KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 10 — Malaysia’s engagement with Brics as a partner state is expected to open new opportunities for multilateral cooperation involving Asean and other regional groupings.

Russia’s Ambassador to Malaysia, Naiyl Latypov, said Malaysia’s participation in Brics this year comes as member states explore deeper cross-platform collaboration, particularly between Asean and emerging international organisations.

“We proposed to our Asean partners to develop cooperation not only on a bilateral basis with Russia, but also on a cross-platform basis, for example, cooperation between Asean as a whole and Brics as a whole,” he told a media briefing today.

He noted that under Malaysia’s Asean chairmanship this year, the decision to invite Brazil, the Brics chair, to the Asean Summit enabled all BRICS members to sit together at the East Asia Summit for the first time.

“I think it is a very good gesture,” he said, adding that Russia sees value in strengthening multilateral linkages between Asean, Brics, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) and the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU).

Latypov said such multilateral engagements would help support stable and mutually beneficial norms of behaviour in the international arena, especially as Global South countries seek stronger collective representation.

Commenting on Malaysia’s cooperation with the United States under the reciprocal trade agreement signed during the recent Asean-related meetings, the ambassador said Russia does not take a position on Malaysia’s bilateral trade choices.

“I am not in the position to comment or to give some advice to Malaysia on what to do,” he said, adding that what matters most is that Malaysia acts in its national interest.

Latypov also reiterated that Brics is not an anti-Western organisation, but a platform for countries pursuing independent foreign policies and seeking alternatives in a shifting global economic landscape.

He added that discussions on de-dollarisation within the Brics framework do not reflect hostility toward the US currency, but stem from concerns over its use “as a tool or weapon” in geopolitical disputes. — Bernama