Connect with us

Opinion

BRICS should step in and resolve Middle East crisis

Published

on

Trump and Netanyahu

First, let us see why the war started by Israel and the US against Iran may be seen as a stupid undertaking. Israel was aiming for regional hegemony and US world dominance, which could be called an utterly foolish dream in today’s multipolar world order, which the theatre of war now reveals. They may have underestimated Iran’s capacity and also the economic fallout due to its ability to control the Strait of Hormuz.

In February 2026, reports emerged that General Dan Caine, the U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, privately warned President Trump about the significant risks of a major war with Iran, including potential U.S. casualties, depleted ammunition stockpiles and entanglement in a prolonged conflict. However, President Trump publicly dismissed these reports as incorrect. General Caine’s appointment by President Trump was considered controversial, as Caine was chosen over many active-duty four-star generals and lacks experience as a combatant commander or service chief. Under these circumstances Caine would have been expected to be subservient to Trump, yet he opted to disagree as he saw the danger. Trump countered his arguments saying it would be a quick job, take out the leadership, destroy the military structure and the people will take over the country. This did not happen and now most of the scenarios that Caine said was possible are gradually coming true.

Israel suffers damage

For Israel, too, damage is much more than expected and could prove to be decisive in its expansionist ambitions in the region if not its very existence. It had previously tried to drag  former US presidents, Bush, Obama and Biden into a war with Iran, but they were aware of the underlying danger. The Gulf countries too were hit hard and the US could not protect them, and they may be regretting that they ever let the US set up military bases on their soil. Former US secretary of state Henry Kissinger once famously said, “To be America’s enemy is dangerous, to be its friend is fatal”.

The US may have succeeded in making states, such as Iraq, Syria and Libya, fail, but Iran is a different kettle of fish. Trump was jubilant after capturing the Venezuelan president and may have been planning to lay his hands on Cuba and Turkey and then try to annex Canada and Greenland. A man who promised a “no war” policy in his presidential campaign has converted his department of defence into a department of war in the real sense of the term. Trump must realise that he cannot act like a global policeman and undermine the sovereignty of other nations with impunity. Trump says “we have won” but has nothing to show as gains in the Iran war.

Trump’s concern about BRICS

Another factor in the equation is that Trump may have been concerned about the growing influence and membership of BRICS, which in effect appears to be anti-American if one were to go by its attempt to de-dollarise world trade. Of particular concern may have been the recent admission into BRICS, of several countries supposed to be staunch US allies, such as Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Egypt. Iran is an active member and was mending its fences with Saudi Arabia under the mediation of China. Further, two of the arch rivals of the US, China and Russia, are leading members of BRICS, which has become the meeting ground for the friends as well as foes of the US, under the stewardship of China. The US saw all this as a huge challenge to its dominant position in the world and Trump, who was trying to “make America great again”, saw that his dream may go up in smoke. He threatened countries which tried to adopt an alternative to the dollar with sanctions. He may have thought if Iran could be destabilised and structurally broken up, he would be able to kill two birds with one stone. He may have se an enemy of both the US and also its ally Israel and disrupt the BRICS organisation.

The war is affecting the economy of the BRICS countries quite badly. The fuel shortage due to closure of Strait of Hormuz has hit India hard and also China. The economies of the Gulf countries, whose oil is transported via the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman, have also suffered immensely. South Africa, a founding member of BRICS imports oil mainly from the Middle East. Brazil, another founder member, though an exporter of oil, imports refined fuels from the Middle East. A large portion of food requirements also of the Gulf countries come through these sea routes. Thus, the BRICS organisation must be concerned about the consequences of the war if it drags on. It obviously augers ill for the BRICS, and it must act quickly to bring about a ceasefire and an amicable settlement as soon as possible.

Jeffrey Sachs’ opinion

Prof. Jeffrey Sachs, the eminent American economist, has argued that BRICS nations  have a critical responsibility to play a leading role in stopping the war in the Middle East, particularly regarding the escalating conflict between the US/Israel and Iran. He contends that because the US is pursuing “global hegemony” and attempting to control the region, BRICS serves as the only effective “standing bulwark” against American domination.

Sachs has stated that if BRICS countries, particularly India, China, and Russia, stand together and demand an end to the war, “it will actually end”. He has described this collective action as the only way to make the world safe. Arguing that the Middle East conflict is a planned campaign by the US and Israel for regional dominance rather than a defensive action, he has called on BRICS to stop the US from running the world. He warned that a continued conflict, especially one that disrupts energy supplies, will cause enormous economic costs for Asia, Europe, and the US.

