[🇧🇩] SAARC---Can it be revived?

[🇧🇩] SAARC---Can it be revived?
30
2K
More threads by Saif

G Bangladesh Defense
South Asia: SAARC’s revival should be a diplomatic priority

Why does SAARC need to be reactivated?

Unilateral and bloody US intervention in countries such as Venezuela has demonstrated that when regional unity is weak, no country’s sovereignty is truly secure.

1768114613700.webp

Helal Mohiuddin
Published: 10 Jan 2026, 08: 11


The people of Bangladesh no longer want a future government that is merely a change of faces produced by a transfer of power, continuing governance along the same old trajectory. There is now a strong public appetite for clear answers: how will the abnormality in relations with neighbouring countries be resolved? What vision will the major political parties and electoral alliances adopt? Clear answers to these questions have become central to public aspirations.

Multilateral diplomacy in South Asia has all but ground to a halt. Bangladesh–India bilateral engagement is at a low ebb. Geopolitical relations are marked by deep unease. With the exception of Afghanistan, India’s relations with no South Asian country can be described as comfortable. Its enduring hostility with Pakistan persists, and the India–Pakistan rivalry has plunged the entire subcontinent into a crisis of trust and insecurity. India’s relations with Nepal, Sri Lanka and the Maldives are also fraught with suspicion and discomfort.


A major reason behind South Asia’s insecurity, economic uncertainty and political mistrust is the paralysis of SAARC (South Asian Association of Regional Cooperation). This paralysis did not emerge overnight. Over many years, a toxic tree of mutual suspicion, unequal conduct, and political and psychological distance has taken root. Normal bilateral diplomatic engagement is no longer sufficient to bridge this gap, because bilateral relations are mired in the politics of emotion, ego and the arrogance of power.

The February election thus represents a historic opportunity for politicians to redefine the country’s diplomatic outlook. The first and foremost foreign policy agenda of the newly elected government should be to initiate the revival and effective activation of the SAARC.


Why does SAARC need to be reactivated? Unilateral and bloody US intervention in countries such as Venezuela has demonstrated that when regional unity is weak, no country’s sovereignty is truly secure. The failure of the Arab League in the Middle East, or the consequences of the lack of regional cohesion in parts of Africa, tell the same story. By contrast, the European Union, ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations), and Latin America’s Mercosur bloc have shown that regional cooperation is not merely an economic arrangement, but a fundamental pillar of political security as well.

Because of the European Union, even smaller states are able to speak as part of a collective force in global economic and political arenas. Without such unity, they would never have been able to negotiate on equal terms with powers such as the United States, China or Russia.
Because of the European Union, even smaller states are able to speak as part of a collective force in global economic and political arenas. Without such unity, they would never have been able to negotiate on equal terms with powers such as the United States, China or Russia.

Similarly, without ASEAN, countries like Indonesia, Vietnam, Thailand and Malaysia could never, on their own, have emerged as central hubs of global production and supply chains. Under ASEAN’s umbrella, they ensured political stability, mutual trust and investment security. As a result, South-East Asia has developed into an alternative manufacturing base even amid the China–US trade row.

Regional alliances also serve as an effective shield for political security. When Mercosur member states—Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay—moved towards a common market and customs regime, they were able to consolidate their position in global agricultural and industrial markets. Mercosur is not fully successful or entirely effective today. Yet during periods when the bloc functioned more effectively, its member states were far stronger individually as well, particularly in trade negotiations with the European Union and the United States.

When regional alliances weaken, every country suffers. Despite sharing close linguistic, cultural and religious ties, Middle Eastern countries failed to forge effective political unity through the Arab League. As a result, Iraq, Libya, Syria and Yemen—each separately falling victim to external intervention.

Bangladesh now stands at a critical juncture where its foreign policy thinking must be carefully considered in advance. If the new government continues to follow the old bilateral template, the outcome will be either subservience to India or an escalation of hostility, resentment and mutual disrespect.
The experience of the African Union is also instructive. When the organisation was relatively active, it achieved some success in democratic transitions and conflict management. Whenever it weakened, countries became vulnerable to civil wars, military coups and external influence.

