A high-stakes gathering of BRICS foreign ministers in New Delhi ended Friday without a unified stance on the escalating war in Iran, signaling a deepening diplomatic fracture within the expanded bloc. The meeting’s final outcome document avoided naming any aggressors or assigning responsibility, acknowledging only that “differing views” persisted among members regarding the conflict.
This marks the second consecutive meeting hosted by India where the group failed to reach a consensus on the hostilities involving the United States, and Israel. While the 10-member grouping of emerging economies successfully coordinated on over 60 technical issues—ranging from digital infrastructure to climate action—the Iran conflict becoming a problem for BRICS has exposed a fundamental tension between the bloc’s ambitions for Global South leadership and the visceral realities of regional warfare.
The deadlock was most visible in the public confrontation between Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and the United Arab Emirates’ representative, Khalifa bin Shaheen Al Marar. The exchange highlighted a critical vulnerability for the organization: the inclusion of member states that are actively opposed to one another in a hot conflict.
A Diplomatic Fault Line in New Delhi
The meeting, held at the Bharat Mandapam under the chairship of Indian External Affairs Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, was intended to be a landmark engagement for India’s 2026 BRICS presidency. However, the atmosphere was dominated by the 77th day of a conflict that has seen global energy prices surge and maritime security collapse.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi pressed the bloc to take a hard line, urging members to explicitly condemn what he termed US and Israeli “violations of international law.” Araghchi argued that BRICS must serve as a pillar for a more just global order where “might can never be right.”
The UAE’s response was swift and contradictory. Al Marar used his national statement to call for the condemnation of Iranian actions, focusing on strikes against energy infrastructure. The tension peaked when Araghchi requested the floor a second time to directly accuse the UAE of being an “active partner in this aggression,” claiming Emirati fighter jets participated in strikes against Iran and that Abu Dhabi allowed the US to use its territory for launches.
Abu Dhabi rejected these claims, asserting that it has intercepted more than 2,800 Iranian drones and missiles since the conflict began. The two nations remained at odds over a strike on a school in Minab city, which Iran says killed approximately 170 students, while the UAE maintained that Iranian strikes targeted civilian facilities within Emirati borders.
Timeline of the Escalation
The diplomatic paralysis in New Delhi is a direct reflection of the rapid deterioration of security in the Persian Gulf. The current crisis has moved from targeted strikes to a full-scale naval and economic confrontation.
| Date | Key Event | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| February 28 | US and Israeli strikes on Iranian military and nuclear sites | Initiation of current conflict |
| March (Various) | Iran closes the Strait of Hormuz | Surge in global energy prices |
| April 13 | US imposes naval blockade on Iranian ports | Severe restriction of Iranian trade |
| April 24 | BRICS deputy ministers meet in New Delhi | First failure to produce joint statement |
The Paradox of the Expanded Bloc
For India, the role of mediator has become increasingly precarious. Minister Jaishankar attempted to pivot the conversation toward the pragmatic need for “safe and unimpeded maritime flows through international waterways,” including the Red Sea and the Strait of Hormuz. He noted that “unilateral sanctions cannot substitute dialogue,” a nod toward the UN Charter and international law, though he stopped short of condemning specific actors.
The inability to find a common voice on security stands in stark contrast to the group’s success in other areas. Member states reached agreements on trade, energy cooperation, and multilateral reform, suggesting that while BRICS can function as an economic club, it struggles to operate as a security alliance.
Jauhar Saleem, a former Pakistani diplomat, suggests that this impasse is a symptom of a broader shift in global diplomacy. He described the group as a “disparate group with exceptionally different foreign interests,” arguing that the expectation of a joint approach to the Iran war was unrealistic from the start. According to Saleem, the era of rigid bloc politics is fading, giving way to a more fluid, bilateral approach to diplomacy.
This shift has positioned countries like Pakistan as unconventional mediators. By maintaining open channels with both Washington and Tehran, Islamabad has attempted to fill the void left by the paralysis of larger multilateral organizations.
What In other words for the Global South
The failure to issue a joint statement on the US-Israel war on Iran undermines the bloc’s stated goal of providing a cohesive voice for the Global South. When the most prominent emerging economies cannot agree on the definition of aggression or the protection of civilian lives, the prospect of reforming global institutions dominated by Western powers becomes more distant.
The final document did manage to condemn “the imposition of unilateral coercive measures that are contrary to international law,” a phrase widely interpreted as a critique of US sanctions on Iran. However, without a specific condemnation of the violence itself, the statement remains a diplomatic formality rather than a policy shift.
The eyes of the diplomatic world now turn to the BRICS leaders’ summit scheduled for September in India. With the conflict likely to continue and internal tensions between Tehran and Abu Dhabi unresolved, the summit will be the ultimate test of whether the bloc can maintain its internal cohesion or if the Iran conflict will continue to render its security ambitions irrelevant.
Join the conversation: Do you believe BRICS can ever achieve a unified security policy given its diverse membership? Share your thoughts in the comments below.
