History and Evolution of SAARC

The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation(SAARC) comprises the seven countries of

South Asia, i.e. Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, the Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan andSri Lanka.

It is an Association based on the consciousness that in an increasingly interdependent world, the

objectives of peace, freedom, social justice and economic prosperity are best achieved in the

South Asian region by fostering mutual understanding, good neighborly relations and meaningful

cooperation among the Member States which are bound bytes of history and culture. The idea of

regional cooperation in South Asia was first mooted in May 1980. After consultations, the Foreign

Secretaries of the seven countries met for the first time in Colombo in April 1981. This was

followed by a meeting of the Committee of the Whole in Colombo in August-September

1981, which identified five broad areas for regional cooperation. The Foreign Ministers of South

Asia, at their first meeting in New Delhi in August 1983, adopted the Declaration on South Asian

Regional Cooperation (SARC) and formally launched the Integrated Programme of Action (IPA)

initially in five agreed areas of cooperation namely, Agriculture; Rural Development;

Telecommunications; Meteorology; and Health and Population Activities. The Heads of State or

Government at their First SAAR Summit held in Dhaka on 7-8 December 1985 adopted the Charter

formally establishing the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC).

The objectives, principles and general provisions

contained in the SAARC Charter are as follows:

Objectives

To promote the welfare of the peoples of South Asia and to improve their quality of life;

To accelerate economic growth, social progress and cultural development in the region

and to provide all individuals the opportunity to live in dignity and to realize

their full potential;

To promote and strengthen collective self-reliance among the countries of South Asia;

To contribute to mutual trust, understanding and appreciation of one another’s

problems;! To promote active collaboration and mutual assistance in the economic, social,

cultural, technical and scientific fields;

To strengthen cooperation with other developing countries;

To strengthen cooperation among themselves in international forums on matters of

common interests; and

To cooperate with international and regional organizations with similar aims and

purposes.

History and mission of SAARC

The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) comprises eight countries

of South Asia, i.e. Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri

Lanka. The idea of regional cooperation in South Asia was first mooted in May 1980 by

Bangladesh President Ziaur Rahman.

President Rahman addressed letters to the Heads of Government of the countries of South

Asia, presenting his vision for the future of the region and the compelling arguments for

regional cooperation in the

context of evolving

international realities.

The Foreign Secretaries of

seven countries in South

Asia met for the first time in

Colombo in April 1981 and

identified five broad areas

for regional cooperation.

A series of meetings followed in Nepal (Kathmandu/November 1981), Pakistan

(Islamabad/August, 1982), Bangladesh, India (Delhi/July 1983) to enhance regional

cooperation.

The next step of this process was the Foreign Ministers meeting in New Delhi in 1983

where they adopted the Declaration on South Asian Regional Cooperation (SARC).

During the next two years South Asian nations committed themselves to form this South Asian

alliance and the process culminated in the First SAARC Summit held on 7-8 December in 1985

in Dhaka where the Heads of State or Government of seven countries, Bangladesh, Bhutan,

India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka adopted the Charter formally establishing the

South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC).

Preamble to the SAARC Charter

The preamble to the SAARC Charter spells out the intention of forming this South Asian

alliance as “We, the Heads of State or Government of BANGLADESH, BHUTAN, INDIA,

MALDIVES, NEPAL, PAKISTAN and SRI LANKA; ‘Desirous of promoting peace, stability, amity

and progress in the region through strict adherence to the principles of the UNITED NATIONS

CHARTER and NON-ALIGNMENT, particularly respect for the principles of sovereign equality,

territorial integrity, national independence, non-use of force and non-interference in the

internal affairs of other States and peaceful settlement of all disputes’ ‘Conscious that in an

increasingly interdependent world, the objectives of peace, freedom, social justice and

economic prosperity are best achieved in the SOUTH ASIAN region by fostering mutual

understanding, good neighbourly relations and meaningful cooperation among the Member

States which are bound by ties of history and culture’ ‘Aware of the common problems,

interests and aspirations of the peoples of SOUTH ASIA and the need for joint action and

enhanced cooperation within their respective political and economic systems and cultural

traditions’” ‘Convinced that regional cooperation among the countries of SOUTH ASIA is

mutually beneficial, desirable and necessary for promoting the welfare and improving the

quality of life of the peoples of the region; ‘Convinced further that economic, social and

technical cooperation among the countries of SOUTH ASIA would contribute significantly to

national and collective self-reliance; ‘Recognising that increased cooperation, contacts and

exchanges among the countries of the region will contribute to the promotion of friendship

and understanding among their peoples; Do hereby agree to establish an organisation to be

known as SOUTH ASIAN ASSOCIATION FOR REGIONAL COOPERATION hereinafter referred to

as the ASSOCIATION...’ Objectives Moreover, the cooperation of the SAARC is also based on

broader principles of respect for the principles of sovereign equality, territorial integrity,

political independence, noninterference in internal affairs of the Member States and on

mutual benefit. Decisions are taken on the basis of unanimity and bilateral and contentious

issues are excluded from the deliberations of SAARC.

