Shanghai Cooperation Organization and Emerging Geopolitics
ATIA ALI KAZMI
The only thing that will redeem mankind is cooperation.
Backdrop
Hundred and thirteen years ago, in 1904, Sir
Halford J. Mackinder hypothesized that ‘whoever
rules the Heartland, will rule the world’. He wrote
this from Western perspective, unaware that an
Asian Century shall follow to test the hypothesis
again. Non-incumbent(s) stand(s) lesser chance to
rule Eurasian Heartland than either an incumbent
power or a regional / an extra-regional coalition,
especially if the latter two look at it constructively
and seemingly eschew the dominant realist
paradigm’s zero-sum game of maximizing power at
other(s)’ cost.
As the arch rival of North Atlantic Treaty
Organization (NATO), the erstwhile Soviet Union-
led Warsaw Pact controlled most of the Heartland
at the peak of Cold War in the 1970s. It however
failed to rule in the true sense of Mackinder’s
conceptualization. Former USSR’s economic
and political system was its nemesis and despite
occupying the huge landmass it did not rule the
hearts and minds of the nations bounded in Warsaw
Pact’s unnatural politico-security union that did
not reap the economic and other dividends.
The manifestation of theory ‘rule the Heartland
and rule the world’ has become more complicated.
This is because a century after Mackinder’s thesis,
the region and its periphery (also stated as Rimland
Bertrand Russell
1
Global Think Tank Network
by the American professor
The author is senior
of international relations, research and policy
Nicholas Spykman) are analyst at NUST Global
now inhabited by five Think Tank Network
nuclear weapons powers. and can be contacted at
A physical occupation by atia.ali@nust.edu.pk
an extra-regional power is thus incomprehensible.
An external power or alliance would also find it
impossible to control the territory through a direct
strategy that involves use of force.
The Twenty-first Century is often characterized
as the Asian Century because it is fast becoming
the economic pivot of the world and the continent
possesses the hard power to defend the Heartland.
The interests of states that form its regional sub-
systems in political, economic, and sociocultural
domains have to be realized by having an
essential degree of practical openness and shared
participation in regional processes, as the past
conventional autarchic ways of geopolitics do not
work any longer.
Economic initiatives like One Belt One Road
(OBOR) and purely non-Western alliance like
the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO)
mark an Asian Century and have the potential to
even realize more than what Mackinder theorized
about ruling the Heartland. SCO was established
on June 15, 2001, in Shanghai by the Republic of
Kazakhstan, the People’s Republic of China, the
 Kyrgyz Republic, the Russian Federation, the Republic
of Tajikistan, and the Republic of Uzbekistan. It was
preceded by the Shanghai Five mechanism. The
Charter of the Organization was signed during the
Saint Petersburg SCO Heads of State meeting in
June 2002, and entered into force on 19 September
2003. Established as an internationally recognized
and authoritative multilateral association, its goals
are: ‘strengthening mutual trust and neighborliness
among the member states; promoting their effective
cooperation in politics, trade, economy, research,
technology and culture, as well as in education,
energy, transport, tourism, environmental protection,
and other areas; making joint efforts to maintain and
ensure peace, security and stability in the region; and
moving towards the establishment of a democratic,
fair and rational new international political and
economic order’. Currently, the SCO:
ӹӹ comprises eight member states namely
2
Kazakhstan, China, Kyrgyzstan, Russia,
Global Think Tank Network
Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Pakistan, and India;
ӹӹ counts four observer states, namely the Belarus,
Iran, Afghanistan, and Mongolia; and
ӹӹ has six dialogue partners, namely Turkey,
Armenia, Azerbaijan, Cambodia, Nepal, and
Sri Lanka.
By virtue of its incumbency and geoeconomic
potential, SCO can not only strengthen the
By virtue of its incumbency and
Heartland against external adversaries but
geoeconomic potential, SCO can also dominate the world.
not only strengthen the Heartland
against external adversaries
but also dominate the world. The Organization
embodies an area much larger in size than
Mackinder’s Heartland and erstwhile Warsaw Pact’s
zone of influence, it does not sport any imperialistic
ambitions and is potentially the avant-garde of the
Asian Century.
This policy insight offers an assessment of SCO’s
