SCO – Shanghai Cooperation Organization
PRC – People’s Republic of China
ASEAN – Associationof Southeast Asian Nations
CIS – Commonwealth of Independent States
OIC – Organization of Islamic Countries
NGO – Non-government organization
NATO – The North Atlantic Treaty Organization
OPEC – Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries
AKP – AK Party
BRI – Belt and Road Initiative
GCC – Gulf Cooperation Council
UAE – United Arab Emirates
USA – United States of America
The failed attempt of the coup in Turkey brought changes in Turkey. Until then, the main goal for Turkey was the European Union and the path towards the Europe. After the coup, when Turkey faced the Europe’s and US’s verdicts, the Turkish government decided to turn them back and look forward to the Asian allies. Turkey had connections with the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) since 2013, but after the coup in 2016, for the first time, the president said in public that their future is not the European Union (EU), but SCO. Since then, the question about future of Turkey has been an open and uncertain chapter. Not only that Turkey’s future in Europe is uncertain, also the membership in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization(NATO) is questionable. Those changes of politics in Turkey can cause changes in the world’s politics too. Even though it is still unreal to compare EU and SCO, it is important to emphasize that members of the SCO are countries that produce the most oil and gas in the whole world and that they will inevitably play a big role in the world’s politics.
Key words: The Shanghai Cooperation Organization, European Union, Turkey, cooperation, economy, energy, government, interest, coup, allies, terrorism
In the last year, Turkey and Turkish politics are one of the main topics in the world. After the failed coup in Turkey, there were many changes in Turkish international politics, together with inter-state politics. The failed coup can be seen as the turning point to Turkey. Besides internal problems that government had, they could see who their actual allies outside the country are. However, European Union (EU) and the United States of America (USA) showed Turkey, that Turkey cannot count on them for any kind of help when they are in need. That was one of the reasons for Turkey’s interests for seeking new allies. As Turkey’s relations with the EU and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)have hit an all-time low, Turkey has stepped up its rhetoric on seeking closer cooperation with the China and Russia, or better said their organization – Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). Even though Moscow is really important variable in this equation, the variable that will define Turkey’s future in SCO is Beijing. For Europe’s foreign and security policy community, Turkey’s cozying up to the SCO and China’s stance on the matter both raise a range of critical questions. It is known that every political action or any kind of cooperation between the countries have deep mutual interest. The questions that pop up when we speak about the SCO, Turkey, and EU, often are connected with their interests, mutual enemies or allies. What are the benefits that Turkey got from being a member of the SCO? But, there is also question, what are the benefits for the SCO if they accept Turkey as a member? Together with that, the question is what kinds of consequences will Europe suffer in SCO became more powerful and more influential that is now?
Often we can see politicians and other saying that the future wars will be because of the water, natural gas, natural oils, etc. Without any doubt, we can say that SCO countries are prosperous one, when it comes to the gas and oil. Together with that, Europe is dependent on Russian oil and gas. All situations and deals that are made inside the SCO about natural gas or energy, indirectly are affecting Europe, so it is normal that Europe is looking for their place, their allies inside the SCO. Because Turkey is one of the most developed countries in Europe and Asia, it is not in Europe’s interest that Turkey becomes part of SCO. With that, SCO will have another big, developed country as a member, together with China and Russia. However, Europe does not want Turkey as their member too, so the question that pops up is: Why the European Union cannot decide what card they will play when it comes to Turkey?
If we take into count what Turkey is saying today, we can say that, for them, the European Union is no longer an option. Turkey waited for the European Union for 50 years, and maybe it is time to leave that behind. In certain time in the past, Turkey and the EU were really close, and improvement in the negotiations could be seen. However, honeymoon phase did not last long. It seems like today, Turkey and EU are far away from each other. However, the destiny of the Turkey is unpredictable. It seems that Turkey was always struggling about the path that they shouldchoose, European or Asian. Beside geographical struggle between Europe and Asia, now there is political struggle also. Because of the geographical, demographical and economical location, there is always option that other ‘big forces’ decide about Turkey’s destiny.
