SCO steps out of Central Asia
- Thread starter Riseup
- Start date
Mo12
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 8, 2011
- Messages
- 2,643
- Reaction score
- -15
Like I said only tri nation of china India Russia have huge land space, economy and military equipments that only the west can think about.
These 3 nations could not only buy out Europe, but take western jobs and dominate them in all sense.
These 3 nations could not only buy out Europe, but take western jobs and dominate them in all sense.
Chinese-Dragon
RETIRED TTA
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2010
- Messages
- 33,932
- Reaction score
- 52
- Country
- Location
That will take quite a while to achieve.
The good news, is that all three countries seem to be on an upwards trajectory.
Hulk
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2009
- Messages
- 7,582
- Reaction score
- -18
- Country
- Location
Very little hope from SCO, China has to understand the strength of unity. The more people are united the more strong the organization, it will bear fruit only when all members think that they have leave the differences for common goal.
King123
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- May 10, 2011
- Messages
- 565
- Reaction score
- 0
Yes, Agree. But I don't think these 3 will take on western world at least not India. India having good relations with most of the western countries. Even Russia is our very good friend. Also, Japan, S.K., Asean. I don't think India will take any side.
Paan Singh
BANNED
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2010
- Messages
- 7,636
- Reaction score
- 0
yawn..............wait guys if usa goes through afghanistan....
roadrunner
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2007
- Messages
- 5,696
- Reaction score
- 0
its nothing like saying that
roadrunner
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2007
- Messages
- 5,696
- Reaction score
- 0
You'll find all those 3 arent going to continue growing the way they are now, more so India. They won't be able to buy out Europe but there will be a balance of power and Asia will probably have little western military influence.
Riseup
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- May 30, 2011
- Messages
- 155
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Following Debate going on China daily....
Sun Zhuangzhi and Zhang Ning
Mutual dependence key to better future
Economic cooperation has laid a solid foundation for multilateral cooperation among member countries of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). In the past decade, the SCO has made great progress in economic cooperation. China's trade with other SCO member countries (Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan) reached $86.8 billion last year, an increase of more than 7.2 times from 2001, and despite the global financial crisis it was $83.96 billion in 2009.
All SCO member states value the importance of mutual economic cooperation but face some concrete problems in strengthening it further.
First, multilateral economic cooperation requires unanimous agreement among all sides on cooperation rules so that they can see the benefits and overcome systematical and legal obstacles. But there are great differences on economic structure and legal terms and even greater differences in economic size among the SCO member states, all of which are undergoing economic and social transformation.
Second, as the dual core of the SCO, China and Russia have different expectations of the organization. As a fast-growing economic power, China is more interested in promoting economic cooperation. But for Russia, security is the main priority and it wishes the organization to take a geopolitical rival's role against NATO and the United States.
Third, almost all the SCO member states are facing a dearth of funds, because projects agreed on so far through multilateral trade talks need about $10 billion, which is difficult to come by.
Fourth, opinions on market issues differ because member states with a relatively developed economy say it is crucial to push forward trade and investment liberalization, while others prefer economic and technical collaboration to increase competitiveness but hesitate to open their markets in order to protect their industries.
Fifth, the SCO allows bilateral and multilateral talks both between member states for achieving cooperation but lacks rules to specify which of the two should become the norm and when. Bilateral negotiations are more conducive to reaching an agreement but multilateral talks can better ensure common prosperity and the integrity of the SCO.
Sixth, further consultation is needed on issues such as energy, for member states' interests are different: China buys more energy resources, Russia focuses on pipeline control, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan concentrate on strengthening energy exploration, exploitation and exports, and Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan are keen on hydropower and electricity grid construction.
Besides taking measures to deal with the above factors, more efforts should be made to raise the level of economic interdependence within the SCO.
So far, efforts to facilitate trade and investment have been hindered by a variety of barriers like tariffs, a license-granting mechanism, foreign exchange control and other laws and regulations. Member states are endeavoring to reach a protocol to encourage and mutually protect investments from each other. Work in other areas such as facilitating legal systems, devising beneficial tariffs, coordination of highway networks and a consultation mechanism on possible product safety problems are being undertaken, too.
Multilateral economic and technical cooperation is gradually unfolding with efforts being made to prioritize energy and transportation projects and telecommunications networks.
