Half Of Humanity: SCO Opposes Global Military Interventions

The SCO summit marks the first time for the leaders of all SCO member states to stand together and speak with one voice on major international issues. With its growing economic power and unambiguous position, the multinational bloc will definitely become a key force for peace in the world.

When the leaders of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) member states concluded their latest summit on Thursday, they unanimously rejected military intervention as a way to resolve international hotspot issues.

According to a statement that came after the summit, all SCO member countries oppose military intervention in Syria and reject the idea of a regime change in the country.

The leaders also rejected the idea of using military means to solve the Iranian nuclear dispute, instead choosing to support dialogue and other diplomatic methods.

These heads of state have ample ground to make an appeal for peace and stability and to support their request for the peaceful settlement of these problems.

Across the world, from the Middle East to north Africa, deadly conflicts and terrorist attacks are still resulting in innocent deaths, as many countries in these regions sunk into chaos last year.

Being fully aware that their own countries’ security and stability are closely associated with that of these troubled regions, the SCO leaders decided that peace can only be created through peaceful means.

It is a common experience in human history, both recent or remote, that meeting violence with violence can only beget more loss of life and spark hard-to-heal hatred.

More than a year has passed since NATO air forces began to drop bombs on Libya in order to drive its previous government out of power, but the country is still in chaos.

Additionally, over ten years have passed since the United States and its coalition partners ousted the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, a country that shares borders with a number of SCO countries.

Yet as Washington drafts its plan for withdrawal, it seems that few people are optimistic about Afghanistan’s ability to stand on its own after taking its weak security forces and frequent suicide bombings into account.

Therefore, the time has come to say “no” to military intervention, as the painful experiences of the past should not be allowed to repeat themselves.