SAARC alternative: myth or reality?
This week a news item was flashed on font pages of almost all the newspapers in Pakistan. The news was about the possibility of creation of an alternate organisation to replace the dysfunctional regional organisation SAARC. The idea of creating this alternative organisation is probably built on the premise that over the years India-Pakistan tensions have stalled and made SAARC dysfunctional so an alternate organisation be created that should exclude India. If this premise is right - which I think is so - then it leads to many pertinent questions that must be first correctly answered. Currently, China is a SAARC observer and not a member country but the core of the alternative SAARC organisation being proposed is anticipated to be built around the two nuclear powers in the region, China and Pakistan.
SAARC has a South Asian identity whereas China is not in South Asia but East Asia. China shares a very long border with India and borders with Nepal, Bhutan, Pakistan and Afghanistan but geographically China is not part of South Asia. So, to start with, any imaginative alternative organisation led by China that is being considered as a replacement to SAARC will represent a geographic space that can be called anything but representing South Asia. ASEAN, Arab League, OIC and EU are organisations that represent ideological and geographic identities.
Attainment of regional peace, economic cooperation and non-interference in internal affairs are the core concepts around which these organisations are structured and on the basis of which they operate. The ideal goal for all of them is to promote and achieve Arab, South East Asian, Muslim and European unity but essentially all these organisations except OIC represent a region and its priorities. If China takes a lead to replace SAARC then that imaginative organisation will neither represent association of South Asian countries nor the region of South Asia. In any case SCO as a regional organisation, led by the two great land powers, Russia and China, already exists and much that is being imagined to be achieved by an alternate to SAARC can be achieved under the mandate of SCO.
Pakistan might view the creation of an alternative organisation to SAARC as a win-win situation for it, as this would indicate a regional dissatisfaction of India's role and may mean a diplomatic victory for Pakistan. But what about the geopolitical and strategic implications? Geopolitically, there are more chances that the region will be further divided into pro-India and anti-India blocs. India led SAARC as its economic engine and many countries in the region excluding Pakistan depended on Indian aid, infrastructural development and trade. Strategically, India will contest any attempt by China to interfere in its sphere of influence and disturb the already existing Indian dominance and control.
Countries like Bhutan and Maldives that are heavily dependent on India for their trade and security will not prefer to join any anti-India bloc. It will also be not easy for Bangladesh and Nepal to do the same as both countries have a history of shared interests with India and both share borders with India. Sri Lanka too will find it difficult to become part of an anti-India bloc as it also heavily depends on India for aid, trade and fuel supplies. Sri Lanka was a recipient of $4 billion aid from India during its economic crisis of 2022-23.
The most interesting is the question about Afghanistan and why it will not like to become part of any anti-India organisation or bloc. Historically, Afghanistan has always stood up to fight any attempts aimed to control it externally. The not so friendly relations between Afghanistan and Pakistan are also built around this core Afghanistan policy concept. Over the years India has offered development oriented and non-interventionist aid to Afghanistan.
India invested $3 billion in Afghanistan, building schools and colleges, Afghan Parliament, Salma Dam and roads including Zaranj-Dilaram Highway that connects Afghanistan to Iran. There was news of Afghanistan planning to even have a naval fleet at Iran's Chabahar Port. India has invested in the Iranian port with a view to bypassing Pakistan for trade with Afghanistan. The Eastern Corridor of INSTC (International North South Transport Corridor) ends in Afghanistan and makes Afghanistan part of this alternate transport corridor against BRI. Afghanistan maintains cordial relationship with India to balance against Pakistan's influence and control; and so, for Afghanistan to join any alternative organisation which is anti-India and led by China and Pakistan will not be an easy decision to make.
Considering that India is a rising power, a land bridge which ensures connectivity of South Asian countries and which also maintains a big naval presence in the Indian Ocean excluding India from any future alternative organisation to replace SAARC will only weaken rather than bolster regional cooperation and problems.
