NEWSLETTERS

Letter from the Executive Director

The first quarter of the New Millennium Year has been an eventful one for the RCSS. In the third week of January, a Conference was held on CBMs in South Asia, Potential and Possibilities, for South Asian media participants and leading experts from the region. A particular focus was exploring possibilities of economic CBMs. The Book on the workshop has already been published and is available both on the web and in hard copies. An Executive Committee meeting of the Fellowship of South Asian Alternatives (FISAA) followed this.

The meeting was to review the progress and help chart a course for the next few years. A few interesting projects on ~A1tematives’ are likely to be taken up in the coming years.

A CBM Conference of senior Indian and Pakistani interlocutors was held in the first week of February at Colombo. A free and frank dialogue took place on a whole range of issues to promote CBMs between the two countries.

The Non Traditional Security Pro/ect for South Asia is progressing in full swing. Authors of the major projects are pursuing their research. Authors Conference for Globalisation and Security was held at Dhaka in the third week of March. The Mahbub Ul Haq Research Awardees have been announced and the researchers for the Regional Research Institutes have also been identified and tasked. Details of these are available elsewhere in the Newsletter.

A major forthcoming activity of the Centre is a Conference on Small Arms and Light Weapons Prol~feration in South Asia in the third week of June at Sri Lanka. This has emerged as a major issue in the region, which can be effectively addressed only through better regional co-operation. The Summer Workshop on Co-operative Security is planned this year at Kathmandu from September 10-22. Applications for participation have always been overwhelming, and once again I would request an early application from all those who are interested.

The RCSS is now eight years old. As the only organisation of its kind in South Asia, it has indeed played a unique and historic role in developing regional understanding and co-operation. But, as with all vibrant organisations, it is also time to take stock. We need to constantly ask how we can perform our roles better and perhaps reinvent ourselves if necessary. The Ford Foundation is helping us with this task and we hope to undertake this Review in the coming weeks. In the meantime it may mean some changes and restrictions in our existing programmes, even as we take up new ones. More of this in the future.

Dipankar Banerjee

In the wake of their nuclear tests in May 1998 and the abandonment of nuclear ambiguity for an overt nuclear weapons status, tensions between India and Pakistan have reached new heights. Almost a year after their nuclear tests, in the spring and summer of 1999, the two states clashed in the disputed territory of Kashmir, a conflict that almost escalated into an all-out conventional war that could have assumed a nuclear dimension. Given the ever pervasive threat of war between India and Pakistan. there is a pressing need for institutionalised mechanisms to de-escalate tensions and to promote regional peace.

Military CBMs and Conflict Prevention
Since the decade of the 1980s, India and Pakistan have been on the brink of war on three separate occasions. In all three cases, the dangers of a conventional conflict escalating into a nuclear exchange could not be ruled out. The presence of nuclear weapons and airborne delivery systems in India and Pakistan, geographical contiguity, short warning times, weak command, control and intelligence and high levels of mutual mistrust and hostility increased the threat of intentional, accidental or inadvertent use of nuclear weapons. Since the I 980s, India and Pakistan have agreed to a number of formal and informal military confidence building and confidence avoiding measures, evidence of a tactic acknowledgement to prevent conflict between two nuclear-capable states. As the 1986, 1990 and the 1999 episodes demonstrate, agreed-upon military CBMs between India and Pakistan have failed so far to de-escalate tensions and to build trust.

Military CBMs and South Asian Dynamics
Military CBMs include information measures such as exchange of information about military forces, force structures, facilities and activities; communication measures such as hotlines for use during crises and cool lines for a sustained exchange of information; and notification measures including advance notification of troops movements and exercises. Observation measures encompass activities such as on-site verification of military exercises. Deployment constraint measures place limits on threatening military movements on the ground or in the air while technology constraint measures forbid the introduction of de-stabilising weapons systems.

A number of preconditions must be present for the successful identification and implementation of military confidence building and confidence avoidance measures. First, successful CBMs require sustained negotiations with the goal of institutionalising the most appropriate mechanisms to de-escalate tensions and prevent the outbreak of accidental or inadvertent war. Second, once CBMs are identified and agreed upon, their success depends on sustained implementation. Third, military CBMs require transparency since their objective is to minimise misperceptions about the intentions of the adversary. Transparency requires verifiable information to monitor agreed-upon CBMs such as force deployments or military movements. Fourth, military CBMs cannot succeed in a vacuum and require parallel political, social and economic policies to build the necessary environment for co-operation between state parties. Finally, the effectiveness of military CBMs depends on the political will of state parties to avoid conflict and to incrementally build mutual trust.