Sachs has argued that India should not have joined Quad, as he views Washington as using a “divide and conquer” strategy. He has characterised the BRICS countries as a fast-growing, multipolar bulwark that rejects the notion of a single “emperor” (referring to US influence). Sachs has warned that if the conflict is not stopped, it could lead to World War III and catastrophic regional consequences (India Today).

China and Russia, though rivals of the US, have the economic and military clout to exert pressure on the US. India is a friend of both the US and Israel and could act as a mediator to bring about an end to this meaningless war. Gulf countries, some of whom are BRICS members, could make a strong appeal to their friend and benefactor, the US, to see what its senseless aggression is doing to their countries.

Unity of BRICS essential

As of 2026, the expanded BRICS group (including Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Indonesia) represents approximately 49% of the world’s population. Moreover, its collective GDP is 35 – 40% of the global GDP when measured in PPP terms, which may be considered as higher compared to G7 countries which record 30%. Thus, BRICS is a force to be reckoned with provided its members stand together. However, they have not been able to do so though it is obvious that it would be beneficial to all of them. Bilateral conflicts within the BRICS, apparently intractable, are preventing any concerted action by these countries. In this regard, as Prof. Sachs says the onus is on China, Russia and India to come together to stop the war, which if allowed to drag on, will irreparably damage the economy and unity of BRICS and worse it would never be possible to attain any of its objectives. It is time the founder members Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa got together and review its goals, the need for such an organisation as BRICS, and the present danger it faces and take remedial steps as soon as possible if it is to remain a viable force with the potential to counter the hegemonic imperialist forces.

Further, the BRICS, as it consists of stakeholders of a new world order and also countries directly involved in the Middle East turmoil, may have an important role to play in working out an arrangement that could bring permanent and stable peace to the region. Once the dust settles on the military front, and the futility of war becomes apparent it may be time for the BRICS countries to raise a voice to demand a settlement based on the two-state solution that was adopted by the UN. Though Trump brushed this UN resolution aside and started taking over Gaza, once the war is over and he contemplates the economic cost of it to the US public – it costs US 1 – 2 billion dollars a day –  he may realize the need for a solution acceptable to all. There have been several US presidents who were strong proponents of the two-state solution—an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel—as a core policy goal. Key proponents included George W. Bush (who first formally backed it in 2002), Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden; they have viewed it as the most viable path to peace.  Israel too after sustaining enormous damage may be forced to agree to a solution, if the US pressures it. Both Trump and Netanyahu, perhaps for personal reasons, wanted a war but they did not expect it to take the turn it has taken. Netanyahu’s days in power may be numbered and Trump may be forced by Republicans to change course as the majority of the US public does not approve of the war.

Therefore, time may be opportune for BRICS to stand together and call for a permanent solution to the Palestinian problem which is at the core of the Middle East conflict. Peace in the Middle East is vital for the further development of BRICS.

by N. A. de S. Amaratunga



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Opinion

Pot calling the kettle black?

Published

on

Doctor Upul Wijayawardhana (eminent physician), posed a riddle for us. He wrote about that island Sri Lanka as ‘ this little dot in the ocean’ when deriding the remark of President Dissanayake who had said that Sri Lanka was a hunduva , a term that indicated a small volume: me hunduve inna puluvan da? (Can you live in this restricted space?) Most sensible people, even uneducated, judge that the volume of a little drop (of whatever) is smaller than that of a hunduva; so is weight. When the learned doctor emphatically maintains ‘….we are not a hunduva’ but ‘… a little dot in the ocean…’, is the pot calling the kettle black or worse?

Physically and population wise, Sri Lanka is neither ‘a little dot’ nor ‘a hunduva. This is all in the rich imaginations of Dissanayake and Wijayawardhana. I once counted that there were more than 50 members of the UN who were smaller than Sri Lanka in physical and population size. England was a sizeable island with a small population in the northwest corner of Europe in late 18th century when it began to become what China, with 1.3 billion people and jutting out to the Pacific, is now. From about 1850, when the population of Great Britain was about 20 million, less than that of Sri Lanka in 2026, it ruled more than half the world. Besides, do not forget Vanuatu, Kiribati, Cook Islands, Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Lesotho and New Zealand (who habitually beats us at cricket). New Zealand with 5 million population played against 1.5 billion population India (1:300) for the T20 cricket championship a few weeks ago. I quietly wished New Zealand would win; so much for crap about dots in the Indian Ocean or the south Pacific.

