Get real time updates directly on you device, subscribe now.
At the recent BRICS foreign ministers’ meeting in Rio de Janeiro, diplomatic friction surfaced as Egypt and Ethiopia the newest African members of the bloc voiced strong opposition to what they called preferential treatment for South Africa. The dispute erupted over a proposed joint declaration that explicitly endorsed South Africa’s bid for a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). Both Egypt and Ethiopia rejected this clause, arguing that it contradicted the African Union’s position on collective continental representation. Their stance ultimately prevented the adoption of a consensus communiqué, exposing growing divisions within the expanded alliance.
BRICS Expansion and African Representation
BRICS, originally composed of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, underwent a significant expansion in 2023 by inviting six new members: Argentina, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. With Argentina declining the invitation and Saudi Arabia’s status remaining unclear, Egypt and Ethiopia formally joined in 2024, giving Africa three full BRICS members the highest continental representation in the group. This expansion was seen as a strategic effort to increase the bloc’s global influence and credibility as a voice of the Global South. However, it has also brought competing interests and internal rivalries to the surface, especially among African nations.
The UNSC Seat Controversy
The diplomatic rift in Rio centered on language in the draft declaration that supported South Africa, along with Brazil and India, in their aspirations for permanent UNSC seats. While previous BRICS statements have expressed support for broader Security Council reform, this marked the first time South Africa was explicitly named as the sole African candidate. Egypt and Ethiopia took issue with this wording, citing the African Union’s Ezulwini Consensus, which calls for two permanent UNSC seats for Africa to be selected by the continent as a whole. The two nations argued that any endorsement of an individual African country undermines the AU’s position and could set a dangerous precedent.
Egypt and Ethiopia Assert Their Positions
Both Egypt and Ethiopia demanded that the statement either align with the Ezulwini Consensus or omit any reference to individual African states. They insisted that African representation on global platforms must come through collective agreement and not unilateral endorsements within external alliances. Their opposition was strong enough to derail the adoption of a final communiqué, and even the fallback option a Chair’s Summary was challenged, as the two nations insisted their reservations be formally recorded. This marked a rare public rupture in BRICS deliberations, especially on an issue as symbolic and politically sensitive as UNSC reform.
South Africa’s Long-Held Position Challenged
South Africa has historically positioned itself as the primary African voice in global forums, including the G20, the UNSC (as a rotating member), and BRICS. Its close relationships with major powers like China and Russia, and its early entry into BRICS in 2010, have helped solidify that image. However, Egypt and Ethiopia two of Africa’s most populous and geopolitically influential countries are now asserting themselves as equally legitimate continental leaders. Egypt’s strategic location and diplomatic legacy, coupled with Ethiopia’s role as host of the African Union, make both nations formidable voices in African and international politics.
Implications for BRICS Unity and Africa’s Global Strategy
The incident underscores broader challenges facing BRICS as it becomes more diverse. While the bloc aims to present a united alternative to Western-led institutions, internal divisions especially between regional powers threaten to undercut that goal. The Rio standoff also spotlights Africa’s ongoing struggle to present a unified stance in international forums. Though the Ezulwini Consensus represents the official AU position, in practice, national ambitions often override regional unity. Without cohesive strategies, Africa’s call for meaningful representation risks being weakened by internal competition.
What Comes Next
The next BRICS summit, set for July 2025 in Russia, will be a critical opportunity to address these internal divisions and revisit questions around fair representation. For Africa, the challenge will be reconciling national interests with a common continental agenda. If Egypt, Ethiopia, and South Africa can work together to advance a unified African position within BRICS, the continent could significantly boost its influence on the global stage. But if rivalries persist, they could fracture Africa’s voice in one of the world’s most influential emerging alliances. The Rio dispute may be just the first of many growing pains in BRICS’ expanded structure and a test of how effectively the bloc can manage its own diversity.
