With no conceptual clarity just as yet, the proposed BRICS Bank is hardly the panacea to lead the global economy towards equitable and resilient growth.

Even though there are several beneficiaries of group’s gravy trail, its authenticity, capacity and cohesiveness are on shaky ground. BRICS remains, to grudgingly cite the western media, a ‘motley crew' with little in common and lacking in demonstrable ability to co-create institutions of substance. The group remains, true to its illogical compounding by an investment banker, on much firmer ground mouthing platitudes on politics, society, climate, energy, food, water, health, education, industry and trade. The performance of the “BRICS Exchange Alliance” claiming to offer investors index-based derivatives trading options of exchanges in domestic currency is a case in point.

Also read: Decathlon in the Savanna: India can beat China in Africa

The “BRICS Bank”, described by some as “South-South Bank”, is considered to be an Indian proposal. Our avowed objective is an institution that can serve development needs and aspirations of the emerging and developing world. With due respect to our banking bluster, isn’t it ironic that we talk of fixing the world with our own house in a spectacular disarray?

Our mandarins presuppose that the ‘motley crew’ can converge around complex and contested issues even on feasibility and operational modalities!

This is not to say that BRICS doesn’t need to take deeper interest in global financial governance. We represent nearly half the world's population. Two of us are among the top five economies in purchasing power parity terms; four are in the top 10.

But before New Delhi can be taken seriously, we need to show the ability to efficiently redistribute and redirect our own domestic savings to infrastructure and social development and rebalance our own domestic economy. It is them alone that we can be seen making a solid contribution in raising capital from open market operations or in floating debt to finance lending operations.

Remember, raising capital would make the fiscal asymmetries within BRICS sovereigns irrelevant. While they will collectively be the shareholders of a BRICS Bank, many including India are barely investment grade. This would limit the amount of capital that could be raised from the financial markets and also increase the cost of capital and therefore the cost of lending.

Then there’s the role of Beijing. With its massive monetary reserves and political clout, China will exert undue influence in this bank. New Delhi must ensure that intelligent financial engineering (read sequester foreign reserves) kicks in so that the smallest BRICS economy, South Africa, could easily commit an amount similar to that of China.

Also, rather than Beijing asserting a natural right over the presidency, do we have the guts to make it a clear vote for egalitiarianism? Can we start with Brazil, and then go on to Russia, India, China and South Africa in two-year terms?

The biggest concern may well be the viability of such a bank amid expectations that it would transact in local currencies. India, for example, is a majorly current account deficit country. Therefore, we won’t be averse to the US dollar being the currency of disbursal. Brazil, instead, has an appreciating “Real.' So, it will prefer local currency. China will see this bank as a platform for the yuan!