The highest authority of the Association rests with the Heads of State or Government. The

SAARC Charter provides that the Heads of State or Government shall meet once a year or

more often as and when considered necessary by the Member States. The country which

hosts the summit holds the Chair of the Association.

The Association also convenes meetings at Ministerial level on specialised themes Council of

Ministers comprising the Foreign Ministers of Member States, the Council of Ministers is

responsible for formulating policies, reviewing progress, deciding on new areas of cooperation,

establishing additional mechanisms as deemed necessary, and deciding on other matters of

general interest to the

Association.

The Council meets

normally twice a year

and may also meet in

extraordinary sessions

by agreement of

Member States.

Standing Committee

The Standing Committee comprising the Foreign Secretaries of Member States is entrusted

with the task of overall monitoring and coordination of programmes, approving of projects

and programmes, and modalities of financing, determining inter-sectoral priorities,

mobilising regional and external resources, and identifying new areas of cooperation.

Usually this Committee meets twice a year preceding the Council of Ministers and submits

its reports to the Council of Ministers.

It may also meet in special session as and when necessary by agreement among Member

States. The Standing Committee is authorised to set up Action Committees comprising

Member States concerned with implementation of projects involving more than two but

less than seven Member States. (Article VII of the SAARC Charter).

Programming Committee

The Programming Committee (which is not a SAARC Charter body) comprises senior

officials of member States. It assists the Standing Committee in scrutinising the Secretariat

Budget, considers the reports of the Technical Committees, SAARC Audio Visual Exchange

(SAVE) Committee, and Regional Centres finalising, and the Calendar of Activities.

Technical Committees

The SAARC Technical Committees are responsible for determination of the potential and

the scope of regional cooperation in agreed areas, formulation of programmes and

preparation of projects, determination of financial implications of sectoral programmes,

formulation of recommendations regarding apportionment of costs, implementation and

coordination of sectoral programmes, and monitoring of progress in implementation.

In addition to the Technical Committees, various Working Groups are established to

consider specific issues and make recommendations to the appropriate SAARC bodies.

Currently five Working Groups are established in the areas of Telecommunications and ICT,

Biotechnology, Intellectual Property Rights and tourism. SAARC Secretariat The SAARC

Secretariat is based in Kathmandu, Nepal.

The Secretariat coordinates and monitors implementation of activities, prepares and

services meetings, and serves as a channel of communication between the Association and

its Member States as well as other regional organizations.

The Secretariat is headed by the Secretary General, who is appointed by the Council of

Ministers from member countries in alphabetical order for a three-year term. Dr. Sheel Kanta

Sharma from India currently serves as the Secretary General of SAARC.

The Secretary General is assisted by Directors on deputation from Member States. Committee

on Economic Cooperation The Committee of Economic Cooperation consists of Secretaries of

Commerce of member states and it promotes regional cooperation in the economic field.

The Agreement on SAARC Preferential Trading Arrangement (SAPTA) was signed in Dhaka

during the 7th SAARC Summit, in 1993.

It aims to promote and sustain mutual trade and the economic cooperation among the South

Asian States, through exchanging concessions.

Later, with the broad objective of moving towards a South Asian Economic Union (SAEU),

the SAARC Member States signed the Agreement on SAARC Free Trade Area (SAFTA) on 6

January 2004 at the 12th SAARC Summit held in Islamabad and came into force on 1

January 2006.

SAFTA has six core elements covering trade liberalization programme, rules of origin,

institutional arrangements, safeguard measures, special and differential treatment for

least developed countries (LDCs), and dispute settlement mechanisms.

SAARC Summits since inception

Dhaka, Bangladesh 7-8 December 1985

Bangalore India 16-17 November 1986

Katmandu, Nepal 2-4 November 1987

Islamabad, Pakistan 29-31 December 1988

Male, Maldives 21-23 November 1990

Colombo, Sri Lanka, 21 December 1991

Dhaka, Bangladesh, 10-11 April 1993

New Delhi India, 2-4 May 1995

Male, Maldives 12-14 May 1997

Colombo, Sri Lanka, 29-31 July 1998

Katmandu, Nepal, 4-6 January 2002

Islamabad, Pakistan, 2-6 January 2004

Dhaka, Bangladesh, 12-13 November 2005

New Delhi, India, 3-4 April 2007

SAARC Social Charter

The signing of the Social Charter by the Heads of State/ Government at the 12th SAARC

Summit held in Islamabad in 2004, has been a major development in SAARC.

The Social Charter aims at promoting the welfare of the peoples of South Asia and

accelerating economic growth and social progress through poverty alleviation, improving

health conditions of peoples, human resource development, empowerment of women,

and providing welfare to the children.

Although the Social Charter is not a binding document, it underpins the SAARC Charter

objective of ‘providing all individuals the opportunity to live in dignity and to realize their

full potentials’.

