SKAZHINEMOLCHI (27.08.2025)
(print version of the interview)
On August 27, 2025, Yuri Yarmolinsky, analyst at the Belarusian Institute for Strategic Research (BISR), head of the Center for SCO and BRICS Studies, answered questions from the hosts of the program “Skazhinemolchi” (eng. – “Tell, do not keep silent”) Victoria Popova and Tatyana Shcherbina.
The conversation focused on the upcoming SCO Heads of State Summit in Tianjin, China (August 31 – September 1), on certain aspects of Belarus’s engagement with BRICS, and on how BISR is embedding itself into the expert tracks of these two international blocs.
Hosts: In just a few days, the SCO summit will be held in Tianjin, China, bringing together leaders of more than 20 countries and heads of international organizations. This will be the largest summit since the Organization’s creation. What is on the agenda, what issues are expected to be discussed?
Yuri Yarmolinsky: At the forthcoming SCO summit, as usual, a broad range of issues will be discussed. These include trade, investment, science, technology, innovation, and mechanisms for financial support of project activities. The agenda also covers strengthening cooperation in energy, connectivity, the digital economy, and “green” technologies. Of course, security will also be discussed—it is impossible to avoid it. The culmination of all deliberations will be the Tianjin Declaration, reflecting the common position of member states on current international and regional issues. The draft document includes more than 80 provisions! We are confident that the decisions adopted will further consolidate the institutional foundation of the SCO.
Hosts: There will also be an SCO+ summit. The first such event was held last year in Astana. Why was such a format needed?
Yuri Yarmolinsky: The “SCO+” format presupposes a broader discussion involving not only heads of state and government of the member states, but also dialogue partners, observers, and other invited leaders. This approach underscores the open nature of the SCO, its commitment to multilateralism, and the plurality of opinions and positions. This year, the meeting in this format will take place on September 1, back-to-back with the Council of Heads of State, with participation from about 30 countries and multilateral organizations.
Hosts: Could the upcoming summit adopt decisions on admitting new members, new observers, or new dialogue partners? What countries might these be?
Yuri Yarmolinsky: The Organization’s doors are open, and expansion in the future is possible; an increasing number of countries are expressing interest in joining. Recently, Armenia signaled such ambitions. A draft decision has been agreed to grant dialogue partner status to Laos. While enlargement strengthens the overall power and influence of the Organization, it has never been an end in itself, but rather the natural result of its development.
Hosts: Our country became a full member of the SCO in July 2024. How would you assess Belarus’s first year of membership?
Yuri Yarmolinsky: The past year as a full-fledged SCO member has confirmed the correctness of Belarus’s earlier strategic course toward accession—we ourselves have become stronger and have reinforced the Organization’s foundations. Belarus has maximally integrated and strengthened its presence across all sectoral tracks of SCO activity.
Hosts: Many states hold observer or dialogue partner status. What prevents them from becoming full members of the Organization—is it their lack of interest, or are there specific obstacles?
Yuri Yarmolinsky: The SCO currently has 14 dialogue partners and two observer states. There are no obvious impediments or obstacles. Apart from purely procedural aspects, each state chooses for itself the most comfortable status at a given time. That is all. It is a matter of the sovereign choice of an independent state, based on its current national interests. This is precisely what makes the SCO attractive!
Hosts: Next year the SCO will mark its 25th anniversary. For such an Organization, is that much or little?
Yuri Yarmolinsky: I think, in today’s terms, this is sufficient to establish itself, to become self-sufficient, and to confidently assert itself on the international stage. The Organization today differs dramatically from the “Shanghai Five” created at the dawn of the 21st century. Yet from the perspective of historical retrospection, 25 years is but a moment. Another matter is that the dynamically changing international environment, with its accompanying risks and challenges, accelerates its “maturation” far more quickly than if it were unfolding under ordinary, relatively comfortable conditions. Such early acceleration—especially amid regular geopolitical stress—has effects that require constant adjustment.
Hosts: At the upcoming summit, a new 10-year SCO development strategy until 2035 is expected to be adopted. The term of the previous strategy expires this year. What has been achieved from the outlined goals? What has not been achieved, and for what reasons?