In the context of India and Pakistan, these essential preconditions for military CBMs are noted by their absence. The history of their bilateral relationship oscillates between hot and cold war. Neither state has demonstrated any real interest in sustaining negotiations that would result in the identification and sustained implementation of tangible measures to promote mutual confidence, to de-escalate tensions, and to prevent the outbreak of conflict.

Since suspicion, hostility and perceptions of threat continue to permeate the political atmosphere, military CBMs are poorly implemented, undermining their effectiveness. Nor do India and Pakistan favour, other than in rhetoric, the adoption of an integrated approach, military, political, social and economic to avoid conflict and to incrementally promote co-operation. The utility of military CBMs therefore remains limited since Indian and Pakistani policy makers lack the political will to build the necessary climate of trust essential for the success of any conflict prevention or conflict resolution mechanism.

Military CBMs in Practice
Military CBMs and confidence-avoidance measures between India and Pakistan have a long history and include treaties, institutionalised exchanges between senior policymakers, hotlines between military personnel, ground rules for military exercises, agreements to prevent air violations etc. Focusing on CBMs reached since the 1 980s. this paper will discuss the utility, prospects and limitations of military CBMs in reducing the risk of war between India and Pakistan.

Following two near war incidents in 1987 and 1990, India and Pakistan reached a number of agreements to establish ground rules for military exercises with the objective of avoiding the outbreak of an accidental conflict. An agreement was ratified in August 1992 on Advance Notice of Military Exercises, Manoeuvres and Troop Movements. The agreement does not permit military manoeuvres of the Pakistani and Indian land. naval and air forces in close proximity to or in the direction of their international border. No military activity is permitted within 5 kilometres of the international border. The agreement also provides for prior notification of major military exercises within a specified timeframe.

The importance of CBMs on prior notification of military exercises is best illustrated by the Brasstacks Crisis when major Indian and Pakistani military exercises in the direction of their international border almost resulted in war. Despite the threats posed by such troops movements, India and Pakistan have repeatedly violated the spirit of the 1992 agreement. During the May-July Kargil conflict, for instance, massive Indian and Pakistani troop deployments occurred along the international border and the Line of Control threatening an outbreak of war.

A similar agreement was reached between India and Pakistan in 1991, subsequently ratified in 1992, for the Prevention of Airspace Violations by Military Aircraft, establishing a no-fly zone along their international border. According to the agreement, combat aircraft are prohibited

within 10 kilometres of the international border and unarmed transport and logistics aircraft are permitted up to 1000 meters from each other’s airspace. If implemented, this agreement could play an important role in preventing an escalation of hostilities, especially during periods of military crises. In practice, however, air violations have occurred and the agreement has failed to dc-escalate tensions amidst mutual accusations of air violations. During the Kargil crisis, for instance, Pakistan’s downing of two Indian aircraft and India’s downing of a Pakistani plane near the international border in the aftermath of the Kargil crisis seriously exacerbated mutual tensions.

Following the 1990 crisis, India and Pakistan also agreed to adopt measures to reduce the risk of war by stationing UN monitors along the Line of Control in Kashmir to provide both sides information on force deployment and movement. No attempt was however made to institutionalise the measure. The resultant uncertainty about military intentions in an area where armed clashes are a frequent occurrence increases the risk of war. The importance of accurate information about force deployment and movement is best demonstrated by the Kargil conflict. Neither side had accurate information about each other’s military intentions. In the wake of the Kargil crisis, as periodic firing along the Line of Control continues to threaten the outbreak of conflict, reliable information about force deployment could act as a vital factor in preventing an outbreak of war.

Acknowledging the dangers posed by their nuclear weapon status, India and Pakistan have also entered into a nuclear-specific CBM, the 1988 Agreement on the Prohibition of Attack on Nuclear Installations and Facilities. Although official lists of nuclear facilities have been periodically exchanged since 1991 when the agreement was ratified, mutual doubts about their accuracy undermine the effectiveness of this CBM. At the Lahore summit of 1999, India and Pakistan also agreed in principle on additional nuclear-specific CBMs such as prior notifications of ballistic missile tests. Moreover, they declared their intention to inform each other of “any accidental, unauthorised, or unexplained incident” that might lower the threshold for a nuclear attack. These pledges have since become the casualty of their post-Kargil cold war. Even if the Kargil episode had not taken place, neither India nor Pakistan is likely to accept the types of intrusive verification measures that would be needed to monitor such confidence building instruments.

