BRICS Summit in Delhi: Is this the end of the bloc's unity due to US policy?

The BRICS summit in Delhi, which began on September 11, 2026, is struggling with deep divisions regarding the war in Iran, undermining the bloc's ability to create a unified front against Donald Trump's policies. The conflict in the Middle East has become the axis of dispute, dividing member countries into proponents of radical action and pragmatists fearing economic isolation. Official declarations about building a new international order are clashing with the divergent national interests of India, China, and Russia.

Delhi in the spotlight: Putin, Xi, and Modi facing new challenges

On September 11, 2026, Delhi became a gathering point for leaders united by a desire to reinterpret the global order, yet divided by almost everything else. Narendra Modi, hosting Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping, faced a task his predecessors could not handle. Vietnam.vn points out that the goal of the meeting is to shape a more balanced international order. Behind this phrase, however, lies an attempt to define the future under increasing pressure from Washington.

The war in Iran has ceased to be a regional conflict, becoming a test for the group's integrity. UA.NEWS reports on deep divisions that are paralyzing the decision-making process. This is not about simple disagreements at the negotiating table. It is a political rift that makes it impossible to develop a joint response to the actions of Donald Trump's administration. Putin, whose political condition has been described by the media as desperate since December 2025, arrived in Delhi hoping to obtain a firm declaration of solidarity. Moscow needs legitimacy for its actions, but in Delhi, it is met with the cold calculation of Beijing and New Delhi.

This situation forces summit participants to adopt defensive rhetoric. Instead of an offensive against the hegemony of the dollar, we are witnessing an attempt to save face regarding unity. In its current form, BRICS resembles a structure incapable of generating a common strategy in the face of threats to market stability. Each leader is playing their own game. The summit in India has become a place for the confrontation of interests, not the building of an alliance. For the global economy, this means a lack of predictability, especially in the energy sector, where the lack of a BRICS consensus translates into high volatility in crude oil prices.

The war in Iran as a bone of contention

The Iranian conflict is verifying declarations about a multipolar world. Member states that were supposed to create a counterweight to US influence have found themselves trapped by their own economic dependencies. For Russia, deeply involved in relations with Tehran, this war is a critical factor in the context of surviving sanctions. India, as the summit host, views the matter through the prism of shipping security in the Indian Ocean and its own energy supplies.

The lack of a unified position on actions in the Middle East region makes BRICS a hostage to its own heterogeneity. If the group cannot find a common language on an issue so vital to global energy trade, it is difficult to expect coherence from it on financial or military matters. Donald Trump does not need to take direct action against BRICS. Maintaining pressure on Iran is enough to make the internal cracks in the group even more apparent.

For observers of the Delhi summit, it is clear that aspirations to be an alternative to the Western financial system have collided with hard reality. The lack of consensus on Iran means that BRICS will not create a common front in oil trading, which is crucial for countries importing raw materials. Investors in global markets are reacting with nervousness, fearing that the lack of a common BRICS policy on Iran will lead to sharp spikes in the price of a barrel of oil. Delhi has become an arena where, instead of a new order, we are witnessing the disintegration of a shared political vision.

Russia's position: A desperate Putin on the international stage

Vladimir Putin's visit to India in 2026 is interpreted by analysts as an attempt to break out of growing isolation. Already in December 2025, following reports of the Russian president's "desperate" situation, it became clear that Moscow had lost the strategic initiative. Today, this desperation manifests in the way the Kremlin tries to impose the summit's agenda. Putin arrives as a petitioner who needs BRICS not as an equal partner, but as oxygen for his exhausted economy.

Russian-Indian relations, though historically strong, are currently subject to the pressure of pragmatism. India cannot afford to break completely with the West, which makes support for Russian policy in Iran too costly for New Delhi. Putin is trying to force solidarity from partners who are unwilling to grant it. His visit to Delhi is a move intended to show the world that Russia is not alone. Behind the scenes, however, talks revolve around the limits of support that India and China are able to provide to Russia without risking retaliation from the USA.

The real challenge for the Kremlin is not presence at the summit, but aligning its own rhetoric with the cold calculation of the Asian giants. The Delhi summit shows that Russia has stopped setting the direction for BRICS. It has become a problem that other members must manage. This dynamic is risky for the group's stability. If Putin does not receive the support he expects, even greater destabilization within the bloc may occur, which will affect trade within BRICS, particularly in the arms and technology sectors.

Is BRICS just PR? Relationship with the USA and Donald Trump

The question of the real efficacy of BRICS has been present since the organization's inception, but in 2026 it takes on special significance. Already in September 2025, Money.pl analysts suggested that the bloc's summits were merely clever PR to thumb their noses at Trump. Currently, this thesis is gaining strength. Official communiqués about a new, balanced world order, reported by Vietnam.vn, become empty slogans if they are not followed by real economic actions.

