There are moments in international politics that feel less like staged rituals and more like inflection points, moments when the choreography of leaders on a stage reveals as much as any declaration. The recent Shanghai Cooperation Organisation summit in China was one of those moments. Not because it produced a dramatic breakthrough or transformed global alignments overnight; it did not, but because of a single tableau that has already echoed far beyond the conference hall. Narendra Modi, Vladimir Putin, and Xi Jinping stood together, side by side, in a carefully arranged photograph. It was a moment thick with rivalry, heavy with symbolism. For some, it signalled the emergence of a new axis. For others, it was merely an awkward convergence, a snapshot of convenience in a world of shifting alignments.
At first glance, the chemistry of the three leaders seemed to offer clues. Modi’s handshake with Xi was firm but cool, burdened with the memory of the Ladakh standoff and an unresolved border that remains one of the world’s most dangerous flashpoints. The exchange lacked warmth, yet its very occurrence was significant: here were two rivals who have not found common ground for years, still pragmatic enough to share a stage. With Putin, Modi’s body language was warmer, marked by a smile that seemed easier, almost familiar. It reminded the world that India and Russia share a strategic intimacy that has weathered decades, even if the West wishes it otherwise. Xi’s demeanour was more reserved, composed but calculating, projecting the air of a leader presiding over a multipolar club in which China holds the largest stake. These differences spoke to old partnerships, new frictions, and the unfinished business of a multipolar world still being shaped.
For India, the SCO has always been a paradox: both a necessity and a burden. Joining in 2017 gave New Delhi a seat at the Eurasian table dominated by Moscow and Beijing, an opportunity to maintain relevance in Central Asia and avoid ceding ground to China. Yet membership also comes with awkward optics, being grouped with Pakistan in an organisation where China often drives the agenda. Modi’s decision to attend this year was deliberate, signalling that India will not walk away and allow Beijing unchallenged influence. His presence was a statement that even in forums not of its design, India will remain visible and assertive, carving out space in an arena where it is often outnumbered.
For Putin, the summit was an opportunity to demonstrate endurance. With the war in Ukraine ongoing and Western sanctions tightening, Moscow needed the SCO to show that it is not isolated. The image of Putin standing with Modi and Xi, leaders of two of the world’s largest economies, was priceless for Russian state media and an important reminder to the West that Russia retains influential partners. His visible warmth toward Modi carried its own message. To Beijing, it signalled that Moscow still values ties beyond the Chinese orbit and will not become a junior partner by default. To Washington, it was a reminder that India, a country courted by the U.S. as a counterweight to China, is not abandoning its old friend. The optics were less about nostalgia than leverage.
Xi’s calculations were more layered. Hosting both Putin and Modi allowed him to project the SCO as a forum that challenges Western-led narratives, proof that Eurasia can set its own agenda. Yet Xi also had to balance appearances. He avoided overplaying dominance, aware that too much Chinese assertiveness breeds unease among both Russia and India. His restraint suggested confidence but also caution. With Putin, his body language hinted at camaraderie born of shared strategic goals. With Modi, it remained formal, careful, neither hostile nor warm, a reflection of how China views India as both competitor and indispensable interlocutor. The quietness of Xi’s posture underscored a reality: China may dominate the SCO, but it cannot fully control it.
For Pakistan, the summit was a reminder of diminished stature. Once eager to use the SCO to match India’s presence in Central Asia, Islamabad now found itself overshadowed. Political turmoil at home, economic fragility, and diplomatic marginalisation meant its voice was faint. Its leaders were present but peripheral, their statements drowned out by larger narratives. The contrast with Iran’s entry was stark. Tehran arrived with purpose, ready to use SCO as a platform to resist isolation and align with Beijing and Moscow. Azerbaijan’s restraint from membership offered another perspective: not all regional players want to be drawn into the gravitational pull of Moscow and Beijing, preferring flexibility to entanglement. These nuances reminded the world that SCO expansion is not automatic; it is a selective and contested process.
