Tuesday, April 24, 2007
(Courtesy: Siddhartha Thapa)
[Nepali.Perspectives]: Indian Foreign Policy and the Dynamics of Regional Politics
The fourteenth SAARC summit, like past summits was poignantly marked with rhetoric, applauses, vague promises and strict adherence to obsessive protocol. But, unfortunately, like other past summits, the New Delhi summit failed to depart from the paradigm of inaction and identify the core problem plaguing development and democratization in South Asia: terrorism.
Quintessentially, the drama attached to the SAARC summit was rather enchanting. Nepal, a prominent boat shaker in South Asian politics came out clearly favoring China to be given member status, this invariably in the long run will challenge India's hegemony and influence in the region. To add to SAARC's endless list of agonies, the addition of Afghanistan does no good, it further strains the mathematics of the beleaguered SAARC treasury. On the global front, powerful countries are coming together as efficient trading blocs and protecting the interest of member states within the trading bloc, unlike SAARC which remains bitterly divided. And despite some positive signs of economic development much to the credit of the IT sector boom and relocation of multi-nationals in South Asia; the rise in terrorism and political instability in the region has halted the consolidation of further success.
In the past Indo-Pak rivalry accounted for much of SAARC's failure and even to this date, the tension between these South Asian giants has hampered much of the progress at SAARC. But much has changed over the decade; India and Pakistan are not the only countries susceptible to terrorism and instability. A common feature in the politics of all South Asian countries is the resurgence of communist and religious extremism.
So are New Delhi and Islamabad the regional spoilers?
Pakistan's geographic location makes it a non-contender and a lesser player compared to India. On all accounts New Delhi has indeed failed on three fronts: stabilizing the region, effective exportation of democracy in its back yard, and conflict management. Peace is a prerequisite to development. Unlike other regional trading blocs, South Asia is marred by instability and contrary to the philosophy of other regional trading blocs; South Asian politics lacks a binding force. On the other hand the in the European Union - democracy, free market and stability in the region are desired objectives of all its member states.
For instance, the made in Delhi '12 point agreement', might yield dividends in Kathmandu but at the expense of the survival of democratic discourse. Where as in Bangladesh, India finds it hands unbound in taking strong measures against a military government. Worse still is Bhutan, where tragic ethnic cleansing, the relocation and repatriation of these refugees to a third country remain unsolved, though seventeen long years have passed by. The price that Nepal has had to pay has been dear, growing frustration among refugees has resulted in refugees posturing extreme nationalistic sentiments and in some cases resorting to violence. And last of course, Sri Lanka, where various groups within Tamil Nadu supported the LTTE. Unfortunately the see-saw change of policy in Delhi vis-à-vis Sri Lanka, costs many lives in the Indian army and tragically that of India's visionary Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi.
Therefore, for any successful overtures in South Asia – India needs to re-evaluate its foreign policy and national security and in conjunction, identify the main threats to its national security. It might also be prudent for the administration in New Delhi to question its policy makers in the South Block about a most pertinent issue - is South Asia headed towards disintegration? To find answers, policy makers and politicians in New Delhi need to identify interest groups within India that have worked in tandem with various extremist groups in South Asia.
It is no secret that the weapons in the Maoist armory were provided largely by radical communist sympathizers in West Bengal and Kerala. Historically speaking, BP Koirala was funded by various socialist parties around the world in collaboration with Indian socialists to provide him with arms. Similarly, the CPI-M has without a doubt provided moral support to the Maoists and more significantly, introduced them to the secret arms market of India.
Second, radical Islamic groups within India have perpetrated the ranks of various political parties in Bangladesh. But in regard to radical Islam, Pakistan 's notorious Islamic fugitives have outdone Indian Islamic radicals in disturbing the existence of a quasi- secular political balance in Bangladesh.
In the case of Sri Lanka, Karunanidhi in the early 80's not only provided monetary assistance but also sanctuary to Prabhakaran and his associates against the Lankan government. And in Bhutan, continued support to an autocratic regime and the reluctance of India to pressurize the Druk government on the repatriation of refugees languishing in Nepal are all parts and parcel of the fallacies of Indian policy in South Asia.
India and Pakistan have to recognize the unifying element in South Asian politics. Unfortunately, home-grown terrorism has contributed towards instability and extremism. First – the unprecedented growth of communism and the notion of self-determination have the proponents of mustering secession movements in India. Although India might have made gargantuan leaps economically, its failure to protect democracies in its backyard has undoubtedly questioned India's intentions and abilities in the global arena. If India cannot solve problems effectively in its own backyard how can she play a greater role in international relations?
The only solution to the advancement of South Asian regional development is a re-evaluation of policy at South Block and Race Course Road. But on a substantive policy level – it must be realized that both radical communism and religious extremism are the biggest threat to peace time politics in South Asia. And the only real response is a collective comprehensive security mechanism and the identification of common threats and rapid socio-economic response to the disgruntled masses. But more importantly it is imperative that India departs from a policy of 'democratic hypocrisy'.
Thursday, April 12, 2007
Sri Lanka-Nepal free trade deal could trigger trade, but also potential for opening services
http://www.lankabusinessonline.com/fullstory.php?newsID=46631837&no_view=1&SEARCH_TERM=10
April 4, 2007 (LBO) – A proposed free-trade deal between Nepal and Sri Lanka could boost trade but analysts say there is more potential for service liberalization.
Trade between the two countries is slim at the moment at just 371 million rupees in Sri Lankan exports last year and seven million rupees in imports, compared to billions of rupees in trade between Sri Lanka and other South Asian neighbours.
There are also issues of connectivity hampering trade between land-locked Nepal and Sri Lanka.
“We are working towards a free trade agreement with Nepal,” G L Peiris, Sri Lanka’s export development and international trade minister said Wednesday at a conference on trade in services in South Asia.
Nepal is keen on an agreement, Saman Kelegama, Executive Director of think tank, the Institute of Policy Studies, says, prompting the move to negotiate an FTA.
Though the deal is not expected to be as significant as the India-Sri Lanka and Pakistan-Sri Lanka free trade deals, a Nepal agreement could have other benefits.
“There isn’t a large amount of trade at the moment. But the thing with these trade deals is that it may trigger unilateral liberalization in other sectors,” Kelegama said.
Potential areas could be in aviation, allowing direct flights between the countries. Currently, Sri Lankans have to fly via Bangkok or New Delhi to Kathmandu.
There is also the potential to increase tourism especially Buddhist pilgrim traffic between the countries, packaging it with ongoing tours to India, Kelegama says.
Travel and tourism accounts for over 60 percent of Nepal’s total service exports, though India, Maldives and Pakistan are Sri Lanka’s top regional tourism markets.
Sri Lanka is also in the process of expanding its existing free trade deal with India, to open up service sectors like finance, tourism, health, education and other professions.
In a recent round of talks held in Colombo, India also agreed to open up all its ports to Sri Lankan exports of apparel and tea and deepened concessions on Sri Lanka’s garment exports.
India and Sri Lanka are hoping to reach some agreement by June this year. A Sri Lanka-Bangladesh trade agreement is also in the works.
Countries in the South Asian region export similar types of goods – textiles and apparel being significant as well as commodities like tea.
Despite the interest in inking bilateral deals with each other, intra-regional trade is still just five percent of total trade by the seven south asian countries, or just three billion dollars.
April 4, 2007 (LBO) – A proposed free-trade deal between Nepal and Sri Lanka could boost trade but analysts say there is more potential for service liberalization.
Trade between the two countries is slim at the moment at just 371 million rupees in Sri Lankan exports last year and seven million rupees in imports, compared to billions of rupees in trade between Sri Lanka and other South Asian neighbours.
There are also issues of connectivity hampering trade between land-locked Nepal and Sri Lanka.
“We are working towards a free trade agreement with Nepal,” G L Peiris, Sri Lanka’s export development and international trade minister said Wednesday at a conference on trade in services in South Asia.
Nepal is keen on an agreement, Saman Kelegama, Executive Director of think tank, the Institute of Policy Studies, says, prompting the move to negotiate an FTA.
Though the deal is not expected to be as significant as the India-Sri Lanka and Pakistan-Sri Lanka free trade deals, a Nepal agreement could have other benefits.
“There isn’t a large amount of trade at the moment. But the thing with these trade deals is that it may trigger unilateral liberalization in other sectors,” Kelegama said.
Potential areas could be in aviation, allowing direct flights between the countries. Currently, Sri Lankans have to fly via Bangkok or New Delhi to Kathmandu.
There is also the potential to increase tourism especially Buddhist pilgrim traffic between the countries, packaging it with ongoing tours to India, Kelegama says.
Travel and tourism accounts for over 60 percent of Nepal’s total service exports, though India, Maldives and Pakistan are Sri Lanka’s top regional tourism markets.
Sri Lanka is also in the process of expanding its existing free trade deal with India, to open up service sectors like finance, tourism, health, education and other professions.
In a recent round of talks held in Colombo, India also agreed to open up all its ports to Sri Lankan exports of apparel and tea and deepened concessions on Sri Lanka’s garment exports.
India and Sri Lanka are hoping to reach some agreement by June this year. A Sri Lanka-Bangladesh trade agreement is also in the works.
Countries in the South Asian region export similar types of goods – textiles and apparel being significant as well as commodities like tea.
Despite the interest in inking bilateral deals with each other, intra-regional trade is still just five percent of total trade by the seven south asian countries, or just three billion dollars.
International Conference on Media Laws Concludes in Nepal
By Altaf Hamid Rao ‘Pakistan Times’ AJK Bureau Chief
http://www.pakistantimes.net/2007/04/15/top8.htm
KATMANDU (Nepal): The three-day International Conference of journalists on Media Laws concluded in Katmandu on Friday providing an in-depth knowledge for the journalists how to successfully face media laws during the course of their professional duties.
Topic of the international moot was "Media Laws - the Media and the Law: A difficult relationship", organized jointly by the Singapore-based NGO KAF’s media programme and legal programme.
Besides a three-member journalists delegation from Pakistan, some media persons and legal experts from various other Asian countries including Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Indonesia, Korea, Nepal, Philippines, Sri Lanka and Singapore participated in the three-day conference.
The delegation from Pakistan comprised Altaf Hamid Rao, Mirpur-based Staff Correspondent of state-run news agency Associated Press of Pakistan, Ms Huma Amir Shah from Current Affairs department, AAJ TV and Mahmood Iqbal, Peshawar-based Correspondent of Daily ‘Dawn’.
Inaugurating the conference Werner Busch, Director, Media Program Asia for the host organization said “The main aim of holding of the seminar was to bring together journalists and legal experts from Asian countries in order to examine the role of media laws as a protection or a threat for journalists, how responsible journalism can be practiced, where are the limits of the freedom of the journalists and are press councils a practicable way to avoid courts cases”.
Media and Law - this is at best a neutral relationship, very often a strained one. And yet, a stable and comprehensive legal basis would help manifold: The papers, its readers, its subjects and the legal system itself, he said.
Journalists and legal experts from Nepal including Editor of Daily Katmandu Post Preetak, Singapore, Korea, India, Pakistan, Philippines, Bangladesh and other countries attending the conference addressed the conference besides participating in the discussion to Media and Media Laws elaborating in-depth analyses on the relationship between media and the Media laws
Participating in the discussion delegate from Pakistan Altaf Hamid Rao said that such conferences are proved to be major sources of guidance and knowledge about all faculties of the media including the topic of the congregations – the media laws.
It would indeed help in to guide the journalists across the globe including in Asian countries how to face media laws and the general law during the course of their professional duties.
The Katmandu global moot sets out to explore perils and possibilities in the workings of Media-Laws - in connection with the journalists, the legal system and those who feel wronged by the writings of the newspapers.
It also tries to advise journalists on how to put Media-Laws to good use, be it in not crossing the boundaries from critical reporting to slander, be it from stopping lower courts jailing journalists, not employing already existing Media-Laws.●
http://www.pakistantimes.net/2007/04/15/top8.htm
KATMANDU (Nepal): The three-day International Conference of journalists on Media Laws concluded in Katmandu on Friday providing an in-depth knowledge for the journalists how to successfully face media laws during the course of their professional duties.
Topic of the international moot was "Media Laws - the Media and the Law: A difficult relationship", organized jointly by the Singapore-based NGO KAF’s media programme and legal programme.
Besides a three-member journalists delegation from Pakistan, some media persons and legal experts from various other Asian countries including Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Indonesia, Korea, Nepal, Philippines, Sri Lanka and Singapore participated in the three-day conference.
The delegation from Pakistan comprised Altaf Hamid Rao, Mirpur-based Staff Correspondent of state-run news agency Associated Press of Pakistan, Ms Huma Amir Shah from Current Affairs department, AAJ TV and Mahmood Iqbal, Peshawar-based Correspondent of Daily ‘Dawn’.
Inaugurating the conference Werner Busch, Director, Media Program Asia for the host organization said “The main aim of holding of the seminar was to bring together journalists and legal experts from Asian countries in order to examine the role of media laws as a protection or a threat for journalists, how responsible journalism can be practiced, where are the limits of the freedom of the journalists and are press councils a practicable way to avoid courts cases”.
Media and Law - this is at best a neutral relationship, very often a strained one. And yet, a stable and comprehensive legal basis would help manifold: The papers, its readers, its subjects and the legal system itself, he said.
Journalists and legal experts from Nepal including Editor of Daily Katmandu Post Preetak, Singapore, Korea, India, Pakistan, Philippines, Bangladesh and other countries attending the conference addressed the conference besides participating in the discussion to Media and Media Laws elaborating in-depth analyses on the relationship between media and the Media laws
Participating in the discussion delegate from Pakistan Altaf Hamid Rao said that such conferences are proved to be major sources of guidance and knowledge about all faculties of the media including the topic of the congregations – the media laws.
It would indeed help in to guide the journalists across the globe including in Asian countries how to face media laws and the general law during the course of their professional duties.
The Katmandu global moot sets out to explore perils and possibilities in the workings of Media-Laws - in connection with the journalists, the legal system and those who feel wronged by the writings of the newspapers.
It also tries to advise journalists on how to put Media-Laws to good use, be it in not crossing the boundaries from critical reporting to slander, be it from stopping lower courts jailing journalists, not employing already existing Media-Laws.●
Road link with Nepal to boost regional ties
By BSS, New Delhi
Fri, 6 Apr 2007, 12:10:00
http://nation.ittefaq.com/artman/publish/article_35177.shtml
Source: The New Nation Bangladesh
Bangladesh-Nepal road link will be beneficial to all, including India, and it will help boost economic activities in the region, if only 17-kilometre road connection is given through Indian territory.
Chief Adviser Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed and Nepalese Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala made this observation when they met at the Hotel Maurya Sheraton here, a day after the end of the 14th SAARC Summit. Foreign Adviser Dr. Iftekhar Ahmed Chowdhury, the acting Foreign Secretary and the Press Secretary were present. Briefing journalists, Chief Adviser's Press Secretary Syed Fahim Munaim said the two leaders discussed bilateral issues in a cordial atmosphere and hoped that Dhaka-Kathmandu ties would be intensified in the days to come.
Dr. Fakhruddin said Nepal could use the Mongla Port as the construction of the Rupsha Bridge and the Paksey Bridge has removed obstacles in road communication. More Nepali students can take the opportunity of higher studies in Bangladesh, he added.
The chief adviser thanked Nepalese Prime Minister for raising the issue of 'water security' and sharing of hydropower in this region during the SAARC Summit.
Koirala said he would take further initiatives toward establishing road link between Dhaka and Kathmandu and exploring other fields of regional economic cooperation.
He appreciated the reform steps taken by the caretaker government and hoped that the people of Bangladesh would get its benefits soon.
Dr. Fakhruddin also paid a courtesy call on Maldives President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom at his hotel suite here on Wednesday. The Press Secretary said both the leaders held talks in a cordial atmosphere and expressed satisfaction over the strengthening of Dhaka-Male relations day by day.
President Maumoon raised the alarming issue of sea level rise and proposed that Bangladesh and Maldives take joint initiatives to address this environmental challenge. He also suggested Dhaka-Colombo-Male air link for extending bilateral cooperation.
Besides, Dr. Fakhruddin paid a courtesy call on Bhutanese Prime Minister Lyonpo Khandu Wangc-huk at his hotel suite and discussed issues of mutual interests.
Fri, 6 Apr 2007, 12:10:00
http://nation.ittefaq.com/artman/publish/article_35177.shtml
Source: The New Nation Bangladesh
Bangladesh-Nepal road link will be beneficial to all, including India, and it will help boost economic activities in the region, if only 17-kilometre road connection is given through Indian territory.
Chief Adviser Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed and Nepalese Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala made this observation when they met at the Hotel Maurya Sheraton here, a day after the end of the 14th SAARC Summit. Foreign Adviser Dr. Iftekhar Ahmed Chowdhury, the acting Foreign Secretary and the Press Secretary were present. Briefing journalists, Chief Adviser's Press Secretary Syed Fahim Munaim said the two leaders discussed bilateral issues in a cordial atmosphere and hoped that Dhaka-Kathmandu ties would be intensified in the days to come.
Dr. Fakhruddin said Nepal could use the Mongla Port as the construction of the Rupsha Bridge and the Paksey Bridge has removed obstacles in road communication. More Nepali students can take the opportunity of higher studies in Bangladesh, he added.
The chief adviser thanked Nepalese Prime Minister for raising the issue of 'water security' and sharing of hydropower in this region during the SAARC Summit.
Koirala said he would take further initiatives toward establishing road link between Dhaka and Kathmandu and exploring other fields of regional economic cooperation.
He appreciated the reform steps taken by the caretaker government and hoped that the people of Bangladesh would get its benefits soon.
Dr. Fakhruddin also paid a courtesy call on Maldives President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom at his hotel suite here on Wednesday. The Press Secretary said both the leaders held talks in a cordial atmosphere and expressed satisfaction over the strengthening of Dhaka-Male relations day by day.
President Maumoon raised the alarming issue of sea level rise and proposed that Bangladesh and Maldives take joint initiatives to address this environmental challenge. He also suggested Dhaka-Colombo-Male air link for extending bilateral cooperation.
