The Quad summit between the top leadership of India, Australia, Japan and the United States of America was canceled as the US President Joe Biden cut short his Asia trip due to the ongoing debt ceiling crises in America. However, the leaders met in Hiroshima to primarily discuss the Indo-Pacific region and the world at large. They also issued a joint statement.
What is Quad? The 4 democratic countries vis. India, Japan, Australia and the United States having found a common ground in the form of democracy came together to form this grouping in order to support the common interest of unhindered maritime trade and security. The group of these countries aims to ensure that the Indo-Pacific region remains free from any security issue, open for all the regional players and all the countries in this region prosper. The idea of Quad was first mooted by late Prime Minister of Japan Shinzo Abe in 2007. However, the idea could not be materialized as Australia pulled out of it, apparently due to Chinese pressure. Finally in 2017, India, Australia, the US and Japan, came together and formed this “quadrilateral” coalition. The summit in Japan’s Hiroshima was the third in-person of the leadership.
What are its focus principles? The main principle of this group is to keep the strategic sea routes in the Indo-Pacific free of any military or political influence. Strategically speaking, this has been viewed by some of the Chinese observers as a coalition to reduce the dominance of China in the Indo-Pacific region. It also believes in the principle of rules based international order wherein no single country dictates the terms to its neighboring countries or to the international system in large. It also concerns itself with ensuring the freedom of navigation in the international maritime roots and keeping in check various security challenges. Liberal trading system is another main objective of this group. This became more important after world saw disruptions in the supply chain due to the Covid-19 pandemic and the trade rivalry between the world’s two largest economies. In addition to the above objectives, the coalition discusses various contemporary global issues at the ministerial and the top leadership level. These issues include and are not limited to critical and emerging technologies, connectivity and infrastructure, cyber security, maritime security, humanitarian assistance, disaster relief, climate change, pandemic and education.
The 2023 summit in Hiroshima
Indo-Pacific remained at the core of discussions and the leaders in the joint statement reaffirmed their commitment to Free and Open Indo-Pacific and making it resilient. The leaders committed their countries for the development of Indo-Pacific region by supporting its stability and prosperity. The shared vision of maintaining dominance free area where no country is dominated and no country dominates others was reemphasized. The importance of regional institutions like the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF), and the Indian Ocean Rim Association (IORA) was acknowledged and quad partners will work with these institutions.
Climate change was considered as a single largest threat to the humanity and the Quad countries pledged their support to the Pacific countries in fighting and finding solutions of the climate change. Quad countries and the Pacific nations will work together in the areas of climate action, ocean health, resilient infrastructure, maritime security and financial integrity. While defining their positive and practical agenda, the leaders recognized the urgency of resolving the climate crises. In this regard they will focus on climate mitigation, adaptation, and resilience efforts. This will be done under the directions of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Paris Agreement. Quad Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation Package (Q-CHAMP) will be utilized to increase the Indo-Pacific’s reach to the climate finance and climate smart technology. Referring to the extent of support provided by the quad countries to the Indo-Pacific countries which included some 400 million doses of Covid-19 vaccines, they announced launching a broad health security partnership. This partnership will focus on strengthening the coordination and collaboration in enhancing the health security in the Indo-Pacific region. Supporting the health workforce development, disease surveillance, and electronic health information systems and coordination on outbreak responses was affirmed.
Quad’s stand on global issues
In the Indo-Pacific region, maritime peace and stability is of utmost importance. In this regard the Quad countries refer to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and affirm their adherence to the international law. The countries in the joint statement strongly opposed the forces which seek to destabilize the peace of Indo-Pacific region and the East and South China sea through any means. Without referring directly to China, the leaders expressed their concern over the growing militarization of the disputes, the manner in which the coastguards and maritime militia vessels are used and on the disruption on the offshore resource exploitation activities by other countries. The peaceful resolution of disputes in accordance to the international law without resorting to coercion was strongly advocated by the leaders. While the international institutions like the United Nations will be supported, any force compromising their integrity will not be tolerated. Underscoring the importance of contemporary realities, the countries reaffirmed their support for the reforms in the United Nations Security Council in both permanent and temporary membership. Terrorism also received some attention towards the end of the joint statement.
Hopes for the future
Quad in the coming years is going to play a quintessential role not only in the Indo-Pacific region but also in the world. Climate change or disaster has become a real threat to humanity. As Quad is a maritime alliance and mostly focuses on the countries bordering the seas and oceans, it has a greater role to play. The steps outlined in the joint statement are an indication of how it will shoulder this responsibility. The cooperation on climate will help in mitigating the climate changes by increasing the efforts on clean energy, climate finance and advanced climate technology.
Another hope emerges from following the international law and upholding the sovereignty of countries. This gives hope to the countries who are facing aggression from the authoritarian countries. While the statement referred to Ukraine, it gave a passing reference to China’s illegal advancement in the South China sea without naming it. This gives a sense of security to the countries having stake in these regions. The reform of the UNSC as highlighted by the joint statement is another hope for the future. Quad has the US as its member and it is also the permanent member of the UNSC. In this regard the Quad support is important for the initiation of reforms in the international institutions particularly the UNSC. Cooperation on terrorism requires likeminded countries to come together. Quad countries have democracy as their founding principle. Therefore, this alliance becomes important to fight the global and cross border terrorism.
Quad is an important alliance of likeminded countries. Their adherence to the international law makes it more important. Issues like climate change, unilateral territorial violations, global and cross border terrorism, maritime peace and security and the reform in the international institutions needs such countries to come together and chalk down the solutions for these issues. While some countries might consider it as an alliance designed to counter the China’s rise, the principles and objectives of Quad are very broad in nature and focus on the fundamental issues faced by humanity.
The issue of occupied territories evokes a strong emotional response from many sections of Indian society and even policy circles; more so due to the continuing cross-border security problems arising from Pakistan and China. These events have hugely influenced India’s national security decision-making and resource allocations towards the same since 1947. Maintaining strategic ambiguity on these issues by all stakeholders has not led to any substantive gains.
This article takes a fresh look at the issue of internationalization of the Kashmir dispute and occupied territories on our western borders. It argues that the on-ground realities on the other side of the LoC need to be analyzed from various perspectives before an attempt is made to have a grand strategy on Pakistan. This research paper makes an important observation that residents of the occupied territories should be the central focus of any dispute resolution process.
It concludes with the observation that when it comes to reinstating control of lost territories, the influence over the people living therein is more important than just physical possession of the land.
This paper observes that borders of nation-states change frequently and so they are neither permanent nor sacrosanct. Therefore, it is not a utopian idea to think that the occupied territories of India – are for purely practical purposes and for addressing challenges to India’s security and sovereignty that will arise in the future.
Introduction :
Pakistan-occupied Jammu & Kashmir (PoJK) refers to the territories held (since October 1947) under an illegal physical occupation, of the then princely state of Jammu and Kashmir by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
From a legal perspective, after the abrogation of Article 370 and the subsequent territorial re-arrangements, PoK is now a part of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) and Gilgit-Baltistan is a part of Ladakh Union Territory.
Partition of India in 1947 was followed by an invasion of the state of Jammu and Kashmir by tribal Pashtun militants from Pakistan (22 October 1947), used as a front by the Pakistan Army to take over the state of J&K militarily, which had otherwise acceded to India. The counter attack by Indian Army pushed back the invaders from most parts of the state, but the subsequent ceasefire agreement led to a ceasefire and both sides held their respective positions. The United Nations Security Council Resolution 39, adopted on January 20, 1948, called for a referendum in the state based on certain conditions, but this proposal now holds no value. The Ceasefire Line or the Line of Control, so declared after the end of hostilities in the 1947-48 conflict separates the Indian side of J&K from PoJK.
Shaksgam Valley, another strategic location in this zone, was illegally ceded to China by Pakistan in 1963 as a part of an agreement and it now forms a part of Xinjiang Province of China. Aksai Chin, (a part of the Ladakh region) which was also a part of the erstwhile undivided princely state of J&K was occupied by the People’s Republic of China in the 1962 war.
The issue of these occupied territories evokes a strong emotional response from many sections of Indian society and even policy circles; more so after increased terror attacks in India, the Taliban takeover in Afghanistan, and Chinese aggression on the borders. So, the on-ground realities therein need to be analysed from various perspectives, before an attempt is made to have a grand strategy for Pakistan.
Geo-Strategic Significance of PoJK and Gilgit-Baltistan:
The very fact that this zone shares borders with several countries highlights its geo-strategic significance: Pakistan is located to its West, Afghanistan to the North-West, Tibet and China to its North and India falls on the Eastern side of PoJK.
