Making SAARC A Viable Regional Body

Yuba Nath Lamsal

Yet another summit of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) started Wednesday (November 10) in Addu Atoll of the Maldives, where executive heads of the eight members states of South Asia are shaking hands, repeating the same old rhetoric and are likely to part away with promises to meet again the next year in Kathmandu.

Lackluster performance

The 17th SAARC summit began with the theme "Building Bridge" in which eight member countries and nine observers are taking part with much hype and hoopla. However, the summit is unlikely to arouse any genuine hope and enthusiasm among the people in the region because of its lackluster track record of 25 years since its inception.

SAARC was created in 1985 with the objective of fostering cooperation among the member states so that South Asia would develop as one community willing and capable of tackling the burning and burgeoning problems faced by more than one-fifth of the world’s humanity. Much has, of course, been said over the last 25 years since SAARC was created.

During this period, 16 summit meetings have been held and many resolutions adopted on various issues ranging from poverty alleviation and containment of terrorism to climate change. These initiatives are definitely praiseworthy as common and collective approaches are necessary to tackle the common problems of the region. In practical terms, however, no significant achievement has, so far, been made to change the lives of the people in the region.

Twenty-five years is a long time for an individual, but not so long for an organisation. But the pace at which SAARC is moving does not prove its validity and relevance. SAARC was created at a time when the Cold War was at its peak. South Asia was one of the hot spots of conflict and superpower rivalry. Two big powers of South Asia - India and Pakistan - had entered into two different military camps, although they were members of the non-aligned movement.

Smaller countries of South Asia were sceptical about their safety should the superpower rivalry take a worse turn in South Asia. While the security situation was vulnerable, the level of economic development was also very low, only second to the Sub-Saharan region of Africa. Because the South Asian countries were unable to harness their potential, the region had the largest concentration of poor people in the world. The South Asian countries were, thus, in search of a common identity and common approach for their security as well as development, which was the prime motive behind the creation of SAARC.

Against this background, South Asian countries sought a common approach and common strategy for the development of the region. South Asian countries share many commonalities and common problems, and they realise that the common problems also need a common solution. Realising and recognising this reality, the South Asian leaders mooted the concept of a regional association not only to present a common identity of the South Asian region but also to foster areas of cooperation for the common good of the South Asian people.

SAARC has, thus, traversed a difficult journey of a quarter century. But its performance and pace are not promising. Compared to other regional blocks like ASEAN and the European Union, SAARC has not been able to advance in a manner it was expected to. So far, the activities of SAARC have been confined to meetings and decision making. Several resolutions have been adopted, but their implementation is glaringly poor and abysmal. In such circumstances, the 17th Summit of SAARC is being held with more focus on the implementation of the previous decisions in order to make this regional body more result-oriented.

Why has SAARC not been able to move faster? Why are SAARC activities not action-oriented to produce better results? The answers are obvious. Despite having many commonalities and potential, mistrust among the member countries has marred any meaningful cooperation among the South Asian countries. India and Pakistan are the bigger members of the regional body. These two countries have many issues and disputes around which SAARC is revolving.

While India and Pakistan are locked in dispute, smaller countries of the region, too, harbor a certain level of mistrust of their bigger neighbours. The conflict between India and Pakistan has kept SAARC hostage to a large degree while suspicion between the bigger and smaller neighbours has given rise to a deficit of trust.

The SAARC Charter has the provision of a unanimous decision-making process and has prohibited any kind of bilateral and contentious issues from being raised in the SAARC forum. Also the SAARC Charter has exclusively confined its objectives and activities to economic, social and cultural cooperation. As a result, the objectives of SAARC have not been realised. If SAARC is to be made an effective regional body to resolve regional issues and nurture meaningful cooperation in various fields, some of the provisions in the Charter need to be amended.

The provision relating to unanimous decision making and prohibition of bilateral and contentious issues from being raised in SAARC need to be reviewed. If SAARC is to be made a genuine regional community and promote cooperation, mutual trust is the first prescription for which a conducive atmosphere ought to be created. Mutual trust can only be created when disputes and contentious issues are resolved amicably first bilaterally, and if bilateral efforts fail to make any headway, a regional approach must be taken, for which SAARC can be a good forum. We must understand that a solution cannot be found by brushing the problems aside. If a genuine solution is to be sought, free and open discussions must be held with an open and a positive mind.

There are some issues which have a regional dimension, but they are being dubbed as bilateral matters. One such issue is related with the Bhutanese refugee problem. More than 100,000 Bhutanese nationals have been living in Nepal for the last two decades as refugees. The presence of such a large number of refugees has put tremendous pressure on the social and economic sector of a small and resource-strapped country like Nepal. Bilateral efforts have not yielded any positive results on the resolution and repatriation of Bhutanese refugee.

Since Nepal and Bhutan do not share a common border, Bhutanese refugees had entered Nepal via Indian territory. Therefore, the refugee country involves three countries. Thus, this issue now needs to be addressed and resolved through a regional approach.

Similarly, SAARC requires some structural change. SAARC has a multi-layer structure. The most powerful one is the summit that consists of heads of state and government. The second tier is the ministerial level and the third one is the Standing Committee comprising foreign secretaries, which, in fact, holds practical decision-making power.

Unfortunately, the Secretary-General has a mere bureaucratic role with no executive and decision-making power. This is also attributed to the lackluster performance and snail pace of SAARC. If SAARC is to be made really strong, the role of the Secretary-General has to be enlarged with executive and decision-making power while strengthening the SAARC Secretariat.

It is now time to implement the SAARC decisions made in the past, which is also the focus of the 17th Summit. In the absence of effective implementation of the resolutions and decisions of the past, SAARC is becoming more like a gossiping forum of South Asian leaders.

Some critics have even started talking about the relevance of SAARC in the present context because of its non-performance. SAARC is the association of eight member countries with nine observers, which in itself is a big irony. The concept of bringing some powerful and rich countries to SAARC as observers was guided by the motive of making the regional body more resourceful. But the resource should be generated from within. In SAARC, India is resourceful which can make substantive contributions for regional development.

China’s membership

Similarly, China currently has an observer status. China is also a South Asian country because it shares a border with five of the eight SAARC member countries. Moreover, China is today the second largest economy in the world. If SAARC is to be made a complete and resourceful regional organisation, China has to be approached for full-fledged membership. Once China is included, SAARC would be the biggest regional organisation in the world with greater international clout.