"A small step for man but a giant step for mankind" said Neil Armstrong when he first set foot on the surface of the moon.
I was reminded of these celebrated words and their converse in considering the forthcoming summit of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) in Colombo beginning later this month.
Two years from now SAARC would be 25 years old. A quarter of a century might be minuscular in the history of mankind and many nations. Yet 25 years is surely sufficient time for an organisation to make an impact on its people who account for nearly 25% of the world's population and contain within the region 40% of the world's poor. Since the first SAARC summit in Dhaka, the Bangladeshi capital, in 1985, the organisation has ambled along with much rhetoric and promises to keep, which have not been met.
One would have expected that a region teeming with poverty would have made efforts over these years to fulfil the promises made in what one might consider the founding principles of SAARC which had as its priority, minimising poverty if not eliminating it, in some meaningful way that would ameliorate the living standards of the millions of its people.
It is not that the South Asian region does not have enormous problems. It seems to me that the fundamental flaw despite all the bombast contained in SAARC Declarations and in summit speeches from the countries' leaders, is the lack of political commitment, the lack of will to turn words into accomplished deeds.
I suppose the world of SAARC should have seen this at its formative stage itself. There were those who did ask questions at the time. I remember covering the first meeting of foreign secretaries from the region. That meeting held in Colombo-if I remember correctly at the BMICH- in April 1981 was to set the stage for the emerging regional bloc that then consisted of seven nations, five of which were from the Indian subcontinent. The two exceptions were Sri Lanka and the Maldives. All except the Maldives had common borders with India.
Therein lay the main problem that besets SAARC. It continues to bedevil smooth, generally seamless, cooperation between the regional states. One of the matters that struck me at the time covering the foreign secretaries' inaugural meeting was the suspicion, and perhaps fear, that lay at the heart of that first officials' meeting. I remember speaking to members of the various delegations. There were two sharply different views that emerged. The smaller countries were fearful that India, given its preponderant presence in the region-its size, population, military strength- would dominate any regional organisation. Since the idea of a regional grouping was especially pushed by the then Bangladeshi leader Zia ur Rahman Pakistan suspected that this was a joint move by India and Bangladesh, the former eastern wing of Pakistan which had achieved independence with Indian military help 10 years earlier, to dominate the region and establish Indian hegemony by common sanction. While Pakistan with its longstanding dispute with India over Kashmir was particularly suspicious, other prospective members had their own worries over a regional organisation over which India would cast its giant shadow.
It is useful to recall that each of India's neighbours did have territorial or other disputes with India which made them fear New Delhi's overpowering presence in a common grouping. Even Sri Lanka, which had earlier had a territorial dispute with India and over the presence of Indian plantation labour which dragged on due to Indian procrastination and duplicity in negotiations, was not having the best of relations with New Delhi after the return of Indira Gandhi to power. The bilateral relations had of course worsened by the time the first SAARC summit was held in 1985, particularly over accusations of India's help to Tamil militants.
India, on the other hand, felt that because of its preponderant presence, the other regional states, were ganging up against her resenting what they perceived as New Delhi's "Big Brother" attitude. I remember that one of the first principles that India insisted on at the Colombo meeting setting up SAARC, was that bilateral disputes should be excluded from discussion at the regional forum. It would be interesting to return to my coverage of that meeting and subsequent commentaries on the emerging SAARC which I am sure are to be found somewhere in the April/ May 1981 copies of the Daily News.
While it would be useful to discuss why regional groupings such as ASEAN, the European Union and others have progressed after early hiccups whereas SAARC has lagged far behind, that should be kept for a later date. Right now I wish to see how Sri Lanka could help instil some confidence into SAARC by means other than those that are usually suggested. These suggestions include genuine trade liberalisation and other economic issues, easing of cross- regional transportation and facilitating regional travel and people to people contact. I am looking at the prospects for change in international institutions and how that could be used to establish greater confidence among SAARC members.
If the Indo-Pakistan dispute is at the heart of the problems facing SAARC is it not possible to make use of possible changes to global institutions to forge greater confidence between the two neighbours that is holding up progress in SAARC and therefore the whole region? Five of the eight members of SAARC-and they are the major players- are members of the Commonwealth. Recently, the Commonwealth held a mini-summit in London to consider changes to international institutions, such as, the UN, the World Bank and the IMF. A full blown summit is planned in New York for late September when recommendations emerging from the mini summit would be discussed to forge a common stand.
A key issue in the reformation of the UN which admittedly will take time would be the expansion of the Security Council and who should sit on it. One of the choices from Asia is India (the other would probably be Japan) It would help if Pakistan and other Commonwealth members of SAARC endorse India's membership of the SC as the south Asian candidate. Such a political decision by Pakistan and some of the other SAARC members would surely be a step forward in confidence building which has been the stumbling block to SAARC progress even on matters of trade. This would also require India to act with great responsibility, dignity and diligence as a potential member of the Security Council.
Foreign Minister Bogollagama follows a punishing international schedule. But I don't think it will hinder him from trying to forge a common SAARC position on reforms to the IBRD and IMF and of course the UN. After all regional groupings do not exist in isolation. They are ever expanding and attracting regional and international players from outside as this multi-polar and globalised world evolves. As such we cannot depend on a self-centred regionalism to carry us forward. Regional groupings must interact with other similar organisations or larger ones connected to each other through common membership and the like.
It would be useful in the long run for SAARC to have an input into the common position the Commonwealth is trying to forge on the reform of international institutions. Moreover Sri Lanka has good bilateral relations with Pakistan and also with India though India's Sri Lanka policy seems unsettled. Nevertheless, on issues like reform of the SC and India's place in it obviously we have no dispute. Even with regard to the Washington twins, India is already on the board of directors of the IMF and that position would help in reforms that south Asia has in mind.
In the next couple of months available to Sri Lanka as chairman of SAARC before the Commonwealth summit, Colombo should try to canvass opinion to forge this common south Asian stand on reform and present it to the summit. That process should begin in Colombo when the SAARC nations meet in Colombo later this month. That would be a worthwhile Colombo initiative. After all connectivity is the theme-connectivity not only within SAARC but also with the world outside. |
E-mail