SAARC can't be complete without China
Yuba Nath Lamsal
The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) was founded 25 years ago on December 8, 1985 with the objective of bolstering enhanced and meaningful cooperation among the countries of South Asian region. However, this regional body appears to be far behind in realizing its lofty goals even in 25 years of its life. The SAARC has moved in the snail's pace with little progress in the areas of cooperation, which is attributed mainly to positional differences of some SAARC member countries on certain key issues including the very objective of the body.
The SAARC is said to the brainchild of former President of Bangladesh late Ziaur Rahman, who first floated the idea of forming the regional group in the model of the ASEAN and the EU. The idea was backed by other countries including Nepal. Nepalese people, therefore, tend to believe that former king Birendra is one of the founders of the SAARC. While Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nepal, Sri Lanka and the Maldives had wholeheartedly backed the idea, India was, in the beginning, not willing to create such a regional body. India took the move as an attempt of smaller states to gang up against India's hegemony and New Delhi, therefore, tried to block the process of creating the SAARC. However, New Delhi's efforts to scuttle the SAARC process turned futile due to the determined resolve of other countries in the region and the shape of SAARC finally came into being.
Initially, it was a group of seven countries of South Asia which included Nepal, India, Pakistan, Bhutan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and the Maldives. But the 14th Summit held at Dhaka of Bangladesh in November 2005 inducted Afghanistan as a new member of the SAARC. With the induction of Afghanistan, SAARC has now eight members. Pakistan had been seeking Afghanistan's entry into the SAARC right in the late 80s. Afghanistan's entry into the SAARC fold could not materialize due to India's opposition. However, Afghanistan's desire to become part of the South Asian union materialized only in 2005 when New Delhi also turned supportive. This was partly because of the changed international power politics.
Some other countries, too, have shown interest in joining the group but their request for membership was turned down on various reasons. Iran had requested for the membership but it was granted only observer status. Similarly, Myanmar, too, has shown interest. Now SAARC has China, Japan, Iran, United States and South Korea as observers.
One thing cannot be understood why China has been given only the observer's status but not the full-fledged membership of the SAARC. China is the part of South Asia and a bridge between South Asia and East Asia. China, therefore, cannot be equated with Japan and South Korea that are far away from South Asia. It is China which alone has either land border or maritime border with all South Asian countries. Based on its geographic location, the SAARC cannot be complete and meaningful without brining China into it as a full-fledged member. Moreover, China is a rising as a global economic powerhouse, which has already been world's second largest economy outpacing Japan. SAARC is, so far, the club of poor nations that do not have adequate resources and capabilities to fund their development projects that may require huge investment. As a result, South Asia is home to largest number of poor people in the world. The region has tremendous potentials for development if its available resources are harnessed properly and collectively. China's entry would, to a large degree, create more funds and bring more investment in the region.
Apart from poverty and underdevelopment, South Asia is a region of mistrust, conflict, communal riots and religious fundamentalism and terrorism. Afghanistan is hotbed of terrorism against which the US-led NATO force is waging a war. Despite multi-lateral war on terror, the complete victory is still elusive. It has spilled over impact in Pakistan, which has been a victim of terrorist incidents being perpetrated by religious fundamentalists. India is also victim of homegrown terrorism, which is its own making. India often instigates and finance militancy and subversive activities in its neighbouring countries. The conflict in Sri Lanka and LTTE were India's making. Similar case is with Pakistan. India and Pakistan often trade charges of aiding and abetting disturbances in one another's territories. Now India is reaping what it sowed in the past. India is, thus, facing the problem of conflict, riots, communal disharmony and militancy from Kashmir to Kanyakumari, from Gauhati to Gorkhaland of Darjeeling and from Nagaland to Nainital.
Despite having endowed with abundant natural resources and hardworking people, South Asia is backward because countries in the region least trust one another let alone cooperating with each other. The concept of SAARC was, perhaps, to dispel the atmosphere of mistrust and create atmosphere for confidence required for mutual understanding and cooperation.
Ever since the SAARC was created 25 years ago, 16 summits have been held so far. In the summits usually held annually, barring a couple of occasions when annual summits could not be held annually, a lot has been said and accordingly resolutions and declarations adopted ranging from poverty alleviation, food bank, social charter and regional development fund to fighting terrorism. However, these resolutions and declarations have remained mostly in papers. This is in the absence of commitment and seriousness on the part of the members to execute the decision taken in the summit meetings.
The fundamental reason behind the slow speed, as already stated, is the differences of perception on the SAARC. India, which is the biggest member in terms of size, population and economy, perceives the SAARC as an alliance of South Asian countries against India. It is true, to some extent. The South Asian countries are so badly bullied by their big neighbour India that they want a common forum in which they can raise the issue and deal with India collectively. India has problems with all members of the SAARC. Pakistan has already fought three wars with India over Kashmir. The Kashmir issue that has remained unresolved for more than six decades since India annexed it in 1948. India and Pakistan have positional differences on Kashmir issue. Pakistan wants the implementation of the United Nations resolution on Kashmir dispute through plebiscite to which India also had agreed in the past. The plebiscite is the democratic and legitimate process to allow the people of Kashmir to decide their fate whether to remain within Indian union or otherwise. However, India has backed out from holding the plebiscite, which has been the root of entire problem relating to Kashmir. Unless Kashmir issue is not resolved, SAARC cannot be effective and sustainable peace in South Asia is not possible.
