Global South Differs Among Themselves Over Level Of 'Vitriol' Directed At Israel

BRICS members, who held an emergency virtual summit to discuss the war in Gaza, failed to agree on a joint declaration to push for peace in the region, reflecting how countries of the Global South differ among themselves over the level of "vitriol" they were willing to direct toward Israel.

Leaders of BRICS nations -- Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa -- and other emerging economies that will officially be members of the grouping from next year had virtually gathered for talks Tuesday for the first time since Israel began pummeling Gaza in retaliation to the Oct. 7 Hamas attack that killed around 1,200 people.

For the grouping that has previously streamlined its focus to economic issues and not matters of conflict, an emergency meeting to discuss the war adds to the voice of global objections against Israel's incessant bombardment of the besieged Gaza strip. However, the group failed to agree on a joint declaration. Moreover, their divergent positions on the issue also reflected the lack of consensus among the Global South on how much they are willing to condemn Israel for launching a barrage of airstrikes, razing buildings to the ground and indiscriminately killing more than 14,000 people.

"On the issue of Gaza, there is a nuanced difference between the countries of the Global South itself. Not all countries are ready to view the October 7 attack by Hamas as terrorist attack and I think that is where there is a difference with the West," Vivek Mishra, a fellow with Indian think tank Observer Research Foundation's Strategic Studies Programme, told International Business Times.

"Israel's response has been criticized as asymmetrically affecting the civilians and the ends may not justify the means but that's the nature of this urban war," he added.

South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, who chaired the Tuesday meeting, accused Israel of war crimes and "genocide" in Gaza. He was vocal about his criticism of Israel more than China, Brazil and Russia, while India's stance was much softer.

"The collective punishment of Palestinian civilians through the unlawful use of force by Israel is a war crime. The deliberate denial of medicine, fuel, food and water to the residents of Gaza is tantamount to genocide," Ramaphosa said.

Saudi Arabia, which will officially become a BRICS member by January, said collective effort was required to bring the "brutal crimes" in Gaza to an end. He also urged all nations to cease the export of weapons to Israel.

Russian President Vladimir Putin blamed U.S. diplomacy "for the failure of the Israel-Palestine conflict rather than Israel itself," Guy Burton, a visiting fellow at the LSE Middle East Centre, told IBT.

While Argentina's Foreign Minister Santiago Cafiero said his country recognized Israel's right "to legitimate self-defence," Iran called the Zionist regime "criminal," and said the situation was a sign of "unjust international system of the West."

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who has been aggressively attempting to position India as the champion of the Global South, skipped the Tuesday meeting. India's foreign minister S Jaishankar made an appearance instead, and said "there was a need for "immediate humanitarian support" and a "peaceful resolution through dialogue and diplomacy."

While India has also historically been supportive of the Palestinian cause, it cracked down on pro-Palestine protests at home and has not condemned Israel's brute force in the past few weeks, as some other emerging countries have.

Ultimately, the statements made by leaders of the Global South won't have much of a direct impact on the fighting. However, the lack of consensus reflects the reluctance of some of the nations of the Global South to resolutely condemn Israel as well as the differences in the long-term interests of the participating nations.

"You don't have a consensus on what the Global South can and should do ... The BRICS countries differed among themselves over the level of vitriol they directed towards Israel, so there was no single declaration, only a summary by the chair. While you had Iran's president calling Israel a 'terrorist' state, India, was not represented by its prime minister and the foreign minister toed a much more moderate line," Burton said.

If the Global South really wants to make a difference, Burton noted that stricter actions would have to be taken in order to do so.

"These countries have to be prepared to act. And 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," he said. "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. Other countries could sign up to the South African charge of Israeli war crimes to the ICJ. 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."

Mishra believes nations of the Global South can also use this opportunity to work with the West in putting the two-state solution in place.

"This conflict is an opportunity for the global south as well as the west to agree on a definition of terrorism and propel India's UN resolution on CCIT (Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism) pending at the UN since 1990s," he said. "This is as much of an opportunity for both Israel and Palestine to move towards a two-state solution - one where an independent Palestine is created and Israel doesn't have to worry about terrorism emanating from Palestine."