标签： Asia

This past weekend, the Indian capital played host to a high-stakes gathering of global leaders at the 2026 Brics Summit, bringing together heads of state from a bloc that has increasingly positioned itself as a counterweight to Western-dominated global governance. Opening the summit, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi framed the group’s collective mission: to evolve from passive “rule-takers” in the existing global order to active “rule-shapers” that reflect the interests of the world’s emerging economies. Among the attendees were heavyweight leaders including Chinese President Xi Jinping, Russian President Vladimir Putin, newly inaugurated Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Sheikh Khaled bin Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, and South African President Cyril Ramaphosa.

It is no understatement to call this assembly of leaders remarkable on its own. Brics’ current membership brings together nations with long-running disputes, competing geopolitical interests, and even recent military conflicts. The 2020 deadly border clash between India and China remains a source of underlying tension, while Iran and the United Arab Emirates have found themselves on opposite sides of the ongoing Middle East war that has roiled global energy markets and sent shockwaves through the global economy. That India managed to bring all these rival leaders together for in-person talks stands as a major demonstration of New Delhi’s growing diplomatic clout, and offered a rare space for powers to reassess their bilateral relationships in the wake of escalating regional conflict.

Despite this diplomatic win, the summit was defined by underlying tensions between members with competing visions for the bloc’s future. For core members including China, Russia, and Iran, Brics serves as a key tool to reduce the geopolitical and economic influence of the United States and Western Europe. But India has long rejected framing the bloc as an explicitly anti-Western alliance, a position driven by New Delhi’s goal of maintaining strategic ties with both Western and non-Western powers. “The group is not against anyone,” Modi emphasized in his opening remarks. Veteran Indian diplomat and former ambassador Anil Trigunayat explained that India’s core goal for the summit was to advance collective strategic autonomy for Global South nations amid a period of widespread geopolitical conflict, rather than positioning the bloc as a hostile counter to the West. “There are countries in the grouping which would like it to become anti-western, but it is not that,” Trigunayat noted.

Against a backdrop of stark divisions that had derailed two previous joint ministerial statements earlier this year, the summit did achieve a rare milestone: the adoption of the consensus-based New Delhi Declaration. What the declaration omits, however, is as notable as what it includes. To reach consensus, negotiators side-stepped the bloc’s most divisive issues, offering only vague language that avoided assigning blame for ongoing conflicts. On the escalating Middle East war, the text calls for “maximum restraint,” condemns attacks on civilian infrastructure and peaceful nuclear facilities, and reaffirms support for a two-state solution for Palestinians while opposing forced displacement and prolonged occupation – but names no responsible parties. In a sharp break from previous Brics declarations, the text makes no mention whatsoever of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. On trade and economic policy, the declaration voices concern over “indiscriminate rising tariffs” and condemns unilateral punitive sanctions, but again avoids naming the United States, a choice widely seen as an effort to avoid triggering backlash from the Trump administration. Trump has previously labeled Brics’ collaborative initiatives, including plans for linked cross-border central bank digital currencies, as explicitly “anti-American,” leading many member states to avoid provoking his anger. Praveen Donthi, senior analyst at the International Crisis Group, noted that the vague, un-named framing of contentious issues bears the clear mark of India’s negotiating approach. “Not mentioning any country by name, even as they condemned the conflict in the Middle East, bears the hallmark of India,” Donthi said, adding that the inclusion of strong language on tariffs was a notable surprise, as it allowed India to quietly convey its economic displeasure without direct confrontation.

Beyond the formal declaration, the summit created space for diplomatic breakthroughs that seemed unthinkable just months earlier. Most notably, Iranian President Pezeshkian held face-to-face talks with Abu Dhabi’s Crown Prince – the highest-level in-person meeting between the two rival states since the outbreak of the latest Middle East war. For Iran, which is facing intense military pressure from the U.S. and Israel, sweeping American sanctions, a U.S.-led naval blockade of its ports, and Washington’s “Operation Economic Outcast” campaign to isolate Tehran globally, the summit offered a critical opportunity to demonstrate that it remains a respected global actor with regional and international partners. Pezeshkian used his time at the summit to push for deeper economic integration and expanded trade ties with other Brics members, including Malaysia, India, and Ethiopia.

