BRICS declaration demands bigger Global South voice, stronger anti-terror action and Gaza ceasefire.
India PM Modi, Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin at BRICS 2026 Summit in New Delhi. (12.09.2026).
BRICS 2026 Declaration: BRICS leaders have used their New Delhi declaration to mount a broad challenge to the way global security, trade and international institutions are governed, combining a tougher call for action against terrorism with demands for reform of the United Nations Security Council, opposition to unilateral economic sanctions and strong support for Palestinian rights.
The declaration, adopted at the 18th BRICS Summit in India, presents these issues as parts of a larger argument: that the international system must become more representative and less dependent on decisions taken by a small group of powerful states.
At the centre of the document is the bloc’s call for a more democratic and accountable multilateral system, one that better reflects the growing economic and political weight of emerging and developing countries.
The language is significant because BRICS is not simply calling for changes to individual institutions. It is questioning the distribution of power underpinning the international system itself.
A broader definition of the fight against terrorism
On terrorism, BRICS leaders sought to establish a position based on what they describe as zero tolerance and equal standards.
The declaration condemns terrorism “in all its forms and manifestations”, regardless of who carries it out or what motivation is claimed. It specifically condemns the 22 April 2025 terrorist attack in Jammu and Kashmir, in which 26 people were killed.
But the statement goes beyond condemning individual attacks. It identifies the cross-border movement of terrorists, terrorism financing and safe havens as central concerns.
That matters because the BRICS position places responsibility not only on those who carry out attacks but also on networks and structures that enable terrorism to survive.
The leaders also reject the idea that terrorism can be associated with a particular religion, nationality, civilisation or ethnic group. At the same time, they argue that those involved in terrorist activity, as well as those supporting it, must be held accountable under national and international law.
The declaration also takes aim at what it calls “double standards” in counter-terrorism.
In practical terms, that means BRICS countries are arguing that states should not condemn terrorism when it suits their geopolitical interests while overlooking or excusing similar activity elsewhere.
The bloc wants international counter-terrorism policy to be applied consistently, while stressing that measures against terrorism must comply with the UN Charter and international human rights, refugee and humanitarian law.
BRICS also called for the long-delayed adoption of a Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism under the UN framework.
The convention has been discussed for years but negotiations have remained difficult, particularly over questions surrounding definitions of terrorism and the treatment of armed groups operating in conflicts.
The declaration also places greater emphasis on preventing radicalisation and extremism among young people and calls for greater cooperation between BRICS authorities.
The message is therefore twofold: governments should disrupt terrorist organisations and their financing, but they should also address the conditions that allow radicalisation and extremism to spread.
India PM Modi, China’s Xi Jinping at BRICS 2026 Summit in New Delhi. (12.09.2026).
Terrorism is increasingly a financial and digital problem
Another important element of the declaration is its focus on money.
BRICS leaders highlight terrorism financing alongside money laundering, illicit financial flows, trafficking, organised crime, corruption and the misuse of virtual assets.
They also raise concerns about cross-border fraud and so-called scam compounds, where organised criminal groups use digital technology and payment systems to exploit vulnerable people.
The wider point is that modern security threats do not necessarily operate through traditional military networks.
Money can move across borders almost instantly. Criminal organisations can use digital platforms and emerging financial technologies, while terrorist groups can attempt to exploit the same systems.
BRICS therefore calls for stronger cooperation between financial intelligence units, law enforcement agencies, customs authorities, tax authorities and regulators.
This reflects an increasingly important part of international counter-terrorism: following the money rather than simply pursuing individuals after an attack has taken place.
Why BRICS wants to change the UN Security Council
Security Council reform is another central demand.
BRICS says the UN system must better reflect contemporary realities and give developing countries a greater role in international decision-making.
The declaration specifically backs comprehensive reform of the UN Security Council, with the stated aim of making it more democratic, representative, effective and efficient.
The bloc says reform should amplify the voice of the Global South.
For India, this has particular significance. New Delhi has long sought a permanent seat on the Security Council, arguing that the council’s current composition does not adequately represent today’s global political and economic balance.
The BRICS declaration also records explicit support from China and Russia — both permanent members of the Security Council — for the aspirations of Brazil and India to play a greater role in the UN, including its Security Council.
African representation is also given particular attention, with BRICS recognising the demands expressed through the Ezulwini Consensus and Sirte Declaration.
The debate is not simply about adding countries to an existing structure. It raises a more fundamental question: who should have the authority to make decisions on international peace and security?
For BRICS, the answer is that emerging and developing countries should have a much greater say.
