Should SAARC be expanded?

The News, Sun, November,14, 2004.

Pervaiz Iqbal Cheema



AS a Chairman of SAARC Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz is expected to visit all member countries before the next summit which due in January 2005 at Dhaka. He has already visited Nepal, Bhutan and Bangladesh and is expected to visit other three countries India, Sri Lanka and Maldives after Ramadan. His visits to Nepal, Bhutan and Bangladesh have been very constructive in terms of both the bilateral relationships between Pakistan and the three countries he visited and the collective interest of SAARC’s. Sincere efforts to promote and strengthen this regional organization have been made by the visiting Prime Minister.

During his visits many issues were discussed and relations between the regional countries were thoroughly analysed.  Two important issues that were raised needs to be discussed. These were the idea of establishing a regional forum on the patterns of ASEAN Regional Forum and the second was whether or not SAARC should be expanded. A linked issue with the possible expansion is the idea of amending of SAARC’s Charter.

Theoretically SAARC was born in 1985 at the Dhaka Summit of seven regional countries though the work towards its creation had started much earlier. The association came into existence with a baggage of disabilities and constraints. The SAARC charter was devised first at Delhi Conference of the Council of Foreign Ministers on Aug.1, 1983 and was subsequently adopted at the first summit. More than 19 years have passed since its birth and the need for assessing SAARC’s performance seems in order.  Adopting a functional approach the association, during the last 19 years, has not only experienced the regional pressures but has also been able to clematise itself with the complexities of operative international political system.  Indeed the record is a mixed one.

Hailed as a much-awaited panacea for many complex problems confronting the region, its performance remained far below the augured expectations. Perhaps that is why In recent times the organization is subjected to somewhat legitimate criticism. Just as the UN Security Council did not live up to the expectations of a vast majority of the member states, SAARC also disappointed many in the region especially in terms of tangible outcomes that could substantively affect the life of ordinary citizens of the member countries. However this does not mean that its existence, in any sense, is disapproved.

In fact the continuous efforts of Pakistani President and Indian Prime Minister to inject peace and stability in the area have manifested in a positive outcome of 12^th SAARC declaration accompanied by an announcement that a composite dialogue would be resumed. The signing of Social Charter, Framework Agreement on SAFTA, and an Additional Protocol on the Regional Convention on Suppression of Terrorism are indeed developments of far reaching consequences.  Each one of these milestones reflects the concerted efforts and determination of the leaders, both Indian and Pakistani, and the level of achievements SAARC has attained.

Being a realist the thoughts of PM Aziz emphasis on non political area is quite understandable. It was reported that he was not in favour of amending SAARC Charter to allow bilateral issues of the region to be discussed on this forum. He is of the opinion that the bilateral issues need to be kept out to allow the member states to allow the member states to progress satisfactorily on non political issue. But he did support an amendment in the Charter to create a regional forum to discuss issues that are outside the ambit of existing charter.

His suggestion to create regional forum can focus on issue linked with the security of the region and can also discuss bilateral issue. During the earlier phase of SAARC’s history the emphasis that bilateral disputes were not really allowing SAARC’s onward movements. Indeed there was nothing wrong with this approach. However things have taken positive turn in the 21^st Century. Not only SAARC has already adopted a mechanism to discuss bilateral issues without amending the Charter.

The idea of having a retreat day in all the summits appears to be primarily meant for enabling the leaders to discuss bilateral issues. In a way it can be viewed as formalisation of informal talks on the side. In an informal setting the leaders are expected to make efforts in order to find an amicable way out of the complex problems that are of bilateral nature. To further strengthen the approach the idea of another forum such as a regional SAARC forum could not only supplement the existing mechanism but would also enable the member countries to security related problems.

The second issue that has been aired deals with the possible expansion of the SAARC membership. The expansion of SAARC was already discussed informally in the SAARC Foreign Ministers last conference during a meeting earlier this year. During the inaugural ceremony the former Prime Minister of Pakistan Chaudhry Shujat Hussain revealed that China had expressed its desire to join this South Asian Organization.

While it is expected that Pakistan might support Chinese inclusion into this regional organization, there are some other member who are unlikely to support this move. More specifically India is likely to oppose such a move if the issue is raised at the 13^th SAARC Summit at Dhaka in next January. However it is likely that the leaders discuss the issue of expansion when they meet next time.

Two aspects of expansion deserve comments. First, the expansion could only take place if all the members agree to amend the Charter and the Charter cannot be amended with a simple majority. It has to have the consent of all the members. It appears rather difficult to see a consensus emerging quickly. However what can happen is that the issue is taken up for discussion. Second the members will have to consider that if they allow one new member, then the case for other aspirant would also strengthen. At two other aspirants are well known. Apart from China, both Afghanistan and Iran are also reported to keenly incline to seek the membership.

The arguments for and against expansion can be convincingly made. The expansion would inject new blood and may accelerate the pace of SAARC’s collective approach towards regional development. But it can also bring new groupings and make it even more difficult to arrive at a consensus. All issues need to secure the consensus before they can be adopted by this collective forum. The induction of new members or refusal to accept expanded membership is heavily dependent upon aspirant’s bilateral relations with all the member countries.

It is not too far fetched to assume that that it is unlikely that the members would agree to SAARC’s expansion given the expressed views of some members against the expansion. Perhaps the way out of this dilemma which may confront the members at the next Summit is to seriously consider establishing a regional forum in which all of these aspirants can be accommodated after sometimes. For obvious reasons first one has to establish the forum and then few meetings need to held in order to crystallize it objective and desired directions. Having done this, the time would be appropriate to consider the expanded membership.

 
The writer works for Islamabad Policy Research Institute.