Valdai Club

The idea of ​​creating a Eurasian security architecture has long been awaiting its implementation. Its various aspects are widely and thoroughly discussed in the expert community, at international forums, in the Collective Security Treaty Organisation, in the SCO and within the framework of the Conference on Interaction and Confidence-Building Measures in Asia, writes Rashid Alimov for the 21st Annual meeting of the Valdai Discussion Club.

The Second Minsk International Conference on Eurasian Security concluded its work in Belarus on November 1. In the context of growing geopolitical confrontation and armed conflict, when the world has entered an acute transition period that carries serious risks and dangers for stability on the planet, this idea is becoming more relevant than ever.

Russian President Vladimir Putin’s initiative to launch a process of broad discussion of a new system of bilateral and multilateral guarantees of collective security in Eurasia may ultimately lead to the creation of a comprehensive security structure that would meet the national interests of all or most countries of the Eurasian continent. On this difficult path, it would be useful to rely on the existing experience of treaties and organisations operating in the Eurasian space. The formation of an architecture of equal and indivisible security in Eurasia can be grounded in the experience of multilateral cooperation accumulated over almost a quarter of a century in the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation.

This can be supported by the fact that the SCO is the world's largest transregional international organisation for multilateral partnership, with the largest population and enormous economic potential - uniting 10 member states and 16 partners in the "Shanghai spirit", it connects vast geopolitical spaces that extend far beyond Eurasia. The geographic area of ​​the modern SCO extends from South and Southeast Asia to the Middle East and Europe. The SCO "family" includes two permanent members of the UN Security Council (China and Russia), four nuclear powers (India, China, Pakistan and Russia) and five states that have declared their territories free of nuclear weapons (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Mongolia), as well as one NATO member country (Turkey). All SCO member states aim to enhance the role of the Organisation in creating conditions for strengthening global peace, security and stability and consider attempts by individual countries or groups of countries to ensure their own security at the expense of the security of other states unacceptable. 

A broad discussion of a new security system in Eurasia can not only become a kind of incubator of ideas and create conditions for "growing sprouts", elements of a future structure, but also a demonstration of growing trust between its direct participants. In this regard, it is worth recalling the two historic agreements on military détente concluded in Shanghai and Moscow in 1996 and 1997, which laid the foundation for cooperation within the Shanghai Five (China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan), which demonstrated its effectiveness and grew into the creation of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation in 2001. I would like to note that the Agreements signed almost thirty years ago and the developed system of mutual trust measures have stood the test of strength over time with dignity and have largely contributed to the rapprochement of the signatory states. However, what is even more important is that close cooperation within the Shanghai Five, and later in the SCO, has changed the way of thinking of its participants from suspicious and confrontational to one that embraces partnership and friendship.

Despite the fact that from the first days of the SCO there has been Western rhetoric about its anti-NATO orientation, neither in the fundamental documents, nor in the structure, nor in the goals and objectives of the Organisation are there any indications of the formation of a military-political bloc. Bloc thinking is alien to the SCO member states. The very topic of turning the SCO into a military-political alliance has never been raised by anyone. Moreover, none of the participants are striving for this. At the same time, the topic of ensuring regional security, countering modern challenges and threats to security has been a priority for the Organisation from its first days.

In determining approaches to creating a security architecture in Eurasia, another important aspect of the SCO experience is of particular interest, in which security issues are considered in the broadest possible terms: from traditional military threats to non-traditional challenges to regional stability, from food and energy to information, biological and environmental security. Hence the corresponding preventive steps to counter them, some of which can be classified as innovative and valuable for the entire world community. In particular, this refers to the SCO Convention on Combating Terrorism (June 15, 2001 and June 16, 2009) and Countering Extremism (June 9, 2017), which created an effective legal basis for cooperation among the SCO member states in the fight against a common threat. Given that the approval of a comprehensive convention on combating international terrorism dragged on within the UN for several decades, this can be considered a great success.

