In the weeks after the US-Israeli attack on Iran and now amid a fragile ceasefire, the silence from the BRICS grouping – where Iran has been a member since 2024 – has been revealing. Despite Iran’s repeated calls for BRICS to play a role in halting aggression, the grouping is yet to take any action condemning the attacks, let alone play a constructive role in the cessation of hostilities.
Officials in India – a founding BRICS member and currently chair – have publicly acknowledged the challenges in adopting a unified position due to “differing views”. This has led many commentators to question the credibility and viability of the group, with some declaring it “utterly ineffectual”.
The questions have merit. Yet it is premature to sound the death knell for BRICS.
Far from posing an existential challenge, the war in West Asia reinforces the importance of the group for Arab States as a forum consisting of non-Western powers which advocate reform of the international system. Among the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries, the United Arab Emirates is already a member, while Bahrain and Kuwait have reportedly shown interest in joining the group. While Saudi Arabia is officially listed as a member on the website, Riyadh has reportedly refrained from formally joining BRICS. Nevertheless, it was invited to join BRICS+ in 2023, and has sent ministerial level delegations to subsequent summits.
With the attacks on Gulf States during the conflict, there is growing disillusionment among GCC countries with the United States because of a lack of consultation before striking Iran and a lack of adequate defence after Tehran hit back. The conflict has revealed deep reservations among the Arab countries about Washington’s reliability as an economic and security partner. With US-GCC relations unlikely to return to pre-war status quo in the near future, BRICS will prove to be an important platform as these countries look to diversify their international economic and political relationships.
Equating silence with irrelevance is flawed – BRICS is not, and was never meant to be, a geopolitical bloc, but a forum which allows states to negotiate from different starting points.
Some have pointed to Iranian strikes against UAE, a fellow BRICS member, as proof of the group’s lack of cohesion, hence relevance. Using the same logic, the military clashes between India and China in 2020 – which led to casualties on both sides – would have invalidated the rationale for the existence of BRICS. Yet, it continues to exist, and has even expanded its membership since.
In times of heightened bilateral tensions, multilateral groups offer a vital off-ramp for dialogue that can prevent further escalation, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, for instance, provided a crucial diplomatic opening for India and China during their 2020 standoff. BRICS can serve as the platform for dialogue between Tehran, Riyadh and Abu Dhabi, with foreign ministers from these countries set to meet in person for the first time since the outbreak of the war – in New Delhi on 14–15 May.
Largely absent from diplomatic efforts to mediate the West Asia conflict, New Delhi needs a successful BRICS meeting to cement its credentials as the self-proclaimed Vishwa Guru (“teacher to the world”). New Delhi’s relative invisibility – in stark contrast to neighbouring Islamabad’s active diplomacy by hosting US-Iran talks – has drawn both domestic and international scrutiny.
Nevertheless, New Delhi has been quietly engaging with all parties involved in the conflict. This includes a recent in-person visit by Indian External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar to UAE for discussions on the conflict.
Hosting a successful BRICS foreign ministers’ meeting, as a precursor to the leaders’ summit, is a tall ask. However, Tehran’s positive signalling suggests New Delhi is well-placed to succeed. Come May, hosting the BRICS and Quad foreign ministers meeting (which is expected to have US participation), New Delhi will be well placed with access to all parties to push for a mediated outcome.
In the past, many have predicted the death of BRICS – with descriptions ranging from “disparate quartet” to a “motley crew” – but it has continued. Equating silence with irrelevance is flawed. BRICS is not, and was never meant to be, a geopolitical bloc, but a forum which allows states to negotiate from different starting points. Its autonomy is its strength, which New Delhi should use to its advantage as it navigates through a deeply divided world.
