The Evolving Power Shift; Multilateral Organization, Conflicts and Role of SCO

Context

As the alliances associated with the global balance of power remain in the
heightened state of flux, the organizations through which these tectonic
shifts are being manifested, such as the United Nations, BRICS, NATO and
SCO, are critical to observe. An inquiry that goes along with this examination
is to understand the purposes of these multinational entities.

Analysis

NATO and Europe

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) came into being in 1949 in
the aftermath of World War II. The first NATO Secretary General, Lord
Ismay, famously stated the organization’s goal was “to keep the Russians
out, the Americans in, and the Germans down.” With the end of the Cold War
and the Warsaw Pact, one of the main premises upon which the NATO
military alliance was formulated was gone. The alliance began to look for a
new purpose and identity that would keep it united against the emerging
threats. The war against terror has proven to be one such unifying factor, as
has dealing with rogue dictators and nations that threaten western interests,
such as Saddam Hussein, Muammar Qaddafi and recently Iran.

However, these motives have proven to be short lived in the present multi-
polar world and with the return of great power politics and the Cold War like
dynamics. The established powers are now directly challenging the emerging
power players, even at the extent of undoing the existing political, security,
and economic systems that the established powers had themselves helped to
set up at the end of World War II. It can be contended that the
overwhelming emphasis on fighting the extremists has weakened and
distracted the western alliance.

Moreover, the abuses of the very capitalist system that was a source of
strength for the western nations, are proving to be its Achilles heels. The
multinational corporations while generated enormous profits have also
weakened the Middle Class, the backbone of any vibrant democratic society.
Additionally, the technological edge the West and the US enjoyed is being
eaten away by the emerging powers such as China.

None of these changes are as fundamental as the present transformation of

Europe and its identity. Since the end of World War II, Europe has
represented the pillar of American power projection around the globe. With
Brexit and emergence of nationalist tendencies – this reliance can no longer
be taken as given. Moreover, the change in what Europe reflected in the
American strategic calculus has been adversely impacted by the America
First doctrine. The doctrine has created scepticism in the minds of the
European powers and that the US can no longer be trusted as provider of its
security. This has resulted in Europe increasingly caught between its
traditional ally US, and the pull of the emerging powers such as China and
Russia. Meanwhile, the traditional European power tussles between France,
Germany and UK also appears to be resurging.

What is the Evolving Role of SCO?

On the other hand, the Chinese have given more importance to the economic
and trade leverages in its foreign policy as opposed to military means, which
seems to be the preferable US choice in recent conflicts. Chinese One Belt
One Road (OBOR) is an example of this. It is only under Trump that the
focus has shifted to using American economic tools against adversaries, but
that has resulted in the prospects of trade wars, which in return also impacts
American economy.

The emerging powers are now represented by organizations such as the

BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa). Additionally the
Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) reflects the interests of the Central
Asian states, and is thought of as the security arm of BRICS.

The SCO was formed in 2001 mainly as a security forum. The member
governments have common security concerns, with emphasis on tackling
terrorism, religious extremism, and ethnic separatism. In 2017, the
organizing reached a milestone when India and Pakistan joined the
organization as full members. Other members include China, Kazakhstan,
Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan. Afghanistan and Iran have an
observer status while Turkey is a dialogue partner of SCO.

It is especially interesting to study the connection between BRICS and SCO,

and their reaction to events in countries impacted by the Arab Spring – and
their position on the developments of the AfPak region. In matters related to
Libya, Syria, and Iran, the positions of BRICS and SCO nations were in stark
contrast to those adopted by the western powers – and Russia and China
have both used their veto powers in the UN in this regard.

This is particularly at display as it relates to the present crisis over Iran and
the US decision to withdraw from JCPOA. The European powers had advised
the US to stay within the agreement to influence Iran, and even after the
American withdrawal, the European powers have tried to salvage the
agreement.

BRICS, SCO and Evolution of its Role in Afghanistan

PoliTact has been keenly observing the evolution of these budding
organizations. To explore the role of BRICS and SCO towards the AfPak
region further, we examined the views expressed at a conference held at the
Woodrow Wilson Centre in June 2011, titled, BRICS: Shaping the New Global
Architecture. We especially focused on the comments of Da Wei, who was at
the time the Director of the President’s Office, China Institute of
Contemporary International Relations (CICIR); Fyodor Lukyanov, Editor in
Chief of Russia in Global Affairs; and Inderjit Singh, a Professor of National
Strategy at the National War College, US National Defence University.