PoJK lies at a tri–junction of South Asia, West Asia, and Central Asia. One of the major negative consequences that India had to face as a result of the partition of the country – the only land access route to Central Asia via the Wakhan Corridor has been cut off. Asian geopolitical situations and the leverage that India would have enjoyed therein would have been different from what it is right now, had these regions remained under Indian control.
There was a certain element of global geo-politics & dominance by a few big powers that influenced the UNGA discussions on Kashmir back then, as these powers were interested in securing their strategic interests in the area. On the Indian part, taking a bilateral issue to the UN proved to be a strategic miscalculation, in the longer run. Lack of strategic hindsight in later wars with Pakistan and China also could not secure back these territories.
Pakistan has since then held on to these territories, ensuring a low standard of living to keep the locals under control. China and Pakistan seek strategic depth in this region to extend their influence: economically, politically and militarily. India, therefore, needs to review its perceptions and policy options concerning these occupied territories in the contemporary security scenario, especially after the abrogation of Article 370 and the formation of two new Union Territories of Ladakh and Jammu and Kashmir; a symbolic gesture that has not gone down very well with both of India’s hostile neighbours.
Pakistan renamed the occupied parts of the Jammu division as “Azad Jammu and Kashmir” (AJK), which covers a total area of 13,297 km2 and has a total population of 4,045,366 as per the 2017 national census. Shaksgam Valley, which once was a part of PoJK has also been illegally ceded to China by Pakistan in 1963 under an Agreement, which mentions that the final status of the Valley will depend on the resolution of the Kashmir dispute between India and Pakistan. AJK has its own President, who functions as the Head of State while the Prime Minister, assisted by an executive council is the Head of Government. AJK even has its separate official flag, a High Court, and even a Supreme Court because the territory is nowhere mentioned in the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and neither has a representation in the Parliament. A separate entity called ‘The Ministry of Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan Affairs’ (under the control of Islamabad) has been created for all matters related to this area.
Gilgit-Baltistan:
Gilgit–Baltistan is a tribal inhabited area, which was once a part of western Ladakh, that was occupied by Pakistan in the 1947 invasion. This zone, known as Northern Areas before 1947, is remote, under-developed with a very thin spread of population. Gilgit-Baltistan area is more remote in terms of connectivity and infrastructure and has been largely cut off from modern-day facilities. Extreme rains and extreme winters make the zone out of bounds for non-residents. This area has abundant fresh water and other natural resources, unpolluted environment and huge vacant lands. This area has a direct land route to Afghanistan, via the Wakhan Corridor.
The International Geopolitical Perspective
When Pakistan ceded the Shaksgam Valley and surrounding areas to China in 1963, local people protested strongly, but this went unnoticed due to ignorance by the international community, including India; the psychological trauma of the 1962 defeat may have been a reason here.
The Agreement then signed by both countries mentions that the status of this area ‘may change the following resolution of the Kashmir issue between India & Pakistan”. Shaksgam Valley now is a part of the restive Xinjiang Province of China. The Uighur crisis in this province and the changed geopolitical situation after the takeover of the Taliban in Afghanistan have increased China’s stakes in PoJK and Gilgit–Baltistan. The Western Theatre Command of the Chinese PLA is responsible for the security of Xinjiang and surrounding areas.
China wants access to the Arabian Sea and West Asian countries directly via its BRI projects in Pakistan. The CPEC which is a part of the larger BRI passes through the Trans-Karakoram Highway, constructed in 1978, that lies in this disputed territory and connects Xinjiang with the KPK region of Pakistan; almost 500 km of which passes via Gilgit-Baltistan.
A huge network of connecting roads has been set up to facilitate all kinds of exchanges between Kashgar and Gwadar. Regular maintenance and upgrade activities are carried out by China, which has made this highway functional all around the year. The highway allegedly has been used for the clandestine transfer of nuclear material from China to Pakistan, reports the IDSA project on PoJK.
Apart from this, China is involved in many other projects in PoK like dam building, water diversions, civil infrastructure, etc. This has huge strategic implications for India as many reports have indicated a large presence of Chinese workers, engineers, and even military personnel inside PoJK. Most of the financial and technical investments in these projects also come from China and go back to their source, since the contracts are awarded to Chinese firms and contractors. It is said that the soldiers from the Chinese PLA have been deployed for the security of CPEC projects inside Gilgit-Baltistan as well as PoJK.
Security discussions within Indian media, policy circles, and even the public continue to remain Pakistan centric, while the Chinese continue to create troubles on our eastern and western borders. So, India must make a grand strategy towards Pakistan (keeping in mind the China factor , of which the policy on PoJK, will just be one part of the whole.
The War of Narratives:
This issue has seen India and Pakistan fight a war of narratives and perceptions. India has painstakingly built a good reputation in J&K by implementing Operation Sadbhawna.
Pakistan has always sought to damage this reputation by consistently peddling fake news on various media platforms, bringing up the Kashmir issue on international platforms, circulating fake videos and pictures from other conflict regions as the situation in Kashmir, etc. The tactics to carry out such propaganda against India have been mentioned in the 2020 edition of the ‘Green Book’ (an internal publication) of the Pakistani Army.
India has not been able to counter this information warfare by DG ISPR – the media wing of the Pakistani Army.
India needs to be much more proactive when it comes to narrative building and shaping the perceptions of people, about Kashmir. Effective engagement via social media platforms, prime-time debates on TV channels, etc. are some of the ways to do this. But it will require sustained institutional backing – a factor that is currently missing in conflict management in Kashmir. India also needs to bring out the on-ground situations in PoJK and Gilgit-Baltistan on international platforms like the UNSC. One aspect in this where India has scored a point over Pakistan is – it has been able to convince the world that the so-called insurgency or freedom movement in Kashmir is not indigenous, but externally motivated. The world has also accepted India’s position that security disputes started in J&K only after the tribal-led invasion of J&K in 1948. Therefore, it is essential to bring this narrative to a logical end by first winning over the hearts and minds of the people living on the other side of the fence.
The Security Perspective
Since the time the Afghan Jihad started in the late 1980s, these areas have become a hotbed of radicalization and terror-related activities. Most of the terrorists infiltrating India come from launchpads located in PoJK. They are actively supported in all aspects by the Pakistan Army, ISI, and the respective tanzeem that they belong to. Large-scale ceasefire violations by the Pak Army hit-and-run kind of attacks by their Rangers and para-military forces etc. have kept the Line of Control burning. Civilian properties, lives and their very existence are under threat on both sides of the LoC due to these actions.
The terrorists of 26/11 Mumbai attacks were trained in a militant camp in Muzaffarabad, the capital of PoJK. Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) headed by Hafeez Saeed, is very active in PoJK since the 2005 earthquake because of the extensive relief they provided to the people, under a new name of Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD) that acts as a front organization of LeT. LeT and JuD both are legally banned in Pakistan. Hafiz Saeed has not been seen in public after a mysterious car bomb blast blew up a section of his house this year.
Looking at the massive incoming of international aid workers for rebuilding infrastructure aft the earthquake, forced Pakistan to shift the terror groups into interior areas of PoK. But the human rights violations could not be covered up and were widely reported in international forums, some of which have been cited in the IDSA Project on PoJK.
Maximum casualties suffered by the Indian Army, BSF, CRPF, and other security forces are in J&K due to the infiltrating terrorists from PoJK and other counter-terror operations It has cost India very heavily as a nation, owing to the huge resources that are spent in maintaining the security within J&K . It has also lagged the development work in the state due to the security crisis. Many scholars have opined that if the terror threat coming via PoJK is eliminated, most of the problems in J&K can be solved in a time-bound manner.
Above mentioned situations have an impact on India’s long-term peace, safety, and stability. Therefore, we need to clearly define our strategic objectives on PoJK. This requires clear articulation of the problem, followed by a strong political resolve to achieve the same. Our armed forces have on many occasions been vocal about the recovery of this region, provided the political executive gives official orders.
Suggestions
When it comes to reinstating control of lost territories, it must be remembered that the influence over the people living therein is more important than just physical possession of the land. Various tools of statecraft like propaganda, espionage, causing internal rebellions, etc. are available to establish control over other territories; direct military action in which, is always the last step. Ancient scholars like Chanakya have very well outlined the approach to be followed in such campaigns, which if used well and adapted as per the present conditions by India, can change the tide in India’s favour, not immediately, but in the coming future.
In consonance with the UN Resolution and the 1994 Parliamentary Resolution on Kashmir, India should assertively claim its rightful position on PoJK at relevant domestic and international forums; supported by national media and India-friendly foreign media firms. Reports prepared by scholars and journalists highlighting conditions inside PoJK need to be discussed at global-level meetings which would need strong state support from India.