Yuri Yarmolinsky: Yes, such a document has been prepared. We are proud that BISR, for its part, participated in its coordination regarding the track of expert diplomacy. However, the Strategy is conceptual in nature, not an action plan with specific measures, timelines, and responsible implementers. It reflects a common vision of principles, long-term benchmarks, and directions of SCO evolution, taking into account accumulated experience and the ongoing modernization process. Therefore, to speak in terms of “done/not done” and why would not be entirely correct.
I regard it as a great success in itself that under today’s conditions of uncertainty and turbulence, when the international environment changes several times a day, the SCO has managed to adopt such a long-term planning horizon. I am confident that the Strategy-2035 has been drafted in the spirit of continuity, including taking into account revisions of its previous version conducted by the SCO Secretariat and other stakeholders.
Hosts: The regional security system was one of the SCO’s founding goals. Has the Organization achieved full readiness to conduct counterterrorist or peacekeeping operations?
Yuri Yarmolinsky: Indeed, the SCO was created as a discussion platform for heads of state to address border issues and strengthen regional security in Central Asia, including through joint efforts to combat the “three evils”—terrorism, separatism, and extremism. Today, the SCO conducts counterterrorism and command-staff exercises, and exchanges relevant information. But it does not possess peacekeeping forces in the traditional sense. At the same time, we should remember that SCO members such as Belarus, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan are also members of the CSTO, which has Collective Rapid Reaction Forces.
Hosts: What measures can the SCO take to strengthen security in the region?
Yuri Yarmolinsky: In Tashkent, on the basis of the SCO RATS, it has been decided to establish a Universal Center for Countering Security Challenges and Threats. In Dushanbe, an Anti-Drug Center will be created. In Bishkek, a structure to combat organized crime will be formed. Kazakhstan has proposed creating a Cybersecurity Center in Almaty. These mechanisms are intended to provide additional opportunities to effectively suppress contemporary risks, challenges, and threats.
Hosts: How would you assess the prospects for strengthening the economic dimension within the SCO—for example, the creation of an SCO bank or a full-fledged free trade zone?
Yuri Yarmolinsky: Such initiatives are undoubtedly to be welcomed, given that economic integration within the SCO lags noticeably behind the political track. This is why all these decisions, as well as Strategy-2035, the Program of Multilateral Trade and Economic Cooperation, the Economic Development Strategy until 2030, and other documents create the necessary infrastructure for this.
However, I would refrain from far-reaching forecasts at this point. I can only hope that economic integration in the SCO space over the next ten years will proceed more dynamically and effectively than in the previous period. As one of my colleagues remarked, “SCO and BRICS are not yet about accounting.” There are too many diverse nuances at the level of member states.
At the same time, when some SCO members are under economic and political sanctions, and others risk secondary sanctions, this makes the deepening of multilateral trade and economic cooperation within the SCO a more critical and urgent necessity.
Hosts: As far as we know, each SCO member has the right of veto, and all decisions are made by consensus. How do such diverse countries, with different scales, cultures, and religions, manage to reach consensus?
Yuri Yarmolinsky: This is the result of intensive multi-level and multi-stage diplomacy, mostly behind the scenes and non-public. A key role is played by the commonality of goals and interests, and the political will of leaders—derivatives of the “Shanghai Spirit.” Although sometimes there are setbacks, when some member states refuse to sign certain documents or do so with reservations. And this is normal, given their objective differences! Incidentally, some analysts have argued for revising the principle of consensus in favor of majority rule, especially on the most important economic issues. I am inclined to agree with such an approach. It might allow for faster and more decisive action, giving life to many initiatives, without obliging dissenting states to comply. But this issue is the exclusive prerogative of the SCO heads of state.
Hosts: At the summit, leaders of countries that are not very friendly toward one another are expected to be present. Could this affect the course of the meeting or hinder decision-making?
Yuri Yarmolinsky: Again, this is a matter of preventive multilateral diplomacy, especially at the level of leaders, plus their basic political and strategic culture. I cannot recall a single summit that was marred by a public scandal. It is difficult to imagine that a high-ranking invited politician would come to Tianjin just to stage a demarche there. To understand what this would look like and entail, one need only recall the episode in the Oval Office in February.
Hosts: From Washington, there have been threats directed at BRICS, claiming that it undermines U.S. interests. No such statements seem to have been made about the SCO. Does the SCO not cause concern for the United States?
