India breaks with China, Russia on Israel-Iran war
The absence of any clause in the group's statement indicating that India disagreed with them initially suggested consensus (including with rival Pakistan), but after the MEA's clarification, it now suggests that India was kept out of the loop. This could have political ramifications if that's indeed what happened.
The SCO was founded to peacefully resolve border issues between China and the former Soviet Republics after the USSR's dissolution and then united them all in their opposition to the shared threats of terrorism, separatism and extremism.
The group has since taken on economic and other connectivity functions after expanding to include India and Pakistan in 2015, with these additional interests increasingly taking center stage since those two accuse each other of fomenting the aforesaid threats. Iran joined the SCO in 2023.
Article 16 of the SCO Charter clearly states that 'The SCO bodies shall take decisions by agreement without vote and their decisions shall be considered adopted if no member State has raised objections during its consideration (consensus)… Any member State may state its opinion on particular aspects and/or concrete issues of the decisions taken which shall not be an obstacle to taking the decision as a whole. This opinion shall be placed on record.'
Accordingly, given the absence of any clause in the SCO's statement indicating that India disagreed with what was written, it therefore compellingly appears that it was kept out of the loop.
That arguably being the case, Western-friendly policy influencers and policymakers in India might now feel vindicated after claiming for a while already that the group no longer aligns with their country's interests as much as before.
This could, in turn, lead to pressure upon India to more publicly distance itself from the SCO.
It's premature to conclude that India will react in that way, especially since it has remained in the SCO thus far, despite the aforementioned interpretations among some, aimed at averting the scenario of China dominating that group, with the possibly attendant consequence of Russia becoming its junior partner.
From India's perspective, that would pose a major national security threat if China then leveraged its influence over Russia to deprive India of military equipment in the event of another border crisis.
To avoid any misunderstanding, there are no credible signs that any such Russian subordination to China is imminent, nor that Russia would comply with speculative demands from China to cut India off ahead of or during a future crisis, thereby giving Beijing the edge over Delhi.
Nevertheless, such fears might now be lent renewed credence among some important people in India given what just happened with the SCO, which follows concerns that Russian policymakers' perception of India might be changing.
Readers can learn more about that here and here, with the second analysis explaining why Russia lent credence to Trump's claim that he personally stopped the latest Indo-Pak conflict, which India has repeatedly refuted.
More than likely, Indian diplomats might soon discreetly request a clarification from Russia about why the group that it co-founded with China arguably kept their country out of the loop when issuing its latest statement.
This article was first published on Andrew Korybko's Substack and is republished with kind permission. Become an Andrew Korybko Newsletter subscriber here.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RTHK
9 hours ago
- RTHK
UK PM hosts Zelensky on eve of US-Russia summit
UK PM hosts Zelensky on eve of US-Russia summit Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, right, and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer depart 10 Downing Street, in London. Photo: Reuters Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on Thursday met with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer in London in a show of support on the eve of a key US-Russia summit from which Kyiv and its European allies have been excluded. Starmer greeted the Ukrainian leader with a warm hug and handshake on the steps of his Downing Street residence, only hours after Zelensky took part in a virtual call with US President Donald Trump. Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin will meet on Friday at an air base in Alaska. A stepped-up Russian offensive, and the fact Zelensky has not been invited to the Anchorage meeting, have heightened fears that Trump and Putin could strike a deal that forces painful concessions on Ukraine. But Starmer said on Wednesday there was now a "viable" chance for a ceasefire in Ukraine after more than three years of fighting. (AFP)
AllAfrica
13 hours ago
- AllAfrica
Why Zelensky should be at the table in Alaska
