EDITORIAL

Common security for shared development

Three evils: terrorism, separatism, and religious extremism… Although they emerged in different periods on their own, they collectively constituted a triple package program devised by imperialism to impede the progress of developing nations. Throughout the 20th century, the “three evils” served as instruments of imperialism to obstruct national unification and cohesion in the emerging nations. Furthermore, imperialism has inverted the meaning of terrorism: National liberation wars and popular revolutions against imperialism were labeled as terrorism, whereas fundamentalist and separatist terrorist groups combating national states were characterized as “freedom fighters.” These organizations were either established directly by imperialism or endorsed and cultivated by it. 
According to imperialism, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, Nkrumah, Nasser, Gandhi, Nehru, Mao Zedong, Sukarno, and other leaders of the people’s revolution are classified as terrorists. In the imperialist centers, contemporary leaders who undertake measures to save their nation from hegemonism are labeled as autocrats. 
Conversely, separatist or religious extremist terrorist organizations that oppose national states under the guise of “religious freedoms” or “ethnic rights” receive direct support from imperialism. Entities functioning in Asia and Africa, including the PKK in Turkey and Syria, the East Turkistan Islamic Movement (currently referred to as the Turkistan Islamic Party) in China, Jundullah in Iran, Tehrik-i Taliban Pakistan and the Baluchistan Liberation Army in Pakistan, ISIS Khorasan in Afghanistan and Central Asia, the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, and Boko Haram in Nigeria, execute operations under the auspices of imperialism in their respective territories, engaging in terrorist activities rooted in ethnic separatism and/or religious extremism.
Imperialism thus diminishes the national power and resources of developing nations, providing a handy justification for intervention in destabilized areas. Simultaneously, under the guise of “safeguarding ethnic and religious rights,” it enforces decentralized political agendas on developing nations, undermining national unity and state structures, primarily aimed at fragmenting its national states. 
The remedy for the “three evils” is the advancement of multipolarity. Indeed, the PKK, among the largest terrorist organizations globally, was compelled to disarm as a victory of multipolarity. The established climate permits other terrorist organizations to disarm, thus enabling the target groups of ethnic or religious extremism to integrate with their nations and states.
In response to this political and ideological program of imperialist hegemony, the solution for the developing world is to develop security cooperation. The security collaboration established by the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which started out in the latter half of the 1990s under the banner of “the fight against the three evils,” possesses a significant distinction from preceding platforms: Countries facing the same threats have convened and continue to convene for collaboration centered on shared development to guarantee collective security. Collaboration centered on shared development empowers emerging nations to strengthen together rather than depleting their resources through vicious and detrimental rivalry among themselves. This strategy prevents imperialism from interfering in the issues of developing nations.
This model’s primary strategy, well executed by the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, is emerging as a crucial element for security collaboration at both regional and global levels. This strategy is progressively being institutionalized within the BRICS, which is expanding and fortifying as the preeminent cooperative framework for emerging nations in the contemporary multipolar landscape.

FİKRET AKFIRAT
Genel Yayın Yönetmeni

Contents

Abstract

This study examines the efficacy of the CSTO in countering terrorism within Central Asia, with particular focus on Russia’s institutional leadership. Grounded in RSC theory, the analysis investigates the organization’s capacity to adapt to evolving security challenges, including the proliferation of transnational jihadist networks, emerging digital radicalization trends, and security issues persisting in Afghanistan and new challenges from Syria. Through qualitative case analysis and process-tracing methodologies, the research evaluates primary operational data and secondary sources to assess the CSTO’s institutional responses. The findings demonstrate that the CSTO maintains robust conventional response capabilities through its Russian-dominated security framework, and systemic vulnerabilities persist in addressing contemporary hybrid threats. These include deficiencies in cyber counterterrorism measures, inconsistent intelligence coordination among member states, and weak deradicalization strategies. The study further reveals how shifting regional security dynamics, influenced by both internal developments and external threats, challenge the organization’s traditional operational paradigms. Based on these findings, the research proposes policy recommendations.
 