potential to collectively and positively shape the
Heartland. The first part examines its geopolitics
and the second traces the roots of SCO – its evolving
agenda, Western perceptions, the collective and
individual interests of SCO Member States, the
direction that the Organization is taking - and lastly,
the potential to influence the Heartland.
Geopolitics of Heartland
In 1904, Mackinder hypothesized that history was
an enduring competition between powers in which
a continental power would gain the ultimate victory.
His theory was an anti-thesis of Alfred Thayer
Mahan’s equally powerful dictum of the Nineteenth
Century that whichever power rules the seas also
rules the world.
Perhaps Mackinder was more right than Mahan
because merely controlling the seas is an incomplete
victory as humans can only inhabit land, which makes
possession of the land quintessential for ruling seas.
Despite its largest navy, America has always found it
very difficult to gain foothold or retain its presence
on foreign soils – Afghanistan and Vietnam are two
examples. This is because Washington does not have
the logistics to bridge and sustain the gaps between
continental Americas and the Eurasian landmass
that covers around 55,000,000 square kilometers
(21,000,000 square miles) – around 36.2percent of
the Earth’s total land mass, and is home to around 5
billion people which is nearly 70 percent of the human
population. Eurasia holds most of the world’s physical
wealth, both in its enterprises and underneath its
soil, and it accounts for about three-fourths of the
world’s known energy resources. History reveals that
America possesses the destructive and disruptive
powers but not enough tools to occupy distant lands
– at least not the geographical fortress called the
Eurasian Heartland.
Mackinder reckons the Eurasian
land mass as a natural fortress
bounded by barriers such as:
ӹӹ Russia in the north-east;
ӹӹ Altai (Central and East Asia - on the
confluence of Russia, China, Mongolia and
Kazakhstan) in the East;
ӹӹ Tian Shan mountains (Central Asia - spreading
into China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and
Uzbekistan);
ӹӹ Hindu Kush mountain ranges (South-Central
Asia, Afghanistan, and Iran);
ӹӹ Zone between the Caspian Sea (its basin
covers Azerbaijan, Iran, Kazakhstan, Russia,
and Turkmenistan) and the Black Sea in the
west (Bulgaria, Georgia, Romania, Russia,
Turkey, and Ukraine); and
 ӹӹ Carpathian Mountains (spread along Central
and Eastern Europe).
He termed this as the ‘Geographical Pivot of History’,
whose Achilles’ Heel lies in the accessible lowlands
flanked by Carpathian Mountains and the Black Sea.
Unlike Western Europe, this gigantic landmass is rich
in resources and perhaps only paralleled by North
American planes, which are resource rich and have
never been foraged by the powers across the oceans
that insulate the continent.
Merely controlling the seas is an incomplete victory as
humans can only inhabit land, which makes possession
of the land quintessential for ruling seas…. Heartland
has transmuted into a portmanteau of Mackinder’s
land and Mahan’s maritime theory, whose core thesis
was that whoever commands the seas, rules the world.
Contemporary Dimensions
The Heartland is geographically contiguous but has
never been politically or economically united. It
has been either pillaged from within or has invited
external powers to moth-eat it. After the Soviet Union’s
dissolution, it was only in 2001 that the possibility of
such a union naturally emerged once the five states
occupying this core territory decided to resolve their
boundary issues. The Shanghai Five later expanded as
the SCO, grew in its scope and membership, and now
covers areas adjacent to the Heartland. Kazakhstan,
China, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan
were its founding members. With Pakistan and India’s
full membership in 2017, the SCO territory now
extends into Southern periphery of the Heartland and
the Subcontinent connects it to the Indian Ocean.
In the latter perspective, the so-called Heartland has
transmuted into a portmanteau of Mackinder’s land
and Mahan’s maritime theory, whose core thesis was
that whoever commands the seas, rules the world.
If seen from geographical paradigm, SCO’s territory
carries the potential of ruling the Heartland, provided
its heavyweights – China, Russia, Pakistan, and India
– are on the same side of the political page in order to
‘promote multilateralism and a community of shared
destiny for mankind’. A regional union however does
not mean that there is complete like mindedness – the
British exit from the European Union and London
