India’s Defence Minister Rajnath Singh took a firm stand at the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) Defence Ministers’ meeting in Qingdao, China, by refusing to sign a joint document that omitted reference to the April 22, 2025, Pahalgam terror attack while including mention of Balochistan. This move underscored India’s unwavering stance on terrorism and its rejection of attempts by Pakistan and China to dilute discussions on cross-border terrorism, particularly in the context of the deadly attack in Jammu and Kashmir that claimed 26 lives. The decision led to the SCO meeting concluding without a joint statement, highlighting deep divisions within the bloc on addressing terrorism.
The SCO Meeting and India’s Position
The SCO, a Eurasian political and security bloc comprising ten member states—including India, China, Russia, Pakistan, and Iran—convened in Qingdao to discuss regional peace, security, and counter-terrorism cooperation. During the meeting, Rajnath Singh emphasized India’s zero-tolerance policy toward terrorism, specifically condemning the Pahalgam attack, which bore the hallmarks of the Pakistan-based terror group Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) operating through its proxy, The Resistance Front (TRF). The attack, which targeted tourists in a scenic meadow near Pahalgam, was one of the deadliest in Jammu and Kashmir in recent years, killing 26 people, including 25 tourists, and injuring over 20 others.
According to sources, the proposed SCO joint document failed to acknowledge the Pahalgam attack while including references to Balochistan, a region in Pakistan where Islamabad has long accused India of sponsoring unrest. Singh viewed this as an attempt by Pakistan and China to divert attention from Pakistan’s role in cross-border terrorism and to dilute India’s concerns about state-sponsored attacks. In response, he refused to endorse the document, a move that prevented the issuance of a joint statement or protocol, as consensus among SCO members could not be reached.
Singh’s speech at the summit reiterated India’s commitment to strategic autonomy and its resolve to combat terrorism. He explicitly criticized the use of terrorism as a state policy tool, a pointed reference to Pakistan, and highlighted the need for collective action against terror networks. The absence of a joint statement was a direct result of India’s refusal to compromise on its position, signaling a broader shift in its diplomatic approach under the Modi government.
The Pahalgam Terror Attack and Its Aftermath
The Pahalgam attack on April 22, 2025, was a meticulously planned assault by four terrorists—two Pakistanis and two Kashmiris—linked to TRF/LeT. The attackers targeted a group of tourists in a meadow near Pahalgam, singling out Hindus and subjecting them to brutal, ISIS-style executions after forcing them to recite the Islamic kalma. The attack, which Pakistan’s defense minister Khwaja Asif controversially described as part of “revolutions” against India’s policies, drew widespread condemnation globally but also exposed Pakistan’s denial of involvement. Islamabad even labeled it a potential “false flag operation” by India, a claim dismissed by New Delhi.
In response, India implemented a series of punitive measures against Pakistan, including suspending the Indus Waters Treaty, closing the Attari-Wagah border, halting postal services, banning Pakistani imports, and expelling Pakistani military attaches from New Delhi. These actions, coupled with India’s military strikes on May 7, 2025, targeting terrorist camps in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK), marked a new phase of assertive diplomacy and military retaliation, described as a “new normal” in India-Pakistan relations.
Balochistan’s Inclusion in the SCO Document
The inclusion of Balochistan in the SCO document was particularly contentious. Pakistan has long accused India of supporting the Baloch Liberation Army (BLA) and other separatist groups in Balochistan, a mineral-rich but impoverished province that declared independence on August 11, 1947, before being forcibly annexed by Pakistan in 1948. The Khan of Kalat, Mir Ahmadyar Khan, had sought accession to India during the partition, but India’s leadership, particularly Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, rejected the proposal, a decision later criticized as a strategic blunder.
