Subcontinent mired in conflict is hardly a sustainable proposition, given the developmental needs in poverty alleviation and social sector, across the divide. Beyond conflict, there is a string of opportunities to assess and explore. More so, as it dawns that the subcontinent has shared resources that await maximum utilization to benefit the underprivileged on both sides of the divide.
Nuclear weapons might promote sense of security; they cannot however obscure the abysmally low social sector indices in the subcontinent. The fact is undeniable, many of poorest world over live in the subcontinent. Infant mortality and stunted growth robs many a precious lives. Illiteracy abounds, health care falls far below established international standards in the subcontinental hinterland.
The subcontinent at the time of partition had worked out an elaborate system of water distribution to irrigate more or less 26 million acres of land, the widest world over. Agriculture was the mainstay of the economy, barring some urban centers of industrialization.
Agricultural economy was not mechanized, still it held to feed a population, though food deficit remained a feature. Over seven decades since partition, it remains a feature. It includes starvation, despite claims in phases of having a food surplus.
Starvation deaths in spite of surplus are attributed to lack of silos, hence the problems of storage. Whatever the measure of assessment, there are gaping holes in farm economy. Farmers in debt commit suicide, unfortunately a regular feature. Some shining urban centers fail to obscure the bitter scenario in the hinterland.
Many economic targets might have been met, but that may not be enough to prove that everything is hunky-dory. There may be some justification in India claiming to be the world’s fastest growing economy; however questions remain on even distribution.
The lop-sided growth concerns economists. It often makes news. The scenario across the divide in Pakistan is even more depressing. The economy needs massive infusion from outside agencies to work out balance of payment, given the sinking exports.
The recent reports of having pulled it back from the brink might be true; it still leaves questions on debt-servicing. Energy levels needed for economic survival might be Saudi and UAE supported over a three year periods, still deferred payments need to be serviced in the long run. The added economic burden hardly finds support from a tax net, which shows no signs of widening. Tax evasion abounds.
Given the issues involved, the subcontinent would do well to share the benefits inherent in collaboration. Water is a shared resource, the most precious in the subcontinent.
In an era of dwindling water resource worldwide, and given the burgeoning population levels, water remains a precious commodity. It is more so, given the reports of shirking glaciers, an environmental hazard. The net result could be the shrinking water table. The mechanism of sharing it is the Indus Water Treaty, signed on September, the 19th 1960 in Karachi. In spite of conflict and war, the treaty remains operative.
It is often called the only positive factor, in an otherwise dismal relationship. Lately, it has come under some strain with calls for maximum utilization of whatever each side is entitled to, as per the terms of treaty. Maximum utilization as per the treaty terms might be a right, but much more could be gained if water resource is jointly harnessed to gain the maximum benefit.
Hydro-electricity is a renewable resource, and subcontinent as a whole is energy deficient. Hence, instead of maximum utilization by either side as per treaty terms, maximizing shared harnessing might be a much better proposition. It could maximize the yield on both sides, whether it concerns irrigation or hydro-electricity.
In terms of subcontinental trade, the levels of import and export on either side remain far below the potential. Inherent in trade is transit and tariff. Neither is at a level, where deficiencies in trade could be eased. The prevailing conflict is hindering transit, an essential element in enhancing trade.
Transit is highly restricted, given the security constraints. On tariffs, India had provided Pakistan the ‘Most Favoured Nation (MFN)’ status in 1996. Though it is an obligation under Article I of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) given the principle of non-discrimination between members of ‘World Trade Organization (WTO)’ Pakistan had not returned the favour.
Pakistan’s hesitation springs from fear of getting into negative trade balance, given India’s much wider productive base. Pakistan’s MFN status has been withdrawn and duty of 200% imposed, following the recent untoward happenings in the subcontinent. Trade experts however predict minimal outfall of recent changes in trade terms, given the markedly low trade exchange across the Indo-Pak divide.
Prabhash Ranjan, Assistant Professor of Law in South Asian University quotes interesting figures in an essay on Indo-Pak trade. Given India’s total trade of $ 970 billion in 2018, bilateral Indo-Pak trade amounts to dismal $ 2.3 billion, as of 2016-17. Compared to India, Pakistan’s total merchandise trade stood at $78 billion in 2017.
It includes exports worth around $21.5 billion. As per the figures available, India exports goods worth $1.9 billion to Pakistan, while Pakistan exports goods worth $0.5 billion to India–just around 2% of Pakistan’s total merchandise exports in 2017.
In spite of low trade figures, Prabhash Ranjan pleads for deeper economic integration through trade. He concludes that, it will create vociferous constituencies that would demand and lobby for peace as it would serve their interests. The overall net-effect would be fewer conflicts and thus more peaceful relations.
Yaar Zinda, Sohbat Baqi [Reunion is subordinate to survival]