SAARC Regional Convention of Suppression of Terrorism The SAARC Regional Convention

of Suppression of Terrorism was signed during the Third SAARC Summit in Kathmandu in

November 1987.

This was the result of a series of discussions held between Member States for more than

two years starting from very first SAARC Summit held in Dhaka. This Convention recognizes

dangers posed by the spread of terrorism and its harmful effects on peace & cooperation

and also the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the States.

This Convention came into force on 22 August 1988. Later, an Additional Protocol to this

Convention was signed during the 12th SAARC Summit in Islamabad on 06 January 2004. This

Additional Protocol updates the Convention by adding terrorist financing and has been ratified

by all Member States.

SAARC Regional Agenda The Agenda of Regional Cooperation under SAARC has expanded

over the years and are broadly covered under the Regional Integrated Programme of

Action (RIPA). In addition, a number of issues are given high priority.

At the 12th SAARC Summit held in Islamabad in 2004, the Heads of States/Government

recognized ‘poverty alleviation’ as the greatest challenge facing the peoples of South Asia

and declared poverty alleviation as the overarching goal of all SAARC activities.

Co-operation with the International Organizations SAARC has established institutionalized

arrangements for cooperation with a number of other regional groupings and

international and regional organizations.

It has entered into cooperative arrangements through the signing of MOUs with

organizations like the EC, UNCTAD, ESCAP, UNIFEM, APT, ITU, UNDP, UNDCP, UNEP,

UNIFEM, CIDA, WHO, ADB, PTB, UNAIDS, UNICEF, World Bank etc.

SAARC has recently agreed with ASEAN Secretariat for a Partnership Work Plan (2004-

2005) in a number of areas including trade, HIV/AIDS, energy and tourism. SAARC has a

dialogue forum with ASEAN and EU on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly sessions.

People to People Contacts

Under the SAARC Visa Exemption Scheme, some specifically identified categories of

persons along with their spouses and dependent children are entitled to travel within the

SAARC region without visa.

Although the Visa Scheme is yet to attain the depth and coverage of regional visa schemes

like the Schengen visa, it has proved to be effective in generating credibility about the SAARC

process.

SAARC as an institution has always emphasized the need for strengthening people-to-

people contacts through greater participation of NGOs, including professional bodies in

the private sector, to promote socio-economic and cultural co-operation in South Asia.

SAARC has formulated a set of guidelines and procedures for granting recognition to

regional NGOs and professional bodies. SAARC Charter Day The SAARC Secretariat and

Member States observe 8th December as the SAARC Charter Day.

SAARC designated years SAARC has designated years to draw special focus on specific

social issues and has contributed to raising awareness, mobilizing resources and

adopting/adapting national programs.

SAARC designated years

1989 Year of Combating Drug Abuse and Drug Trafficking

1990 Year of Girl Child

1991 Year of Shelter

1992 Year of Environment

1993 Year of Disabled persons

1994 Year of the Youth

1995 Year of Poverty Alleviation

1996 Year of Literacy

1997 Year of Participatory Governance

1999 Year of Biodiversity

2002-2003 Year of Contribution of Youth to Environment

2004 Year of Awareness for TB & HIV/AIDS

2006 South Asia Tourism Year SAARC has also declared decades on specialized themes;

.

SUCCESS OF SAARC AFTER 25 YEARS OF ESTABLISHMENT

The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) summit is often described as

being a mere photo opportunity for south Asian leaders who should actually be using the

comatose organization to reinvent regional cooperation in a globalize world. Such

pessimism is inevitable if one takes stock of the progress that SAARC has made over the

period of time. There exists a SAARC convention to deal with all issues that have a certain

salience in the regional context. Yet, even 25 years after its inception the organization is

found wanting both in terms of forming a regional identity and of forging any sense of a

regional belongingness. This is where the problem lies. Contested national identities

constructed by member states have not encouraged an identity based on common socio-

cultural heritage to take root.

South Asian countries engage readily and often with powerful states in the international

system, yet when it comes to regional engagement, their bilateral relations have remained

strained, and are characterized by mistrust and suspicion thus making regional

cooperation hostage to bilateral politics.

Gaining Strategic Space

At present, consisting of eight members, SAARC has the potential to expand its

membership to include Myanmar. What has been intriguing in the recent past is that while

many in South Asia have written the obituary of SAARC as a vehicle for fostering regional

cooperation, there are countries who are vying with each other to become part of it as

observers. One of the observers aspiring for membership is campaigning for it through its

regional proxies. It is too early to say whether SAARC, which could not inculcate a sense of

regional solidarity within its membership, will be able to deal with observer countries who

are more interested in gaining strategic space rather than in regional cooperation.

