Upload
sneha-mehta
View
125
Download
3
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Trade Union
Citation preview
History and Evolution of SAARC
The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation(SAARC) comprises the seven countries of
South Asia, i.e. Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, the Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan andSri Lanka.
It is an Association based on the consciousness that in an increasingly interdependent world, the
objectives of peace, freedom, social justice and economic prosperity are best achieved in the
South Asian region by fostering mutual understanding, good neighborly relations and meaningful
cooperation among the Member States which are bound bytes of history and culture. The idea of
regional cooperation in South Asia was first mooted in May 1980. After consultations, the Foreign
Secretaries of the seven countries met for the first time in Colombo in April 1981. This was
followed by a meeting of the Committee of the Whole in Colombo in August-September
1981, which identified five broad areas for regional cooperation. The Foreign Ministers of South
Asia, at their first meeting in New Delhi in August 1983, adopted the Declaration on South Asian
Regional Cooperation (SARC) and formally launched the Integrated Programme of Action (IPA)
initially in five agreed areas of cooperation namely, Agriculture; Rural Development;
Telecommunications; Meteorology; and Health and Population Activities. The Heads of State or
Government at their First SAAR Summit held in Dhaka on 7-8 December 1985 adopted the Charter
formally establishing the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC).
The objectives, principles and general provisions
contained in the SAARC Charter are as follows:
Objectives
To promote the welfare of the peoples of South Asia and to improve their quality of life;
To accelerate economic growth, social progress and cultural development in the region
and to provide all individuals the opportunity to live in dignity and to realize
their full potential;
To promote and strengthen collective self-reliance among the countries of South Asia;
To contribute to mutual trust, understanding and appreciation of one another’s
problems;! To promote active collaboration and mutual assistance in the economic, social,
cultural, technical and scientific fields;
To strengthen cooperation with other developing countries;
To strengthen cooperation among themselves in international forums on matters of
common interests; and
To cooperate with international and regional organizations with similar aims and
purposes.
History and mission of SAARC
The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) comprises eight countries
of South Asia, i.e. Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri
Lanka. The idea of regional cooperation in South Asia was first mooted in May 1980 by
Bangladesh President Ziaur Rahman.
President Rahman addressed letters to the Heads of Government of the countries of South
Asia, presenting his vision for the future of the region and the compelling arguments for
regional cooperation in the
context of evolving
international realities.
The Foreign Secretaries of
seven countries in South
Asia met for the first time in
Colombo in April 1981 and
identified five broad areas
for regional cooperation.
A series of meetings followed in Nepal (Kathmandu/November 1981), Pakistan
(Islamabad/August, 1982), Bangladesh, India (Delhi/July 1983) to enhance regional
cooperation.
The next step of this process was the Foreign Ministers meeting in New Delhi in 1983
where they adopted the Declaration on South Asian Regional Cooperation (SARC).
During the next two years South Asian nations committed themselves to form this South Asian
alliance and the process culminated in the First SAARC Summit held on 7-8 December in 1985
in Dhaka where the Heads of State or Government of seven countries, Bangladesh, Bhutan,
India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka adopted the Charter formally establishing the
South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC).
Preamble to the SAARC Charter
The preamble to the SAARC Charter spells out the intention of forming this South Asian
alliance as “We, the Heads of State or Government of BANGLADESH, BHUTAN, INDIA,
MALDIVES, NEPAL, PAKISTAN and SRI LANKA; ‘Desirous of promoting peace, stability, amity
and progress in the region through strict adherence to the principles of the UNITED NATIONS
CHARTER and NON-ALIGNMENT, particularly respect for the principles of sovereign equality,
territorial integrity, national independence, non-use of force and non-interference in the
internal affairs of other States and peaceful settlement of all disputes’ ‘Conscious that in an
increasingly interdependent world, the objectives of peace, freedom, social justice and
economic prosperity are best achieved in the SOUTH ASIAN region by fostering mutual
understanding, good neighbourly relations and meaningful cooperation among the Member
States which are bound by ties of history and culture’ ‘Aware of the common problems,
interests and aspirations of the peoples of SOUTH ASIA and the need for joint action and
enhanced cooperation within their respective political and economic systems and cultural
traditions’” ‘Convinced that regional cooperation among the countries of SOUTH ASIA is
mutually beneficial, desirable and necessary for promoting the welfare and improving the
quality of life of the peoples of the region; ‘Convinced further that economic, social and
technical cooperation among the countries of SOUTH ASIA would contribute significantly to
national and collective self-reliance; ‘Recognising that increased cooperation, contacts and
exchanges among the countries of the region will contribute to the promotion of friendship
and understanding among their peoples; Do hereby agree to establish an organisation to be
known as SOUTH ASIAN ASSOCIATION FOR REGIONAL COOPERATION hereinafter referred to
as the ASSOCIATION...’ Objectives Moreover, the cooperation of the SAARC is also based on
broader principles of respect for the principles of sovereign equality, territorial integrity,
political independence, noninterference in internal affairs of the Member States and on
mutual benefit. Decisions are taken on the basis of unanimity and bilateral and contentious
issues are excluded from the deliberations of SAARC.
