Round The World

New Delhi, 13 October 2016

SAARC Meet Flattened

CASE OF CONGENITAL DISEASE

By Dr. S. Saraswathi

(Former Director, ICSSR, New Delhi)

In the present age of globalisation mingled with functional regional organisations, an exception is presented by SAARC. Failing to convene its scheduled Summit Meeting in November at Rawalpindi, Pakistan, has attracted world attention. Had the reason been a common problem or inconvenience necessitating postponement of the event, it wouldn’t be in the spotlight, but the opposition of majority of member countries for holding the Summit itself raises questions.

As is well known by now India announced its decision to pull out of SAARC Summit citing “increasing cross border terrorist attacks in the region”, and  “growing interference in the internal affairs of Member States by one country” making the environment not conducive to holding the Summit successfully. Attack on its military base at Uri hardened India’s stand to provoke even review of the Most Favoured Nation status accorded to Pakistan. 

Three other nations - Afghanistan, Bangladesh, and Bhutan - also decided to skip the meeting for these reasons. Nations in the region are preoccupied with fighting the phenomenon of terrorism.

Sri Lanka joined this group stating that the Summit cannot be held even if one country is absent.

SAARC has presently eight members – Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. Its decisions are taken by unanimity among all members and hence full presence of members is needed for any meeting to take any decision.

Political observers are generally inclined to view this development as a sign of the inevitable decline and fall of a weak regional association, born with certain congenital disorders, nurtured mechanically, and growing in years without positive enthusiasm or involvement. A sad and collective failure of close neighbours to realize the importance of regional unity for their own good!

Contrast this with SAARC’s better days in its initial years. In 1987, it convened the Regional Convention on Suppression of Terrorism which unanimously recognized the seriousness of the problem of terrorism as it affected security, stability, and development of the region. The Convention affirmed cooperation among the members as vital to suppress terrorism.

The SAARC 12^th Summit held at Islamabad in 2004 was considered a milestone in regional cooperation. It was able to make three agreements. One was the SAARC Social Charter, another on Additional Protocol on Terrorism, and a third on the Framework Agreement on South Asian Free Trade Areas.

The declaration of 2004 condemned terrorism in all its forms and manifestations and noted that people of South Asia continued to face a serious threat from terrorism.  The Additional protocol on Terrorism was signed to deal effectively with financing of terrorism.  But, the declaration did not bring the members together. On the contrary, terrorism came to be practiced within to solve other problems.

In the context of the challenges posed by growing terrorist organizations in the region, SAARC has to admit its failure in adhering to its agreements.

The main reason for cancellation of the 2016 Summit is the “prevailing environment” as put by Sri Lanka and given in detail by India. To Afghanistan, as its envoy in New Delhi stated, business as usual cannot continue as global patience with terrorism has grown thin. India is certainly not alone in expressing deep concerns over the rising tide of terrorism in the region.

SAARC’s weakness is not a sudden development. India’s Home Minister received a reluctant welcome in Pakistan in August, compelling cancellation of the Finance Minister’s visit to Pak to attend a meeting of Finance Ministers of member countries.

SAARC countries accepted the concept of regional cooperation in the early 1980s for the purpose of collective self-reliance through economic growth, social progress, and cultural development. At its inception, SAARC identified nine areas for regional cooperation, namely, agriculture, rural development, telecommunications, meteorology, health and population, postal service, transport, science and technology, and sports, art and culture. Three more areas were soon added – problems of terrorism, drug trafficking and abuse, and participation of women in regional development.

The organisation was then keen on promoting a common stand on the New International Economic Order, and the General Agreement on Tariff and Trade (GATT). But, the “environment”, now cited as the ground for disbanding the Summit meeting was brewing even in the 1980s.

Though terrorism is a common problem which every country has to fight, it is difficult to forge common international action where there are problems of even suspected State-sponsored terrorism. Even if terrorism is not within the concerns of SAARC, regional cooperation cannot be built over in-fighting units.

It may be argued that terrorism is an altogether different problem; that art and sports are beyond politics; that trade relations must go on despite political differences and so on. But, basic to genuine regional cooperation is cordial and peaceful atmosphere with mutual trust and good will among members. 

Under the prevailing circumstances, India can only hope to work meaningfully with countries that share its vision and in areas devoid of controversies. Promoting regional connectivity and SAARC satellite programme are some areas that can still go ahead despite the failure of SAARC.   Unfortunately, even disaster relief is spoilt by mutual rivalry.

Despite the dark clouds around, SAARC need not be disbanded, but can be postponed indefinitely with the hope that the present environment will not go on forever.  It is difficult to form a union, but easy to break it.  SAARC was established mainly to deal with a number of common social and economic problems which still persist.  

It had in the past taken many significant decisions such as promoting concerted action on poverty alleviation, and creating a free trade area. What would be the consequences of the flattening of SAARC Summit for South Asian cooperation?  Will it lead to a new SAARC without Pakistan, i.e. SAARC minus Pakistan as it is put? Seems unlikely as Pakistan, geographically and politically, holds a place at the centre of South Asia and plays a noticeable role in global politics.

With the hope of resurrecting SAARC getting bleak in view of escalation of border incursions into India, and terrorist menace, India has to strengthen its ties with other countries through other international organisations. Among these are BRICS (Bangladesh,  Russia, India, China, and South Africa), and BIMSTEC – The Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation  (Bangladesh, Bhutan,  India, Myanmar, Nepal,  Sri Lanka, Thailand,) which are functional despite some bilateral problems.

In deciding the future of SAARC, a crucial factor that needs to be kept in mind by the members is the possible reaction of China waiting for opportunities to expand its influence in the region.   Smaller countries are likely to grow smaller in the company of ambitious partners with hegemonistic deas.

On the whole, it seems that holding SAARC Summit at this juncture is rather ridiculous, but allowing it to die is not a wise decision. Death, of course, doesn’t require a decision of the parties, but can be fought. South Asian countries must shed the attitude of distrusting and envying neighbours -- a disease they have in common-- lest they should  fall in the trap of empire builders. ---INFA 

(Copyright, India News and  Feature Alliance)