The organization has yet not delineated the possible role of the observer countries. In this

context it is not clear whether their engagement will benefit the SAARC countries. Some

member countries like Sri Lanka and Bangladesh have expressed hopes that the observers

would play a positive role. AARC has progressively addressed 'hard' issues that confront

the region more than 'soft' issues. If one compares the agenda of the organization when it

was formed with its current goals then SAARC can be seen to be slowly moving towards

regional integration in the real sense. This integration is beyond having just a common

approach to issues like poverty, telecommunication, weather, sports, culture, etc., as was

envisaged in the beginning. The translation of its agenda into a meaningful cooperation

has also not been possible due to the declaratory approach the leadership has taken and

endorsed without having any real commitment towards these goals. The reason could be

that the leaders perhaps feel compelled to demonstrate to the people of the region that

they are committed to the process of regional cooperation without appearing to be

spoilers. There exists popular support for regional cooperation. The people want less rigid

visa controls and free exchange of goods and ideas, while keeping the current borders

intact. Regional cooperation is a reality. An economic raison d'être is a prerequisite for

regional politics in a globalized world where regional cooperation is the only option. The

transnational character of problems relating to terrorism, drug trafficking or climate

change cannot be addressed individually by countries which share porous and, many a

time, un-demarcated and contested borders. The countries of the region realized this but

are yet to shed their securitized state-centric mindsets. Regional cooperation without

regional commitment Regional engagement among south Asian countries has been

minimal compared to their engagement with Western countries. Whether it is security or

economics, SAARC countries are more integrated with the global order than with their

regional arrangement. There are no underlying economic compulsions that bind the

countries of the region as was the case with the European Economic Community (EEC).

The countries of south Asia do not have common security concerns to unite them. Threats

are mostly seen arising from within the region rather than from the outside. Therefore the

problem is: how can the countries of South Asia cooperate with each other when they

perceive each other as being responsible for their instability? Because of this mistrust,

many of the conventions--such as the Additional Protocol of the SAARC Convention on

Terrorism--have become defunct. Each country faces the challenge of terrorism yet South

Asian countries have not been able to devise a common approach to it. They neither share

intelligence nor is there any commitment to stop cross-border support to terrorist groups.

If one analyses the various clauses of the Additional Protocol of Terrorism which

criminalised the collection or acquisition of funds for the purpose of committing terrorist

acts, it becomes amply clear how the very purpose of dealing with the issue has been

defeated because of the double standards prevailing among states in the region. Though

SAARC has a Terrorism Monitoring Desk in Colombo it has not yet come out with any

report. The SAARC interior ministers' meeting has also not made any concrete suggestions

on how best to cooperate. The issue of terrorism has rather been addressed bilaterally. If

one studies the speeches of the heads of states at the recently concluded 16th SAARC

summit it will be seen that they devoted much time to expounding their countries'

achievements in dealing with various socio-economic and terrorism-related problems.

Some of these speeches were prescriptive in nature when what was required was how

their countries had promoted regional cooperation. The leaders reiterated the importance

of regional cooperation without specifying how to take this cooperation forward. The

president of Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai, in his speech put greater emphasis on terrorism

and said: 'Until all members of SAARC, without exception or reservation, commit not to

allow their territories to be used directly or indirectly to shelter, arm or train terrorist

groups . . . the wild fire of terrorism will not discriminate in choosing its target'.1 He also

stressed that with current bottlenecks, expeditious overland movement of goods and

benefits of a modern transport infrastructure would not be felt. Maldivian president,

Mohamed Nashid called for a 'comprehensive review of the on-the-ground effectiveness

of SAARC'. He asked for greater dialogue between India and Pakistan and expressed the

frustration of the smaller countries of south Asia who have often found themselves

hostage to the Indo-Pak conflict. The president said that the 'neighbours can find ways to

compartmentalise pending differences, while finding areas on which they can move

forward'.2 Bhutan felt that SAARC was losing its focus because of the requirement of close

to 200 meetings per year. It therefore suggested a substantial reduction of activities and

meetings to ensure focus.3 The Indian prime minister said that the countries of south Asia

need to accept that the glass of regional cooperation is half empty and the institutions are

not empowered sufficiently to be proactive.4 The Bangladesh prime minister rejected

anyone using the cloak of Islam or any other religion to perpetuate violence and

categorically stated that Bangladesh will not let its territory be used for launching

terrorism elsewhere.5 Pakistan's prime minister Sheikh Hasina Wazed, said that SAARC has

not made much progress due to historical legacies, differences and disputes while the Sri

Lankan president, Mahinda Rajapaksa, said: 'We often tend to provide priority to our

engagements with extra regional actors, without devoting sufficient attention to further

developing and strengthening the links within our own regional organisation'.6 SAARC

needs to follow a bottom up approach rather than a top down one. In this context good

relations between the countries can help regional cooperation rather than the other way

round. Moreover, even though there is a people's SAARC at the civil society level, attempts

should be made to build synergy between the official SAARC and the people. The reason is

that SAARC is yet to connect with people and its agreements and commendable

conventions have not touched the lives of the people on whose behalf these declarations

have been made. Moreover, issues like terrorism are addressed at a bilateral level. This

shows that the countries do not have much faith in the regional approach. Even though

there exists a convention on terrorism and an additional protocol, Bangladesh has put

forward a proposal for forming a regional task force. India, which has been a victim of

terrorism and shares its borders with many South Asian countries, has taken up the issue

of terrorism bilaterally. Some issues where bilateralism is adopted even though relevant

