The main task of BRICS in the financial sphere is not to create a single currency, but to shape a pragmatic and interoperable payment architecture that provides businesses with reliable, fast, and cost-effective cross-border settlements while preserving the monetary sovereignty of member states.
Pragmatism Instead of Financial Confrontation
From a Single Currency to an Interoperable Architecture
The prospects for developing a unified payment system in the format at issue are considerable, though it is necessary to distinguish between a unified payment system and a single BRICS currency. A single currency remains a long-term and politically difficult task. The association’s members have different monetary regimes, degrees of capital account overtness, inflation dynamics, regulatory systems, and strategic priorities.
In fact, the current official discussion centers mainly on reducing transaction costs, expanding settlements in national currencies, and exploring compatible payment instruments and platforms, rather than on introducing a single currency. A more realistic goal is the formation of an interoperable BRICS payment architecture that would link up national systems while preserving the monetary sovereignty of each participant.
Contours of a Compatible Payment System
Such an architecture could include several complementary elements: direct settlements between authorized banks in national currencies; interoperability between national fast payment platforms; common technical standards for messaging, identification, and compliance; central bank currency swap agreements to provide liquidity; clearing mechanisms to manage imbalances between national currencies; carefully controlled pilot projects using central bank digital currencies; and trade finance instruments, guarantees, and credit lines in national currency.
A model of this kind does not require unifying monetary regimes. It presupposes technical and regulatory compatibility where necessary, and the preservation of national specificities where they are fundamentally important.
Contribution of Participants
The countries of the format could contribute by offering up their existing expertise in building payment platforms and their regulatory know-how. Hence, the association can lean not on an abstract single-currency project, but on national solutions that already exist and have proven their effectiveness.
Criteria for Success
The principle should be “strengthening interconnections without losing sovereignty.” Success should be measured not by political statements, but by whether an exporter, importer, or logistics company can complete a transaction quickly, predictably, and at a reasonable price. It is precisely this practical criterion that should become the main one for evaluating any initiatives in the field of payment infrastructure.
The Technology Is There, but the Difficulties Lie Elsewhere
The main problem is not technology, since most of the necessary technologies already exist. More complex are the issues of liquidity, regulation, trust, and coordination. It is these that determine the speed and scale of possible progress.
Five Bottlenecks
First, trade between BRICS countries is not always balanced. One country may accumulate another member’s currency without having sufficient opportunities to use, convert, or reinvest it. The payment system will therefore require a more developed foreign exchange market, currency swap lines, hedging instruments, and mechanisms for investing surplus balances.
Second, BRICS is marked by economic and institutional diversity. Member states have different banking rules, capital controls, data protection requirements, anti-money laundering rules, and approaches to digital currencies. Harmonization cannot mean imposing a single national model on the entire group.
Third, any shared infrastructure must meet high standards of cybersecurity, operational resilience, and data protection. A large cross-border platform will become an attractive target for cyberattacks, fraud, and politically motivated acts of sabotage.
Fourth, businesses need legal certainty. Before companies begin using a new system on a large scale, issues must be resolved concerning applicable law, dispute resolution, finality of settlement, taxation, and liability for failed transactions.
Fifth, there is a risk of excessive politicization. If the platform is presented exclusively as a tool against the dollar or Western countries, some members and private financial institutions may tread carefully. A more compelling argument is the commercial aspect: competition between payment channels, lower costs, and greater resilience benefit the entire international economy. Financial fragmentation can itself generate costs, including a weakening of international risk sharing, reduced investment, and greater macroeconomic volatility. BRICS should therefore build additional infrastructure while preserving links with the broader financial system wherever possible.
The Geopolitical Challenge
Finally, the geopolitical dimension cannot be overlooked. Delaying the creation of a unified BRICS payment system—even if what is meant is a compatible architecture rather than a single currency—objectively serves the interests of the “collective West.” It seeks to slow down, and ideally to derail, integration processes within the association, preserving the dominance of the existing financial infrastructure and the capacity for political pressure through payment channels.
Therefore, procrastination, endless coordination, and the absence of pilot projects should be viewed not only as a technical weakness but also as the result of external obstruction. This does not cancel out the need for pragmatism, but it does make the speed of launching at least limited corridors a strategic matter.
A Phased Approach
For this reason, some experts recommend a phased approach. Starting with bilateral pilot projects, followed by small multilateral corridors, BRICS “regulatory sandboxes,” common compliance standards, and finally broader compatibility based on demonstrated commercial demand.
A pragmatic BRICS agenda in the financial sphere should be built around additional channels, not around the symbolic replacement of one system with another. A single currency remains a distant and politically difficult goal. Real progress is possible through interoperability, compatible standards, swaps, clearing, and pilot projects.
The criterion for success should be not the loudness of statements, but the ability of businesses to complete cross-border transactions quickly, predictably, and inexpensively. This is precisely the meaning of the principle of “interconnection without loss of sovereignty.” And delay in this matter benefits those who would like to freeze the current financial configuration and prevent the strengthening of BRICS’s integration potential.
Vlad Markin, Deputy Editor-in-Chief of NEO
Follow new articles on our Telegram channel
