Ishaq Dar, the deputy prime minister of Pakistan, has stated that Bangladesh, China, and Islamabad’s recent trilateral agreement could be “extended” to include other regional countries and beyond.
He addressed the Islamabad Conclave forum on Wednesday, saying, “We have opposed zero-sum approaches and consistently stressed the need for cooperation rather than confrontation.”
Recommended Stories
list of 3 itemsend of list
The proposal amounts to the establishment of a second bloc with a focus on South Asia, with China being added, at a time when the region’s main grouping, the SAARC, has become almost ineffective due to rising India-Pakistan tensions in recent years.
In a trilateral dialogue that was “not directed at any third party,” diplomats from China, Pakistan, and Bangladesh held in June, focusing on regional stability, economic growth, and improving people’s lives.
Dar’s remarks come in the wake of growing regional tensions, including Pakistan’s decades-long conflict with India. In May, the two nuclear-armed neighbors engaged in a brief four-day airstrike, further straining relations.
In addition, since former Bangladeshi prime minister Sheikh Hasina was ousted in August of last year, ties between Dhaka and New Delhi have deteriorated significantly. Hasina fled to India after being ousted during a popular uprising, and New Delhi has so far refused to send her back to Bangladesh, where she was found guilty of crimes against humanity and given a death sentence.
Will the majority of the other South Asian countries, which include India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Maldives, Bhutan, and Afghanistan, agree to a new regional grouping that appears to be aimed at limiting or cutting India out of the region?
What information is necessary here:
What is the proposal from Pakistan?
The trilateral initiative with Bangladesh and China was intended to “foster mutual collaboration” in areas of shared interest, according to Deputy Prime Minister Dar, who is also Pakistan’s foreign minister. It should also be “expanded and duplicated” to include more nations and regions.
He addressed the conclave in Islamabad, “As I have previously stated, there could be groups with variable geometry on issues from economy to technology to connectivity.”
You know where I’m referring to, he said, in an ostensible reference to India, and our own national development needs and regional priorities cannot and should not be held hostage to anyone’s rigidity.
Regarding the tensions between Islamabad and New Delhi, Dar cited the “structured dialogue” process that has existed between India and Pakistan as “for more than 11 years” and claimed that other regional states have had “seesaw relationships with our neighbor India”.
Pakistan’s foreign minister said that it wants to have a “South Asia where relationships and cooperation replace divisions, economies grow in synergy, disputes are settled peacefully in accordance with international legitimacy, and peace is maintained with dignity and honor.”
The proposal is likely “more aspirational than operational,” according to academic Rabia Akhtar.
At a time when SAARC is still paralyzed, Akhtar, director of the University of Lahore’s Center for Security, Strategy, and Policy Research (CSSPR), told Al Jazeera, “But it signals Pakistan’s intention to diversify and reimagine regional cooperation mechanisms.”
What does SAARC, a regional organization, stand for?
At a summit in Dhaka, Bangladesh, SAARC was founded in 1985.
Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, the Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka were the organization’s seven founding members. Afghanistan joined in 2007 as the organization’s eighth member.
The SAARC’s goals, according to its website, include promoting economic growth and cultural development while improving South Asians’ welfare and quality of life.
Despite its lofty ambitions, the organization has struggled to reach its goals over the past 40 years, in large part due to the decades-long tensions between India and Pakistan, which have waged three major wars since 1947, when they were separated from the British and were also at the same time as the subcontinent split.
After India pulled out, the 19th SAARC summit, which was scheduled to be held in Islamabad, was indefinitely postponed due to a deadly attack in Kashmir, which Pakistan claimed was responsible for.
SAARC cannot advance without the two largest members’ political will to break regional cooperation from bilateral disputes, according to CSSPR’s Akhtar.
2014 was the last regional body summit held in Kathmandu, Nepal. However, according to analysts, SAARC has the potential to be useful if India and Pakistan permit it to continue to exist.
What makes SAARC significant?
South Asia is the most densely populated region in the world because SAARC countries account for more than two billion of the world’s population by 2025.
However, the World Bank claims that South Asia’s trade is sluggish, accounting for only about 5% of the region’s total trade, or $ 23 billion. In contrast, trade between ASEAN member states, a group of 11 Southeast Asian countries with around 700 million people, accounts for 25% of their international trade, according to the Washington-based organization.
According to the World Bank, South Asian countries could exchange goods worth $67 billion, three times their current trade, if barriers were to be reduced.
Particularly, trade between India and Pakistan is still weak. Official trade between the two neighbors reached a paltry $ 2.41 billion in the fiscal year 2017-2018. Unofficial trade between them, which is routed through other countries, is more lucrative, at about $10 billion, according to experts, but it has increased, halving to $1.2 billion by 2024.
One of the main causes of the region’s weak trade links is the lack of regional connectivity.
A Motor Vehicles Agreement, which would have allowed cars and trucks to travel across South Asia as well as they can in Europe, was set to be signed by the grouping in 2014. In response to India’s tensions, Pakistan, however, halted that agreement and a separate one on regional railroad collaboration.
Since then, the grouping’s ability to co-exist has been limited to a few occasions, such as when member states established an emergency fund and set aside $ 7.7 billion to combat the public health crisis.
SAARC could in theory be revived if the two nations [India and Pakistan] were able to identify even flimsy ways for cooperating in the service of broader regional interests, according to analyst Farwa Aamer.
However, such a breakthrough seems unlikely to occur in the current political climate, according to Aamer, director of South Asia Initiatives at the Asia Society Policy Institute (ASPI).
Pakistan is not the first country to try to erode SAARC’s regional partnerships. Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, and Nepal , a group known as the BBIN after the nation’s initials, signed a similar agreement after SAARC failed to approve a regional transport pact.
Aamer cited the presence of India in other regional organizations like the Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC). India, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Thailand are included in BIMSTEC.
However, according to Aamer, “regional multilateralism will continue to predominate” over “regional multilateralism” in the “near to medium term.” Because working with just one or two nations at once tends to “offer more flexibility, clearer incentives, and a greater likelihood of producing tangible outcomes,” she said.
Will Pakistan’s proposal succeed?
According to academic Akhtar, the success of the proposal will depend on two things.
“First, whether prospective states find smaller, issue-focused groupings useful in a time when traditional architectures are in decline, and second, whether participation does not cause political friction with India.”
According to Akhtar, several South Asian nations may show a tinge of interest in Pakistan’s proposed regional initiative, but progress toward formal participation is anticipated to remain constrained.
“I believe that countries like Bhutan, Sri Lanka, Nepal, the Maldives, and others may be open to exploratory engagement, particularly in terms of connectivity, climate adaptation, and economic resilience,” she said.
Akhtar noted, however, that India’s regional sensibilities and its wider geopolitical rivalry with Pakistan and China “mean that actual membership uptake will be cautious.”
However, Aamer of ASPI believes Pakistan’s position was “strategically coherent.”
She continued, “The country is in a moment of diplomatic agility,” adding that it has maintained strong ties with China while fostering rekindled and strengthened ties with the Gulf and the United States.
Source: Aljazeera
Leave a Reply