Why has the US-Israeli war on Iran left Brics speechless?

China condemned it. Russia condemned it. Brazil condemned it. Brics, as a bloc, has said nothing. More than a week after US and Israeli strikes killed Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and triggered the worst regional crisis in years, the grouping that positions itself as the collective voice of the Global South has yet to issue a single joint statement. The silence is not an oversight. It is the sound of a bloc whose expansion has outpaced its ability to speak as one, analysts say. When Brics moved to admit Iran and the United Arab Emirates and invited Saudi Arabia to join in an expansion scheduled to take effect from January 2024, the move was celebrated as a milestone in the bloc’s push for a more multipolar world order. Now, those same members are pulling in different directions. Iran, under assault from the United States and Israel, has launched retaliatory strikes against American assets around the region, including in Saudi Arabia and the UAE. “This situation leaves the Brics+ unable to respond in a balanced, coherent or logical way that projects or protects the interests of all its members,” said Chris Ogden, programme director and associate professor of global studies at the University of Auckland, referring to the expanded bloc. Unless the conflict were to settle into a purely US-Israel vs Iran dynamic, with Tehran standing down from strikes on its Gulf neighbours, Ogden said a formal collective Brics response was unlikely, “even if that is to press for a ceasefire”. India’s middle path The bloc’s apparent paralysis is compounded by its current chair. India holds the Brics presidency this year – and New Delhi’s instinct has been to say as little as possible. India’s ties with Israel span defence, technology, agriculture and intelligence cooperation. Its relationship with Iran, meanwhile, is built around energy security and regional connectivity – most visibly in the development of Chabahar port on the Middle Eastern nation’s southeastern coast. “India has been moving closer to Israel for many years, though it has also maintained its historical ties with Iran,” said Sarang Shidore, director of the Quincy Institute think tank’s Global South programme. “When two members of a club are at loggerheads, it is not surprising that the club cannot find a consensus,” he added, referring to Iran and the UAE. When two members … are at loggerheads, it is not surprising that the club cannot find a consensus Sarang Shidore, Global South specialist Delhi’s diplomatic tradition of non-aligned balancing between major powers – the so-called middle path – may yet shape the bloc’s response, according to Rajeev Ranjan Chaturvedy, an associate professor of international relations at Nalanda University. He said India might push member states towards a joint declaration that urged adherence to international law and condemned aggression in general terms, carefully worded to avoid taking sides. “India’s approach has always been the middle path,” Chaturvedy said. “Hence, the Brics statement may reflect this as well.” A talking shop? Other concerns are also at play, analysts say. After Spain criticised the US-Israeli strikes, Washington threatened to cut off all trade with Madrid, with US President Donald Trump calling the European nation “terrible”. The episode sent a signal, according to Ogden: openly criticising the strikes on Iran risks inviting more punitive US tariffs or a full-scale commercial freeze-out. Defence researcher Gaurav Kumar of the United Service Institution of India said it appeared that Brics members were “quietly consulting each other before taking any collective position”. “At the moment, it looks more like a diplomatic pause,” he said, adding: “It naturally raises questions about how coordinated Brics really is.” The bloc was not built for this. When Brics began to take shape nearly two decades ago, its agenda was broadly economic – trade cooperation, investment flows and, later, a push to reform global governance structures. The Ukraine war began pulling it into harder geopolitical terrain. The Iran crisis has dragged it further still. “As the world gets more securitised and militarised, geopolitical questions will present an increasing challenge for the cohesion of Brics,” Shidore said. A bloc that represents 40 per cent of humanity and 39 per cent of global gross domestic product cannot be ignored. But the Iran crisis has raised doubts about whether Brics can act as more than a talking shop when its own members are at war.

Why has the US-Israeli war on Iran left Brics speechless?

.css-1c6uqr6{color:inherit;font-weight:inherit;font-size:inherit;font-family:inherit;line-height:inherit;overflow-wrap:break-word;}As Tehran retaliates against its Gulf neighbours, the newly expanded bloc built for trade is discovering the limits of its own unity

As Tehran retaliates against its Gulf neighbours, the newly expanded bloc built for trade is discovering the limits of its own unity