SAARC possibilities overcast by problems

Political leadership in India has always subscribed to commonality in the region and the need to cooperate, instead of looking at diversities and differing perceptions from a narrow, sectarian perspective. As early as August 1983, when SAARC was not even formally born, Mrs Indira Gandhi, addressing the foreign ministers of South Asia, said:

‘Our cooperation in no way limits each country’s freedom of judgment. It is allied solely to development and to the strengthening of the economics of our individuals countries. Let us not be disheartened if we have some difficulties and differences to contend with —– our very cooperation will increase our capacity to withstand pressure. With unity we can hope to move ahead to a future of freedom, peace and prosperity.’¹

At the time of establishment of this regional forum (SAARC) in 1980s there were some declared objectives but some hidden agenda also. Bilateral relations of the regional countries, particularly Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nepal with India were not so warm at that time; rather, it was strained in the fields of politics and economics. In absence of deep rooted democracy or democratic environment in those countries, perception of regional development among the political leadership was hazy. Bilateral issues dominated in the field of the foreign policy because of lack of foresight of the possibilities of common regional development. It was a fact that the nature of the existing bilateral issues with neighbouring countries was not simple, and prospects of solving them hardly bright. Particularly, with Pakistan and Bangladesh, it was  the continuing vendetta of partition. Apart from that, neighbouring countries of India have been trying hard to internationalize some bilateral issues and condemning India’s intervention in them, e.g.  the liberation war of Bangladesh in 1971. Pakistan was not ready to admit that it was the wrong policy of Pakistan that led to the separation of its eastern province.

        Though the SAARC members do not face a common threat to security, they have a sort of common allergy to India. Overwhelming predominance of India in South Asia is a major handicap for the smooth sailing of SAARC. In short, the gigantic size of India is generally regarded as an inimical factor in the development of regional cooperation in south Asia.² Apart from size; there is an enormous disparity between India and its wary neighbours in terms of population, resources, military might and the level of economic and technological development. In South Asia, India is centrally situated while other members of SAARC are located in the periphery. As a result of this peculiarity, each country of the region is closely related to India socio- culturally, economically and politico-strategically. Moreover, it is due to the peculiar geographical position of India that numerous problems and tensions frequently erupt between India and its neighbours. Periodical border clashes and the alarming problem of migration, which are the by–products of this unique socio economic, political and geographical feature, hamper the smooth progress of SAARC. It is no exaggeration to say that there is the inevitable presence of India, to a considerable extent, in every other country of South Asia. In other words, India has strong cultural, religious, historical and political bonds with the South Asian countries.

The uniqueness of South Asia is considered to be a basic problem which is uncongenial to the promotion of regional cooperation in this region. The region of South Asia is marked by the presence of great disparities which rarely exist in any other part of the globe; again, there are very few regions in the world which share such strong cultural affinities like South Asia. In Western Europe, the original members of the European Economic Community (EEC) were more or less equal in terms of status, power, population and resources, but each of them had long separate historical and cultural   tradition which led to the development of separate national identities. The seven constituent states of SAARC(at the time of establishment)  were unequal in status, size, population, possession of natural resources and the level of economic development. These types of dissimilarities have not been conducive to the uninhibited growth of regional cooperation in South Asia.³

Since its very inception, the normal activities of SAARC have been inhibited by the strained bilateral relations between India and its neighbours. A number of irritants have often marred the apparently cordial relations between India and the other member states of SAARC. India’s conflictual relations with most of the neighbours no doubt have an adverse effect on the overall performance of SAARC, but it is Indo-Pak hostility since 1947-48 that accounts for a major part of success or failure of SAARC. Indeed, Indo-Pak rivalry lies at the root of all troubles in South Asia. There are several contentious issues between these two rival countries, of which Kashmir problem is the foremost. The Kashmir imbroglio has triggered four armed conflicts between these two countries so far.  In order to further complicate the bilateral relations, Pakistan even attempted to fish in the troubled waters between India and other neighbours. In addition to this, Pakistan even tried to gang up with the smaller neighbours against India by exploiting their grievances against India. Pakistan suffers from a paranoia that its economy is going to be swamped by the huge Indian economy. This is why Pakistan opposed the launching of South Asian Preferential Trade Agreement (SAPTA) proposed by India. Later on, although Pakistan accepted SAPTA, it had not granted the ‘Most Favoured Nation (MFN)’ status to India, while India had already accorded the same to Pakistan ⁴. Thus, the continuing animosities and mutual suspicion between India and Pakistan on Kashmir explains the slow progress of SAARC. The quest for integration in South Asia, economic and political, will be a far cry unless the relations between them are improved. SAARC lacks the essential prerequisite of a common threat perception, and this is one of the most important impediments to the smooth sailing of SAARC. The huge size of India has made it the source of perceived threat for other SAARC members, and this perception has resulted in a distortion of inter-state relations in South Asia characterized by a lack of trust, tension and at times, even armed confrontation ⁵.

