- Resurgence of Asia and
the Spirit of Panchsheel and Bandung - Growing Asian
Initiatives - BCIM on Track
II - Boao Forum for Asia
since 2001 - Asian Regional
Cooperation – Issues of People’s
Rights
Panchsheel Vision and the Age of Self The Golden Jubilee
of Panchsheel in 2004 and of the Bandung Conference in 2005
presented opportunities for the humankind to reaffirm the vision
of creating a just and equitable world for which peoples of the
colonies had waged tortuous anti-imperialist struggles for over a
century. It is especially relevant as a perspective in the twenty
first century when groups, nations and regions are showing
increasing determination to realize their aspirations. The
contemporary world is characterized by two simultaneous trends.
One is the trend of integration of the world economy facilitated
by communication explosion and the other is the trend of
assertion of the self – the rising democratic consciousness
of individuals, groups, regions and nations seeking to fulfill
their potentiality by removing obstacles to their
self-realisation. The concept of self-determination has evolved
into a dynamic notion of self-realisation which has vertical and
horizontal dimensions.
Vertically it seeks territorial self-rule or
participative exercise of power from the lowest level of village,
town and province to the regional, national, supra-national and
global levels. Horizontally, unevenly structured relations among
classes, castes, tribes, ethnic groups, races, regions, men and
women are striving to alter their situation so that they can
achieve their potentialities.8 This is why twenty
first centry can be called the Age of Self or the age of
self-realisation and the Panchsheel vision provides an
appropriate framework to pursue these goals. All policies whether
pursued by states or non-state organizations are bound to be
measured by the yardsticks of the process of self-realisation.
International cooperation in the age of self therefore has to
respond not only to the forces of global economy but also the
movements of people’s rights.
When Panchsheel, the Five Principles of Peaceful
Coexistence was proclaimed to the world in 1954 it had embodied a
vision of a new world that was rooted both in the history of
Asia and in
the worldwide struggle against imperialism. The term Panchsheel
was taken from the Buddhist legacy of five norms of human
behaviour.9 Asian civilization put high salience on
the values of love, kindness, sacrifice and peace which were
highlighted in the discourse on Panchsheel. At the same time the
struggle against imperialism emhasised the value of equality of
nations and cultures and their right to self-determination. So
when the two most populous countries of the world, China and
India began to
outline a framework for developing their bilateral relations and
envisage a new post-colonial world they formulated the Five
Principles. They were joined by Burma and later these principles
became the alternative set of ideas propounded by the Non-aligned
and other developing countries that campaigned for a just and
equitable world order. This was an alternative to the Cold War
framework of competing alliance systems based on the concept of
balance of power.10 The Five Principles were
essentially conceived as principles guiding state-to-state
relations.11 But the past fifty years’ history
of international relations and social transformation in the world
has revealed the vast potential of these principles. They may
have serious implications for people-to-people and
region-to-region and culture-to-culture relationships as well.
Respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity, non-aggression
and non-interference in the internal affairs are extremely
significant today when hegemonic forces invade countries and
intervene in the name of building democracy or for humanitarian
reasons. 12 But they are also relevant to federal
structures and inter-ethnic relations. Equality and Mutual
Benefit are the most significant of the five principles.
Imperialism had been challenged by over a century’s
peoples’ struggles both violent and peaceful to assert
these principles. That no country can claim to have a right to
rule over another in the name of superior culture and that no
country had a right to exploit natural resources in another
country in the name of possessing higher technology and capital were
effectively countered in course of the liberation struggles in
India, China and other countries of Asia, Africa and Latin
America.
