Interaction of SCO Member States: The Case of the Afghan Problem

Li Ziman Postgraduate student; Department of Public Policy and History of State and Law; Peoples' Friendship University of Russia named after Patrice Lumumba 10 Miklukho-Maklaya str., Moscow, 117198, Russia 949124928@qq.com Other publications by this author

Introduction

The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) is a regional multilateral consultative mechanism established in April 1996 as the Shanghai Five format, and transformed into a full–fledged organization in 2001. The principles of mutual trust, equality, consultation, respect for cultural diversity and striving for collective development are implemented within the association. The SCO's foreign policy is based on the principles of non-alignment and non-hostility to other states and regions.

Over more than two decades of evolution, the organization has brought together 10 full members, 2 observer States and 14 dialogue partners, making it one of the most significant interstate cooperation institutions in the Eurasian space.

Afghanistan is located at a strategically important intersection point of East, South and Central Asia, as well as the Middle East, occupying a central place in the region of the SCO member states' presence. In an effort to help resolve the Afghan conflict, China has sent, according to Sun Chuangzhi, "significant diplomatic resources, including appointing four special representatives and conducting more than ten rounds of negotiations" ^{[8, pp. 34-43]}.

Based on this, Russia has also launched an initiative to establish contacts with various Afghan political groups and has created a mechanism for the "Moscow Format of Consultations on Afghanistan," which covers 10 countries in the region. As V.A. Kravchenko points out, Moscow was thus "trying to build a new format for resolving the Afghan issue with the participation of neighboring states" ^{[3, pp. 45-53]}.

Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Iran, Tajikistan and India also have difficult relations with various political structures in Afghanistan, and the interests of each of these countries have their own specifics and may differ.

The interaction of the SCO member states is not unambiguous and ranges from formal to strategic, which is determined by differences in identities and national interests. First, the SCO membership differs in political systems, levels of influence, and foreign policy orientations, which complicates communication between them. A similar situation is typical for the Afghan issue, especially after the expansion of the SCO, the withdrawal of American troops in 2021, as well as the transformation of the external and internal political situation in Afghanistan. Secondly, despite the common desire to ensure security and economic cooperation, the interests and positions of individual Member States vary.

From a theoretical point of view, the interaction between international actors is a central subject of analysis in the framework of international relations. This paper attempts to examine the internal determinants of such interaction based on a relational approach, which allows us to offer a fresh perspective on the reform and further development of the SCO.

In international practice, the interaction of States is a key element in the formation of sustainable regional organizations. Cooperation between major Powers within integration structures can have both a stabilizing effect on the development of these organizations and a destructive one, depending on the nature of interstate relations. At the same time, constructive interaction strengthens institutions, while rivalry and conflict lead to their weakening.

The SCO is a regional organization that "surrounds" Afghanistan, and its member states are closely linked to the Afghan problem, forming a complex interaction scheme that can serve as a typical example of interaction between member states.

The Afghan problem is considered through several conceptual positions.

First, the "expansionist view" suggests that ensuring stability in Afghanistan, creating conditions for regional development, and protecting security interests are important reasons for states' participation in the SCO. As emphasized by I.E. Fedorova, the countries bordering Afghanistan, includingPakistan, Iran and the Central Asian states are particularly vulnerable to challenges emanating from its territory, and "one of the reasons for Iran's accession to the SCO was the stabilization of the situation in Afghanistan" ^{[10, pp. 137-141]}.

Secondly, the "view on the Community of the Common Destiny of Mankind" reflects the view that peace and development in Afghanistan will allow it to become the central link of the SCO, contributing to strengthening regional stability and the authority of the organization in the international arena. As noted by Xiaoding Ch. and Penfei Ya., Afghanistan can "strengthen the SCO's structural influence in the regional security architecture" ^{[9, pp. 41-52]}.

Thirdly, the "look at the geopolitical game" emphasizes that the common geographical neighborhood with Afghanistan, along with demographic and religious ties, makes the Afghan problem extremely important for the political security and economic interests of the member States. According to the conclusions of S.V. Chernyaeva and E.V. Zhuravleva, "the Afghan factor has a systemic impact on the geopolitical calculations of the SCO member states" ^{[13, pp. 535-544]}.

Fourthly, from the "point of view of the public good," the SCO member states provide Afghanistan with various types of public resources. Russia and other countries support energy projects, China supports infrastructure projects, and Central Asia supports security. As noted by E.T. Mehdiyev and S.D. Sodikov, "provision of public goods in Afghanistan has become the subject of interregional cooperation" ^{[5, pp. 69-75]}.

