ASSIGNMENT # 4

COMPARISON OF SAARC WITH

ASEAN
History:
SAARC
The South Asian Association of Regional Cooperation (Saarc) came into
being in 1985, with founding members Bangladesh, Bhutan, India,
Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. Afghanistan joined in 2007. Both
were set up because the members were embroiled in serious disputes
The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) is an
economic and geopolitical organization of eight countries that are primarily
located in South Asia or Indian subcontinent. The SAARC Secretariat is based
in Kathmandu, Nepal. The idea of regional political and economic cooperation
in South Asia was first raised in 2 May 1980 by Bangladesh President Zia ur
Rahman and the first summit was held in Dhaka on 8 December 1985, when
the organization was established by the governments of Bangladesh, Bhutan,
India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka. Since then the organization
has expanded by accepting one new full member, Afghanistan, and several
observer members.

ASEAN
Asean started with founding members Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines,
Singapore and Thailand; then added Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar
and Vietnam in later years.Its aims include accelerating economic growth,
social progress, and sociocultural evolution among its members, protection
of regional peace and stability, and opportunities for member countries to
resolve differences peacefully.

Comparing ASEAN AND SAARC

As comparing SAARC with ASEAN we see many causes that ASEAN is much
more effective regional organization. ASEANs basic is based upon
cooperative security and comprehensive security. ASEAN use this as
building block. While SAARC on the other hand is yet to be focus on one

agenda. Leaders of ASEAN have altered their mutual interests to cooperate

in region, while SAARC members are yet to do so. SAARC states are tangled
in multilateral cooperation. Moreover ASEAN has better policies to integrate
or involve their members while SAARC members are surrounded by a
number of conflicts. Most of the conflicts are between India and Pakistan.

Comparability

The unfortunate reality is that, with abundant natural resources and more
than 1.5 billion people, Saarc has the potential to become the worlds largest
economy after the United States and China and is perceived as the next
largest consumer market buoyed by steady economic growth and a booming
middle class. Yet, Saarc is failing to harvest the benefit with intra-Saarc
trade of only 5%, compared to Aseans 32%, the EUs 50% and NAFTAs 65%.
It means side by side examination of two or more alternatives, processes to
determine if they have common ground or similarities to permit a meaningful
comparative analysis.
According to this definition we can keep ASEAN and SAARC side by side to
compare some of their common grounds. In SAARC member states India the
physically largest as well as economic and military power house. Any
external power can always cultivate a smaller nation to gain in the region
and India in particular. These suspicions are the stark reality in South Asia.
Without political leadership regional groupings will fall apart that happened
in Bangkok Agreement. The leadership that Suharto gave to ASEAN played a
major role that is the main strength in keeping ASEAN together till today.
With the Gujral Doctrine coming into place SAARC received leadership from
India under Prime Minister Gujral. After that SAARC is back to square without
leadership. India considers itself as a global player but Pakistan has refused
to accept the pivotal role of India in South Asia.
For challenging Indias role Pakistan has received encouragement from
external forces. India has been reluctant to give leadership to SAARC process
because of these factors. ASEAN was partially setup to establish good
relations with their neighbor countries and they are successful .SAARC
members can learn from ASEAN from that perspective. When ASEAN member
states talk they present ASEAN as a central point .In most of cases SAARC
has little meaning to its member states especially to India and Pakistan.

CONCLUSION
From regional stability and security ASEAN is now moving to regional
economic integration and cooperation which is another step of their success.
Neither in terms of economic cooperation nor in terms of promotion of peace
and understanding there have been no signs of regional cooperation in
SAARC. Because of India and Pakistans suspicion and mistrust of each other
SAARC continues to stagnate and will never be as successful as ASEAN.