The Ten Principles adopted in the Bandung conference of
April 1955 had not only reiterated the Five Principles but had
added a number of specific ones on decolonization, human rights
and fighting racism. These were reaffirmed in the fiftieth
anniversary conference in April 2005 in Djakarta where 89 Asian
and African countries took part and adopted a crucial declaration
on Asian African Strategic Paretnership ( AASP) . The new
declaration of AASP restated the centrality of self-determination
and chalked out a fresh agenda emphasizing the need to strengthen
multi-lateralism. The nine point declaration also codified a
commitment to diversity and building a "just, democratic,
transparent, accountable and harmonious
society".13
Keeping these principles in view the concept of peaceful
coexistence of states with diverse social systems and diverse
ideologies and diverse cultures was articulated so that people of
the country concerned had the basic right to struggle for their
socio-political transformation. Dignity and plurality of cultures
of the world were embedded in the Panchsheel. So was the right of
a people to pursue their own path of development. No doubt, in an
interconnected world there are bound to be mutual assessment of
each other’s choices and experiences because that is how
the human civilization has grown and that is how the knowledge
discovered in one part of the world is shared by people
elsewhere. But this process has to go on neither in the framework
of imperialism and domination nor in the framework of hegemonic
globalisation. The Panchsheel framework would promote equitable
exchange of ideas and resources, technology and capital, fair
trade in the true sense of the term – an exchange that is
mutually beneficial to the parties or a win-win relationship
among nations and peoples. All the institutions in the global and
continental arena in the new century ranging from the United
Nations to World Trade Organization ( WTO ) , from Asia Pacific
Economic Cooperation (APEC) to Association of South East Asian
Nations (ASEAN) will be judged according to the norms of
Panchsheel.
The Cold War persisted till the end of the 1980s
crippling the possibilities of transformation of the world
towards an equitable one. Its end saw the emergence of a
hegemonic world situation dominated by the Western capitalist
powers led by the US. At the contemporary moment many countries
of the world are seeking space to relate to one another in a
cooperative and peaceful way on the principles of peace ,
equality and mutual benefit. As democratic assertion of
countries, nations and identities grows and oppressed groups
become more conscious of their creative potentialities and the
obstacles to their fulfillment the movements for self-realisation
gathers new momentum. The momentum gathered by the initiatives in
regional cooperation in Asia during the last decade is part of
that unfolding process in the Twenty First
Century.14
This is evident in the discourses in the regional
forums. For example, addressing the annual conference of the Boao
Forum for Asia ( 24-25 April 2004) Cambodia’s Prime
Minister Hun Sen called for three kinds of transformations in
Asia : 1) from internal conflicts to a zone of peace and
cooperation, 2) from imbalanced development to comprehensive and
harmonious development ; 3) from poverty and under- development
to epicentre of prosperity.15 This by and large
reflects the nature of the political and economic processes going
on in contemporary Asia. They involve recognition of multiple
levels of self-assertion by deprived or alienated groups within
and across countries all of whom are reckoning with the forces of
globalisation and going through various kinds of economic
reforms. If the efforts at regional cooperation focus only on
trade and economic growth without addressing these demands they
may actually accentuate social tensions .
The internal conflicts within countries are mostly
connected with the autonomy movements by cultural and regional
groups seeking self-determination and various democratic rights
movements , especially agrarian movements and tribal struggles.
Until recently, these demands were seen by the leaders of the
nation states as fissiparous and separatist campaigns to
disintegrate the postcolonial states. In recent years however,
there is increasing appreciation of the nature of the demands
resulting in peace talks in various countries. In South Asia the
talks with LTTE in Sri Lanka, the Naga peace talks leading to
cease-fire in northeast India and the initial steps towards
dialogue on Kashmir are some examples of the new trend. The peace
talks with the Maoists in Nepal was on the cards so as to end the
deadlock and arrest the escalating trend of violence. The
government of President Arroyo in Philippines has been engaed in
peace talks with the New People’s army and the
People’s Democratic Front in Amsterdam and there is a
ceasefire on the ground. While the military dictatorship in Burma
persists in its manouvres to delay handing over power to the
democratic leadership, the movement for the restoration of
democracy goes on with initiatives for peace and dialogue. Many
of these democratic and autonomy movements and social upsurges
have international dimensions; therefore the solutions of
internal problems require creating an international environment
conducive to peace. Regional disparities within each country
often lead to the alienation of the people of the underdeveloped
regions. There are regions of poverty in every country, and more
extensively in South Asia. Hence, tackling poverty and regional
disparity have emerged as major goals in the current phase of
economic reforms in many countries including China and
India.