Financial cooperation has deepened as all the member states gear up to establish a special financial account for the organization. The feasibility of an SCO development bank is under consideration, too. And efforts are being made to broaden existing cooperation mechanisms like joint ventures on wind and solar energy, and industrialization of scientific and technological achievements, and starting new cooperation frameworks for border trade in agricultural products and food safety.
The authors are researchers at SCO Research Center, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.
Sun Zhuangzhi and Zhang Ning
Mutual dependence key to better future
Economic cooperation has laid a solid foundation for multilateral cooperation among member countries of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). In the past decade, the SCO has made great progress in economic cooperation. China's trade with other SCO member countries (Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan) reached $86.8 billion last year, an increase of more than 7.2 times from 2001, and despite the global financial crisis it was $83.96 billion in 2009.
All SCO member states value the importance of mutual economic cooperation but face some concrete problems in strengthening it further.
First, multilateral economic cooperation requires unanimous agreement among all sides on cooperation rules so that they can see the benefits and overcome systematical and legal obstacles. But there are great differences on economic structure and legal terms and even greater differences in economic size among the SCO member states, all of which are undergoing economic and social transformation.
Second, as the dual core of the SCO, China and Russia have different expectations of the organization. As a fast-growing economic power, China is more interested in promoting economic cooperation. But for Russia, security is the main priority and it wishes the organization to take a geopolitical rival's role against NATO and the United States.
Third, almost all the SCO member states are facing a dearth of funds, because projects agreed on so far through multilateral trade talks need about $10 billion, which is difficult to come by.
Fourth, opinions on market issues differ because member states with a relatively developed economy say it is crucial to push forward trade and investment liberalization, while others prefer economic and technical collaboration to increase competitiveness but hesitate to open their markets in order to protect their industries.
Fifth, the SCO allows bilateral and multilateral talks both between member states for achieving cooperation but lacks rules to specify which of the two should become the norm and when. Bilateral negotiations are more conducive to reaching an agreement but multilateral talks can better ensure common prosperity and the integrity of the SCO.
Sixth, further consultation is needed on issues such as energy, for member states' interests are different: China buys more energy resources, Russia focuses on pipeline control, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan concentrate on strengthening energy exploration, exploitation and exports, and Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan are keen on hydropower and electricity grid construction.
Besides taking measures to deal with the above factors, more efforts should be made to raise the level of economic interdependence within the SCO.
So far, efforts to facilitate trade and investment have been hindered by a variety of barriers like tariffs, a license-granting mechanism, foreign exchange control and other laws and regulations. Member states are endeavoring to reach a protocol to encourage and mutually protect investments from each other. Work in other areas such as facilitating legal systems, devising beneficial tariffs, coordination of highway networks and a consultation mechanism on possible product safety problems are being undertaken, too.
Multilateral economic and technical cooperation is gradually unfolding with efforts being made to prioritize energy and transportation projects and telecommunications networks.
Financial cooperation has deepened as all the member states gear up to establish a special financial account for the organization. The feasibility of an SCO development bank is under consideration, too. And efforts are being made to broaden existing cooperation mechanisms like joint ventures on wind and solar energy, and industrialization of scientific and technological achievements, and starting new cooperation frameworks for border trade in agricultural products and food safety.
The authors are researchers at SCO Research Center, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.
Riseup
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- May 30, 2011
- Messages
- 155
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Xu Xiaotian
Internal cooperation most important
The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) has been rather conservative in expanding its area of influence. By not admitting even a single new member in its 10-year history it has, to some extent, caused misunderstanding among some countries.
The SCO has focused efforts on improving coordination and cooperation among member states, and that is exactly what it should continue doing in the short term. It should improve the existing mechanisms to enhance mutual trust among its decade-old members.
The six-member SCO can accept new members under the new situation, though, for several countries in the region are eager to improve their economy and security by cooperating with it. But the expansion should not be very fast. Accepting too many new members in a short time could create unforeseen problems, and even ruin the existing cooperation mechanism in the long run.
That's why the SCO should increase its influence by strengthening internal cooperation rather than rapid expansion. It has to focus on beefing up the existing mechanism and using it in innovative ways. The SCO member states have to enhance mutual trust to better resolve their common security issues, keep Central Asia as their core area of interest and concentrate on combating terrorism, separatism and extremism, as well as drug trafficking.
Maintaining its current membership status, the SCO could hold a forum on Eurasian economic cooperation and development with observer states, dialogue partners and other countries. The topics could range from regional cooperation to energy transfer and infrastructure construction. That would give non-member states the flexibility to join only some of the programs instead of becoming full-fledged members. For example, Turkmenistan, a guest attendant, could stay out of the SCO but join its gas cooperation program.
