N4S
UPSC usually picks such topics when bilateral tensions affect the functioning of multilateral forums. The 2023 question on SCO shows how UPSC links current diplomatic flashpoints with deeper strategic issues. It doesn’t just ask “What happened?” but wants to know “What does it say about India’s foreign policy?” Aspirants often falter here in two ways. First, they focus only on the event (like India walking out of the SCO statement) but miss the bigger theme – India’s regional challenges and the limits of multilateralism. Second, they don’t connect India’s larger strategy (like multi-alignment or strategic autonomy) with daily diplomacy. This article helps bridge that gap. It doesn’t stop at headlines – it decodes why India acted the way it did and what that says about our broader regional approach. Sections like “Rethinking India’s Regional Policy” and “Impact of the Virus of Conflict” provide real insight into the limitations of consensus-based diplomacy and India’s tightrope walk between security concerns and diplomatic engagement.
PYQ ANCHORING
GS 2: ‘Virus of Conflict is affecting the functioning of the SCO’. In the light of the above statement point out the role of India in mitigating problems. [2023]
Microtheme: Groupings involving Immediate and Extended neighbours
During the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) Defence Ministers’ meeting in Qingdao, India refused to endorse the joint statement. It was due to the absence of references to cross-border terrorism and the recent Pahalgam terror attack in Jammu & Kashmir. This marked a rare moment of open disagreement within the SCO. India’s decision highlighted the persistent challenge of aligning national security priorities within multilateral forums. It also underscored the diplomatic tightrope it walks – balancing strategic autonomy with active participation in diverse geopolitical groupings.
In this context, important questions emerge:
How do bilateral tensions affect the functioning of multilateral organizations like the SCO?
Does India’s approach reflect a maturing strategic autonomy or a growing frustration with the limitations of consensus-based diplomacy?
Rethinking India’s Regional Policy
India’s refusal to sign the joint statement at the 2025 SCO Defence Ministers’ meeting in Qingdao highlights a deeper dilemma in India’s regional engagement. China’s shielding of Pakistan, and Russia’s growing strategic dependence on Beijing, limits the space for India’s diplomatic manoeuvres in such forums. The core issues are as follows:
| Issue | Description | Examples |
| 1. Overdependence on Multilateral Forums | India expects multilateral forums (like SCO, SAARC) to support its core concerns, especially terrorism, but is often blocked by mutual conflicts China-Pak axis. | lack of consensus in SAARC due to India-Pak tensions. |
| 2. Ineffective Isolation of Pakistan | India aims to isolate Pakistan diplomatically, but Pakistan retains leverage through China, OIC, and occasional US support. | China’s shielding of Pak at global forums. |
| 3. Strained Ties with Bangladesh | Recent alienation of Dhaka, despite historical and cultural ties. | Recent tilt of Bangladesh towards China; reduced trust post CAA-NRC debates. |
| 4. Neglect of Smaller Neighbours | A perception persists that India takes its smaller neighbours for granted, leading them to seek Chinese support as a counterbalance. | Sri Lanka, Nepal, Maldives increasingly engaging with China for infrastructure, aid. |
| 5. Weak Economic Regional Integration | India has not led or facilitated strong economic integration in South Asia, unlike ASEAN or EU models. | SAFTA remains ineffective; low intra-SAARC trade. |
| 6. Reactive, Not Strategic Approach | India often reacts to crises rather than proactively shaping the regional agenda or investing in long-term ties. | Delayed responses to political shifts in Maldives, Nepal, and Afghanistan. |
| 7. China’s Expanding Influence | China’s growing strategic and economic footprint in South Asia and the Indian Ocean poses challenge in India’s backyard. | China’s BRI projects in India’s neighbourhood like Hambantota port in Sri Lanka. |
Impact of ‘Virus of Conflict’ on SCO
The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), envisioned as a platform for regional cooperation and security, is increasingly being undermined by internal divisions and unresolved conflicts among its member states. These tensions – whether bilateral, ideological, or geopolitical – act like a “virus of conflict,” slowing down consensus, weakening joint action, and diluting the organization’s core purpose.
