19 May 2020, NIICE Commentary 4758
Sweta Khadka
Even after 35 years of establishment of South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), South Asia’s dream of regional integration still remains un-fulfilled. Comprising of 8-member nations scattered along various parts of Asia, the power play runs high in the region with a mix of multiple global and regional actors making the integration complicated. Further, the struggle between the two Asian giants, India and China, too assert dominance in the region especially in the aftermath of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).
Balance of power has always been a significant part of all regional politics. In a globalized world, success of a region largely depends on its ability to contain the extremes of balance and forge cooperation for meaningful integration. Europe, Africa and America have experienced the wrath of extremes of balance of power in the past and have moderated the power play in their region to attain a level of peace essential for development in a globalized world. The new economic order brought by globalization demanded intricate cross border trade links for which peace and cooperation were major prerequisite.
In case of South Asia, a vibrant economic zone has been unable to unleash its potential as it continues to be embroiled with bilateral and multilateral conflicts. Kashmir still remains an unsettled territory, Afghanistan continues to suffer civil unrest, and Pakistan has yet to get its grip over terrorism, while India and China, the two regional giants periodically make headlines for border conflict. Also, the increasing proxy power struggle between the two in relatively smaller nations of the region like Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal and the Maldives are fueling the regions inhibition.
Political Origin of South Asia
Political identity of the South Asian continent in the modern world was marked by the end of colonization. Period between 1858 to 1947 saw establishment of British hegemony in Indian subcontinent which coincided with the decline of the Chinese Empire. With India totally in British grip and China no longer able to perform its role, the balance of power situation apparently ceased to exist. However, from late 1940’s political atmosphere changed in the region with India’s independence and China’s end of civil war; these two giants rose as powerful sovereign nations and soon power play became an organic political consequence in the region.
Legendary leaders like Nehru in India were leading the region and world politics with political campaigns like Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) to contain the effects of cold war in an infant nation and the region as a whole. Convening the first Asian Relations Conference in 1947 in which Prime Minister Nehru proclaimed the arrival of Asia on the world scene and stressed on the need for Asian Unity and regional cooperation elevated the regional aspiration globally.
On the other hand, China, an East Asian giant and a permanent member of UN Security Council turned extremely inward to restructure its social and economic systems as per the nation’s new-found philosophy of socialism during the early 1950’s as for a nation drained by years of war and unrest participation in the world and regional politics was not a primary priority.
India, thus became a default supreme regional actor of South Asia. However, with China’s entry into the World Trade Organization in December 2001, it rapidly advanced in international diplomacy, leveraging its success to become the primary trading and development partner for emerging economies across Asia, Africa and Latin America. Further, with the introduction of BRI, China has consolidated its presence in South Asia.
Nepal-India-China Trilateral Relations
While India and China were emerging as the powerful nations during 1940’s, Nepal was untouched by the radical winds of change and continued to live in the “eighteenth century world”. Though Nepal was successful in protecting itself as sovereign nation, it failed to adopt the liberal values that were largely responsible for their development and shaping the new Asia.
Thus, the trilateral political dynamics became intricately embroiled in the 1950’s. India’s absolute involvement in establishing democracy in Nepal, which is believed to be the foundation for the “special relation”, was borne out of its own security concerns with China. Existence of an oligarchic regime in the country which was once very close to British was intolerable to India. Further, the immediate reason for the Indian involvement in Nepal, however, is assumed to its own perception of security consideration arising out of the Chinese move into Tibet in 1950. Importance for Nepal was based on the discovery of Kerung pass in the seventh century which linked Nepal directly with Tibet was the point of origin of “strategic friendship” between China and Nepal.
Prior to that, Tibet acted as an additional buffer vis-a-vis China. Amalgamation of Tibet into greater China meant that Chinese were on the other side of the mountain. Realizing that Himalayas are natural barrier that separates Indian subcontinent from Central Asia and even a partial control of these mountains will give the Chinese a highly strategic advantage India extended support to establish good relations with Nepal and hence extended needed support to the nation.
In Nehru’s words, “Himalayas that lie between Nepal and Tibet were important to India. It provided us with a magnificent frontier … we cannot allow that barrier to be penetrated for it is also the principal barrier to India. Much as we stand for the Independence of Nepal, we cannot allow anything to go wrong in Nepal or permit that barrier to be crossed or weakened, because that would be a risk to our security. Therefore, although Nepal and India were bonded by commonality of culture and close geographic proximity it was only in the aftermath of India’s independence which was followed by Democracy in Nepal in 1951 that tied the nations politically. However, in the aftermath of BRI, this geopolitical power play is inching towards polarization in the nation.
Conclusion
South Asian regional integration is limited to official visits and conferences. Being the regional giant, India can and has to play a key role integrating the region meaningfully. Tracing the history of regional integration, treaty of Westphalia which rose as a new system of political order in 14th century in central Europe, laid the foundation of regional integration based upon peaceful coexistence among states. Settlement of territorial disputes was recognized as the crucial aspect of the treaty, as without it, regional integration was impossible.
The settlement of territorial disputes and connectivity are crucial for regional integration. India has to concentrate on devising strategies to comprehend it. Similarly, its attempt to become a global economic power house will be marred by the unstable region as cooperation at the regional level is a vital to adjust to the forces of globalization. Therefore, until border disputes along with other complex bilateral political issues between India and its south Asian neighbors are resolved; these countries will continue to look for balancing equations with other countries outside the region which will in turn affect their willingness to participate in regional cooperation will be both limited and inhibited.
Also, the formation of multiple sub regional initiatives and organization with India’s lead has further derailed if not damaged the process of wholesome regional integration. BIMSTEC came into being in 1997 with five South Asia and two Southeast Asia countries, BBIN, another sub regional initiative of four South Asian counties came into being in 2017. Division of nations into narrower groups has concretized “groupism and thus hindered regionalism”. Formation of such sub regional grouping may yield immediate gains but will surely derail the regional integration process.
