Decoding the connectivity conundrum

Narendra Modi’s government is gloating over a road connectivity pact it has just signed with three SAARC (South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation) countries — Bangladesh, Bhutan and Nepal — for seamless journeys by cars, buses and trucks across frontiers boosting trade and people-to-people contact.
But New Delhi knows too well that the BBIN (Bangladesh, Bhutan, India and Nepal) Motor Vehicle Agreement for Regulation of Passenger, Personal and Cargo Vehicular Traffic is no consolation for its disconcerting failure to get Islamabad’s nod for rail-road connectivity with Afghanistan through Pakistan — a mouth-watering proposition for India.
While the full implementation of the BBIN pact remains a “distant dream,” as a neutral financial daily pointed out, a few ironies are self-evident even as toasts are raised for economic and strategic reasons, India wants unfettered road access to countries on its periphery — including Afghanistan with which India doesn’t share a border — but opposes road connectivity with China through Sikkim which borders Tibet, or the northeast bordering Myanmar and Bangladesh which are connected by road to Kunming, capital of Yunnan province in southwest China.
India’s abhorrence for the New Silk Road is too well known to bear repetition. What’s not so well known is New Delhi’s relentless undermining of a proposed Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar highway from Kunming to Kolkata via Mandalay, Chittagong, Dhaka and Silchar in Assam, mooted by a well-meaning Track II group to boost tourism and trade among the four nations.
One man’s meat is another man’s poison, goes the adage. Therefore, what is good for one country may be bad for another, and what is pleasant for one nation may be acutely unpleasant to another. In other words, national interest comes first, not principles.
The need of the hour, therefore, is that the three nuclear powers — India, Pakistan and China — sit down and resolve connectivity issues amicably for the growth and development of one of the most volatile and densely populated regions of the world instead of trying to get the better of one another.
India is against road connectivity with Tibet through Sikkim and is opposing the proposed Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar economic corridor citing security fears. But trade imbalance is a criterion too. In 2013-14, while China exported goods worth $51,049.01 million to India, it imported goods worth $14,829.31 million, according to latest data released by Directorate General of Commercial Intelligence and Statistics. India fears that road connectivity will worsen the situation.
Fair enough, India doesn’t want its market flooded with Chinese products. But won’t Indian businessmen flood Bangladesh, Bhutan and Nepal markets with their goods when the BBIN pact becomes operational? From the security angle, Pakistan’s concerns vis-à-vis India are no different from India’s vis-à-vis China. So it is wary of throwing open its roads to cars, buses and trucks from India. And, frankly, I don’t see Pakistan granting India overland transit route to Afghanistan, especially as Sartaj Aziz, adviser to Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif on National Security and Foreign Affairs, keeps accusing India of “attacking Pakistan from Afghanistan.”
Similarly, India levels grave charges of Pakistan exporting terrorism to India. In such a surcharged atmosphere, connectivity is bound to become a hostage of prevailing circumstances with hawks on both sides calling the shots.
Be that as it may, India’s influence in Afghanistan is on the wane due to geopolitical reasons. President Ashraf Ghani suspended an arms deal with India and is cozying up to Pakistan and China. Moreover, Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence and the Afghan National Directorate of Security seem to have kissed and made up.
It’s all very well to celebrate “sub-regionalism” which the BBIN pact represents as opposed to SAARC, which is a regional body. The celebrations are perfectly in tune with the new strategy of “SAARC-minus-one” aimed at rallying and integrating SAARC countries leaving out Pakistan. A few advocates of this approach are against hankering after connectivity with Pakistan-Afghanistan, as they believe it will facilitate the entry of terrorists into India!
Like a prayer, diplomacy too can produce a miracle. India, Pakistan and China — which enjoys observer status at SAARC — have so much at stake. If they really want frontiers to dissolve for trade and tourism, they must sit across a table, air their fears and extract ironclad guarantees of good behavior before lowering their guard.