SAARC conventions exist are as follows. The previous Bangladesh National Party

government provided shelter to Indian insurgent groups as strategic assets in violation of

the SAARC convention. They were arrested and handed over to India only after the Awami

League government came to power in Dhaka. This was largely the result of a bilateral

initiative. Bhutan's decision to flush out Indian insurgent groups who took shelter in

southern Bhutan is again a bilateral initiative. Similarly, the issue of cross-border terrorism

originating in Pakistan was decided in 2004 on the sidelines of the Islamabad SAARC

summit. The now defunct Indo-Pak Joint Terror mechanism is yet another bilateral

initiative. Both India and Afghanistan have approached the United States a number of

times to resolve the issue of terrorism emanating from Pakistan. This is in spite of the fact

that Pakistan has been a frontline state and a crucial player in the global war against terror

but it has been reluctant to cooperate either with India or Afghanistan. Post-Mumbai,

Pakistan could have taken action under Article 7 of the Additional Protocol to confiscate

funds of the Jamaat-ul-Dawa. However, this was only done following a UN resolution and

under pressure from China and the US. This establishes that the regional approach to

terrorism has been a non-starter. SAARC speaks of regional connectivity, but Bangladesh's

offer to provide transit facilities to India and the use of its ports to India, Nepal and Bhutan

has been entirely a Bangladeshi initiative. In the regional context Pakistan has not allowed

Afghan trucks to carry Indian goods from Wagah. They go back empty. India also has been

using Iran for its trade with Afghanistan. The concept of the South Asia Growth Quadrangle

was another way to carry forward sub-regional cooperation under Article 6 of the SAARC

charter. There is an urgent need to reactivate the Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh and India

cooperation under the Growth Quadrangle. The 16th summit declaration: anything new?

As has been the case with past summits, the 16th summit declaration says the leaders

'expressed satisfaction' that SAARC has achieved a number of milestones which are not

specified. It is silent on whether these 'milestones' have made any difference to the region.

Had that been the case the SAARC leaders would not have lamented the failure of the

organisation even 25 years after its establishment. As was pointed out in the summit

declaration, SAARC's relevance lies 'in providing a platform for regional cooperation'.

However, it is up to the member countries to make the platform effective. It is therefore

not surprising that now, after 25 years of existence, the leaders are discovering the need

for a vision statement. The declaration further states that the: 'silver jubilee year should be

commemorated by making SAARC truly action oriented by fulfilling commitments,

implementing declarations and decisions and operationalizing instruments and living up to

the hopes and aspirations of one-fifth of humanity'.7 The summit recommended public

diplomacy to reach out to different sections of society. Such an aim can only be realized if

the countries can implement some of the agreements they have signed and evoke these

agreements to resolve problems. For example, in spite of two agreements on terrorism,

why is there no cooperation between countries to deal with the menace? The member

states reiterated their resolve to cooperate on terrorism and drug trafficking and

reaffirmed their commitment to implement relevant regional conventions.

Implementation will remain a big challenge as long as state sponsorship of terrorism

continues. There are inherent contradictions in what the countries project. While Bhutan

speaks of Gross National Happiness (GNH) and promises to hold workshops on GNH in the

country, it has denied the right of return to its ethnic Nepalese who fled the kingdom in

1990. Economic cooperation between countries of the region is yet to take off and

explains why, in spite of South Asia Free Trade Association (SAFTA) being ratified, regional

trade has remained below five per cent. On the issue of energy there is no concrete

cooperation for establishing a regional energy grid. India has offered to prepare a roadmap

for developing a SAARC market for electricity, which needs enabling markets in the

member states. One of the welcome developments has been the establishment of the

South Asia Development Fund (SDF) which was envisioned in 2005 by reconstituting the

South Asia Development Fund established in 1996.8 To make the SDF viable the countries

first need to arrive at a consensus and identify areas where these funds would be used.9

One hopes this would not be bogged down by bilateral and trilateral disputes. The leaders

have sagaciously agreed that 'the projects being funded through SDF are demand-driven,

time bound and aligned with the developmental priorities of the region'.10 It would,

however, take a lot of diplomatic sweating to translate this vision into reality. Perhaps one

of the issues that SDF needs to address urgently is to fund infrastructure projects to

enhance regional connectivity. The summit also recommended increased public-private

partnership for greater intra-SAARC investment promotion efforts. This would help in the

speedy implementation of projects as this is an effective way to deal with administrative

bottlenecks pertaining to land acquisition, electricity supply and bureaucratic red tape.

Intra-SAARC investment for the private sector would also be a welcome development.