Besides, Dr. Fakhruddin paid a courtesy call on Bhutanese Prime Minister Lyonpo Khandu Wangc-huk at his hotel suite and discussed issues of mutual interests.
Ethnic groups ask Bangladesh, Nepal migrants to leave Indian state
The Associated PressPublished: April 12, 2007
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/04/12/asia/AS-GEN-India-Migrants.php
GAUHATI, India: Illegal migrants from Bangladesh and Nepal have started leaving a northeastern Indian state after dominant ethnic groups there set a May 1 deadline for their departure, police said Thursday.
There is a strong anti-migrant feeling in India's remote northeast, where tens of thousands of people from outside the region have taken jobs and set up businesses.
There was no panic over the situation, due to police and paramilitary forces' strong presence in the area, said Meghalaya state Police Chief B. K. Dey Sawain.
"There is no large scale-exodus, but floating migrant workers are leaving the state," Sawain said.
Most migrants in Meghalaya work in coal mines on the Bangladesh border, said Emlang Lyttan, president of the Federation of Khasi, Jaintia and Garo People.
The Khasi, Jaintia and Garo — ethnic minority tribal groups who live mostly in India's northeast — have set a May 1 deadline for all migrants to be out of Meghalaya state.
Lyttan did not say what action would be taken against any who defy the deadline.
There are no government estimates of the number of illegal migrants from Bangladesh and Nepal in the area. Lyttan said there are about 12,000 in Meghalaya.
India shares a twisting, porous, 4,000-kilometer (2,500-mile) border with Bangladesh. Indian residents near the frontier fear they could soon be outnumbered by Bangladeshi migrants.
Indian authorities have completed 2,000 kilometers (1,240 miles) of a floodlit fence they are building along the border, mainly to keep out job-seeking immigrants.
Lyttan said tribal leaders largely blame migrants for rising crime — robberies, rapes and vehicle hijackings — in the area.
He also warned coal mine owners against employing foreign migrants.
"We are, however, not against migrant workers from elsewhere in India who are out here in search of jobs," he told The Associated Press.
Last year, the United Liberation Front of Asom — an ethnic minority-based group which has been fighting since 1979 for an independent state in India's northeast — asked "all Indians who migrated to Assam to leave that state," which is also in the northeast.
Most Indian migrant workers from other states ignored the ULFA's call.
The rebel group has since gunned down nearly 100 migrant workers from India's Bihar state.
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/04/12/asia/AS-GEN-India-Migrants.php
GAUHATI, India: Illegal migrants from Bangladesh and Nepal have started leaving a northeastern Indian state after dominant ethnic groups there set a May 1 deadline for their departure, police said Thursday.
There is a strong anti-migrant feeling in India's remote northeast, where tens of thousands of people from outside the region have taken jobs and set up businesses.
There was no panic over the situation, due to police and paramilitary forces' strong presence in the area, said Meghalaya state Police Chief B. K. Dey Sawain.
"There is no large scale-exodus, but floating migrant workers are leaving the state," Sawain said.
Most migrants in Meghalaya work in coal mines on the Bangladesh border, said Emlang Lyttan, president of the Federation of Khasi, Jaintia and Garo People.
The Khasi, Jaintia and Garo — ethnic minority tribal groups who live mostly in India's northeast — have set a May 1 deadline for all migrants to be out of Meghalaya state.
Lyttan did not say what action would be taken against any who defy the deadline.
There are no government estimates of the number of illegal migrants from Bangladesh and Nepal in the area. Lyttan said there are about 12,000 in Meghalaya.
India shares a twisting, porous, 4,000-kilometer (2,500-mile) border with Bangladesh. Indian residents near the frontier fear they could soon be outnumbered by Bangladeshi migrants.
Indian authorities have completed 2,000 kilometers (1,240 miles) of a floodlit fence they are building along the border, mainly to keep out job-seeking immigrants.
Lyttan said tribal leaders largely blame migrants for rising crime — robberies, rapes and vehicle hijackings — in the area.
He also warned coal mine owners against employing foreign migrants.
"We are, however, not against migrant workers from elsewhere in India who are out here in search of jobs," he told The Associated Press.
Last year, the United Liberation Front of Asom — an ethnic minority-based group which has been fighting since 1979 for an independent state in India's northeast — asked "all Indians who migrated to Assam to leave that state," which is also in the northeast.
Most Indian migrant workers from other states ignored the ULFA's call.
The rebel group has since gunned down nearly 100 migrant workers from India's Bihar state.
'Indo-US nuclear deal not to fuel arms race in South Asia'
Press Trust Of India March 08, 2007
http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?id=abdb08f6-f47c-4006-acd3-0cac80150ebb&ParentID=af110d1f-c116-4869-8a88-0f2735bada40&
Stressing on the importance of Indo-US civilian nuclear deal, a senior US official has assured lawmakers in his country that the agreement would not in any way fuel an arms race in South Asia.
"I appreciate the effort the Congress put into passing the legislation. It was landmark legislation and, we think, very important, very well crafted in terms of letting the president and the Prime Minister move forward in a way that is prudent and in a way that meets their own expectations that they put down when they negotiated this," Assistant Secretary of South and Central Asia Richard Boucher told lawmakers at a hearing of the House Foreign Affairs Committee on Wednesday.
"There have been a lot of studies and a lot of statements you heard them all during the debate about what this would do for India's military programmes, whether it would do anything at all. I still believe it wouldn't; I don't think the incentives are there," he said.
"As far as the potential for an arms race in the region, we've talked quite clearly to both India and Pakistan. Both of them tell us they don't want to see an arms race; they have no intention of starting one. And indeed, as you yourself noted, they're not only talking, they're making a lot of progress," the senior official added.
"On the issue of military versus civilian, the essence of the deal was a separation between the two and a separation that can be maintained and will be maintained by the Indians based on their decisions and policy, but also in cooperation with some of these international agreements."
"But indeed, there are a series of safeguards that will be negotiated between India and the International Atomic Energy Agency. That is one piece of the package that will be looked at, will be ready for the Congress to look at when we ask you to vote again on finalising the deal.
"We'll have a standard bilateral agreement between the United States and India that has the provisions required by law to make sure that there is adequate legal basis for our cooperation. Congress will get a chance to look at that as well, when it comes down to it," he added.
In his prepared remarks to the Committee, Boucher went beyond the civilian nuclear deal to speak of the kind of issues going on between the two countries, including consultations on the Doha Round expressing confidence that the strategic relationship will deepen and grow.
"Beyond the civil nuclear agreement, we're building a even stronger relationship with India in a whole host of areas. We're deepening our security ties. We're expanding our economic and business cooperations. We're working with India in the Doha Development Round negotiations," he said.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?id=abdb08f6-f47c-4006-acd3-0cac80150ebb&ParentID=af110d1f-c116-4869-8a88-0f2735bada40&
Stressing on the importance of Indo-US civilian nuclear deal, a senior US official has assured lawmakers in his country that the agreement would not in any way fuel an arms race in South Asia.
"I appreciate the effort the Congress put into passing the legislation. It was landmark legislation and, we think, very important, very well crafted in terms of letting the president and the Prime Minister move forward in a way that is prudent and in a way that meets their own expectations that they put down when they negotiated this," Assistant Secretary of South and Central Asia Richard Boucher told lawmakers at a hearing of the House Foreign Affairs Committee on Wednesday.
"There have been a lot of studies and a lot of statements you heard them all during the debate about what this would do for India's military programmes, whether it would do anything at all. I still believe it wouldn't; I don't think the incentives are there," he said.
"As far as the potential for an arms race in the region, we've talked quite clearly to both India and Pakistan. Both of them tell us they don't want to see an arms race; they have no intention of starting one. And indeed, as you yourself noted, they're not only talking, they're making a lot of progress," the senior official added.
"On the issue of military versus civilian, the essence of the deal was a separation between the two and a separation that can be maintained and will be maintained by the Indians based on their decisions and policy, but also in cooperation with some of these international agreements."
"But indeed, there are a series of safeguards that will be negotiated between India and the International Atomic Energy Agency. That is one piece of the package that will be looked at, will be ready for the Congress to look at when we ask you to vote again on finalising the deal.
"We'll have a standard bilateral agreement between the United States and India that has the provisions required by law to make sure that there is adequate legal basis for our cooperation. Congress will get a chance to look at that as well, when it comes down to it," he added.
In his prepared remarks to the Committee, Boucher went beyond the civilian nuclear deal to speak of the kind of issues going on between the two countries, including consultations on the Doha Round expressing confidence that the strategic relationship will deepen and grow.
"Beyond the civil nuclear agreement, we're building a even stronger relationship with India in a whole host of areas. We're deepening our security ties. We're expanding our economic and business cooperations. We're working with India in the Doha Development Round negotiations," he said.
South Asia needs effective regulation for liberalisation
Dr. Saman Kelegama
http://www.sundayobserver.lk/2007/04/15/fin02.asp
South Asia needs effective regulation but historically the region is plagued with over regulation. It is particularly important in the services sector as it cannot be inspected prior to consumption, said Executive Director Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) Dr. Saman Kelegama making the introductory remarks at an International Conference in Colombo.
Themed Trade in Services, in South Asia: Opportunities and risks in liberalisation the conference was organised by the IPS and Fredrich Ebert Stiftung.
He said that regulations are important in services such as health and education which have social impacts and telecommunication and finance which have economic impacts. Therefore an effective but un-cumbersome regulatory regime is an essential pre-requisite for liberalisation.
Dr. Kelegama said that the shortage of data is also a significant constraint on effective liberalisation while research is required to identify the scope for collaboration and cooperation within South Asia.
South Asian countries have already liberalised their service sectors to a certain extent through unilateral, multilateral, regional and bilateral initiatives. But the trade in services is not close to the proportion of services to the GDP.
Under the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) most South Asian nations other than Bhutan have made commitments. Further commitments are expected under BIMST-EC and CEPA.
Trade in services is also expected to find its way into the SAFTA framework. He said that prior to embarking on negotiations a country should have a strong grasp of its own offensive and defensive interests and this responsibility lies with all stakeholders.
Since factor markets are imperfect liberalisation could result in medium and long term unemployment in certain uncompetitive sectors. Therefore it is necessary to strike a balance between the medium term hazards of increased unemployment and the long term benefits of increased competitiveness.
Trade in Services has largely been an offensive interest of developed nations attempting to break into regulated developing country markets. The status quo is shifting with developing nations harnessing significant offensive interests in services as well.
It is important to identify particular sectors where strong offensive interests exist and identify the direct and indirect benefits these could bring.
When considering domestic liberalisation defensive interests need to be considered along with the benefits of liberalisation. Defensive interests include sectors where livelihoods of the poor are affected, emerging sectors require independence from reliance on foreign supply.
Eleven years after services were included in the multilateral trading system, the WTO's GATS remains an unfinished project due to the absence of data, commercial insecurity and a crippling perception of an unfavourably tilted playing field prevailing in development circles throughout the negotiations.
Minister of Export Development and International Trade Prof. G. L. Peiris who was the chief guest said that Sri Lanka is working towards a Free Trade Agreement with Nepal while the country has signed FTAs with India and Pakistan.
At present Sri Lanka and India are negotiating a Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) to facilitate the export of services between the two countries which is an extension of the FTA.
He said that export of services has overtaken the export of goods globally and even in Sri Lanka 57% of earnings are through services.
http://www.sundayobserver.lk/2007/04/15/fin02.asp
South Asia needs effective regulation but historically the region is plagued with over regulation. It is particularly important in the services sector as it cannot be inspected prior to consumption, said Executive Director Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) Dr. Saman Kelegama making the introductory remarks at an International Conference in Colombo.
Themed Trade in Services, in South Asia: Opportunities and risks in liberalisation the conference was organised by the IPS and Fredrich Ebert Stiftung.
He said that regulations are important in services such as health and education which have social impacts and telecommunication and finance which have economic impacts. Therefore an effective but un-cumbersome regulatory regime is an essential pre-requisite for liberalisation.
Dr. Kelegama said that the shortage of data is also a significant constraint on effective liberalisation while research is required to identify the scope for collaboration and cooperation within South Asia.
South Asian countries have already liberalised their service sectors to a certain extent through unilateral, multilateral, regional and bilateral initiatives. But the trade in services is not close to the proportion of services to the GDP.
Under the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) most South Asian nations other than Bhutan have made commitments. Further commitments are expected under BIMST-EC and CEPA.
Trade in services is also expected to find its way into the SAFTA framework. He said that prior to embarking on negotiations a country should have a strong grasp of its own offensive and defensive interests and this responsibility lies with all stakeholders.
Since factor markets are imperfect liberalisation could result in medium and long term unemployment in certain uncompetitive sectors. Therefore it is necessary to strike a balance between the medium term hazards of increased unemployment and the long term benefits of increased competitiveness.
Trade in Services has largely been an offensive interest of developed nations attempting to break into regulated developing country markets. The status quo is shifting with developing nations harnessing significant offensive interests in services as well.
It is important to identify particular sectors where strong offensive interests exist and identify the direct and indirect benefits these could bring.
When considering domestic liberalisation defensive interests need to be considered along with the benefits of liberalisation. Defensive interests include sectors where livelihoods of the poor are affected, emerging sectors require independence from reliance on foreign supply.
Eleven years after services were included in the multilateral trading system, the WTO's GATS remains an unfinished project due to the absence of data, commercial insecurity and a crippling perception of an unfavourably tilted playing field prevailing in development circles throughout the negotiations.
Minister of Export Development and International Trade Prof. G. L. Peiris who was the chief guest said that Sri Lanka is working towards a Free Trade Agreement with Nepal while the country has signed FTAs with India and Pakistan.
At present Sri Lanka and India are negotiating a Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) to facilitate the export of services between the two countries which is an extension of the FTA.
He said that export of services has overtaken the export of goods globally and even in Sri Lanka 57% of earnings are through services.
Time For Musharraf To Go!
http://www.countercurrents.org/pak-khalid270307.htm
The Government is eager to portray the hiatus over the reference against the Chief Justice as a purely ‘judicial matter’. It isn’t! Until this regime resigns or is removed, crisis will prolong and fester.
General Musharraf was legitimised in power for the first three years by a court ruling, and for the next five years by a deal with the MMA on which he reneged. With that kind of legitimacy, he feels he is entitled to give the country a new polity. He calls it ‘enlightened moderation’. He is reluctant to explain what it is but its effects are clearly discernible. On the rare occasion that he does say a few words in explanation, he says it means that the Muslims should give up ‘jihad’ and the Americans should help resolve the problems of Palestine, Kashmir, Chechnya etc. He does not mention Iraq, Afghanistan or Somalia where jihad against American occupation is going on in real earnest. But then his role is not to solve the problems of Muslims but to solve America’s ‘Muslim Problem’.
‘Enlightened moderation’ is not just for Pakistan, it is the basis of a new relationship between America and rulers of Muslim states. It has a regional and a Pakistani internal dimension. Regionally, it implies submission to India’s hegemony - advancing India’s interests (through SAARC & SAFTA) and to create conditions that the people submit to Indian hegemony. Internally, the agenda of ‘enlightened moderation’ is to decry Jihad, abandon the Kashmiris and their struggle for liberation, and to revile those who resist occupation as extremists. He openly promotes heretical cults. This regime has extended patronage to those openly ridicule the ‘Two Nation Theory’ and work for the agenda of foreign powers to break up of Pakistan along ethnic lines. To broaden the constituency opposed to the Two-Nation Theory, they have wooed and obtained the support of secular political parties which also support this pro-India agenda.
With all the props for the triumph of ‘enlightened moderation’ regionally in place, the government is trying to sell it to the Middle East, even South East Asia. But in those regions, there is very little enlightenment; they call its proponents traitors and collaborators.
Democracy stands discredited in Pakistan because of the arrogance and misconduct of Benazir and Nawaz Sharif in power. Even in the USA and the UK, where democracy has deep roots, free elections have returned to power leaders who lied to and cheated to wage illegal wars that devastated Afghanistan, Iraq and Somalia and now threatening to invade Iran in utter disregard of international law and the will of their constituents. The secular parties – PPP and ANP – are led by persons even more enlightened (more pro-India) and more moderate (more anti-Islam) than Musharraf. Ethnic nationalists are openly anti-state. The Armed Forces of Pakistan are led by a General who openly reviles the polity of Pakistan. Who represents the majority in Pakistan that is neither enlightened (pro-India) nor moderate (anti-Islam)?
Political observers have already noted that the outcry against the suspension of the Chief Justice is as much a concern for the ‘independence of the judiciary’ as a ‘vote of no confidence’ in Musharraf. It has also been noted that unlike the public protests over ‘sugar price’ in 1969 that got transformed into ‘anti-Ayub’ movement, the present ‘judicial crisis’ has not yet given rise to a public movement against this regime. It is because in 1969, there was a popular alternative leader – Zulfikar Ali Bhutto - on the scene. Today the leaders of the national parties are neither ‘less enlightened nor less moderate’ than Musharraf. If the Muslim League and the PPP cannot find any one to lead their parties apart from the stale and discredited leaders they have now, Musharraf may win by default.
But it does not have to be like that. If Musharraf leaves, the PML is more likely to make an alliance with MMA and PML (N) rather than with the MQM and the PPP. That alliance won two third majority in the National Assembly in 1996 Elections and can do so again without any help from the Army or America.
Musharraf administration has many achievements to its credit. It has restored economic health of Pakistan. It has maintained the efficacy of the nuclear and non-nuclear deterrent for security and dealt with insurrection in Balochistan with cool courage. But the rate of growth of the economy is now slowing because of the uncertainty created by Musharraf refusing to leave office gracefully. He did not answer my question: “What would you do different to Ayub and Zia that your legacy would outlive your period in power”? I will give the answer: You will relinquish the office of the COAS now and not encumber the PML with an un-natural alliance with the MQM and/or the PPP. The Armed Forces and the Judiciary are the two institutions where performance and conduct of their members are judged by their peers. After a dumb start, the Chief Justice of Pakistan is being judged by his peers. But Musharraf has resisted the judgment of his peers. They have been telling him privately at first and publicly now that it is time for him to go. That way his legacy, the good name, and public confidence in the armed forces can be saved.