and Paris keeping their own nuclear deterrents despite
NATO’s security umbrella are cases in point. In SCO’s
case, an earnest commitment to the ‘Shanghai spirit’
can be the driving force to compel the Members to
respect their ‘mutual trust and benefit, equality,
mutual consultation, cultural diversity,
and joint development’.
A regional alliance can
SCO emerged as a dictate of geography. unravel at its seams if one
country plays the zero-sum
At the turn of 21st Century, the geography game of containing anoth-
and the Century’s geopolitics are er in partnership with an
naturally gravitating towards Beijing, external power…. Despite
Moscow, and Islamabad into an alliance its excellent trade and eco-
that is not military in nature. In this nomic interdependencies,
India’s relations with China
potentially powerful alliance, India
and Russia shall take an
appears as the only wildcard because awkward turn if it plays
it has given up its non-aligned status an active role in American
and has entered a strategic partnership containment strategy.
with the United States, apparently to
exploit latter’s weakness to contain rising
China. A regional alliance can unravel at its seams if
one country plays the zero-sum game of containing
another in partnership with an external power. Russia
and China perhaps allowed India’s membership as a
3
design to keep a door of Indian reconciliation open. It
Global Think Tank Network
would be India’s choice to strengthen SCO or work at
cross purposes and either become its Achilles’ Heel or
exit to form an enduring Axis with the United States.
Time will tell if New Delhi will choose a win-win
or win-lose approach in SCO – whether it will opt
for fortifying harmony amongst nations or fueling
the ‘clash of civilizations’! The supposed American
efforts to contain China and a resurgent Russia has
forced it to partner with a land and naval power on
Heartland’s southern rim – its underbelly. Despite
its excellent trade and economic interdependencies,
India’s relations with China and Russia shall take an
awkward turn if it plays an active role in American
containment strategy.
The Prospective Impacts of Evolving Strategic
Partnerships in the Region
... how America ‘manages’ Eurasia is critical. A
power that dominates Eurasia would control two of
the world’s three most advanced and economically
productive regions. A mere glance at the map also
suggests that controlling Eurasia would almost
automatically entail Africa’s subordination, rendering
the Western Hemisphere and Oceania geopolitically
peripheral to the world’s central continent.
Zbigniew Brzezinski
 The emerging Indo-U.S. relations cannot be analyzed
in isolation. In this defining partnership, the United
States needs India as a surrogate to serve its strategic
interests in the Heartland as Washington is severely
handicapped in expanding the insignificant foothold
in the region. New Delhi provides that ideal bond
because it is a natural bonding ground between
Indian and Pacific Ocean and offers the toehold on
the Eurasian plate. However, Himalayan ranges are a
formidable barrier to that ambition and that is where
Pakistan’s critical role emerges. Pakistan is the shortest
land-bridge to the landlocked parts of the Heartland
through Afghanistan. Its Balochistan province is
the Golden Gate to the strategic access. Like the
Eurasian powers need Pakistani bridge to connect
to the Indian Ocean, the U.S. needs it to overcome
its geographical weakness as a maritime power.
American presence in Afghanistan and its interest of
bringing peace and sustainable development to the
4 country critically depend on the former’s relations
with Pakistan. The U.S. and Afghanistan have to
Global Think Tank Network
India Joint Statement issued in June 2017, that:
‘Regrettably, those who seek to appropriate a
leadership role in the fight against terror are
themselves responsible for much of the terror
unleashed in recent years in Pakistan. India had
supported the Tehreek-e-Taliban as a proxy against
Pakistan from across the border. India’s culpability
in creating this further source of regional insecurity
cannot be ignored’.
The U.S. has apparently partnered with India because
that is the ‘next best option’ to access the Heartland
through Southern sea-ward rim. The U.S. cannot
be blamed for placing its bet on India because it is
the only jump off point for the American interests
in the region and to franchise net security in Indian
Ocean. Likewise, Mackinder could not be blamed
for misplacing Heartland’s center of gravity in the
lowlands flanked by Carpathian Mountains and the
Black Sea because he was looking at it from the British