The consequences of SAARC’s paralysis in South Asia are no different. India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal or Sri Lanka—none is secure on its own. India may believe itself strong in isolation, but in reality, regional mistrust and distance are undermining India’s own strategic security.


Following the recent death of Khaleda Zia, India’s prime minister Narendra Modi swiftly expressed his condolences and sent a personal representative with a message of sympathy. The people of Bangladesh hoped that a long-standing chill was beginning to thaw. Yet amid this seemingly positive development, hostility towards Bangladesh was reignited in cricket when Mustafizur Rahman was dropped from the IPL (Indian Premier League). Public expectation was instantly transformed into disappointment and frustration.

Cricket is a humanitarian and cordial sphere beyond the confines of sports diplomacy—particularly so, given its status as a gentleman’s game. Public emotion, affection and patriotism are deeply intertwined with it. India’s decision, influenced by an aggressive Hindutva mindset, has therefore intensified anti-India sentiment across the region. The incident is not confined to the exclusion of a single player; rather, it has called into question India’s claim to be a secular, tolerant and liberal democratic state.

Under Sheikh Hasina’s rule, India may indeed have achieved a measure of dominance in Bangladesh. Yet throughout history, no country has succeeded in the long term by installing compliant governments in neighbouring states and extracting unilateral advantages. Even if India remains in a state of delusion for now, it will eventually be forced to learn that regional relationships must be built on a blend of education, culture, sport, trade and commerce—and above all, mutual respect and shared interests.


If Bangladesh’s new government genuinely wishes to begin a new diplomatic chapter, it must pursue the revival of SAARC from day one. This is the only dignified path towards normalising relations with India. No party is required to bow its head within a regional alliance. The simple premise is this: if SAARC is strong, everyone benefits.

Division and fragmentation will reduce South Asia to a powerless region, leaving all countries equally vulnerable to external powers. Such weakness cannot be overcome through the arrogance of arms stockpiles, territorial size or economic might.

India has historically shown little enthusiasm for SAARC. From the condescension of being the region’s largest country, it promoted an alternative grouping—BIMSTEC (Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation). In essence, BIMSTEC was an attempt to bypass SAARC and establish an India-centric geopolitical authority. However, South Asian countries failed to find a dignified and equitable place for themselves within this framework. As a result, BIMSTEC has never become, and never can become, an alternative to SAARC. In reality, there is little prospect of BIMSTEC’s success.


Bangladesh now stands at a critical juncture where its foreign policy thinking must be carefully considered in advance. If the new government continues to follow the old bilateral template, the outcome will be either subservience to India or an escalation of hostility, resentment and mutual disrespect. By contrast, a bold and historic initiative such as the revival of SAARC would constitute a genuine step towards thawing relations. Reconciliation requires an appropriate platform—and SAARC can be that platform.

A regional alliance becomes sustainable only when it is founded on mutual equality, respect and collective decision-making. That potential within SAARC remains intact. Bangladesh’s late president Ziaur Rahman, the organisation’s visionary founder, demonstrated remarkable foresight. Not only the BNP, the party he established, but also other parties and alliances could incorporate a commitment to reviving SAARC into their election manifestos. Such a pledge would signal to voters that political forces possess goodwill and proactive intent with regard to positive geopolitics.

* Helal Mohiuddin is a professor of Sociology at Mayville State University, North Dakota, USA​
 
South Asia: SAARC’s revival should be a diplomatic priority

Why does SAARC need to be reactivated?

Unilateral and bloody US intervention in countries such as Venezuela has demonstrated that when regional unity is weak, no country’s sovereignty is truly secure.

View attachment 23701

Helal Mohiuddin
Published: 10 Jan 2026, 08: 11


The people of Bangladesh no longer want a future government that is merely a change of faces produced by a transfer of power, continuing governance along the same old trajectory. There is now a strong public appetite for clear answers: how will the abnormality in relations with neighbouring countries be resolved? What vision will the major political parties and electoral alliances adopt? Clear answers to these questions have become central to public aspirations.