Turkey is now at a crossroads. We can say that the Turkish government has two options, the EU or the SCO. The purpose of this thesis is to present the facts about both organizations, together with their attitudes towards the Turkey. Also, one of the purposes is to present the current position of the Turkey in those organizations, as well as the possible future outcomes. In order to achieve those goals, we used books, journals, articles and reports, together with news and interview transcripts. Also, a lot of information was gathered from the official websites of the organizations that were mentioned in the work. When it comes to the current situation, the most recent studies and the news were used for creating the most realistic picture of the situation. This work will be divided in four main parts. In this chapter, we will try to give the answers to the questions about the SCO’s origin. The first chapter will give the main information about Shanghai Cooperation Organization. Besides main information, there will be given details about the origin of the organization, their first steps and decisions. Even though in the beginning, the SCO had only five members, now the situation is different. More countries want to become members of this organization, especially the ones in Eastern Europe and Eurasia. The second chapter will be dedicated to the relationship between two unions, European and Asian. The main focus of this chapter will be Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and European Union (EU). This chapter will give the answers to the questions related to the cooperation between those two organizations.Because they don’t have jurisdiction on the same soil, we can conclude that they are not a threat to each other. However, that does not mean that they have, or must have, good cooperation. Relationship between EU and SCO is not yet clearly defined. Beside the mutual benefits that two of them can have by joining together, there are some obstacles about some issues that they cannot find mutual stance.The first research questionin this chapter will be what their mutual interests are. Interesting topic is the future of the relationship between those two organizations. Because of that, this chapter will give answers to the questions related to their future and possible outcomes. Beside many other interests, one thing mutual for them is Turkey. Turkey started 50 years ago its path towards the European Union. However, it seems that now Turkey is far away from the European Union. Chapter three will be dedicated to the relationship between European Union and Turkey. Answers to the questions such as: what the EU is; when have the relationship between Turkey and EU started; what are the possible outcomes; will be given. 2016th was the year of changes in Turkey. After failed attempts of coup in Turkey, Turkey changed its international policy. After the European Union and the USA, decided not stand on a side with the Turkish government after the failed coup, Turkey turned towards Asia and SCO. But it was not the first time that Turkey started cooperation with Asian countries, however, it was the first time that a president of the Turkey said that their future is not in the EU, rather than in SCO. Chapter four will be dedicated to relationship between Turkey and SCO. Just like we gave the answers to a certain questions about the relationship between Turkey and EU, we will give the answers to the same questions but related to the SCO and Turkey. Today, destiny of Turkey is unpredictable. Just like everything in life, things are changing overnight. Final chapter, conclusion, will be dedicated to possible outcomes for Turkey – whether its path is Europe or SCO. The main research question is: What is Turkey’s future, SCO or the EU?The answer to this question will be presented in the conclusion part. The answer will be based on the facts that we will provide in the chapters of this thesis.
The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) is an organization that is composed of several Asian countries with the most developed economy. Beside the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and the Russian Federation, four Central Asian Republics found their place in this organization. Those are the former member of the Soviet Union: Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan. This organization was founded in 2001. In the beginning they had to develop legal and political framework, in order to be classified and recognized by others as a serious organization. Their main focus was fighting against any form separatism, extremism and terrorism.
The SCO’s centre guideline is shared acknowledgment. Idea of Cooperation, which dates since 2005, requires that all Member States give shared acknowledgment of demonstrations of psychological oppression, nonconformity and fanaticism, paying little mind to whether the enactment of the SCO Member States incorporates the demonstration in a similar classification of wrongdoings or whether it depicts it utilizing a similar wording (Michelle, Knaute, & Rizk, 2012).Notwithstanding, there are a few challenges in comprehension and applying this demand. That is on the grounds that, in executing the SCO’s legitimate structure through their national enactment SCO Member States, there is no basic meaning of the fear based oppression and terrorism. Also, the shared acknowledgment standard keeps people from looking for a haven in neighbouring SCO states in light of the fact that their speculated association in dissident or psychological militant exercises will be perceived and will trigger their revocation to their home State independent of the way that they could confront torment there (Michelle, Knaute, & Rizk, 2012). Some SCO records infer that those blamed for fear based oppressor inclusion as well as those just associated with psychological warfare by one SCO Member State, must be so perceived by other SCO states. Human rights Non-governmental organizations (NGO) from SCO Member States have featured that the SCO structure has empowered Member States to challenge many arrangements of universal human rights and displaced person law.
