What Happened
- The Congress party accused the government of "diminishing" the value of India's BRICS+ presidency by declining to issue a collective statement on the US-Israel war on Iran.
- Congress leader Jairam Ramesh stated that India "has not summoned the inclination or courage" to put out a BRICS+ joint statement on the US-Israeli offensives on Iran and on Iran's subsequent attacks on Gulf states.
- Congress noted that Brazil, which held the BRICS+ presidency in 2025, had brought the bloc together to issue a joint statement in June 2025 condemning US-Israeli air strikes on Iran as a violation of the UN Charter.
- The party alleged that India's silence is driven by the desire to maintain favourable relations with the Trump administration and Prime Minister Netanyahu.
- The government's critics also point to the US Navy's reported activities in the Indian Ocean near Sri Lanka and India as warranting a stronger Indian response.
- In a separate development, Prime Minister Modi spoke with Iran's president — his first conversation since the war began — signalling cautious diplomatic engagement.
Static Topic Bridges
India's BRICS+ Presidency 2026 — Context and Responsibilities
India assumed the BRICS+ rotating presidency for 2026 (the "+" referring to the expanded bloc that includes Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, and Iran as full members since 2024). As president, India is responsible for setting the agenda, convening summits, and building consensus on collective statements. The presidency is a significant diplomatic platform to shape the bloc's position on global issues.
- BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) was formally established in 2009; the first expansion round was announced in August 2023
- India's previous BRICS presidency was in 2021
- Brazil's 2025 presidency produced the Rio de Janeiro Declaration (July 2025), which expressed "grave concern" over strikes on Iran and called them a "blatant breach of international law" — India signed on to this declaration
- The 2026 West Asia conflict — directly involving BRICS members Iran, UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt — places India's presidency under unprecedented pressure to broker or at least articulate a collective position
Connection to this news: The congressional criticism hinges on a direct comparison: Brazil, under far greater geopolitical constraints (being in the US's Western Hemisphere), managed to lead the BRICS+ bloc to issue a clear statement on Iran. India, a more powerful global player, has so far avoided doing so in 2026 despite holding the presidency.
India's "Strategic Autonomy" and Multi-Alignment
India's foreign policy doctrine of "strategic autonomy" is rooted in its Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) heritage and refers to its practice of maintaining independent positions and diversified partnerships rather than joining formal military blocs. Under the current government, this has evolved into what some analysts call "multi-alignment" — actively cultivating ties with the US, Russia, the Gulf states, and Iran simultaneously.
- India is a founding member of NAM (Bandung Conference, 1955; NAM formally established 1961 in Belgrade)
- India has historically maintained relations with Iran through the Chabahar Port agreement, which provides access to Afghanistan and Central Asia bypassing Pakistan
- India imports a significant share of its oil from Russia (discounted crude) and the Gulf states
- India's refusal to join Western sanctions on Russia after 2022 set a precedent for its current approach to the Iran war
- "Issue-based alignment" rather than bloc-based commitment is now India's stated approach in multilateral forums
Connection to this news: The silence on Iran directly tests the limits of India's multi-alignment. A BRICS+ statement would antagonise the US and Israel; explicit condemnation of Iran would alienate a key energy and connectivity partner. India's inaction is itself a strategic choice, but one with political costs at home and reputational costs within BRICS.
BRICS+ Expansion and the Challenge of Consensus
The 2023 expansion of BRICS brought in states with deeply divergent interests: Iran (under Western sanctions, at war), UAE and Saudi Arabia (historically US-aligned Gulf monarchies), Egypt (which has its own security calculus), Indonesia, and Ethiopia. Building consensus among 11 members with conflicting alignments is structurally more difficult than among the original five.
- The BRICS+ expansion was approved at the Johannesburg summit in August 2023; the new members were invited to join as of January 2024
- Iran's membership creates a direct tension: any BRICS+ statement that condemns US actions on Iran is effectively one BRICS member endorsing the position of another in an active war
- China and Russia have consistently sought to use BRICS as a counter-Western platform; India and Brazil have resisted this framing
- The UAE and Saudi Arabia — now BRICS+ members and also targets of Iranian drone strikes — complicate any pro-Iran collective statement
Connection to this news: India's presidency faces the structural challenge of leading a bloc that is internally divided on the very conflict in question. The Congress criticism, while politically motivated, points to a genuine diplomatic tightrope that India must walk as the BRICS+ chair.
Key Facts & Data
- Brazil's 2025 BRICS+ presidency produced a joint statement in June 2025 condemning strikes on Iran as violating the UN Charter
- The Rio de Janeiro BRICS Declaration (July 2025) called strikes a "blatant breach of international law" — India signed it
- Iran became a full BRICS+ member as of January 2024
- India's 2026 BRICS+ presidency has not issued a collective statement on the Iran war as of March 16
- Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was killed in the US-Israel offensive launched on February 28, 2026
- Congress also called for a parliamentary debate on the West Asia crisis
- PM Modi called Iran's president for the first time since the war began, reflecting cautious diplomatic outreach