Bangladesh had friendly relations with the Soviet Union and India during and after the liberation war in 1971. It existed until the death of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman since when the Bangladesh government abandoned its previous policy of amity with India, and embraced China. With a fast development of China-Bangladesh relations in subsequent years, Bangladesh also revised its policy on Pakistan, and adopted a closely conciliatory and cooperative attitude towards it. Except during the Awami League’s new regimes in the nineties and post 2009, the Bangladesh government has been maintaining all through a conciliatory policy towards China and Pakistan⁶.

Reasons behind stasis:

One of the reasons for the painfully slow space of SAARC’s progress is the excessive ardour reflected in India’s advocacy of SAARC. When we push hard, our smaller neighbours pull back. We need to tone down our enthusiasm, at least in its articulation. India does not need SAARC; it has a large enough market of its own. The smaller countries of South Asia need SAARC; they need India even for trade and cooperation among them. We should leave it to them to set the pace.

Another reason is Pakistan’s own political problems and its narrow political approach when it comes to dealing with this issue. If Pakistan’s political life had not been interrupted by periodic intrusions by its military and if democracy had been allowed to strike roots in that country, SAARC would have probably made much better progress. Military rulers have never been sensitive to people‘s needs. The general mass of people in Pakistan wants SAARC to move forward. They want open borders, free trade, and better interaction. But talk to Pakistan authorities, and they will tell you that trade will not move till the Kashmir problem is resolved to their satisfaction. Now resolution of the Kashmir issue is a desirable objective, but it cannot take place within the parameters of SAARC. What is the fallout of this intransigence? Poverty has grown in Pakistan which was once the most prosperous country in our region. Poverty has grown in Nepal and Bangladesh too. Holding SAARC’s economic agenda back by raising contentious issues like Kashmir and insisting on their resolution in a forum like SAARC harms the economic prospects of the region as a whole, and more particularly of its smaller countries, including Pakistan.

During the eighties, the phenomenon of hijacking came to fore. This gave a serious jolt to the SAARC spirit as many in our country questioned the raison d’etre of SAARC when its members did not abide by even its elementary provisions. One instance of hijacking took place at the Srinagar airport and the hijackers, when they landed in Lahore, were given a hero’s welcome. The latest of the unsavoury event was the hijacking of an Indian Airlines plane from Kathmandu. When negotiations were going on in Kabul to secure release of the hijacked passengers, it became clear that the hijackers were being directed from Islamabad by the ISI. On the other hand, several members of terrorist organizations from north-eastern states of India were getting shelter and other forms of support in Bangladesh since the eighties. Ministers and government officials were directly involved in it. The main objective behind these activities was only to create instability in that region, and obstruct development activities.  How can an organization for regional cooperation work in this kind of environment?

Since 1990, Pakistan-sponsored terrorism in Kashmir has been vitiating the relations between India and Pakistan. If they go on playing such games, there will be no SAARC in any real sense, no economic development of the region as a whole, and no prosperity for our people. Has that realization really dawned on all of the region’s leaders? The SAARC region continues to be one of the most underdeveloped regions of the world. Over one fourth of the poor of the world live in the SAARC region. Poverty alleviation has been high on the agenda of SAARC, but what has been done to remove   poverty is hopelessly inadequate. Population of the region has been rising faster than anywhere else in the world.⁷

Cooperation at the political level has been plagued by long-standing issues like Kashmir between India and Pakistan, ethnic disturbances in Sri Lanka, immigration of millions of people from Bangladesh and resultant demographic changes in some parts of India, military dictatorship and ISI influence in Pakistan, and its adventurism in stirring conflicts by infiltration of terrorists into India. Even after more than half a century the wounds of partition of the subcontinent are not healed. Communal tensions are fanned by politicians for their own benefit. Terrorism in recent years has proved to be a major setback to SAARC. The terrorists were found to have links with neighbouring States of India and prominent member of SAARC. 