The organization can be expanded in the long run, but only gradually. Given the situation in Afghanistan, security in the region will face greater challenges from terrorism and separatism, and the existing gaps among different countries could be widened.
Under such conditions, the SCO has to strike at the root of the problem by helping Afghanistan in its reconstruction efforts. Only economic development can end terrorism in that country - though it can also stimulate cooperation and healthy competition among the big powers in the region.
From the United States, the European Union and Russia to China and India, none of the powers are likely to forfeit their interests in the region. But none of them can play the dominant role, either. The SCO can offer all of them a platform for dialogue, which could be the gateway to competition and cooperation both. In fact, the region is in dire need of a mechanism that will prompt big powers to express their interests and prevent misunderstanding, and the SCO should take up the responsibility to build one.
Of course, SCO cooperation and expansion will not be without problems. The history of international organizations shows that more members often mean less common understanding. Therefore, the SCO should be aware of the possible decline in its efficiency level if more countries become its members. This could also distract the organization from the key issues in Central Asia.
Besides, the SCO mechanisms need to undergo reform to adapt to changing situations. The SCO is a regional organization with real cooperation in many areas. It is not a forum for only economic and security issues. Hence, it needs a whole set of mechanisms to ensure the smooth progress of all its programs. The organization also has to respect the multi-civilizational and multicultural character of the region, which is home to more than 300 ethnic groups and several sects of the world's three leading religions.
The past decade has seen the SCO transform from a talk-club into a formidable political force in Eurasia, while the Western world has realized its potential and power. The development of both internal and external cooperation helped it to acquire such importance. The next five to 10 years will thus be crucial for the SCO. But all the same, its member states are expected to make greater contributions to regional peace and stability through constant growth.
The author is a research scholar in Central Asia studies at the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations.
Internal cooperation most important
The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) has been rather conservative in expanding its area of influence. By not admitting even a single new member in its 10-year history it has, to some extent, caused misunderstanding among some countries.
The SCO has focused efforts on improving coordination and cooperation among member states, and that is exactly what it should continue doing in the short term. It should improve the existing mechanisms to enhance mutual trust among its decade-old members.
The six-member SCO can accept new members under the new situation, though, for several countries in the region are eager to improve their economy and security by cooperating with it. But the expansion should not be very fast. Accepting too many new members in a short time could create unforeseen problems, and even ruin the existing cooperation mechanism in the long run.
That's why the SCO should increase its influence by strengthening internal cooperation rather than rapid expansion. It has to focus on beefing up the existing mechanism and using it in innovative ways. The SCO member states have to enhance mutual trust to better resolve their common security issues, keep Central Asia as their core area of interest and concentrate on combating terrorism, separatism and extremism, as well as drug trafficking.
Maintaining its current membership status, the SCO could hold a forum on Eurasian economic cooperation and development with observer states, dialogue partners and other countries. The topics could range from regional cooperation to energy transfer and infrastructure construction. That would give non-member states the flexibility to join only some of the programs instead of becoming full-fledged members. For example, Turkmenistan, a guest attendant, could stay out of the SCO but join its gas cooperation program.
The organization can be expanded in the long run, but only gradually. Given the situation in Afghanistan, security in the region will face greater challenges from terrorism and separatism, and the existing gaps among different countries could be widened.
Under such conditions, the SCO has to strike at the root of the problem by helping Afghanistan in its reconstruction efforts. Only economic development can end terrorism in that country - though it can also stimulate cooperation and healthy competition among the big powers in the region.
From the United States, the European Union and Russia to China and India, none of the powers are likely to forfeit their interests in the region. But none of them can play the dominant role, either. The SCO can offer all of them a platform for dialogue, which could be the gateway to competition and cooperation both. In fact, the region is in dire need of a mechanism that will prompt big powers to express their interests and prevent misunderstanding, and the SCO should take up the responsibility to build one.
Of course, SCO cooperation and expansion will not be without problems. The history of international organizations shows that more members often mean less common understanding. Therefore, the SCO should be aware of the possible decline in its efficiency level if more countries become its members. This could also distract the organization from the key issues in Central Asia.
Besides, the SCO mechanisms need to undergo reform to adapt to changing situations. The SCO is a regional organization with real cooperation in many areas. It is not a forum for only economic and security issues. Hence, it needs a whole set of mechanisms to ensure the smooth progress of all its programs. The organization also has to respect the multi-civilizational and multicultural character of the region, which is home to more than 300 ethnic groups and several sects of the world's three leading religions.
