SCO Holds War Games in Tajikistan Horia BARBULESCU
April 21, 2009
Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan participated in a military drill organized by the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. The simulation consisted in the saving of hostages kidnapped by afghan terrorist in a chemical factory. Observers from India, Pakistan and Iran were also present at the site. Uzbekistan was absent from this drill, saying its special services were occupied with other, pre-planned events. The drill takes place as Russian President Dmitri Medvedev suggested that SCO states should play a larger role in international efforts to bring peace to Afghanistan (Reuters, Moscow News, BBC).
The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) is often associated with an alternative model (a rival one, in some approaches) to NATO, in the region where the member states are situated. Nevertheless, the differences are significant. The major one is the classical conceptual distinction between an alliance – NATO – and a security organization. Another difference – derived from the first one – is suggested by this military drill. Unlike the NATO simulations, the scale of this one is extremely small, its image and what it could indicate is of greater interest for the SCO’s members. Unlike the NATO model, these war games were extremely short. If we take a look at the plans for the NATO drill in Georgia that will take place during a period of almost a month – 6th of May-1st of June, the difference is contrasting.
For Russia, this drill is a good opportunity to show that it is concerned with the problem of terrorism and that it is not inactive while the USA is making efforts in Afghanistan. Notwithstanding, Russia’s interest seem to be rather opposed to this attitude of support suggested by President Medvedev. On the one hand, he wants to suggest that he offers everything he can to support the stabilization of Afghanistan, on the other he “stimulates” Kyrgyzstan to evacuate the American base in Manas. For China, the importance of these war games is marginal: it is related to the cohesion of the SCO and to one of the main purposes of the latter: combating terrorism and separatism. In this regard, the SCO contains a Regional Counter-Terrorism Structure. Nevertheless, if for NATO the concept of “security” is consistent with what is called the “widening” and “deepening” of security, for the SCO security is a much narrower domain, refering strictly to counter-terrorism and operations against separatism.
All the SCO member states have problems regarding terrorism and separatism, but these are not related only to the domestic environment but also to the regional and global developments. This fact seems to be lost to the member states. They created the SCO in order to support the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity, orienting themselves inwards. Thus, the shaky edifice of the SCO could shatter at anytime if disagreements should arise between the two major players of the organization – China and Russia. On the other hand, NATO has remained standing when the European states have deeply opposed to the American strategy of countering terrorism.
Regarding the Central-Asian states in the region, one can say that some clear orientations and alignments are outlining. Uzbekistan was the little-big absent of this event. Its attitude is not surprising if we take into consideration its recent history of chilly relations it had with the SCO. It might become the new partner of USA and NATO in Central Asia. On the other hand, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan have always tried to counterbalance the other “stans” in the region. We notice it right now in what we might call hydro-politics: the opposition towards the construction by Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan of two dams on rivers that provide much of Uzbekistan’s and Turkmenistan’s water.
In conclusion, from the perspective of these war games, about the SCO attitude towards international terrorism and towards NATO, Russia and the other participants are successfully “simulating” the attitude of support.