learn from the history of last two decades. In order vantage point in the 20th Century – the realities
to move forward, understanding Pakistani approach have changed in the 21st Century. For American
and working synergistically with Islamabad is key to perspective, the strip within the Rimland’s resource
stabilizing the troubled country. Any country that rich part in Iran’s Sistan and Pakistan’s Balochistan
does not share border and the collective ideology of provinces is the base that Washington would ideally
Afghan people can only invest money and work as need to access the Heartland. A possible American
a spoiler, but cannot bring lasting offset strategy would be to
peace.
Pakistan is the shortest land-bridge to gain access to the Heartland
the landlocked parts of the Heartland through the narrow strip of
Furthermore, the Indo-U.S. through Afghanistan. Its Balochistan Balochistan via Afghanistan, for
strategic axis tends to sidestep province is the Golden Gate to the which Washington shall have to
regional actors and ignore strategic access. make trade-offs with Pakistani
geopolitical expediencies. Pakistan neighbors to the East and West.
has twice offered its land bridge to New Delhi’s guarantee to secure
the U.S. in the past for two of its self-created wars – its tail in Indian Ocean is the apparent insurance
during the Cold War to contain former Soviet Union; policy to sustain that presence. There is howevera
and to fight the so-called war against terrorism need of inclusively pragmatic policies for this region
emanating from a post-Cold War Afghanistan. If by the American strategists.
again it were to become a jump-off point to contain
China’s rise, Washington would not have entered a SCO’s Strengths and Vulnerabilities
‘unique’ relationship with New Delhi. Sino-Pakistan
relations are too strategic for Islamabad to trade In the geopolitical order of 21st Century, Heartland’s
it with instable maneuvers of an off-shore power. southern rim shall play a pivotal role. If it can pull
The country has paid a heavier price in franchising off regionalism, SCO stands a better chance to
its territory to the United States than what it has tilt the balance of power in its favor and save the
gained in tangible terms. In the wake of Indo-U.S. Heartland from encroachment from the South. The
emerging axis to contain China and resurgent Russia, Organization has been observed to evolve from being
Pakistan has continuously been cautioning both of a ‘security-only organization’ into a ‘multi-functional
the potential harmful effects of such an approach group’ that focuses on political and economic
towards the region. In a stark warning and rebuff, cooperation. Moreover, its expansion to the Eurasian
Pakistan gave a public rejoinder to the recent U.S.- belt is expected to make it more relevant to the
 global affairs, and even strong enough to challenge
Washington’s interests. Mackinder’s theory was put to
test in Second World War, and will be tested again on
the crucible of SCO, which shall make it the locus of
power and the avant-garde of the Asian Century. SCO
is formidable in its potential because after Pakistan
and India’s inclusion, it now represents 45 percent of
the world’s population and accounts for 25 percent of
the world’s GDP.
The Organization has drawn skepticism particularly
from Western media. It has been considered an
‘emergent anti-NATO coalition’, ‘an OPEC with
bombs’, and a military and
economic alliance ‘to be
SCO is formidable in its
potential because after
reckoned with’. It is even being
Pakistan and India’s branded as the ‘NATO of the
inclusion, it now represents East’. The behavior of Member
45 percent of the world’s States is under scrutiny too. For
population and accounts instance, Uzbekistan listened to
for 25 percent of the world’s
SCO’s call and evicted Karshi-
GDP.
Khanabad American Air Base
in 2005, which the U.S. had
leased since 2001. If the SCO expands as security-
centered organization or a multi-functional group
that includes political and economic collaboration, it
will automatically draw NATO as its adversary and
give latter a lease of life and the raison d’être.
The world powers would not be blind to SCO’s
potential as an organization that could actually
manifest Mackinder’s Heartland theory. If Russia
and China are driving SCO into that overarching
geopolitical construct, it runs contrary to American
interests in Eurasia and it will take measures that the
idea is either a still born or there are enough arrows
in Western quiver to salami slice such a grand design.
The United States has, however, a huge disadvantage
in gaining access to the Heartland - Russia and China
sit on this land mass. Being a maritime power, the
United States commands the seas but not the Eurasian
landmass. That is why by sitting in Afghanistan and
partnering with India, Eastern European States,