Yuri Yarmolinsky: Indeed, such threats have recently been voiced. It so happened that BRICS is perceived in the West as the main economic antagonist. To some extent, we ourselves are to blame, when in pursuit of sensationalism we irresponsibly and publicly speculate on sensitive topics—such as proposing a hypothetical BRICS “common currency” against the U.S. dollar—thus provoking even a declining, yet still influential, hegemon. As the saying goes, finance loves silence! But the most important thing is to remember that the core of BRICS is also the SCO! Therefore, such threats are quite relevant (albeit indirectly) to this Organization as well. Moreover, the Americans are quick to find “culprits.” To minimize such risks, we must move away from rhetoric of opposition to the West and toward narratives of self-sufficiency, emphasizing sustainable development within the BRICS and SCO space.
Hosts: Belarus is currently a BRICS partner country (since January 2025). What are our prospects of becoming a full member?
Yuri Yarmolinsky: According to the assessments of the Belarusian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, our chances of full BRICS membership—which is positioned as a foreign policy priority—are quite high. However, in my view, we should first become well acquainted and established internally in the status of partner country, and study the mechanics of key processes and mechanisms. After all, membership is not an end in itself, but painstaking daily work. Incidentally, BISR, within the framework of the presidentially approved “Strategy of Action for the Implementation of the Foreign Policy of the Republic of Belarus in the Framework of Participation in BRICS Activities”, is considering joining the BRICS Think Tank Council—an international dialogue platform bringing together leading research institutes and think tanks of member states and partners (an analogue of the SCO Forum).
Hosts: You once stated, “Belarus’s participation in the SCO and BRICS provides it with freedom of geopolitical maneuver.” Could you elaborate on this thesis?
Yuri Yarmolinsky: In brief, it means the existence of a strategic alternative or backup plan at any moment. Put more academically, freedom of geopolitical maneuver is the ability of a state to independently, without external interference, determine and pursue its foreign policy, select partners and allies in economy and trade, and make independent decisions in defense and security, in accordance with its current national interests.
Hosts: Are SCO and BRICS countries ready to counter threats from the United States? Is there potential to resist the hegemon?
Yuri Yarmolinsky: There is certainly potential, just look at the economic and military profiles of the key member states of both blocs. However, this is a necessary but not sufficient condition. The best response to challenges and threats is our cohesion and unity. The SCO today is undergoing a historic stress test, perhaps the most serious in its history. We see how the powerful of this world, through trade tariffs (essentially political sanctions) under the guise of quasi-peacemaking, are already encroaching on the sovereignty and security of even the strongest members of the Organization. Only together can we resolve our problems and realize our advantages. We simply must consolidate within the SCO’s zone of responsibility in order to become stronger. If all member states undertake concrete efforts, then no one, anywhere, at any time will be able to destabilize our situation.
Hosts: India recently refused to yield to Trump. Could tariffs push India toward Russia and China rather than sever relations? What opportunities might this open for Belarus?
Yuri Yarmolinsky: Relations will not be severed—the institutional “umbilical cord” and mutual strategic dependencies are too strong. One must not discount the four-million-strong Indian diaspora in the U.S., which is influential and integrated into key decision-making centers. This is a serious resource for New Delhi. Yet the sense of insult to national dignity from public humiliation will remain, reducing trust in the relationship. These factors will influence strategic decision-making in the long term, as well as stimulate—already happening—the diversification of foreign trade toward the SCO, BRICS, ASEAN, and Africa, toward the Global South, within balancing strategies. At the same time, despite fundamental contradictions and lingering mistrust, India will continue to adjust (as much as possible) its relations with China—processes launched at the Kazan BRICS summit in 2024. Simultaneously, New Delhi will seek reserves to expand comprehensive cooperation with Moscow. The high-level shuttle diplomacy of recent months among the three capitals makes it possible to speak of the potential resumption of the Russia–India–China (RIC) dialogue format, frozen since 2018. The main question is whether the parties, especially India and China, will manage to resolve existing contradictions and move from situational responses to U.S. actions toward long-term strategic cooperation. For our bilateral agenda, in my view, India’s “moment of truth” against the backdrop of the U.S. tariff-sanctions maneuver opens a window of opportunity for Belarusian diplomacy in the context of a long-overdue reset of Belarus–India relations. The forthcoming SCO summit in Tianjin provides a good basis for this.
