In This Issue

In the first issue of South Asian Journal, two former prime ministers have presented their vision for South Asia and a number of academics and analysts from the region have written on a theme on which they have considerable expertise and which interests them.

S. D. Muni, professor at the School of International Studies at the Jawaharlal Nehru University in New Delhi, looks at South Asia as understood in a modern context. The creation of independent India and Pakistan and the partition of the sub-continent raised issues which continue to be debated by academics and policy makers. Muni argues that despite independent states, there are numerous grounds of commonality between the peoples of the region. He analyses recent trends that are taking place in different countries and the region and argues for a more viable regional entity to address numerous internal and external challenges against the backdrop of globalisation and democratisation.

Sanjay Joshi, historian at the Northern Arizona University, continues the evaluation of South Asia, tracing the historical notion of South Asia from the colonial times to the period up to Independence. He argues that South Asia did not exist in the colonial period as, for the British, their empire in India defined the entire region. Even though the category 'South Asia' came into common circulation only after the end of British colonialism, he argues that the notion of South Asia as we know it today has a critically important historical legacy reaching back to the colonial era and the nature of nationalism. Even today, South Asia continues to be used as a synonym for what was British India. Joshi believes that only by taking into account that history can we comprehend the range of problems with which we are confronted when we deploy this category today.

The third article in this issue by Khaled Ahmed, a leading journalist and eminent writer from Pakistan, forms a natural link with the first two, examining more topical and current issues. Ahmed examines the reasons why the countries of South Asia have so far failed to emerge as a vibrant regional entity, a worldwide trend with many countries forming trading blocs in order to deal with political and economic challenges on a global level. Much of Khaled Ahmed's paper is on the South Asian Association for Regional Co-operation (SAARC) and its inability to become an entity, for example, like the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN). He looks, particularly, at the sizeable presence of India in the SAARC and how different nationalisms in the region have hindered the strengthening of the regional entity.

Dr. Salman Shah, a leading economist of Pakistan, writes about the gains from better economic and trade relations in South Asia, particularly between India and Pakistan, if the political and security situation improves. He argues that a South Asian Economic Union, on the pattern of the EU, would have emerged, had the relationship between the two countries not been bedeviled by the dispute over Kashmir. For him, the peace dividend would run into billions of dollars, forever changing the lives of the citizens of South Asia. A major benefit of a South Asian Economic Union, based on settlement of long-standing disputes and by beneficial economic cooperation would be an environment in which major reductions in defence spending could be made and transferred to development activities. He suggests a sequential programme to achieve these aims.

Dr. Pervez Hoodbhoy, professor of Physics at the Quaid-e-Azam University in Islamabad, traces the development of nuclear weapons in South Asia, especially in Pakistan, and looks at the horrible prospects of a possible nuclear conflagration between India and Pakistan. His paper examines the institutional, cultural and political manifestations of the nuclear issue, particularly in Pakistan, but also in India. He evaluates the dynamics of multifarious aspects which have an impact on 'security' in the region. Hoodbhoy examines the role of the U.S. in the light of the nuclear developments in South Asia, especially with regard to the post-9/11 developments. He also suggests ways in which civil society can understand and address the nuclear threat in South Asia.

Talat Masood, a retired Pakistani army general, in his article, covers numerous issues related to India and Pakistan, ranging from the issue of Kashmir, to the nuclearisation of the region, to conventional defence weapons and procurement. He also looks at the situation with regard to the two countries in the light of developments in the region. He argues that Kashmir, to a large extent, shapes and dominates Pakistan's foreign and domestic policy and that the collateral fallout of the Kashmir dispute has been enormous for both India and Pakistan. He believes, however, that there is a growing realisation among the leadership as well as the people on both sides that there is no military solution to the Kashmir dispute. In addition, going nuclear has not reduced military budgets of India and Pakistan for conventional arms. He believes that a more holistic and cooperative, rather than a confrontational, approach towards security is necessary to counter the internal and external threats facing the countries of South Asia.

The two former prime ministers of India and Pakistan, I.K. Gujral and Benazir Bhutto, present their cases for the need for a strong regional entity. Ms. Benazir Bhutto examines European historical developments in the pre-modern age and contrasts them with developments in medieval India, and then examines developments in modern day South Asia. Her paper looks at the historical development of the SAARC and how it began and examines the reasons why such an entity is essential. She presents a roadmap for the SAARC and actively endorses the spirit and details of the Dhaka Declaration of the South Asian Free Media Association (SAFMA) conference of May 26, 2003.