and Far-Eastern countries is its best bet to contain
a resurgent Russia and rising China. The American
option of joining the group for collective gains will be
too idealistic but is not an impossibility in the wake
of present era of competitive-cooperative (military-
economic) relations between nation states.
The Western strategy to contain China and Russia is
compelling the two into an alliance, in which their
bilateral frictions have naturally
begun taking backseat. Amongst
SCO’s members, India is the only “If Russia and China are
State on which the U.S. is hedging driving SCO into that
overarching geopolitical
to sow discord and weaken it. It
construct, it runs contrary
is in Sino-Russian joint interest to American interests in
to reduce American influence in Eurasia and it will take
Eurasia, especially Afghanistan. measures that the idea is
The SCO does not appear anti-U.S. either a still born or there
in its mandate but the likelihood of are enough arrows in
Western quiver to salami
it butting heads with Washington slice such a grand design.
seems unavoidable.
The SCO’s strength is that it sits on Eurasian landmass
and it can also strain American maritime ascendancy
in the Indian and Pacific Oceans, especially if India
decides to ultimately place its eggs in the regional
basket. This is perhaps the reason that Washington
considers Eurasia and its partnership with India
of paramount importance, and has gone out of the 5
way to support colored revolutions and has invested
Global Think Tank Network
heavily in Indians during the Bush and Obama
Administration. The joint statement issued on Modi’s
recent visit to Washington D.C. so far reveals that
the Trump Administration will follow the policies of
its predecessors. The extent of American hospitality
towards India has been so vast that New Delhi has
given up its policy of non-alignment and despite its
vast economic relations with Moscow, some chinks
are visible in the armor of their relationship.
In the globalized world of today, no nation can reach
self-sufficiency to the extent of achieving economic,
political, and security expediency. Even Mackinder
had observed that once presenting his Heartland
theory, that ‘the actual balance of political power at
any given time is, of course, the product, on the other
hand, of geographical condition, both economic
and strategic, and, on the other hand, of the relative
number, virility, equipment, and organization of
the competing peoples’. SCO members’ shared and
important agenda of making themselves stronger
by working together will give the organization an
internal strength that is necessary if it is to thrive and
become geopolitically significant. The seeds for such
cooperation were sown in its Moscow Summit in
2003, once the members agreed to fulfil a program of
multilateral trade and economic cooperation by 2020.
The program envisaged 127 joint constructions of
hydroelectric plants, upgrading highways, laying out
fiber-optic communications networks, hydrocarbons
exploration and pipeline construction. China had
 then shown consent to issue low-interest line of disputed territory and has being marked incorrectly]
credit for USD 900 million for the initial projects connects Heartland’s underbelly, and Indian and
and to train 1500 engineers and experts from the Pacific Ocean regions into unprecedented six
Central Asian States, while Russia had proposed the overland and sea-based economic corridors that
investment plans for SCO as joint ventures. will surpass British Empire’s power and influence in
comparison. The SCO’s expansion in 2017 is timed
The SCO’s potential is a residue of a key geopolitical with BRI and is set to transform the global economic
fact i.e. its members cannot landscape. Pakistan lies at the heart
maximize their individual of the initiative, as it is diligently
or collective powers unless The SCO’s expansion in 2017 is timed implementing the CPEC. These mega
with BRI and is set to transform the
they overcome their bilateral global economic landscape. Pakistan lies projects will benefit the entire SCO
problems and work together. at the heart of the initiative… community and beyond.
Economic cooperation can
provide the foremost incentive If Chinese initiative pulls off, the
to dampen pugnacity amongst Heartland will become the economic
the member states of SCO. This can be put into basket of the World Island and the geo-economic
practice by measures such as forming Eurasian and geopolitical power could shift from West to East.
transportation corridors. These are manifest in Belt Beijing had pragmatically insisted in keeping SCO
and Road Initiative (BRI) and its flagship China- non-military in outlook and even offered the U.S.
6 Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) project. and the West stakes in this initiative.
Global Think Tank Network

