Reinvigorating SAARC to rejuvenate SAFTA
It is often said that economic imperatives determine the
polity and political decisions. But, political condition may also influence the
economic conditions. But ultimately, even that political condition is also
decided by the economy. In other words, it seems to be a classic ‘chicken-egg’
syndrome, but in most cases, the economic turmoil has a direct bearing on the
political system. An incapable polity may or may not negatively impact the
economy in every scenario, but a bad economy has unilaterally caused political
upheaval throughout human history.
For example, the economic conditions of Germany and Italy
after the First World War, coupled with the Great Depression of 1929,
completely uprooted the popularity of the democratic institutions and led to
the emergence of Nazism and Fascism based on economic assurances and optimism.
The support to these kinds of militant nationalist ideologies stemmed mainly
from the fact that it is the military which would go for aggressive policy, win
colonies and bring booty and bounty for the nation. Through this method, the
economic conditions may be ameliorated. Recently, the ongoing Ukraine crisis
has polarized most of the world into two opposing camps reminiscent of the Cold
War. But strong German-Russian economic ties are constraining both nations and their
partners to negotiate for a middle path and avoid an uncompromising extremist
stance against each other. Closer to home, the deteriorating economic
conditions have led to the decline of democratic institutions in Thailand and
the world witnessed a coup in the nation. The defeat of UPA II by NDA,
especially by BJP, can also be attributed to the failures of UPA II’s economic
policies in tackling unemployment, inflation, fiscal deficit etc. Both the
primary and secondary sector failed to perform at a satisfactory level and the
growth in real terms was jeopardised. The newly elected prime minister of India
Narendra Modi, who made Gujarat vibrant only through liberal economic policies,
has already realized that this victory has been given to neither NDA nor RSS or
any other sectarian factors. It is solely a mandate to transform the economic
situation of the world’s most populated nation by 2028, with 1.45 billion
expected inhabitants as per the latest United Nations report.
ASEAN conducted $602 billion or nearly 25 per cent of its
cumulative trade in goods with fellow member nations in 2012. This figure has
almost quadrupled from 2000’s $167 billion. Steadfast political support and
regional cooperation over the past decade has ensured elimination of customs
duties for nearly 50 per cent of all commodities involved in intra-ASEAN trade;
gradual expansion of the group’s membership; and signing of FTAs with other
nations such as China, Japan, South Korea, India, Australia and New Zealand.
The European Union (EU) follows the ‘single market’
principle that grants the free movement of goods, services, capital and people
across national borders. To facilitate such movement, EU institutions are
empowered to enact laws that take precedence over national laws and are binding
on national authorities. Between 1992 and 2011, cross-border trade between EU
member nations has risen from Euro 800 billion to Euro 2.8 trillion, while
international trade has leaped from Euro 500 billion to Euro1.5 trillion. The
benefits of EU can be seen from tackling of the ‘PIGS-Portugal, Italy, Greece
and Spain’ crisis. The strong economies within EU, especially Germany, planned
a road map and helped those nations financially to get rid of their crisis
situation.
Mercosur’s intra-group trade reached $67 billion in 2012.
Despite repeated rounds of political instability and unrest as well as the
major 2001 Argentinian economic meltdown, the group has managed to register
respectable annual rates of growth (10-year average) of 14.9 per cent and 14.5
per cent for all exports and imports respectively by 2010. Still, stronger
political will and coordination is needed to change the protectionist nature of
the customs union against imports from non-members and hostility to trade
liberalization. Leftist ideological forces within Mercosur still view the
protectionist customs union as a political body that should oppose free markets
as a threat to South American unity. Trade within Mercosur currently represents
only 16 per cent of the group’s total trade.
SAFTA’s trade with both its
sub-regional and external partners has increased significantly since 1990s,
although trade growth with external partners has been faster. As per IMF,
intra-regional share of overall trade has risen very gradually from 2.7 per
cent ($1.8 billion) in 1990 to 4.23 per cent ($41 billion) in 2012, compared to
Mercosur’s 16 per cent, ASEAN’s 25 per cent, NAFTA’s 48 per cent and EU’s 65
percent. The sensitive list appears to be the major obstacle for intra-regional
trade in SAARC. Every country has made a fairly rigid sensitive list as per its
protectionist domestic self-interest that discourages regional trade. Cold
political relationships among the member states and denial of transit
pass-through to third country by the second country in the group have further
exacerbated the existing transport and logistics infrastructure bottlenecks.
