The Expansion of the SCO to the OPEC-CSTO Axis and Europe's New Security Border | www.eurasiacritic.com
The Expansion of the SCO to the OPEC-CSTO Axis and Europe's New Security Border
In the 21st century, in place of alliances and pacts of the old international system and in line with regional trends, the forces that govern economic development, security and military cooperation have been left to regional organisations such as the European Union (EU) and NATO. In this vein, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) has established its place within the international system and politics as a new regional organisation model that is being developed in Central Asia, a "pivotal" region of global geopolitics. The sine qua non condition for a regional organisation is that member states either share a common interest or they align their interests, which is what has happened between Russia and China (to some extent) at the SCO. At this point you can assume that the strategic interests of Russia and China, the founders and leaders of the SCO, will always have a "leading" role in the formation and development of the organisation. In this respect, the SCO's process of organisational transformation, which is a similar formation to that of OPEC and the CSTO, is being evaluated as their expansion towards the energy and security axis. In addition, this transformation process has been realised, in a sense, because of the overlap of Russia and China's strategies. In other words, the SCO's move towards energy and security issues is the direct result of Russo-Chinese interests.
Security Expansion of the SCO
According to the SCO's founding and summit declarations, the main purposes of the organisation are to stand against terrorism, separatism and radicalism and to provide and develop regional security and stability. The SCO intensified its efforts to maintain its position as the sole authority on security and stability in the Central Asia region, that is, its area of influence, after the deployment of US soldiers in the region following the 9/11 attacks. In this respect, to counter terrorist threats in the region, the SCO established an "Anti-Terrorism Centre" and decided to strengthen its "Anti-Terrorism Structure". This approach taken by the SCO can be regarded as a signal that security matters in Central Asia should be their responsibility.
In the beginning, the SCO was a mediatory mechanism who used crisis management and preventative diplomacy for regional security matters, soft power and security elements being its medium. However, after its military exercise of 2007, it is assumed that the SCO has moved towards the use of hard power and security and has the ability to undertake military intervention against regional problems.
Moreover, the SCO has already mentioned its aim of constructing a "new security regime" based on international laws and norms in its 2007 Bishkek declaration, which shows that the security perspective of the SCO has widened from a regional one to that of global. In other words, the SCO limits the influence of the US in the region, asserting that the problems of the region should be solved by the region's states and consequently, constructing its own security system. At the same time, the declaration expresses that global balance should be realised in a multi-polar system and is against the US's unipolar approach.
Even if the SCO's security formation is perceived as a formation to counter that of NATO's or as a new Warsaw Pact, we can say that it is in fact becoming a focal point for balancing power within international politics. Besides which, the SCO aims to establish regional security in the international system and take on responsibilities in global security through some serious initiatives. According to today's conjuncture, the organisation, which is enhancing its strength and effectiveness in regional and global dynamics, is expected to become a new centre of power.
The SCO's establishment and development of a joint and inclusive "Regional Anti-Terrorism Structure" (RATS) with high security and military budgets is considered as a military bloc, like the CSTO. The SCO is transforming into a mechanism that is developing in areas of the military and security and is capable of responding effectively and swiftly to regional security issues.
Energy Expansion of the SCO
The fast increase in the world's demand for energy and the SCO countries having 17.5% of oil and 47.5% of gas reserves naturally makes the SCO an energy power. Russia, especially, has expressed its wish for the formation of an energy dialogue or energy club under the auspices of the SCO for energy cooperation.
Consequently, the SCO focuses on energy cooperation and most importantly the energy and security axes are considered in parallel with each other. The Bishkek declaration states that cooperation in energy is the foundation for economic development and security. In other words, security and stability can be achieved via a secure and "mutually beneficial" partnership.
The scope of energy cooperation, which encompasses the producer, the consumer and the transit states under the membership, signals the emergence of the SCO as an "energy superpower" of the international arena. The wish for Turkmenistan to become a member in establishing regional cooperation is an expression of the above aim.
Although time will tell whether the SCO has become an OPEC-like natural gas cartel, its aim of establishing a "Common Energy Market" hints at the direction the organisation wants to take. The SCO, which is emerging as a new power centre in energy geopolitics, broadens and deepens energy cooperation with these moves. Departing from this point, the SCO is trying to increase its influence on energy resources and pipeline routes.