A very strong information warfare campaign needs to be started, with strong institutional support from the Indian state, civil society, and the military as well to counter the false narratives being peddled by Pak on social media platforms.
On the security front, sustained overt and covert operations against terrorists should be done regularly, employing all possible means to stop infiltration and cross-border terrorism emerging from PoJK. This must be complemented by a comprehensive approach to security and development going together on the Indian side of Kashmir.
Scholars like Bharat Karnad had suggested steps like getting the Pakistani elites to invest economically in Indian projects or elsewhere in the world to create a vested interest for them, on not attacking the place of their investments. The first step towards using the economy as a tool of strategy has been successfully taken when India last month signed a deal with Dubai for infrastructure development in J&K – something that Pak-backed terror groups would not dare to attack. Such steps are effective in isolating Pak at the global level and turning the opinion of the “Islamic World” against Pakistan. But this will not help much in the longer run, as other parts of the state may come under attack.
Apart from these state-level solutions, the common people of India need to engage with Kashmiris on both sides of the border, as their fundamental duty, and to realize national integration, in letter and spirit. People-to-people contact is the best way to resolve isolation and alienation and integrate our fellow citizens into the national mainstream.
Conclusion:
It must be mentioned that the borders of nation-states have been changing frequently over the last many centuries. This points to the fact that state borders are neither permanent nor sacrosanct. Therefore, it is not a utopian idea to think that the occupied territories of India, can be regained, not for emotional or nationalistic ideals, but for purely practical purposes and for addressing challenges of security and sovereignty that will arise in the future. As the nation waits for that opportune moment, our capability development and plans to manage the acquired territories should be ready before we decide to intervene in PoJK.
About the Author
Rahul Wankhede is a post graduate in Defence and Strategic Studies with a gold medal. Rahul has worked with think tanks and NGOs in the domains of research, analysis and mentoring and is a former Assistant Professor in the Department of Defence and Strategic Studies, Savitribai Phule Pune University, Pune, India. Currently he is doing PhD from JNU Special Centre for National Security Studies. The views expressed are personal.
Operation Kaveri which involved the evacuation and airlifting of over 3500 Indian nationals Especially the Hakki-Pikki tribe, along with several other foreign nationals from war-torn Sudan to India, has been wrapped up with success of bringing 3862 Indians back home. The mission was carried out in response to the escalating violence and instability in Sudan, particularly in the Darfur region. The IAF deployed three C-130 Hercules transport aircraft and a team of over 50 personnel to facilitate the evacuation, along with INS Sumedha. The operation was conducted in close coordination with the Indian Embassy in Khartoum and the UN Mission in Sudan. Apart from Sudanese authorities, the MEA and the Indian Embassy in Sudan were in constant contact with the UN, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, and the United States, among others. India not only brought back its own citizens but also those of its neighbour, Sri Lanka.
Sudan’s Coup
In April 2019, which ousted President Omar al-Bashir from power. The coup was led by the military after months of protests against al-Bashir’s regime. The military formed a transitional government, which was later replaced by a civilian-led government in 2020 after negotiations between the military and civilian forces. This was a significant moment in Sudan’s history, as it marked a shift towards democracy and civilian rule after decades of authoritarianism.
But the coup by the Sudanese Army in 2021 overthrew the Temporary Transitioning Government of Sudan as it was a move of ambition for power by Sudanese Armed Forces General Al-Burhan. The country is now in a state of civil war and tussle between the power-hungry General and the Rapid Security Force (RSF). Amid the civil war, the country has turned into an extreme hostile zone with no basic services functioning, and amidst all the chaos, the Indian diaspora is stuck in the regions of Darfur and Khartoum.
USA Brokered Ceasefire
A 72-hour ceasefire brokered by the US between Sudan’s warring generals went into effect following ten days of urban violence that killed hundreds, injured thousands, and prompted a major departure of foreigners. This truce intends to build humanitarian corridors that will allow citizens and communities to reach necessary resources, healthcare, and safe zones, as well as evacuate diplomatic missions. The government of India tried to make the most of the 72-hour window.
But the military is warning the people of North Bahri and even Al-Qari about the RSF’s looting of numerous grain mills, overpasses from some road companies, and distribution tanks owned by food companies that were being used to transport munitions from their depot, making them military targets.
United Nations
External Affairs Minister Dr S. Jaishankar also met with UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon in New York to request assistance. Given that humanitarian workers and ambulances have been targeted, it is evident that military troops, bureaucrats, and diplomats faced difficult days . They were undoubtedly helped by the cumulative experience of previous operations over the decades, culminating with the greatest single civilian evacuation during the Gulf War in 1991.
Regional Support
Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Egypt are the key players and partners who helped India bring its citizens home back safely. INS Sumedha, the third ship of the indigenously built Saryu class Naval Offshore Patrol Vessels (NOPV), arrived in Abu Dhabi, UAE, on February 20, 2023, to participate in NAVDEX 23 (Naval Defence Exhibition) along with IDEX 23 (International Defence Exhibition). It was an important element in transporting the Indian diaspora from Sudan’s port to Saudi Arabia’s Jeddah port.
Egypt
Between April 13 and 17, the INS Sumedha was moored at ‘Port Said’ in Egypt. On April 15, 2023, as fighting erupted between the Rapid Support Force (RSF) and the Sudanese military, Indian authorities dispatched the INS Sumedha to Port Sudan. INS Sumedha looked to be in a position to give rapid aid to the trapped Indians in Sudan due to its vicinity.
Saudi-Arabia
According to the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), this is due to the restriction of Sudanese airspace to all foreign planes, as well as the logistical hurdles and hazards connected with overland travel. Two Indian Air Force (IAF) C-130J planes were waiting in Jeddah to depart back to India with the trapped Indians from Jeddah Airport.
India’s Expertise in earlier Rescue Operations
This is not the first time when India has brought back its citizens home. Rescuing the Indian diaspora from hostile zones and returning them back to the motherland . Complex situations like these are the test of diplomatic ability and military capability of nations, and India has not just once but several times before proved its metal and executed such rescue missions successfully.
From Kuwait Air lift in 1990, following the march of one lakh Iraqi forces into Kuwait, over 2 lakh Indians were left trapped, leaving the general populace defenceless and with nowhere to go. Over the course of two months, the Indian government flew Indian citizens out of the country. Following this, Air India was inducted into the Guinness Book of World Records for carrying out the largest-ever air evacuation mission.
When the Yemeni government and Houthi rebels were embroiled in a fight in 2015, Indian authorities launched Operation Rahat. During the crisis, thousands of Indians and hundreds of international nationals were rescued from Yemen.
Operation Vande-Bharat was launched when the pandemic struck globally in 2020 and 2021, it trapped nearly 60 lakh Indian students as well as citizens of foreign nations. As a result, all foreign travel services were halted. The Indian government employed chartered planes, navy ships, and other ways to assist its countrymen in returning to the country.
Following Russia’s Special Military Operation in Ukraine, Kiev proclaimed a no-fly zone. However, almost 20,000 Indians were present in Ukraine and were assisted in returning to India in stages through Operation Ganga.
India’s capacity to evacuate its people is noteworthy, and the principle of “No man left behind” is strictly enforced. The standard operational procedures that India follows are now being adopted by other nations, demonstrating the Government of India’s dedication to its people.
The city of Sudan for almost a month is under a civil war where the two military factions are in a power struggle over a wavering transition to a civilian led government. The intense confrontations between Sudan military and paramilitary force have led to civilians paying a heavy toll. The nation is experiencing heavy looting, killing, fleeing of over more 3,00,000 people to neighbouring countries (according to UN Agencies).
The civil war is led by Gen Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, while the paramilitaries of the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) follow the former warlord Gen Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo also known as Hemedti.
Despite truces, ceasefires agreed by both sides, have been regularly violated, the fight between the two factions continues in the capital city of Khartoum. According to the NY Times “The most of the fighting now appears to be taking place in Khartoum and in the western region of Darfur. The army, which has access to planes, dominates much of the country, including Port Sudan. But most of central Khartoum is controlled by fighters with the Rapid Support Forces. Analysts say that in the view of dominance, the power struggle has led to political and social instability in the region.
The Rapid Support Force (RSF) was formed by Bashir 20 years ago to suppress the rebellion that arose in Sudan because of political and economic marginalisation in Darfur. Locally known as Janjaweed, RSF has been under scrutiny for committing serious atrocities. In 2013, RSF was formed as a paramilitary force and was deployed to repress the rebellion in South Darfur. In 2019, RSF was led by Gen Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo and general armed forces under Burhan cooperated to oust Bashir.