The writer is the Director London Institute of South Asia.
E-Mail:usmankhalid@lisauk.com
( First published in 'The Nation' Lahore on March 26, 2007)
The Government is eager to portray the hiatus over the reference against the Chief Justice as a purely ‘judicial matter’. It isn’t! Until this regime resigns or is removed, crisis will prolong and fester.
General Musharraf was legitimised in power for the first three years by a court ruling, and for the next five years by a deal with the MMA on which he reneged. With that kind of legitimacy, he feels he is entitled to give the country a new polity. He calls it ‘enlightened moderation’. He is reluctant to explain what it is but its effects are clearly discernible. On the rare occasion that he does say a few words in explanation, he says it means that the Muslims should give up ‘jihad’ and the Americans should help resolve the problems of Palestine, Kashmir, Chechnya etc. He does not mention Iraq, Afghanistan or Somalia where jihad against American occupation is going on in real earnest. But then his role is not to solve the problems of Muslims but to solve America’s ‘Muslim Problem’.
‘Enlightened moderation’ is not just for Pakistan, it is the basis of a new relationship between America and rulers of Muslim states. It has a regional and a Pakistani internal dimension. Regionally, it implies submission to India’s hegemony - advancing India’s interests (through SAARC & SAFTA) and to create conditions that the people submit to Indian hegemony. Internally, the agenda of ‘enlightened moderation’ is to decry Jihad, abandon the Kashmiris and their struggle for liberation, and to revile those who resist occupation as extremists. He openly promotes heretical cults. This regime has extended patronage to those openly ridicule the ‘Two Nation Theory’ and work for the agenda of foreign powers to break up of Pakistan along ethnic lines. To broaden the constituency opposed to the Two-Nation Theory, they have wooed and obtained the support of secular political parties which also support this pro-India agenda.
With all the props for the triumph of ‘enlightened moderation’ regionally in place, the government is trying to sell it to the Middle East, even South East Asia. But in those regions, there is very little enlightenment; they call its proponents traitors and collaborators.
Democracy stands discredited in Pakistan because of the arrogance and misconduct of Benazir and Nawaz Sharif in power. Even in the USA and the UK, where democracy has deep roots, free elections have returned to power leaders who lied to and cheated to wage illegal wars that devastated Afghanistan, Iraq and Somalia and now threatening to invade Iran in utter disregard of international law and the will of their constituents. The secular parties – PPP and ANP – are led by persons even more enlightened (more pro-India) and more moderate (more anti-Islam) than Musharraf. Ethnic nationalists are openly anti-state. The Armed Forces of Pakistan are led by a General who openly reviles the polity of Pakistan. Who represents the majority in Pakistan that is neither enlightened (pro-India) nor moderate (anti-Islam)?
Political observers have already noted that the outcry against the suspension of the Chief Justice is as much a concern for the ‘independence of the judiciary’ as a ‘vote of no confidence’ in Musharraf. It has also been noted that unlike the public protests over ‘sugar price’ in 1969 that got transformed into ‘anti-Ayub’ movement, the present ‘judicial crisis’ has not yet given rise to a public movement against this regime. It is because in 1969, there was a popular alternative leader – Zulfikar Ali Bhutto - on the scene. Today the leaders of the national parties are neither ‘less enlightened nor less moderate’ than Musharraf. If the Muslim League and the PPP cannot find any one to lead their parties apart from the stale and discredited leaders they have now, Musharraf may win by default.
But it does not have to be like that. If Musharraf leaves, the PML is more likely to make an alliance with MMA and PML (N) rather than with the MQM and the PPP. That alliance won two third majority in the National Assembly in 1996 Elections and can do so again without any help from the Army or America.
Musharraf administration has many achievements to its credit. It has restored economic health of Pakistan. It has maintained the efficacy of the nuclear and non-nuclear deterrent for security and dealt with insurrection in Balochistan with cool courage. But the rate of growth of the economy is now slowing because of the uncertainty created by Musharraf refusing to leave office gracefully. He did not answer my question: “What would you do different to Ayub and Zia that your legacy would outlive your period in power”? I will give the answer: You will relinquish the office of the COAS now and not encumber the PML with an un-natural alliance with the MQM and/or the PPP. The Armed Forces and the Judiciary are the two institutions where performance and conduct of their members are judged by their peers. After a dumb start, the Chief Justice of Pakistan is being judged by his peers. But Musharraf has resisted the judgment of his peers. They have been telling him privately at first and publicly now that it is time for him to go. That way his legacy, the good name, and public confidence in the armed forces can be saved.
The writer is the Director London Institute of South Asia.
E-Mail:usmankhalid@lisauk.com
( First published in 'The Nation' Lahore on March 26, 2007)
Nepal: Cultural whirlwind
http://www.organiser.org/dynamic/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=179&page=35
By Sandhya Jain
The Western-Christian agenda in Kathmandu is meanwhile becoming increasingly apparent. Buoyed by the success in making Nepal a secular state, thereby improving the climate for conversions under the Christian leadership of the Maoists, the Vatican has moved swiftly to appoint a Bishop for the country. Last month, Pope Benedict XVI not only elevated Nepal from a Prefecture to a Vicariate, he appointed Father Anthony Francis Sharma, 69, as the former Hindu kingdom’s first bishop.
Nepal Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala will go down in modern history as the leader who brought ruination upon his nation. Mr. Koirala has negated a political career spanning
60-year to work out a Neville Chamberlain style of ‘peace’ with the Maoists, bringing them into the government without even the formality of a UN-certified arms surrender.
The Maoists have entered the interim Parliament, and now the government, and it is clear that Mr. Koirala and his colleagues in the Seven-Party Alliance were unequal to the invisible pressures exerted by the forces that paid for the rent-a-crowd mobs that brought down King Gyanendra.
It is now virtually certain that the forthcoming elections to the constituent assembly are unlikely to be free or fair or non-violent. The plains people, Madhesis, are increasingly involved in physical fights with the Maoists, who are still armed and resorting to violence and intimidation. An increasing number of Indian businessmen in Nepal are reporting sorry experiences with the Maoists and returning home in disgust.
This trend is likely to accelerate in coming weeks and months, especially as the Royal Nepal Army has been confined to the barracks under a scandalous (and now violated) agreement whereby the royal government arms were kept under sole UN custody and the token arms surrendered by Maoists kept under joint custody. This gives Maoists the opportunity to retrieve their arms at any point, though it is well known that all arms have not been surrendered. Even UN does not claim a complete surrender.
The western-Christian agenda in Kathmandu is meanwhile becoming increasingly apparent. Buoyed by the success in making Nepal a secular state, thereby improving the climate for conversions under the Christian leadership of the Maoists, the Vatican has moved swiftly to appoint a Bishop for the country. Last month, Pope Benedict XVI not only elevated Nepal from a Prefecture to a Vicariate, he appointed Father Anthony Francis Sharma, 69, as the former Hindu kingdom’s first bishop.
Sharma’s widowed mother converted to Christianity while living in Assam, and got the four year old boy baptized. He will be ordained as Bishop in Kathmandu on May 5 by the Pope’s representative, Papal Nuncio Pedro Lopez Quintana. Nepal is now likely to face intensified evangelical pressures, driven explicitly by the West. Father Sharma has already declared his mission to concentrate upon the conversion of the country’s ethnic communities, a development that is likely to increase internal stress in the Himalayan state as the traditional culture of the people is displaced by west-funded religion and an open assault upon the old way of life.
It is interesting to recall that King Prithvi Narayan Shah had expelled Christian missionaries from his kingdom on the ground that they were spying for the British government. Modern day evangelists too, are likely to play a similarly disruptive role in the country, and the impact of evangelisation upon India ’s security environment will also have to be assessed, especially if the Maoists provide their western-backers with military bases to spy on China and Tibet, not to mention India.
Little wonder that the Maoist entry into government has met with silence from India, where there is growing realisation that Ms. Sonia Gandhi’s domination over the UPA has sacrificed crucial national interests. Yet, it has been welcomed enthusiastically by the international community. Maoist pressure has assured the retention of the highly unpopular Home Minister Krishna Prasad Sitaula.
The Maoists have managed to make spokesman and chief of the parliamentary party Krishna Bahadur Mahara the Information and Communications Minister. The wife of Prachand’s deputy Baburam Bhattarai, Ms. Hisila Yami, has been given the Physical Planning and Infrastructure portfolio. Mr. Khadga Bahadur Bishwakorma has been given charge of women, children and social development; Mr. Dev Gurung has been given Local Development, while Mr. Matrika Prasad Yadav from the Terai has got the Forest and Soil Conservation portfolio.
Maoist ascendancy has already begun to impact upon the cultural environment in Nepal. Fringe groups like homosexuals and lesbians are being encouraged by unknown forces to come out of their privacy and take centre-stage of the country’s socio-cultural landscape. In an open assault of the kingdom’s natural conservatism, the first same-sex marriage has already been held along with a beauty pageant of trans-genders. The country is slated to hold its first ever gay film festival next month, and this will be crowned by a beauty pageant of homosexuals dressed as women.
There can be no doubt that this is part of a larger conspiracy to culturally disarm and demoralise the Nepali people. If the sexual activity of marginal social groups is all that a society has to offer or demand in the name of secularism, the Nepali people would do well to ponder if the loss of the kingdom’s Hindu status is worth it.
If Nepal is to be saved from becoming a cultural wasteland like Thailand (best known for casinos and child prostitution), the Nepali people and non-Maoist political parties would do well to ensure that elections to the constituent assembly are preceded by a fair delimitation of seats, with the Terai getting its legitimate share in proportion to its population. They should also scrutinise the activities of the evangelicals closely, particularly the drastic and often deleterious cultural changes introduced in the lives of communities where missionaries are active. Above all, they should ensure that Maoist terrorising tactics during and prior to the elections are met with fierce resistance. The bells are tolling, not just for the Nepalese monarchy, but also for the Hindu culture and civilisation of the nation.
By Sandhya Jain
The Western-Christian agenda in Kathmandu is meanwhile becoming increasingly apparent. Buoyed by the success in making Nepal a secular state, thereby improving the climate for conversions under the Christian leadership of the Maoists, the Vatican has moved swiftly to appoint a Bishop for the country. Last month, Pope Benedict XVI not only elevated Nepal from a Prefecture to a Vicariate, he appointed Father Anthony Francis Sharma, 69, as the former Hindu kingdom’s first bishop.
Nepal Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala will go down in modern history as the leader who brought ruination upon his nation. Mr. Koirala has negated a political career spanning
60-year to work out a Neville Chamberlain style of ‘peace’ with the Maoists, bringing them into the government without even the formality of a UN-certified arms surrender.
The Maoists have entered the interim Parliament, and now the government, and it is clear that Mr. Koirala and his colleagues in the Seven-Party Alliance were unequal to the invisible pressures exerted by the forces that paid for the rent-a-crowd mobs that brought down King Gyanendra.
It is now virtually certain that the forthcoming elections to the constituent assembly are unlikely to be free or fair or non-violent. The plains people, Madhesis, are increasingly involved in physical fights with the Maoists, who are still armed and resorting to violence and intimidation. An increasing number of Indian businessmen in Nepal are reporting sorry experiences with the Maoists and returning home in disgust.
This trend is likely to accelerate in coming weeks and months, especially as the Royal Nepal Army has been confined to the barracks under a scandalous (and now violated) agreement whereby the royal government arms were kept under sole UN custody and the token arms surrendered by Maoists kept under joint custody. This gives Maoists the opportunity to retrieve their arms at any point, though it is well known that all arms have not been surrendered. Even UN does not claim a complete surrender.
The western-Christian agenda in Kathmandu is meanwhile becoming increasingly apparent. Buoyed by the success in making Nepal a secular state, thereby improving the climate for conversions under the Christian leadership of the Maoists, the Vatican has moved swiftly to appoint a Bishop for the country. Last month, Pope Benedict XVI not only elevated Nepal from a Prefecture to a Vicariate, he appointed Father Anthony Francis Sharma, 69, as the former Hindu kingdom’s first bishop.
Sharma’s widowed mother converted to Christianity while living in Assam, and got the four year old boy baptized. He will be ordained as Bishop in Kathmandu on May 5 by the Pope’s representative, Papal Nuncio Pedro Lopez Quintana. Nepal is now likely to face intensified evangelical pressures, driven explicitly by the West. Father Sharma has already declared his mission to concentrate upon the conversion of the country’s ethnic communities, a development that is likely to increase internal stress in the Himalayan state as the traditional culture of the people is displaced by west-funded religion and an open assault upon the old way of life.
It is interesting to recall that King Prithvi Narayan Shah had expelled Christian missionaries from his kingdom on the ground that they were spying for the British government. Modern day evangelists too, are likely to play a similarly disruptive role in the country, and the impact of evangelisation upon India ’s security environment will also have to be assessed, especially if the Maoists provide their western-backers with military bases to spy on China and Tibet, not to mention India.
Little wonder that the Maoist entry into government has met with silence from India, where there is growing realisation that Ms. Sonia Gandhi’s domination over the UPA has sacrificed crucial national interests. Yet, it has been welcomed enthusiastically by the international community. Maoist pressure has assured the retention of the highly unpopular Home Minister Krishna Prasad Sitaula.
The Maoists have managed to make spokesman and chief of the parliamentary party Krishna Bahadur Mahara the Information and Communications Minister. The wife of Prachand’s deputy Baburam Bhattarai, Ms. Hisila Yami, has been given the Physical Planning and Infrastructure portfolio. Mr. Khadga Bahadur Bishwakorma has been given charge of women, children and social development; Mr. Dev Gurung has been given Local Development, while Mr. Matrika Prasad Yadav from the Terai has got the Forest and Soil Conservation portfolio.
Maoist ascendancy has already begun to impact upon the cultural environment in Nepal. Fringe groups like homosexuals and lesbians are being encouraged by unknown forces to come out of their privacy and take centre-stage of the country’s socio-cultural landscape. In an open assault of the kingdom’s natural conservatism, the first same-sex marriage has already been held along with a beauty pageant of trans-genders. The country is slated to hold its first ever gay film festival next month, and this will be crowned by a beauty pageant of homosexuals dressed as women.
There can be no doubt that this is part of a larger conspiracy to culturally disarm and demoralise the Nepali people. If the sexual activity of marginal social groups is all that a society has to offer or demand in the name of secularism, the Nepali people would do well to ponder if the loss of the kingdom’s Hindu status is worth it.
If Nepal is to be saved from becoming a cultural wasteland like Thailand (best known for casinos and child prostitution), the Nepali people and non-Maoist political parties would do well to ensure that elections to the constituent assembly are preceded by a fair delimitation of seats, with the Terai getting its legitimate share in proportion to its population. They should also scrutinise the activities of the evangelicals closely, particularly the drastic and often deleterious cultural changes introduced in the lives of communities where missionaries are active. Above all, they should ensure that Maoist terrorising tactics during and prior to the elections are met with fierce resistance. The bells are tolling, not just for the Nepalese monarchy, but also for the Hindu culture and civilisation of the nation.
South Asia’s media watchdog begins work
http://www.sundaytimes.lk/070415/News/108.news.html
The South Asia Media Commission (SAMC) which was established in early April will prepare model legislation and guidelines to be adopted and followed by the media for it to be able to attain high professional standards and ensure press freedom. These will be among the objectives of the Commission which was established in New Delhi on April 1.
The other objectives of the Commission will include identifying the laws, rules and regulations that circumvent the right to freedom of opinion and expression in different countries of the region, and keep watch on measures adopted by state and non-state actors to punish the independent media economically or in any other way, including withholding of advertisements, setting up regulatory mechanisms, censorship and other punitive measurers.
The Commission will also periodically monitor violations of media rights and attacks on journalists and media organisations and publish its annual and periodical reports. It will also follow up cases of victimisation of journalists and media organizations and will serve as a voluntarily acknowledged media watchdog to set professional standards and audit media content, formats and presentations.
The Hindu newspaper's Editor-in-Chief N.Ram was appointed for two years as the first SAMC Chairman.
The South Asia Media Commission (SAMC) which was established in early April will prepare model legislation and guidelines to be adopted and followed by the media for it to be able to attain high professional standards and ensure press freedom. These will be among the objectives of the Commission which was established in New Delhi on April 1.
The other objectives of the Commission will include identifying the laws, rules and regulations that circumvent the right to freedom of opinion and expression in different countries of the region, and keep watch on measures adopted by state and non-state actors to punish the independent media economically or in any other way, including withholding of advertisements, setting up regulatory mechanisms, censorship and other punitive measurers.
The Commission will also periodically monitor violations of media rights and attacks on journalists and media organisations and publish its annual and periodical reports. It will also follow up cases of victimisation of journalists and media organizations and will serve as a voluntarily acknowledged media watchdog to set professional standards and audit media content, formats and presentations.
The Hindu newspaper's Editor-in-Chief N.Ram was appointed for two years as the first SAMC Chairman.
South Asia’s media watchdog begins work
http://www.sundaytimes.lk/070415/News/108.news.html
The South Asia Media Commission (SAMC) which was established in early April will prepare model legislation and guidelines to be adopted and followed by the media for it to be able to attain high professional standards and ensure press freedom. These will be among the objectives of the Commission which was established in New Delhi on April 1.
The other objectives of the Commission will include identifying the laws, rules and regulations that circumvent the right to freedom of opinion and expression in different countries of the region, and keep watch on measures adopted by state and non-state actors to punish the independent media economically or in any other way, including withholding of advertisements, setting up regulatory mechanisms, censorship and other punitive measurers.
The Commission will also periodically monitor violations of media rights and attacks on journalists and media organisations and publish its annual and periodical reports. It will also follow up cases of victimisation of journalists and media organizations and will serve as a voluntarily acknowledged media watchdog to set professional standards and audit media content, formats and presentations.
The Hindu newspaper's Editor-in-Chief N.Ram was appointed for two years as the first SAMC Chairman.