The Shanghai Cooperation Organization was established on 15 June 2001. Its first step was the issuance of the Declaration on the Establishment of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization by the PRC, the Russian Federation, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Kazakhstan. The Organization tried to improve security and collaboration between its individuals. Especially after the existing military participation that had occurred between the Shanghai Five since 1996. So, we can say that the immediate predecessor of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization was the Shanghai Five mechanism, which was initiated by China. That was the first international organization of that kind that China had initiated. One of the main objectives specified in the Organization’s Charter of June 2002 is the battle against fear mongering and terrorism, which SCO Member States connect with the battle against fanaticism and dissidence.
The initial purpose of the Shanghai Five mechanism was to build and ensure military trust in order to resolve the border issues. After the normalization of relations between China and the Soviet Union in 1989, those two countries made quick progress in solving border issues. However, after the Soviet Union fell apart in 1990, border issues between China and former republics of the Soviet Union remained. Border issues evolved into disputes between China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. The issue was understood in 1996, when all nations consented to the Arrangement on Depending Military Trust in Border Regions. This agreement was the important policy, guarantee for the bilateral and multilateral relations among five countries, and helped to launch the Shanghai Five in 1996.
The SCO tallies a few spectator states, specifically Afghanistan, Iran, India, Mongolia and Pakistan. It additionally has three exchange accomplices: Belarus, Sri Lanka and Turkey, as well as the SCO-Afghanistan Contact Group. Turkmenistan, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) likewise habitually take an interest as guests. All SCO Member States and the vast majority of its eyewitness states and discourse accomplices have tyrant administrations and additionally seriously stifle free voices, especially human rights protectors. These administrations connect security and strength with the need to stifle political and human rights activists, frequently blaming them for radicalism on political grounds.
In April, 1997, the five countries consented to the Arrangement o Reduction of Military Forces in Border Regions. The two records, that were at that point marked, proposed the standards of fairness, put stock in, common advantage and meeting. These five nations ended up plainly fundamental supporters of the quiet settlement of fringe issues. China settled its fringe debated with Kazakhstan in 1998, Kyrgyzstan in 1999, Russia in 2004 and Tajikistan in 2006 (Fei, 2010).
Building trust, resolving border issues was not the only thing that Shanghai Five was doing for the peace in the East. Soon after establishment, they provided a new platform for coping with non-conventional threats in the region. Cross-out skirt violations, for example, tranquillize trafficking, the multiplication of weapons, illicit migration postured dangers to the security and strength of the region. In 1998, the Shanghai Five mechanism began to shift its general purpose from border issues towards anti-terrorism coordination. At China’s suggestion, countries members made a list of terrorists and terrorist organization that they will mutually fight. It was known that the main capital sources of terrorist organization come from the drug trafficking. So, members signed the new agreement, the Agreement on anti-narcotics cooperation. With this step, the Shanghai Five became different from other regional security organizations. On June 15, 2001, the Shanghai Five componentswere lifted to a more elevated amount of collaboration by proclaiming the introduction of another association of territorial participation, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) (Fei, 2010).
At the meeting in 2001, when the Shanghai Five was declared to be a new organization, Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the sixth country, Uzbekistan joined the group. A year later, the organization had precisely identified structure, status and function, together with a secretariat and a number of committees in different ministries that could address a wider variety of issues.
The terrorist attacks of 9/11 showed that the whole world is in need of more anti-terrorist organizations, such as SCO. The establishment of the SCO was both, necessary and timely. However, after 9/11, SCO was silent for a while. The main reason was that, at that point, the organization was still a more political symbol, rather than a regional organization with defined tasks, protocols and capabilities. It was unclear if the organization could direct their efforts against targets outside the SCO, or what kind of form their mission would take.
The SCO has set up relations with the United Nations (where it has spectator status), the European Union (EU), theAssociation of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). Those steps can show us that SCO has worldwide affinities, and that they don’t want to be regional anymore.