The lack of a common strategy toward US policy causes BRICS to lose significance as a geopolitical player. Washington is successfully exploiting discrepancies within the group, playing on the interests of India and China. From Donald Trump's perspective, internal friction in BRICS is a tool to maintain American hegemony. The US administration does not even need to strike at the bloc as a whole; it is enough to maintain pressure on Iran and monitor trade with Russia.

For the reader, this means that the real power of BRICS is much smaller than the leaders' rhetoric suggests. The PR dimension of the Delhi summit covers up the fact that these countries are unable to agree on matters fundamental to global stability. The lack of unity on Iran means that BRICS will not create an alternative settlement system that would be resistant to American sanctions. Dreams of dethroning the dollar remain in the realm of political fantasy, while the real economy within the bloc remains strongly linked to the Western system.

The dragon, the bear, and the tiger: Strategic triad in the new order

The metaphor of the dragon, the bear, and the tiger, used to describe the power of China, Russia, and India, is losing its luster in 2026. As recently as September 2, 2025, Money.pl columnists described these countries as the foundations of a new order. Today, this triad resembles a power structure based on deep distrust. Each of these players has a different vision of its role in the world, which, in the face of the war in Iran, leads to decision-making paralysis.

The dynamic within this triad is far from stable:
- Moscow is oriented toward regime survival and seeks support for its actions in Iran, which meets resistance from partners.
- India, the host of the summit, tries to balance between ambitions of being a leader of the Global South and the necessity of maintaining stable trade relations with the West.
- China, although declaring a desire to build a more balanced order, pursues its own economic agenda, which often stands in contradiction to Russia's interests.

This is not an alliance of equal partners, but a temporary coalition of interests that cracks under the influence of global conflicts. Putin arrives in Delhi to save his position, while Xi and Modi calculate how much they can gain from weakening Russian influence. If India does not find a way to reconcile these conflicting ambitions, the summit will turn out to be merely a costly meeting of diplomats. The lack of coherence within the triad makes all declarations about a new order a decoration for internal bargaining over influence.

Prospects for the future: Will BRICS stand the test of time?

The Delhi summit began on September 11, 2026, in an atmosphere far from optimistic. Official announcements of building a new order collided with a reality in which the war in Iran became a flashpoint impossible to extinguish. Discrepancies in the assessment of this conflict not only paralyze the bloc's ambitions but also call into question the sense of BRICS' existence in its current form.

If member countries do not find a way to work out a compromise on Iran, this summit will be remembered as a turning point where rhetoric about a balanced order lost to brutal national politics. The survival of BRICS depends on whether leaders will be able to prioritize common economic interests over short-term political gains. At this moment, there is no indication of this. In the corridors in Delhi, there is increasingly loud talk about the impossibility of maintaining unity, which makes the bloc a prisoner of its own impotence.

For the world, this means that BRICS will not constitute a real alternative to US policy in the coming years. The lack of unity on Iran excludes the possibility of effectively opposing Donald Trump's administration. Trump, observing these frictions from Washington, has reasons to feel confident. BRICS, instead of becoming a counterweight, is becoming a diplomatic discussion forum where each participant pursues their own, often contradictory, policy. The survival of this organization depends on the ability to work out a compromise, which is lacking in Delhi.

What this means for you

For the observer, the Delhi summit is a signal that global politics is becoming increasingly unpredictable. BRICS, instead of being a monolith, is a platform for expressing opposition that cannot translate that opposition into real economic benefits for its members. Countries that can maneuver between blocs gain; those that count on hard alliances lose. The catch lies in the superficiality of the bloc's actions. In the event of an escalation of the conflict in the Middle East, energy prices may remain under the influence of uncontrolled fluctuations resulting from the lack of a coherent policy between the most important exporters and importers of raw materials gathered around BRICS.

Questions and answers

Why is the Delhi summit considered uncertain?

The summit is taking place under conditions of deep divisions regarding the war in Iran, which makes it difficult to develop a common strategy despite the presence of key leaders of world powers.

What impact does Donald Trump's policy have on BRICS?

Many analysts assess BRICS' actions as a PR response to Trump's policy, aimed at demonstrating the bloc's strength against American influence, which, however, proves ineffective in the face of internal disputes.

Does Vladimir Putin play a dominant role at the summit?

Putin's visit is seen as a desperate attempt to maintain Russia's significance on the international stage in the face of isolation and disputes within the bloc, which limits his room for maneuver in Delhi.

To understand the full picture of the situation, it should be noted that the global economy in 2026 does not tolerate a decision-making vacuum. The lack of consensus within BRICS is a signal to financial markets that assumptions about the stability of the alliance were too optimistic. Investors, analyzing the course of the summit, notice that no concrete mechanism has been developed within the bloc that could permanently replace the dollar in trade settlements, which Moscow has been striving for.

