A Joint Declaration is signed when all the member states in a multilateral Forum, mutually agree to an agreement on a certain issue. It is a formal statement by multiple states expressing shared positions. If any one state disagrees on a particular point, it cannot be called as a Joint Declaration.
One such declaration, which came to be known as Bishkek Declaration, was signed on September 1, 2026, following the 26th SCO Summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). SCO is a permanent Eurasian political, economic and security inter-governmental organization which is aimed at promoting mutual trust and effective cooperation in trade, politics, energy, security and counter-terrorism along with maintaining regional stability. SCO accounts for 43% of the world’s population and 23% of the world economy. It was founded in Shanghai, China on 15th June, 2001. There are ten member countries as of now which includes India, China, Pakistan, Iran, Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan.
Why India’s Position Matters?
Bishkek declaration condemned attacks and sanctions on Iran along with the attacks on Palestine, backed Iranian NPT rights, talked about economic and energy cooperation and condemned terrorism in all of its forms and manifestations. As New Delhi signed the statement criticizing military strikes- this raises an important question- Why is New Delhi adopting such an approach now, when criticism of the United States and Israel has not been the norm in Indian foreign policy?
Initially, it refrained from explicitly condemning the assassination of Ayatollah Khamenei. Five days later, when a condolence register was opened, Prime Minister Narendra Modi did not attend it personally; instead, he delegated a minister to represent the government.
Therefore, India’s endorsement of the statement raises questions about the strategic considerations underlying the decision. Its timing, particularly ahead of the BRICS summit, is significant. It may indicate an attempt to balance competing diplomatic interests while maintaining India’s position within a polarised international order.
The Pakistan factor
India and Pakistan have repeatedly confronted each other at multilateral forums over allegations of terrorism and cross-border militancy. At the SCO summit, Prime Minister Narendra Modi again called for an end to “double standards” in combating terrorism. He also urged countries that to recognize that use of terrorism as an instrument of policy should not be tolerated. His remarks were widely understood as an indirect reference to Pakistan.
At the same time, Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif in his speech portrayed Pakistan as a victim of terrorism itself and emphasised the country’s sacrifices in combating it.
The Bishkek Declaration itself adopted a broader formulation, condemning terrorism, separatism and extremism in all forms, rejecting double standards and calling for action against the cross-border movement of terrorists.
This creates an interesting diplomatic space for India. New Delhi was able to endorse a collective declaration that included Pakistan while simultaneously maintaining its own position on terrorism. Rather than allowing the SCO statement to determine its bilateral narrative with Pakistan, India appears to have used its own intervention to reinforce its established security concerns.
India’s balancing act
India’s position at Bishkek appears more complicated than a straightforward exercise of strategic autonomy. New Delhi has developed strong strategic and economic ties with both the United States and Israel, making its endorsement of a declaration that explicitly criticises military strikes on Iran particularly significant.
The timing also deserves attention. With the BRICS summit approaching, India is operating within a wider diplomatic environment in which questions about the future of the international order, the role of emerging powers and the influence of the Global South are becoming important.
India is a member of both BRICS and the SCO. This gives it a position within institutions that challenge the dominance of the existing Western-led order.
It does not necessarily mean that India is moving away from the United States or Israel. Rather, the Bishkek Declaration highlights the difficulty of maintaining close partnerships with the West while simultaneously participating in multilateral groupings where Russia, China and Iran hold significant influence.
The Pakistan factor should not be underplayed. India and Pakistan signed the same declaration, even as Prime Minister Narendra Modi used the summit to strongly criticise countries that support or provide safe havens to terrorism.
India appears to be separating its participation in multilateral institutions from its bilateral disagreements, particularly with Pakistan.
The larger question is whether this balancing approach will remain sustainable because divisions between the United States and its allies on one side and Russia, China and their partners on the other side are becoming more pronounced. The Bishkek Declaration, ahead of the BRICS summit, may offer an important indication of how India intends to navigate a divided international system.
What does this mean for India?
The Declaration reflects a growing complexity of India’s foreign-policy choices. New Delhi is attempting to maintain its strategic partnerships with the United States and Israel while remaining actively engaged with Russia, Iran, China and other members of the SCO and BRICS.
Its decision to endorse the declaration suggests that India does not want its relations with the West to determine its position in every multilateral forum.
At the same time, the declaration gives India diplomatic space to emphasise principles such as national sovereignty, territorial integrity, opposition to unilateral sanctions and the peaceful resolution of conflicts. These positions allow New Delhi to engage with countries that have sharply different views from its Western partners without abandoning its existing relationships.
The Pakistan dimension is equally important. India and Pakistan endorsed the same declaration, even though New Delhi continues to accuse Pakistan of supporting cross-border terrorism. This demonstrates that India can participate in the same multilateral framework as Pakistan while maintaining a separate and firm bilateral position on security issues.
The approaching BRICS summit adds another layer to this strategy. As India participates in institutions that bring together both Western partners and countries challenging the existing global order, its foreign policy is defined by managing contradictions rather than choosing one side.
Conclusion
The Bishkek Declaration does not necessarily signal a shift in India’s strategic partnerships. Instead, it highlights New Delhi’s attempt to preserve diplomatic flexibility at a time when international alignments are becoming polarised. India’s challenge will be to maintain its relationships with the United States and Israel while continuing to engage with Russia, Iran, China and the wider Global South that challenge the Global order through platforms such as the SCO and BRICS.