Sri Lanka got afflicted by long civil war instigated and perpetrated by India. Bangladesh, too, has barrage of problems with India including border dispute to sharing water resources. The construction of Farakka Dam by India near Bangladesh border has caused tremendous socio-economic and environmental problems in Bangladesh. This issue has been a bone contention between India and Bangladesh for decades. Bhutan is a country that has been forcibly kept under India's security umbrella. There is a simmering discontent among the people of Bhutan against India's hegemonic policy. India's interference and atrocity in Nepal is worse. India has not only been meddling in Nepal's internal affairs but also encroached Nepal's territory in eighteen points. Given this situation, India normally does not allow the SAARC to move fast and New Delhi's desire is either to use this forum to further gag the neighbours or fail the regional body.
The SAARC has specific principles in dealing with issues. It has adopted bilateralism on contentious issues between the two countries and unanimity on decision-making process within the SAARC forum. If any of the nations does not agree on certain issue, the decision cannot be taken on majority basis. The SAARC Charter ( Article X) has explicitly stated that all decisions within the forum are to be taken on the basis of unanimity, while bilateral and contentious issues are excluded from deliberation within the SAARC forum. This is the fundamental handicap of the SAARC. Since the bilateral and contentious issues are not discussed and amicable solution sought collectively, the SAARC cannot move ahead satisfactorily. The atmosphere of trust and confidence would be built only when the contentious issues are resolved amicably.
Many tend to believe that SAARC has come of an age. According to this school of thought, much has been achieved in the areas SAARC has envisioned. Much has also been written on SAARC from this perspective. But this is nothing more than an intellectual copulation. Despite being 25 year old organization, SAARC is still toddling but not walking let alone running fast. If it has to be made an effective and functional regional body, changes must be brought about in its functional procedures. If needed, the Charter needs to be changed to make sure that all the bilateral and contentious issues, too, be raised and discussed within the SAARC forum that would help find an amicable solution to all disputes. Also it would be better if China is brought into the SAARC as the full-fledged member but not merely an observer in order to create good balance of power within the regional group and make the SAARC more resourceful. The SAARC region already has almost a quarter of the world's population. If China is brought in, SAARC would be an association of almost half of the world's population. This would have greater impact and influence in the international arena, as well.
The author can be reached at: yubanath@wlink.com.np
The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) was founded 25 years ago on December 8, 1985 with the objective of bolstering enhanced and meaningful cooperation among the countries of South Asian region. However, this regional body appears to be far behind in realizing its lofty goals even in 25 years of its life. The SAARC has moved in the snail's pace with little progress in the areas of cooperation, which is attributed mainly to positional differences of some SAARC member countries on certain key issues including the very objective of the body.
The SAARC is said to the brainchild of former President of Bangladesh late Ziaur Rahman, who first floated the idea of forming the regional group in the model of the ASEAN and the EU. The idea was backed by other countries including Nepal. Nepalese people, therefore, tend to believe that former king Birendra is one of the founders of the SAARC. While Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nepal, Sri Lanka and the Maldives had wholeheartedly backed the idea, India was, in the beginning, not willing to create such a regional body. India took the move as an attempt of smaller states to gang up against India's hegemony and New Delhi, therefore, tried to block the process of creating the SAARC. However, New Delhi's efforts to scuttle the SAARC process turned futile due to the determined resolve of other countries in the region and the shape of SAARC finally came into being.
Initially, it was a group of seven countries of South Asia which included Nepal, India, Pakistan, Bhutan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and the Maldives. But the 14th Summit held at Dhaka of Bangladesh in November 2005 inducted Afghanistan as a new member of the SAARC. With the induction of Afghanistan, SAARC has now eight members. Pakistan had been seeking Afghanistan's entry into the SAARC right in the late 80s. Afghanistan's entry into the SAARC fold could not materialize due to India's opposition. However, Afghanistan's desire to become part of the South Asian union materialized only in 2005 when New Delhi also turned supportive. This was partly because of the changed international power politics.
Some other countries, too, have shown interest in joining the group but their request for membership was turned down on various reasons. Iran had requested for the membership but it was granted only observer status. Similarly, Myanmar, too, has shown interest. Now SAARC has China, Japan, Iran, United States and South Korea as observers.
One thing cannot be understood why China has been given only the observer's status but not the full-fledged membership of the SAARC. China is the part of South Asia and a bridge between South Asia and East Asia. China, therefore, cannot be equated with Japan and South Korea that are far away from South Asia. It is China which alone has either land border or maritime border with all South Asian countries. Based on its geographic location, the SAARC cannot be complete and meaningful without brining China into it as a full-fledged member. Moreover, China is a rising as a global economic powerhouse, which has already been world's second largest economy outpacing Japan. SAARC is, so far, the club of poor nations that do not have adequate resources and capabilities to fund their development projects that may require huge investment. As a result, South Asia is home to largest number of poor people in the world. The region has tremendous potentials for development if its available resources are harnessed properly and collectively. China's entry would, to a large degree, create more funds and bring more investment in the region.