The summit’s declarations echoed familiar themes; terrorism, connectivity, multipolarity but with sharper undertones. De-dollarisation and local currency settlements surfaced in discussions, reflecting a shared interest in reducing dependence on the U.S. financial system. Energy corridors and transport projects were floated, especially with Iran’s inclusion. Yet the contradictions were visible. India continues to resist China’s Belt and Road Initiative, particularly the China–Pakistan Economic Corridor that cuts through territory claimed by India. Central Asian states remain wary of being subsumed into either Moscow’s orbit or Beijing’s. Russia itself worries about becoming too dependent on China. The SCO is less a bloc than a bazaar of interests, where cooperation meets mistrust.
Washington and its allies watched the tableau with unease. The concern was less about the SCO becoming a coherent anti-Western bloc, few analysts believe that likely, and more about the symbolism of three major non-Western leaders presenting an alternative stage. The sight of Modi, a leader celebrated in Washington for strengthening Quad and resisting Chinese assertiveness, standing shoulder to shoulder with Xi and Putin unsettled policymakers. For them, it raised the uncomfortable question of whether India’s strategic autonomy could sometimes undercut U.S. attempts to consolidate an “anti-China” front in the Indo-Pacific. For New Delhi, however, the same imagery was evidence of confidence. The ability to sit at both tables—Quad and SCO, Washington and Moscow were not contradiction but choice, a refusal to be boxed into one alliance. Every handshake, every photo-op, was a reminder that India remains a sovereign player in a world of shifting coalitions.
The critics, as always, were quick to downplay. For them, the SCO remains more theatre than substance, a forum long on declarations and short on delivery. Unlike NATO, it has no shared defence mechanism. Unlike the G20, it lacks global economic weight. Divergent interests among members from India–China rivalry to Central Asian anxieties; limit its capacity to act as a unified bloc. Seen in this light, the Modi–Putin–Xi photo-op was less a harbinger of a new order and more a performance of resilience, leaders using the stage to remind the world that they remain relevant.
And yet, the moment matters precisely because of its ambiguity. The world is entering an era of overlapping and often contradictory memberships. India can be in Quad and SCO, Russia can depend on China while still valuing India, China can host both adversaries and partners in the same hall. The geometry is not fixed but fluid, drawn and redrawn summit by summit. It is not a chessboard of rigid alliances but a shifting puzzle, each side testing angles of convenience and caution. In this sense, the SCO triangle is a mirror of today’s multipolar disorder: cooperation, competition, and contradiction under one roof.
What humanises this story is the chemistry of leaders. Analysts dissected gestures like scripture: Putin leaning toward Modi with easy familiarity, Xi maintaining distance, Modi managing both relationships with visible calculation. Were these mere formalities, or signals of deeper alignments? International politics often reduces to posture, to how leaders choose to smile, or not, in front of cameras. The choreography matters because it tells us not just how states interact but how they wish to be seen. And in a world where narrative is power, the tableau of three leaders together spoke volumes.
Beneath the geopolitics lies a simple truth: no country can afford to be locked into one story. Modi’s presence with Putin and Xi was a reminder that India will not be written solely into Washington’s narrative, nor serve as a footnote to Beijing’s ambitions. It will write its own script, sometimes parallel, sometimes perpendicular to others. For Putin, the summit was about proving survival, a declaration that Russia is not a pariah. For Xi, it was about showing Eurasia as his stage without appearing domineering. For Modi, it was about balance, proving that India can engage all sides without losing itself.
In the end, the most powerful outcome of the SCO summit may not have been any communique or policy proposal but the tableau itself. Three men, each carrying the weight of their nations and their rivalries, sharing a stage in China. Their gestures, their silences, their restrained words, became part of a larger story; the story of power shifting eastward, of blocs giving way to balances, of certainty dissolving into ambiguity. It is a story still unfolding, one in which no photograph is ever just a photograph, and no silence is ever empty. The SCO triangle was neither signal nor mirage, but a fleeting glimpse of how nations survive today: by improvising through fracture and fluidity.
Dr. Gaurav Vaid
Freelance Writer & Analyst
gauravvaid2010@gmail.com
Source: https://greaterjammu.com/epaper/epaper/edition/685/epaper-4-09-2025/page/6