The upcoming summit between US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin on August 15 in Anchorage, Alaska, is more than a meeting between world leaders. It is a diplomatic gamble for high stakes, one that seeks to deal with the ongoing war in Ukraine but also exposes the contradictory interests between the two sides. For Trump, the summit is a continuation of his repeated promise to bring an end to the war in Ukraine. Throughout his campaign for president, Trump boasted that he could settle the war within 24 hours of being sworn in, a brash promise that now looks and sounds empty nearly eight months into his term. His August 8 ceasefire deadline came and went with minimal movement on either side. His reaction was to declare this headline-grabbing summit with Putin. The concept, in Trump's words, is to 'feel out' the Russian president and coax him into a ceasefire. But this strategy is confronted by the cold reality that Russia's goals in Ukraine were never about negotiating a peace treaty. They are about territorial expansion and imposing a new sphere of influence, something that Putin is not going to give up without a major change in the prevailing geopolitical scenario, where Moscow has Beijing's firm backing. The meeting place is symbolic as well. Convened in Anchorage, Alaska, a state that has long historical roots with Russia (sold by Russia to the US in 1867), the summit unites the heads of two countries, which are only divided by the slim Bering Strait, at a location replete with Cold War-era military history. Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, where the talks will take place, is a strategic US base in Alaska's defense posture. This context emphasizes the strategic character of the summit. It is no coincidence that Trump and Putin are meeting at a place that defines the complicated dynamic between their two nations, competing in many ways, yet neighbours bound by shared histories and interests. But there is something deeply disturbing in the structure of this summit. Trump and Putin will sit at the same table, while Ukraine itself is left out of the negotiations, much to the dismay of President Volodymyr Zelensky. Trump, who has repeatedly expressed disappointment with Putin over the course of the war, has nonetheless indicated that he will push for territory to be returned to Ukraine, particularly in the wake of Russia's occupation of Crimea and the eastern regions of Donetsk and Luhansk. But Trump has also warned that the solution could involve 'swapping' land, an approach that would no doubt outrage Ukraine and its allies in Europe. For Zelensky, this represents a non-starter: any deal that cedes Ukrainian territory to Russia is unacceptable. Putin, however, stands firm in his requirements. He wants Ukraine to be neutral and outside of NATO, and for Russia to keep control of Crimea and portions of the Donbas. For Moscow, the war is not merely about winning territory; it is a battle to keep NATO from encroaching further into what Russia envisions as its sphere of influence. The fight over Ukraine is representative of a larger geopolitical battle between the West and Russia, and Putin is not likely to relinquish these core demands. The exclusion of Ukraine from the negotiations is sad but expected. Although Trump has intimated that Zelensky may be invited to the table at a later date, the implication is clear: the future of Ukraine will be determined by a select few world leaders without direct input from the people and government whose lives and sovereignty are most at stake. Zelensky's legitimate concern is that any deal not involving Ukraine proactively would be a deal imposed on the country, ignoring its people's desire and territorial sovereignty. So what does the summit ultimately represent for Ukraine? On one hand, of course, it holds out the chance for US-influenced diplomatic interaction with Russia. On the other hand, Ukraine risks its future being negotiated away in the interest of political expediency. Trump's approach of trying to browbeat Putin into a ceasefire, admirable in its intent to end the carnage, has the potential to make concessions that will not result in a durable, long-term peace. Any deal compelling Ukraine to submit to Russian domination of occupied land would not only be a moral letdown but a geopolitical mistake with profound implications for the security of Europe and the global order. In the broad context, the summit also highlights the failure of diplomacy in an environment where power politics reign supreme. The fact is that the conflict in Ukraine is not simply a local issue; it is a proxy war between global powers. The US, NATO and Russia are engaged in a battle for control of Ukraine, leaving the country's citizens in the miserable middle. Although Trump has good intentions in seeking an end to the war, however, any meaningful resolution requires a comprehensive approach that takes into account the legitimate interests and sovereignty of Ukraine while also addressing the security concerns of Russia. All in all, the Trump-Putin summit in Anchorage will be a pivotal moment, but it is unlikely to yield any simple solution. The path to peace in Ukraine will require more than just a summit between two world leaders. It will require a commitment to the principles of sovereignty, territorial integrity and self-determination. Until these values are upheld, any 'deal' reached will only serve to perpetuate the cycle of conflict and suffering that has already devastated Ukraine and its people. Bilal Habib Qazi is an independent researcher based in Pakistan with a PhD in international relations from Jilin University in China. His research interests span geopolitics and strategic competition, foreign policy analysis, international security and regional order, as well as global governance and international organizations. He may be reached at bhqazi@
