BRICS Nations May Not Have The 'Stomach' For Stronger Action On War In Gaza

Calls for an end to Israel's war on Gaza mounted as the BRICS group virtually met Tuesday for a meeting on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, who chaired the extraordinary BRICS joint meeting Tuesday, accused Israel of war crimes and "genocide" in Gaza.

Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman urged countries to cease weapon exports to Israel while Chinese President Xi Jinping called for an immediate ceasefire during the meeting.

Russian President Vladimir Putin also blamed the crisis on the failure of U.S. diplomacy in the region whereas India's foreign minister S Jaishankar said there was a need for "immediate humanitarian support" and a "peaceful resolution through dialogue and diplomacy."

In the past, the BRICS grouping has largely focused on economic issues, making Tuesday's meeting a one-of-kind session as the league of nations pushes for a greater say in the global order, which has largely been dominated by the West.

"I suppose it's a first step that a Global South group like the BRICS got together to talk about this issue, especially since the group was initially set up to consider global economic matters, not conflict," Guy Burton, a visiting fellow at the LSE Middle East Centre, told International Business Times.

Although strong statements were made at the meeting, it is unlikely that they have a direct impact on the devastating six-week war that saw more than 14,000 people being killed indiscriminately by Israeli bombardment

"This summit and these statements expose the limits of the Global South through groupings like the BRICS and its member countries. Ultimately, their words won't have much of a direct impact on the fighting," Burton said. "Yes, they challenge the Western/American stance and injects a degree of moral repugnance into the proceedings, but in themselves they won't change what's happening on the ground."

Several BRICS nations, despite being sympathetic to the Palestinian cause, would be wary of severing ties with Israel. India, for instance, has deep ties with Israel and enjoys military and technological partnerships with Tel Aviv while Arab countries, too, have normalized ties with Israel in recent years.

Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Jordan, Egypt and other countries in the region also blocked a proposal to cut all ties with Israel, reports said earlier this month.

In order to have a direct impact on fighting, Burton said the Global South must be "prepared to act."

"In this instance it probably means using whatever leverage they have to put pressure on Israel to call off its military campaign. Some of them could potentially do it. China has important investments in the country, which it could pull out of, cut trade, etc. Russia, which turned a blind eye to Israeli attacks against Hezbollah and other targets in Syria, could take a more assertive stance," Burton said.

"Other countries could sign up to the South African charge of Israeli war crimes to the ICJ," he added. "But for that to happen entails real costs, in the form of lost revenue, damaged diplomatic relations. And I don't think there's the stomach for this."

Since its inception, the BRICS has been pushing for a multipolar world, and the recent inclusion of six new countries also signals an expansion in its symbolic power. But even though a multipolar world is taking shape, it is still not an "even" multipolar world, Burton said.

"The unilateralism of the past is giving way to a more multipolar world, even if the U.S. still remains the dominant global power within it (China in second place is still some way behind, economically, militarily and diplomatically). So it's not an 'even' multipolar world. This, coupled with more assertive states in the Global South (the formation of the BRICS being just one example) means that criticism is more likely," Burton said.

"Because the world isn't completely multipolar and the US remains the principal power, there's only so much that states in the South can do," he added.

Since Israel began its bombardment of Gaza in retaliation to the Oct. 7 Hamas attack, nations belonging to the Global South have also leveled accusations of hypocrisy against the U.S., UK and the EU.

"Many in the Global South see a lot of double standards on the part of the West, especially the U.S., when it comes to the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza. They see Western officials talk about the importance of democracy and human rights but seem to leave that to one side when it comes to Israel's military campaigns against the Palestinians," Burton said.

While the U.S. has always faced some level of criticism, the current context makes the double standards all the more apparent.

"When Russia invaded [Ukraine], the West moved very quickly to condemn Moscow and Western countries looked to their partners in the Global South to back them on this. So the hypocrisy with how they reacted then compared to now is quite stark," Burton said.

Although the U.S. has shown unwavering support for its staunchest ally in the region, Washington has also taken steps to bring peace in the region, said Vivek Mishra, a fellow with Indian think tank Observer Research Foundation's Strategic Studies Programme.

"It is a fact that the U.S.' principled stance on some elements of democracy do not coincide with that of the Global South, simply because of the structural and historical evolution of countries in South Asia. I don't think any country from the Global South would not oppose the killing of civilians but so has the U.S. The U.S. has come forward quite clearly in putting pressure on the stakeholders including Israel and Hamas through Qatar to agree on a ceasefire," Mishra said.

Qatar announced Wednesday that Israel and Hamas reached a deal that would bring the fighting to a four-day halt, during which 50 hostages will be released in stages in exchange for 150 Palestinian prisoners held by Israel.