There are both the economic and realistic logics for creating an alternative organisation to replace SAARC. The economic logic addresses the problem of how to get rich, to maximise prosperity by creating organisations that can promote economic deals and investments with other countries. However, the first question that states ask as actors in the regional and international system is a realist question and that question is - how best to survive? The economists prefer to get rich but the realists prefer to be more powerful to be able to survive and whenever both the economic and realist logic find themselves in a conflict it is always the realist logic that states prefer.
States prefer to become part of regional and international organisations and institutions. EU and NATO came into existence under the same concept. Over the years, EU has done so well because the US through NATO provided EU the security umbrella and instead of competing for security the EU countries invested in their economies. But this has come at a cost. EU does what the US asks it to do. EU's collective foreign policy is driven due to its economic and security relationship with the US. Today, most European countries realise that they don't have an independent foreign policy and they are beholden to the US.
Built only on an economic logic, any alternative to SAARC led by China seems to be a bright idea but seen from a realist perspective there are many questions that the states will have to answer related to their foreign policy and overall security. It is by getting right answers to these questions that the very idea of having an alternative to SAARC will either fail or succeed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Recorder
an hour ago
- Business Recorder
INSTC should be active in tandem with BRI
In today's interconnected world and the new global order, trade corridors are essential highways of the global economy and strategic tools for geopolitical and geo-strategic influence. Global trade is being conducted in a turbo-charged manner. The threats of blockades of shipping routes such as the Suez Canal, Strait of Hormuz, or the Malacca Strait, keep buyers and sellers on edge. In such a situation, countries want to have alternatives. Shipping is the better mode of cost-effective transportation of goods, but the volatile and unpredictable ramifications of conflicts between nations disrupt trade. China took the pioneering initiative by establishing the Belt and Road Initiative in which China Pakistan Economic Corridor is the bedrock component. Cargo through corridors is increasingly being done through multimodal transportation network connecting rail, road, and maritime routes. However, conflicts and tensions among neighboring countries within the route of such corridors impede the success and critical mass of such corridors. Global trade has often been hostage to the arbitrary, pernicious, and harmful imposition of economic sanctions on countries or regions that do not comply with the diktat of economic and military behemoths. More often than not, the economic sanctions are routed through the United Nations, which is subservient to countries that provide substantial financial resources to the world body. Russia analyzed the situation and initiated its own corridor in association with selected countries. The International North-South Transport Corridor was established in 2000 by Russia, India and Iran with the objective of establishing a corridor as an alternative to transporting and facilitating goods via the Suez Canal as well as to reduce the time and cost of delivery of goods. Belarus, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Oman, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Ukraine, Kyrgyzstan, Syria, Turkiye, and now Pakistan have joined the project. The INSTC should be active in tandem with BRI, and enable the South Asian, Central Asian, and West Asian nations to link with other Eurasian countries. Pakistan is now part of this new initiative because, for obvious political reasons, Pakistan has been excluded from BRICS, and was not one of the original members of INSTC. It is also crucial to promote formation of CAPRI as a sub-regional economic, political, and defense bloc as this would provide a geostrategic base for Pakistan in resolving issues with neighbors. CAPRI stands for China, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Russia, and Iran. CAPRI can be linked to INSTC and BRI. It is taken for granted that countries keep changing their alliances and policies as per the prevailing world scenario. The USA is dead set on a mission to curb Chinese influence on countries that are within the BRI outreach. Israeli guidance to Washington has enabled the USA and India to be strategic partners. This has led Russia to revisit its economic and defence ties with New Delhi. The INSTC would work superbly for Pakistan and Russia, and the first train to leave Karachi will be the harbinger of a grand alliance of the future. Pakistan will gain hugely if the policymakers and politicians do not play politics with INSTC as they purportedly did with CPEC. According to Indian defence analyst Pravin Sawhney, 'Pakistan joining the INSTC makes perfect sense since it is located on the route.' Despite the hype about Gwadar Port, it will take many years to achieve optimal operations