Rapporteur Report on Session I

November 4, 2009

Forging Regional Consensus on Core Areas of Cooperation

The first session of the conference titled, Forging Regional Consensus on Core Areas of Cooperation, dwelt upon issues ranging from predicting possible future scenarios for regional cooperation to proposing mechanisms for dealing with terrorism and various armed conflicts afflicting the South Asian region. The underlying understanding was that given the unhappy situation in which the region finds itself at present, there is an urgent need for all countries to shun mistrust and enhance greater regional and sub-regional cooperation. The session had three speakers – Dr. Arvind Gupta, Brig (Retd.) Shahidul Anam Khan and Dr. Darini Rajasingham Senanayake, and it was chaired by N.S. Sisodia, Director-General IDSA.

Dr. Arvind Gupta’s paper, South Asia 2020: A Futuristic Perspective, presented a snapshot of the present socio-economic and security situation in South Asia. He has constructed four possible future scenarios for the region. Gupta, however, clarified that the objective of building future scenarios is not to predict the future, but to view the present from a distance. This, according to him, is necessary for a better understanding of the problems at hand and for suitable course correction. For building future scenarios, Gupta identifies eight drivers which are critical for shaping the future course of the region. These drivers are demography, internal instability, economic growth, energy, climate change, terrorism, anti-India mindset, and the role of external powers. All these drivers are high impact and high uncertainty drivers. But of these, the most important are the issues of internal stability and the anti-India mindset.

According to Gupta, the four plausible scenarios which might unfold in the future are:

1. the business as usual scenario: the present trend of poverty, under development and insecurity will continue to prevail resulting in greater instability in the region;
2. cooperative scenario: the present dismal socio-economic and security situation compels the leaders of the region to shed anti-India sentiments, invest greater political will and enhanced regional cooperation to address problems, all resulting in inclusive growth and peace;
3. mixed scenario denotes a situation where countries of the region cooperate in some areas while competing in others. South Asia Free Trade Agreement (SAFTA) and energy are identified as areas of future cooperation. Cooperation in these areas might gradually impact positively on the security and development situation of the region;
4. worst case scenario will be a situation in which the countries of the region fail to hold on to the modest benefits and are overwhelmed by negative trends exacerbating energy, food and water security situation and conflicts engulfing the entire region.

Gupta concludes that the mixed or cooperative scenario offer a way out from the present dismal situation, but for this to happen, greater political will and regional cooperation are required.

Brig. (Retd.) Shahadul Anam Khan argues in his paper, Dealing with Terrorism 2020: Can there be a Regional Approach?, that given the way terrorism has transformed itself, it is difficult to predict its likely future shape and substance and hence difficult to formulate a substantive plan to deal with it. He also contends that finding a regional approach to deal with terrorism would not bear any fruit given the natural disinclination of the countries to cooperate with each other even on lesser issues. Reinforcing his argument, Khan stated that even though the countries of the region had acknowledged way back in 1987 that terrorism is the greatest threat confronting them, they failed to come together and evolve a mechanism to address the phenomenon. And the more the region waits to cooperate, the more it stand to lose. Khan emphasizes that despite the mistrust among countries of the region, there are strong forces, such as the deleterious effects of Global War on Terror and the inability of a single country to deal with the phenomenon, are compelling them to take a regional approach towards terrorism. He, however, argues that there is an urgent need to understand terrorism in its various manifestations, i.e. religious fundamentalism, Leftist and Maoists ideology, etc. to deal with it effectively. There are many counter mechanisms such as the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC), and United Nations counter terror mechanism. But such mechanisms have not succeeded because in many cases neighbours are looked at as being part of the problem. There are allegations and counter allegations against each other for fomenting trouble. However, given the present dire situation, it is imperative that South Asian countries forge a cooperative mechanism to deal with terrorism. To achieve this, Khan proposes setting up a South Asian Task Force, which would coordinate the implementation of anti-terror strategies, assist countries to identify and assess counter-terrorism needs, coordinate capacity building and technical assistance, coordinate with international organization, etc. He concludes that it is imperative for the countries of South Asia to cooperate against terrorism rather than continue to suffer from its terrible effects.

Dr. Darini Rajasingham Senanayake’s paper on South Asia between Cooperation and Conflict: Globalisation, Peace Building, Violence argues that despite enjoying economic growth, vast areas of South Asia are riddled with abject poverty and armed conflicts. According to Senanayake, since there is a strong relationship between poverty and conflict, South Asia has fallen into a “poverty-conflict trap”. For the region to get out of this trap, it has to reformulate its current state-centric solutions into a human-centric paradigm of security and development. Because, current state-centric solutions have resulted in the phenomenon of what Senanayake describes as violent peace, uncertain peace, unsustainable peace and highly securitized peace. In her view, the South Asian experience shows that the region has not witnessed many incidences of peace building. And whatever efforts have been undertaken they have resulted in extreme internationalisation of peace building without enough local ownership. As a result, the peace, which was achieved, could not be sustained. Therefore, there is a need to rethink the peace building process in the region which would include greater participation of local communities, especially of women, and curbing of phantom aid and targeted distribution of international aid, de-ethnising the problem, understanding and addressing the political and economic reasons for people getting involved in armed conflicts and remaining sensitive to resource and identity politics. In conclusion, Senanayke stresses that sustainable peace depends upon human security.

Questions from the floor:

• How does India help Pakistan fight terrorism?
• What is the mechanism to change the anti-India mindset? Are we clear about what kind of mindset change India is looking for?
• Does India have a fair record of containing armed conflicts? Is Pakistan capable of dealing with terrorism since it is in denial mode?
• Is it possible to control some of the drivers to reduce their uncertainty index to give a direction for the future? Should India play a lead role in this? How could India bring about a consensus among its neighbours on any issue?

Answers:

• There cannot be a mechanism to overcome the anti-India mindset. However, the conviction to cooperate should come from within and once such a conviction comes through, it will pave the way for greater cooperation. SAARC could provide a platform for such cooperation.
• Some drivers can be controlled to give a definite direction for the future to evolve. India alone cannot control these drivers and every country in the region should cooperate.
• For a better future, a human-centric approach should be formulated. Trade could emerge as a major unifying force. If Afghanistan’s and Pakistan’s economies are linked with India many irritants would smoothen out.
• Policies have to address the mindset. Countries of the region should shun the blamegame.
• Terrorism is a phenomenon unique to every country. Different objective conditions prevalent in different countries create this phenomenon. So experiences on terrorism should not be shared with each other. However, common data on terrorism should be shared and real time intelligence could be exchanged. Cooperative efforts should be enhanced for combating terrorism.
• The future appears optimistic as a younger generation takes charge. They have less historical baggage, which presents greater possibility for cooperation.

Prepared by Dr. Pushpita Das, Associate Fellow at the Institute for Defence Studies and Analysis