Chinese President Xi Jinping will not attend this week’s BRICS Summit in Brazil, marking the first time the Chinese leader has missed the gathering of major emerging economies. The abrupt decision has triggered widespread speculation about internal political dynamics within China and the fraying cohesion of BRICS itself.

China’s official explanation — a ‘scheduling conflict’ and the fact that Xi already met with Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva earlier this year, according to the South China Morning Post — has been met with skepticism. Premier Li Qiang will attend the summit in Xi’s place, continuing a recent trend of Xi scaling back his appearances on the global stage.

‘That doesn’t make sense,’ said Gordon Chang, an expert on U.S.-China relations. ‘There are many other countries at the BRICS summit, not just Brazil. To me, it’s extremely significant that Xi Jinping is not going. It suggests turbulence at home — there are signs he’s lost control of the military and that civilian rivals are reasserting power. This is a symptom of that.’

Bryan Burack of the Heritage Foundation agrees that Xi’s absence underscores deeper issues: ‘It’s another indication that BRICS is not going to be China’s vassalization of the Global South.’ He noted that countries like Brazil and Indonesia have recently imposed tariffs on China over industrial overcapacity and dumping, moves that suggest widening rifts within the group.

‘China is actively harming all those countries for the most part, maybe with some exceptions, through its malign trade policies and dumping and overcapacity.’

Tensions with India and global trade pressure may also be factors

Some analysts point to rising China-India friction as a contributing factor in Xi’s decision to skip the summit. 

‘China has been at war with India for decades, essentially,’ Burack said. ‘These are fundamentally opposing interests. It’s difficult to see China changing its behavior in the near term, and that will keep tensions high.’

India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi is expected to take a leading role at the gathering, potentially another deterrent for Xi’s attendance.

Another key leader — Russian President Vladimir Putin — is only expected to address the group by video. 

BRICS: United in name, divided in decades-long tensions 

Formed by Brazil, Russia, India and China and later joined by South Africa, BRICS was envisioned as a non-Western counterweight to G7 dominance. It has expanded to include Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, the UAE and, most recently, Indonesia, strengthening its economic footprint.

Economist Christian Briggs highlighted BRICS’s massive scale: ‘BRICS now comprises 12 full members and up to 23 when counting partners. Collectively, they account for over 60% of the world’s GDP and around 75% of the global population. They control vast natural resources and a growing share of global trade flows.’

Yet despite its scale, the bloc remains ideologically and strategically fragmented. ‘It’s a group of countries that hate each other,’ Burack said bluntly. ‘China is harming many of them through unfair trade practices. There’s not a lot of incentive for real unity.’

Currency ambitions and strategic divergences

The alliance’s aspirations to challenge the U.S. dollar through alternative payment systems and a potential BRICS currency have gained media traction — but experts caution against overestimating this threat.

‘There’s been a lot of fearmongering about a BRICS currency,’ said Burack. ‘But the interests of these countries are completely divergent. There’s more smoke than fire when it comes to a currency challenge to the dollar.’

Chang echoed this skepticism: ‘The only country that can challenge the dollar is the United States. Weakness in the dollar is due to what we are doing domestically, not what the BRICS are doing.’

Still, Briggs offered a counterpoint, arguing that BRICS members are already reshaping global currency flows.

‘They’re moving away from the dollar into digital yuan, rupees, rubles. China has launched a SWIFT alternative already adopted by the Caribbean banking sector — trillions of dollars are shifting.’

Is BRICS still a threat to U.S. influence?

While its cohesion remains questionable, BRICS poses a long-term challenge to U.S. influence — particularly in regions where Washington has retreated diplomatically and economically.

‘China filled the void left by the U.S. in places like Africa,’ said Briggs. ‘Now it controls about 38% of the world’s minerals. Meanwhile, Russia’s economy has doubled despite sanctions, because they preemptively reduced reliance on the dollar.’

Yet Chang sees India as a brake on any aggressive anti-Western tilt. ‘BRICS has an ‘I’ in it—and that’s India. Modi doesn’t want to be part of an anti-Western bloc. As long as India’s in BRICS, the rest of the world is safe.’

A missed opportunity — or a calculated power move?

To some, Xi’s no-show signals instability in Beijing. To others, the opposite: it demonstrates confidence in China’s dominance over the other BRICS members.

‘He doesn’t have to be there,’ Briggs contended. ‘Xi’s power allows him to delegate. China is trading with nearly 80% of the world now. He’s moving the agenda forward even in absentia.’

What’s clear is that BRICS continues to evolve — its internal contradictions as visible as its geopolitical ambitions. Whether Xi’s absence marks a retreat or a recalibration remains one of the key questions hovering over the summit in Brazil.

The first time I remember celebrating the Fourth of July was during the American bicentennial in 1976. As children living in New York City, my parents woke my sisters and I up early to see the Parade of Tall Ships as it entered the Hudson River. Even as a kid, this magnificent display conveyed to me a sense of the grand power of the U.S. The extraordinary event also offered me another feeling: that America, my home country, would do anything and everything in its power to keep me, my family, and indeed, all of its citizens, safe.