Baloch leaders, such as Mir Yar Baloch, have since claimed that Balochistan was never part of Pakistan and have accused Islamabad of committing atrocities, including air bombings and enforced disappearances. In the wake of the Pahalgam attack, Baloch activists expressed support for India, urging Indian media to recognize Balochs as distinct from Pakistanis. Pakistan’s allegations of Indian-sponsored terrorism in Balochistan, particularly through Afghanistan’s territory, were reiterated at the SCO summit, likely influencing the document’s reference to the region. India’s refusal to sign the document was a rejection of these claims, which New Delhi views as an attempt to deflect attention from Pakistan’s own role in terrorism.
Pakistan and China’s Role
Pakistan and China, close allies within the SCO, were reportedly behind the push to exclude the Pahalgam attack from the joint document while highlighting Balochistan. China, which chairs the SCO in 2025, has faced criticism for blocking UN Security Council sanctions against Pakistan-based terrorists, a stance India has described as employing “double standards.” By omitting Pahalgam and focusing on Balochistan, the document appeared to align with Pakistan’s narrative that India is responsible for unrest in its territory, a charge India vehemently denies.
China’s condolences for the Pahalgam victims notably avoided acknowledging the attack site as part of Indian territory, reflecting its cautious approach to India-Pakistan tensions. This aligns with China’s broader geopolitical strategy, including its investments in Balochistan’s Gwadar port as part of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). India’s Chabahar port project in Iran, seen as a counter to Gwadar, further complicates the regional dynamic, with India maintaining a delicate balance in its relations with both Iran and Israel, another SCO-related point of contention.
Implications for SCO and Regional Security
India’s refusal to sign the SCO document exposed fault lines within the bloc, particularly on the issue of terrorism. The SCO’s inability to issue a joint statement underscored the challenges of achieving consensus among members with divergent interests. While Russia, another key SCO member, has historically mediated India-Pakistan tensions (e.g., the 1966 Tashkent Agreement), Pakistan’s ambassador in Moscow sought Russia’s help to de-escalate the current crisis, indicating the complexity of the situation.
For India, the decision reinforced its commitment to prioritizing national security over multilateral diplomacy when core interests are at stake. The Modi government’s actions post-Pahalgam, including the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty and military strikes, signal a shift toward a more muscular foreign policy. However, analysts warn that such measures, while sending a strong message, risk escalating tensions with Pakistan, particularly given the nuclear capabilities of both nations.
The focus on Balochistan also reignites debates about India’s historical decision to reject its accession in 1947. Some analysts argue that supporting Baloch independence could be a strategic tool for India to counter Pakistan’s proxy war in Kashmir, as suggested by Lieutenant General Prakash Katoch (Retd), who advocates for “transporting the proxy war back into PoK/Pakistan” and prioritizing the liberation of Balochistan and Sindh. Others caution that such a strategy could further destabilize the region and strain India’s relations with SCO members like China and Iran.
Conclusion
India’s refusal to sign the SCO document in Qingdao on June 26, 2025, was a bold assertion of its zero-tolerance policy on terrorism and a rejection of Pakistan and China’s attempts to shift focus to Balochistan while ignoring the Pahalgam attack. Defence Minister Rajnath Singh’s stance not only prevented a joint statement but also highlighted India’s growing assertiveness in regional forums. As tensions with Pakistan persist, India’s actions—both diplomatic and military—signal a new phase in its approach to countering terrorism, with potential ramifications for the SCO and South Asian geopolitics. The episode also underscores the unresolved historical grievances surrounding Balochistan, which continue to shape India-Pakistan relations.
Sources:
- News18, June 26, 2025
- Times of India, June 26, 2025
- Rediff.com, April 25, 2025
- Deccan Herald, April 23, 2025
- India Today, May 2, 2025
- Frontline, May 7, 2025
- Posts on X, June 26, 2025
You Might Also Like:
Parliamentary Panel to Visit Kashmir in July After Deadly Pahalgam Terror Attack
Omar Abdullah Ready to Resign for J&K Statehood as NC Threatens Supreme Court Move Over Delay
Trump Claims He Averted Nuclear War Between India and Pakistan by Threatening Trade Withdrawal