Thus, the contemporary Asian environment has three
vertical levels of self- assertion – at the level of
regions within the countries, at the level of countries/nations
and at the trans-national level. Horizontally, the class, caste,
race, ethnic and gender based domination are the basis of many
social struggles. The current process of globalization has to
recognize these multiple levels of self-assertion. The important
task is how to reconcile these levels to mutual benefits. No
level can be subdued by another level and each level has to prove
its positive advantages for the lower as well as for higher
levels. A nation state or multi-national state values its
sovereignty that it has achieved after long years of
anti-colonial struggle. But today it is called upon to exercise
it by granting autonomy to regions and groups within it. At the
same time many layers of integration are now emerging above the
nation states- at the levels of regions in Asia , at the
continental level and the at the level of the third world or the
South or the developing countries and also many issue -based
regional and global formations. Thus the discourse on regional
cooperation has to be located in a framework of multi-layered
self-assertion and integration. That is the Panchsheel framework
of cooperation.
It should be pointed out that most of the current
initiatives at regional cooperation take the national governments
as their units of cooperation. No doubt they are the most
important agencies of cooperation but they often remain
insensitive to the aspirations of autonomy struggles and
people’s movements. At the non-governmental level many
organizations have come up particularly the NGO networks
facilitated by regional institutions such as South Asian
association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) and ASEAN. Business
groups have also evolved their own networks through the
operational channels of the multinational corporations. But there
is clear gap between the intergovernmental and the NGO networks.
The gap has been relatively lessened because of the UN summits
which usually have NGO forums in addition to the conferences of
governmental representatives. Still the gap persists because
people’s organizations and social movement groups have very
little networking on a sustained basis. As a result many
intergovernmental initiatives do not reflect the concerns of
people’s movements and regional economic initiatives may
even be insensitive to the people’s rights. The problem is
further confounded by the fact that collaboration among academics
of the Asian countries as well as among different regions within
a country remains minimal. Only when cooperative links are forged
at all the four levels- government, NGO, people’s
organizations and academics – can regional cooperation
advance smoothly. This is extremely significant in the context of
the newly emerging economic strength as well as the growing
democratic consciousness in Asia which is famously endowed with
great civilisational legacies.
Resurgence of Asia and the
Spirit of Panchsheel and Bandung
In the recent years we have seen a continental
self-assertion in Asia. After two centuries of struggle people of
Asia have begun to perceive themselves as Asians with historical,
cultural and transformative identities.
For one and a half-century western colonialism had
plundered Asia and it so divided Asian territories that a
pan-Asian identity could not emerge. Some thinkers like
Rabindranath Tagore and leaders like Jawaharlal Nehru did try to
articulate the Asian visions. Tagore spoke of Asian civilization
in his lectures in China and Japan. Nehru talked about Asian
nationalism in Glimpses of World History. The Japanese
militarists' concept of an Asian Co-prosperity Sphere had done
considerable damage to the concept of Asia already.
The second half of the twentieth century saw post-
colonial Asian countries pitted against one another as a result
of the cold war policies of the super powers. It is in this
environment Panchsheel was conceived in Asia to chart an
alternative path of world politics on the aftermath of the World
War II and the end of colonialism. The Bandung Conference of the
Asian and African countries in 1955 was an important initiative
to counter cold war politics. The Ten Principles contained in the
Bandung Declaration absorbed the Five Principles.16
But the Afro-Asian movement did not succeed in consolidating
anti-imperialist forces. Asia remained divided because of the
cold war with continuous tensions in the Korean Peninsula, the
war in Vietnam, India-Pakistan relations, invasions and civil war
in Afghanistan and the Arab-Israeli conflict to name a few.