China launched BRI [Map – note that Kashmir is a Russia is busy trying to revive its economy and it is
likely to benefit from BRI, improving its economic
muscle. Pakistan’s role in BRI has unsettled India and
is also a source of ‘silent’ American concern. Shall
India choose to rely on an off-shore-maritime power
that has a history of changing allies or cooperate
regionally is difficult to ascertain because reading
complex Indian strategic thought process is one of
the most difficult phenomenon to discern and base
counter strategies on.
The SCO harbors no counterbalance strategy against
the United States, despite its focus on security issues,
military exercises, and joint counterterrorism and
counternarcotic efforts. However, forays into its
periphery can change the Organization’s character.
The Organization has a limited reach in terms of
economic strength and unified military power but has
huge potential to grow. The leadership has avoided
controversy and have displayed consensus over
the need to fight terrorism, cooperate in common
economic development, and have shown reluctant
interest in solving regional conflicts through peaceful
means - although the latter can potentially make it
another SAARC.
Recently, counter-terrorism has taken salience and
a Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure (RATS) was
established. Headquartered in Tashkent, RATS SCO
is a permanent organ of the Organization and serves
to promote mutual cooperation against the ‘three
evil forces’ of terrorism, separatism, and extremism.
With its priority areas identified, RATS has already
achieved concrete results, for instance, establishment
of border defense mechanisms under its framework;
provision of intelligence information on the use
of internet by terrorist groups in the region; and a
database of information of fighters participating in
armed conflict in Syria and other areas.
In the 2017 Summit at Astana, SCO signaled its key
interest on diverse strategic issues. The Member
States:
ӹӹ advocated strict adherence to the goals and
principles of the UN Charter, primarily, the
equality and sovereignty of states, non-interference
in internal affairs, mutual respect for territorial
integrity, inviolability of borders, non-aggression,
peaceful settlement of disputes, non-use of force or
threat of force, and other internationally recognized
norms of international law designed to maintain
peace and security, to develop cooperation between
states, to strengthen independence, and to ensure
the right to determine one’s own future and paths of
political, socioeconomic and cultural development;
ӹӹ adopted the Statement on Joint Counteraction
to International Terrorism with an intent to further
promote the activities of the SCO Regional Anti-
Terrorist Structure in the interests of ensuring
security within the Organization’s space in
accordance with its tasks and functions;
ӹӹ reaffirmed that the unilateral and unrestricted
build-up of missile defense systems by one state or
a group of states, is detrimental to international and
regional security and stability;
ӹӹ called for an early entry into force of the
Protocol on Security Guarantees to the Central
Asian Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty for
7
all its signatories which will make a significant
Global Think Tank Network
contribution to ensuring regional security and
strengthening the global non-proliferation regime;
ӹӹ noted the importance of keeping outer space free
of weapons in order to ensure equal and indivisible
security for all and to maintain global stability;
ӹӹ supported efforts and initiatives designed to
maintain and comply with the Chemical Weapons
Convention, enhancing the credibility of the
Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical
Weapons, as well as strengthening the regime
provided for by the Biological and Toxin Weapons
Convention;
ӹӹ undertook to continue cooperation in the areas
of disarmament and arms control, the peaceful
use of nuclear energy, and the political and
diplomatic settlement of regional challenges to non-
proliferation regimes;
ӹӹ supported strict observance of Nuclear
Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Both Pakistan and India
have their individual perspectives on these issues
and it would be noteworthy to see how these play in
2018 SCO Summit in China where China will take
over the Organization’s rotating presidency.
ӹӹ will do all they can to bolster peace and stability
and promote trade, economic, cultural and
humanitarian ties in the SCO in line with the SCO
 Development Strategy Towards 2025 and the 2016-
2020 Plan of Action for its implementation.
The SCO members signed ten other agreements in
addition to the Astana Declaration. These include
a convention on combating extremism and a
declaration on joint fight against
The SCO members international terrorism.
supported strict observance
of NPT. Both Pakistan and The territorial disputes of SCO
India have their individual members can seriously undermine
perspectives on these issues
and it would be noteworthy
the organization’s collective
to see how these play in potential. Pakistan-India perennial
2018 SCO Summit in China. dispute over Kashmir is a flashpoint.
Likewise, China considers Russian
far-eastern parts as its territory
and if the two Asian giants dwell on their disputes,
SCO shall be a stillbirth. Moreover, the expected
inclusion of Iran in the next summit, without
8 formally normalizing its global stature, remains a
matter of concern. These political vulnerabilities can
Global Think Tank Network
be exploited, by playing one power against the other.
A silver lining lies in China’s observance of strategic
patience in its relations with the United States, and
its desire to avoid conflict at all costs. This will also
have a sobering effect on Russian ascorbic behavior
in dealing with Washington.
As briefly alluded above, India is SCO’s wild card.
In 2006 SCO Summit, New Delhi scaled down its
participation while other SCO members and observer
countries sent their Heads of State. This decision was
perhaps a conscious choice to play a balancing act
between Russia and the U.S. because New Delhi was
entering a strategic partnership with Washington and
did not want to affect that long-term design. Today,
however, Indian economic motives preside in the
full membership of SCO and would not undermine
its partnership with the U.S – at least till it has not
developed the military and potential that it can afford
to jettison American fuel tanks. Indian membership
of SCO raises it geo-strategic status and would allow
it to tap Central Asia’s energy market provided New
Delhi mends its fences with Pakistan, as the country
offers critical overland routes and connectivity for
trade and energy transactions intra regionally and
inter regionally. China, being the founding member
of the SCO, dismissed apprehensions that differences
of the two significant countries could disrupt the
unity of the group as its charter does not allow
members to bring forth their mutual hostility.
Pakistan views membership of
SCO as a measure to strengthen India is SCO’s wild card.
its cooperation with the member In 2006 SCO Summit,
New Delhi scaled down
states which will effectively its participation while
contribute to regional peace, other SCO members and
stability and development, and observer countries sent
help it play a more effective their Heads of State…
role for regional cooperation perhaps a conscious
choice to play a balancing
against terrorism and extremism. act between Russia and the
Cooperation in energy and U.S.
transport sectors will promote
Pakistan as a regional trade
corridor. Pakistan completely shares Chinese vision
of non-interference, shared destinies and peaceful
rise. In June 2017 Astana Summit, Pakistan’s Prime
Minister Nawaz Sharif signaled that: ‘Instead of
talking about counterweights and containment, let
us create shared spaces for all’.
Afghanistan’s relations with Pakistan shall also define
the future of SCO because Kabul conveniently blames
the terrorist attacks in the country on Pakistan.
During the Astana Summit, both countries displayed
some reconciliation and agreed to use Quadrilateral
Coordination Group mechanism as well as bilateral
channels to undertake specific actions against terror
groups and to evolve a mechanism to monitor and
verify such actions.
Conclusion
In its outreach, the SCO is transcontinental and
serve as a strong link between the Asia-Pacific, East
Asia, West Asia and the Atlantic region. Although
SCO has the potential to influence the Heartland and
shape the geopolitics of world island, the behavior
of member states would enable the organization to
live up to that promise. Much will depend on how
the members overcome their discontents and deal
collectively with external overloads. This shift in
global center of power shall take time for SCO to
take a lead in becoming the cornerstone of global
politics and economics.
The SCO has taken a wise choice to only deal with
major issues on strategic level, leaving it to member
nations to sort out their bilateral issues and details.
This has been done to deal with collective Eurasian
security and economic issues rather than face
impasse over perennial bilateral issues. Being the
most powerful members, China and Russia have
chaperoned SCO’s agenda in a manner that it does
not turn into a impractical group. cooperation-organization