Hosts: You initiated the creation of the Belarus–India expert dialogue “Nemiga–Yamuna.” Could you tell us more about it?
Yuri Yarmolinsky: There will not be many details, since the matter is still under consideration and official review. I can say that BISR strives to keep pace with the times, and even get ahead, preparing within its competence the appropriate expert platform for the future bilateral agenda. The idea arose in 2024 during participation in the international conference “Raisina Dialogue” in New Delhi; it was put on paper and conveyed to Indian colleagues, but at first it did not advance. This year, we clarified its objectives and provided a cultural-civilizational foundation, thereby striking a “nerve” with our partners—and the work began. Hence the name “Nemiga–Yamuna,” sacred rivers for both nations. With favorable circumstances, we expect a decision by the end of the year. We will keep you informed!
Hosts: This year in January, SCO Secretary-General Nurlan Yermekbayev visited BISR. In May you participated in the 20th meeting of the SCO Forum. How is BISR’s cooperation with the SCO developing?
Yuri Yarmolinsky: A series of thematic lectures by ambassadors of SCO member states accredited in Minsk has been launched. The head of the Chinese diplomatic mission has already visited us. Negotiations are underway with the embassies of India, Pakistan, Russia, Iran, and Kazakhstan. In New Delhi, partners from national research centers of SCO member states were presented with a draft Concept of SCO Expert Diplomacy. This is our first initiative in the new status, aimed at systematizing and institutionalizing the role of the expert-analytical community within the Organization. Under the Consortium of Economic Analytical Centers, preparation is underway for the annual analytical report to the 24th SCO Council of Heads of Government meeting on the theme: “Priority Directions for Strengthening Trade and Industrial Cooperation in the SCO Region, Taking into Account the Implementation of Sustainable Development Goals of Member States.” A draft regulation has also been developed on the Public Scientific and Expert Council of BISR on SCO Affairs. Systematic work continues on bilateral tracks with partners from member states, dialogue partners, and observers. We are preparing for meetings with many of them in October at the 3rd Minsk International Conference on Eurasian Security.
Hosts: Back in 2022, at the Samarkand summit, Alexander Lukashenko stated that the SCO was transforming from a regional into a global organization and emphasized: “It is important not to miss the moment.” Three years have passed. In your view, has the moment been missed?
Yuri Yarmolinsky: This question cannot be considered in isolation and apart from the overall context. And besides, three years for the implementation of a global project is too little to draw even preliminary conclusions. Everything is still in process. In general, I believe it is not globalism that we should strive for, but rather the resolution of “earthly” problems, of which there are many in the SCO region. Especially since we see the state of global platforms such as the UN and OSCE today. Perhaps this defines the current strength and attractiveness of the SCO and BRICS. First, we must “bring to proper readiness” what has already been created and is functioning, and only then scale these best practices globally.
Hosts: Most SCO member states were allies in the fight against the Hitler coalition, contributing decisively to the defeat of Nazi occupiers and Japanese militarists. Is it merely coincidental that the summit is taking place on the eve of Beijing’s Victory Parade?
Yuri Yarmolinsky: For an analyst, any coincidence is simply a pattern not yet fully studied. In international affairs, no coincidence is truly accidental, and symbolism plays a crucial signaling role—especially in the East, in Asia. Even more so in the current tense international environment, as the old world order is collapsing.
If we pay attention, most SCO summits take place in summer, primarily in July. Here, however, everything is shifted closer to September, and it is deliberately tied to a specific commemorative date. Questions of historical memory and historical truth are relevant today for all countries, including China. Presumably, according to the organizers’ intent, the symbolism lies in the fact that, as eighty years ago, the progressive majority of the world is once again confronting collective global evil. Beijing and Moscow, together with like-minded countries, are at the forefront of this struggle. A parade is always a demonstration of power. The reactions of the EU and Japan to this forthcoming event provide indirect confirmation of this hypothesis. I believe that, for a careful and thoughtful observer, both the upcoming SCO summit and the military parade in Beijing will offer rich material for reflection and expert analysis.