Apart from poverty and underdevelopment, South Asia is a region of mistrust, conflict, communal riots and religious fundamentalism and terrorism. Afghanistan is hotbed of terrorism against which the US-led NATO force is waging a war. Despite multi-lateral war on terror, the complete victory is still elusive. It has spilled over impact in Pakistan, which has been a victim of terrorist incidents being perpetrated by religious fundamentalists. India is also victim of homegrown terrorism, which is its own making. India often instigates and finance militancy and subversive activities in its neighbouring countries. The conflict in Sri Lanka and LTTE were India's making. Similar case is with Pakistan. India and Pakistan often trade charges of aiding and abetting disturbances in one another's territories. Now India is reaping what it sowed in the past. India is, thus, facing the problem of conflict, riots, communal disharmony and militancy from Kashmir to Kanyakumari, from Gauhati to Gorkhaland of Darjeeling and from Nagaland to Nainital.
Despite having endowed with abundant natural resources and hardworking people, South Asia is backward because countries in the region least trust one another let alone cooperating with each other. The concept of SAARC was, perhaps, to dispel the atmosphere of mistrust and create atmosphere for confidence required for mutual understanding and cooperation.
Ever since the SAARC was created 25 years ago, 16 summits have been held so far. In the summits usually held annually, barring a couple of occasions when annual summits could not be held annually, a lot has been said and accordingly resolutions and declarations adopted ranging from poverty alleviation, food bank, social charter and regional development fund to fighting terrorism. However, these resolutions and declarations have remained mostly in papers. This is in the absence of commitment and seriousness on the part of the members to execute the decision taken in the summit meetings.
The fundamental reason behind the slow speed, as already stated, is the differences of perception on the SAARC. India, which is the biggest member in terms of size, population and economy, perceives the SAARC as an alliance of South Asian countries against India. It is true, to some extent. The South Asian countries are so badly bullied by their big neighbour India that they want a common forum in which they can raise the issue and deal with India collectively. India has problems with all members of the SAARC. Pakistan has already fought three wars with India over Kashmir. The Kashmir issue that has remained unresolved for more than six decades since India annexed it in 1948. India and Pakistan have positional differences on Kashmir issue. Pakistan wants the implementation of the United Nations resolution on Kashmir dispute through plebiscite to which India also had agreed in the past. The plebiscite is the democratic and legitimate process to allow the people of Kashmir to decide their fate whether to remain within Indian union or otherwise. However, India has backed out from holding the plebiscite, which has been the root of entire problem relating to Kashmir. Unless Kashmir issue is not resolved, SAARC cannot be effective and sustainable peace in South Asia is not possible.
Sri Lanka got afflicted by long civil war instigated and perpetrated by India. Bangladesh, too, has barrage of problems with India including border dispute to sharing water resources. The construction of Farakka Dam by India near Bangladesh border has caused tremendous socio-economic and environmental problems in Bangladesh. This issue has been a bone contention between India and Bangladesh for decades. Bhutan is a country that has been forcibly kept under India's security umbrella. There is a simmering discontent among the people of Bhutan against India's hegemonic policy. India's interference and atrocity in Nepal is worse. India has not only been meddling in Nepal's internal affairs but also encroached Nepal's territory in eighteen points. Given this situation, India normally does not allow the SAARC to move fast and New Delhi's desire is either to use this forum to further gag the neighbours or fail the regional body.
The SAARC has specific principles in dealing with issues. It has adopted bilateralism on contentious issues between the two countries and unanimity on decision-making process within the SAARC forum. If any of the nations does not agree on certain issue, the decision cannot be taken on majority basis. The SAARC Charter ( Article X) has explicitly stated that all decisions within the forum are to be taken on the basis of unanimity, while bilateral and contentious issues are excluded from deliberation within the SAARC forum. This is the fundamental handicap of the SAARC. Since the bilateral and contentious issues are not discussed and amicable solution sought collectively, the SAARC cannot move ahead satisfactorily. The atmosphere of trust and confidence would be built only when the contentious issues are resolved amicably.
Many tend to believe that SAARC has come of an age. According to this school of thought, much has been achieved in the areas SAARC has envisioned. Much has also been written on SAARC from this perspective. But this is nothing more than an intellectual copulation. Despite being 25 year old organization, SAARC is still toddling but not walking let alone running fast. If it has to be made an effective and functional regional body, changes must be brought about in its functional procedures. If needed, the Charter needs to be changed to make sure that all the bilateral and contentious issues, too, be raised and discussed within the SAARC forum that would help find an amicable solution to all disputes. Also it would be better if China is brought into the SAARC as the full-fledged member but not merely an observer in order to create good balance of power within the regional group and make the SAARC more resourceful. The SAARC region already has almost a quarter of the world's population. If China is brought in, SAARC would be an association of almost half of the world's population. This would have greater impact and influence in the international arena, as well.
The author can be reached at: yubanath@wlink.com.np
Comments
Post a Comment