New Delhi: A “neighbouring country” of Iran’s that is a BRICS member is insisting that the bloc’s declaration condemn Tehran, Iranian deputy foreign minister for legal and international affairs Kazem Gharibabadi said on Wednesday (May 13), even as he voiced hope that the grouping would still be able to issue a common statement despite divisions over the Iran war.Gharibabadi, who is Iran’s BRICS sherpa, was speaking to a group of Indian journalists in New Delhi ahead of the BRICS foreign ministers’ meeting on May 14-15. Iranian foreign minister Abbas Araghchi arrived in the capital late on Wednesday night to attend the gathering, which will be chaired by external affairs minister S. Jaishankar.“There is one neighbouring country of Iran that is insisting to condemn Iran in the final declaration,” Gharibabadi said. “Iran has been aggressed [upon]. We have been attacked by the US and Israel, and now one neighbouring country of Iran is insisting to condemn Iran.”While he didn’t name the country, UAE is the only BRICS member that borders Iran and has been struck by Iranian counterattacks on US military bases hosted on its territory during the war that began on February 28.This is the first time that Iran publicly pointed to the reason that BRICS has not been able to reach a common position.Gharibabadi said Iran was “in favour of having a joint declaration” because it was happening during India’s presidency. “It is not good to signal this message to the world that BRICS has been divided.”He claimed that Iran had offered to remove language condemning the US and Israel from the text, but the unnamed country insisted that condemnation of Iran should remain even without any reference to Israel or the United States.“If this language against Israel and the US is not in the text, but condemnation of Iran should be in the text. So, who is an obstacle?” he said. He added that no other BRICS member had requested that Iran be condemned.India has deep strategic and economic ties with the UAE, which is its third-largest trade partner. Prime Minister Narendra Modi is scheduled to visit Abu Dhabi on May 15, the day after the BRICS meeting concludes, for talks with UAE President Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan. This will be Modi’s first visit to the region since the Iran war began on February 28 with strikes by Israel and the US.Asked whether India, as chair, had pushed for softer language on Israeli aggression in the declaration, Gharibabadi said India was “showing impartiality” and that he believed the chair would support any idea backed by all member states.Tehran has been pressing India as BRICS chair to ensure the grouping takes a clear position on the conflict. Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian and foreign minister Araghchi have both urged New Delhi to ensure BRICS plays a “strong” and “constructive” role in addressing the crisis.Araghchi has spoken with Jaishankar at least six times since the war began on February 28, raising BRICS-related issues alongside the broader West Asia situation.Under India’s chairship, BRICS has not issued any joint statement since the conflict began on February 28. A meeting of BRICS deputy foreign ministers and special envoys on West Asia held in New Delhi on April 24 ended without a joint statement, with India issuing a chair’s statement instead.The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) had said in March that “some members of the BRICS are directly involved in the current situation in the West Asia region, which has impacted forging a consensus”.This is in contrast to Brazil’s chairship last year, when BRICS issued a standalone joint statement in June 2025 expressing “grave concern” over the strikes on Iran by the US and Israel and describing them as “a violation of international law and the Charter of the United Nations”. The Rio de Janeiro summit declaration in July 2025 went further, with BRICS formally “condemning” the strikes.Gharibabadi made pointed references to the two countries’ shared history in the Non-Aligned Movement.“India has been a member of the non-aligned movement and cannot disassociate itself from non-alignment. Even having new interests, even having new ambitions,” he said. He described both countries as “main founders” of the movement and said that while the methods of pursuing national interests may change, “the principles shouldn’t change”.In answer to a question, Gharibabadi said he had told his counterpart at the MEA that Iran would welcome a diplomatic initiative from India on the war.MEA secretary (west) Sibi George met Gharibabadi on Wednesday for discussions on “bilateral and regional issues”.“Even if India were coming with an initiative, we would welcome that,” he said, adding that India could contribute in various formats including hosting or facilitating negotiations, putting forward proposals or using its diplomatic weight to push for an end to the conflict.On the Chabahar port, a longstanding Indian strategic investment that has been affected by US sanctions, Gharibabadi said Iran was “fully ready to continue that project” and that the question rested largely on India’s willingness to take practical steps.The US sanctions waiver for Chabahar expired on April 26 with no extension announced. India had reportedly informed the US treasury it would “wind down all activities” at the port.Meanwhile, the Wall Street Journal reported on Monday that the UAE had carried out direct military strikes on Iran, including a strike on a refinery on Lavan Island in early April. Reuters reported a day later that Saudi Arabia also conducted secret retaliatory strikes on Iranian soil in late March.Gharibabadi confirmed Iran had documented direct attacks by “two neighbouring countries” and said Tehran had shared the evidence with them. He noted that “this new piece of information that has been released in Western media, we had it before”.