There has been a lot of interest regarding what the BRICS as a collective is likely to state in its formal statement on the ongoing Iran war or the wider Middle East war.

Of course the 10 member states of BRICS have made their own statements on various aspects of this issue, but the significance of a formal joint statement will be much higher and this is why this is so eagerly awaited.

The 10 member states of BRICS are Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa (the five original members), UAE, Iran, Egypt, Indonesia and Ethiopia. These countries have differed in their response when speaking as individual countries. Three of the member countries are from the Middle East and are often on different sides. UAE has also been attacked by Iran in the recent war (or as Iran would say, US bases in UAE have been attacked). Hence it is not difficult to understand why it has not been possible so far (till March 17) for BRICS to issue a statement on such an important event as the Iran war.

Whatever the difficulties, however, it is clear that BRICS should issue a statement on such an important issue, or else its credibility would be adversely affected. India has the current rotating presidency of BRICS and hence has an important role in ensuring that a credible and significant statement is released, not with undue haste of course but also not with excessive delay. At the same time, it should be very careful with the statement, as it should be significant without being provocative, it should unite BRICS further instead of highlighting differences. Above all, this statement should be a step forward on the path of justice-based peace.

Before discussing what this BRICS statement can say or should say, let us take a quick look at what the UN Security Council has stated on this issue. Resolution 2817 of the UN Security Council on March 11 (2026) condemned the retaliatory attacks by Iran against the gulf countries without even mentioning the earlier attacks by the USA and Israel on Iran on February 28 which started the war. This is amazing (the UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres had criticized the Israel-USA attack earlier).

What is most amazing is the fact that although very strong language was used against Iran in this resolution, China and Russia chose only to abstain, foregoing their right to veto this resolution. This is really very surprising. They need not have defended the Iranian retaliatory attacks. These two great powers could have simply vetoed the resolution saying that it is not acceptable as long as it does not mention the original attack by the USA and Israel which started the war. In fact later Russia also brought a second resolution which was not accepted (the USA voted against this). However bringing in this second (unsuccessful) resolution was not significant as by then huge damage to the cause of Iran had already been done.

This also brings out the complexity of the issues involved, as evident from the fact that even the most firm supporters of Iran, who themselves are both great powers in their own right, chose not to veto a resolution that was clearly highly unjust to Iran as it refused to note the original aggression against Iran.

Resolution 2817 criticized and condemned Iran for ‘egregious’ attacks against Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE and Jordan as violation of international law. More particularly it criticized Iran for civilian targeting and closing or blocking navigation routes. The resolution has asked Iran to stop such attacks and to stop closing or obstruction of navigation routes in the Strait of Hormuz or disturbing maritime security in Bab Al Mandab (closer to Yemen where the Houthis, allies of Iran, have attacked ships in the past). 

It has also harmed the cause of Iran that this resolution was co-sponsored by a large number of countries. This happened partly because of the harm feared from obstruction of sea routes or denial of essential supplies, and partly because of success of US efforts to persuade or pressure these countries. 

The BRICS statement on the Iran War should aim at creating a more balanced discourse on this very important issue and at taking forward the cause of justice based peace in such a way that it becomes possible for all the ten countries to agree to a joint statement, admittedly a difficult task considering particularly that both UAE and Iran are member countries.

In this humble submission, this writer suggests that the BRICS statement should emphasize the following six aspects.

• To start with, considerable emphasis and space should be devoted to establishing that peace and stability in the West Asian and Middle-East regions is of exceptionally high importance not only for the countries of this region but for the entire world. Having established this very solidly, the statement should then express great regret that unfortunately this region and its neighborhood have become the scene of forever wars and conflicts. Then the statement should say that it is of the highest importance to make a break from this trend and for the countries of the region as well as the international community, with the help of the UN, to ensure that this region takes the urgently needed path towards permanent peace based on observation of international law and rules. For this all differences need to be resolved on the basis of the precepts of peace and justice by negotiations, helped by the UNO or other mediators whenever needed, also drawing on the work already done for internationally widely supported solutions like the two state solution to resolve the Palestinian crisis.  BRICS should say that it will be highly supportive of all peace with justice efforts in the region.
• The second part of the BRICS statement should say that given the urgency of peace in this region for the entire world, it is to be regretted that the USA and Israel attacked Iran on February 28, despite the fact that encouraging negotiations were being held at this time to resolve pending issues, resulting in the highly regrettable death of its leaders and their family members, and it is also to be regretted that Iran’s response caused harm in some countries that were not directly involved in the attack.
• Thirdly, this statement should say that the situation just now is highly dangerous with great harm being caused to people, infrastructure and environment of the region, while at the same time there are high risks of escalation and a wider war.
• Fourthly, the statement should say that as a result of this war including the blocking or obstruction of sea routes, the entire world economy has been adversely affected, there is acute energy crisis in many countries, food prospects are adversely affected and the humanitarian crisis is worsening at an alarming pace.
• Keeping in view all these adversities and high risks, this statement should call for ending this war as early as possible, for opening up of critical sea routes and ending most of the sanctions against Iran. BRICS should say that it will be happy and willing to contribute to any efforts for justice based peace.
• Finally, this statement should say that special efforts for helping people affected by the humanitarian crisis in all parts of the region and its neighboring areas should be made, with special concern for Gaza, and care should be taken to ensure that the humanitarian crisis does not increase or expand any more.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article. Follow us on Instagram and X and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost Global Research articles with proper attribution.

Bharat Dogra is Honorary Convener, Campaign to Save Earth Now. His recent books include Protecting Earth for Children, Planet in Peril, A Day in 2071, Man over Machine and Earth without Borders. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image source

Global Research is a reader-funded media. We do not accept any funding from corporations or governments. Help us stay afloat. Click the image below to make a one-time or recurring donation.