Fifth, "from the point of view of national interests," it is emphasized that the difference in goals and approaches of the member States limits the collective potential of the organization. In this case, the Afghan problem becomes fragmented. Yang Lei emphasizes that "if there are differences in interests and strategies, individual member countries may be allowed to interact with the organization as a matter of priority" ^{[15, pp. 24-31]}.

This article examines the problems and development of cooperation between the Member States on the Afghan issue from a relational point of view and taking into account the available results.

Theoretical analysis of relationism

Relationism considers the international system as a complex set of relations that are key factors of interaction between actors. In this approach, special attention is paid to how the internal characteristics of the interaction are determined by the identity and interests of the parties. Identity and interests play an important role in the formation of relational intimacy and, as E.N. Grachikov emphasizes, have a "profound influence on the nature of relational interaction" ^{[2, pp. 191-197]}.

Identification factors of relational interaction

Identifying the factors of relational interaction, it is necessary to focus on a number of aspects.

First, identity and relational interaction, in this aspect, the identity of actors is formed on the basis of social interactions, and is also determined by their position in the network of relationships. Within such a network, the role, behavior, and significance of a subject depend on its "nodal position," which determines, according to Qin Yaqing, "social relevance and access to benefits in international processes" ^{[12, pp. 186-196]}. A shared identity reduces the risk of disruptive interactions and promotes the formation of stable patterns. In the field of international cooperation, identity, as a key element, "ensures the reduction of negative impacts and promotes the deepening of cooperation" ^{[12, pp. 188-193]}.

Secondly, there is the dilemma of "situational determinism" of identity, due to the fact that the identities of subjects can be activated in different ways depending on the context, which leads to variability in behavior and emotional response. As F. emphasizes. Depelto, "in the same context, the simultaneous manifestation of several identities forming different levels of engagement is possible" ^{[17, pp. 165-174]}. Changes in the environment lead to shifts in the self–identification of actors, which, in turn, changes their interests and affects the vector of cooperation - towards either strengthening or destruction. A striking example is China's multilateral initiatives – "multilateral regionalism" within the SCO and the global "One Belt, One Road" project, implemented in different contexts.

The third aspect is the rethinking of processes and identity, since identity is not static, it is in dynamic interaction with the external relational environment. According to Qin Yaqing, relationism emphasizes "the procedural nature of interactions and considers relationship transformations as the main mechanism of identity formation" ^{[12, pp. 192-196]}. This approach is especially relevant in the analysis of globalization and interdependence – changes in the environment lead to the transformation of models of interaction and redefinition of identities. At the same time, the internal dynamics of interactions is of paramount importance in the process of relational identity evolution.

Interest-oriented relational interaction factors

The factors under study are determined by a number of circumstances.

The borrowing between the actors is based on common interests, and the needs determined by these interests. This is an important factor in the formation of cooperation. Relationism recognizes the rationality and legitimacy of striving to realize one's own interests. As Berensketter emphasizes, "mutually beneficial relations between actors are formed on the basis of the conjugacy of their interests" ^{[16, pp. 652-658]}. Friendly relations act not only in the personal, but also in the political plane – they are considered as a form of political investment, contributing to the accumulation of "soft power". Cooperation within the framework of such relations brings not only material, but also symbolic benefits, including increased reputation. Thus, common interests play the role of a catalyst for relational interaction.

In this interaction, the dilemma of a "cognitive conflict" of interests arises, this is due to the fact that rationalism emphasizes that for successful interaction, the interests of the parties must coincide. If the actors adhere to the concept of a "zero-sum game" and see the partner exclusively as a competitor, there may be a conflict of ideas that prevents the implementation of joint initiatives. As K. Kavalski explains, "a cognitive conflict of interest arises where actors adhere to antagonistic perceptions and do not seek to synchronize goals" ^{[18, pp. 105-113]}. Territorial disputes often become an illustration of such situations – as long as the parties remain within the framework of absolute gain or loss, compromise is impossible. However, reassessing the situation and focusing on achieving mutual benefits can change the trajectory of interaction.

Another factor is the rethinking of processes and interests. Relationships, as emphasized by relationism, are at the center of social knowledge, and ideas are formed in the course of dynamic practices. As Kavalski points out, "the perception of interests changes with the transformation of the relational context" ^{[18, pp. 111-115]}. Subjects become aware of themselves and their goals through interaction with others, while changing the environment requires a revision of the focus of interests. In the context of dynamic network structures, such a reorientation becomes inevitable and necessary to maintain sustainable forms of cooperation.