Throughout the past half twentieth century Asia has suffered from
external intervention and internal war. It is only in the recent
years, despite the US-led invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, Asian
countries and people are coming together in regional and
continental forums to build structures of cooperation and
strengthen the already existing structures.
Western social science writings including the area
studies scholars emphasized the diversity and disparateness of
Asian countries and regions so much that the concept of Asia
remained almost an illusion.17 Only after the end of
the cold war and the rise of a new wave of self – assertion
throughout the continent of Asia a new climate of regional
identity began to develop.18
Asia was now seen as a civilisational zone extending
from Egypt to Japan and Mongolia to Sri Lanka or beyond where
great religions and cultural systems such as Buddhism,
Christianity, Islam, Hinduism
and Confucianism flourished and interacted with each other
together with large varieties of local religions and cultures for
at least two millennia. The Himalayas and the rivers flowing from
them on all sides and the large stretches of dryland and pastures
constitute the geo- cultural region of Asia . South Asia has a
special location like a peacock with its open feathers extending
to all the other four regions of Asia. That happy status has made
it a region of confluence of Indo-Sinic, Indo-Persian, Aryan and
Dravidian civilizations over two millennia and more. The spirit
of Panchsheel imbibing mutual respect and coexistence of cultures
is the gift of the people’s history of Asia resulting from
prolonged struggles.
Besides the civilisational inherittance, the anti
-colonial history of Asian countries had enduring legacies of
agrarian revolution and multi-faceted liberation. During the past
half century the economic development experience of Asian
countries especially the experiments with various models of
Gandhi and Nehru and his successors in India, those of Mao Zedong
and Deng Xiaoping and his successors in China , the East Asian
tigers and dragons and the rise of the oil economies in the Gulf
and West Asia , the practice of planning and market reforms and
their many mixes – all this presented unique
experiences.
As many Asian countries exhibited their self-confidence
by their economic successes and raised their political voice
highlighting their cultural and natural resources at the dawn of
the twenty-first century there was the talk of an Asian century.
No doubt, China’s economic success, the performance of
ASEAN and Japan and other East Asian countries have made a major
contribution to this new image of Asia. But equally important has
been the rise of democratic movements of people of Asia. The
cumulative force of the new middle class, the entrepreneurs, the
awakened peasants and workers, the women’s movement has
made a significant impact on this new situation. This Asian
environment has also within it persistence of poverty and
regional disparity, environmental decay and ethnic violence among
many other problems. If the economic rise of Asia is projected in
exclusion of the this comprehensive picture we would have only a
partial picture of the evolving reality in the contemporary
world.
There are similar trends of resurgence in Africa and
South America as well. The founding of the African Union in 2002
is a landmark in this process. But for historical reasons the
forces of economic, social and political transformation are
relatively more active today in Asia though the other two
continents are fast catching up. What is significant is that the
three continents are coming together on global economic issues.
In this effort the initiative taken by Brazil, South Africa,
India and China has been crucial as was evident in Cancun, Geneva
and elsewhere in the WTO negotiations.
Though the new Asian consciousness has not translated
itself into many continental level organizations still some of
the regional associations have made remarkable progress. In Asia
the most successful experience in regional cooperation is that of
ASEAN which had already set up the initial structure of an ASEAN
Free Trade Area in 1992. It aims at becoming an ASEAN Community
by 2020. The Bali Summit in October 2003 agreed on what it called
the ‘Three Pillars on ASEAN community’ viz. Political
and security cooperation; economic cooperation and socio-cultural
cooperation. ASEAN had already agreed to have a free trade area
with China by 2010 and with India by 2011 and with Japan in the
following year.
In South Asia, the process of regional cooperation has
been much slower. However, the twelfth SAARC Summit held in
Islamabad on 4-6 January 2004 turned out to be a landmark.
