SCO’s counter-terrorism credibility crisis – Hindustan Times

The heinous terrorist attack in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, on April 22, 2025, which resulted in the death of 26 civilians, should have galvanised a swift and unequivocal regional response. Perpetrated by The Resistance Front (TRF), widely regarded as a proxy for the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), this attack represents a recurring threat architecture that India has long sought to dismantle. Yet, in the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), where counter-terrorism is enshrined as a core mission, the response has once again been tepid, muddled, and politically diluted. The SCO’s founding principles, rooted in combating the three evils of terrorism, extremism, and separatism, have rarely translated into meaningful action. While the organisation has expanded its geopolitical footprint by incorporating India and Pakistan, it has simultaneously inherited their intractable tensions. The result is an institutional deadlock in which political expediency and bilateral rivalries override collective security imperatives.

The Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure (RATS), once heralded as a mechanism for intelligence-sharing and joint operations, has proven ineffective in curbing State-sponsored terrorism. In the wake of the Pahalgam attack, RATS neither coordinated a high-level investigation nor issued a formal condemnation, underscoring its limited utility beyond symbolic gestures.

India accused that the Pahalgam attack was orchestrated with the support of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and executed by Pakistani nationals, reflecting a longstanding concern: that Islamabad continues to instrumentalise terrorism as a tool of foreign policy. The historical precedent, from the 2008 Mumbai attacks to Pulwama in 2019, reinforces the pattern of State complicity, masked by plausible deniability and shifting narratives. Pakistan’s public posturing as a victim of terrorism rings hollow when juxtaposed with credible evidence of its support for groups like LeT and Jaish-e-Mohammed.

Even more telling is the recent public admission by Pakistan’s defence minister of the country’s past support for terrorist organisations, an implicit acknowledgement of a state strategy that continues to haunt the region.

China’s role in this dysfunction is more insidious. As Pakistan’s principal strategic partner and benefactor of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), Beijing has consistently shielded Islamabad from international scrutiny. It has repeatedly blocked UN sanctions against known terrorists at Pakistan’s behest and has resisted any SCO initiative that could expose or isolate Pakistan. This selective engagement betrays the SCO’s counter-terrorism mandate and compromises its credibility. China’s emphasis on non-interference and economic connectivity cannot justify turning a blind eye to terrorism that destabilises the region and undermines regional trust.

While Russia has conveyed its understanding and support for India in the aftermath of the Pahalgam incident, it has not explicitly addressed or critiqued Pakistan’s involvement in the matter. However, it is imperative for Moscow, which is also a victim of terrorism, to take a stronger position within the SCO to tackle the threats of terrorism. The Central Asian republics, long wary of extremism spilling over from Afghanistan and Pakistan, are beginning to recognise that the SCO’s failure to address terrorism weakens their own security architecture. The emerging consensus in Central Asia increasingly aligns with India’s view: that terrorism cannot be categorised or relativised. Yet, absent decisive leadership from Moscow and Beijing, smaller member States remain constrained by the SCO’s structural inertia.

The Pahalgam attack must serve as a watershed moment. For the SCO to reclaim relevance and legitimacy, it must initiate urgent reforms. Member States implicated in harbouring or enabling terrorist infrastructure must face scrutiny, including RATS-led investigations and the possibility of sanctions or diplomatic isolation. While threats from ISIS and Afghan instability dominate RATS’ agenda, equal attention must be paid to terrorism originating from Pakistan. Ignoring this dimension perpetuates a regional blind spot. As principal stakeholders, Beijing and Moscow must choose between preserving short-term alliances and upholding the SCO’s founding values. Their credibility as regional powers depend on this choice. Aligning SCO’s counterterrorism architecture with global frameworks, such as the stalled UN Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism (CCIT), would amplify its legitimacy.

The SCO today stands at an inflection point between being a geopolitical talk shop and a credible regional security bloc. If it continues to subordinate counterterrorism to great-power politics and bilateral appeasement, it risks irrelevance. The Pahalgam attack has exposed not only the transnational nature of terrorism but also the paralysis of institutions tasked with combating it. India’s message is clear: counterterrorism cannot be selective, symbolic, or sacrificed for diplomacy. Unless China and Pakistan are held to the same standards as other member States, the SCO will remain a house divided, vulnerable to the very threats it was created to extinguish.

This article is authored by Pravesh Kumar Gupta, associate fellow (Eurasia), Vivekananda International Foundation, New Delhi.