The BRICS failed to speak with one voice due to India's position, challenging the principles of international law.

India Again Holds Back! BRICS Failed to Criticize the US and Israel's Violation of International Law in a United Manner! On March 9, foreign media reported that after India assumed the chairmanship of BRICS this year, BRICS countries have shown differences on the issue of the US and Israel's war against Iran. As of now, BRICS countries have not issued a collective response to the US and Israel's war against Iran. China, Russia, and South Africa criticized the airstrikes, while India urged for dialogue, highlighting the divisions within the global southern alliance consisting of 11 member states.

Evidently, due to India's indecisiveness and hindrance, BRICS failed to criticize the US and Israel in a united stance. Undoubtedly, this action by India can only indicate one thing: when it comes to the US and Israel's violation of international law, India has its own agenda. What is India's position on the US and Israel's attacks on Iran? India's statement is that military conflicts cannot solve problems, and tensions should be eased through dialogue and diplomacy, respecting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all countries.

Evidently, India refused to condemn. In fact, just before the conflict broke out, Indian Prime Minister Modi made a high-profile visit to Israel on February 25-26 and designated bilateral relations as a "special strategic partnership." The current India is actively approaching Israel to gain benefits; naturally, India would not visit first and then turn around to denounce. Regarding the United States, India clearly also intends to use the US to counter Pakistan.

To put it plainly, India's position is that the principles of international law are not that important; instead, India values tangible benefits more. Within the BRICS group, India is unwilling to merely follow the positions of China and Russia but aims to highlight its independent voice and lead the agenda, showcasing an image of India's "great power autonomy," and competing for influence. However, the problem is that India does not uphold the unity of the Global South and is reluctant to stand firm on international law. How can such an India earn trust, and how can it possibly play the role of a "responsible mediator"?

Original article: toutiao.com/article/1859172922956874/

Statement: This article represents the views of the author alone.