Editorial»
South Asian forum
DEC 31 - White elephant.’ This is the description a television news-reader recently used while airing a report about an organization which is holding a summit level meeting next week in Islamabad. Is it a fair assessment of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) , a forum created by seven countries “ to accelerate economic growth, social progress and cultural development of the region ? “ Is it just like a bulky, useless animal too expensive to be kept as a conveyor or even a pet ?As is obvious, these kinds of evaluations are superficial, simply because they tend to overlook the background in which this regional forum came into being . The Association was established, in 1985, on the basis of abroad agreement reached among the leaders of an expansive region called South Asia. And they took a collective decision only after giving thoughtful consideration to inputs submitted by their foreign policy experts, some of them are still active in their profession. Had it just been one of those burdensome institutions, the Association’s members would have already stopped defraying its expenses.
In terms of performance, it is true that SAARC has not been able to make impressive achievements. But here again skeptics need to be realistic. The organization is unlikely to pick up a speed if its members are satisfied with its slow pace.
“ SAARC will be just as strong and as functional as its member governments will make it,” said Professor Y.N. Khanal, the grand old man of Nepali diplomacy, shortly after the fifth summit held in the Maldives.
Contemporary events and emerging trends show that the countries of South Asia do need an institution like SAARC.
They would have been prompted to invent one if they did not already have the present forum. Latest initiatives taken by India and Pakistan, the two key players of the region, to normalize bilateral relations are an indication of willingness to institutionalize their current state of thaw. It can also be construed as a manifestation of realization in these two countries of a need to develop the existing group as one strong South Asia block which alone can take on present-day global challenges including those that have surfaced after the creation of the World Trade Organization (WTO) . “ It is time we recognize what it [ close regional cooperation ] means for all of us in South Asia, “ said Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee at the inauguration of SAARC information ministers’ meeting in Delhi a few weeks ago. The confidence-building measures taken by either side in these past few months must also be seen in the context of their expressed desire to make the SAARC an active regional institution for South Asia. Could a newly-formed group provide a reliable platform to initiate activities that have been taken in recent months ? Definitely not.
It is true that both India and Pakistan were initially reluctant to be a partner for what was going to be SAARC.
India was apprehensive about a possible bid by smaller neighbours to politically isolate it in the region. And Pakistan preferred to be closer to the Muslim fraternity—in Afghanistan and beyond. But events of 1990s produced a new scenario, compelling the two belligerent neighbors to narrow down their differences and reset priorities. Striking among the incidents is the disintegration of the Soviet Union, India’s most dependable ally.
Then came the tragic happenings of 11 September 2001 in the United States. The resultant need to fight terrorism on a global scale, eventually brought the world’s sole superpower on the threshold of South Asia—to Afghanistan. Equations and dynamics changed, requiring both Delhi and Islamabad to take pragmatic positions on matters that have bothered them for over 55 years. The issue of Kashmir is one of them .
Important point at issue, however, is the positive impact the confidence-building measures are likely to have on the SAARC institution as a whole. Outcome of Islamabad summit in the form of agreements on matters relating to poverty alleviation and liberalized trade regimes is going to be significant for other SAARC members too.
A new atmosphere of trust is sure to make the Kathmandu-based secretariat more active, handling works in the areas already identified by technical committees. In fact, there is so much to do in the region for the upliftment of millions of people living under the poverty line.
One SAARC-related point where India and Pakistan have repeatedly shown their differences (the most recent occasion was the Kathmandu summit, in January 2002) is the question of whether or no bilateral issues should be brought into the official agenda. India is opposed to the idea, and quotes the
Charter provision to substantiate its argument : “ bilateral and contentious issues shall be excluded from the deliberations.”
Pakistan, on the other hand, has been insisting that unless bilateral disputes are not allowed to be discussed and resolved the process of cooperation cannot move ahead.
However, Pakistan, which is hosting the summit, may prefer to utilize opportunity available for “ informal political consultations “ to discuss outstanding bilateral disputes.
After all, it has an open-ended agenda for a bilateral meeting anytime,anywhere and at any level. President Musharraf’s offer of a handshake to Vajpayee during the Kathmandu summit can also be recalled in this context. Media reports originating from Delhi make it clear that leaders of India and Pakistan are certainly going to hold bilateral meeting(s) on sidelines of the summit.
A genuine opportunity lies ahead. But should the key players fail to make any noticeable progress quickly, South Asia would not able to get rid of the tag of “ the most dangerous place on earth”— pinned by former US President Bill Clinton. The region indeed has too many potential areas of conflicts.Posted on: 2003-12-31 02:51
Headlines
Advertisements
