The Political-Economy of the South Asian Economic Union

anil#87

Pakistan has to make up its own mind on this issue. India cannot persuade it - there just isn`t the level of trust to do so. How can you influence anyone who thinks that you carry a knife under your arm when you sweet-talk?

There are some voices in Pakistan who have started to speak for greater bilateral trade. These are some economists and some vested interests who are potential beneficiaries of greater trade. All India can do is to enter into bilateral agreements with countries who are eager to do business with it and demonstrate to others the benefits of such arrangements.

Arjun_m (#88)

There is no doubt that Belgium does not demand territorial adjustments. That does not mean there were no territorial disputes among the members of EU. They now look so miniscule compared to the benefits. No body wants to disturb the show. You know India can defend its position quite well. Pakistan knows it too, otherwsie there would have been war, right now it is only emotional. Let the benefits of peace dividends and economic growth get in the valley. The realization may happen, after all Indian Kashmiris were indifferent before insurgency there. This is atleast my optimistic view.

Anil

#85 by anil on January 5, 2006 2:31pm PT


When a Belgian becomes the President of EU,


Belgium doesn`t demand Germany hand over Karsruhe to Belgium as a precondition for Belgium being a member of the EU...

Jang (#85)

India is world`s largest producer of cotton. It overtook, the U.S. a few years ago. However, Pakistani cotton is of superios quality, and they are engaged in preferrential treatment for their apparel in trade negotiations with the U.S. and the EU. Therefore, you may be correct how much bigger Pakistan`s cotton industry can grow, but it certainly will grow bigger than what it is right now. It may not dominate in entire South Asia, but probably will dominate Pakistan.

Religion is an emotional problem. I certainly do not have answer for these, as I am quite religion blind, and keep my spiritual values to my personal space. However, religion problems too have been solved in medivial Europe.

The link you gave points to some article on new about a temple in Kerala allowing buddhists to enter.

Anil

Anil Kapuria

#85

can pakistan live with a possibility of a dominant cotton empire called Laxmi Cottons, new ground-breaking pooja-muhurat etc? sri-lanka and inidia dont have the religion problem

http://ia.rediff.com/news/2006/jan/04spec1.htm?q=sp&file=.htm

Dost-Mitter (#79)

``Pakistan, in particular, is wary of conceding leadership to India in any sphere.``

India should respect this aspiration of not only Pakistan but all its neighbors, because Pakistan and others at best can look for symbolic leadership. When a Belgian becomes the President of EU, does not mean the power of Germany, France and the U.K. goes down. The ground realities are known for everyone to see. Especially in South Asian region, India is dominant by a factor of 10. No one - including Indians, if they were on the otherside - would want such a skewed trading block.

Until now market distortions allowed each economy to do everything themselves, however, inefficient that may have been. In alternate scenario, market forces will decide. Pakistan may end up having a dominant cotton industry, Sri Lanka may end up having a dominant tea industry etc. If Pakistan indeed becomes the hub, then it may even have a dominant engergy industry. India can take a lead to show it respects the aspirations of smaller nations. This does not mean India should ever compromise on Kashmir issue beyond what its constitution allows, this is not respecting asprirations, it is appeasement.

``The whole foreign policy and military strategy of Pakistan has been geared towards being able to challenge and checkmate Indian supremacy, not to concede it a leadership role, even if it means incurring considerable costs.``

This is Soviet Union philosophy, which, in less than 80 years, simply disappeared from the face of the Earth. Pakistani leaders also see it. We can have faith on economic forces and modern communcation to bring reality to leaders and massses alike.

From my vantage point, Pakistani establishment seems to be bogged down in dealing with the terrorism originating from its territory and its creation. Leadership on this issue seems to be disconnected from the masses. Masses there do not see Jihadist and Telebanists are terrorists and problems, whereas the Pakistani leaders must act, although in the short term they can seem to be acting, to root out terrorism.

Emotionally, India may be anathema to many Pakistani, but reality is more than emotions, but the grind that disconnect between emotions of masses on terrorism and actions of leaders creates would bring some reality and sense on emotionalism on India. Fro now debt and aid are driving Pakistan`s growth. The collectors will be knocking to collect. If these investments did not fuel the growth and starts giving returns by then, Pakistan will find itself again on the operating table. This to me indicates Pakistan needs more trade and savings than emotions.

Two options as I see are: The war on terror becomes perpetual, and Pakistan becomes perpetually embroilled as the battlefield. Pakistan will be ravaged like any other battlefield during this period. The west - especially the U.S. - is running on the defecit, and cannot finance forever. Neither can Saudis or UAE Sheikhs, there money is tied up in the western economies. They came with the west and will go with the west.

The second option is that Pakistan must emerge on its own, and make the most of the current situation, as democracies have very short memories and indeed move on when their interests shift. Pakistani leaders know it too. In this scenario what can Pakistan do to build its economy. The options are limited to probably three or four. Regional economies and regional trading block is certainly one of them. In my view more sensible one. India may need to cooperate with Pakistan leadership to nudge it away from older thinking, without compromising India`s strategic interests. India is doing that with Sri Lanka quite well.

Anil Kapuria

Indian investment rises after Sri Lanka President`s visit to India
Thursday, January 5, 2006, 12:19 GMT, ColomboPage News Desk, Sri Lanka.

Jan 05, Colombo: Investments worth 564 million US dollars will be undertaken by Indian investors in Sri Lanka this year following agreements signed during the President`s recent visit to India.

Investments will be made on a coal-fired power plant and the manufacture of super phosphate fertilizer.

India will also undertake investments in the modernisation of tourist hotels and the refinement of raw sugar into white sugar. The total anticipated investment is 564 million US dollars.

The Sri Lankan government says that another objective was to target the generation of 100,000 jobs, which in turn will ensure higher salaries.

India doesn`t need Pakiland..Pakiland offers jack..

Conexant Puts $250M in India

The number of semiconductor maker’s employees in India will rise nearly threefold in five years.
January 5, 2006

Conexant Systems, a maker of semiconductors used in broadband communications, enterprise networks, and digital homes, plans to invest $250 million in India over five years, its chief executive said Thursday.


“Over the next five years, Conexant will invest $250 million in India on people, capital, and R&D facilities,`` Dwight Decker told reporters in Hyderabad, India. Mr. Decker is part of an elite semiconductor delegation from the United States attending an industry conference here.

He said the Newport Beach, California-based company, with 775 people in India already, would increase its headcount to 1,200 by March 2007 and 2,000 in five years.

Conexant employs about 750 people in the U.S., but Mr. Decker’s logic is that if two-thirds of the work is done at one-fourth of the cost, the overall cost comes down by half for the company.



Conexant is among those technology firms aggressively following a global-development strategy to lower the costs of development while simultaneously getting better access to scarce engineering talent.

The company has four design centers in different cities across India. Two of them were acquired indirectly because of acquisitions of companies in the U.S.


In November 2005, Mr. Decker told The New York Times that in the first year of large-scale work in India, Conexant had reduced costs by $36 million.

Today there was article in newspaper(The Hindu) that Japan has entered into a FTA with India&China.

now THATS something interesting.can we talk about those kind of deals? i feel that while SAFTA is something that may go a long way in promoting trade between the neighbouring countries,it is being debated too much here on Chowk(especially by fellow Indians).

cmon guys,we can do better than keep rambling here ,as one other member put it in the beginning itself,nobody else(meaning other nationalities) have bothered to post any interacts.

regarding free-trade between pakistan and india, the ball is fully in pkistani court. as far as i can see, there are entrenched bussiness interest..from dawood-ibrahims movie pirating bussiness to auto assemlers, for whom free-trade is end of easy gravy and mafia strength. for smaller bussiness and traders, its major opportunity, but they are not as entrenched in power structure. for common man, its cheap medicines.

so a free-trade deal will come only from a huge political effort. to embark on such a thing, mush needs a symbolic gesture so that he can screw the entrenched with a smile. to indians it smells like a weird blackmail, if you want free-trade, give me kashmir concessions.

one way out is if the small-bussness (traders, hospitality, farmers) lobby gets strong enough, and dawood and his allied mafia meets an encounter.

#78 by Layman on January 5, 2006 5:52am PT

Nothing wrong with that...Sri Lankans are fun people..and India sure as heck doesn`t want pakis or bangladeshis..

the problem is that this only benefits India, not Sri Lanka...Most of the Sri Lankans I know went off to greener pastures i.e. US/Europe/Australia...and not one of them has gone back to Sri Lanka...even after years in the west..

Anil#75:

You are preaching to the choir here!

I am all for free trade in the region and am aware that all countries of the region, including India, will benefit from it and it would also be good for political climate. However, I also think that the smaller countries are unwilling to take the plunge at the present time. Pakistan, in particular, is wary of conceding leadership to India in any sphere. The whole foreign policy and military strategy of Pakistan has been geared towards being able to challenge and checkmate Indian supremacy, not to concede it a leadership role, even if it means incurring considerable costs. Never mind free trade, even normal trade would be a big step forward as it takes place only under win-win conditions. As of now, Pakistan is willing to pay more for a product and service instead of buying it cheaper from India because it considers non-economic benefits to more than compensate for the economic loss. India can do nothing more than what it is already doing, namely, giving unilateral tariff concessions to SAARC countries and entering into bilateral agreements with whatever country is willing to do so, thus demonstrating its benefits to others, as it is doing with Sri Lanka.

#77 arjun_m: ``you`ll end up in a situation where you have sri lankans coming to india to work for Indian companies...not branches of Indian companies in SL``
This should be okay too. What`s wrong in having Sri Lankans coming to India, learning IT and then setting up their own firms in SL. People from all over India come to Bangalore, Hyd, Gurgaon etc for IT work. I am okay with people from SL coming over too. Now, if it were people from our neighbour in the West, I`d be wary :-)

#76 by Layman on January 4, 2006 11:38pm PT


Need to develop resources in Pak, BD, SL.


Been there, done that...with SL..Didn`t work out..they have a decently educated workforce but not enough people with experience in major aspects of an IT org..we had to rush network engineers from India to Colombo because they didn`t have anyone there..until the sri lankan expats start coming back and bringing the talent and skill back to start forming companies, you`ll end up in a situation where you have sri lankans coming to india to work for Indian companies...not branches of Indian companies in SL..

I can think of several areas where India can benefit from more trade with Pak, whether the trade is `free` or not.
1. As Indian economy grows, we will consume more steel, cement, timber etc. China`s rapid scaling up of infrastructure has come about by sucking up steel etc from India and other neighbouring countries. Forests have been denuded in Malaysia etc to meet Chinese demand. If India has to grow like China, we can do with some help through imports from Pakistan.
2. Indian IT industry is already facing severe labour shortage and rising costs. Need to develop resources in Pak, BD, SL. If a company like TCS or Infosys set up branches in these countries, it will be easier (compared to local companies) to get more business.

Regarding the author`s plea for India to take leadership or show magnanimity, please note that Indian cabinet has already ratified SAFTA and we have reduced tariffs effective Jan 1 of this year. Now SAFTA calls upon the developing countries (India, Pak and SL) to reduce tariffs to 5% by 2013 and the least developed countries (BD, Nepal, Bhutan, Maldives) to do so by 2018. India has already gone ahead with unilaterally reducing tariffs, even though Pakistan and SL are yet to do so (India has a FTA with SL, so it may not matter much, but Pak has the opportunity to drag out the tariff reduction process while getting the benefit of unilateral reduction in tariff by India). Also, in terms of the restricted lists, Pak has put in a lot of items that are out of the purview of SAFTA, whereas our restricted list is shorter. This is another advantage that Pak has, due to Indian `magnanimity`.

I would like the author or the readers to suggest in concrete terms what more they want from India. There was an article in the Business Standard on the 4th of Jan that said that India`s FTA with SL, though it does not benefit India all that much economically, has helped it politically because it has created a stake for SL business folks in Indian economy and the anti-bigbrother feeling is reduced somewhat in the past year. India has steadfastly kept its nose out of the SL-LTTE affair, but SL is not happy and wants Indian involvement. In the past, when we wanted to be involved, SL cried big brother. I dont think India can make its neighbours happy much - there will be complaints whether we get involved or not in their affairs - we should not even have that as a goal.

Regarding Bollywood, I am happy with the current state of affairs. Bollywood producers can make money today only from the Indian market or from the Indian diaspora and therefore make movies that cater to our tastes. If the Paki market opened to them, then they would have to cater to that market as well. Pak establishment is also happy with current state of affairs as they are defending Pak ideology by keeping our movies out. Pak people are happy as they are able to view movies anyway on pirated VCDs. It is only Pak theatre owners and Bollywood producers who lose out - so what? Also, as things stand, most Bollywood movies are funded by Indian mafia. Do you want Paki mafia/terrorists to profit from it as well?

Dost-Mitter (#71):

I can think of couple of reasons that you probably did not factor in your equations.

India has achieved world parity in certain products and services (skill surplus services, technology, textile, and automobile parts). Wheras region`s countries, like India in the past, due to distortions in the economic structure, have been relying on inferior products and services and paying higher prices. India can easily provide world class products and services at cheaper prices, if the distortions and barriers are removed. Romair once told me that an engineers trained in Oracle in India are cheaper and more plentiful than in Paksitan.

Skill Surplus Services, Tehcnology, Textile, and Automobile parts are major drivers for India`s GDP growth over the next fifteen years. The free trade in the region will add about 20% more trade to India. India like anyother capitalist economy (now strangely China is included too), can never sit on the laurels that it has enough market and does not need more.

Free-trade will benefit Pakistan and others in the region too. For example, Pakistan`s dry fruit industry in or around Quetta would have benefitted tremendously if it had free access to ten times the market that captive Pakistan provided. The profits would have flowed into this underdeveloped region and growers and processing industry would have developed providing more jobs.

Bollywood is an example of profits from larger market. While Lahore`s film industry is an example of failure of protectionism and banning Bollywood. Infact, they did not ban Bollywood, they banned the competition. As a result Lahore film industry had to create competing infrastructure for 1/10 the market which could yield only smaller profits. If the barriers are removed, Pakistani talent can participate in Bollywood, bring profits and wealth back into Pakistan, and create complementary infrasturcture and profitable industry.

Does this not sound familiar with India`s IT industry, and achieved in less than ten (10) years?

I can give more examples, if you wish, however, absorbtion of Benelux in EU illustrate my point quite well.

The commonwealth of inter-dependent infrastructure to generate more profits and jobs efficiently, all members benefit. The destruction caused by war and acrimonious relations get a limit also. Absorbtion of Eastern European (previously communist) countries is a good case in point.

The signs are in new global economic order for knowledge economy. The transtion rests on the paradigm of creating bigger and more efficient economies. My yard stick for more efficient economy is more profits and more jobs at reduced cost and shorter time. If I can illustrate that old way of thinking is akin to that I want to serve only a small part of the village, even though I can serve the entire village. Why would leave the rest for a competitor to come and potentially destroy you. There are no barriers to entry.

Today, it is like global village, why carry the fracturous lines from the past. Let new paradigm redraw what is the best. Today and tomorrows global village can deliver services, capital and labor even faster than within an older village that was possible only a few years ago. Entire global village can be served, then why would Intel or Microsoft not serve it and leave for the competition. No nation can or society can ignore these changes or the changes will make them obsolete and extinct like Dodo Bird.

Anil Kapuria

Here is some hard analysis of the potential of Pakistani exports to India in today`s dawn.

``
Indian market offers $3bn business




By Sabihuddin Ghausi

KARACHI, Jan 3: Indian import market of more than $77 billion offers export prospects of more than $3 billion to Pakistani business given good marketing, appropriate production techniques to bring down cost and improve quality and gearing up of the entire supply chain.

In selected broad 95 categories of imported items in India, Pakistan supplies about 45 items worth only $93.5 million and there is a potential to push up exports the beyond $1 billion figure, with little marketing efforts. A further breakdown of 50 per cent of these broad categories into about 1,500 small categories being imported into India shows that Pakistan is already in business of more than 700 items.

The Export Promotion Bureau has carried out a unique and detailed structural analysis of Indian imports of the year 2003 and has compared it with Pakistan’s exports to India and to the international market. This exercise gives some idea to assess Pakistan’s supply potential to the neighbouring country where the biggest advantage is quick delivery at low freight cost compared to other countries of the world.

These promising prospects of Pakistan’s exports to India come at a time when certain bureaucrats and a few politicians are showing concern over the liberalization of Pakistan-India trade. There is a fear of Indian goods flooding the Pakistani market.

Ironically, the Pakistani market is flooded with varieties of Chinese goods that have hurt the domestic industry.

“Indian market is not of quality goods,” an analyst points out, but hastily adds that many of the 325 million middle class consumers now enjoy the advantage of global exposure and most of them are aware of the availability of quality goods and prices from other sources and hence the emphasis on quality to create a demand.

Market analysts believe that an improvement in Pakistan-India trade will have an impact on the flow of goods and services in the seven-member countries of the South Asian Association of Regional Cooperation (Saarc) and is bound to generate thousands of jobs in the region.

Informal trade between Pakistan and India is estimated at between $1.5 billion and $2 billion a year in which precious stones, sugar, wheat flour and certain selected industrial goods go to India from Pakistan, while cotton saris, cosmetic goods, ayurvedic herbal medicines, alcoholic liquor and CVDs of Indian films come to Pakistan.

Watchers of the Pakistan-India trade are convinced that a pickup in the two-way trade is bound to promote joint venture projects in both the countries that would ensure good quality goods at much lower cost than being imported from other countries in both Pakistan and India.

Mineral fuels and refinery products are the single largest category of items in Indian imports at about $22.5 billion, which is over 29 per cent of its total imports. The import of this category is showing a growth of 10 per every year, as India takes up industrial projects and brings more vehicles on the roads.

Pakistan had supplied about $39 million worth of refinery products to India in 1993. Overall Pakistan’s export of naphtha and refinery products in the world market amounts to over $296 million. Looking at these figures it is not difficult to guess Pakistan’s export potential in this area to India.

Vegetable import is other area where improvement in export prospects to India can be explored. Pakistan’s supply of vegetables to India amounted to only $12.40 million as against $46 million exports to the international market. Vegetables are value-added agricultural products and an improvement in marketing of these products in India offers all the prospects of prosperity to farmers in Punjab and Sindh.

India is a big market for precious stones for its jewellery industry. India had imported about $14 billion worth of precious stones in 1993 in which Pakistan’s share through official trade was only $426,000. Pakistan exported precious stones worth $27.68 million to the international market. A big quantity of precious stones is being transferred to India through informal channels.

Pakistan can seek Indian assistance in setting up of cutting and polishing industry of precious stones that would contribute immensely towards promoting Pakistan’s jewellery business.

Optical photo, medical apparatus and certain other items are also in demand in India for which $1.5bn were provided in 1993. Pakistan’s share in Indian business is only worth $483,000 as against Pakistan’s global export of more than $134 million.

India is also a net importer of iron and steel, iron and steel products, coal, cotton, books, newspapers, a few varieties of textile products, confectionary items and a host of other varieties of goods which can be identified by the chambers and trade associations for exploring export prospects.``

HisExcellency #68

`` With India, SAFTA will just be a D!*K that will screw the remaining six member states. It will be a South Asian disaster. ``

There is no compulsion in getting screwed :-)

#71 by dost-mittar on January 4, 2006 9:10am PT


This assumes that India needs such a union more than the smaller states in SAARC.


Pakis want India to offer them a cake(Kashmir) as an incentive for them to eat the candy(trade)..


India does not need a political or even an economic free trade zone.


Your dealing with the basic paki self-delusion of indespensibility....Pakis think India needs to trade with a market 10 times smaller than it`s own..just exactly why, they won`t say..just exactly what Pakiland has to offer, they won`t say..


It has large enough market and is more advanced than other countries in terms of economic, educational and industrial infrastructure and has an abundant supply of both cheap and skilled workforce.


there you go again...citing inconvenient FACTS...what`re you? the usual paki hating/muslim hating hindu fanatic ?

Dear Osama:

``Can India really prove themselves worthy of leading a group of skeptical countries without actually making them feel that they are being led? Can India show the kind of magnanimity befitting of an emerging super-power that has no insecurities about its new-found status--and hence no need to assert it--that would be required of an anchor country to make SAFTA/SAEU a success?``

I found myself agreeing with most of your article until I came to this piece. Frankly, this is a non-starter. This assumes that India needs such a union more than the smaller states in SAARC. If you have made such a case, I have missed it. That a large country like India should behave generously towards its neighbours is a given, which can stand on its own without the case for a larger political entity. This was the well-known Gujral doctrine, enunciated by I.K. Gujral when he was the Foreign Minister of India.

India does not need a political or even an economic free trade zone. It has large enough market and is more advanced than other countries in terms of economic, educational and industrial infrastructure and has an abundant supply of both cheap and skilled workforce. It`s more interested in gaining access to even larger markets, such as China, Asean, EU and North America. At the present time, all it needs are win-win type arrangements with neighbouring countries for normal transit of goods and servieces, such as are being discussed for the Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline or the transit route to Afghanistan and Central Asia through Pakistan which benefits both India and Pakistan.

The countries of the region are certainly not ready to have a larger common political entity. In a region where one country accounts for an overwhelming weight, as is the case with SAARC, it would require the smaller countries to accept a tacit recognition of the larger country as a Big Brother which would, in turn, impose the kind of responsiblity on the larger country that you talk about. India should do everything to deal with those insecurities if they are grounded on facts and nothing if they are based on irrational insecurities. If the Big Brother starts to behave like a Big Bully, the whole arrangement would naturally come crumbling down.

How about free-trade inside of India and Pakistan. Nice to remove strange tarrifs and octrois and make railway transport more rational in india. pakistan can take care of baluch gas royalties and more equitable deal to non-panjabis.

Pakistan has nothing to offer. It`s not like they have an Infosys or a Wipro, companies busy buying up assets in the west, that can invest on the other side of the border. Pakistan has almost no company that can hold it`s own in the world.

Like the dawn article said, the pakis are also worried because their own industry is not competitive.

re: #35 rsridhar
``SAFTA without India will be like a man without his D!*K. It will be impotent``

With India, SAFTA will just be a D!*K that will screw the remaining six member states. It will be a South Asian disaster.

Kids, time-out. Can we get back to discussing the article please.

re:#60 by faisaluno
May be garbage from India can be exported to Pakistan. I am sure this is a lucrative market.
Sridhar

monkey see, monkey (try to) do..monkey no-can-do



Govt to train IT professionals in niche areas

ISLAMABAD: Minister for Information Technology Awais Ahmad Khan Leghari on Tuesday said the government was willing to fund capacity building and training of any number of professionals in any specific area required by the telecom and IT industry in the country.

Seriously...what is India missing by not trading with jihadi-infested countries? and why does India need to concede anything to Pakiland?

Stephen King: China and India leaving G7 nations in the slow lane
Published: 03 January 2006

Three big issues are likely to dominate the economic landscape in 2006. The first, and most obvious, is the rapidly evolving role of the fast-developing countries in Asia, particularly China and India.

The second, a demand-related story, is the relationship between monetary policy and economic growth. With US short-term interest rates likely to move above US long-term interest rates, the US yield curve is threatening to invert, a development that has sometimes, although not always, signalled the onset of recession.

The third issue is more a supply-side story with specific resonance for the UK: despite low inflation and stable economic growth, the UK`s productivity performance seems to be steadily deteriorating, a development that is hardly encouraging for the longer-term health of the UK economy.

Let`s take the China and India story first of all. The distribution of economic growth around the world in 2005 contained quite a few surprises. Those surprises, though, did not emanate from the West: US and eurozone growth rates came in broadly in line with consensus expectations at the beginning of last year.

China and India offered the really big shocks. Both of them delivered growth rates over 1 per cent higher than expected. Their strength is leaving the G7 nations behind in the slow lane of economic growth. Some 15 years ago, the G7 nations accounted for 70 per cent of global GDP: today, they account for only 62 per cent.
...
Stephen King is managing director of economics at HSBC

given a choice, i would rather be an east pakistani than chowk`s pagal kutta in residence.

#61 by ranjit on January 3, 2006 11:39am PT

faisaluno isn`t a real pure pakistani..he`s a former east pakistani(as in the pakistani army killed a bunch of them in 71)..
he has to do his best to prove his paki credentials..

Re:arjun_m#59

Indeed!! We hear Pakistanis come to India for all kinds of medical treatment, operations etc. We have seen stories of Pakistani kids getting eyesight back and heart operations. A lot of times, Indian medical facilities do not even charge Pakistanis or give them a huge discount.

After that it is extremely upsetting to see people like faisaluno bad-mouth India. That is really disgusting, ungrateful behavior.

joke is`nt funny any more.

problems with lack of hygiene are way more serious than previously thought. we are talking about millions of people here:

http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=83783

No one to weep for Mumbai

Farah Baria

...clogged with 7,800 tons of festering garbage, infected by 27,682 cases of jaundice, typhoid, gastro, dengue and malaria, asphyxiated by toxic pollution, dehydrated by a severe water deficit, blinded by a 1,500 megawatt power crunch, constipated by a toilet to person ratio of 1:50, and populated by 7 million migrants who live in sub-human slums, the city’s prognosis is bleak. And its epitaph has already been written: a recent survey by the Economist listed Mumbai as one of the world’s most unlivable cities, and consigned it to a global terminal ward, along with Dhaka, Abidjan, and Bogota.

The end has been evident for over a decade. Long before July’s cataclysmic downpour, India’s most vivacious metropolis has been enduring a slow, insidious death.

...As for you and me, it’s back to dodging potholes, sidestepping broken pavements, circumventing decomposing refuse, commuting like slaughter house animals, waking up at ungodly hours to fill our buckets before the municipal pipelines run dry, drinking jaundiced water, hoping against hope that our kids don’t catch malaria from exposed sewage pipes, and watching shanties come up for free outside our windows while we sweat to pay off an astronomical loan for a home that may collapse the following monsoon.

...And that’s why, when the end inevitably comes, there will be no one to weep at Mumbai’s funeral.

#58 by faisaluno on January 3, 2006 10:37am PT

How bad are things in Pakistan that paki have to come to India for medical procedures...India with it`s poor standards of hygiene and all..

How come we hardly hear of any Indian going to Pakistan for medical treatment?

biggest reason pak should not trade with india is because of poor standards of hygiene in india. btw this also explains why so many indians live in chowk`s naali. cause they are born into one:

http://thestatesman.org/page.arcview.php?clid=23&id=126183&usrsess=1

No concern for hygiene

...The hospital that is supposed to cater to five lakh people from four Assembly constituencies is under scanner due to its never ending problems.

...Mr Sanjoy Chatterjee, who is from Bhadrapur in Nalhati, said: “Is this a hospital? Here urine from the toilets enter into the maternity ward. I have come to know that this is the normal condition of this hospital.” Not only Mr Chatterjee, many others have accused the hospital authorities for this miserable state.

,,,Used medical items can be seen spread here and there and patients of the maternity ward have to close their nose with clothes to avoid stinking smell.

Looks like Pakistan doesn`t want trade because it can`t compete...no wonder Pakistan hasn`t produced any company, like Infosys or reliance or tatas or wipro, that can hold it`s own in the world..

Inoperative Safta victim of sour ties

By Sabihuddin Ghausi

Apart from the strong lobby of super patriots from among the bureaucrats in Islamabad and Lahore, the stiff resistance to improvement in Pakistan-India trade and economic relationship mainly comes from merely half a dozen auto assemblers and the rich pharmaceutical industry.

Auto assemblers thrive on import of semi knocked down kit of two wheelers and four wheelers and are making for last many years billions in profit simply on premium money and fear import of better quality at low priced Indian automobiles will deprive them of easy money. Indian pharmaceutical industry is mostly based on local raw material is said to be substantially cheaper than that Pakistan’s which is more a packaging industry as it depends to a great extent on imports.

Excluding these two powerful segments of business, a large number of traders and industrialists in Pakistan look forward for a pick up in two way trade in days to come.

#53 by faisaluno on January 3, 2006 8:56am PT


pak has a free trade arrangement with the grand daddy of em all


Daddy wasn`t there...to change my underwear.. - Austin Powers

Trade liberalisation with China costs Pakistan dearly

BY JAVED MAHMOOD
LAHORE - Pakistan had sustained a record deficit of $1.488 billion in bilateral trade with China in last financial year, The Nation learnt on Monday.
In 2004-05, Pakistan’s exports to China amounted to $354 million while imports from the said friendly country expanded to 1.842 billion dollars, the highest-ever in a year since the beginning of bilateral trade between two nations.

ally #52

`` This cannot happen for a very long time, there isn`t enough trust and trade between the countries, many of them received independence from each other and are still not too keen on each other.

Also many of these countries are still trying to keep themselves together, let alone join another union!!! ``

Sri Lanka is a badly divided state. Nepal is in a civil war. Bangladesh has a tenous civil society.

India has unrest in Kashmir, North East.

Pakistan has a constant problem with military-civil relations.

It looks like there is more to clean internally.

jang #42

`` #39 as is indicated by the attitude in #41 ( throwing the spanner ), its clear that pakistan has a lot to offer. while pakistan may not be a huge benefit as a economic partner, it can definately be a huge spanner-thrower. so, i disagree that pakistan has nothing to offer to india. it is important that two larger states set an agenda of peaceful trade.

e.g. the benefits of NAFTA for US have been huge from the point of overall stability in the south. a poorer and unstable mexico is an impossible nightmare for US prosperity. overall, pakistan is relatively stable, and can be influencial in in ensuring stability in our neighborhood. in the minimum, its very important that it not fuel instability. ``

NAFTA has not solved the underlying problem of preventing Mexican illegal immigration to the USA. It might have been better than the alternative - no NAFTA. Mexicans have troubles competing against China in the US market.

pakistan`s exports are doing very well thank you very much. as for the future, pak has a free trade arrangement with the grand daddy of em all. pak businessmen now will have to prove their mettle if they want to survive.

http://www.thebusinessonline.com/DJStory.aspx?DJStoryID=20051215DN002118

Pakistan Nov Exports Up 23.25% On Year At $1.12 Billion-2

In the first five months of the current fiscal year that began July 1, exports totaled $6.626 billion, up 22.90% from $5.391 billion in the same period last year.

http://en.chinabroadcast.cn/855/2006/01/02/262@40377.htm

KARACHI- Bilateral trade between Pakistan and China has surged 44 per cent year-on-year to hit US$3.4 billion in the first 10 months of 2005.
According to a press statement issued here on December 29, Pakistan and China are set to launch free trade regime under the Early Harvest Programme (EHP) from January 1, 2006

This cannot happen for a very long time, there isn`t enough trust and trade between the countries, many of them received independence from each other and are still not too keen on each other.

Also many of these countries are still trying to keep themselves together, let alone join another union!!!

faisaluno #41

`` saarc in its present form is a non-starter and pak sarkar wisely has thrown a spanner in the works by inviting china to be a member. off course india is opposed to participation by china and will block its entry thereby insuring a stalemate in saarc - an outcome that would have made jinnah perfectly happy.

also pak has made good economic progress over the last few years and futher domestic reform and free trade with china will will make saarc irrelevant for pak in a few years. ``

India is large enough to be on its own. Pakistan needs a larger trading bloc to survive.
What do you think Pakistanis are going to sell to the rest of the world - textiles or software or labor ? You have serious rivals in all these sectors.

HP #20


`` The writer of the Article has done lots of research and put in some hard work in writing and presenting his ideas together and the chowk staff should at least respect article contributors and honor them for offering their articles for publishing at chowk by monitoring the interactions for relevancy and the substance. This article is not about politics. It is about some policy issues that were part of the SAARC declaration and all SAARC members have signed on it. The writer has made a serious effort to discuss some aspects of the SAARC declaration and the article deserves a serious look by all readers. ``

I meant no disrespect to the author.

`` The first and foremost factor that worked in favor of the EU was the similarity of culture in pretty much all Western Europe. The culture just does not mean the language or the dress code but the meeting of minds, the uniformity of goals and work ethics form a common culture. It was relatively easy for the Western European countries to work on Economic unity on a faster pace, still, they first relied on opening the borders for travel and assimilation of ideas thru a free movement of people to increase dependency on each other, then followed that up with economic integration that is not by any means complete and still a work in progress. ``

Same situation exists in South Asia.

`` We must also bear in mind that most of the EU countries were almost economic equals before they were able to go full steam in to the EU idea. ``

India is too big versus its neighbors. Also most of the neighbors have no land boundaries with each other. Look at the ASEAN. Indonesia is 40% of ASEAN by population. It has the largest area. But other ASEAN states have a geographic continuity that allows them to form an economic alliance should Indonesia refuse to join one. Such a siutation is absent in South Asia.

`` The first step is gradually reducing the travel restrictions. Let people meet and see for themselves whether the countries in SAARC actually share the culture, work ethics, and goals before forcing them into some economic union that is not able to allay fears between the people and the governments. ``

You have my vote on this.

Urstruly #21

`` There are three countries in SAARC or SAFTA that could form a true economic confederation surpassing US-Canada`s NAFTA or that of EU; these three countries are India, Bangladesh, and Nepal. ``

There is no reason why Pakistan could not form an economic confederation with India or at least expand economic ties with India.

`` Lets take India and Bangladesh first. The relationship between these two countries is one of unique ones in the world. Bangladesh won its freedom because of India. Indians saved them from an on-going genocide, which by Indias` own account had cost Bagladeshis over 30 million lives. India also gave refuge to 100s of millions of Bengalis who fled their country during their war of independence. Bangladeshis established their own rule with the help of Indians. But today the most hated nation on the globe is India. ``

Bangladesh does not owe India anything for their independence. Indians would appreciate if they were a good neighbor.

Can you provide any statistics for India being the most hated country in the world ? It is not like Indians are complaining about being hated.

`` Similarly, there is Nepal, a landlocked country, wholly dependent on India for its trade and economy. It is the only Hindu sttate in the world, so ideologically there is no difference. Culture, religion, heritage and even languages are shared. But despite a communist insurgency, which is supposedly supported by China, the most hated nation in Nepal today is India. ``

Let us assume your facts are true. Why should I care about Nepalis given the level of incompetence shown by them in running their own country.

`` Probably, it is Hindu mentality formed by their religion that do not let them co-exist peacefully with any one. The above mentioned two examples is the empirical evidence of that. ``

Nice work of logic !!!

#46 Ras:
My vision for a NEW SOUTH ASIA includes the following:
- Clamping down on terrorism by Pak
- Pakis realising that the Kashmir issue is already `settled` and move on to more important things like roti/kapda/makan.

If not, this year will be more of the same as last year.

#42 jang:
Yes, Pakistan has the capability to play spoiler (spanner-thrower) and that is what it is doing in SAARC by repeatedly raising bilateral issues (when such issues are clearly not in SAARC charter) or insisting on including China as an observer. India is also a poor country and there is a limit to unilateral concessions that it can make. This is why India should look for non-Pak arrangements in its neighbourhood. India has been doing some of this, through BIMSTEC (which excludes Pak) and individual FTA with Sri Lanka.

While India may not need the Pakistani or the neighbourhood market to grow, it is low-hanging fruit, where we have major competitive advantages in terms of price, quality and proximity (lower transport costs, for example). Finally, it is up to each nation to decide what it is that they really want - more trade that will lead to goods at lower prices and more jobs for everyone, or wait till political issues get resolved to their satisfaction - which may not happen at all. Nations that are democracies have a better chance of making the `right` decision that is in the interests of the people, while military/monarchy rule will put its own interests first.

The biggest advantage, in my opinion, that countries such as India, Pakistan, BD etc have is the large population of under 15 people. We are young nations, growing younger by the day. Compare this will European nations, Japan and even China which have declining and aging populations. If we develop our people, make them employable through education and vocational training, and improve our infrastructure, we will be in business for a long time to come. If we do not do so, we will have a unemployable, restless, envious populace that will easily turn to violence based on religion, language, caste or other factors and drag us all down.

My vision of a NEW SOUTH ASIA (not a NAYA HINDUSTAN) is one which does not

need any reversal of history. The NEW SOUTH ASIA will be one where any ordinary

Indian or Pakistani will drive or ride to the border and with identification visit

the other side for upto 30 days with minimal hassle (as between the U.S.

and Canada befor 9/11). A quick visitor permit will need to be issued. The same

can be implemented between all other SAARC countries if they wish.

The only thing that is currently holding this back is a small group of fanatics

on both sides of this Hindu-Muslim divide and the Kashmir issue.

I have high hopes for a resolution of Kashmir before 2007 so this may indeed be

a HAPPY NEW YEAR for all of South Asia.

The most important aspect of this vision will be the free flow of trade and cultural activity

between India and Pakistan. The foundation of this future trade opening is already

being laid by the Iran-Pakistan-India Gas Pipline.

This vision includes a special place for the Sikhs who will be able to visit and stay at

their religious places in Pakistan whenever they wish and the Ahmadis who would like

to visit Qadian. (And other Pakistanis will be able to visit Sufi Shrines in India).

The NEW SOUTH ASIA will lead to economic and cultural cooperation where

integration or a reversal of Partition is not necessary.

All we need now is a little luck and a great deal of wisdom.

A part of that wisdom can start with us not attacking each others

icons (Gandhi or Jinnah)


Peace & Happy New Year

Ras

Lookie here...India`s hegemonic attitude and Jinnah`s dream doesn`t stop Pakistan from using a backbome running through India...

Submarine Internet cable inaugurated: Pakistan to be linked with India through Wagah: PM

* Country to have five international links by June 2006

KARACHI: Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz said on Monday that Pakistan will be linked to India with a cable laid through the Wagah border as part of an international cable system.

“All work in this regard has been completed at our end. We are waiting for the Indian government to grant permission to its telecom carriers, which we hope will be soon,” Aziz said at the inaugural ceremony of the South-East Asia-Middle East-Western Europe 4 (SEA-ME-WE 4) cable at a local hotel.

For jinnah`s dream to be truly realized, shouldn`t Pakistan refuse to run the secondary backbone through India? Don`t we need two internets, one for muslims and one for non-muslims?

In the fourth quarter of 2005, the
government sold Karachi Electric Supply Corp. and Pakistan
Telecommunication Co. Ltd. to Gulf State investors.


Yeah..how`s that PTCL deal going anyways? Has the pakistani government bend over completely backwards yet?

#39 as is indicated by the attitude in #41 ( throwing the spanner ), its clear that pakistan has a lot to offer. while pakistan may not be a huge benefit as a economic partner, it can definately be a huge spanner-thrower. so, i disagree that pakistan has nothing to offer to india. it is important that two larger states set an agenda of peaceful trade.

e.g. the benefits of NAFTA for US have been huge from the point of overall stability in the south. a poorer and unstable mexico is an impossible nightmare for US prosperity. overall, pakistan is relatively stable, and can be influencial in in ensuring stability in our neighborhood. in the minimum, its very important that it not fuel instability.

saarc in its present form is a non-starter and pak sarkar wisely has thrown a spanner in the works by inviting china to be a member. off course india is opposed to participation by china and will block its entry thereby insuring a stalemate in saarc - an outcome that would have made jinnah perfectly happy.

also pak has made good economic progress over the last few years and futher domestic reform and free trade with china will will make saarc irrelevant for pak in a few years.

from s&p`s latest report on pak:

The outlook revision reflects sharp declines in the government`s
external debt indicators and structural improvements that, over time,
should help Pakistan`s export capacity. Extensive microeconomic reforms
over the past several years have improved Pakistan`s growth prospects,
whereby real GDP growth of about 7% is a real possibility in the medium
term.

...Standard & Poor`s expects strong inward foreign direct investment to
finance much of these deficits. Furthermore, the concessional nature of
the public external debt ensures a very low interest burden and hence
minimal stress on external liquidity from debt service.

The government is pursuing an agenda of privatization, trade
liberalization, and market-led growth. In the fourth quarter of 2005, the
government sold Karachi Electric Supply Corp. and Pakistan
Telecommunication Co. Ltd. to Gulf State investors.

...Custom tariffs have steadily been lowered. The weighted average tariff is 10%.

...Pakistan`s macroeconomic conditions continue to improve because of
responsible economic management and gradual structural reforms. Its
economy has outperformed expectations by registering real GDP growth of
8.4% in fiscal 2005 (ended June 30, 2005), the fastest in over 20 years.
The higher growth rate reflects both cyclical factors, and growing
domestic confidence, evident in consumption and investment growth. The
outlook for GDP growth remains encouraging, thanks to recovery in the
industrial sector, rising investment, and increasing foreign participation
on Pakistan`s economy.

saarc in its present form is a non-starter and pak sarkar wisely has thrown a spanner in the works by inviting china to be a member. off course india is opposed to participation by china and will block its entry thereby insuring a stalemate in saarc - an outcome that would have made jinnah perfectly happy.

also pak has made good economic progress over the last few years and futher domestic reform and free trade with china will will make saarc irrelevant for pak in a few years.

from s&p`s latest report on pak:

The outlook revision reflects sharp declines in the government`s
external debt indicators and structural improvements that, over time,
should help Pakistan`s export capacity. Extensive microeconomic reforms
over the past several years have improved Pakistan`s growth prospects,
whereby real GDP growth of about 7% is a real possibility in the medium
term.

...Standard & Poor`s expects strong inward foreign direct investment to
finance much of these deficits. Furthermore, the concessional nature of
the public external debt ensures a very low interest burden and hence
minimal stress on external liquidity from debt service.

The government is pursuing an agenda of privatization, trade
liberalization, and market-led growth. In the fourth quarter of 2005, the
government sold Karachi Electric Supply Corp. and Pakistan
Telecommunication Co. Ltd. to Gulf State investors.

...Custom tariffs have steadily been lowered. The weighted average tariff is 10%.

...Pakistan`s macroeconomic conditions continue to improve because of
responsible economic management and gradual structural reforms. Its
economy has outperformed expectations by registering real GDP growth of
8.4% in fiscal 2005 (ended June 30, 2005), the fastest in over 20 years.
The higher growth rate reflects both cyclical factors, and growing
domestic confidence, evident in consumption and investment growth. The
outlook for GDP growth remains encouraging, thanks to recovery in the
industrial sector, rising investment, and increasing foreign participation
on Pakistan`s economy.

Athar,
thanks for another informative piece on South Asia. We need to hear more

from Rand here since most of us are not scholars of political economy on CHOWK.

It was nice meeting you at OPEN. I wish you and your wife a Happy New Year.


Ras

#30 by Layman on January 1, 2006 9:51pm PT

Let me run the pakiisms through a pakiisms to real world translator

hegemonical attitude : India`s refusal to hand over Indian Kashmir to Pakistan on a platter.

Pakis want a piece of cake(or the whole cake) as an incentive to eat the candy..

Pakistan has nothing to offer to India..It`s an economy 10 times smaller than India`s with a lower per-capita income. There are no famous Pakistani companies that can invest in India, unlike Infosys, Wipro, Reliance and Tatas that are investing a lot of money in the west..

the problem of bangla and nepal are political. they are politically very unstable. with nepal india already has FTA..nepalis and indian dont need visas and can work freely. what nepal needs is political stability. whether nepalis hate indians or not is not relevant, they become a stable political entity is. lankans dont love indians, but have a good relations with indians and the bussiness relations are ever improving. e.g. air lanka expects most of their growth from indian travellers. nepal also enjoyed great tourism revenues in the past, and while indians dont get free halwa like they get in lahore in nepal, indian tourists always enjoyed their stay in nepal.

banglas are in the grip of a mixture of bangalitis and ummaitis. my prediction is unless w. bengal gets better, bangla desh trade relations will not improve. as someone famous said, defence of the east lies in west ;-)

We want good relations with all neighbouring countries,irrespective of size or economic state.if the neighbouring countries wish to have free trade agreement with India,so be it.if they choose to have free trade agreements between themselves and not include India,then again ,so be it.
It will definitely be interesting to see Pak,BD,Nepal,Bhutan have an FTA without India in it.whetehr it will succeed and how much benefit they derive from this deal and will India have anything to lose by not being an part of it is not known.

frankly an SAFTA(without India) will not produce great worry in India.
The reason is that allover the World and especially in India,people are aware that as far as trade is concerend only 2 countries matter,the US and China.an FTA with these countries will arouse GREAT deal of interest.
the truth is that today we all have greater desire to have FTA with South American countries(like Brazil,Argentina,Venezuela) and others than be stuck without an sense of direction,entering into an FTA with Pak and BD.

ofcourse it would be an nice thing if we are able to trade with each other and SAFTA sounds good,but i only wish to point out that people from neighbouring countries need to be aware that it is better to focus energies building ties with other countries than waste time signing deals without honest purpose.

re: #29 by HisExcellency
Hegemonic attitude of India is an old theme now. Leave aside Pak`s dalliance with terrorism, for the kind of grief BD is giving India, India should have invaded that country (If Mexico had done the same to US, latter would have). India is a soft state. There is no hegemony. Only apathy.
Sridhar

re:#29 by HisExcellency
SAFTA without India will be like a man without his D!*K. It will be impotent.
Sridhar

#32 HisExcellency:
Pakistan sending goods by sea to BD will be more expensive than overland through India, IMHO. If Pak or BD want transit rights from India to Nepal, Bhutan or other countries, would it not be fair for India to expect transit rights through Pak (to Afghanistan) and BD (between NE India and West Bengal) in return? Both Pak and BD have been refusing to do so for long, while India has granted some transit rights between Nepal and BD (I believe some of it is incumbent on India by international law as Nepal is a land-locked state).

I agree with you that transit rights are better than multi-lateral free trade agreement, from the smaller nations` p.o.v and would support an agreement on transit rights amongst SAARC nations.

Regarding free trade, each country has to decide individually if it is in its own interest and make a decision without compulsion/pressure from India. While India may have more to gain from SAFTA, it can survive without it due to its large internal market and growing trade with China, Japan, EU, US etc.

It is too early to predict the fate of SAFTA or SAEU. Such arrangements cannot work/suceed under the atmosphere of distrust and/or political differences. EU, ASEAN etc. are working because they do not have political differences amongst them and also there is a balance of power. In SAARC, there is too much distruct prevailing between the member countries.

However, it is much better to have some sort of groupings than to have none. It is also advisable that the member countries also work on their political and other differences parallely.

#31 Layman wrote...

``How will Pakistan send goods to Bhutan, Nepal or BD?``

Pakistan can send goods to BD by sea, just like it sends goods to Sri Lanka (and vice versa). If necessary, Pakistan-Nepal-Bhutan can sign a transit trade agreement with Hindia just like the Afghan Transit Trade (ATT) agreement that Pakistan signed with Rabbani govt in 1994. Under ATT, Pakistani trucks could deliver goods to Central Asian Republics (CARs) through Afghanistan. Pakistani goods were subject to a flat-rate custom duty negotiated between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Such a transit-trade agreement with Hindia is less risky for Pakistan-Bhutan-Nepal than an outright economic union or free trade agreement with Hindia.

#29 HisExcellency: ``Given the hegemonical attitude of Hindia, SAFTA and South Asian Economic union are non-starters. SAFTA minus Hindia will be more vibrant and mutually beneficial to Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Bhutan, Maldives and Nepal.``

I would welcome a free trade agreement in the region minus India. But how do you expect it to work? How will Pakistan send goods to Bhutan, Nepal or BD? How will Nepal trade with BD? Transit rights anyone?

#26 jang: You may have a point when you say that India needs to pursue SAFTA for political reasons, if not economic ones.

However, I think any investment by Indian companies in Nepal or BD will be viewed with suspicion in those countries, just like the Indian left views foreign investment in India. If the companies make a profit (which is their goal), they will be accused of exploiting the Nepalis or BDeshis. If India does not invest in these countries, we will be accused of ignoring our neighbours and being `arrogant`. It is the reaction that small countries have to a large country.

BD is refusing transit rights for India to transport goods between the NorthEastern states and other parts of India. The transit through BD will reduce transport time and costs, thereby making things cheaper in the NE. I cannot understand why BD is being moronic - not providing transit rights may give them some satisfaction of having ``shown`` India its place, but BD is losing out as well. It can charge transit fees and make some money as well. It is a true win-win proposal if ever there was one.

Given the hegemonical attitude of Hindia, SAFTA and South Asian Economic union are non-starters. SAFTA minus Hindia will be more vibrant and mutually beneficial to Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Bhutan, Maldives and Nepal.

{The onus for doing so clearly lies with India.}

Really? Daniel Pearl`s headless body is turning in its grave. Get this: hate of anything jew and kafir begets hate. If Pakistan wishes even to be counted amongst civilized nations first it must dismantle its jew/kafir hating terrorist training outfits. Otherwise crusades will never stop. Forget about union.

{the most hated nation in Nepal today is India. }

Who says so?

it is very important for india to pursue safta and a saeu. the reasons are not economical but political. currently and increasingly in future, india hosts a large number of bengali and nepali workers, but have poor leverage in politics of these countries. a more formal trade agreement will translate into better political leverage. in this, indian govt will have to be far more aggressive than they have been so far e.g. in Nepal. the govt has been only suppporting some power islands in Nepal, which have evidently poor political stature. India needs to strongly push for extensive JVs and infra projects in Nepal, and hopefully in Bangla Desh..i.e. not repeat mistakes of Nepal. these are extremely volatile regions with large populations which will continue to provide agar-agar for breeding maoist and jihadi viruses. so, at least for these regions a trade-agreement and aggressive trade policy is warranted. for this to happen, indian state of bengal will have to first make transition to a bussiness favourable climate. bengal borders both nepal and BD. currently this state is involved in corrupt politics and are preying on poor bangladeshi immigrants.

pakistan is a more stable place, and a bi-lateral trade deal is perhpas sufficient, aggresive JVs or infrastructure partnerships can take purely opportunistic path, no govt policy is needed.

sri lanka is quasi stable, and is not exporting its instabilites. the trade and political relations, JVs are good therefore status quo is sufficient.

