BRICS leaders condemn Ukrainian attacks on Russian infrastructure

Daily Maverick

5 days ago

The declaration made no mention of Russia's constant missile and drone attacks on Ukrainian cities, which have intensified in recent weeks and caused greater death and destruction
The leaders of BRICS — including President Cyril Ramaphosa — have strongly condemned Ukraine for recent attacks on Russian railway infrastructure, but remained silent on Russia's constant bombardment of Ukraine, which has killed many civilians.
The BRICS nations, meeting in Rio de Janeiro for their annual summit on Sunday and Monday, 6 and 7 July, issued a 126-point declaration covering a wide range of political, economic and security issues.
It included the following:
'We condemn in the strongest possible terms the attacks on bridges and railway infrastructure deliberately targeting civilians in the Bryansk, Kursk and Voronezh regions of the Russian Federation on May 31, and June 1 and 5, 2025, which resulted in the deaths of several civilians, including children.'
The declaration made no mention of Russia's constant missile and drone attacks on Ukrainian cities, which have intensified in recent weeks and caused greater death and destruction, in part because of US President Donald Trump's reduction of US military support, leaving Ukraine without sufficient anti-missile defences.
Ukraine has occasionally struck back at military targets inside Russia, though its attacks have been far fewer than Russia's attacks on Ukraine.
The Bryansk, Kursk and Voronezh provinces which were mentioned in the BRICS declaration 'are all located near Ukraine's northeastern border and have played a central role in Russia's war effort, serving as key logistical hubs and launch sites for missile and drone attacks on Ukrainian cities — often targeting civilian infrastructure and causing casualties', according to the Kyiv Independent.
The BRICS declaration otherwise mentioned Ukraine only briefly and did not present a united position on the war, probably because of the different positions of member countries.
Instead, the declaration allowed members to maintain their varying positions by stating:
'We recall our national positions concerning the conflict in Ukraine as expressed in the appropriate fora, including the UN Security Council and the UN General Assembly.
'We note with appreciation relevant proposals of mediation and good offices, including the creation of the African Peace Initiative and the Group of Friends for Peace, aimed at peaceful resolution of the conflict through dialogue and diplomacy. We expect that current efforts will lead to a sustainable peace settlement.'
Russia is one of the original BRICS members, along with Brazil, India and China. South Africa was admitted in 2010, and since then, Iran, Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia and the United Arab Emirates have also been admitted, as well as 10 partner countries that enjoy partial membership benefits.
Russian President Vladimir Putin did not attend the summit in person, presumably because of the International Criminal Court (ICC) warrant for his arrest, which Brazil would have felt obliged to execute as it is an ICC member. Putin participated by video link and sent his foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov, to represent him in person. Chinese President Xi Jinping did not attend either, apparently because of a clash of schedules.
Strikes on Iran
The presence of Iran — which has supplied drones to Russia to attack Ukraine — was felt in a condemnation of the recent US and Israeli strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities.
'We condemn the military strikes against the Islamic Republic of Iran since 13 June 2025, which constitute a violation of international law and the Charter of the United Nations, and express grave concern over the subsequent escalation of the security situation in the Middle East.
'We further express serious concern over deliberate attacks on civilian infrastructure and peaceful nuclear facilities under full safeguards of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), in violation of international law and relevant resolutions of the IAEA.
'Nuclear safeguards, safety, and security must always be upheld, including in armed conflicts, to protect people and the environment from harm. In this context, we reiterate our support for diplomatic initiatives aimed at addressing regional challenges. We call upon the United Nations Security Council to be seized of this matter.'
Though the declaration characterised Iran's nuclear facilities as 'peaceful', they have not been unequivocally confirmed as such by the IAEA.
Gustavo de Carvalho, a BRICS expert at the SA Institute of International Affairs in Johannesburg, said the Rio de Janeiro declaration was more or less what he had expected. As a consensus-based body, it was difficult for BRICS to engage with divisive language.
He welcomed what he said was the first endorsement by China and Russia — the two BRICS permanent members of the UN Security Council — of the aspirations to permanent Security Council membership of Brazil, India and two African countries (still to be identified by Africa).
He noted that the summit had advanced the ongoing process of strengthening links between the BRICS members on issues such as artificial intelligence, health and education.
He saw progress in the BRICS initiative to increase trade among member countries in their own currencies, rather than the US dollar and interbank payments.
He said that every year there was an expectation that BRICS would take a strong anti-Western position in its summit declarations.
'But we never really see it, partially because most of its members don't consider themselves to be anti-Western, but rather as non-Western, with different layers of interaction and integration with Western countries.'
De Carvalho said that while the BRICS countries acknowledged the threats to multilateralism posed by the Trump administration, they had chosen to take a positive, longer-term stance by emphasising the roles they could play in strengthening international bodies like the UN, the World Trade Organization and the World Health Organization — 'rather than just pointing a finger at the US, which would create a much stronger war of words but not really resolve the issues'. DM