The
inflow of foreign funds in the organization support the long- term objectives
in regard to other aspect of India’s
strategy has been to evolve consensus in SAARC on international economic and
political issues. Such consensus would strengthen India’s own bargaining position in
international forum. This competitive game and diversity in objectives may help
to sustain SAARC but is not congenial for effective regional integration.
There
are diversities in threat perceptions among the South Asian states. For
example, the presence of a superpower in the Indian Ocean
draws more fire from some South Asian neighbours than others. Practically,
threat perceptions in South Asia seem to be
quite a mixed issue. The smaller members of the community fear India,
and some of the South Asian states are concerned about American interests in
the region. China figures as
a possible threat in the Indian calculations, but China is uniformly absent from the
threat perceptions of most of the other South Asian states. These differences
in perception and response point to the absence of any kind of a regional
outlook on defence issues. For this reason different military capabilities have
emerged in the South Asian region, which is in no way congenial for effective
regional integration.
There
is diversity in constitutional arrangements among South Asian states. For
example, India and Pakistan
have provincial government, but others lack these. It takes much time in India
to ratify a treaty which as a consequence of having provincial governments. For
smaller states it is very easy to get approval from their parliaments. Sometime
in India
central government’s willingness is not sufficient to solve a problem without
the help of provincial government and the Indian Supreme Court. Sometimes this
time-consuming system creates mistrust amongst smaller treaty partners. This
situation is also not congenial for effective regional integration in South Asia. Different attitudes among the ruling elite’s
is further factor that hinders effective
regional integration in South Asia. For
example, since 1971 the Indian ruling elite has gradually realised that if outside powers could be excluded from the
region, there would not be a single state in South Asia to challenge India
either diplomatically or militarily, or both. On the other hand, the elite’s of
Sri Lanka and Nepal
have an attitude to seek assistance from extra-regional powers. In Pakistan and
to some extent in Bangladesh,
the ruling elite’s hold anti-Indian attitudes. They frequently express and use
those attitudes in their policies and politics.
The
disproportionate size of the market appears to be one of the most important
obstacles to the expansion of trade in South Asia.
India
is a great economic power in the region. It accounts for 59 percent of the
import market, 62 percent of the export earnings, 41 percent the external
reserves, 79 percent of industrialized value added and 68 percent of mechanized
exports. In terms of exportable commodities, India owns over 5,600 commodities
to export. Only Pakistan,
which has about 4000 commodities, comes next in South Asia.
Nevertheless, Pakistan is no
match to India
in industrial development and size of the market. But the positions of other
smaller members of SAARC in this regard are not same.
In
view of the above, it is evident that the horror of Indian economic supremacy
over the economies of the smaller countries is a barrier to trade co-operation
in South Asia. India’s
economic ascendancy is reproduced in its trade imbalance with almost all the
countries of South Asia, except Pakistan.
In 1992, India exported US$
258 million to Bangladesh,
US$5 million to Maldives,
US$ 85 million to Nepal, US$
47 million to Pakistan, US$
192 million to Sri Lanka.
In the same year, India
imported US$ 5 from Bangladesh,
US$ 21 million from Nepal,
US$ 149 million from Pakistan
and US$ 13 million from Sri
Lanka. The strong industrial base,
technological development and its comparatively restricted market have given India a predominant position in South Asia. The spill-over effects of the fear of India’s
economic domination is also reflected in its neighbour’s psyche. For instance,
it is noticeable in the statement of a Pakistani psychoanalyst, who alleged:
‘It will be more apposite to say that Pakistan
is not willing to have unregulated trade with India without adequate safeguards
for its indigenous industries and comparatively high-wage labour force.’ If
passable safeguarding measures that are incorporated in the South Asian
Preferential Trading understanding for least developed members are not properly
applied to them, the lopsided size of the market may generate the imbalance
basis of trade among the South Asian countries.
This is valuable
ReplyDelete