The Global South has been locked out of real decision-making
En un mundo donde las reglas del orden internacional fueron escritas por pocos para gobernar a muchos, los cancilleres del BRICS se reunieron durante dos días para exigir que esa ecuación cambie. Con una declaración de 63 puntos adoptada el sábado, el bloque colocó el fin del bloqueo estadounidense a Cuba junto a la reforma de las instituciones de Bretton Woods y el Consejo de Seguridad de la ONU, argumentando que el Sur Global —mayoría de la humanidad— ha sido sistemáticamente excluido de las decisiones que moldean su destino. Es un momento en que la retórica de la multipolaridad busca convertirse en arquitectura real.
- El bloqueo económico de Estados Unidos a Cuba fue denunciado por unanimidad como una crisis humanitaria activa, no como una disputa ideológica abstracta.
- La declaración sacude los cimientos del orden de posguerra: el BRICS exige que el FMI, el Banco Mundial y el Consejo de Seguridad de la ONU dejen de ser clubes de los poderosos.
- En Medio Oriente, el bloque no midió palabras: condenó sin calificativos el bombardeo israelí a Gaza, exigió un alto al fuego inmediato e incondicional y respaldó un Estado palestino soberano con Jerusalén Oriental como capital.
- Más allá de las palabras, los ministros acordaron posiciones comunes en sectores estratégicos concretos: ética de la inteligencia artificial, seguridad energética, acción climática y resiliencia de cadenas de suministro.
- India, al frente de la presidencia rotatoria del bloque, subrayó que el consenso alcanzado apunta a soluciones prácticas e inclusivas en un momento de incertidumbre geopolítica y económica sin precedentes.
Los cancilleres del BRICS cerraron su reunión de dos días con una declaración de 63 puntos que tiene más de manifiesto que de protocolo diplomático. El primer punto de quiebre es Cuba: el bloque exigió por unanimidad el levantamiento inmediato del bloqueo económico, comercial y financiero de Estados Unidos, encuadrando la demanda no como postura ideológica sino como imperativo humanitario ante el daño concreto que el embargo causa a la población cubana.
Pero Cuba fue solo el punto de partida. El verdadero objetivo de la declaración es la arquitectura del poder global. Los ministros llamaron a una reforma profunda del Consejo de Seguridad de la ONU y de las instituciones financieras nacidas en Bretton Woods, argumentando que el Sur Global —que representa la mayor parte de la población mundial y una porción creciente de su dinamismo económico— ha sido invitado a la mesa sin recibir un asiento real en las decisiones.
Sobre Medio Oriente, el lenguaje fue directo: respaldo a una solución de dos Estados con una Palestina soberana en las fronteras de 1967 y Jerusalén Oriental como capital, condena sin matices al bombardeo israelí sobre Gaza, y exigencia de un alto al fuego inmediato e incondicional con acceso humanitario irrestricto. Para Líbano pidieron el cumplimiento estricto del cese al fuego y la retirada de tropas israelíes; para Siria, una transición política pacífica sin injerencia externa.
Lo que distingue esta cumbre del teatro diplomático habitual es el paso de las declaraciones a los compromisos. Los ministros acordaron posiciones coordinadas en sectores estratégicos: reforma institucional, comercio, finanzas, ética de la inteligencia artificial, seguridad energética, acción climática, salud, productividad agrícola y resiliencia de cadenas de suministro. India, al frente de la presidencia rotatoria, destacó que el consenso alcanzado busca soluciones prácticas, inclusivas y sostenibles.
Los propios ministros reconocieron la gravedad del momento: conflictos activos, amenazas climáticas, cambio tecnológico acelerado y disrupciones en las cadenas globales de suministro configuran una incertidumbre sin precedentes. La declaración equivale a afirmar que el orden posterior a la Guerra Fría —en el que Occidente fijó las reglas y el resto las acató— ya no es sostenible. Si el BRICS puede convertir esa convicción en poder real es la pregunta que definirá la próxima fase de la política global.
The foreign ministers of BRICS closed a two-day meeting on Saturday with a 63-point declaration that reads less like diplomatic boilerplate and more like a manifesto. At its core sits a demand that the United States lift its economic, commercial, and financial blockade of Cuba—a position the bloc framed not as ideology but as a humanitarian imperative, citing the concrete toll the embargo takes on ordinary Cubans.