| Dimension | How Conflict Affects SCO | Examples |
| Bilateral Tensions | Bilateral conflicts between member states create roadblocks to consensus-based decision-making, weakening SCO’s unity and effectiveness. | India-China border tensions (e.g., Galwan, Ladakh standoff); India-Pakistan hostility over cross-border terrorism. |
| Security Cooperation | Disagreements over defining and acknowledging terrorism reduce trust and hinder collective action on common threats. | India’s refusal to sign SCO joint statement (Qingdao 2025) due to absence of cross-border terrorism reference. |
| Economic & Connectivity Initiatives | Conflicting national interests and lack of trust affect integration projects like BRI and regional trade corridors. | India’s opposition to China’s BRI and CPEC through PoK; Lack of progress on SCO-wide Free Trade Area. |
| Internal Central Asian Disputes | Border and ethnic disputes between Central Asian states distract SCO from larger regional goals and risk internal fragmentation. | Repeated clashes between Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan; Instability in Afghanistan impacting SCO agendas. |
| Consensus-Based Decision Making | Presence of rivalries slows down or paralyzes decision-making as every member must agree, giving conflicting parties veto-like power. | Delayed or watered-down statements on terrorism due to objections from Pakistan or China. |
| Perception and Global Image | SCO’s inability to act decisively on security issues despite being a ‘security bloc’ affects its credibility on the world stage. | Viewed as anti-Western or as a China-dominated bloc rather than a neutral problem-solving platform. |
Way Forward
1. Voice for Accountability on Terrorism
India must continue to insist on clear, unambiguous condemnation of cross-border terrorism. By walking out of vague statements, like it did in Qingdao, India sends a strong message without disengaging from the platform. India’s firm stance serves as a moral compass within SCO, even if uncomfortable for some members.
2. Champion Strategic Autonomy
India’s presence in both the SCO and Quad reflects its multi-alignment strategy. It can bridge the East-West divide by being the voice of non-aligned yet assertive diplomacy, showing that one can work with China and Russia without compromising on core interests. This balance makes India an example of “issue-based alliances” in a fragmented world.
3. Promote Practical Cooperation
While political and security issues may hit roadblocks, India can lead in areas with common ground – such as: Disaster management, Cybersecurity, Counter-narcotics and Digital public infrastructure (e.g., UPI model).These issues bypass political red lines and offer scope for real cooperation.
4. Quiet Diplomacy to Defuse Tensions
India can use SCO sidelines for backchannel talks with adversaries like China and Pakistan, helping prevent escalation while avoiding media glare. SCO’s informal setting allows space for dialogue, even when formal ties are strained.
5. Push for Reform within SCO
India can advocate for institutional reforms, including a conflict resolution mechanism and greater transparency in decision-making—making the SCO more resilient to internal rifts.
In summary, India can’t control SCO dynamics, but it can shape them. By standing firm on its red lines while pushing practical cooperation, India can position itself as a responsible stakeholder, not a passive participant—one that engages without compromising.
#BACK2BASICS: About SCO
The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) is a Eurasian political, economic, and security bloc formed in 2001, evolving from the 1996 “Shanghai Five” (China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan). With Uzbekistan’s entry in 2001, it became the SCO. Current members include China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, India, Pakistan (joined in 2017), Iran (2023), and Belarus (2024).
Significance of SCO
- Geopolitical Weight: SCO is the world’s largest regional bloc by area and population, covering 80% of Eurasia and 40% of global population. It includes major powers like China, Russia, India, and resource-rich Central Asian nations.
- Economic & Energy Strength: Members account for about 30% of global GDP and hold 20% of oil and 44% of gas reserves. The SCO Energy Club fosters energy cooperation. It also supports connectivity projects, aligning with China’s BRI (though India has reservations).
- Security & Counter-Terrorism: Through RATS (Tashkent), SCO facilitates joint action against terrorism, separatism, and extremism, making it Central Asia’s key security forum.
- Regional Stability: SCO contributes to peace and cooperation in Eurasia, especially Central Asia, and offers a forum to discuss regional issues like Afghanistan.
- Dialogue Among Rivals: It offers a rare space for dialogue between adversaries (e.g., India-China, India-Pakistan), promoting de-escalation and diplomacy.
- Consensus-Based Process: All members have an equal say, despite China-Russia dominance – ensuring India’s voice is preserved.
- Balancing Act for India: SCO membership allows India to balance its role in both Western (Quad) and non-Western blocs, maintaining strategic autonomy.
Challenges within SCO
- Bilateral Conflicts
- India-China tensions (e.g., Ladakh standoff) and India-Pakistan animosity (cross-border terrorism) often disrupt consensus.
- Central Asian disputes (e.g., Kyrgyzstan-Tajikistan) also affect regional stability.
- No effective conflict resolution mechanism exists within SCO.
- Power Imbalance: China and Russia dominate the bloc, raising concerns of unequal influence – e.g., SCO’s official languages are Chinese and Russian.
- Weak Economic Integration: Absence of a free trade agreement limits SCO’s economic potential compared to blocs like ASEAN or the EU.
- Perception Problem: Often viewed as anti-Western, affecting its global engagement and image as a neutral platform.
- India’s BRI Concerns: India opposes the BRI, particularly CPEC through PoK, isolating it within SCO’s connectivity agenda.
- Narrow Mandate: Strong focus on security sidelines other critical areas like economic and cultural cooperation.
SMASH MAINS MOCK DROP
In the light of growing internal contradictions within the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), critically examine India’s role in balancing strategic autonomy with multilateral engagement. Can India reshape such groupings to serve its regional interests?