Prospects of Military CBMs in South Asia
Lacking the political will to sustain and to incrementally expand mechanisms for conflict containment, India and Pakistan have adopted military CBMs for other pñrposes, more often than not to placate or divert international opinion.1 Following their nuclear tests in May 1998, for instance, India and Pakistan identified a number of military CBMs more to allay Western opposition to their nuclear weapons programs than to defuse bilateral tensions. A precarious peace and festering suspicions underscore the need for effective military CBMs to prevent conflict. Military CBMs become even more essential due to the absence of political reconciliation between the two geographically contiguous, nuclear-capable states. It is indeed important for Pakistan and India to implement military CBMs such as posting UN observers along the Line of Control in Kashmir. Given the high levels of hostility and mistrust, however, neither side will be willing to implement overly ambitious conventional military CBMs, let alone the types of nuclear CBMs that were identified at the Lahore summit. Indian and Pakistani policymakers should therefore focus their attention on modest agreed-upon measures such as an institutionalised use of dedicated communications channels.

A sustained official dialogue could also play a positive role in identifying and implementing appropriate political, economic and cultural CBMs that would collectively create the trust needed for effective military confidence building and conflict avoidance mechanisms. The necessary political will on both sides to strengthen mechanisms for peace remains an essential precondition for such a dialogue and indeed even for citizen-to-citizen contacts between India and Pakistan. Since there is little evidence of such a resolve, a mutual disregard for substantive mechanisms to ease tensions and to prevent conflict will continue to act as a barrier to the successful implementation of military CBMs in South Asia.

Paper presented at the regional workshop on Confidence Building Measures: Potential and Possibilities at Pegasus Reef Resort, Wattala, Sri Lanka.

* Dr Samina Ahmed is at the Belfer Centre for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University and a former member of the International Research Committee of the RCSS.

CBMs in South Asia: Potential and Possibilities Report

A regional workshop on Confidence Building Measures in South Asia: Potential and Possibilities, was organised by the RCSS from January 24-27, 2000, at the Pegasus Reef Hotel, Wattala, Sri Lanka. Prominent media personalities and CBM experts of Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka participated.

The conference was a sequel to the June 1999 Conference on Confidence Building Measures in South Asia:

Retrospect and Prospects. While that Conference was a success in itself, it also highlighted the enormous lack of knowledge of CBMs even among concerned and well informed people in the region. It was decided then, that the Centre’s CBM programme needed to be enlarged and engage the media in order to examine its potential and possibilities.

The need for sustained dialogue to address issues of regional security in South Asia is underscored in the context of recent nuclear weaponisation of India and Pakistan and subsequent tensions between them. Many questions arise amongst concerned people in the sub­continent. What are CBMs meant to achieve? Are they ineffective and distracting mechanisms, which detract attention from addressing real security concerns of countries? Is it not possible to develop co-operative arrangements in South Asia for sharing resources, increasing trade and alleviate poverty without jeopardising security? What have been the experiences of CBMs elsewhere in the world? What are their prospects in the region?

The workshop provided a forum for prominent media specialists from South Asia to interact with each other and with a group of senior CBM experts and practitioners in the region and the world. Participants reviewed and discussed various CBM instruments and models, studied their viability, successes, and impediments to implementation in the backdrop of different approaches and processes adopted by governments, regional institutions, civil societies and non-governmental organisations. They also reviewed and analysed successes and failures of CBMs in South Asia, and considered ways and means of effective confidence building and institutionalising regional dialogues. A particular focus of this workshop was developing economic CBMs in the region.

Please see the latest RCSS publication CBMs in South Asia —Potential and Possibilities, on the website at www.rcss.org

The beginning of this century is an appropriate time for taking an assessment of the economic confidence building measures (ECBMs) that were initiated in South Asia over the past decade, and the effectiveness and success of these measures. The globalisation of the world economy and closer integration of individual economies in the international system over recent years has provided an enhanced opportunity to nation states to engage in economic diplomacy for peace building.

Business CBMs
Much of the discussion about ECBMs centres around the business activities of trade, investment, and joint ventures. Experience with trade data has shown that during years of good political relations, there is usually a spurt in bilateral business activity, accompanied with an increase in the volume of trade and investment and high confidence building measures that will promote business interests.