Despite having multiple trade agreements with various regional partners,
India’s trade performance has been dismal so far, as evidenced by India’s trade
share with Thailand (1.1 per cent), Sri Lanka (0.6 per cent), Singapore (2.9
per cent), Malaysia (1.8 per cent), Japan (2.4 per cent) and ASEAN (9.7 per
cent). In 2012-13, only 5 nations UAE, China, USA, Saudi Arabia and Switzerland
accounted for 35 per cent of India’s total trade, most of them being very
distant countries.
Therefore, sectarian and national political constraints are
retarding the natural potential rate of regional trade growth in SAARC by a
much greater extent than in Mercosur. The economy has failed to achieve the
escape velocity to counter polity’s gravitational pull to the extent that
politics still decide the economic agenda rather than act as regulators and
facilitators for promoting productivity, market access, innovation and healthy
competition to the benefit of both producers and consumers. Crony capitalism is
an understated but omnipresent reality in South Asia’s four-dimensional
politician-bureaucrat-corporate-criminal nexus. South Asian Preferential Trade
Arrangement (SAPTA) was envisaged primarily as the first step towards the
transition to a South Asian Free Trade Area (SAFTA) leading subsequently
towards a Customs Union, Common Market and Economic Union. The Agreement on
SAFTA presently consists of Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal,
Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Afghanistan. The countries agreed to reduce customs
duties on all traded goods to zero by year 2016. This proposal was drafted by
the COE and signed on 6 January 2004 during the Twelfth SAARC Summit in
Islamabad. The Agreement entered into force on 1 January 2006. Currently, the
Sensitive Lists of products, Rules of Origin, Technical Assistance as well as a
Mechanism for Compensation of Revenue Loss for Least Developed Member States
are under negotiation.
Under the Trade Liberalization Programme scheduled for
completion in ten years by 2016, the customs duties on products from the region
were to be progressively reduced. Sri Lanka has to bring down its customs
duties to 0-5 per cent in six equal installments by 2014 for the products from
other member states. The Least Developing Countries (LDC) like Afghanistan,
Bangladesh, Bhutan, Maldives and Nepal were supposed to bring down duties to
0-5 per cent in 8 equal installments by 2016. India and Pakistan were to bring
down their tariff 0-5 per cent in 5 equal installments by the end of 2013.
Besides that, a decision has been made to reduce the SAFTA Sensitive List
(Negative List) by 20 per cent by all member states at the 14th meeting of the
Committee on Economic Cooperation of SAFTA, held in February 2009 at New Delhi.
Obstacles and prospects before SAPTA
1. The political rivalry of India and Pakistan, especially
after 26/11 Mumbai blasts, has jeopardised the prospects of SAARC. Pakistan has
refused to accord MFN status to India. At the same time, the political
conditions of Nepal, Sri Lanka and Afghanistan (8th member) have not been
stable enough to give a positive direction to the trade relations in the
region.
2. There should have been 29 Summits, but only 17 summits were
organized. This speaks about the sincerity and importance of SAARC for their
members. Nepal has officially proposed to host the 18th SAARC Summit in
November 2014 in Kathmandu.
3. Despite having high objectives to eliminate poverty, to
ensure free trade, and the need to establish good neighbourly relations, SAARC
has failed to achieve any significant breakthrough in reducing poverty. There
has been no meaningful coordinated attempt to tackle this problem..
4. Even after three decades, intraSAARC exports are a mere five
per cent of the total exports of the region. India’s exports to SAARC
registered a 14.71 per cent growth in 2013-14 at $17.3 billion. While South
Asia accounts for 5.5 per cent of India’s exports, imports from the region have
a share of just 0.55 per cent. India’s imports from the region declined 8.31
per cent in the last fiscal at $2.4 billion, leaving a trade gap of $15
billion. There is a potential to increase bilateral trade between India and
Pakistan to $10 billion, from the current level of $2.7 billion.
5. The MFN status means that Pakistan will treat India at par
with its other economic partners. Under the World Trade Organization
agreements, the MFN principle ensures that WTO members do not discriminate
against one another, allowing all countries in the organization to benefit
equally from the lowest possible tariffs. While India granted Pakistan the MFN
status in 1996, Pakistan did not reciprocate as it feared that its markets
would be flooded by Indian goods. This has created a big hurdle for India and
Pakistan trade relations.
6. The existence of trade barriers and inadequate trade
facilitation mechanism has further impeded the cooperation efforts. The
security concerns mainly between India, Bangladesh and Pakistan have been
holding back the economic integration of the region. There is an imperative
need to ensure that the next SAARC summit in Nepal, likely in November, 2014,
must emphasize the removal of such obstacles by inking pacts on game-changing
proposals including a SAARC visa system similar to the European Union’s
Schengen visa as well as a South Asian Development Bank. At present, there is a
SAARC Visa Exemption Scheme, in which some categories of people (including
higher court judges, businesspersons, parliamentarians, journalists, senior
officials and sportsmen) are given a Special Travel document that exempts them
from visas within the region. This arrangement is required to be reworked to
promote tourism (including medical tourism) and trade within the region.
