BRICS ministers fail to reach consensus on Middle East conflict

The two-day meeting of BRICS Foreign Ministers in New Delhi concluded on 15 May, expectedly without a joint statement scuttled by sharp divergences among the member-countries of the trans-continental grouping on the Middle East conflict.

Earlier, a two-day meeting of Deputy Foreign Ministers and special envoys of BRICS countries held in Delhi in April also failed to work out a consensus on the issue. A month down the line, the Foreign Ministerial meeting was also not enough for a breakthrough joint declaration, once again highlighting just how fragmented the bloc has become in dealing with a major geopolitical challenge that has serious implications for global economic stability.

As a host and the current chair of BRICS, India felt more than perhaps any other country the stress caused by the lack of unity in wading through a very complex diplomatic challenge with serious economic implications.

India said in a statement and outcome document of the Foreign Ministers' conclave that "there were differing views among some members as regard to the situation in the Middle East region," India said without specifying any country.

Two BRICS members Iran and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) over the Middle East conflict came out on 14 May during the opening day of the Foreign Ministers' meeting.

It is learnt that there were heated exchanges between Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and the UAE's Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Khalifa Shaheen Al Marar during the first sessions at the meeting. It was left to Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov to cool the tempers.

Without naming the UAE, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi told a news conference in Delhi on 15 May that a BRICS member opposed some parts of the statement.

For India, which walks a diplomatic tightrope on the complicated Middle East scenario, asking to choose a side effectively means to give up its multialignment across the regions. India's maintaining robust ties with the US, EU, Russia, China, Iran and Israel is a demonstration of its strategic autonomy.

At the same time, it is not a coincidence that when the BRICS foreign ministers' meeting rolled into its second day, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi was visiting the UAE and Araghchi was in Delhi. In Abu Dhabi, Modi condemned missile and drone attacks on the UAE.

Araghchi clarified that the UAE has not been Iran's ⁠target in the war and Tehran only hit American military bases and American military installations there.

Aragchi also said he hoped things would change when BRICS leaders gather for the summit in Delhi possibly in September this year. Will the next four months be enough to result in a turnaround for the better?

How to deal with the Middle East war is part of a larger structural challenge for BRICS' repeated calls for a more inclusive world order and providing a credible alternative to the existing US-disrupted and dictated order.

The question the grouping must ask itself is to what extent it can align its geoeconomic and geopolitical interests with those of the US. They must remember how initial moves to break free from the US dollar in conducting intra-BRICS trade had drawn a sharp reaction from the Donald Trump administration which held out the threat of sanctions. The BRICS was forced to promptly issue a clarification that it was not trying to replace the US dollar.

All BRICS countries have robust political and economic ties with the US. The structural problem for BRICS is that it can ill afford to turn away from the US whose dominance is here to stay.

For example, in spite of the US and China's fulmination against each other, Trump was in Beijing and talked to Chinese President Xi Jingping. Iran, in spite of its animosity towards the US, has remained engaged with that country in search of a peace deal in the Middle East.