 |
Kathmandu Tuesday January 22, 2002 Magh 09, 2058.
|
SAARC, caught up in a mess
By MADHAB P KHANAL
After an uncertain spell of over two years the
eleventh summit meeting of SAARC heads of state and government concluded in Kathmandu a
fortnight ago with apparently sickening euphoria and stereotyped fanfare. To what extent
the meeting succeeded in making any head way towards the common objectives for which the
regional grouping was formed sixteen years ago remains absolutely a matter of abstract
reasoning for now. However, for the people of Kathmandu it is a great consolation that the
logistically successful event left behind a city that has undergone a dramatic face lift
within an unbelievably short span of time. It is undeniable testimony that Nepalese
planners and professionals are second to none in performing miracles in planning and
execution. But at what premium they demonstrate such unusual competence remains somewhat
enigmatic for the flabbergasted taxpayer.
Nevertheless, with reminiscences of the third
SAARC summit at the back of their mind, people in Nepal are now convinced that the country
needs occasions of such nature and magnitude at least biennially so that the concerned
agencies of the government as well as the metropolitan functionaries would be morally
obliged to keep the city’s infrastructures well maintained and its environment
hygienically less harmful. Similarly, the massive preparations carried out for the
regional summit have also made the people understand that there is no dearth of funds. If
there is anything lacking in this country it is honesty and dedication among politicians
and bureaucrats. A dent in the state coffers is a matter of lesser importance than
satisfying the ego of those at the helm of affairs.
Intended to be a summit meeting of the chief
executives of the seven countries to explore and expand the areas of regional cooperation,
the event was marked conspicuously by an unseemly exchange of bitterness between the two
blustering nuclear rivals of South Asia right from its very start. Owing to the ominous
winds of confrontation blowing across the volatile borders between India and Pakistan, the
entire atmosphere of the summit was charged with suspense as to the diplomatic moves of
Vajpayee and Musharraf. A bonus for the host was a sigh of relief that the eleventh
diplomatic jamboree could manage to complete its trite rituals.
Whether or not carrying out bilateral diplomatic
exercises with a muffled undercurrent of belligerency between two member states falls
within the purview of the Charter of the regional club, the inaugural speeches delivered
by Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf
have for the first time exploded the myth that the SAARC forum is only for multilateral
purposes. If objectively analysed, their speeches are in no way supportive of the
so-called multilateral character of the association. It may be the beginning of the end of
the sanctity envisioned by its founding fathers.
India and Pakistan, the two leading members of
SAARC, used the rostrum of the summit meeting to give vent to their fifty year old mutual
animosity and belligerent emotions generated by the unfortunate division of Kashmir whose
mountainous terrain forms the strategic frontier between the two countries. Over this bone
of contention they had already fought two wars when they had not attained nuclear power
status. They are now poised for yet another confrontation which may have unknown
consequences for the entire region. Nor can the gnawing dispute between two archrivals be
resolved without tangible concession from either side, something for which they do not
appear to be ready. Under these circumstances it is against the principles of logic to
expect the regional body to remain strictly multilateral in scope or be unaffected by the
bellicose demeanour of India and Pakistan. The reality is that SAARC is likely to be taken
hostage by these nuclear bullies turn by turn as required by their diplomatic expediency.
What SAARC expects from its member states is
diplomatic honesty towards the concept of regional cooperation and not pretentious pledges
and commitments as have been noticed over the years. The importance and achievements of
the association are so inflated that they look absolutely disproportionate. It is a
foregone conclusion that the association is progressively losing its original aura and
importance due to the nonchalant attitude of several member states towards any genuine
spirit of regional solidarity and the regional conventions and resolutions already agreed
upon by members. Failure by individual countries to bring about enabling legislation has
meant the regional convention on terrorism signed by SAARC chief executives fourteen years
ago has so far not come into force and is not likely to be backed up by country
legislation in the foreseeable future. Similarly, the concept of SAFTA among seven
countries with different economic parametres and trade policies basically dictated by
their individual political interests is nothing more than a rosy vision.
The argument put forward by the Pakistani
president with regard to empowering SAARC to thrash out bilateral issues is essentially a
valid one. It is an indisputable fact that without expanding the scope of the regional
organisation and devising a viable mechanism within its framework so as to deal with
contentious issues that may have plagued interstate relations among member countries, the
objectives of SAARC will remain ever elusive. However, such a fundamental change in the
concept of the regional organisation requires a consensus of all the member countries
which under the prevailing circumstances looks pretty difficult to secure. Nor can SAARC
mature into a vibrant regional forum to deal with the complex realities that its member
states are confronted with without enjoying any
mediatory jurisdiction over bilateral disputes among member states. It is now high time
they reviewed the sixteen-year-old concept and rectify its inherent weaknesses if they
want SAARC to survive as a competent regional body.
The two decade old problem of terrorism in Sri
Lanka has a profound bearing upon Indo-Sri Lanka relations. It is widely believed that the
State of Tamil Nadu is still a safe haven for the Tamil Tigers. In this context Sri Lankan
President Kumaratunga’s categorical remark during the summit meeting that there can
be no room for double standards in combating terrorism is highly reflective of what the
island nation feels about India vis-a-vis the bloody insurgency carried out by ethnic
Tamils in the northeastern part of Sri Lanka. The continuing militancy of Kashmiri
separatists and their senseless acts of terror have recurrently brought India and Pakistan
to a flash point. Similarly, the twelve year old problem of a hundred thousand Bhutanese
of Nepalese ethnicity inhumanely uprooted by the Druk repressive regime shows no signs of
early resolution. All negotiations conducted so far have turned out ineffective as far as
their repatriation is concerned. India’s policy towards the refugee stalemate has so
far been far from friendly. Thus relations between these two kingdoms remain confined to
diplomatic rhetoric. Bangladesh, a country created in 1971 with the overt strategic
involvement of India by dismembering Pakistan, has been gradually distancing itself from
Indian hegemony in South Asia owing to the latter’s overbearing attitude towards her
neighbours. Under these circumstances, fostering of regional solidarity is nothing but
wishful thinking.
Other Stories
|