The past decade has seen the SCO transform from a talk-club into a formidable political force in Eurasia, while the Western world has realized its potential and power. The development of both internal and external cooperation helped it to acquire such importance. The next five to 10 years will thus be crucial for the SCO. But all the same, its member states are expected to make greater contributions to regional peace and stability through constant growth.
The author is a research scholar in Central Asia studies at the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations.
Riseup
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- May 30, 2011
- Messages
- 155
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
By ¬Ivan Safranchuk
SCOpe for regional progress
On June 15 Astana hosted the 10th summit of the Shanghai Co-operation Organization. In 2001, Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan founded the organization. Five of them (excluding Uzbekistan) had been successfully co-operating in the demilitarization of their common boarders since 1996.
Since 2001, the SCO has not enlarged to include new full members. However India, Iran, Pakistan and Mongolia joined SCO as observers.
Two more countries Belarus and Sri Lanka chose another status: partners in dialogue. Afghanistan and Turkmenistan, while not having any official status in the organization, are regularly represented at SCO summits by their presidents as guests and enjoy access to SCO debates.
SCO territory extends from Eastern Europe through Russia and the Central Asian countries to the Persian Gulf, Indian Ocean and the Pacific. The most dynamic developing economies are represented in the SCO.
However, the SCO is not an elite closed club. The SCO has already demonstrated its ability to grow and engage new partners. By now it is clear that the organization is mature and capable enough of including new full members.
What keeps such different and distant countries together in the SCO? What makes not only traditional partners, but also competing and even rival nations, seek deeper engagement and co-operation within the SCO? Practical interests. This is correct, but not the full answer.
Besides practical interests, the SCO nations are united by values. The trick is that the set of values, summarized by as Shanghai spirit, is not taken as a value by many outsiders. SCO countries value pluralism in international affairs, non-interference in internal affairs, common interests, mutual trust, and equality.
The SCO is a consensus-based organization. This inevitably compromises the speed of its development. However in the longer run, this contributes to the quality of decision-making. The SCO is not in a rush to challenge the Western World Order. The SCO follows political and economic mega-trends. Political and economic centers of gravity are shifting to the East.
While the practical deeds of SCO are not always evident, this should not deceive observers. Maybe SCO countries are too focused on the process and procedures, on long discussions with comprehensive, but general wording. This makes the process of the SCO dull and even slow. However the result is not missing for the members. To say the least, Eurasia could look different by this time without the SCO.
The democratic rush did not miss the region, but its damage was limited. In three of the six full members of the SCO, the leaders have not changed in the last 20 years. But still, the SCO provides them with the necessary international framework to keep international stability and focus on economic development. This does not exclude political reforms, but makes them less painful and chaotic.
The outstanding peculiarity of SCO is that it is free of US influence. While US diplomacy has made several efforts to establish a relationship with the SCO, the question remains open. The SCO, like BRICS, represents the new trend in the world affairs. They unite countries willing to take responsibility for their political and economic matters. These nations do not demand American leadership, they demonstrate self-determination. Being open for co-operation, the SCO will finally forge some mode of interaction with the US. Probably the Afghanistan issue will drive the SCO and the US towards closer co-operation.
However, while the US is actively engaged with many SCO countries on the Afghan issue, co-operation with the SCO as such will heavily depend on the USs ability to accept the SCO values. The acceptance of the SCO spirit is unlikely to be a formal pre-condition for co-operation. Still, the SCO may hesitate to deepen co-operation without any regard to this set of values, which actually keeps members, observers and partners together.
SCOpe for regional progress
On June 15 Astana hosted the 10th summit of the Shanghai Co-operation Organization. In 2001, Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan founded the organization. Five of them (excluding Uzbekistan) had been successfully co-operating in the demilitarization of their common boarders since 1996.
Since 2001, the SCO has not enlarged to include new full members. However India, Iran, Pakistan and Mongolia joined SCO as observers.
Two more countries Belarus and Sri Lanka chose another status: partners in dialogue. Afghanistan and Turkmenistan, while not having any official status in the organization, are regularly represented at SCO summits by their presidents as guests and enjoy access to SCO debates.
SCO territory extends from Eastern Europe through Russia and the Central Asian countries to the Persian Gulf, Indian Ocean and the Pacific. The most dynamic developing economies are represented in the SCO.