“Absolutely there would be responsibility from the legal point of view and Iran also would take appropriate decision,” added the Iranian minister.Iran working to ‘facilitate passage of some more Indian vessels’ through Strait of HormuzOn the Strait of Hormuz, a direct concern for India’s energy security, Gharibabadi confirmed that Iran had allowed 11 Indian vessels to pass through the waterway under a preferential arrangement for “friendly countries”. He said about 13 Indian vessels remain in the area. “This is not the case for many other countries,” he said, adding that Iran was working to “facilitate the passing of some more Indian vessels”.Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz to most foreign shipping on February 28 after the US and Israel launched strikes on the country. It briefly reopened the waterway in mid-April as part of a ceasefire-linked arrangement that also covered Lebanon, but reimposed restrictions after US President Donald Trump said the naval blockade of Iranian ports would continue.The closure of the strait has hit India hard as roughly 85% of crude oil and about 60% of its LPG are imported, with a large share of both transiting through the waterway.Gharibabadi said Iran was developing a formal fee arrangement for the strait based on the services Tehran and Oman provide as the two coastal states, including navigation, rescue and environmental pollution management.“We are evaluating what are these costs that Iran and also Oman are paying at the Strait of Hormuz and how much each vessel – considering the volume of its cargo and the value of its cargo and the size of the vessel – should be charged,” he said. “It hasn’t been finalised.”He denied that the fees amounted to transit charges. “We are not going to impose transit fees,” he said. He said the arrangement would follow three principles of transparency, non-discrimination and compliance with international standards.As per media reports, some vessels have already been notified of provisional charges depending on their cargo and size. Bloomberg reported in March that Iran had charged some ships as much as $2 million for safe passage. Iranian lawmakers confirmed in late April that the first revenue from the tolls had been deposited into the central bank.Iran is not a signatory to the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, which prohibits coastal states from levying charges on ships for transit passage through international straits.The MEA has, so far, denied that New Delhi is paying any fee to Iran for the passage of its ships.Tehran willing to discuss nuclear programme but Washington is ‘dictating, not negotiating’At the press conference, the deputy foreign minister also gave a detailed account of Iran’s negotiations with the US following the ceasefire, accusing Washington of repeatedly undermining diplomacy.According to Gharibabadi, Iran had proposed a package under which it would reopen the Strait of Hormuz and discuss nuclear issues in exchange for a permanent end to the war, a removal of the US naval blockade and the release of part of Iran’s frozen assets abroad. Nuclear issues and sanctions would then be discussed in a second phase of negotiations over 30 days.On the nuclear file, he said Iran had proposed discussing three specific aspects. “One, the commitment to non-development of nuclear weapons, second, enrichment, and the third, stockpiling, existing stockpiling.”He laid out three options for the approximately 460 kilograms of uranium enriched to 60%. “One is transferring the material abroad. Second is dilution. For example, 60% to 20% or below 5%. And the third is to convert them to fuel rods to be used in research or power reactors.”He said Iran was “ready to discuss all these options at the table of negotiations” but that the US had rejected the approach. The US position, he said, demanded that all nuclear material be transferred exclusively to the United States and that Iran suspend enrichment for 20 years. “That’s dictation. That’s not negotiation,” he said.On the nuclear material itself, Gharibabadi claimed that Iran did not currently have access to or control over the enriched uranium at its bombed facilities. “The material under the ruins, we do not know what has happened. Actually, we haven’t had access to the material,” he said.Last year’s strikes by Israel and later the US targeted Iran’s nuclear facilities and military sites.Trump said on Monday that the ceasefire was on “massive life support” with approximately a “1% chance” of surviving, after rejecting Iran’s latest counter-proposal as “totally unacceptable”. Iran’s parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, the lead negotiator, said Tehran was “prepared for every option”.Asked about Trump’s remarks, Gharibabadi said Iran’s “main decision” was to “defend the country” and warned of the consequences of a resumed war. “President Trump said that before [the next phase] that we attack the infrastructure, power plants, bridges, energy sources,” he said. “But whether Iran would surrender itself? Iranian nation will not fall from their independence.”Gharibabadi also said Iran had insisted that any ceasefire arrangement with the US should apply “at all fronts, including Lebanon”, adding that the provision had been accepted during negotiations. “We cannot leave them alone,” he said, referring to Hezbollah.His remarks come amid continued hostilities between Israel and Hezbollah despite ongoing US-mediated efforts to stabilise the ceasefire in southern Lebanon. While Washington has tried to separate the Lebanon track from the Iran ceasefire negotiations, Tehran has repeatedly argued that the conflicts are interconnected.