Sudan had been looking forward to a democratic, civilian led nation since the overthrow of dictator Omar al-Basher in 2019.The civilians of Sudan demanded supervision over the military and the integration of RSF in the general armed forces. Moreover, civilians have been seeking justice over war crimes by the military and its allies in Darfur since 2003.The trials of Basheer and other suspected Sudanese are undergoing in the International Criminal Court. The attempt was short lived and disrupted by a coup led by Al-Burhan in October 2021. It was directed against the transitional government led by Abdalla Hamdok which further led to suspension of international funding leading to humanitarian crisis in Sudan. The nation experienced political and economic instability, protests resulting to hundreds of deaths and injuries. In 2022, the military and civilian groups aligned for a democratic transition but before the framework could be finalised, Sudan experienced clashes between Al Burhan and Hamdam Dagalo.
THE REGION IN LIMELIGHT
Sudan sits at a key yet unstable position in the African continent. It has a considerable coastline on the Red Sea and is surrounded by seven countries — the Ethiopia, Central African Republic, Eritrea, Egypt, Libya, Chad and South Sudan who themselves have been experiencing political upheavals and conflict. The civil war possesses a threat to not only the reordering in Sudan but could be a start to new chaos in the region. The disputed farmland along the borders of Sudan and Ethiopia has further strained their relations. Many Sudanese refugees have fled to the neighbouring countries.
Sudan bordered by the Red Sea, Horn of Africa and the Sahel region makes it a strategic location and a contention between various regional power plays which complicates the chances of transition of the nation to a civilian led government. Sudan is rich in valuable natural resources which put the African nation in limelight such as China, Russia and USA.
The West since the beginning of civil war has sponsored mediation in and has backed a permanent ceasefire in the war region. The west has negotiated and pressed the Generals in Sudan for a transition to a civilian-led government.
Russia is eyeing for setting up a naval base in Sudan, linking Moscow to the Indian Ocean. Khartoum in 2019 during oust of Al-Bashir became the second largest buyer of Russian arms in Africa. The West fears the Russian naval deal to which the Sudanese military has shown openness. According to a CNN investigation, Russia is allowed to mine gold in different parts of Sudan which has cushioned the Russian economy amidst the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war. Russia has maintained to act neutral in the ongoing civil war in Sudan.
Like Moscow, Turkey seeks to increase its naval presence in the Red Sea and maintains its soft power through charities, educational institutions with Sudan. Turkey ensures a constructive perception in the Sudan region through its soft power.
The two Generals in the country could not come to a consensus and every ceasefire agreement has been momentary since mid-April. The nation amidst this power struggle is facing a huge humanitarian, economic crisis along with mass displacement in the region.
The French Pensions reform bill signed by French President Emmanuel Macron will come into effect from early September. The bill had received widespread backlash from workers around the country, leading to many protests and unaccounted violent attacks in many parts of the country. The bill was in talks from 2019 with warnings and public backlash, but President Macron continued with his plan to increase the legal retirement age from 62 to 64 along with the number of years needed to be in service in order to be eligible for pensions. He argued life expectancy rates have increased and it is straining the country’s economy. This reform was to come into act from 2019 but got delayed because of the Covid-19 situation prevalent across the world.
Background
The plans for increasing the retirement age have been in talks in France for years and there have been various motions to set it in place but it always sparked tensions and protests from the people. France is one of few countries in the world which has the lowest retirement age and the highest pensions for decades. This system has persisted for so long that the economy is faltering. Many other European countries like the UK have increased their ages for retirement as it is the only way to match the increasing number of living older population.
President Macron claims the economy will run into a ditch if the pension reform plans are not put into focus. If the plan is not put into motion, then the economy will have a rundown by 2023 and 2027, although it is said to get back on track by the mid-2030s based on reports by France’s Pension Advisory Council. Although attempts to have any increase have been met only with criticism from the opposition as well as the public. In his first term, President Macron met with criticism for his take on the pension reform plans. Previously, in 1995, the then President Jacques Chirac, planned to increase the age of retirement for some categories of civil servants, but it did not come into effect because it was met with protests with millions of people on the street for the longest period. 2010 was also a year of the marked protests in France over the increase of legal retirement age from 60 to 62. Although it was met with criticism, the government increased the age after the protests subsided after a week. Protestors in France have had success in persuading the government not to make any changes to the pensions bill over the course of years in the country.
Why people are Protesting?
The people in France have been protesting head on for weeks against the increase in the legal retirement age of workers from 62 to 64. They argue that there is no such case of economic crisis and that the government must not burden people even more. Opponents, which include the left as well as the right and the workers’ union, cite that there is no need for such reforms as they will take away a good two years of retirement from the blue-collar workers instead of increasing the taxes of wealthy people.
The bill is said to only benefit the rich and will drive the blue-collar workers into more hustling and even lesser chance of living a happy life after retirement. The bill not only increased the age but also increased the number of years required to fulfil the minimum criteria to be eligible for the pension. This has triggered protests in mass numbers in the cites of Paris, Lyon and Nantes. Labour unions estimate an amount of 2 million people to have come for the protests, while France’s interior ministry has estimated a sum of 570,000. People have been looting stores and restaurants, bank windows are smashed and the BlackRock office in Paris has been invaded. The police have responded with teargas.
The hard-left leader of France, Jean-Luc Melencho says that the protests will continue no matter the outcome of the courts. People are gathering in thousands in Paris and there have been violent attacks and vandalising by the left wing.
The reform bill has not been popular with the members of Parliament either and they do not want to risk public opinion. The public have always been reluctant to the bill and always protested it whenever it was bought up be it 1995, 2010 or 2019. This made it even more reasonable for the Parliament to not support the bill.
Macron, on the other hand, believes that the protests will subside after the coming of the decision from the constitutional council, which will decide if the bill needs to be kept in case of a constitutional appeal by another party. He hopes the result will discourage the protests and that the people will understand the need for reforms in the now globalizing world.
How Macron Pushed through the Reform despite so much opposition?
President Macron faced so much opposition to the reform bill even from the Parliament. So, he decided to move differently around this bill by cancelling the vote. Instead of doing normal parliamentary voting, the President pushed for a controversial special constitutional power. Article 49.3 of the French constitution gives the government the power to bypass the Parliament.
Macron changed the voting method only minutes before the lower house members were about to cast their vote. Macron was in meetings and discussions with political leaders and finally decided to use the extra constitutional power to bypass parliament’s decisions. He explains that the country’s economy is at risk and it cannot be taken lightly. The left and the hard left-wing MPs voiced their opposition in the Parliament by singing the national anthem loudly and asking the President to resign. A vote of no-confidence was called 24 hours after of Article 49.3 and the President narrowly escaped the no-confidence motion by the vote of 278, it fell short 9 votes as 287 votes. If a no-confidence motion had been a success, then the President had to name a new government or hold new elections. A second no-confidence motion set out by Marine Le Pen’s far-right National Rally party was also not met with any success.
Pensions in other European Nations
A closer look at the numbers in the European nations will give a better idea of how France stands in comparison to its other neighbours. France has one of the lowest retirement ages among the European nations. The average age is 64.3 across the 27 nations in Europe. The OECD explains that French people spend longer in retirement as their retirement age is lower and the life expectancy of people is longer than in other European nations. A French man spends 23.5 years in retirement, second to Luxembourg’s 24 years and Britain and Germany’s 20 years. The French spend 14 percent of their economic output on retirement pensions and that is double the OECD average of 7.7 percent. The only two countries spending more than France are Greece and Italy, but this keeps France’s poverty rate at 4 percent compared to other European countries and their gap between the rich and poor is very grim when compared to other nations. The argument which can be made here is not whether France provides a better policy for pensioners, but it depends upon the metric that is used to measure or access the situation.
Moving Forward
France’s President must make decisions ever so carefully now about pensions reform. The judgements and decisions he make will end up having drastic consequences for his people. People are on the streets demanding to take back the reform as they believe it will bring more harm than good, as the President claims. The French pension reforms have always sparked conflicts between the people and the government dating back to history. This clash is always going to be pertinent between the government and the people. Making decisions that will not endanger the common likings of the people as well as the economy is very important for the proper functioning of a country. The French President believes that working a bit longer like their European neighbours could save the country from an economic meltdown, but this is yet to be seen as a study published by a think tank called Rexecode on how the French pensions reform will affect the economy explains that even with the reform, the country will face an economic crisis in the future.
