This week’s one-day annual summit by the so-called Brics countries which groups Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa held at New Delhi assumes great significance in view of the new challenges facing the global economy and politics.

Reports say the summit received less attention in the international media, especially in the West, which some critics say could be due the fact that the group has achieved little since its inception in 2009. While this could be true, what makes the latest summit important is its speaking out on Iran and Syria – the two most important issues that have taken the global attention.

On both, the leaders assembled in Delhi took a position which is contrary to the Western positions. It signals the Brics’ keenness to challenge the established global order which is dominated by the US and the West.

The group stressed that a military action to curb Tehran’s suspect nuclear activities was unacceptable and suggested they were not bound by a looming ban on Iran’s oil exports. Both the Iran and Syria crises must be resolved diplomatically, it said. “We must avoid political disruptions that create volatilities in global energy markets and affect trade flow... We must ensure policy coordination to revive economic growth,” the Indian leader, Manmohan Singh said.

The stance will embolden Syria and Iran. Especially for Syrian people fighting the murderous regime Bashar Al Assad, such vocal support will be extremely disappointing. While the idea of providing an alternative to the current global economic and political order is indeed welcome, doubts persist whether Brics can fulfill that objective.

Its five members are united by a policy of anti-Americanism and a desire for a bigger individual role in global affairs, but a fundamental incompatibility has been preventing them from acting as a leading global force. India and China are competing powers in the Asian region and share an acrimonious relationship caused by a border dispute.

China and Russia have a tenuous relationship with democracy, while India and Brazil have stronger democratic traditions. Russia, Brazil and India are known to prefer a multipolar global system in which they are major actors, while China aims for a bipolar world in which it sees itself as a counterbalance to American power.

Overcoming all these differences will not be easy and will bedevil efforts for greater unity in future. But even despite these differences, the emergence of an alternative to the current order must be welcomed. It can act as a positive, restraining influence on Washington.

Economically, Brics has made some progress, like the plans to create a development fund, achieve wider role in the IMF and the World Bank and seek integration of their markets.