BRICS Summit Declaration Takes Firm Stance on Global Crises, Avoids Naming Specific Countries
The New Delhi Declaration adopted at the 18th BRICS Summit has taken firm positions on sanctions, terrorism, Gaza, nuclear risks and several regional conflicts, but has carefully avoided naming the countries responsible for most of the crises, reflecting the deep strategic differences within the expanded grouping. The declaration devotes around 19 paragraphs to wars, sanctions, terrorism, nuclear risks, territorial disputes and humanitarian crises, but its language becomes deliberately general where identifying an aggressor could divide the bloc, according to an analysis by Global Trade Research Initiative (GTRI) Founder Ajay Srivastava. The ambiguity may have helped India secure consensus among an increasingly diverse grouping. But it also highlights the limits of BRICS as a geopolitical actor. The biggest omission is the Russia-Ukraine war. The declaration does not name either Russia or Ukraine, instead referring generally to ongoing conflicts, sovereignty and peaceful resolution through dialogue, consultation and diplomacy. The approach is particularly evident in its treatment of unilateral sanctions. The declaration condemns economic and secondary sanctions not authorised by the UN Security Council, without identifying the countries imposing them. The language implicitly covers sanctions against Russia and Iran and threats of penalties against countries and companies trading with them. Cuba is a notable exception. The declaration explicitly expresses concern over the tightening of the US blockade and calls for an end to economic, commercial and financial restrictions, although the United States itself is not named. On West Asia, BRICS calls for maximum restraint, protection of civilians and diplomacy, while stressing the importance of uninterrupted trade, supply chains and energy flows. The language comes against the backdrop of the conflict involving Israel, Iran and the United States, and concerns over possible disruption of the Strait of Hormuz. The declaration is more explicit about attacks on nuclear facilities. It expresses serious concern over deliberate attacks on peaceful nuclear facilities under International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards, but again does not identify the attacker or the country whose facilities were targeted. On Gaza, however, the document takes a considerably stronger position. It calls for maintaining the ceasefire, ending violence and ensuring full humanitarian access. It also backs full UN membership for Palestine. For India, a key gain is the declarationβs strong condemnation of the April 22, 2025, terrorist attack in Jammu and Kashmir, in which 26 people were killed. It calls for zero tolerance of terrorism and action against cross-border movement, financing and safe havens. Although Pakistan is not named, the language directly reflects Indiaβs concerns over cross-border terrorism and terrorist safe havens.
