New Delhi: India’s biggest takeaway from the 18th BRICS Summit may have come from the diplomatic meetings held on the sidelines rather than from any single decision announced at the summit. Prime Minister Narendra Modi held bilateral talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin, Chinese President Xi Jinping and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian.
The event gave India an opportunity to engage with major powers at a time when its ties with China are being carefully managed, its relationship with Iran is important for regional stability and trade and the US tariff regime is creating problems for businesses across several countries.
The question is how much these meetings and the New Delhi Declaration have delivered for India.
Dhananjay Tripathi, associate professor at South Asian University, said the declaration sent an important message to developing countries.
“If you look at the New Delhi Declaration, its main message is that you cannot ignore the Global South,” he said and added BRICS countries are seeking changes in the political and economic system governing international affairs.
The meeting between the two leaders was one of the most anticipated parts of the summit. India and China are two of the largest countries in the Global South and major members of BRICS.
At the closing session, PM Modi said the participation of member and partner countries reflected BRICS’ rising relevance and its inclusive character.
“BRICS is about to enter its third decade. Now the world expects concrete results from us,” Modi said.
He said the deliberations during the two-day summit have strengthened the belief that BRICS has become an effective platform for finding solutions.
Former Indian Foreign Secretary Shashank described the summit as a successful event for India.
“I believe this was an overall successful event. Many people were saying that BRICS was finished, some were speculating that there would be no declaration, but a joint declaration was issued on Saturday (September 12),” he said.
He said the United Nations has become weaker and BRICS is taking up issues such as wars and Palestine.
“I think now the BRICS countries will discuss this as an organisation and individually as well. And until China takes over the BRICS presidency next year, any initiative taken will carry India’s name as the chair. That is good for the country,” he said.
He said that the Modi-Xi meeting did not result in any major announcement.
“We cannot say that something very concrete came out of the talks between PM Modi and President Xi Jinping, but it can be seen as another step towards normalising relations between the two countries,” he said.
The India-China border dispute continues to be the main problem between the two countries. National Security Adviser Ajit Doval had also visited China before the BRICS summit.
Congress General Secretary Jairam Ramesh questioned the government’s handling of India-China ties. In a press note posted on X, he asked why the government has softened its position over China’s alleged military assistance to Pakistan during Operation Sindoor. He also questioned whether the “clean chit” given to Beijing after the Galwan Valley clash on June 19, 2020 has weakened India’s position.
He also asked why the government allowed China’s “territorial gains” in Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh.
The New Delhi Declaration gave considerable space to terrorism, an issue India has consistently raised at international forums.
BRICS countries condemned terrorism in all its forms and repeated their commitment to joint action against it and its financing, cross-border terrorism and safe havens for terrorists.
The 45-page, 140-point declaration also condemned the “terrorist attack in Jammu and Kashmir on April 22, 2025”, in which 26 people were killed.
India has blamed Pakistan-backed groups for the attack. Islamabad denied involvement. Pakistan was not named in the BRICS declaration.
Shashank said the declaration has to be viewed along with the Modi-Xi meeting and the tensions between India and China.
“After the Pahalgam attack, India launched ‘Operation Sindoor’, and it is believed that China helped Pakistan in it. In this context, PM Modi’s meeting and bilateral talks with Xi during the BRICS summit are important for normalising relations between the two countries,” he said.
He added, “India and China are the two largest countries in the world in terms of population and ultimately we have to live together, so the differences between the two countries have to be resolved.”
The summit also gave the county a platform to push issues affecting developing economies, particularly trade and tariffs.
The New Delhi Declaration criticised “unjust and unilateral protectionist measures” that have affected several countries. The document did not name Trump or the United States.
Shashank said tariffs have become an important issue for the expanded BRICS group.
“BRICS is a kind of economic organisation. There are now 11 countries in it, and the number of partner countries is also increasing. Tariffs are an important issue for them,” he said.
BRICS began with Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. Its existing members now include Russia, China, India, Brazil, Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, South Africa and the United Arab Emirates (UAE).
Modi said at the BRICS Business Forum on Friday (September 11), “This year we are celebrating the 20th year of BRICS. When this group started in 2006, there were four countries. Now, including BRICS partners, it is a family of 21 countries. BRICS countries represent 50% of the world’s population, 40% of GDP and more than 25% of trade.”
The declaration also criticised domination by any single power and called for changes in international institutions.
Shashank also highlighted the issue of the US dollar.
“President Trump says that the dollar should not be challenged and should not be weakened. But he himself is weakening the dollar. So it will have to be seen how and how far the BRICS countries move forward in these circumstances,” he said.
The presence of Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian gave India another important diplomatic opportunity during the summit.
He met Modi and held bilateral talks with him. The prime minister later wrote on X, “It was a pleasure to meet President of Iran Dr. Masoud Pezeshkian. His visit is special as this is his first visit to India.”
“We discussed India-Iran friendship. We believe that we should move forward with a long-term and mutually beneficial strategy. We also discussed the present situation in the region. India is committed to efforts towards lasting peace.”
Tripathi said India has given greater importance to its relationship with Iran during the summit.
“It seemed that India gave considerable importance to Iran. The two countries have had very old and good relations, so this is quite important. At the same time, the BRICS countries gave an important message to Israel without naming it in their declaration,” he said.
