Political and legal aspects of BRICS cooperation in the field of artificial intelligence

Towards the development of an alternative regulatory approach

Bibliographic Data

ID22433680
AuthorsBidoley V F Agonnoude (0000-0001-5807-6591, Peoples' Friendship University of Russia), Victor A Glebov (0000-0002-4272-8927, Peoples' Friendship University of Russia), А А Maslov (0000-0001-7337-2874, Lomonosov Moscow State University)
Year2026
Volume26
Issue2
Pages286-311
Publication date2026-07-08
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueVestnik RUDN International Relations (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2313-0660 • E-ISSN: 2313-0679
PublisherPeoples' Friendship University of Russia (PUBLISHER • RU)
DOI10.22363/2313-0660-2026-26-2-286-311
OpenAlexW7168402812
LanguageEN
References cited23

Global artificial intelligence (AI) governance is currently framed as a bipolar confrontation between the ‘Brussels’ and ‘California’ approaches. The article argues that the BRICS countries are attempting to craft a third path-an alternative model of AI governance rooted not in unification, but in an ‘overlapping consensus.’ Drawing on political ontology and a comparative analysis of national strategies, the authors demonstrate how the twin imperatives of digital sovereignty and resistance to technological hegemony can bridge the initial regulatory diversity among member states. The methodology combines discourse analysis of key BRICS documents with a case study approach, revealing the emerging architecture of a hybrid ‘soft law’ regime. Empirically, the study draws on frequency and contextual analysis of three core concepts-‘sovereignty,’ ‘inclusiveness,’ and ‘fairness’-across BRICS summit declarations from 2020 to 2025. The findings indicate a clear conceptual shift: from a predominantly political discourse on sovereignty in 2020, to its progressive digitalization and embedding within the technological agenda by 2025. The rising salience of terms tied to technological autonomy and digital security underscores this shift. The ‘overlapping consensus’ model proves workable for states with different politico-economic systems and technological capabilities. It enables them to maintain regulatory sovereignty, manage heterogeneity without resorting to rigid harmonization, and establish flexible coordination frameworks. BRICS cooperation is oriented less toward creating a supranational regulator than toward aligning principles for joint action in international fora. Enlargement enhances the group’s representational appeal for the Global South, but it also complicates standard-setting amid a growing diversity of national interests. The prevalence of ‘soft law’ and flexible ‘coalitions of the willing’ gives members the room to maneuver in the era of intense technological rivalry. On the practical side, the study offers several actionable recommendations: a digital platform for standard alignment, a mechanism for expedited mutual recognition of certification, and a joint large language model program tailored to the Global South’s linguistic and cultural diversity.

Autonomy · Blueprint · Corporate governance · Global governance · Hegemony · Politics · Sovereignty · Stalemate · Summit · COVID-19, Geopolitics, Technology, Migration · Cybersecurity and Cyber Warfare Studies · Ethics and Social Impacts of AI

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access