CBMs in the area of trade involve mainly the elimination of both import tariffs - such as custom duties, import surcharges and taxes, and countervailing duties levied on bilateral merchandise trade — and non-tariff barriers, as the first step towards preferential treatment or free trade. While preferential trade agreements exist between many South Asian states — e.g. between Nepal and India, India and Bhutan, etc., — the South Asian region as a whole has traditionally maintained exorbitantly high import tariff levels to encourage the growth of domestic industry. More recently, the economic reform programs in most countries in South Asia and pressures from business leaders, tariff levels have been progressively declining, indicating that there is some measure of economic confidence emerging among the members states.

But in general, despite the loosening of trade barriers, intra-SAARC trade has remained at a low 4.2% over the past decade, indicating a continuing low level of economic confidence between the South Asian nations to participate as partners in trade. In the case of India and Palsistan, the official bilateral trade has amounted to a meagre $120 million— since 1994 — in comparison to their combined global trade of $72 billion, and has shown practically no substantial increase over the years.

As regards foreign direct investment, this has tended to flow towards countries with (a) sizeable markets in terms of purchasing power and (b) those that are “safe” investments, with political stability being a key indicator of economic stability in the country or the region. On both these counts, the South Asian states have improved their share of FDI inflows received by developing countries during the 1990’s— from 1.46% in 1990 to 2.94% in 1997, although this has been accounted for largely by India and Pakistan. However, the 100 least developed countries in the world, including some of the poorest countries in South Asia Nepal, Bangladesh, Bhutan, —, collectively received only 1% of annual global FDI inflows of about $350 million in 1996.

Thus intra-regional investments have increasingly become an important source of FDI for the developing countries. For instance, 65 % of all FDI stock in China in 1990, 41 % of that in Malaysia, and nearly 28% in Taiwan and Indonesia had their origins in the regional developing countries. For the SAARC region, intra-regional investments have begun to flow between the countries, although still at a modest scale. Indian companies have invested aboUt US $83 million in 140 ventures so far in four South Asian countries Bangladesh, Maldives, Nepal and Sri Lanka. In addition, Indian companies have extended US $3.5 million worth of loans and credits and guarantees worth $16.5 million to their affiliates in the SAARC region. The biggest host of Indian investments in the region has been Sri Lanka with 59 ventures set up, and Nepal leads in terms of equity investments and credits with $34 million worth of investments and $3.5 million worth of loans. Bangladesh have become host to about 25 Indian ventures with $16 million worth of investments.

In the case of India and Pakistan, economic investment has been almost negligible, inspite of the huge potential for FDI flows across the border in areas such as the manufacture of industrial plants, chemicals, cements, electricity and power generation, infrastructure development, and telecommunications.

Management/Professionals CBMs
This type of ECBMs involves meetings between professional management bodies — such as accountants, economists, business executives, etc, or through management school exchanges of faculty or students. It involves comparatively no political or financial “risk” and should be the most easily acceptable option for all countries interested in peace building.

There has been some good record in South Asia for networking management executives through forums like

AMDISA — Association of Management Development
Institutes of South Asia — which has been very active in both collective research and sharing of business experiences through conferences. The South Asian Association of Chartered Accountants also is meets frequently to exchange views and network business practices in the region.

The Institute of Mullet-Track Dz~lomacy in Washington D.C. has also been promoting peace building in South Asia through its workshops on business and conflict resolution, which engage the partyiership of leading business schools in the peace-building process. The Henry L.Stimson Center and Center for Strategic and International Studies have also provided a window of opportunity to economic CBMs through their Fellowship programs, discussion meetings and on-going research.

Beyond these few examples, the record for this type of ECBMs in South Asia has not been as expected, although a vast potential exists for networking management faculties, human resource experts, leading economists, IT professionals, financial officers, and communications managers.

Regional Economic Cooperation
Regional ECBMs are those established through “regional” bodies and forums, which have played a key role in establishing the European Union and NAFTA. The South Asian Association for Regional Co-operation — SAARC — has also achieved a reasonable degree of success through programs initiated under its umbrella.

