The SCO Shanghai Cooperaministers’ summit last week in Beijing ended without a joint statement. The reason, as mentioned by India, was that Pakistan and China were attempting to divert attention away from terrorism.
(ANI Photo)
The SCO Shanghai Cooperaministers’ summit last week in Beijing ended without a joint statement. The reason, as mentioned by India, was that Pakistan and China were attempting to divert attention away from terrorism. In case India had inked the statement it would have impacted our strong stance on cross-border terrorism as also regional security. The draft joint statement did not mention Pahalgam but included the ongoing ‘freedom struggle’ in Baluchistan, which was termed as ‘terrorism’. Evidently China was backing Pakistan, as its own investments in Baluchistan’s gold mines and the CPEC were impacted. Pakistan also wanted to include the Jaffar train hijacking in the statement. In both cases the intent was to link India to the Baloch freedom movement. India’s refusal displayed that it will not bend on its national interests as also its strategic autonomy.
The Indian foreign office mentioned, “On our side, India wanted concerns on terrorism reflected in the document, which was not acceptable to one particular country.” The country was Pakistan, backed by China. Pakistan feared that the statement would make it accountable as a sponsor of terror- ism in India. Rajnath Singh in his address at the meet, mentioned, “It is imperative that those who sponsor, nurture and utilize terrorism for their narrow and selfish ends must bear the consequences. Some countries use cross-border terrorism as an instrument of policy and provide shelter to terrorists. There should be no place for such double standards. SCO should not hesitate to criticize such nations.” While the SCO does not permit individual disputes to be projected in the organization, members raise issues without naming the countries concerned.
Advertisement
Advertisement
What further backed India’s stance was that the chapter on ‘goals and tasks’ in the SCO Charter mentions that members will ‘jointly combat terrorism, separatism and extremism in all its manifestations.’ Contrary to this, the joint statement avoided mentioning terrorism. India and Pakistan became full- fledged members of the SCO in 2017. India was inducted at the insistence of Russia, which then sought a coun- terbalance to China, while Pakistan’s entry was pushed by Beijing, as a challenge to India. It is known that the SCO is China dominated as all its members, except India and to some extent Russia, are beholden to it. Most members of the SCO are also part of China’s BRI (Belt Road Initiative) and hence financially indebted to it.
Any global recognition for the SCO stems from India’s presence. It is the only democratic nation in the organization, the others, Russia, China, Pakistan, Iran, Belarus, Kaza- khstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan are either autocracies or quasi-democracies. The SCO is largely anti-Western with India being an exception, hence India’s conduct is closely watched. Non-issuance of a joint state- ment reflects poorly on the host nation, in this case China, for failing to arrive at a consensus. It also indi- cates strong divisions within the organization. India worked round the clock, interacting with all participants to ultimately arrive at the New Delhi declaration at the end of the G20 summit in September 2023.
The G20 declaration was hailed as a diplomatic success, especially as the summit was conducted in the midst of the Russo-Ukraine war and growing tensions between the US and China. While the declaration was claimed to be low on substance, the fact that it was agreed to by all partic- ipants, despite divergent views, was in itself a success. India appears to be losing inter- est in the SCO, based on how the institution is moving. Under its pres- idency in 2023, India conducted almost 134 meetings and events but ultimately held the Heads of State summit in virtual mode. The announcement to host the same in virtual mode was made about two weeks prior to the summit.
The virtual mode was undertaken to avoid embarrassment to the government as it could have led to PM Modi having to meet the Chinese president and the Pakistani PM. Galwan was yet to be resolved and ties with Pakistan were anyway at rock bottom. Further, India has been the only nation in the organization which has refused to endorse the Chinese BRI, a fact men- tioned in every joint statement issued after a major summit. Recently, India also distanced itself from the SCO’s official com- ment after Israel’s military strikes on Iran, an SCO member. The state- ment criticized Israel for the strikes. The Indian statement, distancing itself from the SCO official communique, mentioned, “India’s own position on the matter had been articulated by us on 13 June 2025, and remains the same.
We urge that channels of dialogue and diplomacy be utilised to work towards deescalation.” It was the only nation in the group to disagree. For India, the China-Pakistan collusion, the unsettled borders with both and terrorism emanating from Pakistan, give it little leeway within the SCO. If the reason for India continuing is a platform to engage with other members, then it is a narrow view. With Central Asian nations, there is the India-Central Asia dialogue and India-Central Asia summit. The last India-Central Asia dialogue involving foreign ministers was held in early June in New Delhi, while the summit was held in 2022. The India-Russia summit of lead- ers is annual event. President Putin is expected to travel to India sometime this year. The visit of the Russian for- eign minister, Sergei Lavrov, to coordinate dates for this year’s India-Russia summit was postponed due to PM Modi’s visit to the G7. India-Iran ties are anyway robust with regular conversations at all levels. India and China are also compet- ing with each other for the leadership of the Global South. The LAC remains unresolved and tensions remain. China, desperate to stem India’s growth, has been placing curbs on key exports, the latest being export of urea to India.
It had earlier blocked export of rare earth minerals and two tunnel boring machines for the Mumbai- Ahmedabad bullet train project, built in China by a German firm, for which payment had been made. In a scenario where the organiza- tion offers little, the government needs to consider whether its membership is in any way beneficial. If not, India should withdraw. As a first sign PM Modi must signal his unhappiness with the direction the SCO is taking by not attending the Heads of State summit in Tianjin, China, later this year.
(The writer is a retired Major-General of the Indian Army.)
Advertisement
