India’s SAARC dilemma The Statesman 15 May 18
The Indian government’s refusal to attend the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) summit in Pak in 2016 had pushed the organization almost into a state of oblivion. With India leading the charge, Bangladesh, Afghanistan and Bhutan had turned down a desire to attend the summit in Pak. As per rules of SAARC, even if one nation turns down the invitation, it is deemed cancelled. Thus, the others had to accept the Indian decision.
Though humiliated, Pak had no choice but to maintain silence. The BRICS summit last year had almost all SAARC members present as members of BIMSTEC (Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation). India has over time created alternate organizations with same SAARC nations, keeping Pak out. Recently Pak has begun displayinh a desire to reignite the SAARC flame.
Realistically, SAARC is only a forum for leaders to meet. It should have led to enhanced economic cooperation, free movement of population and simultaneous growth, however it has been dominated by Indo-Pak rivalry. Hence, as an organization, its utility remains questionable and growth limited. However, conduct of the summit is an issue which impacts the reputation and local standing of the host country.
While nothing would move in Pak till the elections and formation of the new government, however their present leadership has slowly begun seeking support of countries for a summit in Islamabad later this year. Prime Minister Abbasi visited Kathmandu soon after Oli was designated as the Prime Minister and the joint statement mentioned re-commencing the stalled SAARC summit. Recently, the visit of the Sri Lankan President to Islamabad also had early convening of the SAARC summit mentioned in the joint statement.
The visit by the Pak army chief to Maldives enhanced military cooperation between the two nations. Though SAARC was not mentioned in any statement issued during the visit, however the growing bonhomie would indicate it would be willing to support the conduct of the meet. The growing distance between India and Maldives would ensure that it would join Nepal and Sri Lanka in supporting the hosting of the summit.
India had always in the past hesitated on imposing its will and intentions on SAARC, as it did not wish to project being labelled the big brother, who seeks to dominate smaller nations. The size and location of the nation, along with its economic growth and military power had smaller neighbours concerned about its attitude. India has in recent times, enhanced its relations with almost all neighbours, thus expelling this big brother attitude. Its economic support and provision of aid has expelled this fear.
Hence, when it took the decision to skip the Pak summit, it received support from multiple members of the group. Therefore, it was Pak which was isolated on this occasion. Presently, with some members seeking to restart the process, India needs to carefully consider its options.
Pak’s reluctance to accept most proposals projected by India in the SAARC summits compelled India to move on its own to enhance direct cooperation with members of the group, bypassing SAARC. Hence, the utility of SAARC is reduced. With Pak seeking support for conducting the meet and India reluctant, it has become a diplomatic game of who would win.
In case most nations, including those which backed the Indian decision to boycott the summit change their minds, India would be compelled to agree, or it would be termed as being responsible for the demise of an institution of which it was a founder member. In such a scenario, it would be Pak which would emerge the winner. If the summit remains cancelled, then India would emerge on top. Therefore, it is Pak which is rushing ahead, seeking to draw countries to support the initiative, rather than India.
With elections of 2019 looming large, India must be careful on the option which it would take. The Indian stance on Pak stopping support to terror groups was the reason, it remains the same now. There has been no change in the ground situation as at present. Hence, a change in Indian stance, despite pressure from neighbours, would open doors for the opposition to enhance criticism of the government.
The chances of Afghanistan agreeing to attend the summit, as increased attacks by the Pak supported Taliban are on the rise, is low. Therefore, India is bound to have their support. Bangladesh remains unhappy with Pak, however elections around the corner could always throw in a surprise. If the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) headed by Khalida Zia comes to power, it may tow the Pak line. Further, with Bangladesh joining the BRI and Chinese investments increasing, there could be pressure from China to attend. In this scenario, India may come under increasing pressure.
For Pak, which has visualized the present Indian government as being strong and willing to up the ante, removal of it would be a benefit. Hence, if India accepts to attend the summit and there is a strike, it would assist in impacting vote banks, reducing support to the ruling alliance. Thus, the policy dilemma in Delhi.
Since the window of conducting any SAARC summit is small, post the formation of a new government in Pak and elections within a few months in India, the government needs to calibrate its decision carefully. It must stick to its stance, yet not be projected as a hinderance to development of the region. It must continue claiming that unless Pak changes its spots, there can be no cooperation, hence SAARC would bear no fruit. Simultaneously, it must avoid bringing SAARC into statements when interacting with its immediate neighbours, thus enhancing one-to-one cooperation, which bears more fruit than SAARC.
About the Author
Maj Gen Harsha Kakkar
Retired Major General Indian Army