The dream of regionalism that accompanied the formation of South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) now seems distant and elusive. Post-colonial South Asia, marked by historical conflicts both internal and external, still finds itself entangled in political and social fragmentation. Situations in countries continue to reflect the persistent animosity sown during the British Raj. The internal crisis is equally palpable, with states themselves discriminating and marginalising minorities through divisive ideologies. Democracy is sliding towards either majoritarianism, one-party autocracy, or hijacked by the military. Economically, countries are grappling with debt crises, stagflation and any economic growth is accompanied by inadequate job creation. Amidst these challenges, the voices of the people are stifled, dissent is curtailed, and the civil space is under attack.
The 19th SAARC summit, scheduled for 2016, remains postponed and unlikely to take place in the foreseeable future, leaving SAARC in a coma. As regional cooperation stagnates, the countries bound by a shared history and commonalities struggle to address pressing challenges that affect them collectively. The region faces an imminent climate crisis, exacerbated by globalisation’s scant regard for human and ecological needs, impacting vulnerable communities. The region witnesses communal and ethnic violence, terrorism, human trafficking, restrictions on women’s right to education and employment, and a wasteful arms race. These myriad issues transcend borders and necessitate integrated solutions, for which regional cooperation is of utmost importance. However, regional collaborations, if any, have often overlooked the needs of people at the grassroots.
In a context where states grapple with internal crises and cooperation falters, People’s SAARC emerges as an essential platform to rejuvenate regional collaboration. It serves as a call for diverse voices, transcending borders, to unite in urging states to seek collective solutions to common problems. The event“People’s Movements Uniting South Asia for Democracy, Social Justice, and Peace” was organised on February 18, 2024, during the World Social Forum 2024. This gathering aimed to provide a platform for civil society, activists, and individuals from diverse backgrounds across South Asia to voice their concerns about the shortcomings of the current regional framework and propose solutions for a more inclusive, just, and sustainable South Asia. The session was moderated by Mohiuddin Ahmad, a writer and activist from Bangladesh.
The representative from Afghanistan emphasised that true transformation in any country must originate from within. Drawing parallels with nations like Afghanistan, Palestine, Iraq, and Ukraine, he highlighted the internal and external factors influencing their trajectories. The representative reflected on Afghanistan’s historical context, denouncing the disruption caused by external interventions. The representative cited the period before 1974 as a time of relative normalcy, and compared it with subsequent conflicts fuelled by external agenda. Highlighting the devastating impact of war, the representative underscored the persistent poverty and loss of lives despite massive international spending. The representative shed light on the plight of Afghan children, many of whom face the harsh reality of child labour amid ongoing turmoil.
Moreover, he condemned the significant control exerted by religious groups, suppressing discussions on human rights, democracy, and women’s rights. In contemplating the broader implications for South Asian people’s rights, the representative’s reflections urged a deeper examination of the region’s challenges and the imperative for internal-driven solutions.
Mohammad Tahseen from Pakistan stressed the importance of embracing a collective South Asian identity in both thought and action. He recounted
the SAARC Secretariat’s call for the formulation of a social charter, highlighting his involvement in the endeavour. Hossain recalled the active participation of Maldivian and Bhutanese representatives in the People’s SAARC initiative, emphasising the inclusive nature of the collaboration. Identifying a key challenge within SAARC, he noted the veto power wielded by any member, which could derail the functioning of the SAARC summit. In response, Hossain advocated for revitalising SAARC as a vital step towards regional cooperation.
Kanak Mani Dixit, a writer and journalist from Nepal, articulated the need for SAARC to operate more effectively, advocating for improvements in its functionality. He underscored South Asian identity as a cultural civilization with a shared heritage, emphasising that SAARC does not fully encapsulate the essence of the common South Asian identity. Dixit critiqued SAARC as merely a platform for ministerial commitments rather than a true representation of South Asia’s diversity. He urged the current chair of SAARC, along with the host country of the meeting, to take proactive measures not only to promote SAARC but also to champion the broader concept of South Asia.
Dixit highlighted specific issues such as the restrictive visa regime to Afghanistan and the absence of direct flights to Pakistan, calling attention to the government’s failure to fulfil its responsibilities in facilitating regional connectivity. Expressing concern over the decline of civil society engagement, Dixit called for a resurgence of civil society activism and lamented the lack of discourse within Nepal.
