Renegotiating Alternative Integration Model in the SAARC
| Date | 01 January 2017 |
| Published date | 01 January 2017 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0020881718790685 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Renegotiating Alternative
Integration Model in
the SAARC
Mahendra P. Lama1
Abstract
The regional cooperation process in South Asia had been triggered by failure
of North–South Negotiations of the 1960s and 1970s; emergence of South–
South Dialogues among the developing countries in the 1980s; urge to harness-
ing huge potentials of ‘region-ness’ and smaller countries’ bid to create regional
platform to deflect and minimize their perceptions about Indian ‘hegemonic’
practices. Since the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC)
was launched in 1985, 18 summit meetings have taken place and its declarations
are perfect official documents. However, in achievement front, there is little to
demonstrate. Nothing much has percolated down to societies and communities.
Dismal commitments, protracted India–Pakistan imbroglios, principle of ‘unanimity’
and dearth of coordination among national and sectoral focal points have stunted
its growth. Besides fear of Indian domination, severe institutional weaknesses,
poor alignment of the SAARC issues with national priorities, absence of moni-
toring and evaluation and deficiency in acceptable and visionary regional leader-
ship have added to its laggardness. Activities are just initiated as summit rituals.
Model and existing mechanisms that have been used to develop SAARC itself
have very strong limitations. Unless the regional partners rethink about the inno-
vative model and pragmatic modalities, the SAARC would remain moribund and
decrepit. In such an atmosphere, the extra-regional forces will inevitably emerge
as another pole of attraction.
Keywords
Regionalism, integration model, borderland, resource nationalism, performance
gap, regional leadership
Article
International Studies
54(1–4) 82–105
2018 Jawaharlal Nehru University
SAGE Publications
sagepub.in/home.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0020881718790685
http://journals.sagepub.com/home/isq
1 Professor, Centre for South Asian Studies, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru
University, New Delhi, India; High End Expert, Institute of South Asian Studies, Sichuan University,
China.
Corresponding author:
Mahendra P. Lama, Professor, Centre for South Asian Studies, School of International Studies,
Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Mehrauli Road, New Delhi 110067, India; High End Expert,
Institute of South Asian Studies, Sichuan University, China.
E-mail: mahendralama1961@gmail.com
Lama 83
Introduction
South Asia has been a highly endowed region and remained so tightly integrated
as an economic bloc and system. Given varied geographies, rich socio-cultural
heritage, extraordinary bio-diversity and natural resources, robust institutions
and huge pool of quality human resources, this region at one point of time stood
most promising in terms of development status and regional power. In fact,
this region could have been the first set of ‘flying geese’ in Asia far ahead of
newly industrializing countries like Taiwan, Korea and Thailand of the 1980s.
For almost a century, the region’s political system, economy, foreign policy and
defence were treated as part of a composite integrated unit. This unit began to
disintegrate after the Second World War due to various politico-historical reasons
including partition in 1947. The region is again trying to reintegrate its economic
strength, civilizational panorama, natural resources endowments and management
(Dossani et al., 2010).
A crucial intricacy and complex difficulty lies here when an integrated region
abruptly disintegrated and now again is trying to reintegrate. This very process
of reintegration is the stumbling block in the attempt to develop and consolidate
the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) as a regional
institution established in 1985. This is a unique venture and unparallel attempt.
The aim is to primarily ‘promote the welfare of the peoples of South Asia and to
improve their quality of life’; ‘strengthen collective self-reliance’; ‘accelerate
economic growth, social progress and cultural development in the region’;
‘promote active collaboration and mutual assistance in the economic, social,
cultural, technical and scientific fields’; ‘strengthen cooperation among them-
selves in international forums on matters of common interests’ and ‘cooperate
with international and regional organisations with similar aims and purposes’.
Reintegration is always a cumbersome and daunting task. Expectedly any initia-
tives towards this would have met with unprecedented resistance, invisible
roadblocks and more critically a static mindset. The SAARC has been exactly
facing this intricate dilemma.
The regional cooperation process in South Asia had been mainly triggered by
failure of North–South Negotiations in the 1960s and 1970s; emergence of South–
South Dialogues among the developing countries in the 1980s (ECDC Handbook,
1983; Non-aligned Movement, 1983); urge to harnessing huge potentials of ‘region-
ness’ and smaller countries’ bid to create regional platform to deflect and minimize
their perceptions about Indian ‘hegemonic’ practices. Since the SAARC was
launched in 1985 by seven countries, namely Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives,
Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka (Afghanistan became its member in 2007), five
major programmes and actions have been initiated (Lama, 1999; SAARC Secretariat,
1998, 2009), namely (a) Integrated Programme of Action; (b) Regional Agreements
and Conventions; (c) Programmes and Development Funds including in poverty
eradication, free trade and SAARC Development Fund; (d) Regional Centres and
(e) People-centric contact-exchange programmes.
Eighteen Summit meetings so far held indicate the SAARC as a pivot of
diverse regional politics and governance systems. The Summit declarations are
To continue reading
Request your trial