READ: Bengaluru Space Expo puts India’s private space ambitions under the spotlight
India PM Modi, China’s Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin at BRICS 2026 Summit in New Delhi. (12.09.2026).
A challenge to unilateral economic pressure
The declaration also takes a strong position against unilateral coercive economic measures.
BRICS condemns unilateral sanctions and secondary sanctions that it says are imposed contrary to international law and without authorisation from the UN Security Council.
The bloc argues that such measures can have consequences well beyond governments, affecting ordinary people through restrictions on access to food, healthcare, development opportunities and technology.
The declaration also links sanctions to a broader criticism of the international economic system.
BRICS leaders warn against the growing use of unilateral tariffs and non-tariff barriers, saying these measures can distort trade, disrupt supply chains and increase uncertainty for businesses and developing economies.
The distinction between legitimate trade policy and what BRICS regards as coercive or protectionist action is likely to remain politically contentious.
Major powers have increasingly used tariffs, export restrictions and other economic measures as tools of strategic policy. BRICS is arguing instead for a rules-based trading system centred on the World Trade Organisation.
It wants the WTO’s dispute settlement system restored and supports reforms intended to make the organisation more effective and responsive to developing economies.
The broader principle is clear: economic power, in BRICS’ view, should not become a substitute for multilateral rules.
READ: Achilles Shield: Israel-Greece Sign Historic €3 Billion Multi-Layered Air Defence Agreement
Palestine becomes a major test of that principle
The declaration’s language on Palestine is among its strongest sections.
BRICS expresses deep concern over the continuing violence in Gaza and calls for the ceasefire to be maintained and for full and unhindered humanitarian access.
It opposes policies aimed at forcibly displacing Palestinians from Gaza and warns against arrangements that could prejudice Palestinian rights or legitimise or prolong occupation.
The bloc also backs Palestinian self-determination and the right of return and reiterates support for the State of Palestine’s full membership of the United Nations.
Its preferred political outcome remains the two-state solution: a sovereign, independent and viable Palestinian state based on the internationally recognised 1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as its capital, alongside Israel.
The declaration also rejects unilateral attempts to alter the legal and historical status of Jerusalem and calls for access to religious sites and respect for their sanctity.
On Gaza’s humanitarian crisis, BRICS condemns attacks on civilians and civilian infrastructure, including healthcare facilities, and denounces the use of starvation as a method of warfare.
It also supports the role of the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees, or UNRWA, in providing essential services to Palestinian refugees.
The declaration refers to provisional measures issued by the International Court of Justice in the case brought by South Africa against Israel, stressing what it describes as Israel’s obligation to facilitate humanitarian aid.
READ: India Defence Acquisition Council Approves $11.58 Billion Military Procurement Package
Modi puts UN Security Council reform at centre of India’s BRICS agenda.
The larger BRICS message
Taken together, the declaration presents terrorism, UN reform, sanctions, trade and Palestine as interconnected questions of international order.
BRICS is arguing that global institutions must apply international law consistently, that developing countries should have greater influence over decisions, and that powerful states should not be able to bypass multilateral mechanisms when pursuing strategic or economic objectives.
The declaration also reflects the bloc’s growing ambition to position itself as a voice for the Global South.
That does not mean BRICS speaks with one completely unified foreign policy. Its members have different interests, alliances and approaches to major international conflicts.
But the New Delhi declaration identifies several areas where they can present a common challenge to the existing system: opposition to unilateral coercive measures, support for greater developing-country representation, reform of the Security Council and stronger multilateral action against terrorism.
The result is a document that goes well beyond a conventional summit statement.
Its underlying argument is that the post-war international system has not kept pace with the distribution of economic and political power in the 21st century.
For BRICS, reform is therefore not simply about giving more countries a seat at the table. It is about changing who writes the rules, who enforces them and whose interests those rules ultimately serve.
The declaration’s message is particularly pointed at a time of geopolitical fragmentation, rising military spending, trade tensions and continuing conflict in the Middle East.
BRICS is seeking to turn its growing economic weight into greater political influence.
Whether it can translate that collective position into changes at the UN, the global financial system and the international trading architecture remains uncertain.
But the New Delhi declaration makes clear that the bloc intends to keep pushing the argument: a global system that affects everyone, it says, should not be governed by only a few.
Don’t Miss: Modi puts UN Security Council reform at centre of India’s BRICS agenda
Don’t Miss: Modi-Pezeshkian Meet: India, Iran Discuss West Asia Crisis and Regional Stability
