Published on Thought Criminal (http://www.thought-criminal.org)

CFR: The Shanghai Cooperation Organization

By MichaelVail
Created 04/08/2008 - 5:37pm

CFR
Posted: 2008-04-08 18:20:48 [1]

Introduction

The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) [2]–comprised of China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan–began in 2001 as a confidence-building mechanism to resolve border disputes. In recent years, it has risen in stature and scope, making headlines in 2005 when it issued a timeline for U.S. forces to pull out of Uzbekistan. Some experts say the organization has emerged as a powerful anti-U.S. bulwark in the region, while others say that because of inherent frictions between its two main members, Russia and China, the SCO is unlikely to pose a threat to U.S. interests in Central Asia. Meanwhile, talks are under way to amend the group’s mission statement to include, among other things, increased military cooperation, intelligence sharing, and counterterrorism drills. Iran is currently one of four observers to the SCO. It requested full membership in March, prompting speculation about the future direction of the SCO.

North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) [3], the organization is not a mutual defense pact. But the SCO has held a number of joint military exercises, most recently in 2007 near Russia’s Ural Mountains. Some experts cite a convergence of interests among members in recent years, including improved ties between China and Russia and the perceived threat posed by U.S. forces in the region. Others, including Lieutenant General William E. Odom [4], senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, say the SCO is being used by Russia and China as a vehicle to assert their influence in Central Asia and curb U.S. access to the region’s vast energy supplies.

Daniel Kimmage [5], an expert on Central Asia at Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. The SCO serves more as a forum to discuss issues of trade and security than a fully-developed counterpoint to NATO. “If you take NATO as your standard for organizational effectiveness,” Kimmage says, “the SCO is not even close yet.” Plus, unlike NATO, there are no mutual defense pledges. Also holding back the organization’s effectiveness are internal divisions and tensions between its member states, particularly China and Russia over issues of energy and the construction of ports in the region. Finally, multilateral institutions historically have a poor track record in the region. “Most countries do serious stuff bilaterally,” Kimmage says.

That said, most experts agree that the SCO’s influence in the region is on the rise. “I think the current fears [of Iran joining] are overblown but that doesn’t mean the capacity isn’t there,” says Martha Brill Olcott [6], a senior associate with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Others say a stronger SCO, particularly one with a military component and Iran as a full member, might serve as a check to U.S. interests and ambitions in the region. “An expanded SCO would control a large part of the world’s oil and gas reserves and nuclear arsenal,” David Wall, an expert on the region at the University of Cambridge’s East Asia Institute, told the Washington Times. “It would essentially be an OPEC with bombs.”

speculation that Iran might join the SCO [7]. In March 2008, Iran’s Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki officially announced Iran’s bid [8], saying Tehran had submitted a request for full membership to the SCO Secretariat. As of now, there is no clear mechanism in place to expand the SCO and offer Iran—or any other potential member—formal membership.

S. Frederick Starr [9], an expert on Central Asia at Johns Hopkins University. Another problem is “nobody will trust the Iranians,” Olcott says. “[SCO members] may be cutting off their noses to spite their faces,” she says. “If they want to score geopolitical verbal punching points, it's a good move. But if you want it to function better, you get nothing by bringing in Iran.” RFL/RL reports that China and Russia are wary [10] of making Iran a full member on the grounds that Iranian membership could give the SCO more of an anti-American tone.

more of a slogan than a policy [11],” said CFR Senior Fellow Ray Takeyh at a Middle East Policy Council Forum.

Is Iran’s desire to join the SCO aimed at the United States?

Perhaps, experts say. “Part of Iran’s foreign policy, at least in the mind of the Supreme Leader, is to be anti-U.S.,” Sazegara says. Further, Iran views the SCO as a potential guarantor of future security, experts say. Membership, for example, could offer Iran shelter from the international pressure put on Tehran to end its uranium-enrichment program. Similar protection was provided to Uzbekistan after the Andijan massacre in May 2005.

 

Source URL:
http://www.thought-criminal.org/article/node/1481

Links:
[1] http://www.cfr.org/publication/10883/shanghai_cooperation_organization.html
[2] http://www.sectsco.org/
[3] http://www.nato.int/
[4] http://www.hudson.org/learn/index.cfm?fuseaction=staff_bio&eid=OdomWill
[5] http://www.rferl.org/reports/authors/kimmage.asp
[6] http://www.carnegieendowment.org/experts/index.cfm?fa=expert_view&expert_id=23&prog=zru
[7] http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2006/06/1c64fc44-9081-49f0-8b69-2c144f52dcab.html
[8] http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/03/24/asia/AS-GEN-Tajikistan-Iran-SCO.php
[9] http://apps.sais-jhu.edu/faculty_bios/faculty_bio1.php?ID=69&SMSESSION=NO
[10] http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2008/03/bb23c86e-bb46-42bc-99ff-e3c6e4c5c7fc.html
[11] http://www.mepc.org/forums_chcs/41.asp