India occupies a central position in SAARC in terms of its geographical location and size of the country and economy. It shares borders with about all SAARC countries. Democracy and democratic institutions have flourished in India in spite of poverty, illiteracy   and social evils like casteism. Secularism has been enshrined in the Indian constitution, making India a natural leader as compared to some other states in SAARC, which do not possess to secular credentials.

One must recognize here the most important impediment for regional development, i.e. terrorism. Leaders of the SAARC countries thought about it from its first summit in Dhaka on 7-8 December, 1985. They resolved that the standing Committee should set up a study group to examine the problem of terrorism and its effects on the security and stability of member states of SAARC. They further directed the Council of Ministers to consider the report of this study group, and submit recommendations to them as to how best the Member States could cooperate among themselves to solve this problem.

In every summit SAARC leadership was concerned with and condemned, terrorism but it was not possible for them to suppress it. Because some members of the SAARC were directly involve in this matter.

At the eleventh summit in Kathmandu, Jan 4-6, 2002, they were convinced that terrorism, in all its forms and manifestations, was a challenge to all states and to all humanity, and cannot be justified on ideological, political, religious or on any other ground. The leaders agreed that terrorism violated the fundamental values of the United Nations and the SAARC charter, and constituted one of the most serious threats to international peace and security in the twenty first century.

 They emphasized the need for urgent conclusion of a comprehensive convention on combating International terrorism. They also emphasized that international co-operation to combat terrorism should be conducted in conformity with the UN Charter, international law and relevant international conventions. They reaffirmed their commitment to SAARC Regional Convention on Suppression of terrorism, which, among others, recognize the seriousness of the problem of terrorism as it affects the security, stability and development of the region. At the 16^th SAARC summit, 28-29 April, 2010 in Thimphu, the leaders strongly condemned terrorism in all its forms and manifestations and expressed deep concern over the threat which terrorism continued to pose to peace, security and economic stability of the South Asian region. They reiterated their firm resolve to root out terrorism and recalled the Ministerial Declaration on cooperation in combating terrorism adopted by the Thirty first Session of the Council of Ministers in Colombo. It was  the silver jubilee Declaration on terrorism.

Vastness of the economy of one of the member countries of the association, i.e. India, has made economic cooperation among the SAARC nation a distant dream. Without economic cooperation among members, a regional cooperative venture cannot achieve success. The other member- states of SAARC fear that by virtue of its huge economic potential, India will dominate them. Unlike other regions of the world, the countries of South Asia exhibit enormous disparities with wide gaps in their resource bases and production capacities. No comparison can be drawn between India and the other members of SAARC as India is well endowed with resources, economically diversified and buoyant and very much self-reliant ⁸. As a result of wide disparities in economic resources, the smaller members of the organization, especially the second largest country Pakistan, have often sought to develop economic linkages with countries outside South Asia. Moreover, the smaller neighbours of India have often hesitated to accept economic reforms proposed by India, namely the South Asian Preferential Trading Agreement (SAPTA), for fear of being swamped by the Indian juggernaut.⁹

Divergent security perspectives of different members of SAARC, leading to varying strategic perceptions of these countries, constitute another major bottleneck in the promotion of regional cooperation in South Asia. There was a fundamental disagreement between India and other South Asian states with regard to the question of security. ‘’While the former regards the entire region as forming its security parameter and wants the later to collaborate with it in keeping the external powers out of the region’s political and military affairs, the latter welcome the presence of external powers because they see the principal threat to their security in India. ¹⁰’’ Since the smaller members of SAARC like Bangladesh, Nepal and Sri Lanka considered India to be the main source of threat to their security; they welcomed either directly or indirectly, the role of extra-regional powers in the region to offset the military might and the alleged military threat of India. Thus, they developed cordial relations with China and USA.¹¹    

