Multilateral platforms like the SCO offer India and Pakistan a channel of engagement even when bilateral ties are frozen. Critically examine.

Since the April 2025 Pahalgam attack, India and Pakistan have had almost no bilateral contact. Multilateral bodies such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) are among the few places where they still meet. Pakistan has named a minister for the SCO Civilisational Dialogue in New Delhi (20–22 November 2026) [1]. The channel exists, but it does little to resolve the core disputes.

Engagement the SCO enables

• Ministerial contact continues: Bilawal Bhutto Zardari attended the SCO Foreign Ministers' meeting in Goa (May 2023). A Pakistani minister has not visited India since [1].
• Host obligations: India has invited Pakistan to ministerial level for the first time since 2023, despite the freeze. This shows that multilateral duties as host carry on whatever the state of bilateral ties [1].
• Diplomacy at low political cost: Cultural and people-to-people tracks let both sides engage without appearing to give in. Pakistan's statement backed "dialogue among civilisations" in a "spirit of mutual respect" [1].
• A shared agenda: Climate stress on the glacier-fed Indus basin is a common concern. Multilateral settings let both sides discuss it without first having to settle the bilateral dispute.

Limitations of the channel

• The agenda can be hijacked: India invited the Culture Minister. Pakistan sent Musadik Masood Malik, its Climate Change Minister, who openly criticises India's stance on the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT). This signals an attempt to raise water at a cultural event [1].
• Security conditions limit what is possible: India keeps the IWT (1960) in abeyance until Pakistan "credibly and irrevocably" ends cross-border terrorism [2]. No multilateral meeting can override that condition.
• The stakes are high: The Indus system supports 80% of Pakistan's farmland and 93% of its water use [2]. This makes the subject too charged to handle in a group forum.
• Third-party mechanisms have also stalled: The World Bank ran the Neutral Expert and Court of Arbitration processes in parallel. It admitted that this "poses practical and legal challenges" [3].
• Optics over outcomes: Brief meetings on the sidelines rarely lead to structured talks.

Overall, the SCO keeps lines of communication open but does not bring about reconciliation. India should host fairly, keep the forum on its agreed agenda, and use the SCO's Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure (RATS) to press its counter-terrorism case. Engagement becomes substantive only when terrorism ends. Until then, the SCO offers a useful channel of contact, in keeping with India's commitment to peaceful neighbourhood relations.