On the same day as foreign ministers of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) gathered for a key meeting in Goa, a fresh attack by Pakistan-backed Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT) terrorists in Jammu and Kashmir’s Rajouri district cost India the lives of five soldiers. The simultaneity of these events was glaring because the core mandate of the SCO, where Pakistan is a full member, is to jointly counter terrorism, extremism and separatism, and to forge a regional security architecture free of radical forces.
Keeping up the pretence of unified counter-terrorism cooperation under the SCO’s aegis was Pakistani foreign minister Bilawal Bhutto, who said: “I and my country are firmly committed to be part of regional and global efforts for eradicating this menace” and that the SCO’s eight member countries should adopt a “comprehensive and collective approach” instead of engaging in “diplomatic point scoring” and “geopolitical partisanship”.
The gap between Pakistan’s words and deeds was so stark that India’s external affairs minister S Jaishankar had to call out Bhutto as the “promoter, justifier and spokesperson of a terrorism industry”, and remind SCO peers that “taking our eyes off this menace would be detrimental to our security interests”. Jaishankar added that victims of terrorism have to “defend themselves, call it out, deligitimise it and that is exactly what is happening”.
An unstated goal of India’s SCO presidency has been to isolate Pakistan by exposing its terrorist linkages and generating regional consensus and pressure against Islamabad to kick the jihadist habit. India’s diplomatic investment in the SCO’s Regional Anti-Terrorism Structure (RATS) has increased member-States’ awareness of the nefarious ecosystem.
India’s emphasis that the SCO should “fix accountability on those aiding or funding terrorism” and its sharing of intelligence about broader regional threats emanating from Pakistan-based, United Nation (UN)-proscribed jihadi organisations, have garnered greater attention within the SCO. Still, as the string of attacks in Jammu and Kashmir demonstrate, the SCO has not grasped the nettle in tackling terrorism. The same “geopolitical partisanship” Pakistan is decrying has allowed Pakistan to get away with crimes. China, a founding member of the SCO, which lobbied hard to secure full membership for Pakistan remains a central protector of Pakistan on terrorism.
Even though China has suffered multiple terrorist attacks against its citizens in Pakistan, Beijing has prioritised its all-weather friendship with Islamabad, whose strategic purpose is to keep India under check, over and above counter-terrorism goals. Close coordination between Beijing and Islamabad to thwart action at the UN against LeT and Jaish-e-Muhammad (JeM) leaders is one manifestation of this pro-terrorism axis. The use of “made in China” ammunition and drones to enable Pakistani terrorists to plan attacks in India, and the maintenance of a massive and aggressive Chinese force posture along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) with India, give Pakistan space to carry on its “holy war”. Keeping India tied down on two fronts has always been China’s geopolitical goal. In this context, China has not been enthusiastic about cornering Pakistan over terrorism in the SCO.
In Goa, Chinese foreign minister Qin Gang’s call for the SCO to “oppose the attempts of external forces to interfere in regional affairs” overshadowed his routine lip service to “continue to crack down hard” and “sternly combat all forms of terrorism”. China’s central aim is to use the SCO as a geopolitical instrument to steer its members, especially India, away from developing strategic ties with the United States and construct a Eurasian regional order that is firmly anti-western. In pursuit of this objective, China deems the terrorism shenanigans of Pakistan as tolerable. Given that one SCO member, Pakistan, is spawning jihadi violence while another SCO member, China, is giving it diplomatic and military cover, can one expect the SCO to deliver on its formal declarations and measures to root out terrorism?
The global history of terrorism shows how it has metastasised in a context of geopolitical rivalries and divisions which override shared multilateral interests. Indian defence minister Rajnath Singh’s blunt point that the SCO has to “effectively deal with terrorism” to become a “more credible international organisation” deserves reiteration here. India has done its utmost as the SCO president to bring home the truth, but the realities of world politics show this endeavour’s limits.
Sreeram Chaulia is Dean, Jindal School of International Affairs The views expressed are personal