The New Delhi Declaration expressed “deep concern” over the situation in the Middle East. BRICS leaders called for maximum restraint and diplomacy to deal with the crisis involving Palestine and the military confrontation between the United States and Iran.
The declaration called for a ceasefire in Gaza and unrestricted humanitarian assistance. It opposed the forced displacement of Palestinians and supported a two-state solution based on the internationally recognised 1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as the capital of an independent and sovereign Palestinian state.
BRICS also condemned attacks on civilians, healthcare facilities and other civilian infrastructure, along with restrictions on humanitarian aid.
Shashank said the position on Palestine followed an established international line.
“There is nothing new in what the BRICS countries have said. It has been the old principle of the United Nations. BRICS has taken it forward,” he said.
Tripathi said the summit did not result in a major concrete achievement for India. “If you ask what was achieved at the BRICS summit, there is no concrete achievement. There was nothing new in the bilateral talks between India and Russia either,” he said.
He added BRICS sent a message on issues involving developing countries, women’s security, unilateral tariffs and economic matters.
It also called for better representation of developing countries and women, particularly women from the Global South, in the United Nations and other international organisations.
The grouping repeated its commitment to implementing UN Security Council Resolution 1325 and the Women, Peace and Security agenda. BRICS leaders called for women to have full, equal, safe and meaningful participation in decision-making at every level on issues of peace and security.
Stay informed on all the latest news, real-time breaking news updates, and follow all the important headlines in india news and world news on Zee News.
Facts Only
* Prime Minister Narendra Modi held bilateral talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin, Chinese President Xi Jinping, and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian during the 18th BRICS Summit.
* The New Delhi Declaration stated that developing countries cannot ignore the Global South and that BRICS nations seek changes in the political and economic system governing international affairs.
* Prime Minister Modi stated that the deliberations strengthened the belief that BRICS is an effective platform for finding solutions.
* Former Indian Foreign Secretary Shashank described the summit as a successful event for India, noting that a joint declaration was issued.
* The PM-Xi meeting did not result in any major announcement but was seen as a step towards normalizing relations between the two countries.
* BRICS nations condemned terrorism and repeated their commitment to joint action against it and financing.
* The declaration condemned a terrorist attack in Jammu and Kashmir on April 22, 2025, where 26 people were killed.
* The declaration criticized "unjust and unilateral protectionist measures" affecting several countries but did not name the United States or Trump.
* BRICS representatives called for better representation of developing countries and women in international organizations like the United Nations.
* The declaration expressed deep concern over the situation in the Middle East, calling for restraint regarding the Palestine crisis, a ceasefire in Gaza, and humanitarian assistance.
Executive Summary
Bilateral meetings between Prime Minister Modi and leaders from Russia, China, and Iran during the BRICS Summit provided an opportunity for India to engage with major global powers amidst managing complex relationships. The discussions focused on India's strategic interests concerning its ties with China, regional stability involving Iran, and the impact of the US tariff regime on businesses. A joint New Delhi Declaration was issued, which asserted that developing countries cannot ignore the Global South and seek changes in the international political and economic system.
The summit proceedings were viewed by some as strengthening the belief that BRICS functions as an effective platform for finding solutions, especially as the organization enters its third decade. While specific major announcements from bilateral talks were noted as absent, they were interpreted as steps toward normalizing relations between India and China. Furthermore, the declaration addressed issues like terrorism—condemning attacks and committing to joint action—and criticized unilateral protectionist measures like tariffs, highlighting concerns regarding the status of the US dollar.
The participation of Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian offered an opportunity for bilateral discussions emphasizing India-Iran friendship and regional peace efforts. The document also reflected a focus on issues affecting developing economies, women's security, and the need for greater representation in international bodies.
Full Take
The narrative presented focuses on using multilateral platforms to navigate increasingly divergent geopolitical realities. The core tension lies between the stated goals of inclusive cooperation within BRICS and the underlying competitive dynamics between major members, particularly India and China. The mechanism by which this is managed involves careful signaling: bilateral engagement (Modi-Putin, Modi-Xi) serves as an informal track for de-escalation and managing friction, while the formal declaration offers a unified, albeit non-binding, framework for addressing shared global concerns.
The implication of the analysis centers on whether institutional frameworks like BRICS can effectively translate diplomatic dialogue into concrete systemic change. The observation that major outcomes were qualitative—strengthening belief or establishing consensus on humanitarian principles regarding Palestine—rather than quantitative—major policy shifts—suggests a limitation in utilizing these forums for high-stakes resolution. Furthermore, the specific focus on trade and terrorism within the BRICS context indicates a prioritization of immediate, tangible concerns over broader institutional reform.
The selective framing surrounding the India-China relationship highlights how established structural disputes persist despite high-level engagement. The insistence that regional stability (Iran) and economic fairness (tariffs) are the primary levers for success demonstrates an agency sought by the group to steer the organization away from being purely a vehicle for superpower rivalry. The repeated emphasis on women's security within a structure dominated by established powers points toward a persistent effort to carve out space for marginalized voices, even if progress remains incremental.
Bridge Questions: If BRICS relies on side meetings for major diplomatic advancement, what mechanisms could be institutionalized to ensure that these informal dialogues translate into enforceable outcomes? How does the balance between shared global concerns (like terrorism) and internal geopolitical competition ultimately constrain the group's ability to effect systemic change? What specific metrics would indicate that engagement with the Global South is moving beyond rhetorical commitment to tangible shifts in international economic governance?
