SAARC became Irrelevant long ago, Let it Rest In Peace now
- In Current Affairs
- 09:44 AM, Oct 02, 2016
- Ajit Datta
“… when we speak of SAARC, we usually hear two reactions – cynicism and scepticism. This, sadly, is in a region throbbing with the optimism of our youth. Today, less than 5% of the region's global trade takes place between us. Even at this modest level, less than 10% of the region's internal trade takes place under SAARC Free Trade Area. Indian companies are investing billions abroad, but less than 1% flow into our region. It is still harder to travel within our region than to Bangkok or Singapore; and, more expensive to speak to each other. How much have we done in SAARC to turn our natural wealth into shared prosperity; or, our borders into bridgeheads to a shared future?”
This is an extract from prime minster Narendra Modi’s speech, when he participated in the SAARC summit two years ago in Kathmandu. Although much of what was stated before and after this was the usual optimistic and flowery diplomatic mumbo-jumbo, the point Mr. Modi briefly touched upon wasn’t missed. SAARC, to put it bluntly, has been a failure of epic proportions. Two years down the line, the organisation’s routine biennial summit has been called off. Six of its eight members planned a coordinated boycott because Pakistan was hosting this edition.
That the organisation has been a failure and that it faces several obstacles to achieve the goals and ideals upon which it was founded, is not disputed by any serious thinker. If the ongoing disharmony and the resulting mass boycott are anything to go by, then the larger question we have to answer is whether such an organisation has any foreseeable future or whether it is growing more futile by the day. The aforementioned extract from the prime minister’s speech in Kathmandu, is after all the ground reality of an effort which has lasted for over thirty years.
To judge whether this intergovernmental organisation has gone past the point of no return, it is important to understand the basis of its formation. The SAARC charter, signed by seven heads of state including Rajiv Gandhi and Zia-Ul-Haq, begins by stating that peace, stability, amity and progress is what this grouping of neighbouring countries desires. It goes on to advocate for enhanced cooperation in several domains, such as economics, culture, technology and science. Add to this its call for ‘collective self-reliance’, which is a dignified way of pushing for interdependence. These are indications that the organisation has a very common theory, the same the European Union, for its basis: that the more socially, politically and economically interdependent neighbouring countries are, the more likely it is for peace to prevail between them.
The theory is intuitive enough, but the problem in the context of SAARC is that it doesn’t seem applicable if the region’s equations are taken into account rightly. Relations between most countries in the region have been largely peaceful. The only thorn in the setup has been Pakistan, which has been hostile towards three members of the organisation. One of them is Bangladesh, which used to be a part of Pakistan before it freed itself from their occupation, and the other two are its immediate neighbours India and Afghanistan. It can be argued that the necessity of an organisation like SAARC is precisely to curb such hostility, but such an argument betrays ignorance of what Pakistan is all about. Pakistan is fundamentally against any sort of peace in the region, because the military which controls the country requires perpetual conflict to justify its existence. Pakistan’s membership in organisations such as SAARC and their participation in any peace-propagating forum is hypocritical tokenism.
There are several peaceniks in India who refuse to see the truth, and our blind to what drives Pakistani interests. For decades, they have been advocating cultural and economic interdependence between India and Pakistan, in similar lines to what the SAARC declaration states. Sudheendra Kulkarni, one of the key decision-makers of the Vajpayee-Advani era, is one of them. In a television debate after the Uri attack to place, he argued that the Indian government should not revoke the Most Favoured Nation (MFN) status accorded to Pakistan. This status, which ensures economic non-discrimination, was accorded to Pakistan in 1996. Kulakarni argued that the reason conflicts between China and Japan never escalate is because they conduct bilateral trade of several hundred billion dollars, and that similar conditions should be replicated in the subcontinent to maintain peace. His argument rings hollow at several levels. Pakistan has refused to reciprocate India’s granting of MFN status for twenty years. Moreover, Pakistan survives on international alms. No other economy, irrespective of how well it performs, has the scope of conducting trades of such large volumes with it.
The current dispensation is the first one to have grasped Pakistan’s intent. It realizes that conflict-inducing measures from Pakistan will never cease, no matter what façade it puts forth. It is on such a basis that they have dealt with Pakistan, with a clear intent of facilitating its implosion. Olive branches were extended to the country without unfounded expectations. At the same time, firing on the frontiers as well as the export of terrorism has been responded to in kind. Freedom struggles in regions that Pakistan occupies illegally have gained fresh momentum. Very soon, India may begin housing governments-in-exile from those regions. India has leveraged its weight effectively, and garnered the support of the international community in its efforts to isolate Pakistan. Measures to cripple Pakistan’s economy, such as sanctions from the world over, the damming of the Indus river to destroy their agriculture sector, and the revocation of the MFN status, are on the cards.
With such a worldview, it is quite clear that India has rejected the ‘interdependence for peace’ theory. An intergovernmental organisation such as SAARC, considering it has Pakistan as one of its members, is completely futile hereafter.
But letting SAARC gradually fade into oblivion will be a missed opportunity for India. India and its allies in the region need to work towards actively dissolving the organisation and creating a new one without Pakistan. This will further isolate Pakistan globally, and propel it into pariah-hood. Furthermore, India should channelize some of its energy to make sure that the new Pakistan-free organisation attains certain levels of success. It is commonly known that Pakistan has acted as a roadblock to several SAARC initiatives, and its absence should be taken full advantage of. If the new organisation can cooperate economically, having members of it on either sides would further cripple Pakistan’s economy. If India actually takes this course, it is likely that countries such as Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan and Sri Lanka would willingly cooperate.
But let us hope it does not come to this. Let us hope the current dispensation breaks Pakistan into four pieces, and that the new organisation includes members such as Balochistan, Sindh and Pakhtoonistan as well.
Comments