The South Asia Media Commission (SAMC) which was established in early April will prepare model legislation and guidelines to be adopted and followed by the media for it to be able to attain high professional standards and ensure press freedom. These will be among the objectives of the Commission which was established in New Delhi on April 1.
The other objectives of the Commission will include identifying the laws, rules and regulations that circumvent the right to freedom of opinion and expression in different countries of the region, and keep watch on measures adopted by state and non-state actors to punish the independent media economically or in any other way, including withholding of advertisements, setting up regulatory mechanisms, censorship and other punitive measurers.
The Commission will also periodically monitor violations of media rights and attacks on journalists and media organisations and publish its annual and periodical reports. It will also follow up cases of victimisation of journalists and media organizations and will serve as a voluntarily acknowledged media watchdog to set professional standards and audit media content, formats and presentations.
The Hindu newspaper's Editor-in-Chief N.Ram was appointed for two years as the first SAMC Chairman.
MEDIA-SOUTH ASIA: Joint-TV Programmes May Yet Build Regional Trust
http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=37351
NEW DELHI, Apr 14 (IPS) - A unique, private media initiative involving joint television programmes may do what political leaders in South Asia have failed to do so far -- bring together the people of this fractious region.
The initiative is being driven by a clutch of seven privately-owned television channels from five countries that will take advantage of pledges made at a summit of the eight-nation South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) in early April.
Of the seven television channels, three are based in India while one each is from Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Nepal. In addition to these five countries, SAARC includes Bhutan, the Maldives and new entrant Afghanistan, providing a potential viewership of 1.5 billion people.
While in a few of these eight countries, the media is relatively underdeveloped and controlled by those in positions of power and authority, in most SAARC nations, the media is vibrant, fiercely independent and free of government influence. The latter group of countries would include those that have come together to launch the ‘Southasian' television initiative.
Kanak Mani Dixit, senior journalist based in Nepal's capital Kathmandu and editor of ‘Himal', an English language monthly magazine, says he was the first to use ‘Southasian' as a single word and insists that this manner of designating one of the most populous parts of the world goes beyond mere symbolism. "What was attempted not very successfully by the print medium in these countries will now hopefully be a success as far as television is concerned," he said.
The partners of the new broadcasting initiative are Channel I based in Dhaka, Bangladesh, Image TV from Nepal, Aaj/Geo TV from Pakistan, Maharaja TV from Sri Lanka and three broadcasters from India: New Delhi Television (NDTV), India TV and Tara Newz based in Kolkata.
Rathikant Basu, Chairman, Broadcast Worldwide, that owns the Tara group of channels, who started this initiative with a meeting in December 2006, says the new programme would aim at "rediscovering and reinforcing a South Asian identity based on shared history, civilization and culture, to work towards a common future".
More than two decades ago, after a SAARC summit meeting, the governments of seven countries (excluding Afghanistan that was not a member) had started a scheme that was called ‘SAVE' or the SAARC Audio Visual Exchange involving state-owned television and radio broadcasters. The scheme failed to take off. Basu, who was then associated with India's public broadcaster, Doordarshan, recalls that programmes under SAVE were irregular, erratic and failed to make much of an impression on viewers.
The new initiative involving private broadcasters would be very different, he believes. A half-hour programme is already on air and is being simultaneously broadcast every Sunday evening by all the partner channels. The duration of the programme, anchored by a woman from Bangladesh, Rubana, would be increased and Basu said he hoped broadcasters from other countries would participate in the initiative.
While the new TV programme would promote liberalism, a scientific temperament, education, sports, health, heritage and cultural diversity, it would oppose divisive forces, superstition, fundamentalism, discrimination and violence especially against women and children, environmental pollution, cruelty to animal, cultural hegemony and communalism.
‘Southasian' TV programmes would "take special care whenever dealing with matters of controversy to assure that a plurality of viewpoints are acknowledged and are fairly and adequately represented." In addition, there would be "full disclosure of the interests of all stakeholders", a media release by the group of television channels stated. Basu said there would be no copyright on the programme and other channels would be free to show it.
"If South Asian integration is to be meaningful and if the much talked-about ‘trust deficit' reduced, there should be a considerable amount of self-criticism among the stakeholders," says Jawed Naqvi, a New Delhi based journalist who has been writing regularly for ‘Dawn' newspaper, the Pakistani daily based out of Karachi, for the last seven years. He told IPS that there were forms of ‘embedded journalism' in India and Pakistan when it came to reporting on foreign policy.
Naqvi said what Indian journalists described as Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir was called ‘Azad' (or ‘independent') Kashmir by the media in Pakistan. Similarly, the northern-most state in India, Jammu & Kashmir, was invariably described as India-Occupied Kashmir by Pakistani journalists. "It is time we used less combative phrases like India-administered Kashmir or Pakistan-administered Kashmir, terms used by the United Nations," he adds.
Despite such stereotyping, Naqvi acknowledges the independence of sections of the media in both countries. "I believe the paper I write for, ‘Dawn', is the most liberal newspaper in South Asia that has squarely taken on the Pakistani establishment," says he.
The long-standing dispute over Kashmir between India and Pakistan, the two largest countries of SAARC, is often cited as the reason for the many failures of the grouping. For instance, while the South Asia Free Trade Agreement (SAFTA) came into effect in 2006, differences between India and Pakistan have hindered the actual implementation of a regional free-trade system.
While SAARC countries are now committed to lower their tariffs to below five percent by 2015, Pakistani Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz said enhanced trade relations between the two countries would depend on a resolution of the Kashmir dispute.
At the launch of the ‘Southasian' TV programme, dancer and social activist from Bangladesh, Lubna Mariam, recalled her personal experiences travelling around the subcontinent and her realisation that the peoples of the region were not merely culturally close but also that they share the same kinds of problems.
Shaheed Nadeem of Aaj TV in Pakistan said electronic media had a tremendous impact on viewers in the region and television broadcasters should "use this power to unite people and not divide them".
Despite the slow progress of SAARC, which was founded in 1985, the growing importance of the region was underlined by the fact that the April summit was attended for the first time by Japan, China, South Korea, the United States and the European Union as observers with Iran eager to follow suit. (END/2007)
NEW DELHI, Apr 14 (IPS) - A unique, private media initiative involving joint television programmes may do what political leaders in South Asia have failed to do so far -- bring together the people of this fractious region.
The initiative is being driven by a clutch of seven privately-owned television channels from five countries that will take advantage of pledges made at a summit of the eight-nation South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) in early April.
Of the seven television channels, three are based in India while one each is from Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Nepal. In addition to these five countries, SAARC includes Bhutan, the Maldives and new entrant Afghanistan, providing a potential viewership of 1.5 billion people.
While in a few of these eight countries, the media is relatively underdeveloped and controlled by those in positions of power and authority, in most SAARC nations, the media is vibrant, fiercely independent and free of government influence. The latter group of countries would include those that have come together to launch the ‘Southasian' television initiative.
Kanak Mani Dixit, senior journalist based in Nepal's capital Kathmandu and editor of ‘Himal', an English language monthly magazine, says he was the first to use ‘Southasian' as a single word and insists that this manner of designating one of the most populous parts of the world goes beyond mere symbolism. "What was attempted not very successfully by the print medium in these countries will now hopefully be a success as far as television is concerned," he said.
The partners of the new broadcasting initiative are Channel I based in Dhaka, Bangladesh, Image TV from Nepal, Aaj/Geo TV from Pakistan, Maharaja TV from Sri Lanka and three broadcasters from India: New Delhi Television (NDTV), India TV and Tara Newz based in Kolkata.
Rathikant Basu, Chairman, Broadcast Worldwide, that owns the Tara group of channels, who started this initiative with a meeting in December 2006, says the new programme would aim at "rediscovering and reinforcing a South Asian identity based on shared history, civilization and culture, to work towards a common future".
More than two decades ago, after a SAARC summit meeting, the governments of seven countries (excluding Afghanistan that was not a member) had started a scheme that was called ‘SAVE' or the SAARC Audio Visual Exchange involving state-owned television and radio broadcasters. The scheme failed to take off. Basu, who was then associated with India's public broadcaster, Doordarshan, recalls that programmes under SAVE were irregular, erratic and failed to make much of an impression on viewers.
The new initiative involving private broadcasters would be very different, he believes. A half-hour programme is already on air and is being simultaneously broadcast every Sunday evening by all the partner channels. The duration of the programme, anchored by a woman from Bangladesh, Rubana, would be increased and Basu said he hoped broadcasters from other countries would participate in the initiative.
While the new TV programme would promote liberalism, a scientific temperament, education, sports, health, heritage and cultural diversity, it would oppose divisive forces, superstition, fundamentalism, discrimination and violence especially against women and children, environmental pollution, cruelty to animal, cultural hegemony and communalism.
‘Southasian' TV programmes would "take special care whenever dealing with matters of controversy to assure that a plurality of viewpoints are acknowledged and are fairly and adequately represented." In addition, there would be "full disclosure of the interests of all stakeholders", a media release by the group of television channels stated. Basu said there would be no copyright on the programme and other channels would be free to show it.
"If South Asian integration is to be meaningful and if the much talked-about ‘trust deficit' reduced, there should be a considerable amount of self-criticism among the stakeholders," says Jawed Naqvi, a New Delhi based journalist who has been writing regularly for ‘Dawn' newspaper, the Pakistani daily based out of Karachi, for the last seven years. He told IPS that there were forms of ‘embedded journalism' in India and Pakistan when it came to reporting on foreign policy.
Naqvi said what Indian journalists described as Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir was called ‘Azad' (or ‘independent') Kashmir by the media in Pakistan. Similarly, the northern-most state in India, Jammu & Kashmir, was invariably described as India-Occupied Kashmir by Pakistani journalists. "It is time we used less combative phrases like India-administered Kashmir or Pakistan-administered Kashmir, terms used by the United Nations," he adds.
Despite such stereotyping, Naqvi acknowledges the independence of sections of the media in both countries. "I believe the paper I write for, ‘Dawn', is the most liberal newspaper in South Asia that has squarely taken on the Pakistani establishment," says he.
The long-standing dispute over Kashmir between India and Pakistan, the two largest countries of SAARC, is often cited as the reason for the many failures of the grouping. For instance, while the South Asia Free Trade Agreement (SAFTA) came into effect in 2006, differences between India and Pakistan have hindered the actual implementation of a regional free-trade system.
While SAARC countries are now committed to lower their tariffs to below five percent by 2015, Pakistani Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz said enhanced trade relations between the two countries would depend on a resolution of the Kashmir dispute.
At the launch of the ‘Southasian' TV programme, dancer and social activist from Bangladesh, Lubna Mariam, recalled her personal experiences travelling around the subcontinent and her realisation that the peoples of the region were not merely culturally close but also that they share the same kinds of problems.
Shaheed Nadeem of Aaj TV in Pakistan said electronic media had a tremendous impact on viewers in the region and television broadcasters should "use this power to unite people and not divide them".
Despite the slow progress of SAARC, which was founded in 1985, the growing importance of the region was underlined by the fact that the April summit was attended for the first time by Japan, China, South Korea, the United States and the European Union as observers with Iran eager to follow suit. (END/2007)
SOUTH ASIA: PAKISTAN EYES LARGER SHARE OF TRADE
http://www.adnki.com/index_2Level_English.php?cat=Politics&loid=8.0.404480844&par=0
Islamabad, 13 April (AKI) - (Syed Saleem Shahzad) - Pakistan is making an active bid to carve out a greater share of regional trade and prevent its arch-rival India from competing with it in southwest and central Asian markets. A delay in completing the Indian built Zaranj-Delaram highway in Afghanistan has boosted Pakistan's chances of success, by giving it crucial extra time to build up its infrastructure and penetrate the region's markets, well before India connects to central Asia via Iran. Afghanistan, is a key trade conduit and a new member of the South Asia Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC).
Had the Zaranj-Delaram highway linking northern Afghanistan to Iran's ports been completed on schedule in 2006, India would have gained easy and direct access to Afghanistan and the whole of central Asia, dealing a severe blow to Pakistan’s trade strategy. This revolves around its 300 million dollar Gwadar deep sea water port, inaugurated last month and envisaged by Pakistan as the regional hub for trade and commerce in southwest and central Asia.
The Zaranj-Delaram highway project is now likely to be completed by December 2008, giving Pakistan crucial additional time to set up a transit trade mechanism with neighbouring countries especially China, Afghanistan and Central Asian states that would make Gwadar port an attractive proposition for regional markets.
To increase the freight facilities in the country, the prime minister Shaukat Aziz has initiated the National Trade Corridor Improvement Programme (NTCIP). This includes the introduction of freight trains and new trucks in the private sector and reconstruction of highways.
Aziz has also ordered an overhaul of the entire structure of the trucking system and a policy paper on country's road freight industry. He has signalled the country needs to transport more goods by rail.
Vast potential for increasing the volume of trade between the Central Asian States, Afghanistan and Pakistan exists in many sectors. And once Gawadar port is fully operational, experts predict it will open a major new trading window with China. The distance from the commercial centre of Kashgar in northwestern China to Chinese east coast ports is 3,500 km, whereas the distance from Kashgar to Gawadar is only 1,500 km.
Gawadar offers cost benefits to western China's imports and exports - also being eyed by Pakistan's growing freight industry. Poor roads and vehicles and a lack of rail cargo capacity are however the main obstacles to the smooth operation of the transit trade.
To replace the ageing trucks on Pakistan's roads, the government has also decided to allow the import of used articulated vehicles that are no more than five years old.
The government has also initiated a progamme to improve road facilities and has allocated 5.8 million dollars for the modernisation, repair and construction of Pakistan's ports, rail and roads sectors. It has also moved to build new warehousing facilities and overhaul existing customs, insurance and banking systems.
(Aki/Syed Saleem Shahzad)
Islamabad, 13 April (AKI) - (Syed Saleem Shahzad) - Pakistan is making an active bid to carve out a greater share of regional trade and prevent its arch-rival India from competing with it in southwest and central Asian markets. A delay in completing the Indian built Zaranj-Delaram highway in Afghanistan has boosted Pakistan's chances of success, by giving it crucial extra time to build up its infrastructure and penetrate the region's markets, well before India connects to central Asia via Iran. Afghanistan, is a key trade conduit and a new member of the South Asia Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC).
Had the Zaranj-Delaram highway linking northern Afghanistan to Iran's ports been completed on schedule in 2006, India would have gained easy and direct access to Afghanistan and the whole of central Asia, dealing a severe blow to Pakistan’s trade strategy. This revolves around its 300 million dollar Gwadar deep sea water port, inaugurated last month and envisaged by Pakistan as the regional hub for trade and commerce in southwest and central Asia.
The Zaranj-Delaram highway project is now likely to be completed by December 2008, giving Pakistan crucial additional time to set up a transit trade mechanism with neighbouring countries especially China, Afghanistan and Central Asian states that would make Gwadar port an attractive proposition for regional markets.
To increase the freight facilities in the country, the prime minister Shaukat Aziz has initiated the National Trade Corridor Improvement Programme (NTCIP). This includes the introduction of freight trains and new trucks in the private sector and reconstruction of highways.
Aziz has also ordered an overhaul of the entire structure of the trucking system and a policy paper on country's road freight industry. He has signalled the country needs to transport more goods by rail.
Vast potential for increasing the volume of trade between the Central Asian States, Afghanistan and Pakistan exists in many sectors. And once Gawadar port is fully operational, experts predict it will open a major new trading window with China. The distance from the commercial centre of Kashgar in northwestern China to Chinese east coast ports is 3,500 km, whereas the distance from Kashgar to Gawadar is only 1,500 km.
Gawadar offers cost benefits to western China's imports and exports - also being eyed by Pakistan's growing freight industry. Poor roads and vehicles and a lack of rail cargo capacity are however the main obstacles to the smooth operation of the transit trade.
To replace the ageing trucks on Pakistan's roads, the government has also decided to allow the import of used articulated vehicles that are no more than five years old.
The government has also initiated a progamme to improve road facilities and has allocated 5.8 million dollars for the modernisation, repair and construction of Pakistan's ports, rail and roads sectors. It has also moved to build new warehousing facilities and overhaul existing customs, insurance and banking systems.
(Aki/Syed Saleem Shahzad)
SAARC turns down Chinese money
http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?NewsID=1090245
Seema Guha
Wednesday, April 11, 2007 21:30 IST
NEW DELHI: China’s entry into SAARC, where India is the big player, is an indication of the future balance of power in Asia. The two largest nations in the continent are natural rivals but for the moment it suits both sides to emphasise the need to work together.
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has always shrugged off suggestions of rivalry with China, stressing instead the huge opportunities there are for cooperation between the two Asian giants. The fact that India has finally agreed to have China as observer and China accommodating India in the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) is the way the two nations will work in Asia and other part of the world.
China’s wish to be part of SAARC fits in well with Beijing’s ambitions to make its presence felt worldwide. Beijing was keen to be part of the South Asia bloc, despite having excellent relations with several member states like Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Nepal. China’s case for observer status was pushed by both Nepal and Bangladesh. Pakistan is a close ally and Beijing has had traditional ties with Colombo. In fact, it was India which held back for a while because China had done the same about New Delhi’s entry as observer to the Shanghai Cooperation grouping.
Finally, India gave in as China made way for India for the Shanghai grouping.
Analyst Yangdon Wong sees this as a first step in the “balance” of power in Asia between the two largest countries in the continent. He says China wants to play a constructive role in South Asia, but it wants to assure New Delhi that it is in no way trying to upstage India’s rightful role in its backyard. Conscious of India’s latent wariness of Chinese intentions, China’s foreign minister Li Zhaoxing, who attended the SAARC summit, sent out a reassuring signal.
“The Chinese government follows a foreign policy of building friendships and partnerships with its neighbours. A peaceful, stable and prosperous South Asia and a SAARC of unity, cooperation and progress are in the interests of all countries in the region and of China.’’ He went on to add, “As the biggest neighbour of South Asia, China hopes that all South Asian countries will live in harmony and pursue common development… SAARC must play a bigger role in regional and world affairs.’’