Thus, identity and interests are key factors in the process of relational interaction between actors, and identity and common interests are important driving forces of interaction.

The dilemma of "situational determinism" of identity and the dilemma of "cognitive conflict" of interests significantly affect the nature of interaction between states.

Cooperation of the SCO member states on the Afghan issue

From the SCO's point of view, the Afghan problem is of exceptional importance, due to the fact that Afghanistan borders six countries, of which five – China, Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Iran and Tajikistan – are members of the organization. Russia and India have traditionally maintained steady contacts with Kabul, while Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Belarus are also affected by instability in the region.

The complexity of the Afghan issue is determined by many factors – the geopolitical rivalry of major powers, religious differences, the fight against terrorism, migration flows and drug trafficking. In this regard, the identity and interests of the Member States form a kind of network structure, within which the processes of cooperation, hedging and rethinking develop.

Identification factors of interaction between Member States

Identity facilitates cooperation, as the common identity of the Member States has a positive political impact, reducing the cost of consultations and simplifying communication. Thanks to the efforts of the SCO, an effective mechanism for dialogue with the Afghan side has been created. As stipulated in the Protocol between the SCO and the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan on the Establishment of the SCO–Afghanistan Contact Group (2005), the group includes permanent representatives of the member countries to the Secretariat, staff of the Secretariat itself, as well as Afghan diplomats in China. According to the document, "members of the Contact Group have the opportunity to visit Afghanistan for consultations with relevant ministries." Thanks to this, a collective identity is being formed within the SCO, and countries with historical tensions, such as India and Pakistan, can interact in a constructive format.

The "situational determinism" of identity is manifested in the identification processes. After the withdrawal of US troops in 2021, the political situation in Afghanistan changed radically – power passed to the Taliban, and the influence of the former government and Washington significantly weakened. This led to a change in the positions of countries that had previously focused on cooperation with the United States or the Ghani government. India is a prime example. According to Ruttig, during the period of the American presenceIndia has provided about $3 billion in aid to Afghanistan, implementing over 400 projects. However, in March 2021, China, Russia and Pakistan were invited to an international conference in Moscow, while India remained outside the participation ^[20].

It is worth noting the impact of identity restructuring on cooperation. Pakistan and Iran, being Afghanistan's neighbors and active participants in the regional process, have played an important role in changing the SCO's identity. Their accession to the organization has made the SCO the largest multilateral consultative mechanism, including most of the countries with a direct border with Afghanistan. This highlights both the importance of the Afghan issue and the need for coordination among Member States.

The changes inside Afghanistan have a direct impact on the transformation of Member States' approaches to the security of their borders. In order to more effectively protect the common interests of the SCO, further deepening of cooperation within the framework of the Afghan track is necessary. The Bishkek Declaration of 2019 explicitly points to the special role of the Afghan issue, proclaiming that "an early resolution of the Afghan issue is one of the important factors in maintaining and strengthening security and stability in the SCO space" ^{[6, pp. 15-19]}. As N. Modi emphasizes in a joint declaration with K.K. Tokayev and S. Jinping, "this statement consolidated a new institutional position in relation to Afghanistan and formed the basis for practical steps of the SCO in this direction" ^{[6, pp. 17-20]}.

Interest-oriented factors of interaction between Member States

The first thing that research attention should be paid to is that cooperation is determined by the presence of common interests. In the context of ensuring security, such interests include the stabilization of the situation in Afghanistan, the fight against terrorism, and countering drug trafficking. The SCO member states have stepped up the exchange of intelligence information, provide long-term assistance to Afghan security structures, and promote training in drug control, customs administration, and law enforcement. As Yavnova I.I. and Zalilova L.R. point out, "cooperation with Afghanistan in the fight against drug trafficking has become a stable direction of SCO policy" ^{[14, pp. 63-65]}.

Among the factors, it is necessary to consider the "conflict of perceptions", which prevents the deepening of cooperation. Geopolitical, religious, and historical contradictions, especially between India and Pakistan, create a state of cognitive tension that prevents constructive dialogue. According to Omidi and Nulkar-Oak, India sought to "oust Pakistan from the strategic space of Afghanistan," and Pakistan, in turn, tried to avoid "encirclement by India" ^{[19, pp. 26-34]}. Under the rule of Hamid Karzai, Afghanistan's foreign policy was oriented towards India, which caused concern in Islamabad. Despite the existence of the Afghanistan Contact Group format, practical cooperation between the two countries within the SCO remains limited, with Pakistan in some cases explicitly refusing India's invitation.