7. The region as a whole has competitive, rather than
complimentary nature of product mix.
8. The growing political tension has also eroded the relevance
of SAFTA. India has started to give emphasis to IBSA as an alternative to SAPTA.
But geo-political locations cannot be shifted.
9. India’s comparative advantage in a range of products has
resulted in asymmetric trade relations with her neighbors, hindering regional
integration.
10. All the countries in the region had been pursuing, until the
late 1980’s, import substitution policies aimed at promoting domestic
industries.
11. Region-wide agriculture is facing several challenges,
threatening its growth and sustainability. The physical and economic
environment in which agricultural activities are under taken is changing
rapidly and getting complex. This necessitates preparedness to face upcoming
challenges from the unfolding new reality. Many changes affecting agriculture
transcend geography and are trans-boundary in nature: climate change and trans
boundary animal and plant diseases pose formidable challenges which require
strong regional cooperation to face. ‘SAARC Agriculture Vision 2020’ would help
maximize benefits from available options, enhance ability to face threats and
new challenges and to harness the opportunities forthcoming.
12.Disappointingly, New Delhi’s initiative to open up Indian
skies to more frequent air services from its SAARC neighbors was not given
attention. As SAARC’s GDP growth is now projected at five per cent, intra-regional
trade growth has become a key driver in the region’s GDP whilst exploring the
possibility of establishing a pan-SAARC Airline and permitting private airlines
to operate in the region will also improve the much-needed air connectivity
required for SAARC. As a result of equipping the region with new ports,
airports and logistic facilities during the last decade, SAFTA shows potential
to be an emergent Asian Corridor.
13.Tariffs are high across South Asian borders-Pakistan and
Bangladesh have import levies as high as 25 percent. ASEAN members charge each
other 5 percent or less for 96 percent of the goods they trade.
14.Despite the target year of 2016, Sri Lanka has just a modest
amount of trade taking place under and within SAFTA agreement accounting for
only US $ 1.18 million from July 2006 to December 2010. Since the
operationalization of bilateral Free Trade Agreement (FTA) in 2000, trade has
multiplied by as much as eight times. Trade volumes crossed $5 billion in
2011-12 and the cumulative FDI approvals for Indian investments stand at about
$1 billion since 2003, with investment inflows of $160 million in 2012. India
has planned to double its bilateral trade with Sri Lanka to $10 billion in the
next three years.
15. At the same time the total intraregional trade under SAFTA
stood at US$ 823.62 million from July 2006 to December 2010. Intra-regional
trade makes up five per cent of the total trade done by the SAFTA nations. By
contrast, intra-regional trade among the 10 south-east Asian nations hovers
around 50 per cent.
16.Even today, most of the tradable items are in the negative
lists of the respective member states. Besides that, even those concessions
granted under South Asian Preferential Trading Arrangement (SAPTA) for tradable
itemshave been placed in the negative list of SAFTA, though the SAFTA
concessions were expected to supersede the concessions granted under SAPTA.
17. Under the SAFTA, which came into force in July 2006, India’s
imports are classified under two lists – the MFN list and sensitive list. India
provides duty-free quota free access to all items barring just 25 products to
the least developed countries in the group under SAFTA. The SAFTA agreement
came into force on January 1, 2006. It required the developing countries in
South Asia (India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka) to bring their customs duties down
to 20 per cent in the first phase of the two-year period ending in 2007 and to
zero by 2016 in phases. In 2012, India had reduced its sensitive list from 868
to 614 products, on which tariff concessions will not apply. India has the
shortest sensitive list among these nations after Maldives. It has been felt,
despite the SAFTA deal, that trade between South Asian nations could not
blossom due to excess size of the Sensitive Lists, which has allowed member countries
to practically bar access to competitive items produced in the region.
There should be serious attempts to
reduce the sensitive list under the trade liberalization programme of SAFTA and
the focus should also be to bring down the tariff levels for those items which
still remain within the sensitive list. Further, India has earmarked US$100
million each for its neighbouring countries to undertake developmental work in
basic infrastructure projects. There is a need for activating and concluding the
SAARC Agreement on Trade in Services (SATIS) as growth in manufacturing will
necessarily give rise to a greater demand for services.