“South Asia’s international standing is rising and it is full of vigour and vitality,’’ China’s foreign minister Li said during his address at the opening ceremony. He was obviously referring to Asia’s growing economic clout and the fact that the world regards Asia with much greater respect today. Li made some generous offers to SAARC member countries. Beijing wants to cooperate in infrastructure building and in the energy sector. China has been scouring the world for oil, from Africa to South America, Chinese leaders have been travelling to ensure steady supply of oil.
Chinese enterprises are keen to invest in SAARC member states. China can help Bangladesh, Nepal or Sri Lanka bilaterally, but Beijing now believes it is more diplomatic to work with South Asian states through SAARC. It does not want India’s hackles up. Beijing was keen to give a substantial amount of money for the SAARC Development Fund, but India turned down the offer, saying it was too early for donations. There was enough money in the kitty for now.
Seema Guha
Wednesday, April 11, 2007 21:30 IST
NEW DELHI: China’s entry into SAARC, where India is the big player, is an indication of the future balance of power in Asia. The two largest nations in the continent are natural rivals but for the moment it suits both sides to emphasise the need to work together.
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has always shrugged off suggestions of rivalry with China, stressing instead the huge opportunities there are for cooperation between the two Asian giants. The fact that India has finally agreed to have China as observer and China accommodating India in the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) is the way the two nations will work in Asia and other part of the world.
China’s wish to be part of SAARC fits in well with Beijing’s ambitions to make its presence felt worldwide. Beijing was keen to be part of the South Asia bloc, despite having excellent relations with several member states like Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Nepal. China’s case for observer status was pushed by both Nepal and Bangladesh. Pakistan is a close ally and Beijing has had traditional ties with Colombo. In fact, it was India which held back for a while because China had done the same about New Delhi’s entry as observer to the Shanghai Cooperation grouping.
Finally, India gave in as China made way for India for the Shanghai grouping.
Analyst Yangdon Wong sees this as a first step in the “balance” of power in Asia between the two largest countries in the continent. He says China wants to play a constructive role in South Asia, but it wants to assure New Delhi that it is in no way trying to upstage India’s rightful role in its backyard. Conscious of India’s latent wariness of Chinese intentions, China’s foreign minister Li Zhaoxing, who attended the SAARC summit, sent out a reassuring signal.
“The Chinese government follows a foreign policy of building friendships and partnerships with its neighbours. A peaceful, stable and prosperous South Asia and a SAARC of unity, cooperation and progress are in the interests of all countries in the region and of China.’’ He went on to add, “As the biggest neighbour of South Asia, China hopes that all South Asian countries will live in harmony and pursue common development… SAARC must play a bigger role in regional and world affairs.’’
“South Asia’s international standing is rising and it is full of vigour and vitality,’’ China’s foreign minister Li said during his address at the opening ceremony. He was obviously referring to Asia’s growing economic clout and the fact that the world regards Asia with much greater respect today. Li made some generous offers to SAARC member countries. Beijing wants to cooperate in infrastructure building and in the energy sector. China has been scouring the world for oil, from Africa to South America, Chinese leaders have been travelling to ensure steady supply of oil.
Chinese enterprises are keen to invest in SAARC member states. China can help Bangladesh, Nepal or Sri Lanka bilaterally, but Beijing now believes it is more diplomatic to work with South Asian states through SAARC. It does not want India’s hackles up. Beijing was keen to give a substantial amount of money for the SAARC Development Fund, but India turned down the offer, saying it was too early for donations. There was enough money in the kitty for now.
Blazing fire in the Neighbourhood
http://archive.gulfnews.com/articles/07/04/09/10116867.html
By Jo Johnson, Financial Times
As host of a lacklustre annual summit of the South Asian Association for Regional Co-operation, which ended last week, India demonstrated it still has much to learn from China's deft economic diplomacy. While Beijing has sought to create interdependencies with its rivals, in support of its stated ambitions for a "peaceful rise", New Delhi appears complacent about the fact that it presides over the least economically integrated region in the world.
Good fences make good neighbours, but India has taken the saying too literally. Intra-regional trade is less than two per cent of south Asian gross domestic product, according to the World Bank, compared with more than 20 per cent in east Asia. There is little cross-border investment and the flow of people and ideas, despite a shared taste for Bollywood, is a trickle.
Only 7 per cent of international telephone calls are to other countries within the region, for example, compared with 71 per cent for east Asia.
As an aspiring global power, India has recently concentrated on cultivating the US and improving relations with China, but has failed to bring stability and democracy to its own region. Its fellow members of Saarc, a dysfunctional organisation that has been stymied by the existential conflict between India and Pakistan, are all either under autocratic rule, slowly emerging from civil war or rapidly heading back into one. The list of failed states in India's back yard is lengthening.
Democracy is in peril in Bangladesh, following the cancellation of elections and declaration of a state of emergency in January. Its army chief last week rejected a return to "elective democracy".
Nuclear-armed Pakistan's future looks grim, as blowback from Afghanistan foments extremism, vestigial democratic institutions crumble and the unity of the state comes under renewed threat from separatists in Balochistan hoping to split the country, again, to create a "second Bangladesh".
Sri Lanka's ethno-religious civil war is worsening by the day: insurgents fighting for a separate Tamil homeland two weeks ago brazenly showed off their new air wing by flying 400km to bomb an airbase near Colombo's international airport.
The peace process in Nepal, emerging from a decade-long Maoist insurrection, is in real trouble. Only xenophobic and autocratic Bhutan, a microstate of about one million people in a region of 1.5 billion, is making superficial progress towards democracy.
Responsibilities
South Asia, then, is a low-rent neighbourhood. But it would be in India's interests to try harder to gentrify it by spreading the benefits of its own growth. As the dominant regional economy, accounting for over 75 per cent of south Asian GDP, the onus is on India to make the moves. Manmohan Singh, India's prime minister, last week acknowledged New Delhi's "asymmetrical responsibilities" to open the Indian market to south Asian neighbours without insisting on reciprocity.
But his offer of duty-free access for the "least developed countries" in Saarc by the end of the year will have little practical benefit as long as exporters continue to face horrendous non-tariff barriers in the form of inspections, arcane customs procedures at Indian borders and long "sensitive lists" of non-tradable items. Trucks, for example, are not allowed to cross Indian borders to deliver cargo to or from any Saarc country except Nepal and even these have to return within 72 hours.
As a relative latecomer to liberalisation, with a trade to GDP ratio lower than the world average, south Asia remains less open than most other regions. Economists worry that deepening preferential arrangements such as the South Asian Free Trade Area will divert trade from more competitive third countries and become a drag on south Asian growth. That would happen, for example, if Indian DVD players sold duty-free in Bangladesh displaced more efficient Taiwanese ones subject to duties.
Rather than adding to the trade-diversionary spaghetti bowl of sub-regional bilateral trade agreements, the best move India could make would be simply to let geography work and apply itself to the task of reducing the welter of non-tariff barriers to regional trade.
Dubai route
The World Bank estimates that today's $1 billion annual trade between India and Pakistan, for example, most of which is routed through Dubai, could be nine times higher if such barriers were removed.
Connecting national energy systems should be another priority for power-starved India. Energy trade in the region is small, despite complementarities between energy deficit countries, such as India and Pakistan, and energy surplus states, such as Nepal and Bhutan.
There are no gas pipelines across national borders, despite the fact that Bangladesh is endowed with huge natural gas reserves and despite Pakistan and Afghanistan's ability to connect India to central Asian energy.
Such ties would help erode the lack of trust that sours relations between India and its neighbours and pushes up defence spending across the region.
Trade on its own is unlikely to solve intractable conflicts, such as that over Kashmir, but could, in time, help create the conditions for a substantial peace dividend and free up resources for greater investment in education, health and infrastructure.
In its haste to become a global power, India is in danger of neglecting the fires blazing in its back yard.
By Jo Johnson, Financial Times
As host of a lacklustre annual summit of the South Asian Association for Regional Co-operation, which ended last week, India demonstrated it still has much to learn from China's deft economic diplomacy. While Beijing has sought to create interdependencies with its rivals, in support of its stated ambitions for a "peaceful rise", New Delhi appears complacent about the fact that it presides over the least economically integrated region in the world.
Good fences make good neighbours, but India has taken the saying too literally. Intra-regional trade is less than two per cent of south Asian gross domestic product, according to the World Bank, compared with more than 20 per cent in east Asia. There is little cross-border investment and the flow of people and ideas, despite a shared taste for Bollywood, is a trickle.
Only 7 per cent of international telephone calls are to other countries within the region, for example, compared with 71 per cent for east Asia.
As an aspiring global power, India has recently concentrated on cultivating the US and improving relations with China, but has failed to bring stability and democracy to its own region. Its fellow members of Saarc, a dysfunctional organisation that has been stymied by the existential conflict between India and Pakistan, are all either under autocratic rule, slowly emerging from civil war or rapidly heading back into one. The list of failed states in India's back yard is lengthening.
Democracy is in peril in Bangladesh, following the cancellation of elections and declaration of a state of emergency in January. Its army chief last week rejected a return to "elective democracy".
Nuclear-armed Pakistan's future looks grim, as blowback from Afghanistan foments extremism, vestigial democratic institutions crumble and the unity of the state comes under renewed threat from separatists in Balochistan hoping to split the country, again, to create a "second Bangladesh".
Sri Lanka's ethno-religious civil war is worsening by the day: insurgents fighting for a separate Tamil homeland two weeks ago brazenly showed off their new air wing by flying 400km to bomb an airbase near Colombo's international airport.
The peace process in Nepal, emerging from a decade-long Maoist insurrection, is in real trouble. Only xenophobic and autocratic Bhutan, a microstate of about one million people in a region of 1.5 billion, is making superficial progress towards democracy.
Responsibilities
South Asia, then, is a low-rent neighbourhood. But it would be in India's interests to try harder to gentrify it by spreading the benefits of its own growth. As the dominant regional economy, accounting for over 75 per cent of south Asian GDP, the onus is on India to make the moves. Manmohan Singh, India's prime minister, last week acknowledged New Delhi's "asymmetrical responsibilities" to open the Indian market to south Asian neighbours without insisting on reciprocity.
But his offer of duty-free access for the "least developed countries" in Saarc by the end of the year will have little practical benefit as long as exporters continue to face horrendous non-tariff barriers in the form of inspections, arcane customs procedures at Indian borders and long "sensitive lists" of non-tradable items. Trucks, for example, are not allowed to cross Indian borders to deliver cargo to or from any Saarc country except Nepal and even these have to return within 72 hours.
As a relative latecomer to liberalisation, with a trade to GDP ratio lower than the world average, south Asia remains less open than most other regions. Economists worry that deepening preferential arrangements such as the South Asian Free Trade Area will divert trade from more competitive third countries and become a drag on south Asian growth. That would happen, for example, if Indian DVD players sold duty-free in Bangladesh displaced more efficient Taiwanese ones subject to duties.
Rather than adding to the trade-diversionary spaghetti bowl of sub-regional bilateral trade agreements, the best move India could make would be simply to let geography work and apply itself to the task of reducing the welter of non-tariff barriers to regional trade.
Dubai route
The World Bank estimates that today's $1 billion annual trade between India and Pakistan, for example, most of which is routed through Dubai, could be nine times higher if such barriers were removed.
Connecting national energy systems should be another priority for power-starved India. Energy trade in the region is small, despite complementarities between energy deficit countries, such as India and Pakistan, and energy surplus states, such as Nepal and Bhutan.
There are no gas pipelines across national borders, despite the fact that Bangladesh is endowed with huge natural gas reserves and despite Pakistan and Afghanistan's ability to connect India to central Asian energy.
Such ties would help erode the lack of trust that sours relations between India and its neighbours and pushes up defence spending across the region.
Trade on its own is unlikely to solve intractable conflicts, such as that over Kashmir, but could, in time, help create the conditions for a substantial peace dividend and free up resources for greater investment in education, health and infrastructure.
In its haste to become a global power, India is in danger of neglecting the fires blazing in its back yard.
South Asia should decide about energy deal with Iran: US
Washington, April 10: Though the United States has made its views clear about nations having energy cooperation with Iran, its upto the South Asian countries to decide whether they want to have a deal with the Islamic country or not, US State Department spokesman Sean McCormack has said.
"There's a lot of demand for energy among those nations (South Asia). They have growing economies, growing populations. And they're going to have to decide for themselves as to how they meet those energy needs," McCormack said.
"With respect to Iran as a possible supplier of energy needs, we've made our views clear. But ultimately, it's going to be for the states in that region to decide," he said in response to a query about the recently concluded SAARC summit in New Delhi.
http://www.zeenews.com/znnew/articles.asp?aid=364913&ssid=51&sid=BUS
"There's a lot of demand for energy among those nations (South Asia). They have growing economies, growing populations. And they're going to have to decide for themselves as to how they meet those energy needs," McCormack said.
"With respect to Iran as a possible supplier of energy needs, we've made our views clear. But ultimately, it's going to be for the states in that region to decide," he said in response to a query about the recently concluded SAARC summit in New Delhi.
http://www.zeenews.com/znnew/articles.asp?aid=364913&ssid=51&sid=BUS
China and the US: To Hedge or Engage
Continuing Sino-American cooperation throughout Asia could ensure global stability
David Shambaugh
Karl F. Inderfurth
YaleGlobal, 11 April 2007
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=9038
Despite extensive cooperation between China and the US, both countries remain suspicious of each other’s intent. The result has been, from the US side, a policy of hedging all the while engaging with China. This arms-length approach may not be good for either country’s interest or the interest of stability in Asia. David Shambaugh and Karl Inderfurth, China and South Asia analysts, respectively, and professors of international affairs at George Washington University, suggest that both countries could expand their cooperation. Asia offers many opportunities for engagement on issues of energy security and regional stability, particularly with India, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Central Asia. Cooperation and engagement decrease possibilities of conflict and its costs for both China and the US, while boosting diplomatic influence and mutual economic benefits. – YaleGlobal
WASHINGTON: Some of the discourse about China in Washington suggests that America has identified its Next Great Enemy. On balance, though, this complex relationship is characterized by substantial cooperation on bilateral, regional and global issues. Yet, despite this cooperation, each remains suspicious of the other’s motives and actions.
China worries about US attempts to encircle it strategically with security alliances and partnerships, backed by a substantial military buildup in the South Pacific and Indian oceans – actions that the US government describes in official policy documents as prudent “hedging.” For its part, Washington worries about China’s military modernization program, economic dynamism, expanded diplomatic influence across Asia and increased global search for energy resources.
While this paradoxical mix of relations is likely to persist, more engagement and less hedging is needed. Given the severity of the challenges facing the international community today, it is increasingly important that Washington and Beijing maximize their cooperation on a global scale. While the US and China are increasingly interacting on all continents, the most promising area of Sino-American collaboration is in Asia.
Dealing with some challenges, notably the North Korean nuclear issue, has already benefited from policy coordination, but much more can be achieved to effectively manage the medium- and long-term issues confronting the region. The February 13, 2007, agreement is a significant step in freezing North Korea’s nuclear weapons program. But if the freeze is to turn into a denuclearization, if North Korea is to be stabilized and brought into the world community, and if a lasting peace on the Korean Peninsula is to be achieved – active cooperation between Beijing and Washington is mandatory.
The US also could do more to involve China in regional security architecture. For a number of years, the US alliance structure in East Asia (with Australia, Japan, the Philippines, Republic of Korea and Thailand) has been the core of the regional security framework, supplemented by a series of more recent bilateral security arrangements struck with several non-allied states throughout Asia (Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Mongolia, Malaysia, Singapore, India and Pakistan).
However pervasive this US-led regional security architecture may be, it is not complete without China’s involvement. Some recent signs of improved US-China security cooperation have emerged – including the visit of Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Peter Pace to China in March, who agreed to an expanded set of bilateral and multilateral military exchanges.
Another opportunity grows out of the interim North Korea agreement. A working group is exploring a possible Northeast Asia Security Mechanism, which could both serve to ensure North Korea’s security and also potentially turn the Six Party Talks into a new sub-regional security mechanism that would supplement the existing US alliances and draw Beijing, Moscow and Pyongyang into a partnership to stabilize this critical part of the world.
When it comes to the ever-sensitive issue of Taiwan, Beijing and Washington have, since 2003, coordinated their approaches towards the Chen Shui-bian government, working together to contain its independence impulses and stabilize the Taiwan Strait. Recently, however, the Chen government has taken a number of unilateral steps to further strip Taiwan’s historical links to China from its official identity. These are serious provocations and require Beijing and Washington to deal with them prudently, yet not over-react.
Washington and Beijing also have mutual responsibilities to improve Japan’s role in the region. Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao’s visit to Japan this week is an important effort to improve badly deteriorated bilateral relations. Yet Japan cannot acquire credibility as an Asian or world power until it effectively comes to terms, in a sustained and public fashion – such as Germany has done – with all dimensions of its World War II atrocities. It is in US national interests to encourage Japan to come to terms with this persistent problem.
Asia’s security agenda also increasingly involves a broad range of “non-traditional” challenges: nuclear nonproliferation; natural resource management and environmental protection; securing financial markets and electronic transactions; improving cooperation among regional public health authorities to deal with the threat of pandemics and infectious diseases; quickly providing humanitarian relief to earthquake or tsunami zones and other natural disasters; port security; security of energy supplies and overland and water-supply networks; and countering terrorism, narcotics smuggling, piracy, organized crime and human trafficking. The US and China have only begun to scratch the surface of cooperation in these vital areas.
Turning to South Asia, the dramatic improvement in US-India relations takes place against the backdrop of Sino-Indian entente, as well as thickening US-China ties. The task of all three nations is to manage ties as a virtuous circle rather than a competitive triangle. Two core concerns for all three nations command cooperation: energy security and regional stability.
The US and China are the world’s two largest importers of energy, while India is sixth. China and India signed an agreement in 2006 to promote collaboration between Chinese and Indian enterprises for joint exploration and development in third countries. It behooves all three to work together and not try and “lock up” energy supplies.
