In today’s fast changing global and
regional scenario, how can SAARC countries become more pragmatic and practical
and really benefit this great chunk of humanity?
This is a question that has become a cliché. Ever since the South Asia Association of Regional
Cooperation (SAARC) was conceived in 1985, it has been a work in progress. It
remains largely ineffective, hostage to the political polemics of
member-nations particularly India and Pakistan.
The leaders of South Asian states
will once again be converging in Kathmandu on November 26 and 27 to attend the
18th SAARC Summit meeting. Of course, as the leaders are adept in
public speaking, lofty ideas will be tossed around, with every one of them
stressing the historic links of the region to peace, harmony and friendship.
However, at the end of it all the
question when SAARC – world’s largest grouping of nations – will make a
difference in the quality of life of the people will be still left hanging in
the air. That has been the norm. For once I wish I am proved wrong.
It is not for want of effort SAARC
has failed to make progress. A look at the SAARC website shows 16 areas – a mélange of alphabets ranging from agriculture
to tourism – identified for cooperation at the 17 summit
meetings held so far. But the
problem it faces in translating ideas into collective action.
For instance the SAARC Convention on
Terrorism was evolved in 1987 – within two years of formation of the SAARC –
even before the Al Qaeda carried out the 9/11 terror attacks in the U.S.
Additional protocols to the Convention updated the strategies in 2005.
However, terrorism is firmly
established in South Asia now than when the Convention on Terrorism was
originally adopted. The sub-continent has become so fertile a ground for its
growth that international terrorism in the form of Islamic State is attracted
to roost here.
Similar is the progress made on the
SAARC Preferential Trading Arrangement (SAPTA) finalized in 1993, became operational
in 1995. It was followed by the South Asian Free Trade Agreement (SAFTA) in
2006. However, narrow political considerations and suspicion about each other have
prevented its benefits from reaching the ordinary people. Inevitably, FTAs
between SAARC-member nations have been slow in coming and the consumer continues
to pay the price for the inaction.
So SAARC protocols and conventions
look largely good on paper. As a result SAARC continues to run in the same
place with bureaucracy largely doing what they can think of. If only the
decibels of leaders in summit meetings could add value, SAARC would have
emerged vibrant. But this remains a distant dream and the development story in
the region remains a lop-sided one benefitting the haves rather than the
have-nots.
Usually any talk about gingering up SAARC starts and ends India and its
fractured relationship with Pakistan for very good reasons. India dominates its
South Asian neighbours with its enormous geographical size and overwhelming
economic, political and military power. India occupies a major part of the historical memories
of its neighbours. As a result India’s soft power has become embedded in the
region’s religious, social and cultural perceptions with strong but varying
internal response. India’s success as a functional democracy since independence
and rise as a major Asian economic power has scaled up the latent love-hate
feelings about India among the neighbours.
India as the only nation having land
and sea connectivity with all SAARC members gives it a strategic edge over its neighbours.
Excluding Maldives and Sri Lanka which are island nations, others do not have
land connectivity with each other. Cumulatively, all these factors give India
an unmatched ability to influence and arbiter issues in South Asia.
Predatory politics in the region has
found it a useful to tool to fan the fears of India overwhelming its neighbours.
India-baiting invariably finds a place both in their political and security
perceptions. This has resulted in anti-India sentiments usually featuring in
political discourses during the elections.
In spite of this, most of India’s
neighbours have been pragmatic enough to maintain good relations and
reciprocate India’s gestures. Nepal and
Bhutan enjoy the fruits of such good will to enjoy unrestricted trade and entry
facilities for its citizens. Smaller states like Sri Lanka and Maldives had
sought Indian military assistance in times of political and national
emergencies.
Unfortunately, India had been slow
to understand the need for taking greater care and sensitivity in wielding its power.
However, India’s efforts to change its style since 90s has been buffeted by
strategic priorities and internal political coalition compulsions affecting its
delivery.
It is true the fractious India-Pakistan relations are a major roadblock
to the growth of SAARC. The two nations together represent over five-sixth of
the 1.8 billion people of the sub-continent. And with their collective economic
and political clout, only these two nations have the potential to energise
SAARC. But they are yet to exercise their cumulative power for this larger
objective.