Dr. Wijayawardhana also wrote about history and about ‘The achievements of Hunduwa’. The massive reservoirs and extensive irrigation systems in rajarata and ruhuna as well as the stupa are indeed tremendous works of irrigation and bear witness to superior ingenuity and organising ability, for the time they were built. They compare very well among structures elsewhere in the ancient world. Terms like ‘granary of the East’ must be taken with more than a grain of salt. Facile use of such terms does not take account of whatever shreds of evidence there is of adversity in those times. Monsoon Asia over the ages has more or less regularly suffered from floods, droughts and consequent famines. The last dire famine was in Bengal in 1944. The irrigation works in Lanka were a magnificent response to those phenomena. The modern response has been scientific agriculture making India a major grain exporter, from near famine conditions in 1973-74. Recall Indira Gandhi’s garibi hatao (eliminate poverty) speech to the General Assembly of the UN, that year.

The bhikkhu who wrote down the tripitaka in aluvihara did so because there was the threat of a severe famine in the course of which learned bhikkhu might have come to harm. Buddhist thought over centuries had been passed from generation to generation vocally (saamici patipanno bhagavato savaka (listener) sangho) and the departure from that tradition must have required a major threat of famine. There are stories of bhikkhu from Lanka fleeing from dire straits. In the same vein, while the mahavamsa speaks of kings and their valiant deeds, there is little account of the large mass of little people who lived then. Sensible teaching of the history of a people must include the history of as much of the people as possible and some idea of the history of other peoples in comparable times to avoid feeling dangerously smug and arrogant, which we have seen many times over.

Usvatte-aratchi

Continue Reading

Opinion

Ministerial resignation and new political culture

Published

on

Kumara Jayakody

The resignation of Energy Minister Kumara Jayakody comes after several weeks of controversy over his ministerial role. The controversy sharpened when the minister was indicted by the Commission on Bribery and Corruption for a transaction he was involved in ten years ago as a government official in the Fertiliser Corporation. The other issue was the government’s purchase of substandard coal from a new supplier. Minister Jayakody’s resignation followed the appointment of a Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry to investigate coal and petroleum purchases. The minister who resigned, along with the Secretary to the Ministry of Energy, Udayanga Hemapala, stated that they did not wish to compromise the integrity of the investigation to be undertaken by the Commission of Inquiry.

The government’s initial resistance to holding the minister accountable for the costly purchase was based on the argument that the official procedure had been followed in ordering the coal. However, the fact that the procedure permitted a disadvantageous purchase which has come to light on this occasion suggests a weakness in the process. The government’s appointment of the Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry to examine purchases as far back as 2009 follows from this observation. In this time 450 purchases are reported to have been made, and if several of them were as disadvantageous as this one, the cost to the country can be imagined. The need to investigate transactions since 2009 also arises from the possibility that loopholes in official government procedures in the past would have permitted private enrichment at a high cost to the country.

Concerns have been expressed in the past that the purchase of coal and petroleum, often on an emergency basis, enabled the use of emergency procurement processes which do not require going through the full tender procedures. The government has pledged to eradicate corruption as its priority. As a result, the general population would expect it to do everything within its power to correct those systems that permitted such corruption. Accountability is not only forward looking to ensure non-corrupt practices in the present, it is also backward looking to ensure that corrupt practices of the past are discontinued. This would be a matter of concern to those who headed government ministries and departments in previous governments. Those who have misapplied the systems can be expected to do their utmost to resist any investigation into the past.

Politically Astute

One of the main reasons for the government’s continuing popularity among the general population, as reflected in February 2026 public opinion poll by Verité Research, has been its willingness to address the problem of corruption. Public opinion studies have consistently shown that corruption remains one of the top concerns of citizens in Sri Lanka. The arrests and indictments of members of former governments have been viewed with general satisfaction as paving the way to a less corrupt society. At the same time, the resignations of Minister Kumara Jayakody and Secretary Udayanga Hemapala are an indication that not even government members will be spared if they are found to have crossed red lines. This is an important signal, as public confidence depends not only on holding political opponents to account but also on demonstrating fairness and consistency within one’s own ranks.

There appears to be a strategy on the part of the opposition to target government leaders and allege corruption so that ministers will be forced to step down. Organised protests against other ministers, and demonstrations outside their homes, are on the rise. The government appears not to want to give in to this opposition strategy and therefore delayed the resignation of Minister Jayakody until it had itself established the Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry. It enabled the minister to step down without it seeming that the government was yielding to opposition pressure. In political terms, this was a calibrated response that sought to balance the need for accountability with the need to maintain authority and coherence in governance.