Abstract

The BRICS has been taking note of developments in international conflicts, especially those in Africa and West Asia. The issue of security has been a priority for BRICS since the beginning. The national security advisors of the BRICS countries have been meeting since 2009 to expand dialogue on security issues and exchange information. To streamline these efforts, a BRICS Joint Working Group on Counterterrorism was also set up, which held its first meeting in 2016. In 2019, the working group decided to constitute five subcommittees on terrorist financing, the use of the Internet for terrorist purposes, countering radicalization, the issue of foreign terrorist fighters, and capacity building. The BRICS Counter-Terrorism Strategy was adopted at the online Leaders' Summit in Moscow on 17 November 2020, and the Counter-Terrorism Action Plan was adopted at the 2021 summit in India. The following is the Counter-Terrorism Strategy of the BRICS nations.

Abstract

The fight of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization against the “three evils” is an important chapter in the story of the organization. The “three evils”, also called “three evil forces,” refer to terrorism, separatism, and extremism. The concept was first defined in June 2001 during the first SCO summit. Taking regional security and stability as a priority, the SCO has been making unremitting efforts to crack down on the “three evils.” The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), an exemplary organization in cooperation in the fight against terrorism, has achieved significant regional and international successes since the early 2000s. The following is the statement on countering terrorism, separatism, and extremism that was declared by the SCO Heads of State at the 2023 summit.

Abstract

The World Economic Forum has been questioned and criticized for its influence on globalization for many years, but it has not received sufficient attention from the academic community. In Marx’s capital accumulation theory, this study constructs a theoretical framework for systemically critiquing the “spatio-temporal fix” logic of international monopoly capital. Historical materialist analysis unveils the WEF’s structural incapacity to mediate the endogenous dual paradox engendered by globalized capital accumulation. It indicates that the so-called “international economic cooperation and exchange” it promotes is, in essence, the reconstitution of an accumulation system through which monopoly capital groups transfer surplus value through geographical expansion.
 

Abstract

The modernist content of the concept of Young China, first used by Liang Qichao (1873-1929) in 1900, was developed politically and culturally, especially after the 1911 Xinhai Revolution failed in a short time. “New Youth,” which can be considered a derivative of “Young China,” was not only a magazine name but also at the center of the “New Culture Movement,” which is called the first great cultural revolution of the “Young Chinese.” This movement describes an intellectual explosion, especially in culture, literature, philosophy, political theory, and women’s rights. The spark for this explosion was the patriotic youth struggle that began on May 4, 1919.This movement unleashed great intellectual energy and significantly impacted the political arena. After the discussions during this period, all kinds of monarchist ideas disappeared from China’s agenda. May 4 and the New Culture Movement played a significant role in the establishment of the Communist Party of China (CPC) and the spread of modernist ideas to the masses in China. Various organizations and movements belonging to the “Young Chi-nese,” which are part of the “Young” Movements in the world, have raised the flag of “de-mocracy and science” while fighting against “tradition” with nationalist goals. Despite the contradictions between them and nationalism, the Chinese representatives of universalist modernist movements have tried to explain their prescriptions for China’s national liberation and establish their ties with nationalism. This period had an essential share in the mental worlds of the cadres who brought New China into being in 1949, reflecting the bond between Marxism and nationalism.
 

Abstract

The World Association for Political Economy (WAPE) Annual Forum, organized by the China Business Development and Friendship Association (Turk-China Business Association) at Yeditepe University on August 6-8, 2025, was attended by 85 political economists from 16 countries, and 68 papers were presented. The theme of this year's Forum was the challenges and opportunities that multipolarity brings to political economy. Topics such as artificial intelligence, ecology, the digital Silk Road, global economic transformation, socialist modernization in China, and regional alliances were discussed from a political economy perspective based on current data. Please find attached Prof. Cheng Enfu's and Adnan Akfırat's speeches at the opening session and the final declaration of the WAPE 18th Forum.
 

Abstract

Translated from Turkish to English by BRIQ (Edited by Hüseyin Haydar and Latif Bolat)
 

Abstract

Translated from Turkish to English by BRIQ (Edited by Hüseyin Haydar and Latif Bolat)