At first when the SCO was formed, it was an intense time for all nations in the Central Asia. They were all the while endeavouring to build up themselves as autonomous nations in the prompt area and on a more worldwide level. Some of them were occupied with utilizing position, and some of them needed to avoid any kind of local groupings. Nations, for example, Russia, China, Iran, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia were altogether keen on utilizing their position. Then again, there were nations, for example, Uzbekistan, which would not like to get hindered by local groupings like the SCO. That might be clarified by the inadequacy of the greater part of the association that was shaped around then, so it was sensible that a few nations needed to remain on a side.
However, the situation on the local and global fronts was constantly changing. On the local front it has been more than a long time since the Central Asian nations ended up noticeably free. Some of them stayed allies with the Russians, and some of them wanted to cut all relations with them. After becoming independent, former Soviet Union countries were developing their own ideas of sovereignty and fining their own place in the world politics. From that point forward they have demonstrated an inclination for a multi-vector approach in their worldwide arrangements. However, we must not forgive to mention the activity of the United States army in this region. During the history, it is known that Russia and United States where most of the times enemies. There were some times when they had common interests, but most of the time this relationship was characterized as not well. With the United States more dynamic in the district, Russia and China understood the significance of cooperation on a wide arrangement of issues.
The makeup of the SCO reveals some insight into the way that the SCO is approaching widening its extension in wording on which it needs to participate with on the worldwide scene. The nearness of Russia and China, alongside littler Central Asian nations demonstrates the significance of territorial collaboration that is fundamental to the development and advancement of the district (Joshi, 2015).The consideration of onlooker nations like India, Pakistan and Iran demonstrate that the SCO needs to energize agreeable relations and give a voice to the Eurasian district (Prajatki & Siddharth, 2007).
The manageability of the SCO is addressed much of the time as a result of the security circumstances in the part nations. It is useful for this situation to consider the SCO in light of the development of the European Union (EU). The accomplishment of the EU lies in the way that it has possessed the capacity to unite European nations particularly in the financial circle. Economy is the key in the nation’s prosperity. In this way, other than the counter psychological militant purposeful publicity, the SCO has stretched out, it’stransmitted to incorporate issues that assistance in cultivating monetary and social thriving in the area.
In spite of the fact that the United States and nations in Europe think the SCO is a political instrument which its individuals are utilizing as a hostile political apparatus – and have been named as ‘one more club of tyrants’- the eventual fate of the SCO lies increasingly in the domain of monetary and social issues (Prajatki & Siddharth, 2007).All things considered, it is fundamental to comprehend that the SCO considers the governmental issues of its part nations. Its pluralistic position can be contextualized by considering that it has acknowledged Iran, Afghanistan and India as onlooker nations. Iran has principally an adversarial association with the US, while Afghanistan and India have an unequivocally ideal association with the US. In this manner, the SCO ought not to be viewed as favouring one side (Dunay, Bailes, Troitskiy, & Guang, 2007).
The SCO is regularly scrutinized on issues of human rights and vote based systems. In the area there is a typical observation that this talk is an interruption and risk to the power of the states. The circumstances are intensified by the dialect utilized which was viewed as a ponderous rebuke by effective nations criticizing littler countries particularly on account of Central Asian countries. The accentuation on the comprehensiveness of these standards demonstrates an absence of comprehension of neighbourhood forms at work in the part nations of the SCO (Bailes, 2007).The requests and ultimatums towards the nations of the East uncover the power condition, at work and overlook the ground substances and authentic conventions of the nations while forcing an apparently outside framework on them. It is fascinating that in spite of this the SCO has not struck back with a merged “Eastern” position which rejects “Western” thoughts on human rights, popularity based standards and types of government(Zhao, 2012). The SCO has kept the eventual fate of an exchange open and has not situated itself as an association that is unwilling to collaborate on ideological grounds (Fei, 2010).