and activities. INSTC and BRI can enable Gwadar to become a fully functional transit Port. Pakistan is well poised as a point of regional connectivity and as a facilitator of trade for many countries. However, there are big boulders on the highway, such as the reluctance of cooperation with Pakistan by India in this initiative, the Damocles Sword of US sanctions, the law and order situation in Balochistan, and the menace of terrorism. A few years ago, the then Prime Minister had gone to Moscow primarily to develop a favorable linkage that would have given leverage to Pakistan to protect export markets, raw material suppliers, avenues of development finance, and security shields in times of need. Russia-Ukraine War seriously impeded the expected momentum of a strong trade and investment relationship between Pakistan and Russia but President Putin is making a paradigm shift unlike his predecessors who were primarily fixated only on India. Putin has sensed the new geostrategic metrics, and it is a win-win situation for Russia and Pakistan to bond with China and other countries. Pakistan has been delicately playing all sides in the past by claiming that it adheres to an independent foreign policy. In fact, this has seldom been to the benefit of Islamabad because it never took advantage of this independent stance by promoting economic diplomacy. The victory over India and the Israeli-Iran conflict have shifted the pendulum for Pakistan. Other countries have maintained political diplomacy in conjunction with economic diplomacy and resultantly succeeded in many aspects. The difficulty in smooth success of INSTC depends formidably on the ecosystem in Iran. The Eurasian Development Bank forecasts that the INSTC will handle 30 million tons of goods annually by 2030, generating a couple of billion dollars in transit revenue for Iran. This could enable Iran in modernizing logistics infrastructure and expanding the economic potential. On the other hand, US economic sanctions on Iran pose a significant barrier to the participation of international companies in INSTC-related projects. This is Achilles' heel in the long-term success of INSTC. The BRICS countries have accelerated their plans of moving away from dollar-based international trade through monetary mechanisms, but the strongly-worded warning from President Donald Trump to those countries who are keen to join the emerging multilateral monetary agreements may, in the short term, discourage them from it. Stephen P. Groff of the Asian Development Bank, once stated about nations, such as Pakistan, that 'If countries succeed in building effective national road, energy and urban infrastructure systems which then feed into broader subregional infrastructure networks, the fruits of Asia's growth can be shared much more broadly across borders'. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Business Recorder
an hour ago
- Business Recorder
They're still flying high
EDITORIAL: The Pakistan Air Force (PAF) has always drawn praise from everyone – not through grandstanding, but by delivering whenever it is tested. The latest nod came from the Chief of Staff of China's People's Liberation Army Air Force, Lieutenant General Wang Gang, who called the PAF's performance in the recent war with India 'a textbook example of precision, discipline, and courage' in the face of unprovoked aggression. The remark came during a high-level visit to Air Headquarters in Islamabad, where General Wang also noted China's keen interest in learning from the PAF's battle-tested integration of Multi-Domain Operations, which says a lot. That's not a compliment Beijing hands out lightly – especially given its own airpower ambitions. But for those who've watched the PAF over the decades, this shouldn't come as a surprise. The Pakistan Air Force has always punched well above its weight. It captured international attention during the 1965 war, when a much smaller fleet held its own against a numerically superior Indian Air Force. Some of its wartime manoeuvres became case studies in combat aviation. The legend only grew over time – with stories of PAF pilots flying for Arab states and downing Israeli jets during the Yom Kippur War becoming part of regional military lore. Even in peacetime, the service maintained its edge, consistently training to a standard that attracted foreign observers, joint drills, and deep bilateral engagements – not least with China, which co-developed the JF-17 Thunder with Pakistan. That same platform has since matured into a credible deterrent force, operated by highly trained PAF squadrons who've adapted to modern hybrid warfare challenges without bloating the budget. What's more, the PAF's operational discipline and strategic clarity often stand in contrast to the disarray that marks other parts of the country's institutional machinery. Whether it's political paralysis, economic stasis, or diplomatic drift, Pakistan struggles to project stability in most arenas – except when its military, particularly its air wing, is in frame. So when China singles out the PAF for praise – and explicitly expresses a desire to learn from it – the statement carries weight beyond flattery. It confirms what military analysts have long argued: that the Pakistan Air Force remains one of the region's most competent and coherent fighting forces. It also