The SCO's Enlargement Problem in Relation to Energy and Security
The enlargement problem that arose at the Bishkek Summit - just like that of the EU - has become significant for the SCO's future structure and shape. The source of the problem is the conflict of interest between newly admitted members and the founders and leaders of the SCO, Russia and China, and the balanced/imbalanced power relationship within the organisation.
For instance, China has a positive stance towards the membership of Pakistan and Iran for meeting its energy needs and energy cooperation, while Russia has a cautious approach towards the membership of these two countries because of the fear that these states will get closer to China and upset the balance and status quo. On the other hand, Russia sees India's membership as an asset, but this conflicts with China's interests. Moreover, the prospective membership of India, Pakistan and Iran, who possess nuclear power, would turn the SCO into a centre of nuclear power. This increases doubts in the minds of the West and particularly that of the United States. Iran's prospective membership, especially, is giving reason for the organisation to be perceived as an anti-West and anti-US bloc.
As a result, the complex enlargement process of the SCO appears to follow the pathway where Russia and China's strategic interests overlap.
Turkey's Approach to the SCO
From a historical and geopolitical point of view, Turkey cannot be expected to be a bystander to events in Central Asia. Turkey should broaden its foreign policy perspective of Eurasian geopolitics to become more proactive. For this reason, it could be said that joining the SCO would appear to be the way forward for Turkey becoming effective in the region.
However, Turkey's membership to the SCO shouldn't be seen as a move that is anti-West (US) or an alternative to the European Union and Turkey should express this openly. Otherwise, Turkey's already strained relations with the West and especially the
United States (after Iraq) may reach breaking point.
Furthermore, Turkey's bid for membership to the SCO can create problems with China on East Turkistan and with Russia on energy rivalry. However, by using some diplomatic manoeuvring, Turkey has the potential to change this disadvantageous situation to its advantage. In the same manner, the Chinese government can be persuaded to be tolerant, libertarian and respectful towards human rights in East Turkistan. Moreover, Turkey can shift its energy rivalry with Russia to that of cooperation by expressing joint interests. Consequently, SCO membership is in Turkey's interest. The Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs' active contact with Central Asia, Russia and China would be enough to realise this possibility.
The lines between the West and the SCO pass through Kazakhstan
Like Turkey, Kazakhstan is another important actor for the SCO in security and energy issues and is expected to play a determining role in global relations. The Chairmanship of the OSCE, which will enable the extension of Europe's new security border to China, may lead to a possible Russian-OSCE conflict and put Kazakhstan into a difficult position. The OSCE's decision to prioritise frozen conflicts and potential sources of instability in the former Soviet region can become a source of stress for Kazakhstan. The lines between the West and the SCO look likely to pass through Kazakhstan. Therefore, an evaluation of Kazakhstan's forthcoming chairmanship will be helpful.
The Chairmanship of the OSCE and the Rising Star of Kazakhstan
The Ministerial Council of the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) assembled for the 15th time in Madrid on 29th - 30th November and reached a decision for rotating the chairmanship of the OSCE. Nicholas Burns, the US Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs, prepared a press conference at the end of the meeting and announced that the chair of the body will be Finland in 2008, Greece in 2009, Kazakhstan in 2010 and Lithuania in 2011. In other words, Kazakhstan is going to chair the body in 2010 for the first time as an ex-Soviet Union country, member of the CIS, the SCO and as a Central Asian Republic. In fact, Kazakhstan has pursued intense shuttle diplomacy and was lobbying for the rotating chair of the OSCE for 2009. Despite the powerful opposition of the US, Kazakhstan still managed to get the chair of the body for 2010 with great success. The chairmanship of the OSCE, which is a very significant acquisition for Kazakhstan, is critically noteworthy by means of regional and global scales.
From the perspective of understanding the case's global dimensions, it is a conflict of interests of coulisse and it is necessary to evaluate the strategic clearance of US-Russia relations. In this context, more than as an opposition for Kazakhstan's chairmanship bid, the US's intention was to secure a later date. The most important reason for this deferment can be accepted as the scheduling of a potential - irrational - operation against Iran in 2008-2009 and Kazakhstan's chair of the body, which is likely to move in accordance with Russia's inspiration, and the possibility of setting the OSCE against NATO (and naturally the US). Actually, it was known that Russia would block all decisions passed by the Council if Kazakhstan's chair had failed. In addition, Moscow's desire for the OSCE's equipoise against NATO is widely known. So as not to upset Kazakhstan, who is rich in natural resources and has a decisive magnitude in Central Eurasian geopolitics, the US reached a consensus with Russia upon Kazakhstan's chairmanship of the organisation in 2010.