But Cuba was only the opening move. The real thrust of the declaration targets the architecture of global power itself. The ministers called for a fundamental overhaul of how the world's institutions function—specifically the United Nations Security Council and the financial bodies born from Bretton Woods. The argument is straightforward: the Global South, which comprises most of the world's population and much of its economic dynamism, has been locked out of real decision-making. These nations are invited to the table but given no seat. BRICS wants that to change.
The declaration also turned its attention to the Middle East and North Africa with unambiguous language. On Palestine, the ministers reaffirmed support for a two-state solution with a sovereign Palestinian state within the 1967 borders and East Jerusalem as its capital. They condemned Israeli bombardment of Gaza without qualification and demanded an immediate, unconditional ceasefire along with unrestricted humanitarian access. For Lebanon, they called for strict adherence to the ceasefire and the withdrawal of Israeli troops. On Syria, they backed a peaceful political transition free from outside interference.
The humanitarian crisis in Sudan drew their concern as well—they called for a permanent ceasefire in a conflict that has displaced millions and created one of the world's worst hunger emergencies. They also condemned a terrorist attack in April 2025 in Jammu and Kashmir, reaffirming their commitment to fighting terrorism in all its forms. Unilateral coercive measures—sanctions imposed by single nations—were denounced as illegal and contrary to international law.
What distinguishes this gathering from typical diplomatic theater is that the ministers moved beyond declarations to concrete commitments. They agreed on a shared position for cooperation across strategic sectors: the reform of the UN Security Council and international financial institutions; trade, industry, and finance; the ethical development of artificial intelligence; energy security; climate action; biodiversity protection; health; agricultural productivity; and food security. They also committed to coordinated work on supply chain resilience, disaster risk reduction, and people-to-people exchanges.
Indian officials, whose country holds the rotating presidency of BRICS, emphasized that consensus prevailed on the need for the bloc to move forward with determination in finding common ground that yields practical, viable, inclusive solutions rooted in sustainable commitment. Yet the ministers were clear-eyed about the moment they inhabit. They acknowledged the profound consequences for BRICS and the Global South of an era marked by unprecedented geopolitical and economic uncertainty—active conflicts, climate threats, rapid technological change, and disruptions to global supply chains that ripple through every economy.
The declaration amounts to a statement that the post-Cold War order, in which the West set the terms and the rest followed, is no longer tenable. Whether BRICS can translate that conviction into actual power remains the question that will shape the next phase of global politics.
Notable Quotes
The Global South and developing countries should cease being passive participants and become actors with genuine decision-making capacity— BRICS foreign ministers, in their declaration
The bloc emphasized the need to move forward with determination in finding common ground that yields practical, viable, inclusive solutions— Indian officials representing BRICS presidency
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why does BRICS care so much about Cuba's blockade? It's been in place for decades.
Because it's a test case. If the Global South can't protect one of its own from unilateral punishment by a superpower, what does solidarity actually mean? The blockade also symbolizes something larger—the right of one nation to impose its will on another without consequence.
But the real news here seems to be about reforming global institutions. Why is that the centerpiece?
Because every country in BRICS has felt the weight of a system designed before they had a voice. The UN Security Council, the IMF, the World Bank—these were built in 1945 and 1944. The world has changed. The Global South has grown. But the power structure hasn't moved.
They mention unprecedented geopolitical uncertainty. What are they really worried about?
Supply chains breaking, conflicts spreading, technology outpacing governance, climate disasters accelerating. They're saying: we need to act together now, or we'll be managed by others' crises instead of shaping our own futures.
Is this bloc actually unified, or are they just performing unity?
The fact that they reached consensus on something as contentious as the Middle East—where India, Brazil, and South Africa have different interests—suggests real negotiation happened. But yes, there's always performance in diplomacy. The question is whether they can move from words to coordinated action.
What happens next?
They've committed to working on AI ethics, energy, food security, supply chains. Those are concrete areas where they can either prove they can act together or reveal the limits of their unity. The real test is whether any of this actually shifts power.