To all Chowkies:

Haiy tau yeh rasm-e-zamanah, lekan phir bhi
Ho mubarak tumhain yeh saal nya, meray rafiq

Happy New Year

Mohammad Gill

20/HP
[.....Most of the posts are irrelevant and the chowk admin should filter them out...]

I am sure somebody died and made Mr. HP the king.....Yep, the King has spoken - most posts are junk - so blank them all out, except the ones posted by His Excellency....

+++

[... article is about SEAU in 2020 not today, not tomorrow or even in the next five years. ...]

The article is asking for one potential member of the future Union to make unilateral ``sacrifices`` and make sure the other members ``donot feel bad about being led``...... so whether the SAEU is formed today or 20 years down the line - it don`t really matter - it would be a non-starter......

urstruly
[.... it is Hindu mentality formed by their religion that do not let them co-exist peacefully with any one...]

May be..... but then this problem of ``co-existence`` is even more acute in muslim communities/countries around the world.....Iraq-iran, paki-afgan, iran-paki, turkey-kurds, saudis-turkey - the list is long[salim amdea compilation sometime back].....

Who are you going to blame that on? hinuds, jews, americans?....

There are three countries in SAARC or SAFTA that could form a true economic confederation surpassing US-Canada`s NAFTA or that of EU; these three countries are India, Bangladesh, and Nepal.

Lets take India and Bangladesh first. The relationship between these two countries is one of unique ones in the world. Bangladesh won its freedom because of India. Indians saved them from an on-going genocide, which by Indias` own account had cost Bagladeshis over 30 million lives. India also gave refuge to 100s of millions of Bengalis who fled their country during their war of independence. Bangladeshis established their own rule with the help of Indians. But today the most hated nation on the globe is India.

Similarly, there is Nepal, a landlocked country, wholly dependent on India for its trade and economy. It is the only Hindu sttate in the world, so ideologically there is no difference. Culture, religion, heritage and even languages are shared. But despite a communist insurgency, which is supposedly supported by China, the most hated nation in Nepal today is India.

Probably, it is Hindu mentality formed by their religion that do not let them co-exist peacefully with any one. The above mentioned two examples is the empirical evidence of that.

It is painfully clear that most of the comments on the article are from people who have not even read the article. Most of the posts are irrelevant and the chowk admin should filter them out. Chowk editors should realize that if they put articles of some academic value on the site for discussion then it is also important that only the posts that discuss the article and thoughts in the article be allowed for display.

The writer of the Article has done lots of research and put in some hard work in writing and presenting his ideas together and the chowk staff should at least respect article contributors and honor them for offering their articles for publishing at chowk by monitoring the interactions for relevancy and the substance. This article is not about politics. It is about some policy issues that were part of the SAARC declaration and all SAARC members have signed on it. The writer has made a serious effort to discuss some aspects of the SAARC declaration and the article deserves a serious look by all readers.

Ensuring respect for female authors is not enough. It is the beginning. ALL authors should be ensured the same courtesy.

I would have preferred to use feedback but posters on this site must also show some commitment to the site. If they lack the commitment then their posts should not be displayed at all. It is better to have 10 comments on an article then 1000 of no value at all.
Sorry for the digression…

---

“calls for the creation of a South Asian Customs Union (SACU) by 2015, and a South Asian Economic Union (SAEU) by 2020.”

It is clear from the article that the article is about SEAU in 2020 not today, not tomorrow or even in the next five years. The article is talking about something that is still almost 15 years out in future.

However, I think Athar made an error in relying on an obscure economist C. Westerate’s position in 1948. 1948 was some sixty odd years ago and the economic realities have changed considerable since then. The means of trade and distribution of labor and capital have gone thru some astronomical changes in the last 60 years and some ideas discussed by Westerate may not be relevant today.

In terms of creating the EU, some of Westerate’s ideas were relevant but with the current pace of activity in the international trade, creating layers, and relinquishing sovereignty are obsolete thoughts. Following France and Germany is not a good analogy either as France, Germany scarifies came when they were in an economic position to do that and none of the SAARC countries have anything to scarify anyway.

The first and foremost factor that worked in favor of the EU was the similarity of culture in pretty much all Western Europe. The culture just does not mean the language or the dress code but the meeting of minds, the uniformity of goals and work ethics form a common culture. It was relatively easy for the Western European countries to work on Economic unity on a faster pace, still, they first relied on opening the borders for travel and assimilation of ideas thru a free movement of people to increase dependency on each other, then followed that up with economic integration that is not by any means complete and still a work in progress.

We must also bear in mind that most of the EU countries were almost economic equals before they were able to go full steam in to the EU idea.

Looking at the SAARC countries, it is clear that all countries are in a horrible economic shape. All of them have recently adopted free and private economy and they are still going thru some painful changes in their economic structures. All of them suffer from serious internal political, ethnic, and communal discords and it is obvious that the leadership in all countries is not mature and visionary enough to fully implement a seamless economic transformation in their respective countries.

Economic changes cause political changes and political changes bring turmoil and chaos in societies. Chaos leads to rivalries between the regions and some regions in an effort to catch up make wrong political choices. Some regions are left behind and the hope to recover them diminishes. Leaving regions behind means rise of militancy in those regions and often arm conflicts which eventually begin to hurt the regions that are doing better.
A visionary leaderships in politics, business, and the society can create policies and follow them thru to control the horrors of economic changes.

All members of SAARC lack the visionary leadership and still have to rely on prompting from the World Bank, the IMF and the US state department to move forward with even the smallest of initiatives. In this atmosphere, it is hard to imagine that the current or the future leadership in SAARC countries would be able to implement SAEU initiative even in 2020.

The best course is to allow the economic integration follow its natural course and let people define what would they accept and what can be accomplished without a whole lot of intervention from the moribund leadership.

The first step is gradually reducing the travel restrictions. Let people meet and see for themselves whether the countries in SAARC actually share the culture, work ethics, and goals before forcing them into some economic union that is not able to allay fears between the people and the governments.

It is possible Pakistanis are not willing to make the cultural changes to compete in this world

kham
[.....indians don`t want to trade with pakis ....]

It`s not that Indians don`t ``want`` to trade with pakis - but they are reluctant to make unilateral ``sacrifices`` for that purpose...... SAFTA trade should happen as it does in other cases e.g. Indo-China trade is at 15bn$ within a few years - nobody was asking for ``sacrifices`` for that to happen.....

if ASEAN countries had said that - oh, China is the ``emerging superpower`` - so the chinese should be ``magnanimous`` before we can trade with them - then the ASEAN would have never got off the ground....

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

...since indians don`t want to trade with pakis and pakis are