Saturday, 12 July, 2025
Ambitions by the BRICS group to take on a greater climate leadership role, building on success last month at United Nations nature talks, depend on the countries overcoming fractious politics and entrenched disagreements over money.
As the United States has withdrawn from global efforts to combat climate change and, more generally, shifted its focus to promoting domestic interests, Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa - known collectively as the BRICS - are well-placed to influence the outcomes of high-profile meetings this year.
They established their credentials by proposing a draft text that ensured agreement at the COP16 talks in February in Rome, a dozen sources told Reuters, potentially unlocking billions of dollars to help halt the destruction of ecosystems.
"Now BRICS has been able to come together in this fashion, (it) will influence our discussions in other platforms going forward," Narend Singh, deputy minister of forestry, fisheries and the environment, for South Africa said.
South Africa is boosting its profile as holder of the G20 presidency this year, while another BRICS member Brazil prepares to host COP30 climate talks in November.
"BRICS has the potential to fill a critical gap in multilateral negotiations," said Maria Angelica Ikeda, Brazil's chief negotiator at COP16.
Colombia's Susana Muhamad, president of the COP16 nature talks, highlighted the BRICS countries' ambitions to serve as "bridge builders."
"They are working to balance global representation, particularly for the Global South, in the face of rising far-right governments in the U.S., Italy, and Argentina," she explained.
"I understand why so many countries want to join BRICS—it offers a united front when confronting global powers like the U.S.," she added.
A British official at the talks, speaking anonymously, noted that other countries need to consider how BRICS’ more assertive approach could reshape global institutions.
If BRICS aims to fill the vacuum left by the U.S. under President Trump, it must overcome internal divisions on political and financial matters.
Timo Leiter, a distinguished policy fellow at the London School of Economics, pointed out that the group's reluctance to assume the financial responsibilities of donor nations could pose a significant challenge.
So far, the middle-income BRICS nations have resisted calls from financially strained developed countries to share the burden, complicating negotiations on climate finance at the U.N. and upcoming talks in Seville, Spain.
In 2022, nearly three-quarters of the $25.8 billion in biodiversity financing came from five major sources: the European Union, France, Germany, Japan, and the U.S., according to OECD data.
The group's divergent national interests—Russia’s reliance on fossil fuel sales versus Brazil's push for faster decarbonization—could also become key sticking points.
"They (BRICS nations) differ widely in terms of development stage and emissions trajectory," said Li Shuo, director of China Climate at Asia Society. "What unites them is their geopolitical aspirations, but the real question is whether they can agree on a unified agenda."
The group's unity will be tested at upcoming meetings in Bonn and Seville, analysts predict, where discussions on COP30 positions and global sustainability goals will take center stage.
"This is the perfect opportunity for BRICS to advance its vision of a new global order, especially with the shift in U.S. policy," Leiter remarked.
In the short term, BRICS is expected to push for more influence in the governance of the Global Environment Facility (GEF), a key fund for global biodiversity efforts.
As developed countries cut back on development spending while demanding more from nature-rich nations like Brazil, Ikeda lamented, "Instead of directing more money to biodiversity, we see countries investing in nuclear arms and weaponry, yet demanding more obligations from us, the megadiverse nations."
Comments
Ambitions by the BRICS group to take on a greater climate leadership role, building on success last month at United Nations nature talks, depend on the countries overcoming fractious politics and entrenched disagreements over money.
As the United States has withdrawn from global efforts to combat climate change and, more generally, shifted its focus to promoting domestic interests, Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa - known collectively as the BRICS - are well-placed to influence the outcomes of high-profile meetings this year.
They established their credentials by proposing a draft text that ensured agreement at the COP16 talks in February in Rome, a dozen sources told Reuters, potentially unlocking billions of dollars to help halt the destruction of ecosystems.
"Now BRICS has been able to come together in this fashion, (it) will influence our discussions in other platforms going forward," Narend Singh, deputy minister of forestry, fisheries and the environment, for South Africa said.
South Africa is boosting its profile as holder of the G20 presidency this year, while another BRICS member Brazil prepares to host COP30 climate talks in November.
"BRICS has the potential to fill a critical gap in multilateral negotiations," said Maria Angelica Ikeda, Brazil's chief negotiator at COP16.
Colombia's Susana Muhamad, president of the COP16 nature talks, highlighted the BRICS countries' ambitions to serve as "bridge builders."
"They are working to balance global representation, particularly for the Global South, in the face of rising far-right governments in the U.S., Italy, and Argentina," she explained.
"I understand why so many countries want to join BRICS—it offers a united front when confronting global powers like the U.S.," she added.
A British official at the talks, speaking anonymously, noted that other countries need to consider how BRICS’ more assertive approach could reshape global institutions.
If BRICS aims to fill the vacuum left by the U.S. under President Trump, it must overcome internal divisions on political and financial matters.
Timo Leiter, a distinguished policy fellow at the London School of Economics, pointed out that the group's reluctance to assume the financial responsibilities of donor nations could pose a significant challenge.
So far, the middle-income BRICS nations have resisted calls from financially strained developed countries to share the burden, complicating negotiations on climate finance at the U.N. and upcoming talks in Seville, Spain.
In 2022, nearly three-quarters of the $25.8 billion in biodiversity financing came from five major sources: the European Union, France, Germany, Japan, and the U.S., according to OECD data.
The group's divergent national interests—Russia’s reliance on fossil fuel sales versus Brazil's push for faster decarbonization—could also become key sticking points.
"They (BRICS nations) differ widely in terms of development stage and emissions trajectory," said Li Shuo, director of China Climate at Asia Society. "What unites them is their geopolitical aspirations, but the real question is whether they can agree on a unified agenda."
The group's unity will be tested at upcoming meetings in Bonn and Seville, analysts predict, where discussions on COP30 positions and global sustainability goals will take center stage.
"This is the perfect opportunity for BRICS to advance its vision of a new global order, especially with the shift in U.S. policy," Leiter remarked.
In the short term, BRICS is expected to push for more influence in the governance of the Global Environment Facility (GEF), a key fund for global biodiversity efforts.
As developed countries cut back on development spending while demanding more from nature-rich nations like Brazil, Ikeda lamented, "Instead of directing more money to biodiversity, we see countries investing in nuclear arms and weaponry, yet demanding more obligations from us, the megadiverse nations."
Comments