Expanded participation between Central Asian countries will prompt facilitating of trans-national issues, for instance, in the Ferghana Valley, which is shared between Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan (Prajatki & Siddharth, 2007)The SCO conceivably gives a gathering to an unhindered commerce zone in the individuals at local level. The outskirt amongst Uzbekistan and Tajikistan is vigorously mined and the SCO can help in de-mining and cultivating a situation of kinship and participation (Prajatki & Siddharth, 2007). The basic trans-limit exchange that is enduring would then be able to be made safe and financially useful for individuals living crosswise over fringes. Another trans-fringe issue that requires nations to cooperate, under certain conditions, is environmental issues. The assurance of water-bodies and biodiversity require collaboration between states. An accentuation on a talk of social advancement in the district will be useful for nearby family units to alleviate financial impoverishment(Michelle, Knaute, & Rizk, 2012). Numerous such exercises are right now hindered because of dread from outer and interior components like fear based oppression (Michelle, Knaute, & Rizk, 2012).The SCO can make a move by moving far from issues of frail and permeable fringes to measures that assistance construct certainty with the goal that the party states can increment inward security and direct funds into financial and social projects (Zhao, 2012).
The SCO can possibly fill in as a vehicle for building the economies of the nations of Central Asia and to bring them into the worldwide field. The likelihood of utilizing the structure of an aggregate association, for example, the SCO, particularly in the oil and a flammable gas division gives nations like Kazakhstan preferred use over it would have gathered independently in the worldwide oil showcase. As to the vitality advertise there is additionally scope for the SCO to associate with the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) and gain from its structure and association. The GCC nations have possessed the capacity to advance an aggregate front and coordinate with each other to guarantee that every one of the nations share in the riches creation from their common assets (Prajatki & Siddharth, 2007). The SCO can look to the GCC to track the advancement of new economies profoundly subject to hydrocarbon saves. United Arab Emirates (UAE) and other Gulf nations are great cases of oil and gas economies that have discovered a place in the worldwide economy in exchange, saving money and trade. The August 2007 meeting of the SCO was a valuable meeting that offered voice to issues, identifying with expanding and keeping up great neighbourly relations alongside making a “brought together vitality advertise” (Prajatki & Siddharth, 2007).
One question that pops up every time when the Eurasia and SCO are mentioned is: should they become partners? The improvement of the connection between the SCO and Eurasian Union will significantly affect the SCO’s future. Before the presidential decision in March 2012, President Putin set forward the new Eurasian combination venture, which has four arranged stages: the Customs Union, the Common Economic Space, the Eurasian Economic Union, and the Eurasian Union (Prajatki & Siddharth, 2007). Right now, the Eurasian Union is in the period of the Eurasian Common Economic Space, which incorporates Russia, Belarus, and Kazakhstan, with Kyrgyzstan holds up to be acknowledged. The Eurasian Union is commanded by Russia, and it covers essentially with the SCO as far as individuals and capacities (Prajatki & Siddharth, 2007). Many individuals respect the SCO and the Eurasian Union as contenders and anticipate that the opposition between them will strengthen with time.
The SCO should frame valuable relations with the Eurasian Union. Politically, they ought to be accomplices. Practically, they could be parallels. This sort of relationship is feasible for the SCO and the Eurasian Union. The two associations share real part states. This makes common conditions for them to be political accomplices. Monetarily, the SCO and the Eurasian Union are not destined to prohibit each other. In reality, the SCO and the Eurasian Economic Community, the forerunner of the Eurasian Union, exists together from the earliest starting point (Prajatki & Siddharth, 2007). The Eurasian Economic Community appeared in 2000, one year before the SCO. The Eurasian Union is upheld by the customary linkages of the previous Soviet republics, while the SCO depends on recently settled financial associations. The two have a strong establishment in advancing financial participation, and those two could be advantageous for the part states (Zhao, 2012).
With developing collaboration in the local region between Russia, China and Central Asia alongside an accentuation on participation in the more extensive district with the incorporation of spectator nations (India, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan) it is vital for the present hub of energy the US, Europe and Japan – to forge relations with not simply singular part and eyewitness nations but rather the SCO all in all. The objectives of the SCO are to empower exchange connections, social and political participation, discover joint answers to issues of condition, framework, instruction, and to construct logical and social connections between part expresses, the area overall and universally. In its own particular expressed points the SCO is not an association that is against any groupings, locales or specific country states. It ought not to be viewed as a danger, but rather a vehicle for expanding financial and social thriving in the district.