Two general provisions of the SAARC charter—– unanimity of decision and the exclusion of bilateral and contentious issues‘ from the deliberations of SAARC summits are the most difficult obstacles that are inhibiting SAARC’s progress. There is no doubt that hostile bilateral relationships are the root cause for all troubles in South Asia. This problem was very much relevant in the 1980s. There should be some conflict-resolving mechanism for finding an amicable solution. Moreover, by prohibiting the discussion of bilateral issues at the summits the framers of the SAARC charter have crippled SAARC to a large extent. Unless and until bilateral disputes are discussed freely and frankly by all the members at the annual summits, chances for improving the regional atmosphere will remain a search for the will- o- the wisp. Unless a favourable atmosphere is created, the SAARC members’ attempts to fulfill the socio- economic objective of SAARC will remain an illusion. ¹²

            Cross –border terrorism is at present the main reason for SAARC’s failure. In the post-cold war era, this problem has become very prominent. Rebel organizations have sprung up in Kashmir with the help of Pakistan. Terrorists through their heinous crimes (in Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh) have made the life of South Asian people miserable.

It is amply clear that SAARC leadership failed to suppress terrorism in the South Asian region. Development of democracy did not flourish also, and the paranoia about partition still exists in Pakistan and Bangladesh. Apart from that, internal power struggles of those countries arrest the possibilities of SAARC. Development of India in so many fields may be enviable to some neighbouring countries but by terrorism it shall not be checked. It is imperative to desire cooperation with each other for everybody’s development.

Moreover, as a result of the anti-Indian feeling shared by the majority of the SAARC nations, they have frequently tried to raise their bilateral problems vis-a–vis India within the SAARC forum with the hope that they will be able to exert collective pressure on India and achieve a better bargaining deal vis-à-vis India. Instead of showing any cooperative attitude towards India, the smaller members of SAARC have often made an attempt to embarrass India.

In spite of these problems faced by SAARC, some modest achievements have been made by SAARC mainly in the non-political field.

Since South Asia is a poverty-stricken region the leaders of SAARC have paid some attention to eradicate this formidable problem.

Taking into account the importance of environmental protection and natural disasters, the SAARC leaders had initiated cooperation in this sphere.

Several short- term activities have been completed in the field of culture such as South Asian Archaeological Congress, history Conference, Photographic exhibition of Monuments and Natural Heritage, etc. SAARC quiz competitions are held, which have evoked keen interest among the youth of the region. South Asian festivals are organized which focus on the region’s common cultural heritage.

 In the field of sports, South Asian Federation games are held. These achievements are quite minor and SAARC has failed in its main objective of bringing about political integration in South Asia and promotion of economic well-being of the people.

The prospect of the future of SAARC does not appear to be too much encouraging- considering the present state of relations between India and Pakistan. Indo- Pakistan relations constitute the key to the success or failure of SAARC, and therefore, to the welfare and well –being of the people of the region. The origin of Indo – Pakistani disputes can be traced back to the Hindu- Muslim dispute during the years of India’s freedom movement. The relations between the two countries have severely deteriorated in the post cold war years over the issues of Kashmir, nuclear arms race, cross border terrorism, etc. which have produced severe repercussions on the different SAARC summits.

 It is imperative for both India and Pakistan to dissociate them from the path of nuclear arms race and concentrate more on the economic development and welfare of the common people of the two countries. Thus, India and Pakistan must identify the issues of their common concern and strive to pursue them so that the goals of SAARC can be fulfilled. It will be very difficult, of course, for the two countries to abandon their old hostile policies towards each other, given the traditional misunderstanding and suspicion between them. But, in the new global situation, we hope the new governments of India and Pakistan must try to solve their problems, on which depends the future of SAARC.

