Lessons from other regions for Saarc
We are witnessing a new upsurge of freedom, democracy and unprecedented economic growth in many regions of the world. South Asia must break out of the stranglehold of poverty, hunger and disease. It must take up the challenge, as one region, to combat economic deprivation.
No comparisons need be drawn between various regional organizations as each one of them represents a different set of problems and priorities. In particular, one must guard against the temptation to cite the EU example as a model for South Asia.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel. As stated earlier, the European Union has a long history that stands out in sharp contrast to other regions trying to integrate economically. It had qualitatively a more conducive political and economic environment, with Western Europe building on the ashes of the War a new edifice of mutual cooperation. It did not rest on any laurels and carefully crafted its institutions and mechanisms to achieve its goals. This whole process started in 1951 and took more than half a century in culminating in its present form.
Likewise, the history of Asean bears no parallel with the evolution of regional cooperation in South Asia. Like the EU, Asean was conceived in the context of the Cold War compulsions as an attempt to forestall any extra-regional security threat and to link noncommunist economies of this region with global capitalism. Asean entered the global economic expressway when the going was fast and smooth. Another advantage that Asean had over Saarc was the geo-political harmony of its member-states which were also smaller in size and had comparatively more efficient and centralized system of decision-making.
The closest that Saarc can compare itself with is the Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO), headquartered in Tehran, which I had the privilege of transforming during my tenure as its Secretary-General from a small trilateral entity of Iran, Pakistan and Turkey, originally called RCD or Regional Cooperation for Development into a major regional organization of ten-member states with the inclusion of Afghanistan and six newly-independent former Soviet republics of Central Asia and Caucasus.
In order to adapt itself to the new challenges after its enlargement, ECO went through a comprehensive reform and restructuring with the help of an inter-governmental group of eminent persons. I recall within one year of the establishment of the group of eminent persons, we not only received its report but also had it approved at all competent levels with its recommendations on various aspects of the organization's reform, including their vision of the charter, fully implemented and legally enforced.
We had to revise the ECO Charter only because the original charter in the form of the Treaty of Izmir had become redundant with the transformation of the organization from a trilateral entity into a major regional grouping of ten member-states.12 Within one-year span, we were able to completely restructure the organization, including its regional policy framework and socio-economic development strategy.
We also started implementing the major plans of action, which included the Quetta Plan of Action, the Istanbul Declaration and the Almaty Outline Plan for Development of Transport Sector. In terms of priorities, the development of a modern transport and communication infrastructure linking the ECO member-states with each other and with the outside world was at the top of our agenda.13 An elaborate plan for developing regional network of oil and gas pipelines was also formulated.
Among the various regional projects finalized during that period were ECO Trade and Development Bank, ECO Reinsurance Company, ECO Shipping Company and ECO Air.
After intense negotiations, two regional agreements, one on transit trade, and the other on simplification of visa procedure for the businessmen of ECO countries were concluded.
These are concrete projects with regional scope and dimension, which have their location and equity already approved and committed, and which on implementation will contribute significantly to the region's economic cooperation activity. Two regional institutions, namely, ECO Science Foundation and ECO Cultural Institute have already been established.
One must admit, however, that like Saarc, ECO's real potential as a regional cooperation organization remains captive to the geopolitics of the region. With Afghanistan still in turmoil, there is no prospect of an early break-through toward a meaningful economic integration in this part of Asia.
Meanwhile, the newly-independent republics of Central Asia are grappling with the challenge of bringing their political and economic systems in the global mainstream.
Despite their structural economic and political problems inherited from their previous system, the newly-independent members of ECO are gradually moving towards market and export-oriented patterns of development. ECO offers them not only a vast market in close proximity for their natural resources including gas and oil but also the only nearest outlet to other markets of the world.
The regions covered by Saarc and ECO are contiguous and mutually complementary in terms of their potential for regional cooperation. Both are vast and rich in natural and human resources. Their geography and strategic location is an asset that perhaps no other region of the world has. Our common civilizational experience and cultural heritage are unrivalled anywhere in the world. We have an enormous untapped economic potential, which, if exploited properly through innovative national and regional strategies, could transform this part of Asia into an economic power house, besides making it a major factor of regional and global stability.
Parallel to intra-regional cooperation, Saarc also needs to pursue a process of mutually beneficial cooperation with other major regional organizations, including Asean and EU.
Annual consultations with Asean, ECO, South Pacific Forum, and Escap at the level of executive heads were institutionalized in 1994 which should be continued with special focus on such areas of common interest as trade and investment, transport and communication, human resource development and energy. This process would also enable the participating organizations to benefit from each other's experiences in these areas.
Saarc-EU cooperative links initiated in 1994 involving annual Troika ministerial meetings need to be further expanded so as to strengthen closer interaction in areas of mutual interest. EU could help Saarc in its capacity building and also "facilitate the ongoing integration process through its economic influence in the region and by sharing its own experience of dealing with diversity and its interests in crisis prevention." More specific initiatives should be considered to overcome the political inertia in this cooperative process, and to expand the scope of EU technical assistance for Saarc programs.
There have been welcome calls for expanding Saarc's economic links with other regions of the globalized world. In his address at the 12th Saarc Summit, the Prime Minister of Pakistan had suggested that besides deepening cooperation within South Asia, we should also encourage "strong linkages with other regional enterprises, enabling Saarc to leverage the economic complementarities" between Asia's different regions.
India also seems to be supportive of such linkages, especially with the economies of South East Asia, and with Japan, China, and South Korea, "to create a community of Asian dynamism."