The summit also marked a key milestone for India and China: it was President Xi’s first visit to New Delhi in seven years, a trip that came amid gradual de-escalation of border tensions that reached a crisis point with the 2020 Galwan Valley clash. While deep mistrust and a massive lopsided trade imbalance in Beijing’s favor remain unresolved, the two leaders held cordial talks, agreeing to expand bilateral business ties, improve cross-border transport links, and work to reduce remaining trade barriers. Though Xi stayed less than 24 hours and skipped the summit’s gala dinner, trading only a handshake rather than Modi’s signature welcoming hug, Trigunayat framed the meeting as part of a gradual warming of bilateral ties, driven by mutual interest in cooperation. “We have to trust, but verify first,” he noted, adding that whether the talks will produce tangible long-term progress remains to be seen.

Ultimately, the 2026 Brics Summit in New Delhi made clear that the bloc has carved out a unique role in global politics: it provides a space for rival powers to talk, advance their shared interests in reforming the global order, and operate outside the framework of Western-led international institutions. The core question that remains unanswered, however, is what comes next. While all members agree that a more inclusive, multipolar global order is needed now more than ever, reaching consensus on what that new order should look like, and how to achieve it, remains the bloc’s greatest unmet challenge.

A deadly ferry incident in Indonesia’s Java Sea has left one person dead, with search and rescue teams racing to locate dozens of missing passengers after the vessel lost contact amid severe bad weather, national search authorities confirmed.

The stricken vessel, identified as Virgo Transport 8, was carrying a total of 243 passengers and crew when it ran into distress on its scheduled route from Surabaya, East Java, to Banjarmasin, the capital of South Kalimantan on Borneo. The last official communication from the ship was received at approximately 2:00 a.m. local time on Sunday, when it was located around 150 kilometers south of its destination port of Banjarmasin. Contact was abruptly lost shortly after that, triggering an immediate large-scale rescue response.

As of the latest official update, 102 people have been pulled from the sea safely by responding teams. The search operation remains active, with multiple dedicated search and rescue vessels and a helicopter deployed to the incident zone. Authorities have also issued an alert to all commercial and private ships transiting through that section of the Java Sea, asking mariners to immediately report any sightings of debris or missing passengers to rescue coordination centers.

This latest maritime incident comes just one month after another ferry emergency off Indonesia’s Madura Island, where a vessel fire claimed five lives. For the world’s largest archipelagic nation, which comprises more than 17,000 separate islands spread across thousands of kilometers of ocean, ferries serve as the primary and most widely used mode of inter-island transport for both passengers and cargo. The country’s long history of maritime accidents has repeatedly raised questions about safety standards for domestic ferry operations, particularly during monsoon season when severe weather and rough seas are common.

Indonesia’s national search and rescue agency has not yet released additional details on the exact cause of the Virgo Transport 8 incident, nor the identities of the fatality and missing passengers. Authorities have pledged to continue search operations until all remaining people on board are accounted for.

In comments made Saturday, former U.S. President Donald Trump revealed that Yemen’s Houthi movement has privately reached out to the United States, calling for Washington to stay out of its intensifying military conflict with Saudi Arabia. “The Houthis called us, and they let us know that they don’t want to fight with us. They don’t want me to go after them,” Trump stated publicly.

Trump further noted that the Houthi group has allowed the vast majority of commercial vessels to pass unimpeded through regional waters, adding that their hostility is focused solely on a single nation. He also indicated he expects to resolve the ongoing standoff through diplomatic channels.

Trump’s remarks came in the wake of a rapid, large-scale Houthi military advance across Yemen’s Red Sea coastline this week. In a lightning offensive, the Iran-aligned movement captured a broad stretch of territory along the strategic waterway, including key islands and control of the Bab el-Mandeb Strait — a critical global shipping chokepoint that sits between Eritrea, Djibouti, and Yemen. The strait serves as the primary transit route for crude oil shipments leaving Saudi Arabia bound for Asian markets, making its control a critical geopolitical and economic flashpoint.

According to a Friday report from Axios, Saudi Arabia — which backs Yemen’s internationally recognized government — had formally asked the Trump administration twice to launch direct military strikes against Houthi targets as the group advanced on the Red Sea chokepoint. Trump, the outlet confirmed, turned down both requests.

The escalation of tensions extended beyond Yemen this week. On Friday, Saudi Arabia announced it had temporarily halted operations through its key East-West Pipeline after a drone attack launched from Iraqi territory targeted the infrastructure. The kingdom said it would hold off on retaliatory action at the request of the Iraqi government.

In response to the incident, Iraqi authorities launched an official investigation, confirming that security forces had located drone launch platforms in the al-Tib region near the Iraq-Iran border. Following the discovery, the Iraqi government ordered the temporary closure of three border crossings connecting the country to Iran.

When asked about the pipeline attack, Trump said he believes Iran was “probably” responsible for the strike that originated in Iraqi territory, though he offered no concrete evidence to support the claim. The former president also added that he had spoken by phone with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, whom he referred to as a personal friend.