Given the tardy processes of regional trade and restrictions in foreign investment and long

negative lists it will not be easy to attract private capital. To implement the public-private

partnership trade it will be important to ensure liberalization, harmonization of standards

as well as guarantee that products produced through this partnership would have access

to regional markets.

Regional Cooperation

SAARC has already established the South Asia Regional Standard Organization. Efforts

should be made to make it operational. Bilateral relations between the countries would be

crucial to facilitate such investments as private businessmen are unlikely to invest given an

environment of distrust which is not conducive for business. For example, bilateral

proposals involving investments have already run into rough weather. Even after the

Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) announced a liberalized policy for investment by Indian

businesses there continues to be resistance to Indian investment. An investment proposal

by TATA, for example, got derailed due to Bangladesh's internal politics. A common market

for south Asia is still in its infancy because of non-tariff and Para tariff barriers. Therefore,

unless the tendency to politicize economics does not end, this vision of the leaders of the

region will be added to the list of wishful thinking that the SAARC has accumulated over 25

years. The summit also took a decision to declare 2010-2020 the 'Decade of Intraregional

Connectivity in SAARC'. It is important that SAARC leaders take steps to implement

regional connectivity in order to drive growth, induce better synergy and give a boost to

SAFTA.

Observers in SAARC China's growing influence in the region has been a matter of concern

for India. China's entry into SAARC in 2005 has been significant and Nepal, Bangladesh and

Pakistan played an important role in facilitating Chinese entry. China's presence is a matter

of concern for two reasons. First, there is a growing nexus between China and Pakistan at

the heart of which lies the policy to balance India. Its presence therefore cannot be

considered neutral. Second, China's presence in SAARC is specifically for gaining strategic

space. China has been following a strategy to engage with neighboring countries for

defense and economic cooperation. Though China's trade ties with India have seen an

upward swing, it has border conflicts with India and Bhutan. The relations between India

and China have remained highly suspect. China shares good relations with the neighboring

countries whereas India is looked upon with suspicion. In this context China's presence

could be a pressure tactic that may be employed on India. A conflicted relationship with

China would confine India to the region and prevent it from playing a larger global role.

This has been one of the principles of China's engagement in the region. Since SAARC itself

has hardly made any progress it is not clear how China can contribute to its progress.

Some other observer countries have other interests in the region. For example, Japan is

the highest aid donor to the region and the US is heavily engaged in the region to counter

terrorism and has a stake in regional peace; Australia has the largest number of

immigrants from this region. SAARC will now have to brace for an India-China contest

apart from the one between India and Pakistan which was largely blamed for the slow

progress of SAARC. The Chinese vice foreign minister said China would 'expand

cooperation with SAARC and elevate our friendly and cooperative ties to a new level'.11 It

proposes to hold a China-SAARC senior officials meeting. The Myanmar representative said

that its geographical proximity, historical and cultural links prompted it to become an

observer in SAARC. It also offered to act as a bridge between south and Southeast Asia.

However, one has not been able to understand why Myanmar has not applied for

membership. The representative of Iran said that Iran's geographical location and

extensive transport network enables it to help South Asia in expanding its trade with other

parts of the world. Conclusion Regional cooperation in the South Asian region lacks the

commitment and dedication that is required to make it a success. Some countries have

agreed to cooperate because they do not want to be spoilers while there are others who

genuinely believe that this is the way forward. In spite of scathing criticism of SAARC by

the leaders of the region on its 25th anniversary, one is not sure whether there would be

any fundamental change in the attitude of the countries. Earlier, attempts were made to

multi-lateralize bilateral issues but now efforts are being made to resolve some issues like

terrorism bilaterally. The countries which do not have bilateral synergy will not be able to

make a meaningful contribution to the success of SAARC.

Collective Self-Interest

To quote the Pakistani Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani: 'Only when we refuse to be

held hostage to history, only when we sincerely and assiduously work to build trust,

resolve disputes, bridge perceptions and see merit in an enlightened collective self-

interest, will we be able to unleash our latent potential'.12 The big question that remains

is 'When?' It is a tall order to expect regional cooperation between countries who do not

see eye to eye even in bilateral matters.

Each country joined SAARC to forward its interests or to avoid getting sidelined,

particularly within the Indo-centric region. Pursuing national interests is desirable but to

pursue it under the cloak of regionalism is a recipe designed for the failure of SAARC. A

regional identity is essential for the success of SAARC.

People-to-People Contact

If the countries try to undermine regional interests for their narrow political advantage

then members can resign themselves to this forum becoming a mere talking shop. Even

after 25 years it has failed to connect with the masses. Its promotion of people-to-people

contact is restricted to judges, diplomats and the parliamentarians.

SAARC needs to get off its elitist pedestal and adopt a subaltern approach. However, the

time to write the epitaph of SAARC has not yet come. In spite of all the misgivings, and

non-implementation of various agreements and conventions, SAARC provides greater

regional visibility to smaller countries and provides them with the opportunity and

responsibility to contribute to the region in a meaningful way. For them even a failed

SAARC is more attractive as a platform than being restricted to bilateralism in an India-

dominated region.