Although Prime Minister Narendra Modi
stressed on areas of concern such as infiltration of terrorists from Pakistan
and plight of Tamils in Sri Lanka, he mainly pitched for improved economic
partnerships and better infrastructure linkages with his South Asian
neighbours. As per the expected lines, Modi shared his vision for the region
built on partnerships for development and mutual prosperity, and stressed on
the need to improve road and rail linkages connecting SAARC countries, and also
discussed sub-regional connectivity with the Premiers of Nepal, Sri Lanka,
Maldives and Bhutan. One should not think that this visit will dilute the
issues of cross-border terrorism but one should be positive about the
normalisation of trade ties between the two countries, including Pakistan’s
acceptance of India’s long-pending demand of a non-discriminatory market access
(NDMA). Granting India the most favoured nation status or the
non-discriminatory market access if one were to use a less politically
sensitive term would clear the hurdle for full implementation of the South Asia
Free Trade Area (SAFTA). The two sides had agreed to a roadmap in September
2012, according to which India was to bring down its sensitive list under SAFTA
to 100 by April 2013, after Pakistan grants India MFN status by December 2012.
Pakistan had missed the December deadline. Now Pakistan had made a conditional
offer for granting MFN status to India in January 2014, and had sought access
for 250 to 300 items at lowered duties. The negative list which became
operational from March 21, 2012 contains 1,209 items that India cannot export
to Pakistan, including pharmaceutical and agricultural products. India can
export around 7,500 items there. Earlier, under a small ‘positive list’, India
could export 1,946 items. Some of these items of export were vegetables, meat
products, animals, fruits, tea, spices, palm oil, crude oil, sugar, cotton and
organic chemicals.
It is often analysed by the experts
that Modi wanted to dispel the widespread international impression that his
government will embark on a confrontational path with the neighbours. Let me
clarify that politically NDA has secured 334 seats out of which the BJP has 284
seats and therefore, political factors matter nothing to them, at least at this
juncture. Today, in a globalized world, the diplomacy matters predominantly for
economic interaction and consolidation and is not a mere tool for settling
border disputes. The economic imperatives can drive both China and Russia to
strike a gas deal after 10 years of negotiation. Russia has agreed to invest
some $55 billion in pipeline construction. Gazprom’s Chinese counterparts,
China National Petroleum Corp., will provide for similar infrastructure within
China and the project is likely to be operational by 2018. One can recollect
that a number of border disputes are pending between China and Russia. They
have overcome such issues to meet the future of the energy security. The Modi
Government wants a deal struck in India-Pak trade in electricity and
hydrocarbons, in addition to speeding up of opening of branches of Indian and
Pakistani banks in each other’s territories and boosting infrastructure
development at the border for trade facilitation. Despite border disputes and
bitter historical antecedents with Russia, Japanese lawmakers are reviving
efforts for a 600 billion yen ($5.9 billion) natural gas pipeline from Russia,
which last week signed a supply deal with China, to cut energy costs after the
Fukushima nuclear disaster. A group of 33 lawmakers is backing the
1,350-kilometer (839 miles) pipeline between Russia’s Sakhalin Island and Japan’s
Ibaraki prefecture, northeast of Tokyo, Naokazu Takemoto. I am not trying to
undermine the significance of the initiative of the NDA government, but if this
international mini-meet is not followed by liberal policy announcements from
all the members of SAARC, then its outcome cannot be regarded as positive and,
if we evaluate from a political point of view, then this event could be
regarded as nebulous like many others that had happened in the past. To me,
only economic growth and creation of opportunities in terms of employment can
dilute and undermine the core intractable pending political issues and nothing
less than that will work. But the odds of this scenario bearing fruit seem as
poor as ever. Both prime ministers Modi and Sharif are being pilloried by their
own countrymen and supporters for avoiding the KT issue (Kashmir &
Terrorism) and focusing on trade, infrastructure and economic cooperation
during the mini-meet. It is blatantly obvious that the incessant prolonging of
the KT issue economically and politically benefits various sectarian factions
and parallel power centres operating both in India and Pakistan, none of which
truly cares about the primary welfare and development of the citizens of
Kashmir. The almost unsurprising shelling of Indian borders by the Pakistan
Army on the eve of Sharif’s arrival unmistakably drives home this forlorn
point.
Outgoing Prime Minister Manmohan Singh
had observed that borders cannot be changed, but they can be made irrelevant.
But the seemingly intractable obstacles challenging NDA’s bid towards greater
economic integration of South Asia are amply demonstrating that if borders
cannot be made irrelevant, nothing can change. Only the power and fruits of
economic growth and sustainability for the common man which affords him social
security can convert the trespassing of borders into the meeting of hearts and
minds.
No comments:
Post a Comment