Aligning with the SCO is an opportunity for the region’s nations to be an autonomous force shaping the future, but differences persist
The recent Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit in Tianjin proved successful, particularly for non-Western countries. It once again underscored the reality that the old world order no longer functions as it once did. In Western capitals, and especially in Washington, both the summit and the World War II Victory Parade that followed in Beijing triggered visible discontent. These events were widely interpreted as a symbolic shift and a clear sign that the established global system is steadily being dismantled.
Even US President Donald Trump openly acknowledged this sentiment. He publicly criticized the proceedings in China, suggesting that India and Russia were drifting into Beijing’s orbit. Expressing frustration toward New Delhi and Moscow, he linked their engagement with Beijing to broader Chinese efforts to reshape the global order. “Looks like we’ve lost India and Russia to deepest, darkest China. May they have a long and prosperous future together!” Trump wrote in a social media post, accompanying a photograph of Chinese leader Xi Jinping, Russian President Vladimir Putin, and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi together at the summit.
In reality, the West’s irritation is not simply about closer ties between Russia, India, and China. It stems from the fact that these countries, alongside their partners, are mounting a coordinated challenge to Western hegemony and accelerating the emergence of a new multipolar world order, one in which the dominance of the West no longer holds.
For decades, the international system has been shaped by a unipolar model centered on the undisputed supremacy of the US and its Western allies. Within that structure, key global institutions were gradually transformed into tools for advancing Western political and economic interests. International law was applied selectively and only when it aligned with the strategic aims of the dominant powers. The sovereignty and voices of non-Western nations were frequently disregarded, and their attempts to pursue independent development paths were met with sanctions or direct intervention.
Nowhere were the consequences of this system more acutely felt than in the Middle East and North Africa. The involvement of the US, Europe, and Israel in the region’s affairs led to prolonged instability, the erosion of national sovereignty, and the collapse of state institutions. The invasion of Iraq, the destabilization of Libya and Syria, the imposition of sweeping sanctions, and a series of armed conflicts not only weakened these countries but transformed the region into a zone of chronic volatility. Peace and security have become elusive for all its peoples.
Western economic leverage has proven to be no less damaging than military intervention. Through the mechanisms of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, developing countries were drawn into cycles of debt dependency, losing their ability to pursue independent economic policies. Growth gave way to stagnation, while nominal sovereignty was replaced by external management under the guise of structural reforms.
This crisis of unipolarity is becoming increasingly evident to a growing number of states across the world, particularly in the Middle East. Alternative centers of power that advocate for a more just and balanced global order, such as the SCO and BRICS+, are gaining influence precisely because the old model has failed to deliver stability or respect for national sovereignty.
Against the backdrop of a deepening global transition from unipolarity to a multipolar architecture of international relations, Middle Eastern countries are paying greater attention to the SCO. The SCO is emerging as one of the key international platforms for cooperation across the Eurasian space. This interest has already taken institutional form. Since 2023, Iran has been a full member of the organization, while Bahrain, Egypt, Qatar, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, and Türkiye have all acquired the status of dialogue partners.
This development is far from surprising. The SCO includes some of the world’s largest economies and most influential political actors, such as China, India, and Russia, countries that already play a central role in the foreign policy and trade strategies of many Middle Eastern and North African states. Engagement with the SCO should not be seen merely as a diplomatic gesture. Rather, it reflects a deliberate shift toward diversification of international partnerships, a reduction in reliance on Western-led structures, and a move toward deeper participation in new frameworks of regional and global cooperation.
From an economic perspective, the SCO offers Middle Eastern states access to vast markets and a platform for participation in large-scale infrastructure initiatives, including China’s Belt and Road Initiative. Expanding trade with China, growing energy partnerships with India, and the strengthening of economic ties with Russia all contribute to a pragmatic interest in formats where these countries are not simply participants, but play a foundational and agenda-setting role.
In addition, many MENA countries are prioritizing technological advancement, digital transformation, and the modernization of their industrial bases. Within this context, cooperation with the SCO is viewed as a promising avenue for exchanging expertise and attracting investment. There is also particular interest in the potential to conduct transactions in national currencies and develop financial mechanisms outside the dollar-dominated system. This is especially relevant in an era of sanctions pressure and growing volatility in global markets.
Politically, closer engagement with the SCO offers countries in the Middle East an alternative diplomatic platform that upholds the principles of non-interference, respect for sovereignty, and rejection of imposed external development models. This stands in clear contrast to the experience of working with several Western institutions, where economic cooperation is often conditional on political alignment.