reinforces the reality that Pakistan's strategic partnerships are not just alive – they're evolving. China is not lavishing praise as a favour; it is acknowledging value. A battle-tested, professionally run air force with multi-domain integration capabilities is an asset, especially as China gears up for its own next-generation military transformation. And for Pakistan, deeper integration with China's airpower doctrines and technologies could be the edge it needs to maintain parity with a larger neighbour constantly updating its arsenal. Yet there's a larger implication here, one worth noting. Pakistan's military, and the PAF in particular, has remained committed to hard capability even as fiscal realities have shrunk civilian development space. One might argue whether this allocation of resources is sustainable – that's a different debate – but there is little doubt that it has paid operational dividends. For a country still fighting an internal insurgency, struggling with fiscal meltdown, and burdened by political disarray, having one institution consistently deliver competence and reliability on the global stage is more than just optics – it's leverage. That's not to say the country can fly on the wings of the PAF alone. But when the civilian leadership is largely absent from diplomatic or economic strategy, and parliament rarely debates serious national security matters, such moments of international recognition carry weight far beyond military circles. They serve as reminders of what disciplined focus can achieve, even under systemic stress. So yes, the PAF deserves the recognition. Not just for what it did this summer, but for the decades of consistency, evolution, and excellence that led up to it. If anything still commands quiet respect for Pakistan abroad, it's not its economy, its democracy, or its diplomacy. It's the precision of its pilots. And they're still flying high. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Business Recorder
an hour ago
- Business Recorder
India's proxy war of terrorism
EDITORIAL: The Corps Commanders' Conference on Thursday once again underscored Pakistan's growing concerns over India's role in fomenting terrorism within this country. In the wake of the Pahalgam incident, and what was described as India's 'manifest defeat in direct aggression against Pakistan', the military leadership called for 'decisive and holistic actions at all levels' against Indian-backed and -sponsored proxies. The use of proxies by India reflects a well-documented pattern of behaviour in recent years, particularly since the rise to power of ultra-Hindu nationalist Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, in 2014. Pakistan has consistently highlighted India's support for separatist and militant elements, most notably Baloch insurgent groups and the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) terrorist outfit, both of which have been involved in high-profile terrorist attacks. The urgency of the matter was underscored by events on the very day of the conference in the Sur Dukai area of Baluchistan, where armed men stopped two buses, checked passengers' identity cards, and dragged out nine of them with Punjab addresses to be shot dead in cold blood. The so-called Balochistan Liberation Front later claimed responsibility for the heinous act. Pakistan has submitted multiple dossiers to the United Nations and other international bodies, detailing Indian financial and logistical support for these terrorist groups, often operating from Afghan soil or via clandestine regional networks. The issue gained significant traction following the 2016 arrest of a serving Indian naval officer Kulbhushan Jadhav in Baluchistan. Found in possession of a passport under a fictitious Muslim name, Jadhav later confessed on video to orchestrating subversive activities in that restive province on behalf of India's intelligence agency, RAW. A striking element of the top brass' assertions is the pointed reference to India's National Security Adviser, Ajit Doval. Just a day before the Corps Commanders' meeting, Director General of ISPR, Lt Gen Ahmed Sharif Chaudhry, had also named Doval as the 'chief architect of terrorism in Pakistan.' This, of course, did not come as a surprise. Doval has, on multiple public platforms and in think-tank discussions, outlined his 'offensive defence' doctrine – a Pakistan-centric strategy that advocates taking the fight to adversary through covert means. This doctrine has come to symbolize India's use of violent proxies to destabilise this country. The military's call for 'holistic' action reflects the evolving nature of modern security challenges, which requires a multi-dimensional approach. In addition to military readiness it demands greater political alignment and economic resilience—especially at a time when Pakistan is grappling with political uncertainty and grim economic challenges. Meanwhile, India's attempts to offset its military setbacks through proxy warfare leave limited space for diplomatic engagement in an already fragile regional environment. Common sense suggests that both nuclear-armed neighbours work to de-escalate tensions. Unfortunately, however, India's interference via proxies continues, adding to the tensions between two nuclear-armed countries. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
