SAARC summit postponed

[nasifkhan]

Originally posted by cricketfan
India has good bilateral relations with Nepal, Sri Lanka, Bhutan and Maldive long before SAARC came into being. These countries, because of historical reasons. enjoy privileges which are unheard of elsewhere.For example, Nepali enjoy the same rights as Indians in India ( except voting). They can freely enter India(no visa is required), take up jobs( no work permit is required), buy property in India. They are eligible for Government jobs, including Military, where they join in large numbers.What does SAARC provide to Nepal that they do not already have vis-a vis India. Same is true for Bhutan. Sri Lanka and Maldive also do not need SAARC to deal with India.

Indian relations with Pakistan were strained due to reasons well known to everyone. BD foreign policy mandarins have tried to follow in the footsteps of Pakistan rather than the other neighbours of India in dealing with India. BD can as well deal with India bilaterally like other non-Pakistan neighbours. Where is the need of SAARC for that?

Edited on, February 10, 2005, 5:09 AM GMT, by cricketfan.

bhai..apnar moto koi jon buje????

[fab]

Originally posted by cricketfan
Where is the need of SAARC for that?

err. So we can have multilateral agreements instead of just bilateral ones.. So we can have similar effect as ASEAN.. There are many reasons, dude.

[cricketfan]

Considering that none of the SAARC countries share borders with each other(except with India), what is use of multilateral agreements. For instance, for trade between BD and Sri Lanka,India need not come into the picture as that trade can take place directly. Similar is the case for trade between Maldive and Sri Lanka.

The fact of the matter is that SAARC is not required by any country in the region except perhaps Bangladesh. Even Bangladesh basically needs to deal with India.

ASEAN is a different matter altogether. It is not a matter of one large country sharing boundaries with many smaller countries there.

[rafiq]

Sharing borders is not a prerequisite for a regional economic block such as SAARC. Increased trade, "free" trade, tax-advantaged movement of goods, services and labor, economies of scale, access to nearby markets, level playing fields, etc are some of the economic goals. There are political and social goals as well, as cooperation on political issues, common social issues, etc can be expected.

That's the theory. In reality something like SAARC, given the countries involved, simply hasn't delivered on its promise. The question is how much more effort should be spent on it.

[cricketfan]

I am not sure if meetings of ASEAN get postponed due to the absence of one member.Why cannot the SAARC meeting go ahead and the absentee is excluded from the membership.

If presence of one particular country is so essential for these meetings then SAARC may not be what it is made out to be.

Edited on, February 10, 2005, 10:44 AM GMT, by cricketfan.