Multilateral diplomacy in South Asia has all but ground to a halt. Bangladesh–India bilateral engagement is at a low ebb. Geopolitical relations are marked by deep unease. With the exception of Afghanistan, India’s relations with no South Asian country can be described as comfortable. Its enduring hostility with Pakistan persists, and the India–Pakistan rivalry has plunged the entire subcontinent into a crisis of trust and insecurity. India’s relations with Nepal, Sri Lanka and the Maldives are also fraught with suspicion and discomfort.


A major reason behind South Asia’s insecurity, economic uncertainty and political mistrust is the paralysis of SAARC (South Asian Association of Regional Cooperation). This paralysis did not emerge overnight. Over many years, a toxic tree of mutual suspicion, unequal conduct, and political and psychological distance has taken root. Normal bilateral diplomatic engagement is no longer sufficient to bridge this gap, because bilateral relations are mired in the politics of emotion, ego and the arrogance of power.

The February election thus represents a historic opportunity for politicians to redefine the country’s diplomatic outlook. The first and foremost foreign policy agenda of the newly elected government should be to initiate the revival and effective activation of the SAARC.


Why does SAARC need to be reactivated? Unilateral and bloody US intervention in countries such as Venezuela has demonstrated that when regional unity is weak, no country’s sovereignty is truly secure. The failure of the Arab League in the Middle East, or the consequences of the lack of regional cohesion in parts of Africa, tell the same story. By contrast, the European Union, ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations), and Latin America’s Mercosur bloc have shown that regional cooperation is not merely an economic arrangement, but a fundamental pillar of political security as well.

Because of the European Union, even smaller states are able to speak as part of a collective force in global economic and political arenas. Without such unity, they would never have been able to negotiate on equal terms with powers such as the United States, China or Russia.
Because of the European Union, even smaller states are able to speak as part of a collective force in global economic and political arenas. Without such unity, they would never have been able to negotiate on equal terms with powers such as the United States, China or Russia.

Similarly, without ASEAN, countries like Indonesia, Vietnam, Thailand and Malaysia could never, on their own, have emerged as central hubs of global production and supply chains. Under ASEAN’s umbrella, they ensured political stability, mutual trust and investment security. As a result, South-East Asia has developed into an alternative manufacturing base even amid the China–US trade row.

Regional alliances also serve as an effective shield for political security. When Mercosur member states—Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay—moved towards a common market and customs regime, they were able to consolidate their position in global agricultural and industrial markets. Mercosur is not fully successful or entirely effective today. Yet during periods when the bloc functioned more effectively, its member states were far stronger individually as well, particularly in trade negotiations with the European Union and the United States.

When regional alliances weaken, every country suffers. Despite sharing close linguistic, cultural and religious ties, Middle Eastern countries failed to forge effective political unity through the Arab League. As a result, Iraq, Libya, Syria and Yemen—each separately falling victim to external intervention.

Bangladesh now stands at a critical juncture where its foreign policy thinking must be carefully considered in advance. If the new government continues to follow the old bilateral template, the outcome will be either subservience to India or an escalation of hostility, resentment and mutual disrespect.
The experience of the African Union is also instructive. When the organisation was relatively active, it achieved some success in democratic transitions and conflict management. Whenever it weakened, countries became vulnerable to civil wars, military coups and external influence.

The consequences of SAARC’s paralysis in South Asia are no different. India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal or Sri Lanka—none is secure on its own. India may believe itself strong in isolation, but in reality, regional mistrust and distance are undermining India’s own strategic security.


Following the recent death of Khaleda Zia, India’s prime minister Narendra Modi swiftly expressed his condolences and sent a personal representative with a message of sympathy. The people of Bangladesh hoped that a long-standing chill was beginning to thaw. Yet amid this seemingly positive development, hostility towards Bangladesh was reignited in cricket when Mustafizur Rahman was dropped from the IPL (Indian Premier League). Public expectation was instantly transformed into disappointment and frustration.

Cricket is a humanitarian and cordial sphere beyond the confines of sports diplomacy—particularly so, given its status as a gentleman’s game. Public emotion, affection and patriotism are deeply intertwined with it. India’s decision, influenced by an aggressive Hindutva mindset, has therefore intensified anti-India sentiment across the region. The incident is not confined to the exclusion of a single player; rather, it has called into question India’s claim to be a secular, tolerant and liberal democratic state.