The demand by opposition parties to focus attention on the coal problem could also be seen as an attempt to shift the national debate from the corruption of the past to controversies in the present. The opposition’s endeavour would be to take the heat off themselves in regard to the corruption of the past and turn it onto the government by making it the focus of inquiries into corruption. The decision to set up a Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry accompanied by the resignation of the minister and the ministry secretary was a politically astute way of demonstrating that the government will have no tolerance for corruption. It will also help to remind the general public about the rampant corruption of past governments which prevents the opposition’s corruption accusations against the government from gaining traction amongst the people.

New Practice

The resignation of a government minister who faces allegations but has not been convicted is still a relatively new practice in Sri Lanka. The general practice in Sri Lanka up to the present time has been for those in government service, if found to be at fault, to be transferred rather than removed from office. This is commonly seen in the case of police officers who, if found to have used excessive force or engaged in abuse, are transferred to another station rather than subjected to more serious disciplinary action. A similar pattern was seen in the case of former minister Keheliya Rambukwella, who faced allegations of corruption in the health field but was reassigned to a different portfolio rather than removed from government.

Against this background, the present resignation assumes greater importance. It signals a willingness to break with past practices and to establish a higher standard of conduct in public office. However, a single instance does not in itself create a lasting change. What is required is the consistent application of the same principle across all cases, irrespective of political affiliation or convenience. This is where the government has an opportunity to strengthen its credibility. By ensuring that the same standards of accountability are applied to its own members as to those of previous governments, it can demonstrate that its commitment to good governance is not selective.

The establishment of the Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry, the willingness to accept ministerial resignation, and the recognition of systemic weaknesses in procurement are all steps in the right direction. The challenge now is to ensure that these steps are followed through with determination and consistency. If the investigations are conducted impartially and lead to meaningful reforms, the present controversy could mark a turning point. The resignation of the minister should not be seen as an isolated event but as the beginning of a new practice. If it becomes part of a broader pattern of accountability, it can contribute to a new political culture and to restoring public trust in government.

by Jehan Perera

Continue Reading

Opinion

Shutting roof top solar panels – a crime

Published

on

The Island newspaper’s lead news item on the 12th of April 2026 was on the CEB request to shut down rooftop solar power during the low demand periods. Their argument is that rooftop solar panels produce about 300 MW power during the day and there is no procedure to balance the grid with such a load.

We as well as a large academic and industrial consortium members have been trying to promote solar energy as a viable and sustainable power source since the early 1990’s. We formed the Solar Energy Society and made representations to Government politicians about the need to have solar power generation. This continuous promotional work contributed to the rapid increase in PV solar companies from three in the early 1990’s to over 650 active PV solar companies established today in the country. These companies have created tens of thousands of high-quality jobs, as well as moving in the right direction for sustainable development.

However, all these efforts appear to have been in vain since the CEB policy makers have continuously rejected solar energy as a viable alternative. Their power generation plans at that time did not include solar energy at all but only relied on imported coal power plants and diesel power generation. Even at the meetings where CEB senior staff were present, we emphasised the importance of installation of battery storage facilities and grid balancing for which they have done nothing at all over the past three decades. Now they have grudgingly accepted the need to include solar energy, which was an election promise of the present government. The government policy is that Sri Lanka should go for renewables to satisfy 70% of its energy needs by 2030 and soon move towards the green hydrogen technology by using solar and wind energy.

The question is why the diesel generators and hydropower stations cannot be shut off one by one to accommodate the solar power generated during the daytime. Unlike a coal-fired plant, diesel generators and hydro power plants can be shut off in a relatively shorter period of time. Norochchalai Lakvijaya power plant produces around 900 MW of power while the total country requirement is 2500 MW on a daily basis. The remainder is provided by diesel generators, hydro and other renewable energy sources.

The need for work to achieve this goal of grid balancing should be the primary responsibility of the CEB. Modern grid balancing systems are in operation in countries such as Germany where around 56% of its energy come from renewable sources. They also plan to increase this to reach 80% of the energy required through renewables by 2030. Our CEB is hell bent on diesel power plants. Who benefits from such emergency power purchases is anybody’s guess?

The Government and the CEB should realise that all roof top solar plants are privately financed through personal funds or bank loans with no financial burden on the Government. It is a crime to request them not to operate these solar panels and get the necessary credits for the power transmitted to the national grid. It appears that the results of CEB’s lack of grid balancing experience and unwillingness to learn over three decades have now passed to the privately-funded rooftop solar panel owners. It is unfortunate that the Government is not considering the contributions of ordinary individuals who provide clean power to the national grid at no cost to the Government. Over 150,000 rooftop solar panels owners are severely affected by these ruthless decisions by the CEB, and this will lead to the un-popularity of this new government in the end.

by Professors Oliver Ileperuma and I M Dharmadasa

Continue Reading

Trending