To head off the possibility of a new destabilizing Great Game in Central Asia, China, India, and the US should begin working together to jointly promote regional cooperation. This can take place bilaterally, trilaterally or through the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation forum and the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation.
In promoting regional stability in South Asia, both the US and Chinese governments should use their positive ties with India and Pakistan to encourage their ongoing efforts to normalize relations, implement new confidence-building measures and resolve their longstanding dispute over Kashmir.
The United States and China should also use their close ties with Pakistan to prevent repeat of the A.Q. Khan nuclear proliferation scandal. Both should assist Pakistan to take those steps necessary – through enhancing export controls and enforcement capabilities – to safeguard and secure its nuclear stockpiles. Both have an equally strong interest in seeing Pakistan follow the path of “enlightened moderation,” as called for by its present leadership, to become a progressive and prosperous state.
Finally, the US and China have a vital interest in a secure and stable Afghanistan that does not again become a haven for Islamic extremists or international narco-traffickers, with possible spillover into China’s western provinces. To date, the US and NATO have shouldered the military burden in Afghanistan; China should step up its assistance in providing security through contributing police and greater development assistance.
These real and potential areas of Sino-American cooperation throughout Asia should provide insight into the merits of hedging versus engaging China. The US needs to engage more and hedge less. US hedging begets counter-hedging by Beijing and, in any event, creates the perception of an encirclement and semi-containment policy led by Washington. In addition to straining relations with US friends and allies, such geopolitical maneuvering can quickly manifest security dilemmas and risk escalation of unforeseen crises. Failure to cooperate on these challenges could prove a lose-lose scenario for the United States, China and Asia in the years ahead.
David Shambaugh is director of the China Policy Program in the Elliott School of International Affairs and professor of political science and international affairs at George Washington University. He is also a nonresident senior fellow in the Foreign Policy Studies Program at the Brookings Institution in Washington, DC. Karl F. Inderfurth is director of the International Affairs Program in the Elliott School of International Affairs and the John O. Rankin Professor of the Practice on International Affairs at George Washington University. He served as assistant secretary of state for South Asian affairs from 1997 to 2001.
David Shambaugh
Karl F. Inderfurth
YaleGlobal, 11 April 2007
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=9038
Despite extensive cooperation between China and the US, both countries remain suspicious of each other’s intent. The result has been, from the US side, a policy of hedging all the while engaging with China. This arms-length approach may not be good for either country’s interest or the interest of stability in Asia. David Shambaugh and Karl Inderfurth, China and South Asia analysts, respectively, and professors of international affairs at George Washington University, suggest that both countries could expand their cooperation. Asia offers many opportunities for engagement on issues of energy security and regional stability, particularly with India, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Central Asia. Cooperation and engagement decrease possibilities of conflict and its costs for both China and the US, while boosting diplomatic influence and mutual economic benefits. – YaleGlobal
WASHINGTON: Some of the discourse about China in Washington suggests that America has identified its Next Great Enemy. On balance, though, this complex relationship is characterized by substantial cooperation on bilateral, regional and global issues. Yet, despite this cooperation, each remains suspicious of the other’s motives and actions.
China worries about US attempts to encircle it strategically with security alliances and partnerships, backed by a substantial military buildup in the South Pacific and Indian oceans – actions that the US government describes in official policy documents as prudent “hedging.” For its part, Washington worries about China’s military modernization program, economic dynamism, expanded diplomatic influence across Asia and increased global search for energy resources.
While this paradoxical mix of relations is likely to persist, more engagement and less hedging is needed. Given the severity of the challenges facing the international community today, it is increasingly important that Washington and Beijing maximize their cooperation on a global scale. While the US and China are increasingly interacting on all continents, the most promising area of Sino-American collaboration is in Asia.
Dealing with some challenges, notably the North Korean nuclear issue, has already benefited from policy coordination, but much more can be achieved to effectively manage the medium- and long-term issues confronting the region. The February 13, 2007, agreement is a significant step in freezing North Korea’s nuclear weapons program. But if the freeze is to turn into a denuclearization, if North Korea is to be stabilized and brought into the world community, and if a lasting peace on the Korean Peninsula is to be achieved – active cooperation between Beijing and Washington is mandatory.
The US also could do more to involve China in regional security architecture. For a number of years, the US alliance structure in East Asia (with Australia, Japan, the Philippines, Republic of Korea and Thailand) has been the core of the regional security framework, supplemented by a series of more recent bilateral security arrangements struck with several non-allied states throughout Asia (Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Mongolia, Malaysia, Singapore, India and Pakistan).
However pervasive this US-led regional security architecture may be, it is not complete without China’s involvement. Some recent signs of improved US-China security cooperation have emerged – including the visit of Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Peter Pace to China in March, who agreed to an expanded set of bilateral and multilateral military exchanges.
Another opportunity grows out of the interim North Korea agreement. A working group is exploring a possible Northeast Asia Security Mechanism, which could both serve to ensure North Korea’s security and also potentially turn the Six Party Talks into a new sub-regional security mechanism that would supplement the existing US alliances and draw Beijing, Moscow and Pyongyang into a partnership to stabilize this critical part of the world.
When it comes to the ever-sensitive issue of Taiwan, Beijing and Washington have, since 2003, coordinated their approaches towards the Chen Shui-bian government, working together to contain its independence impulses and stabilize the Taiwan Strait. Recently, however, the Chen government has taken a number of unilateral steps to further strip Taiwan’s historical links to China from its official identity. These are serious provocations and require Beijing and Washington to deal with them prudently, yet not over-react.
Washington and Beijing also have mutual responsibilities to improve Japan’s role in the region. Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao’s visit to Japan this week is an important effort to improve badly deteriorated bilateral relations. Yet Japan cannot acquire credibility as an Asian or world power until it effectively comes to terms, in a sustained and public fashion – such as Germany has done – with all dimensions of its World War II atrocities. It is in US national interests to encourage Japan to come to terms with this persistent problem.
Asia’s security agenda also increasingly involves a broad range of “non-traditional” challenges: nuclear nonproliferation; natural resource management and environmental protection; securing financial markets and electronic transactions; improving cooperation among regional public health authorities to deal with the threat of pandemics and infectious diseases; quickly providing humanitarian relief to earthquake or tsunami zones and other natural disasters; port security; security of energy supplies and overland and water-supply networks; and countering terrorism, narcotics smuggling, piracy, organized crime and human trafficking. The US and China have only begun to scratch the surface of cooperation in these vital areas.
Turning to South Asia, the dramatic improvement in US-India relations takes place against the backdrop of Sino-Indian entente, as well as thickening US-China ties. The task of all three nations is to manage ties as a virtuous circle rather than a competitive triangle. Two core concerns for all three nations command cooperation: energy security and regional stability.
The US and China are the world’s two largest importers of energy, while India is sixth. China and India signed an agreement in 2006 to promote collaboration between Chinese and Indian enterprises for joint exploration and development in third countries. It behooves all three to work together and not try and “lock up” energy supplies.
To head off the possibility of a new destabilizing Great Game in Central Asia, China, India, and the US should begin working together to jointly promote regional cooperation. This can take place bilaterally, trilaterally or through the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation forum and the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation.
In promoting regional stability in South Asia, both the US and Chinese governments should use their positive ties with India and Pakistan to encourage their ongoing efforts to normalize relations, implement new confidence-building measures and resolve their longstanding dispute over Kashmir.
The United States and China should also use their close ties with Pakistan to prevent repeat of the A.Q. Khan nuclear proliferation scandal. Both should assist Pakistan to take those steps necessary – through enhancing export controls and enforcement capabilities – to safeguard and secure its nuclear stockpiles. Both have an equally strong interest in seeing Pakistan follow the path of “enlightened moderation,” as called for by its present leadership, to become a progressive and prosperous state.
Finally, the US and China have a vital interest in a secure and stable Afghanistan that does not again become a haven for Islamic extremists or international narco-traffickers, with possible spillover into China’s western provinces. To date, the US and NATO have shouldered the military burden in Afghanistan; China should step up its assistance in providing security through contributing police and greater development assistance.
These real and potential areas of Sino-American cooperation throughout Asia should provide insight into the merits of hedging versus engaging China. The US needs to engage more and hedge less. US hedging begets counter-hedging by Beijing and, in any event, creates the perception of an encirclement and semi-containment policy led by Washington. In addition to straining relations with US friends and allies, such geopolitical maneuvering can quickly manifest security dilemmas and risk escalation of unforeseen crises. Failure to cooperate on these challenges could prove a lose-lose scenario for the United States, China and Asia in the years ahead.
David Shambaugh is director of the China Policy Program in the Elliott School of International Affairs and professor of political science and international affairs at George Washington University. He is also a nonresident senior fellow in the Foreign Policy Studies Program at the Brookings Institution in Washington, DC. Karl F. Inderfurth is director of the International Affairs Program in the Elliott School of International Affairs and the John O. Rankin Professor of the Practice on International Affairs at George Washington University. He served as assistant secretary of state for South Asian affairs from 1997 to 2001.
Common market for South Asia?
Kuldip Nayyar | Wednesday, April 11, 2007 12:35:32 IST
An enemy of today is a friend of tomorrow, that is history
PAKISTAN Prime Minister Shaukat Ali probably did not say anything new when he pointed out in a press conference at Delhi a few days ago that trade with India was linked to a solution on Kashmir. But he did correct the general impression that the two countries would have free trade, especially when Kashmir was under discussion behind the scenes.
When he made the opening remarks, Shaukat Ali mentioned travel, trade and Kashmir in the same breath. But then he realised that the relaxation of visa facilities which the two countries had already accepted would sound hallow if he were to bracket travel with Kashmir. He watered downed his reservations on travel. Probably, he was confident that whatever visa facilities he had agreed to Islamabad could always nullify through its mission in India.
In fact, I have found how the two governments have agreed to the liberalisation because of popular pressure on both sides. But it is equally true that they go back on the facilities whenever they feel like or whenever the intelligence agencies frighten them over the increase in the number of visitors. Mindset bureaucrats are ever willing to carry out an informal word.
Internal problems
After a five-day stay last month in Lahore, Pakistan’s political capital, my impression is different: the public and the establishment are at variance. People want to open up with India, a bigger market and a larger economic unit. Yet the government, beleaguered by internal problems, does not want Indians in the midst if it can help it.
Industrialists and businessmen are more eager than others to have free trade with India because they realise that the solution on Kashmir is like waiting till the cows come home. At a meeting of a commerce chamber, where I was present, an industrialist representing the setup, said that he used to believe that Kashmir was the core problem of disputes between India and Pakistan. But he had come to realise that the core problem was free trade, not Kashmir. Nearly 50 leading industrialists present at the meeting applauded him without exception. I did not find any media criticism about his views.
Two things have contributed to the change in the outlook. One, the industrialists have generally felt that they are in no way inferior to their counterparts in India. Two, the circuitous route the goods of both countries take through Dubai and Singapore raise the costs unnecessarily and even profit a particular clique in the establishment.
However, Shaukat Ali’s observation has once again defeated the SAARC purpose which looked like emerging from the debris of bad relations between India and Pakistan. The 22-year-old organisation has made no headway because New Delhi and Islamabad have been at daggers drawn. One felt that there was realisation at last to keep politics and economics apart. But this is not the case when a person like Shaukat Ali who once headed a foreign banking organisation plays to the gallery.
This does not mean that the Kashmir question should be put aside. It has to be sorted out, not only for the sake of peace in the region but also for the satisfaction of people who have died in thousands to change the status quo. Why should Islamabad kick the dust when it is beginning to settle down, probably because of some specific proposals New Delhi has sent to Islamabad? The progress is slow because there is a difference of outlook over the joint control. Still the fact that India has come up with suggestions to change the status quo is a step forward. New Delhi has not done so officially so far.
Finalising even a modicum of agreement will take time. This will need to be placed before the public for debate. Then it will be presented to parliament in India and the National Assembly in Pakistan. This process is difficult and time consuming. Should the SAARC be held to ransom? Trade cannot wait till then. Members at the summit emphasised this.
When Shaukat Ali cautioned at dinner at the Pakistan High Commission in Delhi that the coming generations would not forgive them if they continued to remain mired in conflicts, I told him that this was precisely what my generation said two decades ago. Words have no meaning if they are not backed up with action. Indeed, this is what ails SAARC. Shaukat Ali himself said that the time has come for them to implement the declarations they have made. Then why bring in matters like Kashmir which are sought to be sorted out away from public gaze?
The core problem is how soon economic prosperity comes to the region so that people can forget religious and other differences and set themselves the task of improving their standard of living. This is not impossible because all the SAARC countries are now committed to social justice and democracy.
I support Shaukat Ali’s other observation that there has to be a level-playing field. India is a developed country while, in comparison, Pakistan is developing. If India is justified in seeking concessions from the developed West, Pakistan has every right to expect concessions from India. New Delhi has done well to announce custom-free entry to goods from small neighbouring countries. But it should lower the wall of tariffs for Pakistan.
Collective benefits
The SAARC countries have to develop a common market as Europe has done or the ASEAN countries have nearly done. After the emergence of Bangladesh, I asked Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, then heading Pakistan, whether the common market to string together countries in South Asia, was feasible. He said: “We will have to see whether we can mutually benefit but in principle I think as far as a common market is concerned, we are not ready for such an arrangement. Europe also was not ready for it. It took time for Europe as a whole to get the advantage of a common market. Today we are basically producers of primary commodities and your industrial progress has been better than ours. We have also had some industrial progress but we have not reached that standard where there can be a grand collaboration in industry because these things are very difficult to arrange and even Europe is finding it difficult regarding agriculture commodities.”
That was 35 years ago. Pakistan, if not Bangladesh, has come a long way. The development depends on harnessing natural resources, manpower and technical know-how in the region, from Afghanistan to Bangladesh, and using them collectively. There is an unhappy history. With time, we may jettison the baggage of the past. As Qaide Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah said before partition, “Some nations have killed millions of each others and yet an enemy of today is a friend of tomorrow. That is history.”
An enemy of today is a friend of tomorrow, that is history
PAKISTAN Prime Minister Shaukat Ali probably did not say anything new when he pointed out in a press conference at Delhi a few days ago that trade with India was linked to a solution on Kashmir. But he did correct the general impression that the two countries would have free trade, especially when Kashmir was under discussion behind the scenes.
When he made the opening remarks, Shaukat Ali mentioned travel, trade and Kashmir in the same breath. But then he realised that the relaxation of visa facilities which the two countries had already accepted would sound hallow if he were to bracket travel with Kashmir. He watered downed his reservations on travel. Probably, he was confident that whatever visa facilities he had agreed to Islamabad could always nullify through its mission in India.
In fact, I have found how the two governments have agreed to the liberalisation because of popular pressure on both sides. But it is equally true that they go back on the facilities whenever they feel like or whenever the intelligence agencies frighten them over the increase in the number of visitors. Mindset bureaucrats are ever willing to carry out an informal word.
Internal problems
After a five-day stay last month in Lahore, Pakistan’s political capital, my impression is different: the public and the establishment are at variance. People want to open up with India, a bigger market and a larger economic unit. Yet the government, beleaguered by internal problems, does not want Indians in the midst if it can help it.
Industrialists and businessmen are more eager than others to have free trade with India because they realise that the solution on Kashmir is like waiting till the cows come home. At a meeting of a commerce chamber, where I was present, an industrialist representing the setup, said that he used to believe that Kashmir was the core problem of disputes between India and Pakistan. But he had come to realise that the core problem was free trade, not Kashmir. Nearly 50 leading industrialists present at the meeting applauded him without exception. I did not find any media criticism about his views.
Two things have contributed to the change in the outlook. One, the industrialists have generally felt that they are in no way inferior to their counterparts in India. Two, the circuitous route the goods of both countries take through Dubai and Singapore raise the costs unnecessarily and even profit a particular clique in the establishment.
However, Shaukat Ali’s observation has once again defeated the SAARC purpose which looked like emerging from the debris of bad relations between India and Pakistan. The 22-year-old organisation has made no headway because New Delhi and Islamabad have been at daggers drawn. One felt that there was realisation at last to keep politics and economics apart. But this is not the case when a person like Shaukat Ali who once headed a foreign banking organisation plays to the gallery.
This does not mean that the Kashmir question should be put aside. It has to be sorted out, not only for the sake of peace in the region but also for the satisfaction of people who have died in thousands to change the status quo. Why should Islamabad kick the dust when it is beginning to settle down, probably because of some specific proposals New Delhi has sent to Islamabad? The progress is slow because there is a difference of outlook over the joint control. Still the fact that India has come up with suggestions to change the status quo is a step forward. New Delhi has not done so officially so far.
Finalising even a modicum of agreement will take time. This will need to be placed before the public for debate. Then it will be presented to parliament in India and the National Assembly in Pakistan. This process is difficult and time consuming. Should the SAARC be held to ransom? Trade cannot wait till then. Members at the summit emphasised this.
When Shaukat Ali cautioned at dinner at the Pakistan High Commission in Delhi that the coming generations would not forgive them if they continued to remain mired in conflicts, I told him that this was precisely what my generation said two decades ago. Words have no meaning if they are not backed up with action. Indeed, this is what ails SAARC. Shaukat Ali himself said that the time has come for them to implement the declarations they have made. Then why bring in matters like Kashmir which are sought to be sorted out away from public gaze?
The core problem is how soon economic prosperity comes to the region so that people can forget religious and other differences and set themselves the task of improving their standard of living. This is not impossible because all the SAARC countries are now committed to social justice and democracy.
I support Shaukat Ali’s other observation that there has to be a level-playing field. India is a developed country while, in comparison, Pakistan is developing. If India is justified in seeking concessions from the developed West, Pakistan has every right to expect concessions from India. New Delhi has done well to announce custom-free entry to goods from small neighbouring countries. But it should lower the wall of tariffs for Pakistan.
