Shanghai Cooperation Organisation

Lord Moynihan Excerpts

Thursday 16th October 2025 Grand Committee

[Lord Moynihan (Con)]

My Lords, it is an honour to follow the noble Lord, Lord Skidelsky, not least because I am in complete agreement with the last point that he made. It is a central one in this debate.

We face a new world order in which diplomacy is adapting, somewhat slowly, to the characteristics of populist government. A populist, social media-driven world is inherently less stable, less predictable and more dangerous. Against this background, the SCO and the western-led liberal orders offer very distinct frameworks for international co-operation and governance, which will need to adapt to these changes.

As highlighted by the 2025 Tianjin summit, the SCO emphasises collective security, counterterrorism and regional stability, valuing sovereignty and non-interference by the West. The western-led liberal order prioritises free market economics, democratic governance and human rights. The SCO, primarily centred on Eurasia, with key members such as China, as we have heard, Russia and India, fosters regional alliances. The western-led order is global in scope, with institutions such as the UN and the World Trade Organisation seeking to play central roles, while populist leaders in the West condemn their ineffectiveness and outdated irrelevance. How should the British Government respond?

First, I argue that we need to update our analysis of UK policy in the region to take account of fast-moving post-SCO meeting events. New objectives must be redefined through engagement opportunities. The UK could and should more vigorously engage with SCO countries to enhance trade ties and collaborate on security issues, particularly in combating terrorism and drug trafficking. With the western-led order, we should continue and strengthen participation which supports our economic interests and growth through bilateral and global trade, while reinforcing but not seeking to impose democratic values and human rights.

We must be more sensitive to the fact that change takes time, so the macropolitical message from Tianjin for us is to evaluate which partnerships align most with our long-term national interests. We must engage in dialogue and definitely not disengage with both SCO and western-led countries. We must explore mutual benefits and seek a balance between promoting democratic values and securing economic interests. We should forget calls for cultural imposition and the forceful use of unequal power dynamics: they lead years of work in building co-operation and respect down an abrupt cul-de-sac.

There is certainly a case for more active diplomacy and fewer public shouting matches, so we should be leveraging diplomatic, economic and cultural tools to influence and engage with SCO member states through bilateral dialogue, multilateral platforms and cultural, sporting and educational exchange programmes. We must rediscover the might of soft power. Above all, we should encourage UK businesses to adopt responsible trade practices that emphasise ethical standards, seeking through diplomacy and respect to influence human rights and to reach out for global action on global challenges such as climate change, where equitable co-operation is vital. It is such a platform that allows for the most effective advocacy for human rights and fair governance, with support for like-minded NGOs that we can fund and support in their work towards human rights and fair governance in SCO countries.

I will give one example of how we can put this approach into practice in countries of the SCO and, in particular, in Uzbekistan. The relationship between the UK Government and Uzbekistan is currently marked by a spirit of co-operation and growing engagement. With a growing economy, young population and active foreign policy, Uzbekistan serves as a key for transportation, logistics and cultural exchange in Eurasia. From a purely strategic point of view, Uzbekistan can be seen as a potential world-class provider of rare earth minerals. Keen to develop its significant and mostly untapped resources, Uzbek Government-led entities seek to form joint ventures, attract foreign investment and explore new projects, with a view to becoming major global suppliers for high-tech and green energy industries.

Uzbekistan and the UK have already signed an ambitious co-operation programme for 2025-26, covering politics, economics, education, energy and climate change. Frequent visits and meetings between senior Ministers support regular strategic dialogue and promote trust. The UK’s involvement in Uzbek higher education is a central pillar of this relationship, and the UK actively supports Uzbekistan in ensuring governance reform, economic development and human rights.

Collaboration on border security, training and climate resilience reflects a broadening agenda beyond trade. Uzbekistan is critical to security in the region and beyond, not least with its shared border with Afghanistan, and that is an important part of our national security. We should be more active on the front foot with Uzbekistan. For example, an invitation to the President is long overdue, in my view. At the very least, we should continue to build on the significant strengths of countries such as Uzbekistan, whose focus on pragmatic multivector diplomacy means that we should strengthen the relationship with the country as a valued partner, to act as a balance to the somewhat less advanced relationships with some other members of the SCO.

For all the concerns that have been expressed, the outcomes from the meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation in Tianjin are an opportunity for careful engagement, while always being aware of the potential risks and challenges. In the new world reality, we would be unwise not to identify and pursue these opportunities, fully respecting and understanding the differences that separate us.