In addition, a Universal Centre for Countering Security Challenges and Threats is being created on the basis of the SCO Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure, including the Centre for Information Security and the Centre for Combating International Organised Crime, as well as the SCO Anti-Drug Centre in Dushanbe as an independent structure. Thus, a powerful “security fist” is being formed within the SCO, which is designed to repel any attempts to disrupt peace and stability in the SCO space. 

Afghanistan should have its place in the new system of collective security in Eurasia. It is obvious that without the return of sustainable peace and stability in that country, it is difficult to talk about a full-fledged security architecture in Eurasia.

The situation in Afghanistan is as unpredictable as before, despite Kabul’s noticeable efforts to stabilise it. There is still a long way to go to national accord and full-fledged peace. Those who attempted to turn Afghanistan into a stronghold of democracy for twenty years have left behind its ashes, in which a new fire of war may be kindled. The countries of Central Asia, China and Russia understand this well and, breaking through some prejudices, are taking practical steps to establish dialogue and contacts with the Afghan authorities, as well as provide selfless assistance to the Afghan people.
 
The same non-standard, albeit cautious, approach is necessary when involving Afghanistan in the collective security system. All neighbours and friends of the Afghan people are interested in developing multifaceted trade, economic, cultural and humanitarian cooperation with Afghanistan, and not expecting from its territory the "export" of instability, drugs and terrorist groups that have found refuge there. One of the confirmations of this is the Republic of Kazakhstan’s proposal to create in the city of Almaty the UN Regional Centre for Sustainable Development Goals for Central Asia and Afghanistan. In turn, Kabul must send clear signals to all its neighbours that it stands for building neighbourly relations and decisively cleansing its territory of uninvited guests who are indifferent to the fate of the long-suffering Afghan people.

The consolidation process is confidently gaining momentum in the countries of Central Asia, where the spirit of good neighbourliness and friendly communication is strengthening, and sensitive issues left over from history are being resolved through negotiations. These can and are playing an important role in the process of returning Afghanistan to the path of peace and sustainable development. The stable trend towards regional rapprochement that has developed in Central Asia is not only a historically conditioned reality. According to UN estimates, the region's population may reach 100 million people in the next two decades (it was home to 82 million people at the beginning of 2024). This is not only a powerful resource for an economic breakthrough, but also presents a challenge to regional stability. In the first case, we may witness the birth of "Central Asian leopards", in the second - the loss of opportunities.

It is expected that the leaders of the countries of the region take into account the emerging prospects: the Concept for the Development of Regional Cooperation until 2040 has been adopted, tangible steps have been taken towards transport interconnectivity and the revival of a broad intercultural dialogue, and a dialogue mechanism on security and cooperation in Central Asia has been launched. Thanks to the strengthening of intercountry political dialogue and confidence-building measures, the interaction of the SCO and the CSTO, a two-tier structure of regional security, has been formed in the region, which is cemented by bilateral treaties on allied relations. Most importantly, such a security model ensures the sustainable socio-economic development of the countries of the region with enormous development potential. Suffice to say that trade turnover between the countries of Central Asia has more than doubled over the past seven years and exceeded $11 billion, with the prospect of reaching $15 billion in the very near future.

Central Asia has been defined as the core of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation. A stable and prosperous Central Asia is in the interests of both the countries of the region and the entire SCO "family". The well-being of the entire continent will largely depend on how the “heart of Eurasia” beats. It is important that both the region and the SCO have developed a unified, broad, comprehensive view of security issues. It is based on the understanding that no country can cope with traditional and new threats alone; all threats are interdependent and can only be countered through joint efforts. This largely explains the phenomenon of “compatibility of incompatible values,” when the sum of converging interests significantly exceeds historical sympathies or antipathies.

It is obvious that the process of forming Eurasian security will be long and difficult. This is as large and complex a project as the territory of the Eurasian continent. But in the era of mutual vulnerability, only dialogue can lead to results. As the Eastern proverb says, a thick tree grows from a tiny seed. The time has come to plant it.