शंघाई सहयोग संगठन (SCO): यूरेशियाई कनेक्टिविटी, आतंकवाद पर दोहरा रवैया और आंतरिक मतभेद

[विशेष कूटनीतिक एवं भू-राजनीतिक विश्लेषण]

यूरेशिया के 60% भूभाग वाले एससीओ में आतंकवाद पर दोहरे मापदंड और चाबहार-INSTC बनाम चीनी बीआरआई गलियारे को लेकर अंदरूनी मतभेद गहरा गए हैं।

Dateline: Eurasian Diplomatic Corridors (Astana, Tashkent, New Delhi) — The Council of Heads of State of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) continues to operate as an arena of geopolitical contradictions. Encompassing nuclear-armed powers, resource-rich Central Asian republics, and strategic West Asian states, the SCO spans over 60% of the Eurasian landmass and nearly half of humanity. Yet beneath declarations of regional solidarity lies a complex web of conflicting ambitions and mutual mistrust.

                         THE SCO INTERSECTION
                                  │
    ┌─────────────────────────────┼─────────────────────────────┐
    ▼                             ▼                             ▼
REGIONAL CONNECTIVITY      COUNTER-TERRORISM           MONETARY CLEARING
• INSTC (North-South)      • RATS Framework            • Rupee-Ruble-Rial trade
• BRI (China-centric)      • Double standards dispute  • Clearing via local banks
• Chabahar Port linkage    • Cross-border state proxy  • Avoiding SWIFT sanctions

Counter-Terrorism Credibility: The RATS Framework

The definitive test within the SCO focuses on the regional counter-terrorism architecture coordinated through the Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure (RATS) in Tashkent. Despite ritualistic pledges against the "three evils" of terrorism, separatism, and religious extremism, member states remain sharply divided.

India has persistently condemned diplomatic double standards where member states extend shielding cover to internationally proscribed terrorist organizations or utilize cross-border proxy warfare as instruments of state policy. This selective enforcement fundamentally undermines the SCO's stature as a credible Eurasian security guarantor.

Clashing Connectivity Paradigms: INSTC vs. BRI

Infrastructure connectivity forms an equally contentious geopolitical battleground:

• The Chinese Corridor Model: Focuses on routing Central Asian natural gas and mineral resources directly toward its eastern seaboard, locking regional economies into dependence on Beijing.
• The Counter-Balancing Architecture: India, Russia, and Central Asian partners champion the International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC) and the strategic expansion of Iran's Chabahar Port. This corridor links the Indian Ocean to the Caspian Basin, bypassing Pakistan and establishing an independent, non-aligned commercial highway.

Wary of substituting historic security reliance on Moscow for total economic hegemony by Beijing, Central Asian republics continue to pursue multi-vector foreign policies, engaging India, the European Union, and the United States as vital counterweights.