Warfare in the 21st century has created another wave of changes in a phenomenon historically known as ‘revolution in military affairs”. Wars in this century are being fought by advanced sophisticated machines, on behalf of their human owners. Human psyche has now shifted to let machines fight tactical and operational battles on their own. This is where concepts like artificial intelligence serve the purpose of non-contact warfare. The objective here is to minimize the loss and the costs of losing human life. Small scale machines that are capable of delivering deadly weapons to the enemy are being developed. These machines are unmanned – they do not have a human pilot or a driver sitting inside them. They can be either remotely operated by human controllers sitting in a faraway location, or they can be programmed and trained to be autonomous or self-driven.
Two recent happenings in this domain merit our attention towards a new development in unmanned combat systems. Hitherto these technologies were primarily being used for land warfare and air warfare. The new development is about the unmanned systems now being developed to fight naval battles as well. These recent developments are: the launching of Turkey’s first drone aircraft-carrier and the Indian Navy’s launch of a program to develop High Endurance Underwater Vehicles (HEUV).
Turkey’s First Drone Aircraft-Carrier
Turkey commissioned its largest warship on April 10 2023: the TCG Anadolu, being touted as the world’s first Unmanned Combat Aerial Aircraft (UCAV) carrier which carried the prototype of the latest Bayraktar TB3 drone sitting on its deck.
This is Turkey’s first aircraft carrier and the first ship in the world with an air wing made primarily of unmanned aircrafts. According to the Turkish media Daily Sabah, the carrier is expected to have a mix of different UCAVs in the future. Also, this carrier is categorised as an ‘amphibious assault ship’. With a displacement of 27,436 tons, it is 32 meters wide and 231 meters long. It can operate at sea for 50 days, has a top speed of about 21 knots, and a range of 9,000 nautical miles3. Previously when Turkey was a part of the US made F-35 stealth fighter program, this particular carrier was being designed keeping in mind that it would carry the F-35 jets. But USA kicked out Turkey from the F-35 deal after Turkey purchased the S-400 missile system from Russia. Scholars say that this forced Turkey to alter the carrier’s design to carry UCAVs and helicopters. Now the ship will witness the installation of drone control stations with satellite terminals for longer-range connections, a “roller system” at the ship’s bow to aid in uncrewed aircraft launch, an arresting gear system on the deck to facilitate UCAV landings, and safety nets for the recovery of smaller drone types.
“The Anadolu has six spots where medium-load transport, assault, or general-purpose helicopters can land and take off, along with two other spots that serve as a landing platform for heavy cargo transport helicopters, even though its flight deck is not long enough for classic warplanes to land and take off. Its lightweight deck can support up to 30 wheeled vehicles, including armoured personnel carriers and amphibious vehicles. At least 12 medium-load helicopters can be transported using the ship’s hanger. Tanks and other large, tracked vehicles with substantial armour can be transported on the heavy vehicle deck located at the top of the carrier’s pool”.
The carrier launch was followed by a lift off of the latest Bayraktar TB3 drone. This drone will be fully operational by 2024. Media reports say that the TB3 will fly alongside the Bayraktar Kizilelma, a carrier launched “unmanned fighter jet” which will become operational by 2025. The modern TB3 is the most recent iteration of the potent TB range of assault drones produced by Turkish company Baykar. The TB3, however, is believed to have superior capabilities than its predecessor Bayraktar TB2 and would be used for exports in addition to its domestic deployment in the seas. It must be mentioned that Turkey has already exported a variant of this drone to Pakistan, that rang alarm bells in New Delhi.
The Bayraktar TB3 has foldable wings designed for ship decks and short runways that can take off and land on aircraft carriers. It can also carry out intelligence, reconnaissance, and surveillance tasks in addition to attack operations.
Indian Navy’s Extra Large Unmanned Underwater Vehicle
India has launched an Extra Large Unmanned Underwater Vehicle (XLUUV) development project. Around 12 units are to be developed as per the primary data available from the Indian Ministry of Defence. First prototype of this XLUUV is expected to be ready by the end of 2025.
The Indian Navy had started planning to acquire unmanned underwater vehicles since a few years, owing to delays in acquiring more submarines under the Project 75-I. It is important to note here that these submarines will be carrying the Air Independent Propulsion Systems (AiP), a condition which has also been mentioned in the specification of these planned XLUVVs.
“The XLUUV may have a maximum ‘length with payload’ of up to 50 meters, width of up to 5 meters, height no more than 10 meters and gross weight without ballast under 300 tons. Similar category of systems used in foreign countries include: the German Modifiable Underwater Mothership, the American Orca XLUUV and the Russian Sarma-D. Though these have not yet been fully developed yet; all exist as prototypes currently. China and Turkey are also reportedly planning to develop such systems”.
The Indian Navy is planning to use these vehicles for purposes like ISR, anti-submarine warfare, anti-surface warfare and mine laying operations.
Autonomous features are a key requirement under which the vessel should be capable of deploying from a pier, conducting operations in shallow and restricted waters and returning to the harbour on its own 6. It must be capable of being transported by motherships and trailers on land. An external payload of up to 10 tons of armament is also under consideration, with the MoD probing the feasibility of mounting two 533 mm torpedo tubes and mine laying capability for the XLUUV.
“The submerged vessel should have a maximum speed of 8 knots (15 kilometres/9 miles per hour) and a cruise speed of 4 knots (7.4 kilometres/5 miles per hour). Propulsion options may include integrated thrusters or propellers using electric motors. The XLUUV is mandated to have a maximum endurance of over 45 days using either Li-Po/Li-ion batteries or a fuel cell-based Air Independent Propulsion (AIP) system as the power source. A diesel generator may be used to recharge any batteries”.
Mazagon Dock Shipbuilders Limited (MDL) had issued an expression of interest in March 2022 for collaboration with global firms in design, development and construction of XLUUVs. Eight smaller High Endurance Autonomous Underwater Vehicles (HEAUV) are also planned to be inducted. These containerized eight-ton vessels would be capable of anti-submarine warfare and mine countermeasure operations, with an endurance of over two weeks. Including the time spent in designing and product development, if successful, these systems will be inducted before the Indian Navy gets any of the six submarines being planned under the Project 75-I. But this is a tactical move on the part of the Indian Navy to bridge the gaps in submarine procurement. These vessels should not be considered as a replacement of the submarine program, since submarines are a strategic asset, and therefore irreplaceable at least in the next 30 years. The government will still have to focus on keeping up the strength of its submarine fleet, to maintain an edge over its adversaries.
Conclusion
While the public and the media have been paying more attention to hypersonics, laser weapons, AI etc. this particular development in unmanned underwater systems hasn’t garnered much public attention. But militaries and strategists globally have been thinking about acquiring these lethal technologies since long. Underwater assets are important since: they offer an element of surprise and deniability. A quiet submarine or potent under water platform hidden in the depth of the oceans that can strike a deadly blow anytime, avoiding any kind of detection, is still arguably the best weapon of choice available to armed forces. Plus, the operational and maintenance costs are much lesser as compared to submarines which take years to build and are tough to maintain. Whatever investment goes into these XLUVVs, majority of it happens in the development phase. Once fully deployed, these can be produced at an industrial scale and deployed in any part of the world, technically. Also, since they do not carry human beings, losing any number of these machines would still be economically bearable. Same principles also apply for unmanned drones, irrespective of whether they take off from a ship or a runway. Being launched from an aircraft carrier increases the range of these drones which come at a much lower per-unit price than sophisticated fighters. The cost of human training and salaries etc. also get saved in the longer run here. This unmanned systems market is therefore a quantitative market. It increases the lethal reach of the operator with no direct loss of physical lives. Such systems are therefore a part of the new generation of the ‘revolution in military affairs’ , a scenario in which they will operate autonomously as well as a part of ‘system of systems’. Such disruptive technologies will then definitely alter the balance of power in the world, as the nation which has a technological edge over its adversary will have a qualitative advantage in the end results of any conflict.
About the Author
Rahul Wankhede is a post graduate in Defence and Strategic Studies with a gold medal. Rahul has worked with think tanks and NGOs in the domains of research, analysis and mentoring and is a former Assistant Professor in the Department of Defence and Strategic Studies, Savitribai Phule Pune University, Pune, India. Currently he is doing PhD from JNU Special Centre for National Security Studies. The views expressed are personal.
