, the international community—especially democratic nations across the Americas—must take an active interest in safeguarding Brazilian democracy. Not through interference, but through diplomatic support, strategic partnerships, and public statements that reinforce Brazil’s constitutional commitments. Business agreements or multilateral initiatives that lack transparency and popular support must be scrutinized, as they risk undermining the very principles that sustain democratic institutions.

In conclusion, Brazil’s engagement with the BRICS must be based on clear constitutional alignment and respect for democratic values. The creation of a common BRICS currency, while potentially useful for geopolitical balancing, should not come at the cost of Brazilian democracy or autonomy. It is imperative that both national and international stakeholders recognize the gravity of this moment and act to ensure that any economic integration enhances, rather than endangers, the democratic foundations that are essential not just to Brazil, but to the stability of the entire American continent.