This week has also seen the Houthis step up cross-border attacks directly targeting Saudi energy infrastructure, launching a large-scale wave of drone and missile strikes against Saudi oil facilities. The expanding scope of the conflict has stoked global market fears of potential disruption to energy supplies, which could push already volatile oil prices even higher.

In the most recent incident Saturday evening, just hours after Saudi authorities issued public warnings of imminent potential attacks, a Houthi projectile wounded two people in a southern Saudi region bordering Yemen.

A controversy surrounding a London real estate event marketing properties in illegal Israeli settlements has prompted formal regulatory intervention from the UK’s Charity Commission, resulting in new guidance for a major Jewish charitable trust and a reopened compliance review of the synagogue that hosted the gathering. The entire case stems from a formal complaint submitted by the International Centre of Justice for Palestinians (ICJP), an advocacy group that supports Palestinian legal rights in territorial disputes.

The dispute began when the Great Israeli Real Estate Event was hosted at the Edgware United Synagogue, a London-based registered charity. Ahead of the gathering, an independent investigation by Middle East Eye (MEE) uncovered clear links between multiple participating firms and illegal settlement development in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem—territory universally recognized as occupied under international law. Among the confirmed participants were Harey Zahav, a developer that advertises homes in the illegal Negohot settlement in the southern Hebron Hills; the Meshulam Levinstein Group, which has constructed both residential and commercial projects in illegal settlements across the West Bank and East Jerusalem, including the Homat Shmuel settlement neighborhood; and Tivuch Shelly, a real estate agency that openly lists properties for sale in the Ma’ale Adunim West Bank settlement.

Following the MEE investigation, activists held a public protest outside the synagogue to oppose the event, arguing that marketing properties in illegal settlements constitutes material support for Israel’s unlawful occupation. In response, the Board of Deputies of British Jews (BDBJ), a prominent Jewish community body, dismissed the protest as baseless, claiming event organizers had assured the group no illegal settlement properties would be promoted. BDBJ further characterized the demonstration as an attempt to harass and intimidate the local Jewish community. However, after the event concluded, organizers themselves issued an apology for including multiple illegal settlement properties in the event’s official brochure, directly confirming the protesters’ core concerns.

The ICJP filed its formal complaint against the Board of Deputies Charitable Foundation—the registered charity that funds and carries out BDBJ’s activities—arguing that BDBJ had failed to retract or correct its misleading public statements after evidence confirming the protesters’ claims emerged. The complaint emphasized that BDBJ’s false framing misrepresented a targeted protest against unlawful settlement activity as an attack on a religious institution and the broader Jewish community, risking erosion of public trust and distortion of the facts of the case.

In its response to the complaint, the Charity Commission acknowledged that the contested public statements were formally issued by BDBJ’s corporate entity, not the charitable foundation itself. Even so, the regulator confirmed it would issue formal guidance to the foundation’s trustees under Section 15(2) of the UK’s 2011 Charities Act, reminding trustees of the inherent risks when a registered charity “is, or perceived to be, closely associated with a company, particularly in relation to public statements and communications.” The Commission will also retain all information submitted by the ICJP for consideration in any future regulatory interactions with the charity.

Separately, the regulator opened a review of its previously closed compliance case involving Edgware United Synagogue for hosting the event. The Commission stated it shares widespread concerns that registered charities being linked to support for illegal Israeli settlements risks damaging public trust in the charitable sector as a whole. It also clarified that charity-owned property must not be misused for unlawful or controversial activity that violates public expectations. The regulator’s initial investigation found that despite synagogue leadership having pre-existing concerns about the event and a formal organizational policy prohibiting it from being hosted, trustees still allowed the gathering to proceed on site and failed to implement adequate checks to ensure booking terms were honored. The Commission noted it may escalate regulatory action if further concerns about the synagogue charity arise.

ICJP legal researcher Shaima Dallali emphasized the broader significance of the case, noting that illegal settlement marketing in the UK directly contributes to the displacement of Palestinians and underpins the economic infrastructure of Israel’s decades-long unlawful occupation. She added that the protest was challenging activity that the UK government itself has already moved to restrict, and called on BDBJ to issue a formal correction to its earlier public statements.

In line with longstanding UK policy, a Foreign Office spokesperson reaffirmed to MEE that Israeli settlements are illegal under international law and remain a core barrier to lasting two-state peace. The spokesperson also noted that updated government guidance issued in June 2024 explicitly warns British citizens and businesses against engaging in any economic or financial activity connected to illegal Israeli settlements.