New Delhi: The BRICS foreign ministers’ meeting in New Delhi ended on Friday (May 5) without adopting a common declaration, reflecting the deep divisions within the bloc over the US-Israeli military campaign against Iran and its wider regional fallout.Instead of a negotiated joint statement, India as chair issued a “Chair’s Statement and Outcome Document”, an unusual outcome that reflected the inability of members to bridge disagreements.The divisions surfaced in three distinct ways across the 63-paragraph document, demonstrating the increasingly complex internal dynamics within BRICS following its expansion in 2024 to include rival powers such as Iran and the United Arab Emirates.The most consequential split centred on the Iran war itself – and who should be condemned for the conflict. The UAE had wanted Iran to be explicitly condemned, while Tehran wanted Israel and the US to be named for starting the war.That disagreement prevented consensus on a joint declaration altogether and was reflected in paragraph 21 of the outcome document, which unusually acknowledged internal differences within BRICS.“There were differing views among some members as regard to the situation in the West Asia/Middle East region,” the paragraph stated. BRICS members “expressed their respective national positions and shared a range of perspectives,” it added, listing only broad principles that were presented by the member states, including dialogue and diplomacy, respect for sovereignty, unimpeded maritime commerce and the protection of civilian infrastructure and lives.The paragraph did not name the US, Israel or Iran, nor assign responsibility for the military confrontation. Neither was there any direct reference to the current situation in the Strait of Hormuz, despite the waterway’s importance to global energy flows and India’s energy security.Since India’s chairship, which began in January 2026, BRICS has not issued a single consensus statement on the 40-day conflict in West Asia that followed the US-Israeli strikes on Iran February 28. A BRICS deputy foreign ministers’ meeting on West Asia held in New Delhi on April 24 had also failed to produce a joint communique after clashes between Iran and the UAE.Reservations over Palestine and YemenThe New Delhi document contained two additional fault lines linked to Palestine and Yemen. Two paragraphs carried footnotes recording reservations from “a member”, though the country was not identified.One paragraph stated that Gaza was “an inseparable part of the Occupied Palestinian Territory” and called for it to be unified with the West Bank under the Palestinian Authority. It also urged the international community to support the Palestinian Authority “in undergoing reforms” to fulfil Palestinian aspirations for statehood.Sources said Iran was the unnamed member that registered the reservation, although Tehran did not publicly specify its objection. The Wire has contacted the Iranian embassy for response.While it is not clear why Iran would object, Iranian discomfort may have centred not on support for Palestine itself, but on the language regarding Palestinian Authority governance arrangements.On Palestine more broadly, however, the 2026 outcome document carried language that was in some respects stronger than the April 2025 Rio foreign ministers’ statement issued under Brazil’s chairship.The New Delhi document reiterated support for a two-state solution within the 1967 borders “with East Jerusalem as its capital” and added a call for “the State of Palestine’s full membership in the UN”, language absent from the 2025 Rio statement.Asked whether the language on Palestine represented a shift in India’s position, MEA secretary (economic relations) Sudhakar Dalela said he did “not see this as a departure”. Photo: AP/PTI.It also called for an “immediate, permanent and unconditional ceasefire” in Gaza. The Rio statement had called for a “permanent cessation of hostilities” without the word “unconditional”.The 2026 document further condemned “the use of starvation as a method of warfare”, which was not mentioned last year – and demanded “the full withdrawal of Israeli forces from the Gaza Strip and all other parts of the Occupied Palestinian Territory”.However, the New Delhi document did not include explicit language opposing the forced displacement of Palestinians or condemning Israeli settlement expansion in the West Bank, both of which had appeared in the 2025 Rio statement.Asked whether the Palestine language represented a shift in India’s position, secretary (economic relations) in the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) Sudhakar Dalela said he did “not see this as a departure”. He said BRICS had a “very coherent and clear view on matters relating to Palestine” across previous declarations.A separate paragraph on the Red Sea and the Bab-al-Mandab Strait stressing navigational rights and urging diplomatic efforts to address the Yemen conflict also drew a reservation.Sources again identified Iran as the unnamed objector.The wording touched on highly sensitive issues linked to Red Sea security, the Yemen conflict and the activities of the Iran-aligned Houthis. Since the Gaza war began in 2023, Houthi attacks and threats against commercial shipping in the Red Sea and Bab-al-Mandab Strait have repeatedly disrupted trade routes. During the current confrontation involving Iran, the Houthis have expressed support for Tehran, while maritime security has remained closely tied to wider regional tensions involving Iran, the US and Israel.On the footnoted paragraphs, Dalela told reporters that these were “specific to a region” in which “one of the members from the region had a differing