SCO’s potential to influence the Heartland shall
also depend on how India and Pakistan’s bilateral
relations and Indian strategic partnership with the
United States pans out. The organization should
have mechanisms to avoid inheriting the politics
of SAARC, which is dogged by impasse in India-
Pakistan relations.
[6] Green, D. (2017). Shanghai Eight: Assessing a Multi-
Headed Chimaera. https://worldview.stratfor.com/
article/shanghai-eight-assessing-multi-headed-chimaera
[7] Ismailov, E. and Papava, V. (2010). Rethinking Central
Eurasia, Johns Hopkins University, SAIS Press.
[8] Mackinder, H.J. (1904). The Geographical Pivot of
History. The Geographical Journal, 4(170), December
2004, 298-321

The U.S.-India axis would be a serious impediment
to SCO’s development. It is widely assumed that both
powers are partnering to contain China. Likewise,
despite the economic cooperation with Moscow,
New Delhi’s relations with (it) will come at odds with
its partnership with America that seeks to contain
resurgent Russia. The snags are too fundamental to be
glossed over in SCO and will become pronounced if
Bharat does not maintain balance. India is emerging
as the swing state and the balance of power shall
momentarily shift whichever side New Delhi decides
[9] Mackinder, H.J. (1943). The Round World and The
Winning of the Peace. Foreign Affairs’ An American
Quarterly Review, 4(21) https://people.ucsc.edu/~rlipsch/
migrated/Pol177/Round%20World.pdf
[10] SCO: A New Power Center Developing. https://
worldview.stratfor.com/article/sco-new-power-center-
developing
[11] SCO charter prohibits India, Pakistan to raise
bilateral issues: China. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.
com/world/china/sco-charter-prohibits-india-pakistan-
9
to-raise-bilateral-issues-china/articleshow/59158621.cms