The most important of these is the intra-regional trade co­operation under the 1995 South Asian Preferential Agreement — SAPTA — which has been a strategic instrument in bringing about economic development in the region. The first round of SAPTA negotiations in 1995 resulted in 226 items (at HS six-digit levels) on which tariff concessions was offered by the member states. At the conclusion of the second round of trade liberalisation under SAPTA in 1996, around 2000 products were covered by the regional agreement. Following the third round of SAPTA, negotiations have begun on the transition to the South Asian Free Trade Area — SAFTA — by the year 2001. The inter­governmental expert group is carrying out this process, which was set up for the purpose.

Multilateral Agency Programs
Multilateral agencies such as the World Bank, Asian Development Bank, and other international organisations such as UNIDO/ ILO can be strong catalysts in promoting ECBMs in South Asia, particularly in areas such as energy development, infrastructure, power transmission, and environment protection, which require long-term financial investments and guarantees.

In 1996, Bangladesh, India and Pakistan were responsible for 3.4% of the total global consumption of primary commercial energy. The use of primary energy in the countries of South Asia grew at a rate of 5.800 between 1971-1993. Only the East Asian region and the Middle East countries had a faster rate of growth in energy consumption during this period. The potential for co­operation among South Asian nations to exploit their natural energy reserves and cooperate in oil, natural gas pipelines, hydro electricity, and thermal power generation is vast and promising.

Economic Scoreboard: ECBMs in South Asia
The matrix below is an illustrative model that can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of ECBMs in South Asia. An aftempt has been made to list some of the important ECBMs, and measure their performance on a hypothetical scale of 1 to 5. The ranking give to each ECBM is purely subjective, and based on the authors first-hand experience with ECBMs through national business chambers, regional organisations, international institutions, government, and non-governmental support organisations.

Paper presented at the regional workshop on Confidence Building Measures: Potential and Possibilities at Pegasus Reef Resort, Wattala, Sri Lanka.
 

A two-day Planning Conference of the IDSS (Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies, Singapore) was held at Singapore on March 9-10, 2000. Twenty seven selected paper writers and observers from the United Nations University, Tokyo and Mr Sugeeswara Senadhira, Associate Director, RCSS attended.

Dr Khong Yuen Foong, Acting Director, IDSS, in his inaugural address, emphasised the importance of study of NTS issues in Southeast Asia. Describing the globally evolving changes in conceptions of security since the end of Cold War, he said the individual security has taken prime place from the earlier state-oriented security perceptions. He urged the authors to focus their research in the context of these emerging parameters.

Non Traditional Security issues in Southeast Asia have been broadly divided into four sub-themes: a)Globalization and Security
b)Governance in Plural Societies and Security
c)Environment and Security, and
d)Regional Institutions and Security

The IDSS selected authors by inviting applications from all parts of the world, but the themes were strictly confined to the Southeast Asian issues. The project period will be for a year and a half and the completed papers will be published by the IDSS.

The authors presented their papers and each paper was discussed at length. The following broad proposal and themes emanated during the discussions at the Conference:

• Unsettled maritime borders between Southeast Asian countries could result in mounting tensions and lead to interference and intervention by outside powers. More effective regional collaboration was necessary to address these issues.
• Establishment of a controlling regime to deal with issues pertaining to disputed islands and problems arising from overlapping economic zones was considered essential to prevent a border issue from snowballing into a major confrontation between one or more regional countries
• There is growing apprehension that the globalization of the world economy could create serious economic problems for the countries in the region and that could challenge ASEAN ideology and practice. While ASEAN could manage low level problem an economic climate that was essentially benign. It lacked resources and institutional mechanism to deal with any major crisis.
• The developments in East Timor raise a number questions about the role of regional institutions. It has highlighted the need for a stronger role for regional organisations and providing more specific monitoring and early warning mechanisms to avert a major crisis.
• Shared water resources such as the Mekong river which flows through five Southeast Asian countries and China epitomize the dilemmas surrounding common poor resources. Such dilemmas could result in serious differences specially when implementing large scale hydropower and irrigational projects that leads to conflict between the principle of sovereignty as opposed to common resource issues of ownership, allocation, environmental degradation and security.
• The problems of minorities could pose a serious threat to security. The need to accommodate and recognize ethnic minorities and various marginalized groups produced by the democratization process itself was reiterated by editors. They felt that the question of good governance was critical.
• Theorists and practitioners should re-think what was meant by good governance and security and priorities helping those made insecure by the prevailing political and economic order. Doing away the alleviation of their insecurity will be in the interest of the long-term stability of the region.

