Skip to content
Open access

Political and legal aspects of BRICS cooperation in the field of artificial intelligence: Towards the development of an alternative regulatory approach

Jul 2026 · Vestnik RUDN International Relations · Vol 26, pp. 286-311 · 0 citations · 32 references

TL;DR

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’ model that enables them to maintain regulatory sovereignty, manage heterogeneity without resorting to rigid harmonization, and establish flexible coordination frameworks.

Abstract

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.

Read PDF

Similar papers

Open access Sep 2026

Algorithmic Governance and International Law: Reconciling Sovereignty and Cross-Border Accountability

This article interrogates the concept of artificial intelligence (AI) sovereignty as an emerging site of normative tension within international law. As states increasingly assert jurisdiction over AI technologies and digital infrastructures, established doctrines, particularly those concerning territoriality, jurisdi...

A. Yadav · 0 citations
Review Open access Aug 2026

Governing Artificial Intelligence in a Fragmented World: Toward a Multi-Level Policy Framework for Global AI Governance

It is argued that a layered subsidiarity approach, with specific financing for capacity-building and technical standards that work across the board, is more likely to deliver effective global AI governance than calls for a binding treaty.

Asher Odhiambo Ojuok, Julius Murumba, E. Micheni · 0 citations
Review Open access Aug 2026

Parliamentary discourse and legislative approaches to artificial intelligence regulation: a comparative analysis of five jurisdictions

An updated five-part typology of AI regulation is proposed, introducing the concept of “sovereignty through partnership” as an alternative to technological autarky and one-sided regulatory borrowing, and conceptualizes “delayed reflection” as a regulatory pattern among established democracies that recognize infrastruct...

Elnur Beisenbayev, Bakhytzhan Bukharbayev, Zh.M. Tolen et al. · 1 citation
Open access Aug 2026

A normatively grounded hybrid model of AI governance: insights from the teaching of Leo XIV

The study develops a Leo XIV-informed, normatively grounded hybrid model of AI governance that extends beyond the exercise of agency over technology to fostering a more just and inclusive social order in which technology enables human flourishing.

S. Fel, Marta Choroszewicz, Jarosław Kozak · 1 citation
Review Open access Aug 2026

Human-centric AI governance in the European Union. Accountability, fundamental rights, and institutional resilience in public administration

This Policy and Practice Review concludes that AI-enabled administration remains legitimate only where public authorities retain the capacity to understand, justify, correct, suspend and democratically control the systems they use.

A. Dragomir, Iulea Bulea, Lucian Tarnu · 2 citations
Open access Aug 2026

Artificial Intelligence and the Reconceptualization of Digital Sovereignty: A Political–Philosophical Analysis

It is maintained that AI disrupts the traditional Westphalian principle of state sovereignty, arguing that true digital sovereignty requires more than technical infrastructure but a philosophically cohesive conception of collective self-determination in an increasingly interconnected world.

H. Q. Tran · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.