Under Sheikh Hasina’s rule, India may indeed have achieved a measure of dominance in Bangladesh. Yet throughout history, no country has succeeded in the long term by installing compliant governments in neighbouring states and extracting unilateral advantages. Even if India remains in a state of delusion for now, it will eventually be forced to learn that regional relationships must be built on a blend of education, culture, sport, trade and commerce—and above all, mutual respect and shared interests.


If Bangladesh’s new government genuinely wishes to begin a new diplomatic chapter, it must pursue the revival of SAARC from day one. This is the only dignified path towards normalising relations with India. No party is required to bow its head within a regional alliance. The simple premise is this: if SAARC is strong, everyone benefits.

Division and fragmentation will reduce South Asia to a powerless region, leaving all countries equally vulnerable to external powers. Such weakness cannot be overcome through the arrogance of arms stockpiles, territorial size or economic might.

India has historically shown little enthusiasm for SAARC. From the condescension of being the region’s largest country, it promoted an alternative grouping—BIMSTEC (Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation). In essence, BIMSTEC was an attempt to bypass SAARC and establish an India-centric geopolitical authority. However, South Asian countries failed to find a dignified and equitable place for themselves within this framework. As a result, BIMSTEC has never become, and never can become, an alternative to SAARC. In reality, there is little prospect of BIMSTEC’s success.


Bangladesh now stands at a critical juncture where its foreign policy thinking must be carefully considered in advance. If the new government continues to follow the old bilateral template, the outcome will be either subservience to India or an escalation of hostility, resentment and mutual disrespect. By contrast, a bold and historic initiative such as the revival of SAARC would constitute a genuine step towards thawing relations. Reconciliation requires an appropriate platform—and SAARC can be that platform.

A regional alliance becomes sustainable only when it is founded on mutual equality, respect and collective decision-making. That potential within SAARC remains intact. Bangladesh’s late president Ziaur Rahman, the organisation’s visionary founder, demonstrated remarkable foresight. Not only the BNP, the party he established, but also other parties and alliances could incorporate a commitment to reviving SAARC into their election manifestos. Such a pledge would signal to voters that political forces possess goodwill and proactive intent with regard to positive geopolitics.

* Helal Mohiuddin is a professor of Sociology at Mayville State University, North Dakota, USA​

I think the author is smoking something strong.

The only country that stands to lose from the dissolution of SAARC is India. They have - time and time again, refused to acknowledge the inclusion and importance of Pakistan in this regional forum. Pretty sad - as back in the day, Major General Ziaur Rahman, then president of Bangladesh, floated SAARC as a forum for regional cooperation.

India threw around its dadagiri and ruined SAARC at that time, thinking it could swing regional politics by force and by sheer muscle, and be everyone's daddy. Well some 45 years on, we see where India is and what its relations with its neighbors are. It has been made a pariah entity in the neighborhood diplomatically, pure and simple.

Prothom Alo, as an Indian and RAW sponsored news outlet in Bangladesh, has again published an article that favors the new thinking from Modi's team, using SAARC to again discount Pakistan's regional role and revive some semblance of Indian relevancy in regional politics. Well - that day is gone more or less.

I think the day and time for SAARC was over a decade ago, Bangladesh has nothing to gain from SAARC any longer. It should focus Eastward now and try to become an observer to ASEAN and establish even closer relationship with China and East Asia, both economic and defense-wise.

India's "neighbor first" policy is the biggest crock of $hit that no one in the neighborhood ever subscribed to, and will not ever be duped again to believe.
 
Last edited:
I think the author is smoking something strong.

The only country that stands to lose from the dissolution of SAARC is India. They have - time and time again, refused to acknowledge the inclusion and importance of Pakistan in this regional forum. Pretty sad - as back in the day, Major General Ziaur Rahman, then president of Bangladesh, floated SAARC as a forum for regional cooperation.