SAARC: CAUSES OF FAILURE

THE two-day 16th summit of South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (Saarc) held

in Bhutanese capital of Thimpu on April 28-29 concluded with a joint declaration

expressing the resolve of their leaders to wage common struggle for economic

development, improve their inter-connectivity, promote people to people contacts and

evolve a joint strategy to tackle the issues of climate change, water and food shortages.

During the last quarter of the previous century international relations witnessed a strong

surge towards regionalism. The underlying idea was to promote peace and economic

progress through multilateral partnership of states in the region by pooling the available

resources. Further impetus was provided by the emergence of new issues that threatened

the fabric of international norms, such as terrorism, drug trafficking, extremism, and

economic crisis. It was realised that these problems could not be solved at bilateral level

and required joint efforts and close coordination. Accordingly regional groupings such as

ECO, GCC, Asean and Saarc emerged.

Saarc came into being in December 1985, with the adoption of its charter in Dhaka. The

objectives were to promote the welfare and improve the quality of life of the people of

South Asia by accelerating economic growth in the region and building up mutual trust

among the member states. The importance of Saarc as a regional organisation despite its

rather unsatisfactory record, is recognised by all leaders. The feeling that peace and

prosperity are indivisible and that the South Asia region has a common destiny and a

shared struggle for a better and brighter future has emerged dominant theme.

The leaders who gathered in Thimpu made a frank appraisal and acknowledged that the

organisation has failed to live up “to the hope and aspiration of 1/5th of humanity”

represented by Saarc members. The Prime Minister of Bhutan also expressed the hope

that Saarc will not turn into just “a talk shop”.

This honest confession that “the bloc has not moved away from declarations of intent to

concrete implementation”, should however not blind us to the achievements.

Its performance has not been entirely dismal. Despite failings, a number of significant

achievements such as (i) The Regional Convention on Suppression of Terrorism (ii) Saarc

Agriculture Information Centre at Dhaka (iii) Saarc audio visual exchange programme

(SAVE) and (iv) Social Charter to set targets for eradication of poverty, population

stabilisation and human resource development fall to its credit.

The South Asia Preferential Trading Agreement (SAPTA) was signed in the 7th summit at

Dhaka in April 93, but it has not yet been operationalised. The proposal to establish South

Asian Food Reserve and South Asian Development Fund have also met the same fate.

Similarly declarations on enhancing political cooperation and promotion of mutual trust

and understanding reiterated in each summit have registered limited success. Saarc

despite these limitations and poor performance, however, remains a useful tool for

smaller countries to promote understanding and cooperation at bilateral level.

Facing criticism that Saarc has failed to realise its ambitious objectives during the last 25

years, the Thimpu Summit decided not to indulge in rhetoric and set ambitious goals. The

two major and modest projects agreed upon were US$300 million fund to reduce poverty

in the region and also on trade and environmental protection.

The perceptions of the failure of Saarc to implement its charter have been aggravated by

the political climate obtaining in the region. SAARC summits should act as a forum where

member states discuss not only matters of regional importance but also the underlying

causes of tension in bilateral relations.

To retain its credibility and relevance Saarc should eschew unrealistic economic and social

goals; instead it should be effectively used as a medium to discuss issues of peace, security

and development with international organisations and agencies to promote interests of

the member countries.

At the Thimpu Summit, the leaders pledged that they will unitedly work to realise the

aspirations of the founding fathers t as set out in the first Summit.

The fundamental weakness that Saarc suffers from is trust deficit among the members

states. The political differences had deep negative impact on the political will to realise the

economic cooperation and integration. Besides political differences and conflict, economic

factors have also played an unhelpful role. The member states except India have still not

reached the take-off stage to be able to pursue the programme of economic integration

and collaboration.

The establishment of Saarc Development Fund, Food Bank, The Arbitration Council, and

the Regional Standards Organisations are the right moves. Saarc should also seek free and

preferential trading arrangements with other regional bodies notably EU and the Asean.

It should also remain fully focused on Saarc social charter to spread out its reach to the

common man. The people of South Asia desire to have a peaceful, prosperous and secure

future. The security can be obtained through sincere and sustained efforts to narrow the

political differences. Saarc is the appropriate tool not only to build trust but also to solve

disputes and create conducive climate for realisation of Saarc charter.

Challenges for SAARC

In order to fulfill the high aspirations of its peoples in the face of

current global economic and financial crises, SAARC will need a new strategic vision.In

South Asia, over the past six decades, development practitioners, economists and politicians

have presented a number of measures and approaches to address and fix South Asia's socio-

economic problems, but nothing sufficient has been done in this regard. Unfortunately

South Asia happens to be a region afflicted with terrorism, ethnic rivalries, different kinds

of fatal diseases, shortage of food, intra and inter-state wars, political turmoil, instability,

leadership crises and security issues. The region is bestowed with enormous natural

resources but has little to demonstrate for it. It is a region endowed with fertile land but

cannot feed its people, a region that has given birth to learned human resources in all walks

of human endeavour but has not yet been able to liberate itself from the shackles of

underdevelopment, foreign intervention and vested interests.

