SCO Summit: Opposition Warns Against Pakistan-China ‘Jugalbandi’

At the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) Summit, senior Congress leaders expressed varied perspectives on India’s handling of China, the United States, and broader foreign policy challenges.

Divergent Opinions within Congress
Congress communication head Jairam Ramesh strongly criticized Prime Minister Narendra Modi, accusing him of “cowardly kowtowing” to Beijing while remaining silent on what he termed the Pakistan-China “jugalbandi.” In contrast, Shashi Tharoor, Chairman of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on External Affairs, took a more balanced stance. He described Modi’s engagement with Chinese President Xi Jinping as a “necessary step” to restore balance, given recent setbacks in India’s foreign policy and economic ties.

Tharoor’s View: Multi-Alignment & Strategic Necessity
Tharoor argued that Modi’s meeting with Xi marked continuity in the thaw seen late last year, which had been disrupted by Operation Sindoor, Chinese military and diplomatic support for Pakistan, and punitive measures such as halting supplies of rare earths and magnets. Additionally, China withdrew 300 engineers from Foxconn plants, disrupting India’s iPhone production. These developments, coupled with U.S. tariffs under Donald Trump, placed India in a vulnerable position.

According to Tharoor, India must pursue a strategy of “multi-alignment,” maintaining functional ties with China, Russia, and eventually the U.S. He emphasized that India cannot afford to simultaneously antagonize both Washington and Beijing. Strengthening ties with Russia, including during President Vladimir Putin’s upcoming visit, was also highlighted as part of this broad strategy. While acknowledging America’s current hostility, Tharoor stressed the need for “viable connections” with all three major powers to safeguard national interests.

Tewari and Khurshid: Caution Against Reactionary Foreign Policy
Congress MPs Salman Khurshid and Manish Tewari warned against impulsive or “knee-jerk” foreign policy shifts. Tewari argued that recalibration should be carefully structured rather than swinging between extremes. He cautioned that reliance on China carries inherent costs, and India must assess the reliability of both old and new allies in an uncertain global order shaped by Trump’s disruptive policies.

Highlighting shifting dynamics, Tewari noted that the U.S. has “rediscovered” Pakistan, which maintains its longstanding partnership with China, while Russia—embroiled in the Ukraine war and dependent on Beijing—is no longer the Soviet Union of the past. Hence, India’s foreign policy must be re-examined with extreme care to protect long-term national interests.

Khurshid echoed these concerns, stressing that strategic choices cannot be reactionary but must be guided by long-term vision. He criticized the government for failing to explain the “drift” in U.S.-India relations and for abruptly setting aside seven years of tensions with China, particularly the Galwan clash. He questioned China’s lack of accountability, noting that terrorism was raised at the SCO by India but not by China. He insisted that past grievances, including Galwan, cannot simply be erased from memory.

Tharoor’s Closing Note
While acknowledging China’s recognition of India’s current position of weakness, Tharoor emphasized the importance of finding a viable modus vivendi with Beijing. He insisted that while Hindi-Chini “bhai bhai” (brotherhood) may be unrealistic, India cannot afford a “Hindi-Chini bye bye.” Despite challenges, he expressed confidence that the government would stand firm on issues concerning India’s vital national interests.