perspective on few elements”.He said India would “continue to engage on these matters and make sure that we can find common grounds on these one and one-and-a-half [issues] that we have remaining”.The Iran-UAE confrontation had already played out openly on the first day of the meeting at Bharat Mandapam.Iranian foreign minister Abbas Araghchi accused the UAE of direct involvement in the military campaign against Iran, saying Abu Dhabi had provided military bases, airspace and facilities to the US and Israel.UAE minister of state for foreign affairs Khalifa Shaheen al-Marar reportedly criticised Tehran for its attacks on neighbouring countries and portrayed Iran as the aggressor.In his opening remarks, external affairs minister S. Jaishankar had alluded to the tensions without naming any country. “It is essential for the smooth advancement of BRICS that newer members fully appreciate and subscribe to BRICS’ consensus on various important issues,” he said.Both Iran and the UAE joined BRICS in 2024. The New Delhi meeting was widely seen as the bloc’s first major geopolitical stress test after expansion brought rival West Asian powers into the grouping.Iran blames UAE for blocking consensusAraghchi later openly blamed the UAE for blocking consensus during a press conference at the Iranian embassy in New Delhi.“The final statement by the BRICS ministerial meeting was blocked, or some parts of that was blocked, by a member state which has its own special relations with Israel, and this is very, very unfortunate,” he said. The UAE signed the Abraham accords with and formally recognised Israel in 2020.Iran has repeatedly alleged that Gulf states hosting US military infrastructure facilitated operations against it during the conflict. Araghchi said Iran had “no difficulty with that certain country” and that Iranian strikes had targeted only “American military bases and American military installations, which are unfortunately in their soil”.The sole reason the UAE blocked the statement, he said, was “their support to Israel and the United States in their aggression against Iran”.Araghchi openly blamed the UAE for blocking consensus. Photo: PTI/Kamal Kishore.Asked specifically which member had objected to the paragraph on Palestine, Araghchi avoided directly naming the UAE but strongly hinted at it.“We have to ask the president of this meeting to answer that question. I’m not in charge to answer those questions,” he said. “But I think everybody knows [which] country blocked anything against Israel.”He added that the same country had “provided the US and Israeli forces with their airspace, with their territories, with their military bases”.Araghchi hoped that by the time of the BRICS leaders’ summit later this year, the UAE should “come to a good understanding that Iran is a neighbour”. “We have to live with each other. We have lived for centuries and we have to live for centuries to come,” he added.The BRICS meeting concluded on the same day that Prime Minister Narendra Modi flew to Abu Dhabi to meet UAE President Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed al-Nahyan. Modi condemned the attacks on the UAE during his visit, without naming Iran, saying “the manner in which the UAE has been targeted is not acceptable in any form” and that India was “ready to extend all possible support to bring peace in West Asia.” The two sides signed agreements on a strategic defence partnership, LPG supply and strategic petroleum reserves.When asked for comment on India’s close ties with UAE, the Iranian foreign minister predictably dodged, stating that it was up to India to decide its relations.“What matters for us is good relations which exist between us and India. And as I said, it is rooted in history and it is rooted in old political, economic and cultural relations we have always had. And we are determined to continue our good relations with India,” said Araghchi.While West Asia dominated the political disagreements, the meeting saw far greater convergence on economic issues, particularly sanctions, tariffs and trade restrictions.The outcome document condemned “unilateral coercive measures” including economic and secondary sanctions not authorised by the UN Security Council and warned that such measures harmed development, food security and global supply chains.In BRICS diplomacy, the phrase generally refers to Western sanctions regimes led by the US, particularly those targeting countries such as Iran and Russia, as well as secondary sanctions that penalise third countries or companies for dealing with sanctioned states.The ministers also expressed “serious concerns” over “the rise of unilateral tariff and non-tariff measures which distort trade and are inconsistent with WTO rules.”The language reflected broader concerns among BRICS members over renewed tariff wars, export controls and protectionist policies, including US tariff measures, technology restrictions on China and climate-linked trade barriers such as the European Union’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, which developing countries argue could unfairly disadvantage their exports.The 2026 document went further than previous BRICS statements by more explicitly linking tariffs, sanctions and protectionism to supply chain disruptions, economic fragmentation and widening inequality between developed and developing countries.At the MEA briefing, Dalela said ministers had discussed “concerns regarding unilateral measures and their disproportionate impact on developing countries”.He said the discussions were guided by BRICS’ commitment to “a rule-based non-discriminatory transparent and inclusive multilateral trading system with WTO at its core”.