Is India the Thorn in BRICS’ Side?

Modi’s Fence-Sitting and U.S. Alignment Are Undermining the Bloc’s Multipolar Vision

Recently, it has become increasingly obvious that something is not right within BRICS, and it seems that India is the main thorn preventing the group from moving forward.

Let’s remind ourselves that BRICS is an association of countries, some of which are still engaged in direct or strategic conflict — most notably India and China. While the founding members like Russia, South Africa, Brazil, and to an extent China, have found genuine geopolitical alignment, India’s inclusion in BRICS was always more of a marriage of convenience. And now, that convenience is clearly fading.

India has recently blocked two major proposals:

• One from Russia and South Africa to establish a BRICS currency, and
  

• Another from China to expand the BRICS Bank.
  

  This obstructionism sends a clear message: India is afraid to antagonise the United States. Its public commitment to the U.S. dollar is, frankly, a betrayal of the founding spirit of BRICS — a bloc created to build alternatives to Western economic dominance.

But there’s a deeper issue at play. Today’s India is not the India of Nehru or Indira Gandhi, who stood as pillars of the Non-Aligned Movement. Modern India is ruled by Narendra Modi, a leader more reminiscent of Donald Trump — a populist without consistent ideology or principles, driven instead by personal glory and divisive nationalism.

Modi rose to power through a campaign rooted in hate — particularly anti-Muslim sentiment — and by pushing an ideology of Hindu supremacy. This has deeply shaped both domestic and foreign policy.

India’s political alignment became especially clear during the recent Israel-Iran conflict. While all other BRICS nations condemned Israel’s actions, India remained silent. On the streets of India, I’ve heard it myself: “Israel is good — they’re killing Muslims.” Disturbingly, even Indian volunteers traveled to Israel, although they were not welcomed as enthusiastically as they might have expected.

And then there’s Kashmir.

Personally, I like India, and in many ways it has felt like a second home to me. But let’s be honest: if there were a free and fair referendum in Kashmir today, the people would likely vote not to remain part of India. Kashmir is one of the most militarised zones in the world. No journalist can report from there honestly without risking censorship — especially if they dare mention self-determination.

Anyone familiar with Kashmir’s history knows it was a colonial mistake. When the British left, the Maharaja of Kashmir — a Hindu ruler of a Muslim-majority region — chose to join India. That decision, shaped by colonial power structures, continues to destabilise the region.

Under Modi, India is trying to play all sides — courting influence in the G7, while still sitting at the BRICS table. But as the saying goes: “Those who sit on the fence eventually break their ball.” India can’t have it both ways forever.

Would BRICS collapse if India pulled out? I don’t think so.

India will likely continue to sign selective agreements, but for now it is clearly undermining the BRICS philosophy — which aims to create a new, multipolar world and break free from the hegemony of the U.S. dollar. While Russia, China, South Africa, and Brazil are aligned in this effort, India is not — and that divergence is becoming painfully clear.

There’s another growing challenge for BRICS as well: the danger of too many countries with conflicting agendas and worldviews being invited to join. Without clear alignment, the bloc risks diluting its original purpose.

Still, I hope BRICS remains strong. There are bold and visionary leaders within the bloc. But eventually, Modi must be confronted with a choice:

Are you with us — or not?

Because if you’re not — the rest of the world still wants to join us.

And we will move on without you.