Collective benefits
The SAARC countries have to develop a common market as Europe has done or the ASEAN countries have nearly done. After the emergence of Bangladesh, I asked Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, then heading Pakistan, whether the common market to string together countries in South Asia, was feasible. He said: “We will have to see whether we can mutually benefit but in principle I think as far as a common market is concerned, we are not ready for such an arrangement. Europe also was not ready for it. It took time for Europe as a whole to get the advantage of a common market. Today we are basically producers of primary commodities and your industrial progress has been better than ours. We have also had some industrial progress but we have not reached that standard where there can be a grand collaboration in industry because these things are very difficult to arrange and even Europe is finding it difficult regarding agriculture commodities.”
That was 35 years ago. Pakistan, if not Bangladesh, has come a long way. The development depends on harnessing natural resources, manpower and technical know-how in the region, from Afghanistan to Bangladesh, and using them collectively. There is an unhappy history. With time, we may jettison the baggage of the past. As Qaide Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah said before partition, “Some nations have killed millions of each others and yet an enemy of today is a friend of tomorrow. That is history.”
SOUTH ASIA: Regional Cooperation Finally in Sight
Analysis by Praful Bidwai
http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=37265
NEW DELHI, Apr 7 (IPS) - South Asia, home to more than one-sixth of humanity, and situated at the junction of three important sub-regions of the Asian continent, has made cautious moves towards mutual cooperation and greater integration.
Although analysts warn against taking the hyperbolic rhetoric of "a new dawn breaking out over South Asia" too seriously, there is little doubt that the region is making purposive efforts to fulfil its potential as one of the world's fastest-growing economic clusters, as well as a centre of great ethnic and religious diversity.
South Asia is also beginning to grapple with political ideologies and conflicts which have recently spilled over beyond the region, including Islamic radicalism and Western hegemonism.
The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) has just admitted Afghanistan as its eighth member-state. Iran has been also invited to SAARC as an observer. Iran's new status is seen as a statement of the importance it enjoys in the region --in sharp contrast to Western efforts to isolate Tehran.
At SAARC's 14th summit meeting, which ended here on Wednesday, the leaders of the eight nations that constitute its membership resolved to develop "cross-border regional projects" pertaining to four issues that affect their people's daily lives -- water, energy, food and the environment.
They set up a SAARC Development Fund for poverty alleviation, with an initial modest capital base of 300 million US dollars. They also called for the full implementation of the South Asian Free Trade Area (SAFTA) agreement in "letter and spirit", signed earlier.
And they demanded a international convention on terrorism, "which would take every possible measure to prevent and suppress, in particular, financing of terrorist acts by criminalising the provision, acquisition and collection of funds for such acts."
"More important than these declarations is a combination of two moves made at the New Delhi summit," says Anuradha Chenoy, professor of international relations at Jawaharlal Nehru University. "The first was the agreement to set up a SAARC food bank and also a South Asian University. And the second was a unilateral declaration by India that it would allow duty-free imports of all goods from the least developed members of SAARC, comprising Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan, Maldives, and Afghanistan."
Adds Chenoy: "The SAARC food bank can, if implemented efficiently and sincerely, address a major need that the people of this poor region feel. The region is home to the world's largest number of people living on less than ttwo dollars a day. At the same time, it suffers from periodic shortages of food in different countries, coupled with surpluses".
India's unilateral offer to open up its market to its smaller and poorer neighbours is likely to speed up regional economic integration. India already has a free trade agreement with Sri Lanka.
That only leaves out Pakistan, which has made SAFTA's implementation conditional upon a resolution of its political and boundary disputes with India, especially Kashmir. As of now, intra-SAARC trade accounts for less than five percent of the total international trade of the region's countries.
India as the largest and fastest-growing economy of the region needs to move beyond the principle of "strict reciprocity" which it has so far followed, according to S. Akbar Zaidi, a Karachi-based economist. Former Indian Prime Minister Inder Kumar Gujral had enunciated the doctrine of unilateral non-reciprocal gestures towards India's smaller neighbours. It is now being implemented. Zaidi argues that ideally, the doctrine should be extended even to Pakistan; it would entail no major loss for India.
India needs to do more to balance its trade with the rest of the region. Its imports from it add up to only a quarter of its exports to it -- despite the mutual complementarity of the region's economies.
"As important as the SAARC members' mutual talks, was the presence of observers to the summit, including the United States, China, the European Union, Japan and South Korea," says an Indian ambassador to a neighbouring country, who insisted on anonymity. "This has raised SAARC's profile to the highest level since the grouping was established in December 1978. And not to be discounted are the bilateral discussions that took place between the leaders of different member-states. These were conducted in a particularly friendly climate. That's no mean gain."
The diplomat emphasised the entry of Afghanistan into SAARC as "a major achievement". This was an Indian initiative, but was not resisted by Pakistan-"a tribute to improved relations with India, despite India-Pakistan tensions over Afghanistan."
This could soon pave the way run for trade and transit across the entire region. (Pakistan, suspicious of India's traditional friendly ties with Afghanistan, has so far refused India's request for allowing overland transit of goods to Afghanistan.)
The SAARC summit was accompanied by a number of meetings of civil society organisations from the member-countries, focused on people-to-people cooperation, human rights and media contacts.
An important initiative was an assembly on human rights, convened by Amnesty International, India. This urged the South Asian governments "to establish a regional mechanism to address the human rights abuses in the region." Such large-scale violations of rights are perpetrated through security laws and their specific forms, including anti-terror and detention laws.
"SAARC seeks to promote trust and cooperation across South Asia. Security laws, justified in the context of terrorism in South Asia, frequently curb the freedom of ex-pression and the ability of citizens to express peaceful political dissent. These laws seek to promote security but curtailment of enjoyment of rights erodes people's sense of security," said Mukul Sharma, director of Amnesty International, India.
The Assembly drew upon the experience of the Organisation for African Unity, which has incorporated human rights into its agenda.
Other civil society groups underscored the need for more open visa regimes and greater people-to-people and media interaction. The governments of the region responded positively to the demand by the South Asian Free Media Association for special visas for journalists.
"There is a positive change in the SAARC agenda towards greater cooperation on substantial social and cultural issues," says Chenoy. "The SAARC Development Fund and a South Asian University represent a significant improvement on earlier initiatives, which were confined to setting up documentation centres, some of which were not followed up. The University has a lot of potential which will grow if the eight governments put some energy into it, rather than leave it to private initiatives."
Chenoy said it was only prudent not to ''expect dramatic progress in SAARC given the history of fraught relations and mutual rivalries. But incremental progress has certainly taken place and must be welcomed''.
South Asia has so far been a laggard as far as regional cooperation is concerned. But after the Delhi summit, the prospects for such cooperation have improved. (END/2007)
http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=37265
NEW DELHI, Apr 7 (IPS) - South Asia, home to more than one-sixth of humanity, and situated at the junction of three important sub-regions of the Asian continent, has made cautious moves towards mutual cooperation and greater integration.
Although analysts warn against taking the hyperbolic rhetoric of "a new dawn breaking out over South Asia" too seriously, there is little doubt that the region is making purposive efforts to fulfil its potential as one of the world's fastest-growing economic clusters, as well as a centre of great ethnic and religious diversity.
South Asia is also beginning to grapple with political ideologies and conflicts which have recently spilled over beyond the region, including Islamic radicalism and Western hegemonism.
The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) has just admitted Afghanistan as its eighth member-state. Iran has been also invited to SAARC as an observer. Iran's new status is seen as a statement of the importance it enjoys in the region --in sharp contrast to Western efforts to isolate Tehran.
At SAARC's 14th summit meeting, which ended here on Wednesday, the leaders of the eight nations that constitute its membership resolved to develop "cross-border regional projects" pertaining to four issues that affect their people's daily lives -- water, energy, food and the environment.
They set up a SAARC Development Fund for poverty alleviation, with an initial modest capital base of 300 million US dollars. They also called for the full implementation of the South Asian Free Trade Area (SAFTA) agreement in "letter and spirit", signed earlier.
And they demanded a international convention on terrorism, "which would take every possible measure to prevent and suppress, in particular, financing of terrorist acts by criminalising the provision, acquisition and collection of funds for such acts."
"More important than these declarations is a combination of two moves made at the New Delhi summit," says Anuradha Chenoy, professor of international relations at Jawaharlal Nehru University. "The first was the agreement to set up a SAARC food bank and also a South Asian University. And the second was a unilateral declaration by India that it would allow duty-free imports of all goods from the least developed members of SAARC, comprising Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan, Maldives, and Afghanistan."
Adds Chenoy: "The SAARC food bank can, if implemented efficiently and sincerely, address a major need that the people of this poor region feel. The region is home to the world's largest number of people living on less than ttwo dollars a day. At the same time, it suffers from periodic shortages of food in different countries, coupled with surpluses".
India's unilateral offer to open up its market to its smaller and poorer neighbours is likely to speed up regional economic integration. India already has a free trade agreement with Sri Lanka.
That only leaves out Pakistan, which has made SAFTA's implementation conditional upon a resolution of its political and boundary disputes with India, especially Kashmir. As of now, intra-SAARC trade accounts for less than five percent of the total international trade of the region's countries.
India as the largest and fastest-growing economy of the region needs to move beyond the principle of "strict reciprocity" which it has so far followed, according to S. Akbar Zaidi, a Karachi-based economist. Former Indian Prime Minister Inder Kumar Gujral had enunciated the doctrine of unilateral non-reciprocal gestures towards India's smaller neighbours. It is now being implemented. Zaidi argues that ideally, the doctrine should be extended even to Pakistan; it would entail no major loss for India.
India needs to do more to balance its trade with the rest of the region. Its imports from it add up to only a quarter of its exports to it -- despite the mutual complementarity of the region's economies.
"As important as the SAARC members' mutual talks, was the presence of observers to the summit, including the United States, China, the European Union, Japan and South Korea," says an Indian ambassador to a neighbouring country, who insisted on anonymity. "This has raised SAARC's profile to the highest level since the grouping was established in December 1978. And not to be discounted are the bilateral discussions that took place between the leaders of different member-states. These were conducted in a particularly friendly climate. That's no mean gain."
The diplomat emphasised the entry of Afghanistan into SAARC as "a major achievement". This was an Indian initiative, but was not resisted by Pakistan-"a tribute to improved relations with India, despite India-Pakistan tensions over Afghanistan."
This could soon pave the way run for trade and transit across the entire region. (Pakistan, suspicious of India's traditional friendly ties with Afghanistan, has so far refused India's request for allowing overland transit of goods to Afghanistan.)
The SAARC summit was accompanied by a number of meetings of civil society organisations from the member-countries, focused on people-to-people cooperation, human rights and media contacts.
An important initiative was an assembly on human rights, convened by Amnesty International, India. This urged the South Asian governments "to establish a regional mechanism to address the human rights abuses in the region." Such large-scale violations of rights are perpetrated through security laws and their specific forms, including anti-terror and detention laws.
"SAARC seeks to promote trust and cooperation across South Asia. Security laws, justified in the context of terrorism in South Asia, frequently curb the freedom of ex-pression and the ability of citizens to express peaceful political dissent. These laws seek to promote security but curtailment of enjoyment of rights erodes people's sense of security," said Mukul Sharma, director of Amnesty International, India.
The Assembly drew upon the experience of the Organisation for African Unity, which has incorporated human rights into its agenda.
Other civil society groups underscored the need for more open visa regimes and greater people-to-people and media interaction. The governments of the region responded positively to the demand by the South Asian Free Media Association for special visas for journalists.
"There is a positive change in the SAARC agenda towards greater cooperation on substantial social and cultural issues," says Chenoy. "The SAARC Development Fund and a South Asian University represent a significant improvement on earlier initiatives, which were confined to setting up documentation centres, some of which were not followed up. The University has a lot of potential which will grow if the eight governments put some energy into it, rather than leave it to private initiatives."
Chenoy said it was only prudent not to ''expect dramatic progress in SAARC given the history of fraught relations and mutual rivalries. But incremental progress has certainly taken place and must be welcomed''.
South Asia has so far been a laggard as far as regional cooperation is concerned. But after the Delhi summit, the prospects for such cooperation have improved. (END/2007)
CENTRAL/SOUTH ASIA: THE SILK ROAD RUNS THROUGH IT
EURASIA INSIGHT
Jan Jun 4/08/07
A EurasiaNet Partner Post from RFE/RL
http://www.eurasianet.org
The Silk Road, from the Mediterranean to the Far East, was once among the most important trade routes in the world. It remains an iconic "crossroad" for East-West relations, but the countries it crisscrosses are poorly understood outside the region.
London’s Asia House and the British Council organized a recent forum that asked whether Central Asia’s heritage can help better inform outsiders about a frequently misunderstood region.
References to the Silk Road inevitably bring to mind the former glory of the great cities along this ancient trade route.
"Hundreds of years ago, the countries of Central and South Asia were very well known to the imaginations of people elsewhere in the world -- really because of the import and export of goods along this network of trade routes that went from China all the way to eastern Mediterranean, from the Far East to Europe," says Emily Campbell, the British Council’s head of design and architecture, who chaired the March 29 gathering. "Since then, these countries have fallen into obscurity or the perception of those countries among people in the West has become very skewed."
Campbell says inaccessibility and political obstacles have contributed to the region’s isolation. Many of the old Silk Road countries were under Russian or Soviet rule until 1991.
Word Travels Fast
Campbell says those countries have now emerged from that situation.
In an age when information travels so much faster than cargo, visual cues for distant lands can be important. The region is flush with them -- from the 4,000 intricately woven pieces of Kazakhstan’s "Golden Man" suit, to the Persian blue tiles reminiscent of lapis lazuli, or the carpets of Bukhara. Architectural treasures include Samarkand’s mausoleum of Tamerlane (Timur) the Citadel of Herat, and countless others.
But can such imagery translate into tourism and trade revenues?
Observers say the concepts of a modern identity and how to project it outside the region are a hot topic in Central Asia.
Alismer Faizullaiev, a professor at Tashkent’s University of World Economy and Diplomacy, calls elements of national identity -- like national heroes, languages or linguistic mixes, and common history -- "identifiers."
He points out that identity is a social constant and can be chosen, altered, or even manipulated by political regimes. But he says there is also a need for modern identifiers.
"We are very proud of our history, culture, and identity," Faizullaiev says, "but at the same time it’s important to go [forward], not just look back. And I believe that [in] the branding of [the] Uzbek nation -- or any other nations, like Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgystan, etc. -- it’s important to bring together two parts -- something from the past and something from the future."
Parsing Pointers
Faizullaev argues that an important aspect of all Silk Road nations is that their specific identities can be explained by what he calls "crossroadness."
The term recognizes former trade-nation status -- including being shaped, in part, by their constant trade contacts.
The British Council’s Campbell agrees that there is a need for modern identity "pointers." She says they can be based on tradition -- for example, typical ornamental patterns in textile design or in applied arts and crafts.
Campbell called architecture one of the most "visible" new identity pointers. Well-preserved ancient buildings, palaces, or mosques hold great attraction. But she says there are also striking modern buildings, for instance in Kazakhstan.
"Sir Norman Foster, one of our own architects, has just built this Center for World Peace in Astana, which is an astonishing building," Campbell says. "Architecture will undoubtedly be part of our campaign. And I anticipate that some of that will be to do with the idea of regeneration -- the idea of making the old into something new, into some kind of contemporary proposition, which Britain and indeed many countries in Europe are very, very good at doing."
Potent Reminder
Rory Stewart is a best-selling travel writer and director of the Turquoise Mountain Foundation to preserve local buildings and traditional crafts in Kabul. He has walked extensively in the Silk Road region -- including tracing the Afghan exploits of the founder (Babur) of India’s Moghul Empire for his widely praised book, "The Places In Between."
Stewart agrees that the term "Old Silk Road" remains the best identity pointer for the region and should be revived. He points out that in the old days, it was the cities that mattered most on the old route.
"The idea of nationhood there is relatively recent," Stewart says. "The distinction between these countries was really the distinction between cities, not between states. Afghanistan itself, of course, largely came into being in the late 18th century."
Stewart describes Kabul as an old trading city that desperately needs more investment to become an identity symbol, but he remains hopeful that much can be accomplished.
In Bukhara in southwestern Uzbekistan, for instance, the number of visitors has doubled to 420,000 a year. That rise owes much to investment attracted over the past six years due to the fame of the Old Silk Road.
Editor’s Note: Jan M.P. Jun is the London correspondent for RFE/RL’s News and Current Affairs Department. For nearly 10 years, until 2002, he was a senior editor and commentator for RFE/RL’s Czech Service. He has also contributed analyses on international relations to Czech television and several Czech newspapers. He was awarded the Czech Peroutka Prize as journalist of the year in 1999.
Posted April 8, 2007 © Eurasianet
Jan Jun 4/08/07
A EurasiaNet Partner Post from RFE/RL
http://www.eurasianet.org
The Silk Road, from the Mediterranean to the Far East, was once among the most important trade routes in the world. It remains an iconic "crossroad" for East-West relations, but the countries it crisscrosses are poorly understood outside the region.
London’s Asia House and the British Council organized a recent forum that asked whether Central Asia’s heritage can help better inform outsiders about a frequently misunderstood region.
References to the Silk Road inevitably bring to mind the former glory of the great cities along this ancient trade route.
"Hundreds of years ago, the countries of Central and South Asia were very well known to the imaginations of people elsewhere in the world -- really because of the import and export of goods along this network of trade routes that went from China all the way to eastern Mediterranean, from the Far East to Europe," says Emily Campbell, the British Council’s head of design and architecture, who chaired the March 29 gathering. "Since then, these countries have fallen into obscurity or the perception of those countries among people in the West has become very skewed."
Campbell says inaccessibility and political obstacles have contributed to the region’s isolation. Many of the old Silk Road countries were under Russian or Soviet rule until 1991.
Word Travels Fast
Campbell says those countries have now emerged from that situation.
In an age when information travels so much faster than cargo, visual cues for distant lands can be important. The region is flush with them -- from the 4,000 intricately woven pieces of Kazakhstan’s "Golden Man" suit, to the Persian blue tiles reminiscent of lapis lazuli, or the carpets of Bukhara. Architectural treasures include Samarkand’s mausoleum of Tamerlane (Timur) the Citadel of Herat, and countless others.