India threw around its dadagiri and ruined SAARC at that time, thinking it could swing regional politics by force and by sheer muscle, and be everyone's daddy. Well some 45 years on, we see where India is and what its relations with its neighbors are. It has been made a pariah entity in the neighborhood diplomatically, pure and simple.

Prothom Alo, as an Indian and RAW sponsored news outlet in Bangladesh, has again published an article that favors the new thinking from Modi's team, using SAARC to again discount Pakistan's regional role and revive some semblance of Indian relevancy in regional politics. Well - that day is gone more or less.

I think the day and time for SAARC was over a decade ago, Bangladesh has nothing to gain from SAARC any longer. It should focus Eastward now and try to become an observer to ASEAN and establish even closer relationship with China and East Asia, both economic and defense-wise.

India's "neighbor first" policy is the biggest crock of $hit that no one in the neighborhood ever subscribed to, and will not ever be duped again to believe.
SAARC has no future. We should try and get admission into ASEAN.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

As SAARC remains dormant, South Asia must look elsewhere

3 February 2026, 00:32 AM
Md Mostafizur Rahman and Nafis Ehsas Chowdhury

1770168610122.webp


In this part of the world, we often maintain appearances while the foundation rots. The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) faces a similar fate. The four-decade-old regional instrument has been idling since 2014, following the last summit in Kathmandu, while the rest of the world speeds ahead towards sophisticated multipolarity.

The numbers disappointingly represent an indictment of a shared, regional setback. While blocs like ASEAN have managed to weave their economies together into a 25 percent intra-regional trade powerhouse, South Asia remains a collection of neighbours who share a fence but refuse to trade through the gate. Our intra-regional trade is barely five percent. We have chosen to pay “poverty taxes” through expensive global shipping routes over building the simple, logical corridors using our own geography.

At the centre of this paralysis lies a gaping hole that no amount of diplomatic tea can fix. We must confront the paradox of power defining India’s role in this region. By sheer physical mass and strategic weight, India is undeniably the centre of gravity. Despite this perceived power, India has failed to take its neighbours into confidence using the “Neighbourhood First Policy.”

The India-Pakistan rivalry, a relic of a 1947 divorce that never truly ended, continues to hold the aspirations of billions of people hostage. We’ve allowed a bilateral grudge to function as a regional veto. India must realise that asserting dominance is the quickest way to lose a neighbour; only trust and equitable partnership can build a prosperous region.

On the other side, China is already a neighbour to five SAARC states. Through the China Pakistan Economic Corridor, China has helped create the backbone of Pakistan’s energy and transport. In Bangladesh, China has partnered in many critical infrastructure projects, from power plants to bridges. In Sri Lanka, Nepal, and the Maldives, China’s footprint is measured in billions of dollars in infrastructure financing. To talk about “South Asian cooperation” while pretending China isn’t a central actor is a form of geopolitical delusion.

By formalising the inclusion of China into a revamped bloc—perhaps a SAC+ (South Asian Cooperation Plus) or ASIA CORE—we can create a platform that limits the monopoly of any single state. Yes, there are risks of debt dependency, but we must consider the benefits of enhanced connectivity and bargaining power that smaller countries can get through the existing Belt and Road Initiative.

The other country to consider is the United States. From maritime security in our chokepoints to climate diplomacy for our sinking islands, the US provides a necessary “geopolitical counterbalance.” By bringing in “plus partners” such as the US, Japan, and Australia, we will be able to dilute the regional friction and gain access to the technology and markets that can lift our people out of poverty.

We should consider SACNet (South Asian Cooperation Network), a name that suggests flexible, modular cooperation, or BIPSA (Bay of Bengal–Indo‑Pacific–South Asia), which anchors us in the maritime reality of our future. We need “issue-based working groups” that can bypass political deadlocks. If two capitals won’t speak, let the scientists, the environmentalists, and the academics build a SAC+ network that functions on an “opt-in projects” basis. This is “flexible regionalism”—a system where cooperation isn’t an “all-or-nothing” gamble.

The failure of our regional blocs has a visceral, human cost. It is seen in the eyes of the Rohingya, who remain displaced because we lack a collective regional response. It is seen in our vulnerability to global crises—from the Ukraine war to the Gaza conflict—which hit our economies harder because we have no regional buffer, no shared prosperity to lean on.