Vacancies & Opportunities

Nautilus Institute calls for applications for two positions: Globalization and Governance Program Officer, and Globalization and Governance Program Assistant. Salary will be commensurate with skills and experience (starting range is US$ 28,000 to US$ 35,000). We offer and excellent benefits package including comprehensive health care and retirement benefits.

Please write to: Nautilus Institute,
1831 Second Street, Berkeley,
CA 94710-1902 USA
Fax: (510) 204-9298 For details, visit: http://www.nautilus.org/jobsl
Please apply by May 19, 2000.

The Women’s Feature Service, an international development features service, is seeking to recruit a Director, by June 2000. The job is based in New Delhi. Only women need apply.

The Director is the chief executive officer of the organisation. Interested candidates should have qualifications, knowledge and experience in:

Mainstream media, international development, gender, and women’s empowerment; the United Nations and its agencies, donor agencies, foundations, civil society organisations. Management and administration, Information and communication technologies. Public relations and advocacy Funding raising, the income generation and personnel skills, an ability to lead a team of people, and work in a collaborative manner. Excellent oral and written communication.

Send resume and names of three references to The Director,
Women’s Feature Service,
G-69 Nizamuddin West,
New Delhi 110013
Email: wfsdelhi@nda.vsnl.net.in Warren Feek, Director
The Communication Initiative wfeek@coastnet.com
http://www.comminit.com
Fax:1-250-658-1728

International Journalism Exchange

The International Journalism Exchange is an annual program that enables top editors from around the world to get hands-on experience in US newsrooms. In this five-week program operated bythe International Center for Journalists, newsroom managers will attend formal training sessions given by journalism experts, visit newspapers andmedia centers in Washington and New York, and spend a month working with their counterparts at similarly sized U.S. newspapers.

Only 10 English-speaking editors from around the world will be selected for this competitive program begun in 1984. There is no cost to participants for the exchange, which is sponsored by the American Society of Newspaper Editors and the Freedom Forum. This year’s program will be held Sept. 16 to Oct. 22, 2000. The brochure and application forms for the program is available in electronic form. You may complete the application on the computer and return it by e-mail to ije@icfj.org. Or you may print out the application and return it by fax or by traditional mail. If you apply by e-mail, you should send the English evaluation form and the agreement to program conditions by fax or by traditional mail.

The deadline for applications is June 1.

For further information, please contact Patrick Butler,
Program Director
International Center for Journalists
1616 H Street NW, Third Floor
Washington, DC 20006
202-737-3700; Fax 202-737-0530
E-mail: patrick@icfj.org
Website:http://www.icfj.org http://www.ijnet.org

A Sojourn Towards the Near Mirror Image: Travel from India to Pakistan
Suparna Dasgupta

“You three are planning to go to Pakistan?” A queer and an equally disbelief look crossed the face of any person hearing the plan. The expression would then change to awe and later to envy. We three members of the Ahungulla Group, RCSS decided to go a step further in building bridges between the two nations once together, thereby upholding the objectives of RCSS. The confidence of travelling was given by Maj. Gen. Banerjee, ED, RCSS and the Ahungulla friends from Pakistan staying on the other side of the border.

The opportunity was in the disguise of a wedding of a Pakistani RCSS member — Waqar Ahmed Sheikh. The startling similarity of the customs, rituals and even behaviour of the people of the two nations immediately melted the ice and created an instant bond. Even the city of Lahore with its historical monuments of Lahore Fort, Shalimar Bagh and Shahi Masjid was a mirror image of Delhi’s monuments. Islamabad, the centre of beauracracy, was breathtakingly awesome and challenging - Shah Faisal Mosque, Damne koh, iinnah Super Market, Papsalis Retaurant, Hot Spot, etc. gave a superb blend of tradition and modernization within the city.

The informal discussions at Institute of Strategic Studies (ISS) and Qaide A-zam University (QAU) on “Confidence Building Measures: The Indo-Pak Way” flooded the gates for interactions and opinions from both sides of the border. While ISS opined in the form of counter presentations on issues of military and non-military CBMs (Economic, Media and Non-governmental Organisations), QAU raised apprehensions of Corporate America allying with India coupled with Bill Clinton’s recent visit and thereafter India’s future plans towards Pakistan. The issue of the core problem — Kashmir and its perceptions on solving the matter unfortunately could not find a similar footing. While Pakistan stood firm on solving the matter first before moving towards other CBMs and that too through third party mediation and insisting on recognition of the military rule by the Indian side, the Indian side argued on bettering relations through non-military CBMs, i.e., cooperation through exchange of authentic information, cooperation in trade & investments, cooperation between non-governmental organisations, etc.

The presentations began with emphasizing the need for a military CBM as an important instrument for enhancing relations. One of the delegates, Arpit Rajain tried to locate the roots of insecurity and discussed some confidence and security building measures in the nuclear and missile areas and finally put forward some proposals which could be undertaken if and when political will appears and there is a mutual feeling of reduction of danger or nuclear conflict in South Asia. He stressed the need for no-first use, de­alerting, de- activating, de-targeting as an effective mechanism for reducing the role of nuclear weapons in their security postures between both the countries and China, considering its importance for India on security issues. Arpit outlined certain measures that India needs to adopt to send positive signals namely, engage in FMCT negotiations, signing CTBT, resume dialogue with Pakistan, engage middle powers in dialogue, globally campaign for eliminating tactical nuclear weapons, and also use multilateral organizations to explain its view points.

Important as the military CBMs are, it was highly recommended, citing the examples of Europe and Southeast Asia, that it is ultimately the non-military CBMs in the form of enhanced economic cooperation, particularly, in trade, that could bring India and Pakistan close together. The economic cooperation between the two countries continues to be hampered owing to lack of awareness of potential of cooperation and costs of non­cooperation and also owing to the inability of India and Pakistan to resolve their political differences. Trade between India and Pakistan is a paltry amount of Rs. I ,200 crores risen from Rs. 800 crores, which is still far from Rs. 100 billion targeted to be achieved by 2003 by both the countries.

There is an imperative need to review and identify areas of cooperation. Attempts need to be made to bring the informal border trade in the mainstream of economic activities through generating intra-product groups and intra-industry trade and improving ttansit transport systems, trade facilitation arrangements, infrastructure facilities, and an appropriate policy framework. Secondly. both the countries could work towards lifting import curbs of select commodities, which would open up opportunities for bilateral trade. Thirdly, sectors such as agriculture, food processing, automobiles, machine tools, information technology, energy and power, pharmaceuticals and engineering industry offers tremendous scope by setting up joint ventures through equity participation and technology transfer between both the countries. Lastly, It is extremely important to have cooperation through regional groupings and subgroupings which helps facilitate closer economic links by according MFN status to each other.

Another area of non-military CBM, which could be explored, is through interactions of the non governmental organization and media between the two countries, emphasised another delegate, Nayana Bose. With two countries facing similar i5roblems of poverty, illiteracy, low GDP, high child mortality rate, etc. views and opinions could be sought through exchange of information between both the countries. Nayana gave various examples of Indian NGOs like Saheli, Action India, Phone helpline, Sahara, Sakshi, Help Age, India etc. and their work so as to give an idea to solve similar problems faced in Pakistan. There was a concern of media war and feeling of distortion of information on both sides of the border between both the countries. Both sides strongly felt the need for improvement in this area. This would definitely help in facilitating closer relations. It was strongly felt that there is a need to review the state of economy and divert the resources for human development of both the countries.

Lastly, but not the least, the hospitality showered by each and every known and unknown faces in Pakistan was worth learning - no other country can compete with. There was a pleasant surprise awaiting us too. Dr. Tanvir Ahmed, Chairman, ISS had arranged a trip for us to Murree and Bhurban and we had a daylong trip alongwith a wonderful lunch with the research/senior research fellows of the Institute. It felt like perfect CBMs both at the official and personal level.

In a nutshell, if I can move back on time and relive that glorious trip, it seems like the most exquisite dream I ever had and I would wish to have again. I would like to place on record my heartfelt thanks to RCSS and to all my Ahungulla friends from Pakistan, namely, Waqar Ahmed Sheikh, Nadeem Iqbal, Maria Sultan, Akabir Rehman, Sarah Bokhari & the new acquaintances whom I met there who made the trip memorable and possible. Lastly but not the least I would also like to thank Dr. Tanvir Ahmed, and Dr. Rasul Bakhsh Rias, Director, Area Study Centre for Africa North and South America, Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad for giving us an opportunity to interact and understand the Pakistan perceptions.

Mahbub Ul Haq Awards –2000
The Mahbub Ul Haq Awards for the year 2000 have been awarded to the following researchers.
 