The highest authority of the Association rests with the Heads of State or Government. The
SAARC Charter provides that the Heads of State or Government shall meet once a year or
more often as and when considered necessary by the Member States. The country which
hosts the summit holds the Chair of the Association.
The Association also convenes meetings at Ministerial level on specialised themes Council of
Ministers comprising the Foreign Ministers of Member States, the Council of Ministers is
responsible for formulating policies, reviewing progress, deciding on new areas of cooperation,
establishing additional mechanisms as deemed necessary, and deciding on other matters of
general interest to the
Association.
The Council meets
normally twice a year
and may also meet in
extraordinary sessions
by agreement of
Member States.
Standing Committee
The Standing Committee comprising the Foreign Secretaries of Member States is entrusted
with the task of overall monitoring and coordination of programmes, approving of projects
and programmes, and modalities of financing, determining inter-sectoral priorities,
mobilising regional and external resources, and identifying new areas of cooperation.
Usually this Committee meets twice a year preceding the Council of Ministers and submits
its reports to the Council of Ministers.
It may also meet in special session as and when necessary by agreement among Member
States. The Standing Committee is authorised to set up Action Committees comprising
Member States concerned with implementation of projects involving more than two but
less than seven Member States. (Article VII of the SAARC Charter).
Programming Committee
The Programming Committee (which is not a SAARC Charter body) comprises senior
officials of member States. It assists the Standing Committee in scrutinising the Secretariat
Budget, considers the reports of the Technical Committees, SAARC Audio Visual Exchange
(SAVE) Committee, and Regional Centres finalising, and the Calendar of Activities.
Technical Committees
The SAARC Technical Committees are responsible for determination of the potential and
the scope of regional cooperation in agreed areas, formulation of programmes and
preparation of projects, determination of financial implications of sectoral programmes,
formulation of recommendations regarding apportionment of costs, implementation and
coordination of sectoral programmes, and monitoring of progress in implementation.
In addition to the Technical Committees, various Working Groups are established to
consider specific issues and make recommendations to the appropriate SAARC bodies.
Currently five Working Groups are established in the areas of Telecommunications and ICT,
Biotechnology, Intellectual Property Rights and tourism. SAARC Secretariat The SAARC
Secretariat is based in Kathmandu, Nepal.
The Secretariat coordinates and monitors implementation of activities, prepares and
services meetings, and serves as a channel of communication between the Association and
its Member States as well as other regional organizations.
The Secretariat is headed by the Secretary General, who is appointed by the Council of
Ministers from member countries in alphabetical order for a three-year term. Dr. Sheel Kanta
Sharma from India currently serves as the Secretary General of SAARC.
The Secretary General is assisted by Directors on deputation from Member States. Committee
on Economic Cooperation The Committee of Economic Cooperation consists of Secretaries of
Commerce of member states and it promotes regional cooperation in the economic field.
The Agreement on SAARC Preferential Trading Arrangement (SAPTA) was signed in Dhaka
during the 7th SAARC Summit, in 1993.
It aims to promote and sustain mutual trade and the economic cooperation among the South
Asian States, through exchanging concessions.
Later, with the broad objective of moving towards a South Asian Economic Union (SAEU),
the SAARC Member States signed the Agreement on SAARC Free Trade Area (SAFTA) on 6
January 2004 at the 12th SAARC Summit held in Islamabad and came into force on 1
January 2006.
SAFTA has six core elements covering trade liberalization programme, rules of origin,
institutional arrangements, safeguard measures, special and differential treatment for
least developed countries (LDCs), and dispute settlement mechanisms.
SAARC Summits since inception
Dhaka, Bangladesh 7-8 December 1985
Bangalore India 16-17 November 1986
Katmandu, Nepal 2-4 November 1987
Islamabad, Pakistan 29-31 December 1988
Male, Maldives 21-23 November 1990
Colombo, Sri Lanka, 21 December 1991
Dhaka, Bangladesh, 10-11 April 1993
New Delhi India, 2-4 May 1995
Male, Maldives 12-14 May 1997
Colombo, Sri Lanka, 29-31 July 1998
Katmandu, Nepal, 4-6 January 2002
Islamabad, Pakistan, 2-6 January 2004
Dhaka, Bangladesh, 12-13 November 2005
New Delhi, India, 3-4 April 2007
SAARC Social Charter
The signing of the Social Charter by the Heads of State/ Government at the 12th SAARC
Summit held in Islamabad in 2004, has been a major development in SAARC.
The Social Charter aims at promoting the welfare of the peoples of South Asia and
accelerating economic growth and social progress through poverty alleviation, improving
health conditions of peoples, human resource development, empowerment of women,
and providing welfare to the children.
Although the Social Charter is not a binding document, it underpins the SAARC Charter
objective of ‘providing all individuals the opportunity to live in dignity and to realize their
full potentials’.