This Fourth of July, Americans will find themselves in two very different realities. Most will be surrounded by family and friends, enjoying baseball, hot dogs and ice cream cones. But for my American family, as well as dozens of other families of hostages, this day will be a stark contrast. On this day that celebrates freedom, my son Itay will spend the Fourth of July like he has the last 637 days – likely alone, in the cold, dark tunnels of Hamas in Gaza. He and 49 other hostages remain stripped of their freedom, while their families are in limbo, not able to embrace the holiday of independence. We need to remember, especially on this day, that Hamas is still holding Americans hostage, and 50 hostages in total.

On this day, we must look past the haze of fireworks and remember that the Fourth of July is about something more. It’s about celebrating our hard-fought, long-defended freedom and knowing that an attack on the freedom of any American – and taking them hostage – is an attack on the freedom of us all. Taking U.S. citizens as hostages should be a liability, not an asset, with severe consequences attached. So long as Hamas holds U.S. citizens, we are letting evil and terrorism win.

My son was 19 when he was taken hostage. On this Independence Day, he can no longer watch the Mets games with his brothers, something he loved and cherished. He can no longer try to strike me out in the neighborhood pickup game, or check in every five minutes at the grill asking when the food will be ready. On this Independence Day, his lack of freedom rings loudly.

This Fourth of July, my family and I will wake up again to the same nightmare we do every day, where every moment begs the same agonizing question: Where is my son, and what can we do to get him back?

Right now, all of our energy is focused on one thing. As every parent knows, when your child disappears from your sight – even for a few moments at a playground or store – panic sets in instantly. But when your child is kidnapped, especially by terrorists, the only thing you can think about is getting them back, whatever their condition. Until we can embrace Itay again, we cannot even begin to process what lies ahead or plan for the future. It’s impossible to move forward when this remains an open wound.

After the historic wins over Iran, Hezbollah, and yes, Hamas, now is the time for us to pause and adopt President Donald Trump’s policy of ‘Peace Through Strength.’ It is time for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to collaborate with the U.S. and bring the hostages back. The U.S. was successful last month in bringing New Jersey native Edan Alexander back home, independent of Israel, but it needs Israel to bring the remaining others out.

No fan of half-measures, President Trump is in a prime position to pull off the ‘Big Beautiful Deal,’ a comprehensive diplomatic initiative which would end hostilities in both Iran and Gaza, secure the release of all 50 remaining hostages in Gaza – including my son – and help stabilize the entire Middle East through a carefully negotiated framework.

President Trump is uniquely positioned to drive such an initiative forward. During his previous presidency, he successfully brokered the Abraham Accords, achieving what many had previously considered near impossible normalization between Israel and several Arab nations. The Big Beautiful Deal would be a direct extension of this diplomatic milestone, offering a more comprehensive and regional approach to peacemaking. The president’s unorthodox style has demonstrated that breakthroughs are possible even in the most entrenched conflicts.

America defined the values of freedom and human dignity that we celebrate on the Fourth of July. They didn’t come easily – we had to fight for them, good versus evil – and our continued defense of democracy is an essential part of the American identity.

In the last few months, my family has met Vice President JD Vance, FBI Director Kash Patel, Attorney General Pam Bondi and others who promise us that President Trump’s policy of ‘America First’ is not hollow words and ‘America First’ prioritizes the release of American hostages and those unlawfully detained all around the world, including Gaza. 

To date, the Trump administration has been able to release 47 such Americans, and we pray Itay will be one of them as well soon. This Fourth of July, keep in mind that there was an attack on our freedom on Oct. 7, and fellow Americans remain in captivity. I call on President Trump: Do everything in your power to quash terrorism, and ensure that freedom wins the day with the release of the hostages.

The Supreme Court ended its term last week, but the justices aren’t done yet, partly due to a legal blitz President Donald Trump has strategically deployed in his second term, one that’s proven surprisingly effective in advancing his sweeping agenda.

Lawyers for the Trump administration filed their 20th emergency application to the Supreme Court Thursday in just a 23-week period. 

The dizzying pace of applications comes as the administration looks to advance some of Trump’s sweeping policy actions. And, in many cases, the court’s 6-3 majority has given the administration the green light to proceed. 

The high court has ruled in Trump’s favor in the majority of emergency applications, allowing the administration to proceed with its ban on transgender service members in the military, its termination of millions of dollars in Education Department grants and its firing of probationary employees across the federal government, among many other actions.

Like most emergency orders, the rulings are often unsigned, giving little indication what the justices might be thinking.

Emergency applications — and the Supreme Court’s responses — aren’t meant to offer lasting relief. But Trump has found success using a ‘move fast and break things’ strategy to push key requests through the court’s so-called ‘shadow’ docket.

For context, Trump has filed more emergency applications in five months than his predecessors did in years. Former President Joe Biden submitted just 19 over his entire term, while presidents Obama and George W. Bush filed only eight combined during their time in office.

In the interim, the strategy has allowed him to enforce many of the sweeping executive orders he signed upon taking office. These orders were met with hundreds of lawsuits across the country and blocked by many lower courts, prompting the administration to appeal them, again and again, through the federal judiciary. 

For now, those near-term wins have energized Trump allies, allowing them to press forward with a blitz of executive actions and claim ‘victory,’ however temporary. The approach allows Trump to advance major policy priorities without relying on a slow-moving Congress.