By Sheila Hossana Muhindo
With Donald Trump securing a second term as U.S. president, his administration’s aggressive trade policies—marked by tariffs, sanctions, and economic confrontations—have reignited tensions with global powers, including key BRICS nations such as China, India, and South Africa.
As these economic disputes escalate, the call for a more balanced global financial system has grown louder. Many nations are seeking alternatives to the U.S.-led financial order, and BRICS has emerged as the most viable counterweight.
Coined by British economist Jim O’Neill, BRICS originally represented the economic alliance of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa. Over time, its influence expanded, welcoming new members like Iran, Indonesia, Egypt, Ethiopia, and the United Arab Emirates—forming BRICS+. While Saudi Arabia has accepted an invitation to join, it has yet to formalize its membership. Uganda, among the latest nations to align with the bloc, officially became a BRICS partner on January 1, 2025.
BRICS has significantly expanded its global economic footprint. According to the World Bank and IMF, the bloc now accounts for 27% of global GDP ($31.7 trillion) and encompasses 47% of the world’s population (3.8 billion people). Additionally, its members contribute nearly 44% of global oil production, strengthening its economic leverage.
The foundation of BRICS was driven by the belief that institutions like the World Bank and IMF disproportionately favor Western interests, often imposing restrictive economic conditions on developing countries. The alliance offers an alternative framework that allows nations to trade in local currencies, reducing dependency on the U.S. dollar—a currency frequently weaponized through economic sanctions. Countries like Iran and Iraq have suffered long-term economic hardship due to such restrictions, making BRICS an attractive alternative for those seeking financial independence.
For resource-rich nations like Saudi Arabia, BRICS presents an opportunity to diversify investments beyond Western markets. Likewise, Uganda, as a partner nation, gains access to the bloc’s extensive trade network—where 65% of transactions occur among member states. Additionally, Uganda may benefit from the BRICS Contingency Reserve Arrangement (CRA), a financial safety net that provides economic assistance during crises. Unlike IMF and World Bank loans, which come with stringent policy conditions, BRICS funding mechanisms offer more flexible and sovereignty-respecting terms.
Though Uganda currently lacks voting rights within BRICS, it has a platform to voice concerns and influence policy discussions. This inclusive approach has made the bloc an attractive alternative for nations seeking equitable global representation.
According to Dr. Isaac Shinyekwa, an economist and trade expert at the Economic Policy Research Centre, Uganda’s participation in BRICS could reshape its economic landscape. “When the World Bank and IMF were established in 1945, many emerging economies, including India and China, were not global players. Today, these nations hold significant economic influence, signaling a shift in global power dynamics.”
Dr. Shinyekwa further emphasized that Uganda stands to gain from increased investment, technological collaboration, and infrastructure development—areas where Western financial institutions have fallen short. “BRICS offers opportunities for economic cooperation, innovation, and geopolitical engagement that Uganda can leverage to accelerate its development.”
In addition to financial and trade benefits, Uganda’s partnership with BRICS may foster cultural and educational exchanges, creating new opportunities for knowledge transfer. Furthermore, the bloc’s proposed alternative payment system could allow Uganda to engage in barter trade, using its natural resources to settle transactions, rather than relying on the U.S. dollar.
One of the most significant reforms BRICS is championing involves global trade governance. The World Trade Organization’s (WTO) appellate system, which resolves international trade disputes, has been paralyzed due to U.S. opposition. BRICS is advocating for changes that could revive the WTO’s dispute resolution process—an effort Uganda could support as part of its broader international engagement strategy.
However, Uganda’s alignment with BRICS does not come without risks. The U.S. and its allies are likely to view the growing influence of BRICS as a direct challenge to their economic dominance. With 27% of the global economy operating outside U.S. dollar transactions, Washington’s ability to control international financial systems may weaken. In response, President Trump has threatened 100% tariffs on BRICS nations if they undermine the dollar’s role in global trade.
Attempts to counteract BRICS’ rise could lead to intensified economic confrontations. While BRICS insists that it does not seek to replace the U.S. dollar, tensions between the bloc and Western powers continue to escalate, shaping an uncertain geopolitical landscape.
Despite the potential challenges, Uganda’s engagement with BRICS signals a shift in its international trade strategy. Whether this partnership will yield long-term economic gains or provoke diplomatic tensions remains to be seen, as global power struggles continue to unfold in real-time.