In expressing his views, Da Wei distinguished the role of BRICS countries

and the SCO, and avoided making any comparison of the SCO with NATO, or
to comment on the role of the SCO in Afghanistan. He clarified that the
BRICS are focused on global economic and political affairs while the SCO is
more concerned with security issues. He added that BRICS membership is
open to other countries and is a forum for emerging powers to dialogue
amongst member countries and with other institutions like the SCO. He
clarified further that both BRICS and the SCO are not very “strict-tight”
organizations.

On the other hand, Fyodor Lukyanov emphasized saw the role of SCO in
Afghanistan and stated that, “The SCO now is primarily about Afghanistan
because this [is] a matter of huge concern for all countries of Central Euro
Asia [because of the question of] what will happen in Afghanistan after
American and NATO exit, and nobody can answer it.” He added that NATO
should be very much interested and should encourage the SCO to take over
the settlement of this issue and that it’s the only organization that is very
well-placed to take on this responsibility.

In contrast, while speaking to PoliTact, Dr Inderjist Singh stressed a regional

solution to Afghanistan that includes the interests of India, Russia, China,
and Iran. He had noted at the time that Afghan interest to join SCO did not
carry much significance, as the country cannot yet ensure its own security –
and that’s why the role of Pakistan is important. He commented that Pakistan
should not attempt to marginalize the interests of the Northern Alliance and
India through the Haqqani network because a stable solution for Afghanistan
would have to involve regional powers and the route of negotiations would be
better than the use of force.

Future Role of SCO

The Chinese have clearly adopted a more cautious posture on the role of SCO
as opposed to the more aggressive Russian stance. The differences in their
respective approach is directly connected with their threat perceptions vis-à-
vis the United States and Europe. The tense US ties with both Russian and
China have pushed both strategically closer.
Moreover, the Chinese have given more credence to the economic and trade
leverages in its foreign policy as opposed to military means. Chinese One
Belt One Road (OBOR) is an example of this.

Since its inception, SCO has held a number of military exercises. However, at
this stage it is not in a position to match the interoperability prowess of
NATO.

The future of the US presence in the South and Central Asia, and increasingly
Middle East region, have remained the focus of SCO. In June 2011 Medvedev
had commented that the future of Afghanistan was directly relational to
security and stability in all SCO countries and most observer countries, and
that the SCO must endeavour to increase cooperation and involvement in
Afghanistan to try and ensure stability in a post-US scenario.

At a UN Security Council meeting in September 2011, Russia insisted

Afghanistan must stay neutral after troops withdraw from the region.
Moreover, Russian deputy ambassador to the UN at the time, Alexander
Pankin had stated, “if Kabul sets a goal of restoring neutrality as early as
now, this can ease the reconciliation dialogue with the opposition.” The
diplomat told UN members that military means were not enough to stabilize
Afghanistan. Pankin criticized NATO’s ineffectiveness in controlling the
situation and warned militancy networks could spread to bordering countries.
Russia and China both fear the situation in Afghanistan could destabilize the
Central Asian states.

On the other hand, India has warned against any hasty withdrawal of troops
from Afghanistan. India has maintained the stability of the region can only be
achieved once terrorist organizations such as Al Qaeda and Taliban are
rooted out of Afghanistan.

India, Pakistan, and SCO

US and Indian interests are no doubt convergent when it comes to the AfPak
region, however, India has consistently taken a position against foreign
intervention, in places like Libya and Syria, just as China, Russia, and
Pakistan. India is also aligned with the Indo-Pacific strategy and that is what
complicates its role in both the SCO and BRICS. It simply cannot be a
member of both the emerging power club, and established powers, at the
same time, and sooner or later it would have to choose. This is the same
predicament the European powers are finding themselves in, especially as it
relates to the affairs of Iran, while the UK remains entangled in the on-going
Brexit saga.

This is also true to Indian role in SCO. The SAARC organization become
dysfunctional because of the Pakistan-India tensions and the Chinese do not
desire a similar fate for the SCO platform. However, without taking on a
larger security role and diplomatic posture in mediating long-standing
conflicts, whether it is Kashmir or Palestine, SCO cannot rise to a truly
respected organization – in par with NATO.