In South Asia a number of positive features have, nevertheless, come out of the experience of the past. There is a far stronger commitment among the leaders of the member states, regardless of political persuasion, to strengthen South Asian cooperation, than before. Some personal rapport has also been established, especially at the highest level. Most important among the non-official steps, there is now a rapidly expanding civil society committed to regional cooperation; it can be argued that the pressure on the leadership to go forward with  regional cooperation is in large measure due to the efforts of this civil society. That the member states ‘are bound by ties of history and culture’ is included in the SAARC Charter; social ties or tradition, religious and ethnic traditions, a ‘common civilization continuum, ethnic tradition are mentioned in different summit declarations. Ties of history seem to make the logic of regional cooperation incontestable. For centuries this has been a coherent political, economic and administrative area, with well-knit infrastructural connections, free trade and travel, complementarities suiting comparative advantage in production and consumption; all that seems necessary is to restore what existed in 1947. But all this is subject to difference when it comes to formulating schemes for cooperation.¹³

Challenges:

SAARC countries face challenges on internal as well as external fronts. Terrorism has posed a big threat to mutual understanding and cooperation in the region in recent years. Some of the neighbouring countries of India are suspected to have given it state patronage, which has to be stopped if SAARC has to grow. A number of countries have to set their own houses in order by finding mutually agreeable solutions to the inter-country disputes and issues, some of which are a historical legacy and have no ready solutions. These may be made to wait, so that what can be done to eliminate poverty and raise the standard of living of millions of people in this region are seriously taken. The entire region is bestowed with reach resources by nature. The world’s biggest mountain peaks and some of the biggest rivers and forests are located in SAARC, which is also a haven for big diversity. The lack of infrastructural linkages like rail and road routes, water transport, communication facilities, illiteracy in some parts, technological dependence on the west, low intra-region trade and very small share in world trade, neglect of agricultural and rural areas and small industries, have all compounded the problems. There will be no shortage of energy, water and food in the region, if resources are harvested earnestly and jointly by the member states in the region.¹⁴

       Our Prime Minister Narendra Modi has taken an initiative from day one inviting all the heads of SAARC countries in his swearing ceremony to strengthen bilateral understanding and regional forum for regional development. He has also started to visit neighbouring countries to create a good environment of cooperation and mending economic and development aspects.  It is imperative that without improvement of bilateral relation with SAARC countries prospects of regional forum will not be bright. In this new era, we are expecting good days are coming for SAARC. We hope Prime Minister of India’s initiative to solve long standing bilateral problems with neighbouring states will help to boost the cooperation in the field of trade and commerce as well as diplomacy in future.

Reference foot notes:

1. Lallan Prasad, SAARC –The challenges Ahead, SAARC the Road Ahead, Foundation for Peace and Sustainable  Development, New Delhi, 2007
2. N.Mukherji, ‘South Asian Preferential Trading Agreement’, South Asian Survey, vol.6, no.1, January—June, 1999, p.33

3  Verinder Grover ( ed.) , encyclopedia of SAARC Nation, Deep and Deep Publications, New   Delhi, 1997, P- 627

4. Sangeeta Thaplyal, Potential for cooperation in South Asia’, South Asian survey, vol.6 , No.1, January june 1999, P-57
5. Samsul Haq, ‘Beyond Bangalore’, South Asia journal, vol.1.no.1 July- September, 1987, p-9
6. Suchita Ghosh, China- Bangladesh –India Tangle Today: Towards a solution?

Sterling  publishers Pvt. Ltd,  New Delhi, 1995.

7. Maharajakrishna Rasgotra, Vision of an Empowered South Asia, SAARC—The Road Ahead, Foundation for Peace and Sustainable Development, New Delhi, 2007.
8. Zillur Rahman Khan (ed), SAARC and the super powers, n-18, p-7
9. Aabha Dixit, ‘SAARC: Toward greater cooperation, strategic analysis, July, 1997, p-580
10. Bimal Prasad (ed) ,Regional cooperation in south Asia: Problems and prospects, Vikash publishing, 1989,p-15
11. Iftekharuzzaman (ed) South Asia’s security: Primacy of Internal Dimension, Vikash Publishing, New Delhi, 1995
12. Perviaz Iqbal Cheema, ‘SAARC needs revamping’ South Asian survey vol.3 no. 122, January- December, 1996, p-318
13. L.P.Khosla, economic cooperation in South Asia, SAARC the Road Ahead, New Delhi, 2007.
14. Lallan Prasad, op. cit.

(Published in World Focus, No.419, November 2014, pp.15-20, New Delhi, India.)