SAARC Regional Convention of Suppression of Terrorism The SAARC Regional Convention
of Suppression of Terrorism was signed during the Third SAARC Summit in Kathmandu in
November 1987.
This was the result of a series of discussions held between Member States for more than
two years starting from very first SAARC Summit held in Dhaka. This Convention recognizes
dangers posed by the spread of terrorism and its harmful effects on peace & cooperation
and also the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the States.
This Convention came into force on 22 August 1988. Later, an Additional Protocol to this
Convention was signed during the 12th SAARC Summit in Islamabad on 06 January 2004. This
Additional Protocol updates the Convention by adding terrorist financing and has been ratified
by all Member States.
SAARC Regional Agenda The Agenda of Regional Cooperation under SAARC has expanded
over the years and are broadly covered under the Regional Integrated Programme of
Action (RIPA). In addition, a number of issues are given high priority.
At the 12th SAARC Summit held in Islamabad in 2004, the Heads of States/Government
recognized ‘poverty alleviation’ as the greatest challenge facing the peoples of South Asia
and declared poverty alleviation as the overarching goal of all SAARC activities.
Co-operation with the International Organizations SAARC has established institutionalized
arrangements for cooperation with a number of other regional groupings and
international and regional organizations.
It has entered into cooperative arrangements through the signing of MOUs with
organizations like the EC, UNCTAD, ESCAP, UNIFEM, APT, ITU, UNDP, UNDCP, UNEP,
UNIFEM, CIDA, WHO, ADB, PTB, UNAIDS, UNICEF, World Bank etc.
SAARC has recently agreed with ASEAN Secretariat for a Partnership Work Plan (2004-
2005) in a number of areas including trade, HIV/AIDS, energy and tourism. SAARC has a
dialogue forum with ASEAN and EU on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly sessions.
People to People Contacts
Under the SAARC Visa Exemption Scheme, some specifically identified categories of
persons along with their spouses and dependent children are entitled to travel within the
SAARC region without visa.
Although the Visa Scheme is yet to attain the depth and coverage of regional visa schemes
like the Schengen visa, it has proved to be effective in generating credibility about the SAARC
process.
SAARC as an institution has always emphasized the need for strengthening people-to-
people contacts through greater participation of NGOs, including professional bodies in
the private sector, to promote socio-economic and cultural co-operation in South Asia.
SAARC has formulated a set of guidelines and procedures for granting recognition to
regional NGOs and professional bodies. SAARC Charter Day The SAARC Secretariat and
Member States observe 8th December as the SAARC Charter Day.
SAARC designated years SAARC has designated years to draw special focus on specific
social issues and has contributed to raising awareness, mobilizing resources and
adopting/adapting national programs.
SAARC designated years
1989 Year of Combating Drug Abuse and Drug Trafficking
1990 Year of Girl Child
1991 Year of Shelter
1992 Year of Environment
1993 Year of Disabled persons
1994 Year of the Youth
1995 Year of Poverty Alleviation
1996 Year of Literacy
1997 Year of Participatory Governance
1999 Year of Biodiversity
2002-2003 Year of Contribution of Youth to Environment
2004 Year of Awareness for TB & HIV/AIDS
2006 South Asia Tourism Year SAARC has also declared decades on specialized themes;
.
SUCCESS OF SAARC AFTER 25 YEARS OF ESTABLISHMENT
The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) summit is often described as
being a mere photo opportunity for south Asian leaders who should actually be using the
comatose organization to reinvent regional cooperation in a globalize world. Such
pessimism is inevitable if one takes stock of the progress that SAARC has made over the
period of time. There exists a SAARC convention to deal with all issues that have a certain
salience in the regional context. Yet, even 25 years after its inception the organization is
found wanting both in terms of forming a regional identity and of forging any sense of a
regional belongingness. This is where the problem lies. Contested national identities
constructed by member states have not encouraged an identity based on common socio-
cultural heritage to take root.
South Asian countries engage readily and often with powerful states in the international
system, yet when it comes to regional engagement, their bilateral relations have remained
strained, and are characterized by mistrust and suspicion thus making regional
cooperation hostage to bilateral politics.
Gaining Strategic Space
At present, consisting of eight members, SAARC has the potential to expand its
membership to include Myanmar. What has been intriguing in the recent past is that while
many in South Asia have written the obituary of SAARC as a vehicle for fostering regional
cooperation, there are countries who are vying with each other to become part of it as
observers. One of the observers aspiring for membership is campaigning for it through its
regional proxies. It is too early to say whether SAARC, which could not inculcate a sense of
regional solidarity within its membership, will be able to deal with observer countries who
are more interested in gaining strategic space rather than in regional cooperation.
