Editorial

Jammu and Kashmir is set to host its first-ever international film festival, ‘Rang-e-Cinema’, from September 7 to 10. With 41 countries participating and more than 135 films shortlisted, the event marks a quiet but significant shift in the region’s cultural landscape. For a place long defined by conflict, security narratives and political turbulence, the decision to open its doors to global cinema is both symbolic and strategic.

Cinema has always been more than entertainment. It shapes perception, builds empathy and projects soft power. By inviting filmmakers, artists and audiences from across continents, Jammu and Kashmir is choosing to tell its own stories on its own terms. The festival arrives at a time when the Union Territory has been steadily attempting to reframe its image—from a conflict zone to a destination of culture, tourism and creative opportunity. ‘Rang-e-Cinema’ fits neatly into that larger project.

The choice of name is telling. “Rang” speaks of colour, diversity and vibrancy; “Cinema” of the universal language of images. Together they suggest an aspiration to move beyond monochrome portrayals of the region. International participation from 41 nations ensures that the festival will not remain a local affair. Cross-cultural dialogue, co-production possibilities and exposure for local talent are natural outcomes. Young filmmakers from the Valley and Jammu region will gain access to networks that were previously distant. Audiences will encounter narratives that challenge stereotypes—both those imposed from outside and those sometimes reinforced within.

There are practical benefits too. Film festivals generate economic activity: hospitality, local transport, craft sales, and short-term employment. More importantly, they leave behind institutional memory—programming expertise, venue standards, and a culture of organised cultural events. If sustained, ‘Rang-e-Cinema’ could become an annual fixture that positions Jammu and Kashmir on the South Asian festival circuit alongside established events in other Indian cities.

Yet symbolism alone is not enough. The real test will lie in curation, freedom of expression, and continuity. A festival that merely showcases safe, decorative films will miss its purpose. One that allows space for difficult conversations—about memory, identity, displacement and hope—will earn lasting credibility. Security arrangements must protect participants without stifling the creative atmosphere. And the event must be followed by concrete support for local film infrastructure, training and distribution.

In hosting ‘Rang-e-Cinema’, Jammu and Kashmir is not simply organising screenings. It is asserting that culture can be a bridge rather than a battlefield. Between September 7 and 10, the region will invite the world to look again—not through the lens of conflict, but through the richer, more complex frame of cinema. That invitation itself is progress.

The 26th Shanghai Cooperation Organisation summit in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan, has brought together an unusual constellation of leaders—Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Russian President Vladimir Putin, Chinese President Xi Jinping, and Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian—at a moment of acute global friction. Held against the backdrop of the Russia-Ukraine war, renewed US-Iran military exchanges, and shifting economic alignments, the gathering underscores a simple but consequential reality: the world is no longer organised around a single centre of power.

The SCO was never designed as a military alliance. Its original purpose was regional security and confidence-building in Central Asia. Over time it has expanded into an arena for economic coordination, connectivity projects and political signalling. Bishkek 2026 shows how far that evolution has come. With Iran now a full member and leaders from both major Eurasian powers present, the organisation functions as a platform where countries that feel constrained by Western-led institutions can coordinate without the pressure of alignment.

For India, the summit offered both continuity and careful calibration. Modi’s bilateral engagement with Putin, in which he urged a shift “from endless war to the end of war,” reaffirmed New Delhi’s long-standing preference for diplomacy over escalation. Simultaneously, talks with Iran and other partners reflected India’s determination to protect energy security and trade routes even as tensions in the Strait of Hormuz flared. India’s participation is not an endorsement of any single power’s agenda; it is an assertion of strategic autonomy within a multipolar framework.

China and Russia, for their part, used the summit to project resilience and alternative models of order. The presence of Xi and Putin side by side, alongside Iran’s leadership, sent a message that sanctions and isolation have limits. Kyrgyzstan, as host, gained visibility and a chance to showcase Central Asia’s agency rather than its traditional role as a passive arena for great-power competition.

Yet multipolarity is not automatically stabilising. Divergent interests within the SCO—on Ukraine, on the Middle East, on economic priorities—remain unresolved. The organisation still lacks the institutional depth of more mature forums. Its value lies less in producing binding outcomes than in keeping channels open and preventing total fragmentation.

The Bishkek summit will not end wars or rewrite the global order overnight. What it does is make visible a quieter shift: the growing preference of many nations for flexible, multi-aligned diplomacy over rigid blocs. In a world of overlapping crises, that preference may prove as consequential as any single treaty.

• SAS Kirmani