Rapporteur Report on Session VI

November 5, 2009

South Asian Conference: Way Forward: Building a Common Future

Dr M Rahamatullah: “Regional Connectivity: Getting Past the Impediments”. Dr. Rahamatullah, though basic infrastructure in South Asia is available the transport connectivity is very fragmented. Regional connectivity through land connecting the North Eastern region existed before 1965. Connectivity was also available through ports.

In the context of Pakistan there are two passenger trains from India and Pakistan bus connections between New Delhi and Amritsar. However in the case of India and Bangladesh their locomotives are connected to the trains to Dhaka or Kolkata. Immigration remains a huge problem. Transportation of goods takes place through waterways. Transporting goods from Dhaka to Delhi through rail will take only three days whereas the route presently followed takes 30-45 days.

Pakistan does not allow India to use its roads to export its goods to Afghanistan. Hence a container from India goes to Chahbahar and then to Afghanistan. This is a very costly operation for India.

The entire northeast is landlocked. If one travels through the Chicken’s Neck from Calcutta to Tripura then the route is very long. Bangladesh is yet to provide transit facilities to India therefore to overcome this problem India is developing Sitwe port in Myanmar. But that is a complicated route. Bangladesh and Nepal are separated only by a distance of 22 km. Similarly, India is not allowed to use Mongla port.

Route and roadmaps have been proposed by SRMTS. The Islamabad Summit of 2004 had also decided to develop multi-modal transport connectivity among SAARC countries. Transport integration in south Asia will end the landlocked status of Afghanistan, Nepal, Bhutan and northeast India. SRMTS had identified 10 road corridors, 5 rail routes, 10 maritime and 16 aviation gateways. The new rail routes can revolutionize connectivity. Dr. Rahmatullah also proposed new rail and road routes. He pointed out that water transport was given as protocol in 1972 but it has not been extensively used.

Roadmaps have been proposed by SRMTS. But the main problem is political commitment and physical problems are of a very minor nature. On road transit, agreement is yet to be inked. Land ports are not well developed. On both Bangladesh and Indian sides the conditions of the roads are bad. The countries also lack standardized rail tracks i.e. meter gauge and broad gauge.

There is a need to renew IWT (Inland waterways) protocol between India and Bangladesh. The maritime gateways can be improved by expanding port capacities. Similarly, aviation gateways can be improved by expanding terminal facilities and by promoting low cost carrier service.

All SAARC countries have obligation to implement the road map. Bangladesh, India and Pakistan are transit countries. They have special responsibility in this regard. This will create win-win situation for both transiting and transit countries.

Implementation of Roadmap

Bangladesh can do the following things to implement the roadmap.

The Calcutta port is only serving Nepal and Bhutan. Haldia port is no more a viable option. Here Bangladesh can offer its Mongla port as an option.

Bangladesh could benefit by ‘transport services.’ Currently Bangladesh has a trade deficit. This can be overcome by offering the use of Mongla port for a fee. These transport services has no market outside sub-continent. This should be offered to all the three countries – India, Nepal and Bhutan. Ashuganj port facilities can be opened up. Bangladesh also needs to build expressways to match Indian roads which can take 10-12 axle loads.In general land ports in Benapole and Petrapole need to be developed with adequate warehousing facilities which will help trade. BIMSTEC route can also be used for greater economic development.

Pakistan needs to provide transit facilities to India for its trade with Afghanistan and Central Asia. It can levy transit fees to provide such facilities. For this there is a need for the two countries to develop better understanding.

India is a transit country for all countries in the sub-continent. Bhutan and Nepal have not been allowed to use Bangladesh’s port facilities. India can take steps to improve the situation. Dr Rahmatullah said the cost of non-cooperation is very high. There is a need to undertake a study which can indicate gains for each country as a result of improved connectivity. Not only strong political commitment of leaders is needed but involvement of people is also a necessity. Transit and regional connectivity can not be resolved in isolation. Countries should also try to resolve other irritants.

Q&A and Discussion

• It is important to keep in mind the cost that will be incurred to dredge rivers in northeast India. Leadership is critical to achieve this objective. In the absence of political will, none of the frameworks are going to work. The primacy of infrastructure can never be over-estimated.
• Earlier there had been reluctance on the part of Bangladesh to accept an Indian offer to dredge the port at Indian cost. Bangladesh has the manpower, India has the resources; both can cooperate
• India, Bangladesh, Nepal should come together to deal with China
• Afghanistan has been very supportive of transit traffic. The problem however is Pakistan, which has been extremely reluctant to extend this facility. The issue is how to induce change in Pakistan’s thinking so that south Asia can trade with central Asia

Dr Swadesh Rana: “Regional Framework for Non-state Actors in South Asia”: Dr Rana noted that international advocacy groups have some achievements to their credit. For example an advocacy group in Geneva is trying to make non-state actors abide by landmine agreements. Similarly, international protocols can also include terrorism. Currently we are dealing with a very fluid situation. It will take two to three years for the dust to settle. India must think of how it is going to retaliate in case another 26 / 11 take place. At present Pakistan is suffering much more than India from terrorism.

Speaking of the US military engagement in south Asia she stated that in future American public is going to demand exit strategy more clearly. The better prepared India is to deter another 26/11 or Naxals, Pakistan would be more confident of dealing with the Taliban and come to an agreement with India.

In days to come terrorists will be more elusive. Pakistan has no intention of declaring Osama dead or alive because then they would not get economic assistance. In future terrorism will become nebulous. Once the dust-settles down the problem of terrorism would not be confined to India and Pakistan and the whole of South Asia would be affected.

Armed or unarmed non-state actors can incite violence. Resource wars might also grip the region. South Asia is also very vulnerable to food and water shortages. This region is also plagued by illicit weapons trafficking. There are enough arms to sustain a low level insurgency for two decades. Most of the illicit weapons are in south Asia. Another major concern for the region is money laundering. A large part of the money comes into Pakistan through money laundering.

The region may also witness the derailment of the electoral process. This could be the most serious concern. Protecting civilians under situations of armed conflict will be a major issue. Though none of the South Asian countries is under armed conflict, the situation might change if the state ceases to exist a few kilometers outside the capital.

She suggested a few measures for the South Asian countries to ponder. Intellectuals of South Asian countries should starts thinking about 2020.

1. Monitor compliance by South Asian countries of International agreements
2. Document anti-state activities of non-state actors
3. Explore the possibility of retrieving illicit weapons
4. Follow-up on the national initiatives taken by each countries
5. highlight the supporting international climate in which we are functioning

Q&A and Discussion

• It is important to keep in mind the cost that will be incurred to dredge rivers in Northeast India. Leadership is critical to achieve this objective. In the absence of political will, none of the frameworks are going to work. The primacy of infrastructure can never be over-estimated.
• Earlier there had been reluctance on the part of Bangladesh to accept an Indian offer to dredge the port at Indian cost. Bangladesh has the manpower, India has the resources; both can cooperate
• India, Bangladesh, Nepal should come together to deal with China
• Afghanistan has been very supportive of transit traffic. The problem however is Pakistan, which has been extremely reluctant to extend this facility. The issue is how to induce change in Pakistan’s thinking so that south Asia can trade with central Asia
• State monopoly over use of force is being challenged by non-state actors.
• Non-state actors were initially taken as civil society, but now it is being used for terror groups. It gives a bad name to civil society.
• Often there seems to be a suggestion that violence is the only way out. This framework legitimizes violence.

Report prepared by Dr Anand Kumar, Associate Fellow, Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses