Sign in Subscribe
4 min read

The Importance of SAARC in South Asia: A Pillar for Regional Cooperation, But Facing Challenges

The Importance of SAARC in South Asia: A Pillar for Regional Cooperation, But Facing Challenges
Flags of SAARC member nations displayed alongside the organization's emblem.

The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), established in December 1985, was envisioned as a vehicle for regional integration, cooperation, and peace. With its eight member states—Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka—SAARC’s mission has been to foster economic growth, social development, and cultural exchange across South Asia. Despite its potential, however, SAARC has encountered significant obstacles, particularly stemming from political tensions between certain member states. These tensions have hindered SAARC’s ability to function effectively and achieve its full potential.

Economic Cooperation and Trade Integration

One of SAARC’s most crucial functions has been to promote economic cooperation, including through agreements like the South Asian Free Trade Area (SAFTA). However, political conflicts have stymied this progress, preventing the region from realizing the benefits of a truly integrated economy. A large part of this challenge stems from the inability of some member states to collaborate due to long-standing geopolitical tensions.

Challenges Within SAARC: The Role of Political Tensions

A significant reason behind SAARC's underperformance is the ongoing rivalry between India and Pakistan, two of the largest and most influential members of the association. The strained relations between these two nuclear-armed neighbors have often led to a deadlock in decision-making processes, negatively impacting the entire regional body.

  1. India-Pakistan Tensions: The relationship between India and Pakistan, fraught with historical conflicts over issues such as the Kashmir dispute and cross-border terrorism, has been a persistent obstacle to SAARC’s progress. These tensions have not only led to diplomatic standoffs but have also directly affected SAARC’s operations. In several instances, India or Pakistan has refused to participate in SAARC meetings or blocked initiatives proposed by the other, bringing the organization to a standstill.
    • The 2016 SAARC summit in Islamabad was postponed indefinitely after India, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, and Bhutan decided to boycott the meeting, citing concerns over regional security following the terrorist attack on an Indian army base in Uri, allegedly by Pakistani militants. This move highlighted how bilateral conflicts have paralyzed SAARC’s ability to function as a regional bloc.
    • The rivalry has also prevented the full implementation of economic and trade agreements. For example, SAFTA, which was supposed to create a free trade area in South Asia, has seen limited success due to frequent trade restrictions between India and Pakistan. This has hampered the economic integration of the region, where trade between member countries remains significantly lower than in other regional blocs like ASEAN or the European Union.
  2. Pakistan’s Alleged Support for Cross-border Terrorism: India has often accused Pakistan of supporting militant groups that engage in cross-border terrorism, leading to heightened mistrust between the two countries. This lack of trust has spilled over into SAARC, where India has been hesitant to move forward on key issues without assurances of security cooperation from Pakistan. In return, Pakistan has accused India of using SAARC as a platform to further its own geopolitical agenda, sidelining smaller countries in the process.
  3. Afghanistan’s Struggles: Afghanistan, the newest member of SAARC, has also faced challenges within the organization. Ongoing instability in the country, particularly following the Taliban’s return to power in 2021, has created additional hurdles for SAARC. Afghanistan's political and security situation has led to its relative isolation within the organization, and its ability to contribute meaningfully to SAARC’s broader goals has been limited.

Smaller Nations and the Consequences of Big Power Rivalry

Smaller member states, such as Bhutan, Maldives, and Nepal, have often found themselves caught in the crossfire of India-Pakistan rivalry, limiting their ability to push forward regional cooperation on issues such as trade, infrastructure development, and climate change. While these countries largely favor stronger regional integration, they have found themselves sidelined as the organization is frequently paralyzed by bilateral tensions.

  • Bangladesh’s Role: Bangladesh has traditionally played a strong role within SAARC, pushing for cooperation on trade, connectivity, and energy. However, even Bangladesh’s efforts have been hampered by the larger geopolitical divide. For instance, Dhaka’s efforts to enhance intra-regional connectivity have not progressed significantly due to the lack of cooperation between India and Pakistan on critical infrastructure projects that would link the region.
  • Sri Lanka and the Maldives: Both Sri Lanka and the Maldives have long advocated for greater economic cooperation and regional tourism initiatives within SAARC. However, the absence of political stability in the region has made it difficult to pursue these goals in a sustained manner. Furthermore, the smaller states often face challenges in navigating the influence of India, Pakistan, and China in regional diplomacy.

Reform or Stagnation: The Path Forward for SAARC

While SAARC still holds potential as a platform for regional dialogue and cooperation, it is clear that without significant reform or a reduction in political tensions, the organization will continue to struggle. Several key reforms have been proposed to revitalize SAARC, including:

  1. Flexible Cooperation: SAARC could adopt a more flexible decision-making structure, where willing member states can move forward with certain initiatives without needing unanimous approval. This would allow smaller states to progress on issues like trade, health, and disaster management, even if political tensions between India and Pakistan continue to impede cooperation.
  2. Focus on Non-political Issues: SAARC could prioritize non-political issues, such as climate change, poverty alleviation, education, and public health. These areas of cooperation have less potential for political conflict and could serve as a way to rebuild trust and demonstrate the value of regional cooperation.
  3. Greater Engagement from Smaller Nations: Smaller member states need to assert more leadership within the organization. By forming coalitions and pushing forward a positive agenda on issues like connectivity, trade, and education, they could help reduce the dominance of bilateral disputes in SAARC’s functioning.
  4. Conflict Mediation: SAARC could also play a more active role in conflict mediation between member states, though this would require a significant shift in its mandate and a commitment from all members to engage in dialogue. This could help address underlying political issues that have stymied the organization’s progress.

Conclusion

SAARC’s vision of a more connected, cooperative, and prosperous South Asia remains as relevant as ever. However, the geopolitical tensions, particularly between India and Pakistan, have stifled the organization’s growth and impact. Until these issues are addressed, SAARC’s ability to fulfill its mission will be limited.

Nonetheless, with the right reforms and a renewed commitment from its members, particularly on non-political issues, SAARC can still become an effective platform for regional cooperation. In an increasingly interconnected world, the countries of South Asia have much to gain from strengthening regional ties—and SAARC remains the best available vehicle to achieve that goal, provided its internal obstacles can be overcome.