Regardless of whether the SCO ought to extend is a critical inquiry. Russia, effectively advocates in India and Pakistan to end up as members in the SCO, while China is treating this with alert, stressing that it might prompt a decrease in the association’s effectiveness. China and Russia, alongside the other party states, can proceed with their takeon the issue, yet it is vital that the SCO ought not to let this issue contrarily influence the inside solidarity among the party states, especially amongst China and Russia. It is likewise critical for the SCO to anticipate all the conceivable impacts the extension could realize and keep the most undesirable results from happening, on the off chance that it does at least choose to grow. In the meantime, the SCO should make the best utilization of the potential outcomes that the extension could give (Zhao, 2012).
A part that the SCO can play sooner rather than later, together with the EU and NATO, is that of a facilitator in the advancement of Afghanistan. Ventures forward were taken in such manner that the SCO meeting was held in Bishkek in August 2007 where the party states promised expanded participation particularly in Afghanistan. The likelihood of territorial collaboration through the SCO with different groupings in the area like NATO is boundless and has the ability to be enduring. Afghanistan is a special open door that can be utilized as a certainty building exercise for the SCO and NATO to cooperate in light of the fact that real players from both these gatherings are dynamically in the peacekeeping and revamping process (Bailes, 2007).
When we speak about the European Union and Shanghai Cooperation Organization, there are a few questions that pop up. What do they have in common? Why is SCO vital to the EU? And what benefits can both of them get? Europe has a reasonable enthusiasm for Central Asia getting to be noticeably prosperous and secure. Middle Asia, according to the Europe, is seen as a potential place for basis of terrorist networks. The European Union is not afraid of people of Central Asia, they are afraid that any terrorist actions on that soil can cause the interruption of energy supplies that Europe is receiving from Central Asian countries. Together with that, they see this area as good soil for illegal immigrants. However, the European Union does not have jurisdiction over those countries, or mutual interests with them, so that is where SCO plays big role for the EU. For the Central Asian states, SCO speaks to a helpful potential apparatus for designing solid territorial financial development.Central Asian countries are more oriented towards the SCO than to the EU, and that is one of the most important benefits that the EU can have from the SCO. Middle Asia can’t access the ports or real universal transport passageways without collaboration with China, Russia, India or Iran. However, it is not true that the EU has no role in those countries. For those nations, each sort of financial help is needed. The EU, the US, Japan play a vital, yet at the same time optional, part.
On the off chance that the SCO and EU in the long run figure out how to make an understanding about financial coordination, the majority of the nations of the EU and Asia will be benefitted. Both of them, the EU and SCO have an ambitious economic integration agenda. In the event that they figure out how to understand that joining motivation, and make facilitated commerce zone, this relationship can bring the Europeans real exchange and venture openings (Antonenko, The European Union Should not ignore the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, 2007). However, with free trade zone, there are sets of rules that need to be developed, together with services and technologies.
One of the biggest problemsin Europe, not just European Union, is lack of the energy matters. The majority of the energy supplies in Europe come from the Asia. A couple years ago, Europe was facing problems when the Asians threatened to cut off the gas supplies for the Europe. Europeans are aware that, they need to have good relations with the Asia, in order to have enough energy. The SCO has competence in energy matters, and they could become relevant for Europe’s energy security. Four of the most important countries, when we speak about energy, are the parts of SCO. The largest two producers of the energy in the world, outside the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), Russia and Kazakhstan are the members of the SCO. However, two largest potential consumers, China and India are also the members of the SCO. Even though, India is just an observer country, but still, in this case can be seen as a member. If the SCO decides to make agreements about supplying energy for the members, Europe will be facing with the consequences of that agreement. In 2007 SCO summit in Bishkek, making SCO vitality club has been examined. In spite of the fact that it is a long way from being executed, this thought will dependably stay as the joker card for SCO that will cause issues for the EU. Europe will keep on depending on Russia for oil and gas imports. There is likelihood that later in Europe will contend with China over Eurasian Energy assets. The energy and oil issues are the connecting bond for both, EU and SCO.
