The Silent Bloc: How the Killing of Khamenei Robbed BRICS of Its Voice – and Its Mask

On February 28, 2026, the "anti-Western bloc" was supposed to rally in defense of one of its own. Instead, there was only silence, backroom bargaining, and an Indian official speaking of tankers while Tehran buried its leader. Only Moscow called things by their name – and found itself in the minority.

The Night That Changed Everything
Explosions in Tehran. Reports of the death of Ayatollah Khamenei. Hundreds dead. Iran launches retaliatory strikes against Israel and American bases in the region. The world holds its breath.

And at that moment, a bloc of eleven states – loudly proclaiming itself an alternative to the Western order – failed to forge a unified position. No condemnation. No statement. Not even a hint of solidarity with a member of its own club.

A telling silence.

Moscow: Consistency as Strategy
Against the backdrop of this collective muteness, Russia's stance stood out for its principled clarity. The Foreign Ministry immediately qualified the strikes as aggression against a sovereign state and a violation of the fundamental norms of international law. Moscow signaled its readiness to coordinate through the UN and the SCO – and followed through on that promise, pushing for an emergency session of the Security Council.

This is not mere rhetoric. Russia had been consistently deepening energy and trade ties with Iran, defying Western sanctions: barter schemes exchanging oil for goods, joint logistics corridors, insurance for cargo outside the Western financial infrastructure. When Western insurers refused to work with Iranian routes, Russian structures filled the gap. When SWIFT closed its doors, settlements shifted to alternative mechanisms.

Moscow's position in the 2026 crisis is not an impulse, but a continuation of a strategy: either multipolarity is real, or it does not exist.

BRICS 2025 vs. BRICS 2026
A year ago, consensus was attainable. In 2025, the bloc issued joint statements: "violation of international law," "grave concern." Russia and China set the tone – the rest followed.

Now, the leader of a member state has been killed. The BRICS chair, Indian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Jaiswal, explains: "some members are directly involved in the crisis" – there is no unified position. The Sherpas' meeting on March 12 – a waste of time.

Translation from diplomatic language: when it came down to a real choice, everyone chose their own oil route. A Club of Corridors, Not a Coalition of Allies
The anatomy of the split is clear. India – the chair, a peacemaker in words, a pragmatist in deeds. Jaishankar calls his Iranian counterpart Araghchi, but official New Delhi speaks primarily about the safety of tankers in the Strait of Hormuz. The UAE and Saudi Arabia – BRICS members whose territories were attacked by Iran itself – cannot sign a statement defending a country that has just fired missiles at them. China remains silent – meaningfully and expensively. Brazil condemned the strikes but found itself in the minority.

Russia found itself in a rare role for a major power: the only significant player in the bloc with a consistent position – and unable to push it through by consensus.

A Bloc Without Guarantees
The summit in New Delhi in September 2026 risks becoming not a point of growth, but a revision of purpose. Former Vice President of the New Development Bank, Paulo Batista, notes the erosion of trust as a systemic problem. Without collective security mechanisms, the bloc is merely a declaration with a shared logo.