India, as the host, found itself in a difficult situation. It must maintain relations with China, the main trading partner within BRICS, while not being able to ignore the fact that its energy security is directly dependent on stability in the Middle East. This makes the position on Iran a key flashpoint. Any attempt by Modi to take an unequivocal position carries the risk of cooling relations with one of the powerful partners. Indian diplomacy in Delhi is focused on minimizing image losses, not on forcing changes in the global security architecture.

The war in Iran also affects industrial supply chains. BRICS countries, basing growth on the export of processed products, cannot afford long-term destabilization of sea routes. The lack of agreement on joint patrols means that freight costs will remain high, hitting inflation in member countries. This is further proof that BRICS foreign policy is detached from the needs of the real economy.

The Delhi summit has become a mirror reflecting the weaknesses of the BRICS format. Instead of building a new architecture, leaders focus on managing crises they co-create through a lack of coherence. This approach of putting out fires instead of designing the future is the greatest challenge for the bloc. If subsequent summits take place in an atmosphere of mutual suspicion and lack of agreement on security issues, BRICS will cease to be treated as a real alternative, becoming a historical diplomatic curiosity.

Putin's presence in India is a symbol of a change in the group's structure. In 2025, Russia was seen as one of the pillars; today it is seen as a burden that other members must deal with. This shift in emphasis is most painful for Moscow. BRICS, which was supposed to be a tool for projecting Russian power, has become a platform where Russian policy is evaluated by its own allies.

India, China, and other member countries are drawing conclusions. The realization that an alliance with Russia is burdened with high political risk leads to distancing from the Kremlin. This does not mean the end of BRICS, but it means the end of the BRICS we have known until now. The future of the group will depend on developing a new model of cooperation based on pragmatic problem-solving, not ideological warfare against the West. Is this possible in the face of the war in Iran and US pressure? The answer emerging from Delhi is: not in the near future.

All these facts lead to a conclusion for proponents of multipolarity: BRICS has become a hostage to its own ambitions. The excessive economic and political diversity of member states means that attempts to unite in the face of external challenges end in failure. The 2026 Delhi summit will be remembered not as the birthplace of a new order, but as the place where old divisions were confirmed.

For observers from Europe and the USA, this situation is a signal not to overestimate the influence of BRICS. The group lacks a coherent ideological backbone or common strategic goals. It is a collection of states that sometimes have convergent interests, but much more often act against each other. The war in Iran exposed this, removing the remnants of diplomatic veils that allowed one to believe in the power of the dragon, the bear, and the tiger.

India's role as host at such a difficult moment is an attempt to conjure reality. Narendra Modi is trying to save face, but it is clear that his range of maneuvers is limited. Every word spoken in Delhi is analyzed by Washington, which makes Indian diplomacy have to be cautious. This is not a time for grand gestures; it is a time for survival in a world where alliances are becoming fluid and loyalty is a scarce commodity. BRICS in Delhi is an example of this. The summit did not solve the problems plaguing the world, but with surgical precision showed how divided the world is that was supposed to unite against Donald Trump's policy.

The lack of concrete economic arrangements in Delhi is a disappointment for Global South countries that counted on BRICS becoming real support for them. Instead, these countries received assurances of goodwill, which, in the face of the war in Iran, have no basis in fact. This disappointment may lead to seeking other formats of cooperation, which will weaken the position of BRICS on the international arena.

The Delhi summit may turn out to be the final act of BRICS, in which attempts were made to maintain the appearance of power. Subsequent meetings may be much more honest in their impotence, or become courtesy meetings where no important decision is made. The world is changing faster than structures like BRICS can keep up with, and Delhi 2026 is proof of that. The lack of consensus, vision, and unity is the legacy this summit will leave behind. The reality remains brutally simple: BRICS in Delhi is on the defensive, and its ability to shape the future of the world is close to zero. In this new reality, Donald Trump's policy is proving more effective than all BRICS declarations combined. This is a painful lesson for those who believe in the power of an alliance of states whose only common denominator is dislike of Washington. In Delhi, this dislike proved to be too weak a binder to maintain a project burdened with the risk of collapse. Ultimately, internal contradictions proved to be the greatest threat to BRICS unity. The Delhi summit is proof of this. Have lessons been learned? Time will tell, although the mood in the Indian capital does not give reasons for optimism. All eyes are now on Washington, which is watching the BRICS project fall apart under its own weight. The summit was supposed to change the world, but it only changed the perception of BRICS as a real force. Since September 11, 2026, it has been known that behind the words about a balanced order lies a diplomatic void. No matter how the leaders try to convince otherwise, the facts remain inexorable. BRICS is unable to develop a common position on the war in Iran, which makes it incapable of fulfilling the role it set for itself. This is the end of illusions. In Delhi, the era in which we believed that BRICS could change the rules of the game is ending. Today we know that it is just a game of appearances.

Sources

Article prepared by the Wiadomości PRO editorial team with the support of artificial intelligence. Facts come from the sources provided above.