The leadership of these countries is confronted with poverty of thoughts, which has made them hostage to the phenomenon of pride and prejudice.
Seven countries that constitute SAARC include Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, the Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. Roughly 1.5 billion inhabitants in the seven countries that constitute SAARC represent almost 22% of the world population, having 1.97% of the world GNP. The average per capita income is $450.
Indeed poverty is one of the core issues these nations have been struggling against for quite long time.
The leadership of SARRC countries had dealt a deadly blow to the future of this body by reducing its scope and encouraging consultations. Then came the decision to exclude areas of disagreement, which caused real damage to the very idea of the establishment of this forum. Now, by virtue of that decision, member States cannot take up bilateral conflicts.
One is also disturbed by the lacklustre performance of SAARC in the field of trade and economy. The total external trade of the region amounts to 0.8% of world exports and 1.3% of world imports. Intra-regional exchanges represent only 5.3%(exports) and 4.8% (imports). It is a fact that except South Asia, trade between the neighbouring countries all over the world, is maximum.
The trade within NAFTA is 60% of their total trade, similarly 55% of the total trade of EU is within its region; 30% for ASEAN whereas it is only 5% for the SAARC region. The member States therefore ought to focus more on this aspect and try to enhance intra-regional trade activity, as much they can. The sooner it is done, the better it would be for the future well-being of the organisation.
Real democracy is another problem in the SAARC region since in most of the countries only a sham democracy exists while in Nepal and Bhutan, the King is still the fountainhead of power. The governments cannot function independently under certain undue controls and it becomes even awesome when one is part of an organisation and yet cannot take part in the decision-making process. The European Union model can be pointed out in this regard. In EU countries like Belgium, the Netherlands, Sweden etc, have kings or queens yet they do not interfere in the governments' working.
The hydra of poverty has marred the working of the organisation and has been identified as the core issue, which SAARC has miserably failed to grapple with. The United Nations has recently unveiled its Human Development Report in which the SAARC countries have been termed as the most undeveloped countries, with the exception of Maldives.
The Pakistani and Indian leaders have derived solace from the fact that their ratings have improved this year. They can be happy over this "improved rating" yet the ground realities such as increasing number of suicides, lack of justice, want of basic amenities, unemployment and last but not the least illiteracy remain to nullify governments' claims of socio-economic revolution, that according to them, has changed the lives of the people of the SARRC countries.
The twelfth SAARC summit, held in Islamabad from January 4-6, 2004, had unanimously recognised poverty alleviation as the greatest challenge facing the peoples of South Asia and had declared poverty alleviation as the main goal of all SAARC States. A similar vow was also made during the recent ministerial conference and hopefully same thing would happen even in the coming days. These vows need to be followed by practical steps.
Apart from heeding the core issues, the SAARC countries need to take some tangible steps in order to give a new impetus to intra-SAARC activities. SAFTA is indeed a step in the right direction but more can be done. For instance, the member States can introduce a visa system, enabling the citizens of all member States to move freely in the region.
We have seen Europeans achieving this goal by introducing the Schengen visa regime. One can move around in almost all member States by having only one visa. Norway, which is not a member of the European Union, has also adopted this system, which signifies its importance. The SAARC countries can also introduce a similar system and allow people to have free access to the member States. It's certainly not a big deal provided the leaders show a strong political will and determination. Pakistan, a few days ago had announced to eliminate visa requirements for the people of Nepal. This is no doubt a welcome step and needs to be emulated by others.
SAFTA may be a milestone in the history of SAARC provided it manages to survive the bureaucratic delays and Pakistan-India tensions. Needless to say, SAARC cannot take off until and unless both Pakistan and India resolve their outstanding issues, including the core issue of Kashmir. But it does not mean that all other developments should become hostage to this. If so happens, the organisation would be reduced to a non-entity. The confidence-building measures adopted by both sides show a level of commitment and strong resolve on the part of Pakistan and India to settle their disputes.
Ostensibly, it cannot happen overnight, but what both sides can do is to continue moving on the same lines till the final settlement. The SAARC Charter should be amended in order to address effectively and vigorously the bilateral disputed issues.
SAARC should also cultivate viable working relationships with other organisations such as the European Union. EU has consistently affirmed an interest in strengthening links with SAARC as a regional organisation. It seems as if SAARC has the same thinking yet nothing practical has happened in this direction so far. The European Union fully realises the difficulties that SAARC has in discussing political issues. EU can help consolidate the ongoing integration process through its economic influence in the region, its own historical experience of dealing with diversity, and its interest in crisis prevention.
The EU seems convinced that SAARC can play a useful role in regional co-operation and dialogue, although so far SAARC development has been less than breathtaking in the economic and political arena. In 1996 the European Commission signed a MoU with SAARC, offering them political assistance. The MoU was signed to break the political inertia, but the internal problems of SAARC prevented any effective implementation of the MoU.
In a nutshell, SAARC needs a dynamic leadership that could steer it clear through all sorts of vicissitudes. Bhutan's ambassador in Thailand, Chenkyab Dorji, is to take over as the new Secretary-General of the organisation. Under his leadership SAARC is supposed to take off. However, a Secretary-General from Pakistan or India could have made a world of difference, for we need somebody who could act as a bridge between these two counties, bringing them closer.