Heart of Asia
Source: By Salman Haidar: The Statesman
Afghanistan has been described in different ways at different times, ‘Cockpit Of Asia’ being a frequent 19th century term. That was perhaps a reference to the endemic strife in and around the country, and an acknowledgement too of the fact that Afghanistan was never absorbed into the prevailing imperial structure, and the rulers of Afghanistan were always ready to try consequences with the British armies pushing into their domain. It thereby remained free when the tide of imperial red had covered most of the rest of the map. Afghanistan’s strategic situation is such that it has been a great thoroughfare for armies, and has often been forced to pay a heavy price for its geographical centrality in Asia ~ ‘Heart of Asia’ today but yet coveted by many and recipient of unwelcome attention from many sides. The last century was especially troubled, with the greatest powers of the day, Soviet Union succeeded by the USA, sending in their troops to try to impose control, and being compelled, after prolonged conflict, to depart in disarray.
It is only in the most recent phase that the focus has shifted and rather than seek military ascendancy, key members of the international community have joined in a concerted bid to address Afghanistan’s underlying issues of peace and development. This is no easy task, for international rivalries and unending jockeying for advantage in Afghanistan’s strategic space are still in the way. There have been intermittent previous efforts, as for instance in the heyday of US engagement when attempts were made to rally regional support for Afghan economic development, for which the UN provided a framework and called a few meetings of potential donors, thereby initiating a process. But regional issues kept intruding, underlying differences remained unresolved, and not much was achieved. Pakistan opposed Indian participation, which dampened the international effort, and US-Iran differences had similar effect. It was only later after foreign forces had left that international effort could be renewed, this time adequately broad-based and thus better positioned to work for peace and stability. As may be expected, problems remain even today, but a vast international support effort has been successfully initiated a few years ago, bringing together a number of countries to participate as supporters of the development process in Afghanistan, united by the need to bring under control regional problems of terror and instability. Istanbul was the venue of the first conclave and since then the ‘Istanbul Process’ has been sustained through a series of high-level meetings of Heads, Ministers, and senior officials. This activity is indicative of the earnest commitment of those seeking consolidation of Afghan stability and progress.
The progress and development of Afghanistan is something in which India has long been closely engaged. Even when its resources were severely limited, it was able to eke out the means to make a proper contribution to the development of that country. Projects in agriculture, irrigation, health, culture, mineral exploration, among several others, brought the two countries closer and strengthened their friendship. Their early development cooperation established a strong base for the modern relationship of today which has made India a partner of choice for Afghanistan.
It is in this setting and against the background of a well-established friendship that India assumed the chair at the just-concluded ‘Heart of Asia’ meeting in Amritsar. It was an imaginative decision of the organizers to choose Amritsar as the venue, for this city in the centre of Punjab has played an important part in the commercial and economic life of the entire region. Afghanistan was in earlier times closely linked to Amritsar and other centres of manufacture and trade in the area, and enjoyed active cultural exchanges with them. The physical links that once bound the region together have been affected by the political developments of 1947 when what was once a single economic area was split into separate units, with Afghanistan being reduced to landlocked status between uncertain neighbours. To mitigate some of the adverse effects of that division has long been an objective of India’s neighbourhood policy, and Afghanistan also seeks easier access and transit across the region where it benefited from unrestricted coming and going. Liberalized access would be a substantial economic boost for Afghanistan whose traditional trade with India has not recovered from the restrictions imposed by the transit country, Pakistan. Multilateral conclaves like that in Amritsar revive hopes for at least a measure of restoration of the traditional exchanges.
However, economic issues including transit were not the main focus at Amritsar, for this meeting was held in the shadow of yet another terrorist incident at Nagrota that saw armed killers cross into India from Pakistan in order to wreak murder and mayhem. High indignation in India at the event made it impossible for a regular meeting on the pattern of the earlier ‘Istanbul Process’ gatherings to be held. Pakistan sent a very senior personality and Pakistani spokespersons gave the impression that they wanted Amritsar to provide an occasion for at least partial repair of the breach between India and Pakistan. However this did not happen and despite the presence of high dignitaries from either side, nothing more than a cursory bilateral meeting took place, nothing like a top level exchange in the margins as is customary at comparable international conferences. Meanwhile, the terrorism issue that was raised by India became the prime theme of the conference, with India not alone in pointing a finger at Pakistan for its actions, for the Afghan President made some forthright observations on the same subject.
Owing to the sharp differences within the region it is not clear how far the gathering in Amritsar was able effectively to advance the Istanbul Process. It is also evident that Indo-Pak relations are currently in a deep trough from which it will be difficult for them to be extricated. Exposing Pakistan’s role in terror has become one of the important preoccupations of Indian policy and as a result of active presentation by India at Amritsar and elsewhere there is wider international awareness of the realities and dangers of this matter. At the same time there is a certain amount of international apprehension about where matters could lead if no corrective efforts are made. The Iranian Foreign Minister, who was at Amritsar, went so far as to offer to mediate between India and Pakistan if they so desired. There is no likelihood of India seeking any such intervention but New Delhi cannot be unmindful of the desire of others to see matters calm down in South Asia. The wish for resumed Indo-Pak contact and dialogue has been voiced, and how best to manage this may be the next challenge before New Delhi.
