By Syed S. Hussain

New York

After much ado, India has agreed to participate in the 12th South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) summit, scheduled to be held in January 2004, in Islamabad, Pakistan. The summit was to be held in January 2003, but could not because India showed its inability to attend, as according to Delhi, Pakistan had not done enough with respect to previous agendas. The previous summit in Kathmandu, which was to be held in November 1999, was also postponed because India refused to participate on the grounds of a military coup in Pakistan. Of course, the same general attended the conference, which was finally held on January 4-6, 2002. Because of India’s unilateral approach forced on this body, SAARC, which was established in 1985 with such high hopes, appears to be in danger of turning into an irrelevant organization.

SAARC was established for consolidating mutual cooperation, regional stability, and better living conditions for the peoples of the seven member states of South Asia. A look at the progress of the last 18 years unfortunately does not provide many positive signs of progress in any direction.

What could be the reason for such a dismal performance, which is threatening the very usefulness of this organization? Ironically, issues that SAARC was to avoid by its charter, are the cause of this malady.

SAARC groups seven countries: Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, the Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. It is an organization with laudable objectives but constrained authority to accomplish them. The charter of SAARC was also limited to the rule of unanimity, and by decision to exclude areas of disagreements and contentious issues.

So far 11 summits have taken place, besides many ministerial and secretarial level meetings and seminars. Areas like agriculture, communication, education, culture, sport and security etc have been identified for cooperation. But not many practical steps have been initiated so as to translate the ideals into realities.

The standoff between India and Pakistan is simply too much for India to ignore in any forum, SAARC included. The result has been that SAARC is becoming hostage to this continuous acrimony, and in the process, losing relevancy and effectiveness in addressing its major goals. India has persistently avoided talking to Pakistan, in the absence of what it terms, tangible Pakistani effort to stop cross border terrorism.

The subject of violence in Kashmir is India’s priority, to the exclusion of any other subject, when it comes to dealing with Pakistan. By the same line of reasoning, India is averse to meet Pakistan in any forum including SAARC, and discuss issues other than what they perceive to be the core issue. Interestingly, the Indo-Pak standoff is both a contentious issue as well as a bilateral matter between two member states. Both are excluded from SAARC agenda. So it is quite apparent that either SAARC faces the realities and starts dealing with bilateral issues, or faces extinction, or even worse, stays alive in a state of limbo.

It would be a great pity if SAARC simply lost its relevance. South Asia has a common destiny in the 21st century. Though comprising only 3 per cent of the world’s total area, it houses 21 % of the world’s population. According to World Bank figures, it has only about 2% of world GNP, and per capita income of around 440 dollars, making it one of the least developed areas of the world.

Indeed, South Asian nations have not only shared culture and a long common history, but also common political, social, and now even common economic afflictions. There is an urgent need for an effective mechanism to deal with all the factors, which affect these countries, in a collective fashion. In this backdrop SAARC holds out hope.

The problem with SAARC is that it has not developed as a conflict-resolving institution. It is deficient in devising techniques for consultations on bilateral and multilateral political and security questions. This is seriously undermining the functioning of the SAARC. Also lacking in SAARC is the political will on the part of its leading members to implement the lofty resolutions they had been passing in various meetings in respect of economic cooperation. Real progress cannot be made in enhancing the level of cooperation that can benefit the 1.25 billion people of the region unless all members make concentrated efforts.

As a result of political inadequacy of SAARC, its economic goals have been greatly affected. The SAARC summits have been stressing the need for combating poverty for over ten years, but no progress has been made. Interestingly ,the year 2002 was earmarked for banishment of poverty from the region. It is easy for leaders to sign protocols, but difficult to work unitedly for banishing poverty in a region where over 500 million live below the poverty line.

SAARC can come to grips with core issues only if the countries of the region have the political will to do so rather than dealing with peripheral issues that hinder what SAARC is supposed to achieve. It should facilitate the discussion of all issues that plague the region. SAARC charter which prevents bilateral subjects to be dealt with needs to be made more responsive to the ground realities. It is a pertinent question to ask whether economic cooperation can be achieved while ignoring vital political issues that threaten to cause military conflict, even a nuclear conflict. The answer is quite evident from the achievements of SAARC so far.

Notwithstanding its dismal performance, SAARC is very much the need of the member states, more than what many of them realize. In the present-day world, where there is an increasing emphasis on regional groupings and collective efforts for dealing with problems, South Asia must not opt out of it! It sorely needs a collective effort to improve the economic state of the region.

India has responsibilities, more than any other member state, for SAARC to survive. Noted Indian leader Dr Subramanian Swamy has rightly observed, “Avowedly, India has the responsibility to walk the extra mile to make SAARC work.”

Syed S. Hussain is a political analyst. He has post-graduate degrees in Political Science, International Relations, History and Law. E-mail: Sharafain@aol.com