Multilateral forums like the SCO give India a platform to raise terrorism, but they also limit what it can achieve. Critically analyse.

The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) takes its decisions by consensus, without a vote [1]. It is one of the few forums where India sits at the same table as both China and Pakistan. This makes it a useful platform for India's counter-terrorism message. The same rule also lets any one member dilute or stall India's agenda.

SCO as a platform for India's counter-terror agenda

• Agenda-setting: At Qingdao in June 2025, Rajnath Singh called every act of terrorism "criminal and unjustifiable". He also rejected "double standards" on cross-border terror [2].
• Consensus as leverage: India refused to sign a Defence Ministers' document that left out the Pahalgam attack. The later Tianjin Declaration (2025) condemned the attack [3].
• Norm-building: At the 2026 Bishkek summit, PM Modi demanded "no double standards whatsoever", and the summit adopted the Bishkek Declaration [4].
• Legitimising India's response: At the April 2026 Bishkek Defence Ministers' Meeting, India presented Operation Sindoor as proof that terror epicentres are no longer immune [5].
• Institutional channel: The Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure (RATS) gives India a framework for working with Central Asian states on security.

Limits on what India can achieve

• Consensus cuts both ways: India could block the Qingdao text, but the meeting ended with no joint document at all [3]. Each wording gain has to be fought for again at the next meeting.
• China–Pakistan alignment: With a state accused of sponsoring terror inside the bloc, declarations condemn terrorism in general terms. Naming sponsors and holding them to account stays out of reach.
• The group works around India: At the 2024 Islamabad Heads of Government meeting, India alone declined to endorse China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), while the other members backed it [6]. The BRI includes CPEC, which passes through territory India claims. India's "no" protects its own position but does not change the group's direction.
• No enforcement: SCO declarations are political statements with no binding force and no way to sanction anyone. India's wins stay mostly on paper.

The SCO therefore amplifies India's voice on terrorism but cannot enforce anything. India should keep using its consensus veto selectively to protect core wording, as it did in 2025–26 [3][4]. It should also back this up with bilateral security ties in Central Asia and with pressure in the UN and FATF. Used this way, the SCO serves India's strategic autonomy and its line of zero tolerance for terrorism.