Likewise, Harsh Mander, social activist from India, shed light on the alarming conditions faced by minorities in India, describing it as a terrifying time for them. He emphasised the interconnectedness of oppression, highlighting how the oppressed in one country often become the oppressors in another. Mander drew parallels with the teachings of Mahatma Gandhi, recalling a pivotal moment in history when India gained independence. He recounted Gandhi’s stance on inclusivity and equality, even amidst widespread violence and communal tensions. Mander made a reference to Gandhi’s belief that India belongs to Muslims as much as to Hindus, underscoring the importance of unity and shared ownership of the nation.
He recounted Gandhi’s symbolic act of fasting in Kolkata on India’s Independence Day in 1947, as a plea to halt the violence at the time of the partition. Overall, Mander’s remarks echoed Gandhi’s principles of non-violence, tolerance, and the imperative of ensuring equal rights and dignity for all citizens, irrespective of religious or ethnic backgrounds.
Deekshya Illangasinghe from the South Asian Human Rights Alliance (SAHR) highlighted the absence of the People’s SAARC for a decade. She underscored the sentiment conveyed by the SAARC Secretariat that individuals must engage with their respective governments to affect
change. Despite the perceived difficulty in dialogue between India and Pakistan, Deekshya stressed the potential for grassroots activism to exert pressure and advocate for the revival of People’s SAARC. She lamented the declining identification of younger activists with the concept of being South Asian, urging for renewed efforts to build momentum. She argued against the notion that alternative regional groupings like BIMSTEC could replace the significance of South Asian collaboration. She criticised governments’ attitudes towards
excluding certain countries from regional initiatives, asserting the need for resistance against such exclusions. She called for unity and collective action to breathe new life into SAARC, emphasising its irreplaceable role in fostering regional cooperation and solidarity.
Sushil Pyakuryel, a human rights activist from Nepal, reflected on the limitations encountered in their efforts, describing it as a period of introspection and soul-searching. He expressed concerns about the erosion of secularism, noting that India, once regarded as a secular state, no longer upholds this principle. Similarly, he observed that Pakistan historically struggled with secularism. Pyakuryel highlighted
the growing pressure in Nepal, where secularism is being challenged.
Govinda Rizal, a researcher from Bhutan, shed light on the historical context of dynastic rule prevalent in the region in the 1980s, making reference to the authoritarian tendencies that suppressed internal opposition. He emphasised how these dynasties formed a cohesive club, consolidating power and
stifling dissent within their respective nations. Reflecting on the relationship between the people and the government in India, Rizal highlighted a disconnection, suggesting that while the Indian populace is friendly, the government’s actions often diverge from the interests of the people. He pointed out a phenomenon where political parties adopt a stance supportive of SAARC while in opposition but become critical of it once in power. Rizal also critiqued the democratic facade in South Asian nations, noting the existence of de facto monarchs within the government apparatus. He drew attention to the substantial presence of the “orange army” in Bhutan, comprising over 40,000 members, which he linked to a monarch’s force. Furthermore, he expressed concerns about the interruptions caused by interim governments in Bhutan during election periods, lamenting how such transitional phases often nullify the progressive initiatives of previous administrations. These observations underscored the challenges faced by South Asian countries in maintaining genuine democratic governance and fostering inclusive political processes.
In closing remarks, Arjun Kumar Karki from LDC Watch reflected on the limitations faced by advocates of regional cooperation, acknowledging the challenges in revitalising initiatives such as People’s SAARC. He emphasised the inherent constraints encountered by smaller nations within intergovernmental bodies like SAARC, where their influence may be overshadowed by larger member states. Karki highlighted the origins of the SAARC concept, which stemmed from the aspirations of smaller countries to forge a sense of regional identity as South Asians. However, he lamented that the initial hope for meaningful collaboration within SAARC now appears to have diminished. Despite these obstacles, Karki underscored the importance of continued advocacy efforts, affirming the role of pressure groups in striving to reactivate SAARC and promote regional dialogue. He acknowledged the potential of holding alternative platforms like People’s SAARC as a means of fostering grassroots engagement and sustaining momentum for regional cooperation initiatives. “No one can stop us from holding People’s SAARC,” he said.