India-Armenia-Iran trilateral meeting on April 20, 2023
Armenia hosted the first ever Trilateral meeting of India Armenia and Iran Format on April 20, 2022 in Yerevan. Yerevan is getting quite close with two increasingly important partners for Armenia as it navigates the geopolitical landscape during a difficult period in its ties with Moscow. The foreign ministries of the three countries focused mostly on economic problems and regional communication lines, but with some defence considerations thrown in for good measure. JP Singh, Joint Secretary of the Ministry of External Affairs, led the Indian delegation. Armenia and Azerbaijan are in a constant struggle with each other and with Russia’s recent Special Military Operation in Ukraine it has not been able to get the same sense of security from its warrantor Russia as it enjoyed in the past. Iran in this struggle is aligning itself with Armenia and backing Yerevan. Whereas Russia is currently unable to operate as a weapons supplier, India is being sought as a prospective replacement. This comes at a time when Pakistan, Turkey, and Azerbaijan are stepping up trilateral collaboration.
Armenia-Azerbaijan struggle
The Second Karabakh War, which took place between September and November 2020, was a military conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the disputed region of Nagorno-Karabakh. The conflict resulted in the loss of many lives and displacement of thousands of civilians. The conflict was triggered by the Armenian military’s attack on Azerbaijani positions in the region on September 27, 2020. Azerbaijan responded with a counter-offensive, which led to intense fighting between the two sides. The conflict was marked by the use of heavy artillery, drones, and other advanced military technology.
The war ended with a Russian-brokered ceasefire on November 10, 2020, which resulted in Azerbaijan regaining control of much of the territory it had lost in the previous conflict in the 1990s. The ceasefire also provided for the deployment of Russian peacekeepers in the region to monitor the situation. But with the ongoing Russia-Ukraine War, Russia “The Warrantor” of peace in the region is not able to provide it.
The recent conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the disputed region of Nagorno-Karabakh has been a matter of concern for the international community. The two countries have a long-standing territorial dispute over this region, which has led to several clashes and military confrontations in the past.
The recent escalation of violence in the region has resulted in the loss of many lives and displacement of thousands of civilians. The situation is complex and multifaceted, with several factors contributing to the conflict. The issue of Nagorno-Karabakh is not just a territorial dispute but also involves questions of identity, history and geopolitics.
Iran’s Backing
Iran has historically played a significant role in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Iran shares borders with both Armenia and Azerbaijan and has a large population of ethnic Azerbaijanis living within its borders. Iran has also been a mediator between Armenia and Azerbaijan in the past. Iran has been calling for a peaceful resolution to the conflict and has expressed concern over the recent escalation of violence. Iran has also offered to mediate between the two sides and has been in contact with both Armenia and Azerbaijan to try and find a diplomatic solution to the conflict.
However, Iran’s position on the conflict is complicated by its own internal politics and regional dynamics. Iran has close ties with Armenia and has been a strategic partner for many years. At the same time, Iran is wary of Azerbaijan’s ties with Israel and the United States, which it sees as a threat to its own security.
Zangezur Corridor
The Zangezur Corridor is a proposed transportation link that would connect Azerbaijan and its exclave of Nakhichevan with Turkey, passing through the southern Armenian region of Syunik (Zangezur). The corridor has the potential to significantly boost economic connectivity and regional integration in the South Caucasus. The Zangezur Corridor has the potential to serve as a key trade route connecting Europe and Asia. It could also help to unlock the economic potential of the South Caucasus, which has long been hampered by political tensions and conflict.
However, the corridor is a complex issue, given that it involves several countries with competing interests. The Armenian government has expressed concerns about the potential impact of the corridor on its national security, given that it would pass through a strategic region of Armenia and Iran is backing Armenia considering a threat to its national security as well. At the same time, Azerbaijan and Turkey see the corridor as a vital link for their economic and strategic interests.
India’s Defence Ties
India and Armenia have had a long-standing defense cooperation, with India providing military training and equipment to Armenian armed forces. In 2018, India and Armenia signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) on defense cooperation, which included areas such as military training, joint exercises, and exchange of defense-related information. The MoU was aimed at further deepening the bilateral defense ties between the two countries. India has also been a key supplier of defense equipment to Armenia in the past. In 2017, India supplied four SWATHI weapon locating radars to Armenia, which were aimed at enhancing the country’s artillery firepower.
India and Armenia have maintained a strong defense partnership, and it is believed that this partnership will continue to grow in the future with the development of this Trilateral and can be a counter- balance to the Pakistan-Azerbaijan-Turkey Axis.
Boost to Make in India
With Armenia now seeking more defence equipment, this can boost the efforts of self- reliance and “Make in India”. Firstly, it demonstrates India’s growing role as a major defence supplier in the global market. India has been steadily increasing its defence exports in recent years, and this is a testament to its capabilities in this area.
Secondly, the deals will be a boost to India’s “Make in India” initiative, which will aim to promote domestic manufacturing and reduce dependence on imports. By manufacturing defence equipment for export, India can not only earn foreign exchange but also create jobs and boost the domestic economy.
Thirdly, it is a sign of the growing strategic partnership between India and Armenia. India and Armenia have traditionally had friendly relations, and this deal will further strengthen the ties between the two countries.
Scope for Future
There is great potential for cooperation and collaboration between these three countries. Each country has its unique strengths and capabilities that can be leveraged for mutual benefit. In terms of economic cooperation, there are several areas where the trilateral can work together, such as energy, infrastructure, and trade. Iran is a major oil and gas producer, while India and Armenia are major consumers. There is, therefore, scope for energy cooperation, including the development of the North-South Transport Corridor, which will connect India with Central Asia and Russia via Iran and Azerbaijan.
In addition, there is potential for cooperation in the fields of science, technology, and education. The trilateral can work towards the exchange of expertise and knowledge-sharing in areas such as biotechnology, nanotechnology, and renewable energy. Furthermore, the trilateral can also collaborate on regional security issues, particularly with regards to terrorism and extremism. The three countries can share intelligence and coordinate their efforts to counter these threats.
Overall, the future of this trilateral depends on the willingness of the three countries to work together and overcome any challenges that may arise. With a shared commitment to peace, stability, and development, the India-Armenia-Iran trilateral can be a powerful force for progress in the region.
The role of regional organizations has indeed increased in the era of globalization as the interdependence among nations has grown. SAARC, or the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation, is a regional inter-governmental organization established in 1985 with eight member states including India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Nepal, Bhutan, Sri Lanka, and Maldives. It aims to promote peace, prosperity, and regional integration in South Asia. SAARC has a secretariat in Nepal and maintains observer status at the United Nations. It represents 21% of the world’s population despite occupying only 3% of the world’s area. Extra-regional countries like China, Japan, European Union, and USA also hold observer status at SAARC.
MAJOR ACHIEVEMENTS OF SAARC IN THE CONTEXT OF REGIONAL COOPERATION
SAARC (South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation) has dramatically grown and developed over the last 26 years through increasing interaction and cooperative efforts among its member states. SAARC’s recent accomplishments can be summarised as follows:
IMPROVED COOPERATION
SAARC (South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation) has seen greater cooperation among member nations since its creation in 1985, emphasizing improving living standards, cultural and regional economic growth, and cooperation with other regions. Recognizing the significance of regional cooperation and development, SAARC members have focused on the practical implementation of plans and policies to transform the region into a developed one. This has resulted in the establishment and launch of several mutually beneficial programs and forums, including the South Asian University, SAARC International College, agreements on judicial cooperation in counter-terrorism, the establishment of a food bank and development funds, a telemedicine network, the SAARC Writers and Literature Foundation, and the South Asia Foundation. Furthermore, associated centers focus on the environment, policy studies, women’s empowerment, and other topics.
EXPANDED TRADE AND ECONOMIC INTEGRATION
Economic and trade cooperation is critical to the success of SAARC (South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation) and South Asia’s growth. Economic cooperation discussions within SAARC formed the South Asian Free Trade Area (SAFTA), which superseded the Preferential Trading Area (SAPTA) in the 1990s. SAFTA includes a tariff reduction plan, with Pakistan and India promising to lower tariffs on all commodities to 20% within two years, and the remaining member nations committed to 30% reductions within three years. In the second phase, Pakistan and India committed to lower tariffs on imports to 0-5% within five years, and the rest of the members pledged to do so within seven years. While implementing free trade in the region has been difficult, member nations are nevertheless moving forward with initiatives to boost regional prosperity and collaboration.
COOPERATION WITH OBSERVERS
SAARC countries recognize that, as a relatively poor region, they require help and assistance in numerous aspects of their economies, including capital, resources, education, and technology. In recent years, developed and advanced countries such as the United States, Japan, China, South Korea, Iran, and the European Union have shown a growing interest in assisting in social and economic spheres. SAARC has actively engaged in making agreements and memoranda of understanding (MOUs) with various regional and international organizations, including the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), International Telecommunications Union (ITU), United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), United Nations Drug Control Programme (UNDCP), Asia Pacific Telecommunity (APT), and United Nations International Children Education Fund (UNICEF). These agreements and MOUs signify SAARC’s commitment to cooperating with these organizations in areas such as development, telecommunications, trade, drug control, and education for the betterment of the region.