Another reason why SCO is important to the EU is that Russia and China are important partners in the EU. The European Union wants to attach more importance to bilateral partnerships with Russia and China, but the SCO-EU dialogue could help to reinforce these bilateral relations. The SCO has become a sign for both China’s growing ambition as a global and regional power, and its caution over provoking anxiety and suspicion through unilateral action. The SCO, for Beijing, is a tool for managing China’s peaceful rise. For Russia, it is a mean for maintaining Russian’s role in post-Soviet Central Asia. With SCO, Russia can balance the influence of China and others in those countries. The EU and SCO are not destined to become rivals in the region, so that is not the reason whyRussia nor China should consider European Union as a challenge in the Central Asia.
The EU and SCO share basic enthusiasm for participation to disturb fear monger systems. Shared enthusiasm for the two associations is Afghanistan. A few individuals from the European Union sent their troops in the NATO-drove mission to Afghanistan. Notwithstanding, the SCO likewise settled an extraordinary wring bunch in Afghanistan, yet it has not accomplished much, yet. SCO has great relations with Iran, one of its onlooker states. This can be a card that SCO can play in the future – they can put weight on Iran to desert its atomic desire. A solid SCO-EU exchange may urge the SCO to consider this choice. On the other hand, threatening vibe between the EU and the SCO could energize nations in the last to extend ties with gas-rich Iran, in this way lessening the adequacy of any assents against it (Antonenko, The European Union and Shanghai Cooperation Organization, 2008).
The EU’s new Central Asia methodology should put forth a defence for more grounded EU-SCO joins. By working with the SCO, the EU could help settle Central Asia, give better vitality, security and fortify its endeavours to battle fear mongering and medicate trafficking. The main reason for creating the SCO was fighting terrorism, so that is the one thing those two organizations will always have in common. However, one constraint on closer EU-SCO ties are that some European governments see the SCO as anti-western, and many criticize its members for serious human rights violations.
The relationship between those two will remain the business of Brussels and Beijing. At this point the EU should not enter into any long-term institutional arrangements with the SCO, since questions remain over its future direction as well as its track record on a number of issues — such as democracy and human rights — which are important for EU’s policy in Central Asia (Bailes, 2007). The SCO is currently at the crossroads and the best decision of the European Union is to wait and see what will happen. In the long haul, if the SCO forms into a more comprehensive, straightforward and dominatingly financially orientated foundation, the EU could contemplate following the case of ASEAN, which, notwithstanding its troublesome relations with China, has finished up a considerable participation concurrence with the association (Antonenko, The European Union and Shanghai Cooperation Organization, 2008). This is spotlighting the region’s basic intrigues, for example, fighting global wrongdoing, advancing monetary collaboration and tourism, and participating on common asset administration and vitality. Continuously there will be shared interests between them, however simply the inquiry is the thing that the needs of the European Union are.
An exchange between the SCO and the EU could help in the produce new thoughts for its system towards Central Asia. As a feature of its new system, the EU ought to urge the SCO to reinforce its monetary measurement by proposing that a financial SCO will have a more prominent shot of being considered important by compelling associations like the EU (Antonenko, The European Union Should not ignore the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, 2007).The EU could likewise offer its ability on the most proficient method to accomplish continuous financial coordination. In the security circle the EU could offer the SCO an exchange on movement, fringe security and the battle against cross-out skirt wrongdoing, along these lines moving the accentuation from military to human security concerns (Fredholm, 2013).
At long last, the EU’s targets of human rights and democratization are not best served through detachment: EU sanctions against Uzbekistan have had no impact on its residential approaches. Or maybe, the EU ought to examine these issues with the SCO. The EU must not disregard the SCO, or neglect to recognize its developing part in Central Asia. The EU should quit considering the SCO simply in geopolitical terms, and perceive its commitments to local steadiness and improvement (Antonenko, The European Union and Shanghai Cooperation Organization, 2008).The EU should avoid the path of opposing SCO in order to contain Chinese and Russian influence in Central Asia. It should recognize that all the Central Asian states view the SCO as a positive and important vehicle for their own long-term interests. In the long run, without dialogue with the SCO, the EU is unlikely to fulfil its own potential in the region (Bailes, 2007).