The presumption that the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) would shield Iran, the way it did Uzbekistan last year, remains unfounded. Tehran’s plan to end its isolation vis-à-vis the West was skilfully nixed by Chinese and Central Asian mandarins. For them, there was a bitter lesson in last year’s faux pas when the SCO, spurred on by Russia, ardently rallied behind Uzbekistan to demand removal of US military bases from Central Asia. To the SCO’s disappointment, some members continued to support the US.
Hence, some remained circumspect about Iran’s entry, hinting at technical hitches and political implications. The fear of US wrath was also a deterrent as they enjoy substantive energy and military cooperation with it. Kazakhstan contributed troops to Iraq and is seeking closer partnership with Nato. US officials including Vice-President Dick Cheney have visited Kazakhstan this year, and President Bush is due to visit by September. Rumsfeld’s remark about inviting ‘the leading terrorist nation in the world into a professedly anti-terror organisation’ would have served its purpose. Besides, the Central Asian States have a legal dispute with Iran in the Caspian Sea.
Pakistan has been lobbying hard for full membership, especially given the increasing Indo-US intimacy. But Pakistan’s record of sponsoring terrorism and nuclear proliferation worries SCO members. Moreover, Mongolia has been an observer since 2004, so Pakistan has to await its turn.
India aptly sent a low-key representation to the summit — what had been achieved with the US through painstaking deliberations could not have been washed out for a mere rhetorical show.
Moreover, New Delhi has not forgotten the SCO’s rejection of the G-4 formula for UNSC expansion in 2005, or the disqualification of the OVL-Mittal bid for PetroKazakhstan last year.
India aptly sent a low-key representation to the summit — what had been achieved with the US through painstaking deliberations could not have been washed out for a mere rhetorical show.
Moreover, New Delhi has not forgotten the SCO’s rejection of the G-4 formula for UNSC expansion in 2005, or the disqualification of the OVL-Mittal bid for PetroKazakhstan last year.
Yet despite all criticism, the SCO — covering 30 million sq km and 1.48 billion people — draws significant attention. The US sees it as an effort to thwart its interests in Central Asia. Although the SCO refutes the charge of striving to be ‘Nato of the East’, its security agenda and joint military exercises indicate otherwise. After ‘Peace Mission 2005’, the SCO is planning another giant military exercise in Russia in 2007, possibly with Iranian participation.
‘Shanghai Spirit’ aims to forge new norms of international relations and global security. The declaration professes to uphold diversity of civilisations and development patterns, and warns against interference with other countries’ internal affairs. In reality, it is a smokescreen for keeping the US out of Central Asia.
Of the ten documents signed, four relate to security, especially counter-terrorism. However, actions against the ‘three evils’ — terrorism, separatism and extremism — have so far had no impact. The Regional Anti-Terrorism Structure established in Tashkent in 2004 failed to act when the Hezb-e-Tehrir and IMU struck in Andijan in May 2005. And despite being faced with an immediate threat in Afghanistan, the SCO has played no substantive role there. It would not be unrealistic to say that but for the US/Nato, the Taliban and al-Qaeda-backed Central Asian Islamists would have already been ruling the roost in Tashkent, Dushanbe and Bishkek.
The SCO is likely to be more successful on the economic front, where several bilateral and multilateral agreements have been signed. The formation of the Business Council and an Inter-Bank Association, as well as specialist panels on transport and energy cooperation, will be fruitful. Already, 127 joint economic projects are underway, mostly in Central Asia. China alone has invested $ 1.6 billion in 2003, besides committing $ 900 million as subsidised commodity loan. Putin and Ahmadinejad have also floated the idea of an ‘SCO Energy Club’, inviting criticism from the West that it is establishing an ‘energy hegemony’.
All in all, the SCO is devoid of any democratic and liberal values, and will always
be prone to internal and external fissures. There are too many contradictions in the Eurasian space to allow for the formation of a Nato-like organisation. In addition to US-Russia rivalry over security and energy, there exists a similar undercurrent between Russia and China. Beijing has so far been careful not to tread on Russian sensitivities, except for advancing its economic interests.
(The writer is a Senior Fellow, The Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (IDSA))
(Khushwant Singh’s column, With 'Malice Towards One and All', will appear every Saturday)