I. K. Gujral, in his piece offers a broad assessment of the South Asian region in the light of geo-structural and strategic developments in the region, especially the recent events in Afghanistan, Central Asia and Iraq. He argues that the presence of foreign, particularly the presence of U.S. military forces in the region is a major destabilising force for peace and security in South Asia, which can offset the balance of forces in the region. He also thinks that any foreign involvement in resolving contentious issues, such as Kashmir, will not be productive, warning leaders in Pakistan and India not to fall into a U.S. trap by becoming too pro-U.S. Mr. Gujral says that in order to face the growing U.S. hegemony in the region, India and Pakistan, along with other South Asian countries, should collectively work towards peace and security for their region.

The broader themes which address issues related to the region of South Asia are covered in the articles mentioned above. In addition, this issue carries articles which examine the country-perspective of the five major countries which make up South Asia. Given the larger-than-life presence of India in the region--population, geographical size, economy, etc.--most of the country-perspectives examine the relationship of their own country to a broader South Asian region, with regard to the presence of India.

K.K. Katyal, Consulting Editor of The Hindu, has edited India's perspective on South Asia and options for constructive engagement. The theme from which this contribution is drawn was the subject of a major seminar in New Delhi recently. It was held under the auspices of the Association of Indian Diplomats, a non-profit organisation formed by retired ambassadors and secretaries of the Ministry of External Affairs. A report of its proceedings has been published in a book form. K.K. Katyal presents the abridged overview and the consensus recommendations, not necessarily reflecting his own views.

Dr. Hasan-Askari Rizvi, an independent political analyst from Pakistan, examines Pakistan's role and position in South Asia, focussing a great deal on conflict, once again, between India and Pakistan, giving a detailed historical view of the nature and genesis of these problems. Since Pakistan, like all the other SAARC countries, has issues about identity and internal constraints and contradictions which define the politics of that country, part of Rizvi's paper also addresses internal issues which help define Pakistan today. A growing sense of identity in Pakistan is of an Islamic dispensation, and Rizvi analyses how this affects Pakistan's formulation on South Asia. He presents ideas on how new parameters for the region can be articulated and how some existing hindrances can be addressed.

Abul Ahsan, Vice-President of Independent University and a former foreign secretary of Bangladesh, presents the perspective of Bangladesh about the South Asian region, locating it around the larger issues between India and Pakistan, which primarily determine the nature of the region. He shows how Bangladesh, surrounded by India, has tried to emphasise regional interests rather than simply bilateral ones and the role it has played and continues to play in the SAARC. Much of Abul Ahsan's article is about the benefits of greater regional unity and the pitfalls of continuing hostility between nations.

Jayadeva Uyangoda, professor of Political Science and Public Policy at the University of Colombo, Sri Lanka, writes about the domestic issues which affect Sri Lanka and also those which relate it specifically to India and to the region as a whole. In many ways, the issues in the SAARC have been determined by India and Pakistan's relationship with each other, a theme which is discussed in Uyangoda's paper, showing how this has affected the SAARC and Sri Lanka. Similarly, he argues, the nature of bilateral relations between Sri Lanka and India has defined the smaller nation's relationship with New Delhi.

Indeed, not surprisingly, given their relationship with India, many of the themes discussed in Jayadeva Uyagonda's paper find their parallel in the paper (the last of this inaugral issue) from Nepal by Gopal Siwakoti Chintan, lecturer of International Law and Human Rights at Nepal Law Campus. He also examines in great detail the relationship between the Kingdom and India. However, unlike Sri Lanka, the relationship between India and Nepal seems to determine almost everything, and one gets the impression that the larger South Asian regional entity is somewhat squeezed in between. Interestingly, however, the presence of China on Nepal's northern border gives the Nepal-India relationship a different angle compared to other countries in South Asia except Pakistan.

The country perspectives, in general, tend to create an impression of ‘all versus India’, which is not South Asian Journal’s policy, although they may reflect a partial reality. Moreover, the ideas presented in all the articles are not necessarily, either partially or in totality, reflective of our editorial policy, except where the emphasis is on peace and amity among the South Asian nations.