Global Think Tank Network

to settle. As an offset strategy, both Russia and the
U.S. would try to keep India on their side, something [12] The Astana declaration of the Heads of State of the
that New Delhi shall exploit by playing one against Shanghai Cooperation Organisation. http://eng.sectsco.
the other. org

[13] US asked to leave Uzbek Air Base. BBC World

SCO can no longer be dismissed as a talk shop, News, July 30, 2005 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-
because it has grown in size and its members have pacific/4731411.stm
not been very kind to American presence in the
region. If the SCO continues developing in terms of
joint economic projects and security initiatives, it
would be difficult to rule out that it becomes a new
collective power center.

References
[1] Brzezinski, Z. (1997). The Grand Chessboard:
American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives. New
York, NY: Basic Books.

[2] Charter of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization.

http://eng.sectsco.org/documents

[3] China, Russia: The SCO’s Possible Evolution. June

5, 2012. https://worldview.stratfor.com/article/china-
russia-scos-possible-evolution

[4] Counter-terrorism Committee Welcomes Close

Cooperation With the Regional Anti-terrorist Structure
of the SCO. UN Security Council Counter-terrorism
Committee. http://www.un.org/en/sc/ctc/news/2014-10-
24_cted_shanghaicoop.html

[5] Geopolitical Diary: The Limits of the Shanghai

Cooperation Organization. https://worldview.stratfor.
com/article/geopolitical-diar y-limits-shanghai-
 10
Global Think Tank Network

This material is shared by Global Think Tank Network (GTTN), a key national policy research, analysis, and advocacy initiative, based in the
National University of Sciences and Technology (NUST), Islamabad. The fundamental objective of GTTN is to develop solutions and recommend
multi-partisan public policies for social, economic, ethical, and equitable development of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, as envisioned by
Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah, by associating scholars, professionals, and academicians, not only from Pakistan – particularly from
NUST – but, wherever possible, from all over the world. The Board of Directors of GTTN comprises: Rector NUST, Lieutenant General Naweed
Zaman (retd.) as Co-Chair; Professor Emeritus (Senior Advisor) NUST & Former Deputy Chairman, Planning Commission, Dr. Akram Sheikh
as Co-Chair; Advisor NUST & President GTTN, Mr. Amer Hashmi; Former Governor, Balochistan & KP, Mr. Owais Ghani; Editor-in-Chief,
Blue Chip Magazine, Mr. Humayun Gauhar; Former Member Infrastructure, Planning Commission, Dr. Asad Ali Shah; and, NUST Pro-Rector,
Mr. Irfan Akhtar as Board Secretary/Treasurer.

Disclaimer: The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of NUST or GTTN.