The organization has yet not delineated the possible role of the observer countries. In this
context it is not clear whether their engagement will benefit the SAARC countries. Some
member countries like Sri Lanka and Bangladesh have expressed hopes that the observers
would play a positive role. AARC has progressively addressed 'hard' issues that confront
the region more than 'soft' issues. If one compares the agenda of the organization when it
was formed with its current goals then SAARC can be seen to be slowly moving towards
regional integration in the real sense. This integration is beyond having just a common
approach to issues like poverty, telecommunication, weather, sports, culture, etc., as was
envisaged in the beginning. The translation of its agenda into a meaningful cooperation
has also not been possible due to the declaratory approach the leadership has taken and
endorsed without having any real commitment towards these goals. The reason could be
that the leaders perhaps feel compelled to demonstrate to the people of the region that
they are committed to the process of regional cooperation without appearing to be
spoilers. There exists popular support for regional cooperation. The people want less rigid
visa controls and free exchange of goods and ideas, while keeping the current borders
intact. Regional cooperation is a reality. An economic raison d'être is a prerequisite for
regional politics in a globalized world where regional cooperation is the only option. The
transnational character of problems relating to terrorism, drug trafficking or climate
change cannot be addressed individually by countries which share porous and, many a
time, un-demarcated and contested borders. The countries of the region realized this but
are yet to shed their securitized state-centric mindsets. Regional cooperation without
regional commitment Regional engagement among south Asian countries has been
minimal compared to their engagement with Western countries. Whether it is security or
economics, SAARC countries are more integrated with the global order than with their
regional arrangement. There are no underlying economic compulsions that bind the
countries of the region as was the case with the European Economic Community (EEC).
The countries of south Asia do not have common security concerns to unite them. Threats
are mostly seen arising from within the region rather than from the outside. Therefore the
problem is: how can the countries of South Asia cooperate with each other when they
perceive each other as being responsible for their instability? Because of this mistrust,
many of the conventions--such as the Additional Protocol of the SAARC Convention on
Terrorism--have become defunct. Each country faces the challenge of terrorism yet South
Asian countries have not been able to devise a common approach to it. They neither share
intelligence nor is there any commitment to stop cross-border support to terrorist groups.
If one analyses the various clauses of the Additional Protocol of Terrorism which
criminalised the collection or acquisition of funds for the purpose of committing terrorist
acts, it becomes amply clear how the very purpose of dealing with the issue has been
defeated because of the double standards prevailing among states in the region. Though
SAARC has a Terrorism Monitoring Desk in Colombo it has not yet come out with any
report. The SAARC interior ministers' meeting has also not made any concrete suggestions
on how best to cooperate. The issue of terrorism has rather been addressed bilaterally. If
one studies the speeches of the heads of states at the recently concluded 16th SAARC
summit it will be seen that they devoted much time to expounding their countries'
achievements in dealing with various socio-economic and terrorism-related problems.
Some of these speeches were prescriptive in nature when what was required was how
their countries had promoted regional cooperation. The leaders reiterated the importance
of regional cooperation without specifying how to take this cooperation forward. The
president of Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai, in his speech put greater emphasis on terrorism
and said: 'Until all members of SAARC, without exception or reservation, commit not to
allow their territories to be used directly or indirectly to shelter, arm or train terrorist
groups . . . the wild fire of terrorism will not discriminate in choosing its target'.1 He also
stressed that with current bottlenecks, expeditious overland movement of goods and
benefits of a modern transport infrastructure would not be felt. Maldivian president,
Mohamed Nashid called for a 'comprehensive review of the on-the-ground effectiveness
of SAARC'. He asked for greater dialogue between India and Pakistan and expressed the
frustration of the smaller countries of south Asia who have often found themselves
hostage to the Indo-Pak conflict. The president said that the 'neighbours can find ways to
compartmentalise pending differences, while finding areas on which they can move
forward'.2 Bhutan felt that SAARC was losing its focus because of the requirement of close
to 200 meetings per year. It therefore suggested a substantial reduction of activities and
meetings to ensure focus.3 The Indian prime minister said that the countries of south Asia
need to accept that the glass of regional cooperation is half empty and the institutions are
not empowered sufficiently to be proactive.4 The Bangladesh prime minister rejected
anyone using the cloak of Islam or any other religion to perpetuate violence and
categorically stated that Bangladesh will not let its territory be used for launching
terrorism elsewhere.5 Pakistan's prime minister Sheikh Hasina Wazed, said that SAARC has
not made much progress due to historical legacies, differences and disputes while the Sri
Lankan president, Mahinda Rajapaksa, said: 'We often tend to provide priority to our
engagements with extra regional actors, without devoting sufficient attention to further
developing and strengthening the links within our own regional organisation'.6 SAARC
needs to follow a bottom up approach rather than a top down one. In this context good
relations between the countries can help regional cooperation rather than the other way
round. Moreover, even though there is a people's SAARC at the civil society level, attempts