Kodikara Award Completion

The Kodikara Award for research on South Asian Strategic Studies has now been made for the last five years and has proved to be enormously successful. The response and applications have grown substantially over the years and the Centre intends to support and extend this to more scholars to the extent funds will allow.

With that aim the Centre would also be streamlining the process and improving the implementation of the Award. Presently, the Award is for one year and we expect the Awardees to complete this within this time frame and have since 1999 provided a small incentive to this end. We will also implement a completion time of three years for the Award that will be applicable from the 1997 awardees. Which means that if a project is not completed within three years of the Award being made, it will be deemed to have been terminated. The Awardees will also be requested to refund the grant offered to them. For future years this will be a part of the contract.

The RCSS, therefore, requests the past Awardees to ensure that the Project is completed before three years. The 1997 Awardees have been requested to submit the projects by July 2000 positively. The Centre regrets its inability to consider a further extension of the date and from August 1,2000, the Award will be considered to have been closed. The .RCSS is confident that all Awardees will honour their commitments well before the deadline.
 
 

Recent RCSS Publications CBMs in South Asia: Potential and Possibilities (RCSS 2000).

RCSS Policy Studies
11.Defence Expenditure in South Asia: Bangladesh and Sri Lanka (April 2000);
10.Defence Expenditure in South Asia: An Overview (March 2000);
9.Sectarian Conflict in Pakistan : A Case Study of Jhang (January 2000).
 

Eighth Summer Workshop

The Regional Centre for Strategic Studies (RCSS) invites applications from young South Asian and Chinese professionals to participate in the Summer Workshop on Defence, Technology and Cooperative Security in South Asia to be held in Nepal during September 10— 22, 2000.

The main objective of the summer workshop held annually is to provide a forum for young South Asian and Chinese professionals to mutually and collectively examine and understand the major issues of defence, national security, regional stability and confidence building in South Asia. It also encourages a new generation of analysts, commentators and opinion shapers to introduce fresh ideas, perspectives and initiatives to the security debate in the region. Specific goals of the workshop are to:

• equip participants with the information and understanding on conceptual, technical and practical aspects of defense, national security and regional stability in South Asia;
• provide participants with insights into strategic and security thinking in South Asia and China, and how divergences in security perception transform into arms build-up, affect relations between states, evolve into conflict and prevent regional stability;
• stimulate informed discourse on various shades of opinion and thinking in the region, specially on emerging and new ideas, related to the theme of the workshop;
• facilitate objective debate on extra-regional factors and perceptions that affect issues, perceptions and trends in South Asian security; and
• stimulate alternative thinking on defence and security, free from abstraction and polemics, and promote collective consideration of possible options and approaches to stability, confidence building and cooperative security in South Asia.

Nationals of Bangladesh, Bhutan, China. India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka in the age group of up to 35 years are eligible to apply. In case of deserving candidates, the age limit may be relaxed to a certain extent. Eligible candidates are invited to apply to the RCSS along with the following:

• Full curriculum vitae including academic qualifica­tions and experience. Please include name and full contact address of two referees;
• A statement in about 200 words stating future professional objectives and describing how participation in the workshop will be useful;
• List of publications.

Candidates from all related professional back­ground are eligible. Evidence of sustained interest in the field and possibility of continued profes­sional work with related policymaking & policy-influencing institutions, media and NGOs are important criteria for the selection.

• Female candidates are specially encouraged to apply
• English is the working language of the workshop.
• The total number of participants is approximately 30 from all countries of South Asia and China.

Letter of application with all documents should reach the RCSS not later than June 30, 2000. (There is no prescribed form.). Scholarships are available for selected participants to cover all expenses including economy class airfare, living cost, etc., in connection with the programme. Applications will be considered by a Selection Committee designated by the RCSS.

For more details read the RCSS Website: http: //www.rcss.org

Views expressed in materials published in rcss newsletter are of contributors, and not necessarily of the RCSS. The rcss newsletter is published quarterly. For copies, comments, contributions and further information please write to:

Programme Officer
Regional Centre for Strategic Studies,
2, Elibank Road, Colombo 5, SRI LANKA.
Tel: (94-1) 599734-5; Fax: 599993
e-mail: rcss@sri.lanka.net http://www.rcss.org

Editor: Sugeeswara Senadhira, Associate Director
Published by: Regional Centre for Strategic Studies

Printed by: Ceylon Printers Ltd.
Tel: (94-1) 434161-3; Fax: 074 714693; e-mail: ceyprint@eureka.lk