The rapid expansion of BRICS has often been presented as a symbol of the emerging multipolar world order. By bringing together major economies from the Global South, the bloc has sought to challenge the dominance of Western-led institutions and promote a more balanced international system. Yet recent geopolitical developments have exposed a critical weakness in the structure of BRICS: the absence of meaningful strategic solidarity among its members.

From its inception, BRICS was primarily designed as an economic and political platform rather than a security alliance. While the group has successfully expanded cooperation in areas such as finance, development, and trade, it has never developed a collective security mechanism capable of protecting its members from external pressure. In an era increasingly shaped by hybrid warfare, information manipulation, sanctions, and geopolitical coercion, this institutional gap has become more visible than ever.

The recent escalation involving Iran illustrates this challenge. Following military aggression by Israel and the United States against Iran, many observers expected at least a minimum level of diplomatic solidarity from fellow BRICS members. Instead, the response from most of the bloc remained largely muted. Apart from statements of support from Russia, the majority of members refrained from clearly condemning the attacks.

This silence raises important questions about the strategic credibility of the bloc. If BRICS members cannot even express diplomatic support for one another during moments of crisis, what role can the organization realistically play in shaping a multipolar order?

The issue becomes even more complex when considering the external security relationships of some BRICS partners. Several countries associated with the expanded framework of the group maintain deep military and strategic ties with the United States. Nations such as the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt host American military facilities that play a role in regional security operations. In some instances, criticism was directed toward Iran’s legal responses rather than toward the actions that triggered the escalation.

Such dynamics highlight the structural contradictions within the expanding BRICS framework. While the bloc seeks to position itself as a pillar of a multipolar international system, its members maintain widely divergent security alignments and threat perceptions. Without mechanisms to reconcile these differences, the strategic coherence of the group will remain limited.

In recent years, BRICS cooperation had helped create a platform for mitigating the impact of Western pressure, including sanctions and information warfare targeting countries such as Russia and Iran. However, as these tools of pressure evolve, new forms of geopolitical coercion have emerged. Western governments have expanded military assistance to Ukraine in order to intensify pressure on Russia, while Iran has faced repeated direct military confrontations within a relatively short period of time.

Although other BRICS members have not yet experienced similar direct military threats, the asymmetric nature of geopolitical pressure means that different countries face different forms of vulnerability. Ultimately, however, these pressures can undermine the cohesion of the entire bloc and weaken its broader ambitions in shaping a multipolar order.

If BRICS is to avoid becoming merely a forum for annual summits and symbolic declarations, its members must confront the growing gap between economic cooperation and strategic coordination. Expansion alone cannot guarantee influence. Without a clearer framework for addressing the security concerns of its members, the organization risks undermining its own credibility.

A potential step forward could be the creation of a security consultation mechanism within BRICS. Such a framework would not necessarily resemble traditional military alliances, but it could help distribute risk among members, raise the threshold for escalation against individual states, and discourage unilateral external pressure.

Ultimately, economic cooperation cannot be fully separated from strategic confidence. Countries that feel constantly exposed to external threats cannot focus entirely on long-term development or economic integration. If BRICS genuinely seeks to become a cornerstone of a multipolar world order, strengthening internal solidarity will be essential.

The recent crisis has therefore become more than a regional security issue. It has become a test of BRICS itself—and a reminder that the future credibility of the bloc will depend not only on economic cooperation, but also on the willingness of its members to stand together when it matters most.