But can such imagery translate into tourism and trade revenues?
Observers say the concepts of a modern identity and how to project it outside the region are a hot topic in Central Asia.
Alismer Faizullaiev, a professor at Tashkent’s University of World Economy and Diplomacy, calls elements of national identity -- like national heroes, languages or linguistic mixes, and common history -- "identifiers."
He points out that identity is a social constant and can be chosen, altered, or even manipulated by political regimes. But he says there is also a need for modern identifiers.
"We are very proud of our history, culture, and identity," Faizullaiev says, "but at the same time it’s important to go [forward], not just look back. And I believe that [in] the branding of [the] Uzbek nation -- or any other nations, like Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgystan, etc. -- it’s important to bring together two parts -- something from the past and something from the future."
Parsing Pointers
Faizullaev argues that an important aspect of all Silk Road nations is that their specific identities can be explained by what he calls "crossroadness."
The term recognizes former trade-nation status -- including being shaped, in part, by their constant trade contacts.
The British Council’s Campbell agrees that there is a need for modern identity "pointers." She says they can be based on tradition -- for example, typical ornamental patterns in textile design or in applied arts and crafts.
Campbell called architecture one of the most "visible" new identity pointers. Well-preserved ancient buildings, palaces, or mosques hold great attraction. But she says there are also striking modern buildings, for instance in Kazakhstan.
"Sir Norman Foster, one of our own architects, has just built this Center for World Peace in Astana, which is an astonishing building," Campbell says. "Architecture will undoubtedly be part of our campaign. And I anticipate that some of that will be to do with the idea of regeneration -- the idea of making the old into something new, into some kind of contemporary proposition, which Britain and indeed many countries in Europe are very, very good at doing."
Potent Reminder
Rory Stewart is a best-selling travel writer and director of the Turquoise Mountain Foundation to preserve local buildings and traditional crafts in Kabul. He has walked extensively in the Silk Road region -- including tracing the Afghan exploits of the founder (Babur) of India’s Moghul Empire for his widely praised book, "The Places In Between."
Stewart agrees that the term "Old Silk Road" remains the best identity pointer for the region and should be revived. He points out that in the old days, it was the cities that mattered most on the old route.
"The idea of nationhood there is relatively recent," Stewart says. "The distinction between these countries was really the distinction between cities, not between states. Afghanistan itself, of course, largely came into being in the late 18th century."
Stewart describes Kabul as an old trading city that desperately needs more investment to become an identity symbol, but he remains hopeful that much can be accomplished.
In Bukhara in southwestern Uzbekistan, for instance, the number of visitors has doubled to 420,000 a year. That rise owes much to investment attracted over the past six years due to the fame of the Old Silk Road.
Editor’s Note: Jan M.P. Jun is the London correspondent for RFE/RL’s News and Current Affairs Department. For nearly 10 years, until 2002, he was a senior editor and commentator for RFE/RL’s Czech Service. He has also contributed analyses on international relations to Czech television and several Czech newspapers. He was awarded the Czech Peroutka Prize as journalist of the year in 1999.
Posted April 8, 2007 © Eurasianet
India must apologize to SAARC for exporting terrorism and destabilizing the region
Wed, 2007-04-04 14:18
H. L. D. Mahindapala
Source: http://www.asiantribune.com/index.php?q=node/5211
Predictably, the SARC summit opened with its focus on terrorism. Predictably, the smaller nations plagued by terrorism, have, for obvious diplomatic reasons, skirted round the issue of identifying the chief manufacturer and exporter of terrorism in the SAARC region – India. She is also primarily responsible for the economic and political stagnation of the SAARC region. India's overt hegemonism and covert terrorism, both of which are linked to separatist movements outside its borders, have delayed the integration of its neighboring countries into a viable unit that could race ahead to achieve results comparable to that of other regional blocs.
Despite the repetitious platitudes it proffers from time to time of historical and friendly relations India has failed to live up to either the historical or the friendly relations needed to make SAARC a regional power. India cannot give the lead due from a benign force because it is mired in its own morass of political hypocrisy and narrow self-interests. India's meddlesome regional politics has played a central role in retarding progress not only in stabilizing the region but also in alleviating poverty.
The Nehruvian non-aligned policies declared so pompously at Bandung, or its latest manifestation in the Gujral doctrine is as good as principles written on water. For instance, the "Gujral Doctrine", states: "first, with its neighbours like Bangladesh, Bhutan, Maldives, Nepal and Sri Lanka, India does not ask for reciprocity, but gives and accommodates what it can in good faith and trust.
Second, we believe that no South Asian country should allow its territory to be used against the interests of another country of the region. Third, that none should interfere in the internal affairs of another. Fourth, all South Asian countries must respect each other's territorial integrity and sovereignty. And finally, they should settle all their disputes through peaceful bilateral negotiations."
India has violated practically every one of these tenets. And from the Himalayan heights in Nepal right down to tip end of Sri Lanka the common cry is gainst "Indian expansionism", "Indian imperialism", and "Indian interventions". India survives in the region not because of its diplomacy or adherence to Gandhi-Nehruvian principles but through the sheer weight of its size. This has posed a serious question for the neighboring nations: can they achieve their goals within a SAARC dominated by India?
This region, which consists of one-fifth of the world's population, will continue to lag behind the rest of the world if India continues to pursue its politics of destabilizing the neighborhood for its short term benefit. In the long term it is going blowback and drag India down, inhibiting its own growth. India must decide now whether it wants to grow together or at expense of its neighbors. If it is the latter India will have to pay for it dearly in the years ahead.
It doesn't need much for India to correct its path. All what India needs is to follow the path it recommends to others, particularly its neighbors. To begin with, India must put an end to its two main exports: 1) hegemonism and 2) terrorism. India accuses Pakistan of encouraging and exporting terrorism to Kashmir. But the Indian Prime Minister has no qualms in serving tea and sympathy to Tamil MPs who are the avowed proxies of Tamil Tigers. What would Indian punditry have to say if the Pakistan Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz invites the Naxalites for chai tea in Islamabad?
India cannot pretend forever that it is the source of all goodness and that all evil comes from its disobedient neighbors. Historical facts reveal that the smaller neighbors would have been better off without India. Sri Lanka, for instance, wouldn't have had to face the current problem of Tamil Tiger terrorists if Indira Gandhi did not mother the Tamil terrorists in her bosom and exported them to Sri Lanka. India was also caught red-handed in providing sub-standard radar equipment to Sri Lanka which has enabled the Tiger light aircraft to penetrate the air defenses and bomb the key air base at the Katunayake airport.
Then in 1989 India rushed its gun-boats to Maldives by engineering a Tamil rebel group to "invade" Maldives. India enacted this drama in the Indian Ocean in the name of stabilizing the region. But the whole episode was manipulated by the Indians to signal that the Indian Ocean belongs to her. It was an act of arrogant posturing in the Indian Ocean at the expense of a tiny nation that could hardly harm a sprat.
One of the obnoxious habits of the arrogant India is to flex its muscles to stamp its questionable authority on the region. This is a sign of Indian weakness than a show of its strength. Despite its size India needs the smaller countries more than the smaller neighbors needing India. President Ranasinghe Premadasa proved this when India tried to sabotage the SAARC summit held in Colombo. India, at the last minute decided to boycott the summit to teach President Premadasa a lesson because he was refusing to toe the Indian line. When India decided to boycott the summit Pesident Premadasa immediately got on the phone to the heads of other SAARC countries and organized a summit without India. Then India realized its folly and came down to earth. In the end. It was Premadasa who taught India a lesson. He proved that the small neighbors can function without India though India cannot function without the smaller nations.
The reality is that though the neighbors get along fine with each other India behaves like a crotchety old woman meddling in the affairs of the family and neighbors. Before Afghanistan joined SAARC all problems of the region were linked to India. And those problems still remain unresolved. Bangladesh has its problems with India over disputed maritime borders and the waters of the Ganges. Nepalese are worried about Indian arm-twisting. India is also leaning heavily Bhutan to keep the northern Himalayan border within its sphere of influence. The Indo-Pakistan wrangle over Kashmir has been a perennial problem which is one of the main reasons for the stagnation of SAARC.
There are, of course, accusations against Pakistan too for exporting terrorism. Without providing excuses for such action it can be argued that Pakistan is not into terrorism for hegemonic reasons. India is guilty of pursuing terrorism, or turning a blind eye to it, with the ulterior motives of destabilizing the region -- a deliberate tactic adopted to force each small nation to be dependent on India. This reprehensible conduct of India had caused havoc in the region and it is not inappropriate for India to apologize for violating its own lofty principles and leaving its small neighbors in the current predicament.
If India hopes to play a bigger role in the international theatre and if India hopes to get a seat in the Security Council as a responsible member of the international community caring for global peace and security then it has no moral right to play the duplicitous role of pinching the baby and rocking the cradle. If India continues to play this role the option left for the other regional nations is to work together to isolate India and look farther east towards China for a more constructive leadership.
Incidentally, India is now engaged in tying up with the Western powers, ranging from America, Japan, Australia etc., to build a defensive great wall against China. A raft of new treaties has been signed in recent months, with more to come, to contain China. Of course, there are loud protests from the Western-Indian bloc denying that the new treaties are to contain China. It is most unlikely that China is unaware of this growing trend. These new treaties, giving India a dominant role in Asia, will give more leeway for India to ride rough shod over its neighbors. If India is willing to play foul with its neighbors, big and small, there is no reason why the neighbors, big and small, should protect India.
The unfolding trends are ominous. One way out for SAARC members is to reconfigure their geo-political strategies and strike out in new directions because India is not likely to change its directions. Indian hegemonism will continue to plague the region because it believes that its place as the overlord of the Indian Ocean is secure with the new Western alliances. But the small nations have the power collectively to tie up India like the way the Lilliputians tied down Gulliver. Of course, those familiar with Gulliver's Travels will not forget how Gulliver, the giant in the land of pygmies, put out the fire in the Queen's house: he just opened his fly and eased his bladder.
The Lillputian neighbors, however, are sick of the smell of Indian urine. The Indians may enjoy the urine of even the cow and may find some medicinal properties in it as one Indian Prime Minister did. But the SAARC must consider, sooner or later, ways to put an end to Indian hegemony covered in pompous piety. They must decide whether they will drown in a deluge flowing from a Gullverian bladder or jointly plot and plan to tie down the Gulliver. Indian bladder politics, if it goes on, will degrade small nations that believe in preserving their dignity and self-respect.
The bottom line is that if the Indian Gulliver thinks that it can douse the fires in the neighborhood by releasing its bladder the small neighbors will have to look for another Bigger Brother other than India.
- Asian Tribune -
H. L. D. Mahindapala
Source: http://www.asiantribune.com/index.php?q=node/5211
Predictably, the SARC summit opened with its focus on terrorism. Predictably, the smaller nations plagued by terrorism, have, for obvious diplomatic reasons, skirted round the issue of identifying the chief manufacturer and exporter of terrorism in the SAARC region – India. She is also primarily responsible for the economic and political stagnation of the SAARC region. India's overt hegemonism and covert terrorism, both of which are linked to separatist movements outside its borders, have delayed the integration of its neighboring countries into a viable unit that could race ahead to achieve results comparable to that of other regional blocs.
Despite the repetitious platitudes it proffers from time to time of historical and friendly relations India has failed to live up to either the historical or the friendly relations needed to make SAARC a regional power. India cannot give the lead due from a benign force because it is mired in its own morass of political hypocrisy and narrow self-interests. India's meddlesome regional politics has played a central role in retarding progress not only in stabilizing the region but also in alleviating poverty.
The Nehruvian non-aligned policies declared so pompously at Bandung, or its latest manifestation in the Gujral doctrine is as good as principles written on water. For instance, the "Gujral Doctrine", states: "first, with its neighbours like Bangladesh, Bhutan, Maldives, Nepal and Sri Lanka, India does not ask for reciprocity, but gives and accommodates what it can in good faith and trust.
Second, we believe that no South Asian country should allow its territory to be used against the interests of another country of the region. Third, that none should interfere in the internal affairs of another. Fourth, all South Asian countries must respect each other's territorial integrity and sovereignty. And finally, they should settle all their disputes through peaceful bilateral negotiations."
India has violated practically every one of these tenets. And from the Himalayan heights in Nepal right down to tip end of Sri Lanka the common cry is gainst "Indian expansionism", "Indian imperialism", and "Indian interventions". India survives in the region not because of its diplomacy or adherence to Gandhi-Nehruvian principles but through the sheer weight of its size. This has posed a serious question for the neighboring nations: can they achieve their goals within a SAARC dominated by India?
This region, which consists of one-fifth of the world's population, will continue to lag behind the rest of the world if India continues to pursue its politics of destabilizing the neighborhood for its short term benefit. In the long term it is going blowback and drag India down, inhibiting its own growth. India must decide now whether it wants to grow together or at expense of its neighbors. If it is the latter India will have to pay for it dearly in the years ahead.
It doesn't need much for India to correct its path. All what India needs is to follow the path it recommends to others, particularly its neighbors. To begin with, India must put an end to its two main exports: 1) hegemonism and 2) terrorism. India accuses Pakistan of encouraging and exporting terrorism to Kashmir. But the Indian Prime Minister has no qualms in serving tea and sympathy to Tamil MPs who are the avowed proxies of Tamil Tigers. What would Indian punditry have to say if the Pakistan Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz invites the Naxalites for chai tea in Islamabad?
India cannot pretend forever that it is the source of all goodness and that all evil comes from its disobedient neighbors. Historical facts reveal that the smaller neighbors would have been better off without India. Sri Lanka, for instance, wouldn't have had to face the current problem of Tamil Tiger terrorists if Indira Gandhi did not mother the Tamil terrorists in her bosom and exported them to Sri Lanka. India was also caught red-handed in providing sub-standard radar equipment to Sri Lanka which has enabled the Tiger light aircraft to penetrate the air defenses and bomb the key air base at the Katunayake airport.
Then in 1989 India rushed its gun-boats to Maldives by engineering a Tamil rebel group to "invade" Maldives. India enacted this drama in the Indian Ocean in the name of stabilizing the region. But the whole episode was manipulated by the Indians to signal that the Indian Ocean belongs to her. It was an act of arrogant posturing in the Indian Ocean at the expense of a tiny nation that could hardly harm a sprat.
One of the obnoxious habits of the arrogant India is to flex its muscles to stamp its questionable authority on the region. This is a sign of Indian weakness than a show of its strength. Despite its size India needs the smaller countries more than the smaller neighbors needing India. President Ranasinghe Premadasa proved this when India tried to sabotage the SAARC summit held in Colombo. India, at the last minute decided to boycott the summit to teach President Premadasa a lesson because he was refusing to toe the Indian line. When India decided to boycott the summit Pesident Premadasa immediately got on the phone to the heads of other SAARC countries and organized a summit without India. Then India realized its folly and came down to earth. In the end. It was Premadasa who taught India a lesson. He proved that the small neighbors can function without India though India cannot function without the smaller nations.
The reality is that though the neighbors get along fine with each other India behaves like a crotchety old woman meddling in the affairs of the family and neighbors. Before Afghanistan joined SAARC all problems of the region were linked to India. And those problems still remain unresolved. Bangladesh has its problems with India over disputed maritime borders and the waters of the Ganges. Nepalese are worried about Indian arm-twisting. India is also leaning heavily Bhutan to keep the northern Himalayan border within its sphere of influence. The Indo-Pakistan wrangle over Kashmir has been a perennial problem which is one of the main reasons for the stagnation of SAARC.
There are, of course, accusations against Pakistan too for exporting terrorism. Without providing excuses for such action it can be argued that Pakistan is not into terrorism for hegemonic reasons. India is guilty of pursuing terrorism, or turning a blind eye to it, with the ulterior motives of destabilizing the region -- a deliberate tactic adopted to force each small nation to be dependent on India. This reprehensible conduct of India had caused havoc in the region and it is not inappropriate for India to apologize for violating its own lofty principles and leaving its small neighbors in the current predicament.
If India hopes to play a bigger role in the international theatre and if India hopes to get a seat in the Security Council as a responsible member of the international community caring for global peace and security then it has no moral right to play the duplicitous role of pinching the baby and rocking the cradle. If India continues to play this role the option left for the other regional nations is to work together to isolate India and look farther east towards China for a more constructive leadership.
Incidentally, India is now engaged in tying up with the Western powers, ranging from America, Japan, Australia etc., to build a defensive great wall against China. A raft of new treaties has been signed in recent months, with more to come, to contain China. Of course, there are loud protests from the Western-Indian bloc denying that the new treaties are to contain China. It is most unlikely that China is unaware of this growing trend. These new treaties, giving India a dominant role in Asia, will give more leeway for India to ride rough shod over its neighbors. If India is willing to play foul with its neighbors, big and small, there is no reason why the neighbors, big and small, should protect India.
The unfolding trends are ominous. One way out for SAARC members is to reconfigure their geo-political strategies and strike out in new directions because India is not likely to change its directions. Indian hegemonism will continue to plague the region because it believes that its place as the overlord of the Indian Ocean is secure with the new Western alliances. But the small nations have the power collectively to tie up India like the way the Lilliputians tied down Gulliver. Of course, those familiar with Gulliver's Travels will not forget how Gulliver, the giant in the land of pygmies, put out the fire in the Queen's house: he just opened his fly and eased his bladder.
The Lillputian neighbors, however, are sick of the smell of Indian urine. The Indians may enjoy the urine of even the cow and may find some medicinal properties in it as one Indian Prime Minister did. But the SAARC must consider, sooner or later, ways to put an end to Indian hegemony covered in pompous piety. They must decide whether they will drown in a deluge flowing from a Gullverian bladder or jointly plot and plan to tie down the Gulliver. Indian bladder politics, if it goes on, will degrade small nations that believe in preserving their dignity and self-respect.
The bottom line is that if the Indian Gulliver thinks that it can douse the fires in the neighborhood by releasing its bladder the small neighbors will have to look for another Bigger Brother other than India.
- Asian Tribune -
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)