should be made to build synergy between the official SAARC and the people. The reason is
that SAARC is yet to connect with people and its agreements and commendable
conventions have not touched the lives of the people on whose behalf these declarations
have been made. Moreover, issues like terrorism are addressed at a bilateral level. This
shows that the countries do not have much faith in the regional approach. Even though
there exists a convention on terrorism and an additional protocol, Bangladesh has put
forward a proposal for forming a regional task force. India, which has been a victim of
terrorism and shares its borders with many South Asian countries, has taken up the issue
of terrorism bilaterally. Some issues where bilateralism is adopted even though relevant
SAARC conventions exist are as follows. The previous Bangladesh National Party
government provided shelter to Indian insurgent groups as strategic assets in violation of
the SAARC convention. They were arrested and handed over to India only after the Awami
League government came to power in Dhaka. This was largely the result of a bilateral
initiative. Bhutan's decision to flush out Indian insurgent groups who took shelter in
southern Bhutan is again a bilateral initiative. Similarly, the issue of cross-border terrorism
originating in Pakistan was decided in 2004 on the sidelines of the Islamabad SAARC
summit. The now defunct Indo-Pak Joint Terror mechanism is yet another bilateral
initiative. Both India and Afghanistan have approached the United States a number of
times to resolve the issue of terrorism emanating from Pakistan. This is in spite of the fact
that Pakistan has been a frontline state and a crucial player in the global war against terror
but it has been reluctant to cooperate either with India or Afghanistan. Post-Mumbai,
Pakistan could have taken action under Article 7 of the Additional Protocol to confiscate
funds of the Jamaat-ul-Dawa. However, this was only done following a UN resolution and
under pressure from China and the US. This establishes that the regional approach to
terrorism has been a non-starter. SAARC speaks of regional connectivity, but Bangladesh's
offer to provide transit facilities to India and the use of its ports to India, Nepal and Bhutan
has been entirely a Bangladeshi initiative. In the regional context Pakistan has not allowed
Afghan trucks to carry Indian goods from Wagah. They go back empty. India also has been
using Iran for its trade with Afghanistan. The concept of the South Asia Growth Quadrangle
was another way to carry forward sub-regional cooperation under Article 6 of the SAARC
charter. There is an urgent need to reactivate the Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh and India
cooperation under the Growth Quadrangle. The 16th summit declaration: anything new?
As has been the case with past summits, the 16th summit declaration says the leaders
'expressed satisfaction' that SAARC has achieved a number of milestones which are not
specified. It is silent on whether these 'milestones' have made any difference to the region.
Had that been the case the SAARC leaders would not have lamented the failure of the
organisation even 25 years after its establishment. As was pointed out in the summit
declaration, SAARC's relevance lies 'in providing a platform for regional cooperation'.
However, it is up to the member countries to make the platform effective. It is therefore
not surprising that now, after 25 years of existence, the leaders are discovering the need
for a vision statement. The declaration further states that the: 'silver jubilee year should be
commemorated by making SAARC truly action oriented by fulfilling commitments,
implementing declarations and decisions and operationalizing instruments and living up to
the hopes and aspirations of one-fifth of humanity'.7 The summit recommended public
diplomacy to reach out to different sections of society. Such an aim can only be realized if
the countries can implement some of the agreements they have signed and evoke these
agreements to resolve problems. For example, in spite of two agreements on terrorism,
why is there no cooperation between countries to deal with the menace? The member
states reiterated their resolve to cooperate on terrorism and drug trafficking and
reaffirmed their commitment to implement relevant regional conventions.
Implementation will remain a big challenge as long as state sponsorship of terrorism
continues. There are inherent contradictions in what the countries project. While Bhutan
speaks of Gross National Happiness (GNH) and promises to hold workshops on GNH in the
country, it has denied the right of return to its ethnic Nepalese who fled the kingdom in
1990. Economic cooperation between countries of the region is yet to take off and
explains why, in spite of South Asia Free Trade Association (SAFTA) being ratified, regional
trade has remained below five per cent. On the issue of energy there is no concrete
cooperation for establishing a regional energy grid. India has offered to prepare a roadmap
for developing a SAARC market for electricity, which needs enabling markets in the
member states. One of the welcome developments has been the establishment of the
South Asia Development Fund (SDF) which was envisioned in 2005 by reconstituting the
South Asia Development Fund established in 1996.8 To make the SDF viable the countries
first need to arrive at a consensus and identify areas where these funds would be used.9
One hopes this would not be bogged down by bilateral and trilateral disputes. The leaders
have sagaciously agreed that 'the projects being funded through SDF are demand-driven,
time bound and aligned with the developmental priorities of the region'.10 It would,
however, take a lot of diplomatic sweating to translate this vision into reality. Perhaps one
of the issues that SDF needs to address urgently is to fund infrastructure projects to
enhance regional connectivity. The summit also recommended increased public-private
partnership for greater intra-SAARC investment promotion efforts. This would help in the
speedy implementation of projects as this is an effective way to deal with administrative
bottlenecks pertaining to land acquisition, electricity supply and bureaucratic red tape.
Intra-SAARC investment for the private sector would also be a welcome development.