Our current inter-state relations are held hostage to the political parties in power, rather than a reflection of the people’s aspirations. The common citizen of South Asia doesn’t understand international relations based on borders; they care about the cost of electricity, the survival of their farms against climate change, and the ability to travel and learn from their neighbours. We must transform these shared “vulnerabilities into collective strength.”

Bangladesh has a unique moral authority in this discussion. We were the ones who perceived and proposed this vision. We are the bridge for peace and prosperity in a region that is currently building moats. Our role is to lead with vision and inclusivity, pushing for a forum that is open to form and not limited by rigid numbers. If one forum is blocked by a rivalry, we should have another in parallel. We need a secretariat with actual autonomy and stamina to pursue the purpose, not a place where ambitious policies go to be filed and forgotten.

SAARC is dormant, but the need for cooperation is demanding our attention. We stand at a crossroads where we can either continue to be a collection of fragmented states being picked apart by global interests, or we can build a multipolar bloc that actually commands respect.

Major General Md Mostafizur Rahman, PhD (LPR) is a military strategist and peacekeeping commander.

Nafis Ehsas Chowdhury is a columnist and studies human resources management at United International University.​
 

Dhaka for revival of SAARC

FM Khalilur holds talks with Pak FM on sidelines in Türkiye

Staff Correspondent 19 April, 2026, 00:44

1776563643531.webp


Dhaka on Saturday at a ministerial panel during a diplomacy forum in Türkiye said that revival of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation was one of its major foreign policy objectives.

‘Reviving SAARC is a major foreign policy objective of prime minister Tarique Rahman,’ Khalilur Rahman was quoted to have told the panel in a statement issued by the foreign ministry in Dhaka.

The ministerial panel on the second day of the three-day Antalya Diplomacy Forum recalled the contribution of Bangladesh Nationalist Party founder and late president Ziaur Rahman’s initiative to establish the SAARC.

Bangladesh foreign minister Khalilur, Pakistan deputy prime minister and also foreign minister Ishaq Dar and Afghan transport minister Azizi participated in the panel.

The panel agreed that the South Asian region held unlimited possibilities for cooperation and that dialogue and diplomacy were the only way to overcome the barriers to cooperation among the nations in the region.

The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation, established with the signing of the SAARC Charter in Dhaka in 1985, has been turned into a non-functional organisation as the top political authorities in all eight member countries have failed to meet since the indefinite postponement of a summit in 2016 amid India-Pakistan rivalry.

On Friday, Bangladesh foreign minister Khalilur Rahman in a bilateral meeting with his Pakistan counterpart Ishaq Dar on the sidelines of the diplomacy forum discussed ways to further advance the Dhaka-Islamabad relations.Politics

‘FM Khalilur Rahman held a bilateral meeting with Pakistan’s DPM and FM Ishaq Dar at the Antalya Diplomacy Forum on 17 April 2026…The two ministers also discussed ways to further advance bilateral relations,’ said a separate foreign ministry statement issued in Dhaka.

They discussed the latest developments with regard to talks to resolve the ongoing conflict in the Gulf region, it mentioned.

Khalilur thanked Pakistan for its commendable diplomatic efforts to bring the conflict to a negotiated end.

The prime minister’s foreign affairs adviser Humaiun Kobir was also present at the meeting.

Khalilur Rahman on Thursday morning left the country for Türkiye to attend the Antalya Diplomacy Forum.

After attending the three-day forum, the foreign minister is scheduled for flying to Brussels of Belgium to attend the signing event on the ‘Framework Agreement on Comprehensive Partnership and Cooperation’ between Bangladesh and the European Union, according to a foreign ministry press release issued in Dhaka.

The 5th edition of the Antalya Diplomacy Forum, ADF2026 in short, hosted by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Türkiye under the auspices of president Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, will conclude on April 19 at Antalya of Türkiye, according to a document from the forum made available on its website.

In the face of geopolitical tensions, shifting balances of power, rising trade barriers and mounting pressure on multilateralism, the current global landscape was marked by increasing unpredictability, it mentioned.

This year’s theme ‘Mapping tomorrow, managing uncertainties’ emphasises the importance of anticipating and addressing emerging issues having the potential to shape a better future.Maps

The theme underscores the need to stay ahead of future development by identifying risks.

On his way back home, Khalilur is expected to make a stopover in Ethiopia capital Addis Ababa before returning to Bangladesh on April 24.​
 

Bangladesh calls for SAARC revitalisation
Staff Correspondent 25 April, 2026, 01:12

1777079003028.webp


Bangladesh has emphasised the revitalising the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation at the second meeting of the SAARC Inter-Governmental Expert Group on poverty alleviation held in Malé of Maldives.

The meeting, held on April 22–23, aimed to finalise the first SAARC Development Report titled ‘SDR 2025: Shaping the Future Together for a Resilient SAARC,’ said a foreign ministry press release.

The meeting was hosted by the Maldives government with administrative support from the SAARC Secretariat and financial and technical assistance from the Asian Development Bank.

The Bangladesh delegation was led by Monzur Hossain, member (secretary) of the General Economics Division of the Planning Commission.

The delegation also included SM Mahbubul Alam, director general of the SAARC and BIMSTEC (Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation) Wing of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Bangladesh’s national focal point to SAARC.

The delegations at the meeting stressed a visible, functional and resilient SAARC, which they said was the dream and aspirations of over two billion (200 crore) people of the South Asian region.

Delegations from the member states also presented their respective national perspectives and priorities for SAARC development through deepened regional collaboration to address shared vulnerabilities, fostering collective resilience, and promoting inclusive growth across the region.

Above all, they stressed the need to revitalise the SAARC process to ensure the well-being and mutual benefits of the region and its people.

The session was chaired by Maldives deputy minister for finance and public enterprises Ali Rasheed.​
 

Climate cooperation to reactivate SAARC

1783049740399.webp

Cyclone Ditwah left 646 people dead in Sri Lanka in November 2025. | Agence France-Presse

CYCLONE Ditwah was the most destructive natural disaster to strike Sri Lanka since the 2004 tsunami. More than 640 people lost their lives, over 170 remain missing and more than 2.2 million people throughout the country were affected. Estimates placed the economic cost at over $4 billion, equivalent to about 4 per cent of Sri Lanka’s gross domestic product. Sri Lanka could not cope with a disaster of this scale alone. International assistance was essential and it came quickly. India was the first country to send emergency relief, technical expertise and assistance to restore damaged infrastructure. Other South Asian countries also contributed humanitarian assistance. The Maldivian people collected and gave more than their government. This response was significant for reasons that went beyond humanitarian relief. It showed that person-to-person sympathies in South Asia can transcend nationality and religion.

South Asia is more often associated with political rivalry than regional cooperation. Relations between countries in the region have been shaped by wars, border disputes, security concerns and political mistrust. These divisions have also prevented the region from developing effective institutions for cooperation. The experience of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) illustrates this problem. Established in 1985, SAARC was expected to promote cooperation in trade, agriculture, education, health, poverty reduction and disaster management. Four decades later its record has been disappointing. Political disagreements between member states have stalled summit meetings with the last being held in 2014 and prevented many regional initiatives from moving beyond declarations.

The contrast with ASEAN is striking. Southeast Asia has also experienced territorial disputes, ideological divisions and political differences. But ASEAN chose to separate economic and functional cooperation from political disagreements wherever possible. As a result, trade within ASEAN today accounts for around one quarter of the region’s total trade. In South Asia the equivalent figure remains about 5 per cent. The economic cost of this failure has been borne by every country in the region. Climate change offers an opportunity to adopt a different approach. It is not a substitute for resolving political disputes, but it provides an area in which cooperation is both necessary and politically possible. Floods, cyclones, droughts and heatwaves do not recognise national boundaries. Countries may disagree on political issues while still recognising that they face the same environmental risks.