Europe's dependence upon natural gas, in the concept of energy security, leads to her intense interest in Central Asian countries rich in hydrocarbon resources. In this respect, it is meaningful that the EU and the OSCE included Kazakhstan in spite of the fact that she does not have a democratic regime akin to those of European states. As an outcome of the multiple pipelines policies for energy security over the long term in Europe, the EU and the OSCE give great importance to Kazakhstan for her vast energy sources and geographical pivotal position in Eurasian politics. The reason for the OSCE granting the chair, which carries great significance to Kazakhstan's energy resources, may be a desire for pro-actively participating in Central Eurasian energy politics and to take part in the region. It could be said that Kazakhstan, keeping in mind her pivotal position, used the energy factor as a trump card in its struggle for the OSCE chairmanship bid. In this context, when Kazakhstan put a stop to the Italian ENI company's works in the Kasgahan oil reservoir (one of the biggest oil reserve basins) with a pseudo-reason for three months on 27th August 2007 and her decision based on her ability to annihilate treaties with foreign energy corporations, shaped an imperative phase in its OSCE chairmanship bid. As a reaction to this event, Italian PM Romano Prodi unexpectedly visited Kazakhstan and declared Italy's support for Kazakhstan's chair of the term. For that reason, the energy factor played a crucial role upon the decision of Kazakhstan's chair of the body.
From Kazakhstan's perspective, granting the rotating chair of the OSCE for 2010 carries significant implications by means of regional and global dimensions. Before all else, it could be foreseen that the chair of the organisation will help Kazakhstan's liberalisation in economic and democratic reforms so as to breakthrough in an old Soviet country which, across-the-board, is the most stable state in Central Asia. Furthermore, when Kazakhstan's annual growth rate (9-10% approximately) is taken into consideration, foreign investments are very indispensable by means of the state's economic structure and development. In this respect, political issues are important for foreign investors in the country. Kazakhstan's memberships in international organisations (SCO, CIS, CSTO etc.) and her effective role makes her more and more vital in Eurasian energy and security matters. More than ever, Kazakhstan with the OSCE chairmanship will have status on a regional and global scale and also a prestige in the international arena and a global reputation. Another important point is that Kazakhstan with the chair of the body creates a balance of relations between the US and Russia and attracts the balance of interests of Russia and the West upon herself. These strategic objectives and consequences can be confirmed as the outcome of a multi-dimensional and well-balanced foreign policy by Kazakhstan. Accordingly, it could be said that other Central Asian states probably follow Kazakhstan as a role model for themselves.
To summarise, it is foreseen that granting the chair of the OSCE will contribute so much to Kazakhstan's economic and political development. Besides which, it is calculated that the EU and OSCE honouring Kazakhstan with the chair of the body will have the added benefit of increasing the effectiveness of the organisation in the region. More to the point, Russia's use of the OSCE as a counterbalance against NATO and logically the US is halted for the time being. Yet, important reciprocal diplomatic attacks between the US and Russia are expected to be within the framework of the OSCE. Energy resources and geo-strategic position in pipeline diplomacy and Nazarbayev's multi-dimensional and well-balanced foreign policy strategy has played a critical role in Kazakhstan's chairmanship of the OSCE for 2010.
Conclusion
Developments point out that the future of the SCO depends on the overlap of Russia and China's strategies. Russia sees the organisation as a balancing and bargaining asset against the West and the US, whereas, China wants to use the organisation to satisfy its increasing energy demands and to secure transportation routes. At this point, it can be claimed that the main goal of the SCO is the satisfaction of the needs and the balance of these two states.
Consequently, the SCO's development is dependent on the course of Russo-Chinese relations and the United States' continuation of unilateral world hegemony. In other words, the SCO's borders and development process can change according to whether Russo-Chinese relations can be harmonious and whether the US will act according to international balance.
In today's international conjuncture, Western hegemony i.e. the US is losing prestige and power whereas Russia and China under the framework of the SCO represent rising power. In other words, the SCO's ability to influence international balance is increasing and becoming a catalyst for development in Asia. The successful completion of the SCO's institutionalisation is a positive development for the restoration of a multi-polar system and international balance.