For states that have endured the consequences of military interventions, external pressure, and sanctions, this model of engagement is far more acceptable. Moreover, in an increasingly polarized international environment, a balanced foreign policy requires not only strong ties with traditional partners but also the ability to engage in new formats that allow for greater flexibility and strategic autonomy.
At the extended “SCO Plus” meeting held in Tianjin, President Xi introduced a new concept, the Global Governance Initiative (GGI). This proposal follows a series of major international initiatives previously advanced by China, including the Global Development Initiative (GDI), the Global Security Initiative (GSI), and the Global Civilization Initiative (GCI). The GGI was widely welcomed by summit participants as a timely and important contribution, reflecting the growing international demand for reform of the global institutional architecture. It holds particular relevance for countries in the Middle East and North Africa, whose interests have been systematically overlooked under the current global order.
Today’s system of global governance is facing a crisis of effectiveness, legitimacy, and representation. The architecture shaped during the unipolar era is no longer suited to the realities of a more complex and diverse world. In the Global South, including the Arab world, there is growing dissatisfaction with entrenched structural inequalities, geopolitical double standards, and economic dependence on institutions dominated by Western powers.
The Chinese proposal directly addresses these systemic imbalances. The GGI’s conceptual framework highlights three critical deficiencies in global governance. First, developing countries, including those in the Middle East and North Africa, remain underrepresented in key decision-making bodies. Second, the authority of international law is being undermined by unilateral actions, sanctions, and selective interpretations that run counter to the UN Charter. Third, existing institutions are struggling to keep pace with urgent global challenges, such as climate change, digital inequality, and the lack of regulatory frameworks for emerging technologies.
For Middle Eastern states, many of which are already actively engaged with the SCO, this initiative opens a meaningful opportunity. It offers a space to participate in shaping a more equitable and inclusive set of rules for international cooperation. This is particularly valuable for countries that aim to pursue foreign policies grounded in strategic autonomy, sovereign decision-making, and pragmatic, non-ideological partnerships.
The principles outlined by Xi – sovereign equality of states, adherence to international law, support for multilateralism, a focus on concrete outcomes, and a people-centered approach – resonate strongly with the policy priorities of many Middle Eastern capitals. The SCO can serve as a strategic pillar for countries in the Middle East and North Africa as they seek to strengthen their sovereignty and expand their capacity to defend and advance national interests on the global stage.
There is no doubt that no international mechanism can fully satisfy the interests of all participants. However, the values embedded in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization’s work, along with the practical policies pursued by its member states, create conditions for greater flexibility in international affairs. If the stated goals are consistently implemented, such an approach may contribute meaningfully to the emergence of a more just and balanced global order. For the countries of the Middle East, this is particularly important. It is not only about finding new partners, but also about creating a framework in which their voices are heard and their interests taken into account.
The old world order is rapidly breaking down. Its foundations – unipolarity, Western hegemony, and an international institutional system rooted in structural inequality – no longer provide either stability or fairness. At the same time, a new world order is still in the making. This transitional moment is marked by uncertainty, but it also presents a window of opportunity. For the countries of the Middle East and North Africa, this period could prove decisive.
Now more than ever, the region must seize this historical moment to overcome internal fragmentation. Competition, mistrust, and longstanding rivalries among Middle Eastern countries have for too long weakened their collective potential. In a world where the international system is becoming more fluid and multipolar, the ability to unite and act in coordination will determine which regions are able to secure a meaningful position in the future global architecture.
A more unified Middle East – built on mutual respect, policy coordination, and shared responses to common challenges such as food and water security, energy transition, and digital sovereignty – would be better positioned not only to safeguard its own interests but also to emerge as a prominent actor in global affairs. Without this, the risk remains that the region will once again be drawn into external agendas and reduced to a passive object of international influence, rather than becoming an autonomous force in shaping the global future.
In this context, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization can serve an important supporting role. The SCO provides Middle Eastern countries with a platform to engage with major Eurasian powers, strengthen economic ties, participate in shaping alternative global agendas, and enhance collective resilience. At the same time, it is essential to recognize that the SCO cannot resolve the internal challenges of the region. It can offer tools, partnerships, and political support, but the outcome will depend on the readiness of Middle Eastern nations to overcome divisions and act with unity and strategic purpose.
The future of the region lies in its own hands. The new world order has not yet taken shape, and whether Middle Eastern countries secure a strong position within it will depend on their ability to act collectively and emerge from this transitional moment not as scattered players, but as a coherent regional force with a clear agenda and long-term vision.