Ditwah effects

A CONFERENCE on Climate, Peace and Security held in Kathmandu organised by the Global Partnership for the Prevention of Armed Conflict this week reflected a growing recognition that climate change is no longer only an environmental issue. The meeting of practitioners, academics, government officials and youth from the South Asian countries was a meeting of hearts and minds that transcended national differences. It also highlighted another important point. Effective responses to climate change cannot come from governments alone. They need to be informed by the experiences of the communities that are most directly affected. One of the case studies was Sri Lanka’s experience following Cyclone Ditwah which illustrates why community participation needs to be part of climate policy. Recovery is not simply about rebuilding damaged infrastructure. It is also about restoring livelihoods, resolving land issues and rebuilding confidence between affected communities and public institutions.

In their presentations at the conference, the Regional Centre for Strategic Studies and the National Peace Council provided the experiences in Sri Lanka of communities affected by Cyclone Ditwah to identify lessons for future disaster responses. Their work was presented at the Kathmandu conference and brought community voices into a discussion that is often dominated by technical experts and policymakers. The research focused on communities that had experienced severe flooding and landslides. Rather than looking only at the physical destruction, it examined the impact on livelihoods, land ownership, relocation, compensation and social cohesion. The findings showed that recovery is often slowed not by a lack of humanitarian assistance but by unresolved social and administrative issues.

Many of those surveyed had lost crops, farming land and sources of income in addition to their homes. Some families continued to live in schools, temporary shelters or with relatives months after the disaster. Although most accepted that relocation from high risk areas was necessary, they wanted assurance that they would not lose their livelihoods or become separated from their communities. For many, the greatest concern was not the move itself but uncertainty about access to farmland, schools, health services and places of worship after relocation.

The survey also highlighted weaknesses in the decision making process. More than half of those interviewed said they had not been consulted before relocation decisions were taken, while only a very small minority believed their views had been properly considered. The strongest message from the communities was that relocation should take place with their participation and, wherever possible, keep existing communities together rather than dispersing them.

Beyond Lanka

ANOTHER issue brought out by the research was the particular vulnerability of plantation communities in Sri Lanka. Families whose homes had been damaged found that they could not always receive the full compensation available because they did not possess legal title to the houses they had occupied for generations. Climate related disasters therefore exposed long standing issues relating to land ownership and equal access to state assistance that had existed long before the cyclone. Based on these findings, recommendations included that relocation programmes should preserve community networks and livelihoods, that plantation families should receive greater security of land tenure, that compensation procedures should be simplified, and that communities should participate more fully in disaster planning. They also called for stronger early warning systems, better communication in both Sinhala and Tamil and greater transparency in the management of disaster recovery funds.

These problems are not unique to Sri Lanka. Across South Asia, climate related disasters are exposing similar weaknesses. Whether it is flooding in Bangladesh, glacial melting in Nepal, heatwaves in India or coastal erosion in the Maldives, governments are finding that recovery depends as much on effective public institutions and community participation as on financial resources. There is considerable scope for countries to learn from one another’s experience. This is where SAARC could regain some of the relevance it has lost. It already has agreements and institutions dealing with disaster management, food security and regional cooperation. Rather than allowing broader political disputes to prevent progress in every area, member states could focus on issues where cooperation benefits everyone. Joint disaster preparedness, regional early warning systems, scientific collaboration, humanitarian assistance and climate adaptation are practical areas where progress is possible. As a recent beneficiary of South Asian solidarity and concern, Sri Lanka has a special obligation in this regard.

As a friend of all South Asian countries, Sri Lanka can play a facilitative role in the revival of SAARC cooperation. By sharing their experiences and lessons learned with counterparts elsewhere civil society organisations can help to strengthen regional cooperation from the ground up, complementing cooperation between governments. Climate change will not remove the political disagreements that divide South Asia. But it does create a compelling reason for governments to work together where their interests coincide. Cyclone Ditwah demonstrated both Sri Lanka’s vulnerability and the willingness of neighbouring countries to respond when disaster struck. The next step should be to convert that humanitarian response into sustained regional cooperation. Climate cooperation could become an initiative in which South Asian governments and civil societies work together.

Jehan Perera is executive director of the National Peace Council of Sri Lanka.​
 

Latest Posts

Back