Given the tardy processes of regional trade and restrictions in foreign investment and long
negative lists it will not be easy to attract private capital. To implement the public-private
partnership trade it will be important to ensure liberalization, harmonization of standards
as well as guarantee that products produced through this partnership would have access
to regional markets.
Regional Cooperation
SAARC has already established the South Asia Regional Standard Organization. Efforts
should be made to make it operational. Bilateral relations between the countries would be
crucial to facilitate such investments as private businessmen are unlikely to invest given an
environment of distrust which is not conducive for business. For example, bilateral
proposals involving investments have already run into rough weather. Even after the
Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) announced a liberalized policy for investment by Indian
businesses there continues to be resistance to Indian investment. An investment proposal
by TATA, for example, got derailed due to Bangladesh's internal politics. A common market
for south Asia is still in its infancy because of non-tariff and Para tariff barriers. Therefore,
unless the tendency to politicize economics does not end, this vision of the leaders of the
region will be added to the list of wishful thinking that the SAARC has accumulated over 25
years. The summit also took a decision to declare 2010-2020 the 'Decade of Intraregional
Connectivity in SAARC'. It is important that SAARC leaders take steps to implement
regional connectivity in order to drive growth, induce better synergy and give a boost to
SAFTA.
Observers in SAARC China's growing influence in the region has been a matter of concern
for India. China's entry into SAARC in 2005 has been significant and Nepal, Bangladesh and
Pakistan played an important role in facilitating Chinese entry. China's presence is a matter
of concern for two reasons. First, there is a growing nexus between China and Pakistan at
the heart of which lies the policy to balance India. Its presence therefore cannot be
considered neutral. Second, China's presence in SAARC is specifically for gaining strategic
space. China has been following a strategy to engage with neighboring countries for
defense and economic cooperation. Though China's trade ties with India have seen an
upward swing, it has border conflicts with India and Bhutan. The relations between India
and China have remained highly suspect. China shares good relations with the neighboring
countries whereas India is looked upon with suspicion. In this context China's presence
could be a pressure tactic that may be employed on India. A conflicted relationship with
China would confine India to the region and prevent it from playing a larger global role.
This has been one of the principles of China's engagement in the region. Since SAARC itself
has hardly made any progress it is not clear how China can contribute to its progress.
Some other observer countries have other interests in the region. For example, Japan is
the highest aid donor to the region and the US is heavily engaged in the region to counter
terrorism and has a stake in regional peace; Australia has the largest number of
immigrants from this region. SAARC will now have to brace for an India-China contest
apart from the one between India and Pakistan which was largely blamed for the slow
progress of SAARC. The Chinese vice foreign minister said China would 'expand
cooperation with SAARC and elevate our friendly and cooperative ties to a new level'.11 It
proposes to hold a China-SAARC senior officials meeting. The Myanmar representative said
that its geographical proximity, historical and cultural links prompted it to become an
observer in SAARC. It also offered to act as a bridge between south and Southeast Asia.
However, one has not been able to understand why Myanmar has not applied for
membership. The representative of Iran said that Iran's geographical location and
extensive transport network enables it to help South Asia in expanding its trade with other
parts of the world. Conclusion Regional cooperation in the South Asian region lacks the
commitment and dedication that is required to make it a success. Some countries have
agreed to cooperate because they do not want to be spoilers while there are others who
genuinely believe that this is the way forward. In spite of scathing criticism of SAARC by
the leaders of the region on its 25th anniversary, one is not sure whether there would be
any fundamental change in the attitude of the countries. Earlier, attempts were made to
multi-lateralize bilateral issues but now efforts are being made to resolve some issues like
terrorism bilaterally. The countries which do not have bilateral synergy will not be able to
make a meaningful contribution to the success of SAARC.
Collective Self-Interest
To quote the Pakistani Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani: 'Only when we refuse to be
held hostage to history, only when we sincerely and assiduously work to build trust,
resolve disputes, bridge perceptions and see merit in an enlightened collective self-
interest, will we be able to unleash our latent potential'.12 The big question that remains
is 'When?' It is a tall order to expect regional cooperation between countries who do not
see eye to eye even in bilateral matters.
Each country joined SAARC to forward its interests or to avoid getting sidelined,
particularly within the Indo-centric region. Pursuing national interests is desirable but to
pursue it under the cloak of regionalism is a recipe designed for the failure of SAARC. A
regional identity is essential for the success of SAARC.
People-to-People Contact
If the countries try to undermine regional interests for their narrow political advantage
then members can resign themselves to this forum becoming a mere talking shop. Even
after 25 years it has failed to connect with the masses. Its promotion of people-to-people
contact is restricted to judges, diplomats and the parliamentarians.
SAARC needs to get off its elitist pedestal and adopt a subaltern approach. However, the
time to write the epitaph of SAARC has not yet come. In spite of all the misgivings, and
non-implementation of various agreements and conventions, SAARC provides greater
regional visibility to smaller countries and provides them with the opportunity and
responsibility to contribute to the region in a meaningful way. For them even a failed
SAARC is more attractive as a platform than being restricted to bilateralism in an India-
dominated region.