PEOPLE-TO-PEOPLE CONTACT
SAARC recognizes that developing people-to-people relations is an essential goal of regional cooperation. Despite the constraints of building a climate conducive to open social connection due to the massive institutional structure, SAARC has undertaken several initiatives to promote people-to-people connectedness throughout South Asia. South Asian Festivals, Association of SAARC Speakers and Parliamentarians, SAARC Law, Cooperation of Non-Governmental Organisations, SAARC Chamber of Commerce and Industry, SAARC Scheme for Promotion of Organised Tourism, and SAARC Documentation Centre are among the initiatives. Civil society in member nations also plays a vital role in establishing communication networks among intellectuals, writers, journalists, academics, and retired civil and military personnel. This goal of people-to-people connectivity influences the success of Track II diplomacy between Pakistan and India. Former Indian Prime Minister I. K. Gujral described SAARC’s development in creating people-to-people contacts within South Asia as a “New Regionalism” enveloping the entire South Asian area.
FINANCIAL COOPERATION
SAARC Finance Ministers Meetings are an essential part of the SAARC agenda, with four meetings held so far in Pakistan, India, the Maldives, and Bhutan. The First SAARC Finance Ministers Meeting formed an Inter-Governmental Expert Group on Financial Matters to prepare a path for realizing the South Asian Economic Union (SAEU) in stages. Member countries are exchanging concept papers in the financial sector, and a SAARC Expert Group on the Development of Capital Markets in South Asia was also convened. The Sixth Inter-Governmental Expert Group on Financial Issues met in April 2013, followed by the Seventh Informal Meeting of SAARC Finance Ministers in New Delhi in May 2013, which discussed financial cooperation progress and explored new opportunities.
COOPERATION ON SECURITY AND TERRORISM
Under UN Security Council Resolution 1373, SAARC (South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation) signed the SAARC Convention on Terrorism Suppression in 1987, followed by the Additional Protocol on Terrorism in 2005. Despite these critical texts, member countries have shown little enthusiasm or collaboration on issues of terrorist violence and funding. The establishment of the SAARC Terrorist Offences Monitoring Desk (STOMD) and SAARC Drug Offences Monitoring Desk (SDOMD) in Colombo, Sri Lanka, demonstrates that cooperation has been mostly limited to bilateral projects.
INTEGRATED PROGRAM OF ACTION
The IPA is an important program within the SAARC process, consisting of 12 areas of cooperation, each supervised by a specific Technical Committee. The Secretary-General reports to the Standing Committee on the status of IPA enforcement, which also analyses the operation of the Technical Committees, their mandates, and the Secretariat’s activities. Agriculture, communications, education, culture and sports, environment, health, population activities and child welfare, meteorology, prevention of drug trafficking and drug abuse, rural development, science and technology, tourism, transportation, and women in development are just a few of the topics covered by IPA’s various committees.
POVERTY ERADICATION
As one of the world’s poorest regions, poverty eradication is a primary goal for SAARC. With over 1.6 billion people in its eight member countries and almost 40% of the population living in poverty, combating poverty is a huge concern. The Independent South Asian Commission on Poverty Alleviation (ISACPA), which conducts in-depth studies on member states’ experiences, was enhanced at the Seventeenth SAARC Summit in 2011. Social mobilization, access to education, safe drinking water, health services, nutrition, agricultural development, labor-intensive industrialization, and human resource development are all strategies for poverty alleviation.
SHORTCOMINGS OF SAARC
INTER-STATE DISPUTES
Mistrust, mutual security concerns, and hatred are barriers to SAARC member cooperation. Member countries perceive neighboring countries as threatening in various ways, including politically, economically, and territorially. Historical conflicts of colonial control and disagreements following colonial masters’ departure, such as loss of property, lives, identities, and communal violence, continue to impact relationships. There is always the possibility that the community and terrorist threats will impede efforts to cooperate.
FEAR OF INDIAN DOMINATION
Fear of India’s perceived hegemonic influence in the region is one of the primary reasons behind SAARC’s failure. Concerns have been made by neighboring nations such as Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and Bangladesh about India’s intention to lead and participate in decision-making processes.
CIVILIZATIONS CLASH
Professor Samuel Huntington’s book “The Clash of Civilizations” suggests that SAARC has been a failure due to cultural differences among member countries, particularly India and Pakistan, which have a history of hostility and violence. Disagreements over minor concerns are common, and member countries lack a sense of belonging. The deteriorating India-Pakistan ties have raised concerns about SAARC’s future prospects, with the 19th SAARC summit in 2016 being indefinitely cancelled. There is growing fear that India may prioritize alternative regional cooperation platforms like BIMSTEC, as seen from its diplomatic investment in BIMSTEC through summits, ministerial meetings, and disaster management exercises. This aligns with India’s strategy of isolating Pakistan and advancing regional integration without their participation.
The China-Pakistan axis is strengthening, and the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) is helping Pakistan overcome its geopolitical isolation in South Asia. The “clash of civilizations” is deepening, with religion, culture, and civilization becoming primary markers of identity in the post-cold war world. These factors do not bode well for the future prospects of India-Pakistan relations and SAARC.
UNSTABLE FINANCIAL POSITION
The organization’s future is doubtful due to SAARC member countries’ poor financial standing. Members’ trade imbalances reflect their economic underdevelopment. Most member nations export comparable items, with India playing a significant role, encouraging aid demands/arrangements and extra-regional commerce rather than regional economic integration. South Asia has limited intra-regional trade, and member nations compete rather than complement one another, hampering SAARC’s goal.
LACK OF ECONOMIC INTEGRATION
Despite establishing SAFTA in 2006, SAARC’s lack of economic integration might be linked to persistent tensions and strained relations between India and Pakistan. Despite having a combined nominal GDP of approximately US $3.31 trillion, making it one of the world’s emerging development regions, SAARC nations have been unable to meet the enormous market demand across a variety of sectors, including industry, services, agriculture, and health, due to a lack of interdependence. This has resulted in market exploitation by China and other global players, as their proactive approach, bulk production, consistent supply, lower prices, and infrastructure development in countries such as Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka have harmed India’s economic standing in the South Asian region.
LACK OF TRUST BETWEEN MEMBER STATES
A considerable lack of trust among SAARC member states impedes the regional organization’s future development. Historical rivalry and mistrust have done significant harm, and elites in member nations do not trust one another because of nationalistic feelings, entrenched interests, and inter-state disputes. Such issues make it difficult to grow SAARC on a solid foundation.
EXCLUSION OF CONTENTIOUS ISSUES FROM THE SAARC CHARTER
SAARC’s charter has self-imposed peculiarities, such as the prohibition on discussing contentious and bilateral problems. While it encourages greater cooperation and exchanges, it avoids negotiating such disagreements. Furthermore, the requirement for majority decision-making makes reaching a consensus harder. These issues indicate an unstable inter-state relationship and impede South Asian citizens’ equal involvement in policymaking. This weakens the organization’s fundamental goal and jeopardizes its long-term development.
DIFFERENT POLITICAL SYSTEMS
South Asian countries’ different political systems, from democracy in India to transitional democracy in Pakistan, kingship in Nepal, and a presidential system in Sri Lanka, have contributed to SAARC’s failure. Many countries in the region have experienced insecurity due to weak democratic governance. The Kashmir dispute between Pakistan and India has stopped them from cooperating and putting aside their disagreements inside the SAARC conference. Furthermore, India has disagreements with other SAARC members, such as Bangladesh, Bhutan, and Nepal, which has hampered achieving SAARC’s goals.
ASYMMETRY BETWEEN INDIA AND OTHER MEMBER STATES
The economic, technological, and demographic disparities between India and the other SAARC member countries have aided India’s dominance. India has a substantial advantage because of its bigger size, economy, and technological infrastructure, accounting for the majority of regional GDP and worldwide exports. However, smaller South Asian nations are concerned about their commercial relations with India because of the current tariff structure, despite the fact that India has a substantial trade surplus with its neighbors and a significant volume of informal trade. India’s core geographical location within the area also makes it a vital link for the region’s other member countries.
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN AFGHANISTAN AND PAKISTAN
Recent developments in Afghanistan and Pakistan include PM Narendra Modi’s proposal at the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation to reject the Taliban regime in Afghanistan due to concerns about terrorism, illegal activities, and potential humanitarian crises. SAARC nations agreed to exclude Afghanistan from SAARC activities. Pakistan’s economic crisis, FATF grey listing, and limited financial support may exacerbate the humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan, leading to hunger, lack of medicines, poverty, and misery.
