Author: Tiberio Graziani – 25/08/2025
Russia’s necessary role in Eurasian stability: between BRICS divergences and unity
The transition toward a multipolar, polycentric world order is an inherently complex and dynamic process. In this context, each actor operates based on a distinct set of national interests and strategic priorities, which can vary significantly. For instance, for many countries in the Global South, the agenda is dominated by the need to achieve industrial development (as is the case for Vietnam, Bangladesh, Indonesia, and Morocco), while for others, internal security and stability are considered paramount (such as in Ethiopia, Mali, Niger, and Yemen).
The dynamics within the BRICS group (now BRICS Plus) are a clear reflection of this complexity. While members share a common interest in building a new international order they perceive as more equitable, their relationships are a delicate balance of convergences and divergences. This balance is the conditio sine qua non for the existence, strengthening, and progress of the entire cluster.
Divergences between China and India
Among the BRICS’ founding nations – an aggregate that is both geoeconomic and geopolitical -, the tensions between China and India are of particular geopolitical significance. Given their strategic position in the heart of the Eurasian landmass and their projection into two oceans, any friction between them risks having repercussions far beyond the group’s borders. The divergences, which range from border issues (such as the Himalayan territorial dispute) to economic and strategic rivalries, are held in a precarious equilibrium by the common interests and shared multipolar perspective that bind them.
An escalation of these tensions to an irreconcilable point would not only lead to the collapse of BRICS. It would also create a dangerous geopolitical vacuum throughout Asia, destabilizing a crucial area for the emergence of the new world order. Such a scenario would threaten regional and global stability, compromising the aspirations for a more balanced system.
Moscow’s function as a mediator
To avert this scenario, the Russian Federation is called upon to play a fundamental role as a bridging element between the two Asian powers. With its historical, economic, and strategic ties to both Beijing and New Delhi, Moscow is in a unique position to act as a neutral mediator.
A historical precedent for this mediating function can be found in the RIC (Russia-India-China) project, conceived in the mid-1990s by Russian Foreign Minister Yevgeny Primakov. His plan was to create a “strategic triangle” that would act as a counterweight to post-Cold War US hegemony, promoting a multipolar world order. Although it never achieved full formalization, this initiative laid the groundwork for a trilateral dialogue that allowed Moscow to act as a diplomatic bridge, facilitating cooperation between New Delhi and Beijing on security, economic, and geopolitical issues. Primakov’s project, which aimed for a pragmatic integration rather than a rigid alliance, is considered the precursor to subsequent multilateral structures, including the BRICS group itself.
Russia’s function would not be limited to mitigating Sino-Indian crises; it would also involve facilitating continuous, constructive dialogue, ensuring that divergences do not reach a point of no return. Moscow’s actions in this capacity are crucial for maintaining the unity of BRICS and for ensuring that Eurasia’s geopolitical aspirations can be realized without a catastrophic conflict.
Furthermore, it is important to emphasize that Russia’s role as a mediator would take on a broader significance: it would send a reassuring signal to all BRICS and Global South countries, particularly those placed in Africa. It would demonstrate that misunderstandings and divergences between member countries can be resolved peacefully, reinforcing confidence in the new multipolar order’s ability to pragmatically manage its internal complexities. Russia’s commitment to acting as a diplomatic bridge is therefore essential for both the stability of the BRICS cluster and for confidence in the success of the vision for a new, equitable, and polycentric world order.