SAARC: CAUSES OF FAILURE
THE two-day 16th summit of South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (Saarc) held
in Bhutanese capital of Thimpu on April 28-29 concluded with a joint declaration
expressing the resolve of their leaders to wage common struggle for economic
development, improve their inter-connectivity, promote people to people contacts and
evolve a joint strategy to tackle the issues of climate change, water and food shortages.
During the last quarter of the previous century international relations witnessed a strong
surge towards regionalism. The underlying idea was to promote peace and economic
progress through multilateral partnership of states in the region by pooling the available
resources. Further impetus was provided by the emergence of new issues that threatened
the fabric of international norms, such as terrorism, drug trafficking, extremism, and
economic crisis. It was realised that these problems could not be solved at bilateral level
and required joint efforts and close coordination. Accordingly regional groupings such as
ECO, GCC, Asean and Saarc emerged.
Saarc came into being in December 1985, with the adoption of its charter in Dhaka. The
objectives were to promote the welfare and improve the quality of life of the people of
South Asia by accelerating economic growth in the region and building up mutual trust
among the member states. The importance of Saarc as a regional organisation despite its
rather unsatisfactory record, is recognised by all leaders. The feeling that peace and
prosperity are indivisible and that the South Asia region has a common destiny and a
shared struggle for a better and brighter future has emerged dominant theme.
The leaders who gathered in Thimpu made a frank appraisal and acknowledged that the
organisation has failed to live up “to the hope and aspiration of 1/5th of humanity”
represented by Saarc members. The Prime Minister of Bhutan also expressed the hope
that Saarc will not turn into just “a talk shop”.
This honest confession that “the bloc has not moved away from declarations of intent to
concrete implementation”, should however not blind us to the achievements.
Its performance has not been entirely dismal. Despite failings, a number of significant
achievements such as (i) The Regional Convention on Suppression of Terrorism (ii) Saarc
Agriculture Information Centre at Dhaka (iii) Saarc audio visual exchange programme
(SAVE) and (iv) Social Charter to set targets for eradication of poverty, population
stabilisation and human resource development fall to its credit.
The South Asia Preferential Trading Agreement (SAPTA) was signed in the 7th summit at
Dhaka in April 93, but it has not yet been operationalised. The proposal to establish South
Asian Food Reserve and South Asian Development Fund have also met the same fate.
Similarly declarations on enhancing political cooperation and promotion of mutual trust
and understanding reiterated in each summit have registered limited success. Saarc
despite these limitations and poor performance, however, remains a useful tool for
smaller countries to promote understanding and cooperation at bilateral level.
Facing criticism that Saarc has failed to realise its ambitious objectives during the last 25
years, the Thimpu Summit decided not to indulge in rhetoric and set ambitious goals. The
two major and modest projects agreed upon were US$300 million fund to reduce poverty
in the region and also on trade and environmental protection.
The perceptions of the failure of Saarc to implement its charter have been aggravated by
the political climate obtaining in the region. SAARC summits should act as a forum where
member states discuss not only matters of regional importance but also the underlying
causes of tension in bilateral relations.
To retain its credibility and relevance Saarc should eschew unrealistic economic and social
goals; instead it should be effectively used as a medium to discuss issues of peace, security
and development with international organisations and agencies to promote interests of
the member countries.
At the Thimpu Summit, the leaders pledged that they will unitedly work to realise the
aspirations of the founding fathers t as set out in the first Summit.
The fundamental weakness that Saarc suffers from is trust deficit among the members
states. The political differences had deep negative impact on the political will to realise the
economic cooperation and integration. Besides political differences and conflict, economic
factors have also played an unhelpful role. The member states except India have still not
reached the take-off stage to be able to pursue the programme of economic integration
and collaboration.
The establishment of Saarc Development Fund, Food Bank, The Arbitration Council, and
the Regional Standards Organisations are the right moves. Saarc should also seek free and
preferential trading arrangements with other regional bodies notably EU and the Asean.
It should also remain fully focused on Saarc social charter to spread out its reach to the
common man. The people of South Asia desire to have a peaceful, prosperous and secure
future. The security can be obtained through sincere and sustained efforts to narrow the
political differences. Saarc is the appropriate tool not only to build trust but also to solve
disputes and create conducive climate for realisation of Saarc charter.
Challenges for SAARC
In order to fulfill the high aspirations of its peoples in the face of
current global economic and financial crises, SAARC will need a new strategic vision.In
South Asia, over the past six decades, development practitioners, economists and politicians
have presented a number of measures and approaches to address and fix South Asia's socio-
economic problems, but nothing sufficient has been done in this regard. Unfortunately
South Asia happens to be a region afflicted with terrorism, ethnic rivalries, different kinds
of fatal diseases, shortage of food, intra and inter-state wars, political turmoil, instability,
leadership crises and security issues. The region is bestowed with enormous natural
resources but has little to demonstrate for it. It is a region endowed with fertile land but
cannot feed its people, a region that has given birth to learned human resources in all walks
of human endeavour but has not yet been able to liberate itself from the shackles of
underdevelopment, foreign intervention and vested interests.