It would be facile to argue that the problems of SAARC
relate only to the estranged relationship of India and Pakistan. South Asian
countries have some inherent problems to start with. They have some of the high
population densities in the world. The largest number of illiterate people and people
below poverty level live in South Asia. Most of its members suffer from
problems of internal unrest and extremism, lack of resources, poor
infrastructure and governance. The life blood of many members has been sapped region
in combating against some of the most powerful terrorist and insurgency groups
in the world.
But the positives of the region should not be missed
out while looking at the negatives. These include young and energetic
population, strong entrepreneurship skills, rich mineral and marine resources,
and assets of shared history and culture binding the people across the nations.
And a huge under serviced market place and ready availability of large
technical manpower that can absorb new technologies are assets waiting to be
exploited.
The harsh truth is SAARC has failed because
member-states have not learnt from the experience of other groupings like the
ASEAN and the EU to adopt collective action to pool their strengths to overcome
their weaknesses. Historical memories have been preventing to build their collective
experience. This has resulted in the absence of a collective South Asian
identity for fostering regional solidarity.
It is odious to compare ASEAN and EU
with SAARC because each nation has its baggage of national experience
conditioned by their geographical contiguity, religious and cultural beliefs
and perceptions. The historical context
and environment in which the EU and ASEAN groupings came about were unique.
Both the EU and ASEAN are products
of Cold War compulsions. In the case of EU the post-World War-II economic
privations and the threat of Soviet Union destabilizing their countries prodded
them to come together. On the other hand,
ASEAN came about with the U.S. patronage to act as buffers to ward off
Communist China’s threat to Southeast Asia. When Cold War ended, both the
groupings focused on evolving structural frame works for issues of relevance to
members like security, energy, developmental resources, trade and commerce,
economic stability and counter-terrorism.
In the case of South Asia, there was
no common external threat for collective action. The only common factor was the
vestiges of British colonial occupation which conditioned not only the
perceptions of former colonial countries but other independent ones like
Afghanistan, Nepal and Bhutan. At present in all countries, democratic dispensation
is in place with elected governments in power except Nepal where the process is
on for drafting a new constitution.
In Afghanistan where a new president
has been elected and installed as Taliban terrorism has been brought to
manageable levels. In Pakistan, despite the looming threat of terrorism and
history of militarism, people have preferred to democratically elect the Nawaz Sharif
coalition with a majority.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi who
assumed office in May 2014 after his thumping victory in the parliamentary
elections, ushers in an era of political stability. He is trying to change
India’s traditional laid back approach to its neighbours. His invitation to the
leaders of neighbouring countries for his swearing-in sent a strong signal that
building better relations with them will be his priority. With economic development on top of his
national agenda, India would like to further trade and commerce links with the
neighbours.
His invitation to Prime Minister
Nawaz Sharif on the occasion surprised everyone including his own
supporters. And despite opposition at
home, the Pakistani leader reciprocated the gesture and attended the anointing
of Narendra Modi as Prime Minister of India.
At a New Delhi press meet on the occasion, Nawaz Sharif said “we both
are in the beginning of a clear mandate from our respective nations. This
provides an opportunity to fulfil the hopes of 1.5 billion people of the two
countries who want us to focus on people and welfare. We had talks in warm and
cordial atmosphere.” The Pakistan Prime Minister was actually touching upon
India-Pakistan rapprochement - one of the key triggers for making SAARC an
effective entity.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi has followed up his initial gestures to
South Asian neighbours by visiting Bhutan and Nepal first, rather than visiting
Japan or meeting with the Chinese President. When India achieved a land mark
success in placing a satellite on Mars orbit in its very first attempt, Prime Minister
Modi told the scientists of Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) to
develop a SAARC satellite. “We should dedicate this satellite as India’s
gift….We should share the fruit of this with our neighbouring countries,” he
added underlining his preference for India’s neighbours. These friendly gestures should not be missed
out in reading India’s new Prime Minister.
There are disturbing developments in and around South Asia that show
time is running out for collective action. With the U.S. and its NATO allies poised
to withdraw their troops from Afghanistan, the three groups of Taliban militants
are likely to vigorously renew their operations against the elected government
in Afghanistan. This could adversely affect the terrorism situation in Pakistan
also.