However, the SCO is not an elite closed club. The SCO has already demonstrated its ability to grow and engage new partners. By now it is clear that the organization is mature and capable enough of including new full members.
What keeps such different and distant countries together in the SCO? What makes not only traditional partners, but also competing and even rival nations, seek deeper engagement and co-operation within the SCO? Practical interests. This is correct, but not the full answer.
Besides practical interests, the SCO nations are united by values. The trick is that the set of values, summarized by as Shanghai spirit, is not taken as a value by many outsiders. SCO countries value pluralism in international affairs, non-interference in internal affairs, common interests, mutual trust, and equality.
The SCO is a consensus-based organization. This inevitably compromises the speed of its development. However in the longer run, this contributes to the quality of decision-making. The SCO is not in a rush to challenge the Western World Order. The SCO follows political and economic mega-trends. Political and economic centers of gravity are shifting to the East.
While the practical deeds of SCO are not always evident, this should not deceive observers. Maybe SCO countries are too focused on the process and procedures, on long discussions with comprehensive, but general wording. This makes the process of the SCO dull and even slow. However the result is not missing for the members. To say the least, Eurasia could look different by this time without the SCO.
The democratic rush did not miss the region, but its damage was limited. In three of the six full members of the SCO, the leaders have not changed in the last 20 years. But still, the SCO provides them with the necessary international framework to keep international stability and focus on economic development. This does not exclude political reforms, but makes them less painful and chaotic.
The outstanding peculiarity of SCO is that it is free of US influence. While US diplomacy has made several efforts to establish a relationship with the SCO, the question remains open. The SCO, like BRICS, represents the new trend in the world affairs. They unite countries willing to take responsibility for their political and economic matters. These nations do not demand American leadership, they demonstrate self-determination. Being open for co-operation, the SCO will finally forge some mode of interaction with the US. Probably the Afghanistan issue will drive the SCO and the US towards closer co-operation.
However, while the US is actively engaged with many SCO countries on the Afghan issue, co-operation with the SCO as such will heavily depend on the USs ability to accept the SCO values. The acceptance of the SCO spirit is unlikely to be a formal pre-condition for co-operation. Still, the SCO may hesitate to deepen co-operation without any regard to this set of values, which actually keeps members, observers and partners together.
The_Assassin
FULL MEMBER
New Recruit
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2010
- Messages
- 72
- Reaction score
- 0
You guys are so naive. You always try to give much importance to Pak when Pak doesn't even matter. SCO is mainly about Astan and Pak is BS to say the least. Pak isn't even it's full member till now. SCO is about enchanced cooperation between China, Russia and Central Asian countries. Indeed it is about CAR region. And since many of the militants, be it the Chechanya millitants or the militants attacking China and CAR region resides in Pak border region, Pak is a resaon of worry for SCO. Pak has nothing much to offer to SCO other than keeping those militants in check. So basically it is the responsibility of Pak to keep it's territory free of militants attacking other countries, that is of some importance to SCO. As far as the Gwadar port is concerned, it is still a long way from becoming a outlet of CAR resources as was shown by the lack of enthusiasm for any commitment by the Chinese for further investment in it during the recent visit of Pak dignitaries.
If that happens then India would be preferred over Pak as India has more to offer. The ambitions of SCO is to becomne an important international organisation. And for that to happen India is a more rightful choice because of what it offers. A growing economy which is already world's 10 largest. A billion plus people in a democratic setup. A good international reputation and a voice which is heard in International circles. Moreover India's offers a great opportunity to invest billion of dollars in CAR region to develop their resources.
Pak has nothing to offer in financial terms. Even Gwadar is far from becoming a reality of being an outlet for CAR resources. The only thing that Pak can offer is a crackdown on terrorists which is it's responsibility anyways. So basically if SCO has to choose between India and Pak, Pak is not even in the race.
roadrunner
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2007
- Messages
- 5,696
- Reaction score
- 0
India has nothing to offer the main SCO countries on geostrategy and security.
The_Assassin
FULL MEMBER
New Recruit
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2010
- Messages
- 72
- Reaction score
- 0
Stability needs investment in the form of money. India has money. Pak has nothing other than checking the terrorists it harbours.
AMCA
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2010
- Messages
- 4,027
- Reaction score
- -21
- Country
- Location
Questioning Indian foreign policy?? India has everything to offer, from man to material...
Similar threads