SAARC’s failure can be attributed to a lack of visionary leadership, inadequate cost-benefit analysis, bureaucratic obstacles, unnecessary formality, political will, unanimous decision-making, and a lack of cohesive vision. These factors have hampered the organization’s efficiency and ability in addressing globalization concerns, border skirmishes, infiltration, terrorism, and water disputes among member countries, potentially exacerbating interstate rivalries and worsening relations.
NEED FOR REFORMS
POLITICAL REFORMS
Policy actions at both the government and non-government levels, together with South Asian leaders’ dedication and mutual confidence, can assist in stabilizing and building the region. Among the suggested projects and policy actions are: For regional stability and collaboration, India should approach neighboring South Asian countries with a cooperative and equal partnership rather than a domineering “big brother” attitude. The significance of SAARC has grown in response to shifting global and regional dynamics, and India should be aware of this. Because most problems in South Asia revolve around India, using a low-key approach can help develop trust among smaller neighboring countries.
CCGs (Conflict Coordination Groups) can be formed within SAARC to address bilateral disputes if all parties involved agree to seek SAARC’s assistance. To maintain impartiality, these panels can include members from both parties in dispute as well as other member states. CCGs can also address concerns such as the exploitation of women and children or other challenges that countries in the region agree to address.
To recover the trust of its neighbors, Indian leaders should emphasize the phrase “Dependable India” rather than hard force. The COVID-19 pandemic has given India a chance to demonstrate its proactive attitude under PM Narendra Modi’s leadership, such as bringing all SAARC states together on a shared video platform, providing a glimmer of hope for the resurrection of SAARC. Despite the fact that public health has not traditionally been a strength of SAARC members, India’s initiative is admirable. It has positioned itself as a leader amid the global crisis, demonstrating the spirit of SAARC for regional collaboration.
The SAARC Charter should include provisions for member country leaders to debate international concerns such as peace, security, trade, the environment, and technological transfers. The current system does not allow for such discussions because summit statements are drafted by bureaucrats ahead of time, preventing leaders from exchanging views on regional issues. During the CTBT negotiations in Geneva, for example, India and Pakistan had comparable concerns but did not collaborate, reducing collective strength. SAARC could also explore provisions for the peaceful resolution of bilateral conflicts and relaxation of the necessity for unanimous decision-making on all issues, including bilateral ones. However, geographical sovereignty, political independence, and non-interference must be upheld.
Individual governments from all eight member nations play a critical role in strengthening SAARC. Trust and earnest efforts are required to overcome the lack of development in the organization. With constructive thinking and a cooperative vision, SAARC has the potential to exceed the European Union (EU) in regional integration. To address issues such as cross-border violations and detentions, a SAARC fact-finding team, in partnership with the International Red Cross, may be constituted to investigate claims by visiting jails and incarceration centers.
The suggestion is that the sudden US withdrawal from Afghanistan in August 2021 has created a vacuum that various terrorist and extremist forces could fill. As an alternative, the proposal of a joint UN Peacekeeping Force (UNPKF) from the SAARC region, under the United Nations auspices, is presented as an option to be considered.
ECONOMIC REFORMS
Regional policy changes must be monitored to effectively respond to globalization’s difficulties, such as trade liberalization, tariffs, and price controls. All member countries would gain from establishing a shared identity for South Asia regarding quality, brand names, standards, and investment regimes. Sub-regional cooperation can promote development between West Bengal, Bangladesh, and Bangladesh-India-Nepal. Improving road, rail, and air transit infrastructure is critical for improved engagement among South Asian communities. Joint venture ventures in the service and education sectors can transcend cultural divides and encourage people-to-people collaboration. India should be trustworthy and accommodating to foster trust among smaller neighbors. Economic policy coordination, learning from triumphs and failures, the construction of free trade zones, the free flow of physical and financial resources, and targeted development are all vital for developing South Asia’s regional economic integration.
The idea is that economic integration is critical for tackling SAARC’s difficulties and that economic and social factors must take precedence over security concerns. During the COVID-19 epidemic, India’s outreach, such as delivering vaccines to SAARC members, including Pakistan, and humanitarian assistance to Sri Lanka, could serve as accelerators for restoring commercial and market-related activity within SAARC. India’s activities and goals should be supported to stimulate regional economic activity, increase competitiveness and interdependence, and pave the road for a self-sufficient SAARC (“Atmanirbhar SAARC”).
SOCIAL REFORMS
To facilitate dialogues and exchanges, people-oriented organizations such as civic, political, professional, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) should cooperate to foster regional cooperation in South Asia. Building a South Asian identity based on shared norms rooted in cultural, historical, social, ethnic, and civilizational traditions is critical, and the state should prioritize civil society. Greater exchanges of academics, poets, and cultural circles across South Asian countries and simple access to each other’s TV and electronic programs can boost mutual collaboration and trust-building activities. Media actions, particularly electronic media, have the potential to bring South Asians closer together. Another potential approach is establishing a SAARC Joint Commission comprising notable historians from member nations to help document the region’s history and eliminate historical misconceptions.
INSTITUTIONAL REFORMS
Institutional adjustments are required to increase the SAARC Secretariat’s responsiveness and effectiveness, including raising the Secretariat’s size to deal with the IPA’s wide range of challenges. Member nations should also contribute additional funds, such as 1% of their defense budgets, to support the Secretariat’s expanded activities. To improve contact among member nations, the Secretariat should plan at least three summit meetings of Foreign Ministers and leaders of states each year and more frequent meetings of ministers in other portfolios. With the nations’ permission, the Secretariat should also be given more leeway in preparing position papers on multilateral matters. Furthermore, the establishment of a SAARC Parliament or Assembly with deliberative functions could help to achieve a well-integrated economic community. Coordination with non-governmental organizations (NGOs) should also be improved to expand economic and infrastructure aid.
SUGGESTIONS TO IMPROVE INDIA-PAKISTAN RELATIONS FOR BETTER FUNCTIONING OF SAARC
The suggestion acknowledges the significance of SAARC meetings in promoting regional cooperation and re-engaging with neighboring countries. It emphasizes India’s leadership role in revitalizing SAARC through a soft power approach. It also highlights that the provision of holding meetings as per the SAARC Charter is often not followed. The suggestion emphasizes the need for proactive efforts from Pakistan in calling for SAARC meetings, despite existing tensions, and suggests virtual meetings as a possible solution to logistical challenges.
Including Pakistan in India’s ‘Neighbourhood First’ Policy could have potential benefits, such as promoting cooperation, dispelling notions of hegemony, and addressing regional challenges like terrorism and better functioning of SAARC. However, it’s important to consider the complexities of the India-Pakistan relationship and broader geopolitical dynamics in South Asia.
Efforts to improve trade relations between India and Pakistan would require careful consideration of complexities, diplomatic efforts, confidence-building measures, and sustained dialogue. Addressing mutual concerns, building trust, and addressing relevant factors like infrastructure, regulatory frameworks, and trade facilitation measures would be crucial for smooth functioning of SAARC.
Pakistan and India in the SCO might potentially improve their relationship by providing a platform for the growth of friendship and addressing unresolved issues. Attending SCO gatherings can also help overcome the SAARC impasse brought on by tensions between India and Pakistan, which might eventually improve SAARC performance.
Cultural diplomacy involves diverse exchanges like art, music, dance, theatre, sports, and artists, beyond performing arts. These bilateral exchanges can alleviate political tension and promote stability and peace in bilateral relations, ultimately contributing to the improved functioning of organizations like SAARC. For example, sports events like cricket can be a part of cultural diplomacy efforts to foster better relations between countries.
Initiation of bilateral dialogue between India and Pakistan based on the “UFA” agreement aims to address issues like terrorism, humanitarian concerns, and people-to-people exchanges, signaling willingness for cooperation and potential for new dimensions in diplomatic engagements. Success hinges on commitment, sincerity, and overcoming challenges, and could have a positive impact on SAARC’s functioning.
CONCLUSION
The quote by Nelson Mandela “If you want to make peace with your adversary, you have to cooperate with your opponent, then he joins you as a partner” highlights the potential of SAARC to unite nations through cooperation with adversaries. Despite challenges, the psychological integration of South Asian leaders is seen as a strength of SAARC. Reviving SAARC requires better branding, visibility, and concerted efforts at all levels. SAARC is likely to continue existing in its current form, with meetings, discussions, disagreements, and cancellations. SAARC is not just an organization, but also an idea that promotes harmony and integration among nations, and its vision of regional peace, prosperity, and integration will persist despite challenges.