These factors, besides limiting the development of the region, raise one basic question:

what role has leadership played to help improve the situation? Could South Asia have been

better with visionary, devoted leaders? It is often said that "the only safe ship in a storm is

leadership." Martin Luther King, Jr. once said, "The ultimate measure of a man is not where

he stands in moments of comfort, but where he stands at times of challenge and

controversy." Unfortunately, leadership has not played its due role to tackle the challenges

and problems plaguing the region. Most of the conflicts, intra and inter-state rivalries and

the worst terrorist activities in the region, thrive on the wings of leadership. In the region,

we see that human life, property and resources have been lost and wiped out in pursuit of

this leadership.

In South Asia, the agenda to achieve prosperity is driven by the need to achieve sustainable

growth and reduce poverty. This requires public sector reform, including tax reform and

expenditure restructuring, and an improvement in the performance of public enterprises

through increased competition, privatisation, a wider distribution of shared ownership and

removal of entry barriers that still impede participation of the private sector. Tax reform is

still in the early phase. Financial reform remains an elusive objective although some

important steps have been taken in Pakistan while India has placed it at the top of the

policy agenda. Little progress has been made in reforming land and labour markets.

Developing South Asia's human resource base is

particularly important in pursuing an outward-looking, pro-poor growth strategy in the

current global scenario. South Asia's ability to pursue this strategy will depend on its

success in shifting public expenditure priorities to the social sectors to ensure a more rapid

buildup of human capital. Currently, life expectancy in South Asia lags behind that in East

Asia; out of every ten children born, at least one is expected to die before reaching his/her

first birthday and nearly half of the children in the region do not complete primary school.

Although there is a danger of raising the level of expectations about the ongoing inter-

governmental talks between India and Pakistan, which can result in serious disappointment

as only modest results can be achieved in the face of existing ground realities and the

limited vision of the political leadership in both countries, it is essential not to lose sight of

the opportunities in store and to analyse the causes of those opportunities that have been

missed in the past. The most serious impediment in achieving even a modest degree of

improvement in the presently dismal state of Indo-Pakistan relationship is the high level of

misunderstanding and misperceptions that the public opinion in each country has about the

problems facing the other.

Relationship of South Asian countries is often a source of discord than unity among them.

The challenge for South Asian nations is not that they should forget the history of hostility

towards each other, but they should rather develop an understanding about the evolution of

culture and society in the subcontinent through objective research based on respect for

various religions and social groups that have lived in it and have contributed to its

development and splendour. The term "enlightened moderation" does not need to be

restricted to the relations between Western and Eastern cultures, but also needs to be

applied to relations among various religions and cultures which thrive in South Asia. Even

more importantly, history need not be viewed simply as a clash of religions and cultures,

but be interpreted in terms of its economic and social dimensions as well.

Unfortunately, SAARC has not yet delivered

on its promise. In order to fulfill the high aspirations of its peoples in the face of current

global economic and financial crises, SAARC will need a new strategic vision. It will have to

change its ways and its structure and will have to make efforts to revitalize itself. SAARC's

new vision could be seen as a bridge between East Asia, rich in its human resources and

technology and West and Central Asia, rich in natural resources and finance.

The SAARC region's massive population and educated elites could complement the needs of

both nations, with India overseeing the Eastern flank and Pakistan providing the linkage to

West and Central Asia. This will help realize the dream of the Asian century. It will also

avoid the counterproductive competition between India and Pakistan in their respective

regions of influence, which has often been a mutual diplomatic irritant between the two

countries. This vision will present a win-win, non-zero-sum situation for all concerned. The

only downside such a vision may entail is the possible fear of smaller SAARC countries that

collusion between India and Pakistan - the reverse of the present situation and far from

probable - may result in some detriment to them.

South Asia's growth prospects depend to

a large extent on what happens in India. The reform efforts in India, combined with similar

reforms of investment and the trade and payments system initiated in Bangladesh, Pakistan

and Sri Lanka, augur well for the medium-term growth prospects of South Asia. Contingent

to the successful completion of current reforms, export growth is expected to improve and

boost growth to the 5-6 percent range from the present low of 3-4 percent.

Uncertainties remain. Almost all South Asian countries face transition in leadership. The

political process is broadening out in these countries and generational changes in political

and economic leadership are taking place. No one can be sure how these processes will

evolve or what the economic consequences will be. And in some of the bigger countries in

the region - India and Pakistan - there are large numbers of poor people at early stages of

an accelerated development process. Rapid rates of growth are not synonymous with robust

institutions at the local level, which is where ultimately most decisions on investment and

implementation are made. It will take time for the institutional infrastructure - public and

private - to effectively support the modernisation of these economies in the face of the

current global economic and financial crisis