According to Pakistan media reports the Pakistani Taliban has declared
its allegiance to the Islamic State (IS). The IS which has gobbled up large
swaths of territory in Syria and Iraq has effectively used social media to
appeal to Muslim youth the world over from the U.S. to Indonesia. This has
enabled the IS to emerge as the most feared terrorist group with its widely
publicised acts of brutality against Shia, Christian and Yazdi population.
The Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) which is locked in a war with
Pakistan has expressed solidarity with the IS on the occasion of Eid al-Adha.
Its spokesman Shahidullah Shahid said “Oh our brothers, we are proud of you in
your victories. We are with you in your happiness and your sorrow….All in the
Muslim world have great expectations of you….We are with you, we will provide
you with Mujahideen and with every possible support.”
Last month, the al Qaeda Chief Ayman-al Zawahari had appointed a Taliban
leader Asim Umar as the ‘emir’ of the new South Asia branch of the al Qaeda
network signalling the renewed interest of al Qaeda in expanding its activities
in South Asia.
Though the IS and the al Qaeda have not formed an alliance so far, al
Qaeda may well follow the example of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU),
an ally of the Taliban based in the tribal belt since 2001, has declared its
allegiance to the IS. A significant aspect of IMU leader Usman Gazi message is
his praise for the IS for its refusal to recognise state borders and being
“free from the patriotic or nationalist agenda.” Due to the convergence of al
Qaeda’s interests and goals, there is a distinct and dangerous possibility of
it forming an alliance with IS in the near future.
South Asia holds the world’s highest Muslim population. This makes it highly
vulnerable to IS threat. South Asia has to evolve collective strategies to
combat the spread of IS terrorism and militancy in their midst.
Polio and Ebola are two other non-conventional threats of immediate
relevance to South Asia that urgently need collective action. Thanks to
religious fundamentalists’ objection polio vaccination there had been a huge
setback in fighting polio in Pakistan. After 13 years Pakistan has recorded the
highest number of 202 polio cases this year. This is not only a national
emergency for Pakistan but for South Asia, particularly India, where polio has
been eradicated with remarkable success after relentless campaigns.
One can keep on adding to the list of such non-conventional threats to
nations including the Western penchant to slap WTO and intellectual property
protocols against competitive pharmaceutical and manufactured products from
South Asia.
But will India and Pakistan come together for collective action to
tackle these common threats without the aid of the big powers? This still
remains the ‘Big Question.’ Nothing much has happened on the thaw expected in
India-Pakistan relations after the cordial May-meeting between the leaders of
the two countries.
Even as the two nations contemplated resuming formal talks, two hardy
perennials of India-Pakistan wrangle - K-issue and terrorism – surfaced again to
dissipate their enthusiasm. As a result tragic happenings have continued in
Jammu and Kashmir, reeling from the recent devastating floods. Indian media has
highlighted that five people were killed even as they were celebrating the
Eid holy festival by firing from across the border. Without entering into a slanging
match who triggered it, it is evident the five deaths were as avoidable as the
polio attacks in Pakistan.
India-Pakistan polemics including the Kashmir issue are
rooted in the seeds of Partition, which divided not only India but the society
and people on the basis of religion. While the healing process has made some
headway in India thanks to its enduring democracy, Pakistan’s periodic military
rule has stifled it from happening. As a result the two countries have fought
four wars during the last six and a half decades of existence and its leftovers
are holding up rapprochement between the two feuding neighbours. Unless the
people rise up to change it, SAARC will continue to remain a paper tiger. Will
Modi and Nawaz rise up to the occasion? This remains an open ended question.
Written on October 7, 2014 for South Asia Magazine,
Karachi November 1, 2014 issue.
[Col R Hariharan, strategic analyst, is a former MI
specialist on South Asia. He is
associated with the Chennai Centre for China Studies and the South Asia
Analysis Group. E-mail: haridirect@gmail.com Blog:
http://col.hariharan.info ]
Courtesy:
South Asia Analysis Group Paper No 5814 dated November 1, 2014 http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/node/1645
No comments:
Post a Comment