Contents
Inter/Intrastate Conflicts in South Asia
Large sections of the people of South Asia had to suffer the worst havoc of history, caused by the tsunami, due to the absence of a proper warning system since human security has never topped the agenda of the policy makers in a region embroiled with conflicts. South Asia, has, so far, failed to resolve inter/intrastate disputes that threaten its peace and impede the prospects of regional cooperation. There are perennial disputes that continue to fuel hostility which, in turn, give birth to ancillary conflicts that further complicate the prospects of conflict management and prohibit progress on the economic agenda envisaged by South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC). The past, and the current, mutually exclusive approaches to either dominate the region, ignoring the concerns of immediate small neighbours, or look beyond it to counterbalance the immediate 'hegemon' did not help forge understanding in the region, nor will they in the future.

The governments and the parties to the conflict are under tremendous domestic and international pressure to find amicable solutions to their conflicts, especially in a changing regional, ecological and global environment. The states of South Asia need to jointly face the challenges, such as low river-water discharges, natural disasters, such as by the recent tsunami, and global trade disparities, in order to prevent the birth of a new inward-looking era in which each state fends for itself in the face of problems that can essentially be handled collectively in a dynamic regional setting. A new regional understanding of the riparian issues is essential to resolve Indo-Nepal, Indo-Bangladesh and Indo-Pakistan water disputes since regional riparian statutes are obligatory under RRR statute model respecting Helsinki Convention that envisages 8K upstream and downstream rights. All reconciliation processes and negotiations have to be even-handed, attuned to the priorities of the parties to the conflict, balanced, productive and mutually beneficial, and need to be framed and phased in a manner that the interlocutors continue to benefit from the process and are able to move forward.

The slow pace of negotiations between India and Pakistan, suspension of the negotiation process between the Sri Lankan government and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), failure to initiate reconciliation with the Maoists in Nepal and inability of New Delhi and Dhaka in putting together a comprehensive negotiation framework to iron out their differences is causing despair among the people who have suffered too long due to these conflicts. However, it is a matter of satisfaction that the governments and the parties to the conflict increasingly realise the futility of conflict and have seen so much of it that they should find little reason in not taking the course of peacefully negotiated settlement of the disputes.

Quite encouragingly, the composite dialogue process between India and Pakistan has entered its second round and both the governments have reiterated not to let the reconciliation process get derailed. Being nuclear powers, India and Pakistan must respect the desire for peace of their peoples and not let them down by slipping back into their frozen rigid positions. The respective nationalist ideologies of enmity need to be replaced with a paradigm of peace and harmony that views bilateralism as mutually reinforcing and equally rewarding. This would require approaching the outstanding issues with flexibility of approach and innovation, especially with regard to Jammu & Kashmir. The lesser differences should be quickly resolved to create an environment favourable to a process that may essentially result in the resolution of the main issue. The joint statements of January 6 and September 24, 2004, ask for stopping cross-border infiltration, and repression by respective states, exploring all possible options on Kashmir to find a solution to the satisfaction of the parties to the conflict -- above all the peoples of Jammu and Kashmir. They, simultaneously, call for normalisation of relations, taking confidence-building measures and expanding areas of possible cooperation.

Indo-Bangladesh relations are passing through yet another uneasy phase of tension. It seems that New Delhi's complaints of Dhaka's alleged 'help' to militants from India's north-east and Bangladesh's concern over India's 'refusal' to correct the trade imbalance and differences over the river-linking project by New Delhi have strained their relations. While India should do more to remove tariff barriers on exports from Bangladesh and take Dhaka into confidence over the river-linking project, both the countries must take each other's security concerns more seriously and prevent cross-border hostilities.

The political conflict in Sri Lanka, that has assumed an ethnic form due to the marginalisation and exclusion of ethnic minorities, cannot be resolved with a mindset of an already defined majoritarian state. Nor can a distinct Tamil political identity in the north-eastern region be recognised, without ensuring equality to other ethnic and religious minorities, territorial integrity of the state and stopping human rights violation from all sides and guaranteeing the rights of minorities. In the interim, the Ceasefire Agreement of 2002 needs to be strengthened and the urgent needs of the people of the war zone, including the minorities, necessitate the establishment of an interim administrative structure without further delay. The current havoc caused by the tsunami demands joint efforts by the LTTE and the Sri Lankan government.

Given a very serious crisis in Nepal, it is time to review the Indo-Nepal Treaty of 1950 and the Letters exchanged in 1950 and 1965 and the constitution of the country. There is a need to effectively regulate Nepal-India border to stop cross-border activities that are detrimental to peace and security of the two countries. However, the Maoist conflict cannot be solved militarily and, therefore, calls for a negotiated settlement that can happen only if the parliamentary forces reach a consensus to bring the constitutional process back on the rail and the Maoists are brought on board to settle the conflict on a democratic basis. There is an urgent need to stop violence and violations of human rights by the security forces and the Maoists.

It is a matter of serious concern that the pretext of inter/intrastate conflicts or 'war against terrorism' is being used to clip civil liberties, introduce draconian laws and suppress democratic aspirations of the people. While appreciating the voices of sanity for peaceful resolution of conflicts from the civil societies and the media, it is disappointing that certain sections of establishments, media and societies are still embedded to the so-called 'national consensus' that are one-sided and exclusionary. This is the time for South Asia to focus on its real issues of poverty, development and human security to save the people from the bloody waves of tsunami and get rid of inter/intrastate conflicts.


Produced By: Free Media Foundation For South Asian Free Media Association