Five Takes logo
Five Takes News
HomeArticlesAbout

Get the 5 Takes Daily in your inbox →

The most polarizing story of the day, seen from 5 political perspectives. Every morning.

No spam. Unsubscribe any time. Privacy policy

Michael
•
© 2026
•
Five Takes News - Multi-Perspective AI News Aggregator
Contact Us
•
Legal

news
Published on
Wednesday, May 13, 2026 at 11:07 AM
Imperial War on Iran Fuels Market Chaos, Divides BRICS

The US-Israel war on Iran has plunged global markets into turmoil, driving soaring energy prices and forcing BRICS nations to implement emergency measures to protect their economies and consumers. This economic fallout is set to overshadow a two-day meeting of the foreign ministers of the BRICS grouping, which commences in New Delhi, India, on Thursday.

Imperial Aggression and Market Turmoil

The conflict began on February 28, when the US and Israel launched a war on Iran. Following this, Iran began lobbing missiles and drones at Gulf countries. The escalation led to Iran largely closing the Strait of Hormuz, a critical global shipping lane, which directly caused the soaring energy prices that have destabilized markets worldwide. In response, the US later imposed its own blockade of Iranian ports, further intensifying the economic warfare.

The BRICS grouping, originally comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, has expanded over the years to include Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Iran, and the United Arab Emirates. Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi is expected to arrive late on Wednesday to attend the gathering, which will run through May 14–15. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov is also anticipated to attend the meeting, though who will represent the UAE was not immediately clear.

BRICS Divided by Capital's Conflicts

India, serving as the BRICS chair for 2026, was urged by Iran to use the platform to build a consensus condemning US and Israeli actions in the Gulf conflict. However, significant differences have emerged within the bloc, particularly between the United Arab Emirates and Iran. Indian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal stated in March that some BRICS members were directly involved in the conflict, making it “difficult for us to forge a consensus.”

During the fighting, the UAE and other Gulf states did not openly join the US and Israeli strikes on Iran. However, a report in early April claimed that the Emirates and Saudi Arabia had quietly struck Iranian military and energy sites. This revelation is liable to raise tensions and highlights the complex, often hidden, alignments within the region's power struggles, which serve to protect accumulated capital and strategic interests.

The blockades over the key waterway have compelled many BRICS nations, including India, to introduce emergency measures to protect their economies and consumers from the ripple effects of imperial aggression. China has maintained a nominally neutral stance, balancing its robust ties with both Iran and Sunni-majority Arab states. China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi is unlikely to travel, with US President Donald Trump visiting Beijing this week; China will be represented by its Ambassador to India Xu Feihong.

The Limits of Diplomatic Solutions

Despite the severe economic and geopolitical implications, the BRICS forum struggles to present a unified front. Another Indian ministry official told Reuters that India was hopeful it would get a joint statement after the latest round of meetings with foreign ministers. Former Indian diplomat Manjeev Singh Puri commented, “Glad that the foreign ministers from all the BRICS countries, except China who is otherwise tied up, are coming. This is a good sign on efforts to build a BRICS coalition around a matter of interest to emerging economies and the global south,” adding, “Of course political solutions are difficult but the fact that they are meeting is positive and hopefully it will lead to a way forward.” Such statements underscore the limitations of diplomatic efforts within the existing global power structures, where fundamental challenges to imperial actions are often reduced to hopes for "joint statements" rather than concrete action to halt the concentration of wealth and power through conflict.

Previous Article

U.S. Deficit Swells: Capital's Burden Shifted to Workers

Next Article

State Apparatus Returns Capital to Corporations Via Tariff Refunds
← Back to articles