The perestroika of countries' interests has its impact. Changes in the regional configuration of power have led to a revision of the structure of interests in relation to Afghanistan. The new situation required the SCO member states to adapt to the changed conditions, including a review of strategies in dealing with key actors inside Afghanistan.

Iran is a special case. His interests in Afghanistan remained fluid and ambiguous. As V.A. Khomenko notes, at an early stage the Taliban were "the main opponent of Iran," and the Shiite leadership of the country supported the Northern Alliance, which opposed the Taliban ^{[11, pp. 177-180]}. At the same time, using a strategic partnership with the United States, Tehran helped overthrow the Taliban in 2001. However, with the deterioration of US-Iranian relations after the start of the Iranian nuclear program in 2003, the vector of interests changed, and limited forms of interaction with the Taliban began.

After the withdrawal of American troops, the Taliban became key political actors in Afghanistan. In response, Iran has revised its approaches and intensified contacts, focusing on securing the western border and stabilizing the situation in neighboring areas. In 2022, Iran joined the SCO, which, according to Khomenko, "created a platform for an official dialogue with the Taliban in a multilateral format" ^{[11, pp. 181-186]}. This made it possible to use the SCO mechanism to deter radical elements and promote collective solutions to resolve the situation in Afghanistan.

SCO's assistance in building a Community of common destiny for humanity

The SCO was established more than two decades ago under the conditions of the post-cold war, with the aim of maintaining regional peace and stabilizing the security system in Central Asia. Since its establishment, the organization has been successfully functioning as a multilateral platform that facilitates coordination of efforts to address current challenges. Currently, in the context of rapid changes in the international political order, the SCO's activities are taking on a new meaning as a model for building a Community of common destiny for humanity.

The key challenge for the SCO is the need for effective coordination between member States and increased organizational cohesion. In this context, cooperation on the Afghan issue opens up new approaches and management ideas.

Studying the interaction of the member states on Afghanistan allows us to identify two determining factors - identity and interests, which, as E.N. Grachikov emphasizes, "form relational patterns of sustainable cooperation" ^{[2, pp. 193-198]}. In the context of ongoing uncertainty in Afghanistan, the SCO continues to play a constructive role due to its institutional capabilities.

First, it is necessary to form a common identity and support the common interests of the Member States, strengthening their cooperation in issues of Afghan settlement, maintaining peace and regional security. The SCO–Afghanistan Contact Group meets regularly to discuss the reconstruction of the country, the fight against terrorism and drug trafficking, as well as to coordinate humanitarian assistance.

The second thing to pay attention to is that the Contact Group performs an important function in overcoming difficulties in cooperation between the SCO countries and Afghanistan. Its activities contribute to maintaining order, defensive consolidation and building trust between the parties. A multilateral approach in the format of regular meetings, as O.L. Chulanova points out, "strengthens solidarity and promotes mutual trust" ^{[31, pp. 72-78]}.

Efforts should be focused on restoring cooperation with Afghanistan, with an emphasis on practical cooperation. It is important to use the resources and capabilities of all SCO members to monitor the situation in the region. Consultations are needed on the formation of an inclusive Government in Afghanistan, the abandonment of criminal practices, including drug trafficking, and the deterrence of radical elements. Such measures will prevent the destabilization of the situation.

Conclusion

Based on a relational approach, this paper analyzes the interaction of the SCO member states on the Afghan problem. During the analysis, three key functions of relational factors were identified – driving, hedging and reforming. Identity and interests act as the main regulators of relational interaction, influencing the nature and depth of cooperation between countries.

The Afghan problem remains an important area of international cooperation for the SCO. As E.N. Grachikov emphasizes, "the identity and interests of the member states form stable models of interaction that determine the strategy and tactics of relations within the organization" ^{[2, pp. 194-197]}. The interaction of the SCO member states on the Afghan issue is influenced by these factors and requires a systematic approach to their consideration.

It is necessary to strengthen cooperation based on a common identity, which will ensure greater influence on resolving the Afghan problem. This is possible through regular operation.The SCO–Afghanistan Contact Group, contributing to the maintenance of regional peace and security.

Emotional and sovereign dilemmas must be overcome through the development of bilateral and "mini-multilateral" formats within the SCO. This approach will strengthen solidarity and mutual trust, as well as demonstrate the real application of the principle of multilateralism in international practice.

The members of the organization need to actively respond to changes in the identity and interests of the Member States. This requires the use of the SCO's combined capabilities, an accurate assessment of the situation in the region and the development of effective solutions aimed at promoting a peaceful settlement of the Afghan problem. Such a proactive approach will help strengthen the SCO's role in international politics and strengthen its position as a platform for collective management of regional security.