BRICS Expansion and Africa's Quest for New Alliances

There is a change in world geopolitics, and the BRICS transformation is not one of the last shifts that can be made. What started as a loose group of the rising economies Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa has now doubled in number. Egypt, Iran, Ethiopia, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates officially joined the bloc in 2024, not only providing a symbolic competition to the West but also becoming a significant economic and political force.

This enlarged BRICS coalition already has a population of over 46 per cent of the world, and it is now controlling almost 40 per cent of all oil production in the world. The inclusion of new members such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE allows the bloc to transform world trade and, more significantly, the hegemony of the U.S. dollar in the energy markets.

However, Nigeria, which is the largest economy of Africa, and Ghana, which is one of the most stable democracies, remain off the table. The question is, why, and is even membership of BRICS a correct direction for African countries?

 

BRICS 2.0: Idea to Opposition

By the time the acronym BRIC was coined by Goldman Sachs economist Jim O Neill in 2001, the term referred to the emerging economies of the world that were growing the fastest. South Africa was made BRICS in 2010. However, the increase in 2024 completely changes the power distribution. This is not merely an economic bloc, but it is becoming a geopolitical platform that seeks to diminish Western domination, and especially the monopoly of the dollar in the world market.

BRICS already tries to experiment with local currency settlements, gold-backed trade agreements, and a possible alternative to the petrodollar system. When oil is traded in yuan or rupees, or even a BRICS currency, the effect on world finance may be apocalyptic. The U.S. currency, which represents almost 60% of the world's foreign currency reserves (IMF, 2023), is being challenged in a way that has never been credible since the Bretton Woods system failed in the 1970s.

 

The Nigerian and Ghanaian Absence

The lack of Nigeria is impressive. It has more than 220 million inhabitants, huge oil deposits, and the biggest GDP on the continent, and thus it appears to be a natural match. Ghana has been a smaller country, but has established itself as an example of democratic stability and alignment with the IMF. So why are they not in BRICS?

According to the analysts, there are two key causes:

1. Geopolitical Balancing: Nigeria is close to China as well as the West. The BRICS may upset the balance by becoming members, as it would complicate its relations with different countries.

2. Domestic Unrest: There are security issues, governance issues, and economic instability, which could question the ability of Nigeria to compete on the BRICS level.

In the case of Ghana, the country is smaller and is closely related to the IMF, and that is why it is more aligned with Western institutions.

However, the exclusion will probably not be permanent. Assuming that BRICS is further expanded, Nigeria will probably be on the shortlist. Whether Nigeria is a joiner is the smaller question, but whether Nigeria should be is the major question.

 

Should Africa Be in BRICS at All?

The critics say that BRICS is not necessarily a partnership; it is rather about the development of the strategic objectives of China. They caution against the same game new empire, where Africa exchanges one type of dependency for another. Professional opinion opposes that joining BRICS will provide African states with leverage, alternative financing and avoid austerity like the IMF.

In the meantime, Africa has its integration projects. The African Union (AU) has long been dreaming of a single continental currency, and West Africa has produced the Eco. Even though there are suggestions to support such a currency by the abundant natural resources of Africa: lithium, coal, water and so on. However, deadlines continue to slip, and political confidence is still weak.

The predicament is evident; the more the BRICS takes in African giants, the more difficult it will be to create a combined African financial system. However, it may not be a case of either.

 

Dual Strategy: BRICS for Leverage, Africa for Sovereignty

A two-prong attack can be the most intelligent one:

- Selective engagement of BRICS: Find good trade bargains, demand technology transfer, and other forms of financing that are not run by the Western-dominated systems.

- Create an African base of Build Africa: Triple down on regional currencies, invest in intra-African infrastructure, and make trade stronger on the continent.

India provides a very valuable example here. It connects with all, BRICS, the West and more, but lays more emphasis on domestic capacity. Turkey also demonstrates the way to strike a balance between multiple alignments. Ankara was able to absorb the economic pain by resisting IMF intervention even when its lira collapsed.

In the case of Africa, it should follow the same priority, to remain strategically independent and exploit external opportunities.

 

Intra-African Trade: The Potential Power

Africa exports much more to Europe, China and the U.S. than to Africa. The African Development Bank stated that less than 15 per cent of all trade between African countries is intra-African, compared to 60 per cent in Europe and 50 per cent in Asia. The African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA), which was initiated in 2021, is expected to alter this by establishing the largest free trade region in terms of population.

However, unless transport corridors, energy grids and digital infrastructure are invested in to support AfCFTA, it might be seen as a symbolic move, as opposed to a transformative one. Once more, BRICS might come in handy: Africa needs to conclude infrastructure transactions that would not be tied to any debt traps but rather some transfer of knowledge, technology, and property.

 

The Risk of Overreliance

The problem of overreliance is the most vulnerable in Africa, according to history. Whether it is Western aid, Chinese loans, or exporting commodities, the external dependence leads to cycles of vulnerability. Entering BRICS, without a definite domestic agenda, may just replicate the same game with fresh participants.

The moral is obvious, a good home base is the key point of defence. Africa should not replace one master with another. It should be governed by strategic independence, rather than blind alignment.

 

Conclusion

The rise of BRICS is an indicator of a different era in the world. The bloc is posing a serious alternative to Western domination with oil giants and population heavyweights on board. The opportunity is real for Africa, but the risk is also real.

The fact that Nigeria and Ghana are absent can be taken as some form of caution, however, sooner or later, they will have to make the decision. Should they become BRICS and get leverage? Or would they do nothing but work at developing African-led solutions?

The best course of action is between the two. Brics as a strategic leverage, but do not forget the bigger picture, which is to develop African financial and political architecture. Otherwise, any collaboration, be it with Washington, Beijing or BRICS, will turn out to be another round of dependency.

The future of Africa will never be achieved by taking sides. It will be fixed by creating a base that is solid so that no other force, new or old, can determine its course.