These factors, besides limiting the development of the region, raise one basic question:
what role has leadership played to help improve the situation? Could South Asia have been
better with visionary, devoted leaders? It is often said that "the only safe ship in a storm is
leadership." Martin Luther King, Jr. once said, "The ultimate measure of a man is not where
he stands in moments of comfort, but where he stands at times of challenge and
controversy." Unfortunately, leadership has not played its due role to tackle the challenges
and problems plaguing the region. Most of the conflicts, intra and inter-state rivalries and
the worst terrorist activities in the region, thrive on the wings of leadership. In the region,
we see that human life, property and resources have been lost and wiped out in pursuit of
this leadership.
In South Asia, the agenda to achieve prosperity is driven by the need to achieve sustainable
growth and reduce poverty. This requires public sector reform, including tax reform and
expenditure restructuring, and an improvement in the performance of public enterprises
through increased competition, privatisation, a wider distribution of shared ownership and
removal of entry barriers that still impede participation of the private sector. Tax reform is
still in the early phase. Financial reform remains an elusive objective although some
important steps have been taken in Pakistan while India has placed it at the top of the
policy agenda. Little progress has been made in reforming land and labour markets.
Developing South Asia's human resource base is
particularly important in pursuing an outward-looking, pro-poor growth strategy in the
current global scenario. South Asia's ability to pursue this strategy will depend on its
success in shifting public expenditure priorities to the social sectors to ensure a more rapid
buildup of human capital. Currently, life expectancy in South Asia lags behind that in East
Asia; out of every ten children born, at least one is expected to die before reaching his/her
first birthday and nearly half of the children in the region do not complete primary school.
Although there is a danger of raising the level of expectations about the ongoing inter-
governmental talks between India and Pakistan, which can result in serious disappointment
as only modest results can be achieved in the face of existing ground realities and the
limited vision of the political leadership in both countries, it is essential not to lose sight of
the opportunities in store and to analyse the causes of those opportunities that have been
missed in the past. The most serious impediment in achieving even a modest degree of
improvement in the presently dismal state of Indo-Pakistan relationship is the high level of
misunderstanding and misperceptions that the public opinion in each country has about the
problems facing the other.
Relationship of South Asian countries is often a source of discord than unity among them.
The challenge for South Asian nations is not that they should forget the history of hostility
towards each other, but they should rather develop an understanding about the evolution of
culture and society in the subcontinent through objective research based on respect for
various religions and social groups that have lived in it and have contributed to its
development and splendour. The term "enlightened moderation" does not need to be
restricted to the relations between Western and Eastern cultures, but also needs to be
applied to relations among various religions and cultures which thrive in South Asia. Even
more importantly, history need not be viewed simply as a clash of religions and cultures,
but be interpreted in terms of its economic and social dimensions as well.
Unfortunately, SAARC has not yet delivered
on its promise. In order to fulfill the high aspirations of its peoples in the face of current
global economic and financial crises, SAARC will need a new strategic vision. It will have to
change its ways and its structure and will have to make efforts to revitalize itself. SAARC's
new vision could be seen as a bridge between East Asia, rich in its human resources and
technology and West and Central Asia, rich in natural resources and finance.
The SAARC region's massive population and educated elites could complement the needs of
both nations, with India overseeing the Eastern flank and Pakistan providing the linkage to
West and Central Asia. This will help realize the dream of the Asian century. It will also
avoid the counterproductive competition between India and Pakistan in their respective
regions of influence, which has often been a mutual diplomatic irritant between the two
countries. This vision will present a win-win, non-zero-sum situation for all concerned. The
only downside such a vision may entail is the possible fear of smaller SAARC countries that
collusion between India and Pakistan - the reverse of the present situation and far from
probable - may result in some detriment to them.
South Asia's growth prospects depend to
a large extent on what happens in India. The reform efforts in India, combined with similar
reforms of investment and the trade and payments system initiated in Bangladesh, Pakistan
and Sri Lanka, augur well for the medium-term growth prospects of South Asia. Contingent
to the successful completion of current reforms, export growth is expected to improve and
boost growth to the 5-6 percent range from the present low of 3-4 percent.
Uncertainties remain. Almost all South Asian countries face transition in leadership. The
political process is broadening out in these countries and generational changes in political
and economic leadership are taking place. No one can be sure how these processes will
evolve or what the economic consequences will be. And in some of the bigger countries in
the region - India and Pakistan - there are large numbers of poor people at early stages of
an accelerated development process. Rapid rates of growth are not synonymous with robust
institutions at the local level, which is where ultimately most decisions on investment and
implementation are made. It will take time for the institutional infrastructure - public and
private - to effectively support the modernisation of these economies in the face of the
current global economic and financial crisis