India secures win as host by helping Iran, UAE find common ground on war without ditching ‘national positions’, but raises concerns by dropping mention of Ukraine war in New Delhi Declaration
Indian diplomats would be relieved and pleased to have secured a BRICS Summit-2026 declaration despite the vastly different positions of the UAE and Iran on the situation in West Asia. It would have been embarrassing for India, as the host, if it had not succeeded and had to fall back, as during the BRICS foreign ministers meeting in May this year in Delhi, to a Chair’s statement. Generally, the onus of achieving a consensus during a multilateral summit falls on the host. The success of its diplomacy is judged by its ability to forge one. And India achieved in doing so; hence, credit has to be given where it is due.
A mostly non-controversial document
That said, an analysis has to be made on the contents of the declaration to see if it contains any element which will make a significant difference to international relations or the lives of the peoples of the member-states. That is difficult to visualise in the immediate future. It has also to be seen whether, in the process of achieving consensus, India itself moved from its traditional positions on important issues.
Also read/watch: Is China hijacking BRICS? | Ex-diplomat TS Tirumurti interview
The BRICS declaration entitled, “BRICS New Delhi Declaration: Building for Resilience, Innovation, Cooperation and Sustainability," is 140 paragraphs long. It covers issues relating to the changing world order, international peace and security, developmental matters including energy and food security, health, supply chains and the availability of critical minerals and culture and the people-to-people sector.
Much of this is non-controversial among member states and does not attract public and media interest. What inevitably concerns the international community and diplomats are contentious political, peace, and security-related matters. So, that has been the case in the latest summit declaration.
With Saudis neutral, it’s Iran vs UAE
The most contentious part of the declaration is related to the situation arising from the Iran war. Both Iran and the UAE – one of the most heavily targeted countries in the Gulf by Iran in its war with the US – are members of BRICS.
The position of Saudi Arabia, which has also been targeted by Iran, however, is ambiguous. While BRICS treats it as a full member, Saudi Arabia does not consider itself as such. It describes its position as an “invited country”. Its foreign minister attended the summit, but Saudi Arabia did not take an active part in its activities, including drafting the declaration.
Also read/watch: BRICS Summit | Modi-Xi meeting: ‘India-China border row remains key hurdle to ties’
Thus, with Iran attacking the Arab Gulf countries even though it claims that it was only targeting US facilities there and also blocking the flow of hydrocarbons through the Strait of Hormuz, the battle lines were drawn only between the UAE and Iran in the negotiating chambers. The process would have been immensely complicated had the Saudis been full members.
West Asia situation most contentious part
As a former diplomat, this writer feels that the most contentious paragraph in the declaration is paragraph No. 28. It deals with the “situation in West Asia” – a euphemism for the Iran war. On its part, Iran would have obviously wanted a full condemnation of the US and Israeli action, which began on February 28 with a decapitation strike. The UAE’s focus would have been Iran’s missile and drone strikes on its territory and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz.
The fact that both countries agreed to find common ground was facilitated by the formulation of the first two sentences of this paragraph, which state: “We express deep concern over the continued escalation of tensions in Middle East/West Asia and, recalling our respective national positions, call for exercising maximum restraint, as well as avoiding actions that could further aggravate the situation. Furthermore, we urge to ensure the protection of civilians and civilian infrastructure in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations in their entirety and interconnectedness, including respect for the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the states”.
Iran, UAE find common ground; national positions intact
This takes care of Iran’s concerns on territorial integrity and sovereignty and those of the UAE relating to civilian and civilian infrastructure’s security. However, all this would have been meaningless without the specific mention of “recalling our respective national positions”. The inclusion of this phrase is always the last resort for achieving a consensus because it enables the parties to demonstrate that they have not given up their ‘national positions’, and that is a signal that they have retained their primacy on their views over whatever else may be contained in the document.
Also read: Modi-Xi BRICS meet excellent optics; real test will come when euphoria fades
Thus, both the UAE and the Iranians would be able to tell their peoples that they gave nothing away in the negotiations. This would have been particularly important for President Masoud Pezeshkian because he has to deal with the hardliners of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps back at home.
Ukraine war dropped from declaration
It is significant to note that at the last BRICS summit in Brazil, a compromise was reached on the Ukraine war by using the same tactic of ‘national positions’. It read, “We recall our national positions concerning the conflict in Ukraine as expressed in the appropriate fora including the UN Security Council and the UN General Assembly…”. Giving way to Russian preferences, even this reference was dropped altogether in the New Delhi Declaration.
Interestingly, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar visited Ukraine and Poland from September 3-5, barely a week before the summit. He met President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Kyiv. Did Jaishankar warn Zelenskyy that while India stood for peace in Ukraine, it would be going by Russian desires and drop the Rio reference to the war altogether? In this writer’s thinking, whatever goodwill may have been earned in Kyiv and Warsaw by Jaishankar’s visits, has been endangered substantially by dropping the Ukraine war paragraph.
‘Root cause’ phrase may come to haunt us
Two other points may be mentioned.
India has been particularly strong on the non-inclusion of any reference to “root causes” of terrorism because that is the slippery slope of finding justifications for it. In this declaration too, there is no mention of the root causes, which is good.
However, the first paragraph under the section on international peace and security mentions the following formulation: “We note the current global context of polarisation and distrust and encourage global action to strengthen international peace and security. We call on the international community to respond to these challenges and associated security threats through politico-diplomatic measures to lower conflict potential and stress the need to engage in conflict prevention efforts, including through addressing their root causes”.
Also read: Why India’s electronics boom in BRICS comes with a concentration risk
While it can be argued that this is a general proposition, many view terrorism as an asymmetric conflict of the weak against the strong. Hence, it would have been better if this had not been allowed to go through by Indian diplomats, for it may be used against us in the future on the terrorism issue. This is not nitpicking because sometimes formulations are used tangentially and acquire a life of their own to come back to haunt.
Will China follow AI safety caution?
The paragraph on AI safety requirements is wise. It is in line with the current caution on AI by leading US companies in this sector. The question is whether it will have any effect on China–which has signed on to it—as it is involved in a great struggle in this field with the US. And the country which leads in AI may well become the world’s leading power in the future.
Finally, the Narendra Modi government will naturally project the BRICS Summit as a great triumph which has enhanced India’s and Modi’s position in the world. The fact is that once the ‘captains and the kings’ depart, it is the mundane issues, more domestic than foreign, which determine the fate of countries and their leaders.
(The Federal seeks to present views and opinions from all sides of the spectrum. The information, ideas or opinions in the articles are of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Federal)