RTHK
a day ago
- RTHK
Europeans urge Trump to push for Ukraine ceasefire
Europeans urge Trump to push for Ukraine ceasefire German Chancellor Friedrich Merz welcomes Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky upon his arrival in Berlin. Photo: Reuters Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and his European allies urged US President Donald Trump on Wednesday to support Kyiv and push for a ceasefire when he meets Russia's Vladimir Putin in Alaska this week. A stepped-up Russian offensive, and the fact Zelensky has not been invited to the Anchorage meeting Friday, have heightened fears that Trump and Putin could strike a deal that forces painful concessions on Ukraine. According to an AFP analysis of battlefield data from the US-based Institute for the Study of War, Russian forces made their biggest 24-hour advance into Ukraine in more than a year on Tuesday. As the war rages on in eastern Ukraine, Zelensky flew to Berlin and joined Chancellor Friedrich Merz on an online call with other European leaders, and the Nato and EU chiefs, in which they talked to Trump and urged a united stance against Russia. French President Emmanuel Macron said afterwards that "the American will is to obtain a ceasefire". Speaking in Berlin, Zelensky said that "we hope that the central topic at the meeting will be a ceasefire. An immediate ceasefire". "Sanctions must be in place and must be strengthened if Russia does not agree to a ceasefire." But he also voiced doubt about Moscow's intentions and said: "I have told my colleagues, the US president, and our European friends, that Putin definitely does not want peace." Merz, standing beside Zelensky, also said that "a ceasefire must come first" before any peace talks and that Ukraine must "at the table" at any follow-up meeting after Alaska. Any negotiations must include robust security guarantees for Kyiv and "be part of a joint transatlantic strategy", he said. Trump on Monday played down the possibility of a breakthrough in Alaska but said he expected "constructive conversations" with Putin. "This is really a feel-out meeting a little bit," Trump said. But he added that eventually "there'll be some swapping, there'll be some changes in land". Merz said "Ukraine is ready to negotiate on territorial issues" but also stressed that "legal recognition of Russian occupations is not up for debate". Macron said that "territorial questions concerning Ukraine can be, and will be, negotiated only by the Ukrainian president". Trump would also be pushing for a trilateral meeting with Putin and Zelensky in the future, Macron said, adding that he hoped such a meeting could be held in Europe "in a neutral country that is acceptable to all parties". After the call, European leaders voiced optimism on the path ahead. EU chief Ursula von der Leyen said on X that "today Europe, the US and Nato have strengthened the common ground for Ukraine. "We will remain in close coordination. Nobody wants peace more than us, a just and lasting peace." Nato head Mark Rutte hailed a "great" call and wrote on X: "Appreciate Trump leadership and close coordination with Allies. The ball is now in Putin's court." Merz said the talks had been "really constructive" and the leaders had "wished President Trump all the best" with the meeting. "There is hope for movement, there is hope for peace in Ukraine." The Russian foreign ministry had earlier branded the frantic round of diplomacy "politically and practically insignificant" and an attempt at "sabotaging" US and Russian efforts to end the conflict. Despite the upbeat comments, Russia's offensive in eastern Ukraine was gaining speed and seizing ground on Wednesday. With the world's eyes on the looming Alaska summit, Russia has made rapid advances this week in a narrow but important section of the front line in Ukraine. The AFP data analysis showed that the Russian army took or claimed 110 square kilometres on August 12 compared to the previous day. It was the most since late May 2024. In recent months, Moscow has typically taken five or six days to progress at such a pace, although Russian advances have accelerated in recent weeks. The head of the Donetsk region on Wednesday ordered civilians with children to evacuate from towns and villages under threat. Ukrainian soldiers in Kramatorsk, an eastern city about 20 kilometres from the front, said they had low expectations for Trump's meeting with Putin. Artem, a 30-year-old serviceman, said the war would likely continue for "a long time". "Putin is massing an army, his army is growing, he is stockpiling weapons, he is pulling the wool over our eyes." (AFP)