Besides the India – Pakistan peace initiative taken by
Vajpayee and Musharraf the SAARC Summit adopted the SAFTA
Framework Treaty. The SAARC leaders agreed to reduce tariffs in
the region in two phases to 0-5% partly by 1 January 2006 and
fully by 31 December 2015. The leaders also agreed to set up a
South Asian Economic Union and explored the possibility of the
establishment of the South Asian Development Bank. The adoption
of the SAARC social charter was another successful event of this
Summit. 2004 was designated as the SAARC Awareness Year. Vajpayee
also floated the idea of a South Asian currency. SAARC’s
progress had been thwarted all these years by India-Pakistan
conflicts. But the public opinion in both the countries had been
pressurizing their governments to open channels of communication
and build up people-to-people contacts. The consensus on this
line of thought was evident in the fact that the Manmohan Singh
Government of the UPA ( United Progressive Alliance) that came to
power in May 2004 defeating the NDA has continued the initiative.
The SAARC Foreign Ministers’ meeting in Islamabad in August
2004 carried forward the SAARC agenda. But much ground needs to
be covered before SAARC meets the common aspirations of people of
South Asia.19
India’s Look East Policy launched by the PV
Narasimha Rao regime in the early 1990s has not only led to
closer cooperation with ASEAN but also to participation in
another regional initiative called BIMST-EC (Bangladesh, India,
Myanmar, Sri Lanka, Thailand- Economic Cooperation). Its Sixth
Ministerial meeting in Phukat in Thailand on 8 January 2004
adopted the Framework Agreement of BIMST-EC Free Trade Area.
Nepal and Bhutan had joined the organization in the meantime. It
chalked out a programme of cooperation in developing hydropower
projects, air links, shipping and highway linkages. The first
BIMST-EC Summit was held on 30-31 July 2004 in Bangkok.
Indicating the importance that India attached to this initiative
India’s new Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh attended this
Summit and affirmed India’s commitment to multilateral
cooperation in Asia.20 The BIMST-EC Summit Declaration
of 31 July took a number of significant decisions. It renamed the
organization as Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral
Technical and Economic Cooperation thus retaining the acronym
while admitting more countries into it. The leaders signed the
Framework Agreement BIMSTEC Free Trade Area and launched a
schemes on tourism, transport and forging cooperation in a
variety of fields ranging from agriculture and biodiversity to
communication, energy and infrastructure
development.21
Another initiative in which India played a major role
was the Mekong-Ganga Cooperation ( MGC) which was declared in a
Declaration in Vientiane, Laos in November 2000. It was signed by
six countries five of whom were from Southeast Asia. They were :
Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Thailand, Myanmar and India. The aim was
to promote tourism, transport and cultural links. When the
exclusion of china was noticed the answer was that it was the
region from Mekong river to Ganga river. There were steps taken
to prepare project reports for transport networks such as an East
West corridor and Trans-Asian Highway. Joint research on
scientific, technological and cultural issues were also proposed.
The second Ministerial meeting took place alongside the ASEAN
meeting in Hanoi in July 2001 which drew up an Action Plan and the
third after a gap of two years in June 2003 in Phnom
Penh.22 In the evolving climate of multilateralism in
Asia, India, Vietnam , Thailand and the other members of GMS are
not likely to give up the advantages of this grouping though they
are yet to invest adequate attention to finding out the vast
potentiality of this initiative. This is however not as
well-funded as the other Mekong project aided by the Asian
Development Bank namely, Greater Mekong Sub-region Economic
Cooperation which is known as ADB’s GMS. China’s
Yunnan Province is a major beneficiary of this latter
international project.
Whereas ASEAN, SAARC and BIMST-EC were either South East
Asian or South Asian initiatives the Shanghai Cooperation
Organization ( SCO) was mainly a Chinese initiative. In 1996 the
Shanghai Five consisted of three central Asian
republics-Kazakhstan, Kirgystan, Turkmenistan – the republics of
the erstwhile Soviet Union and Russia and China. Uzbekistan
became a member a few years later when the group formally
constituted itself as the Sanghai Cooperation Organization in
June 2001.Even though the Charter of the SCO does not exactly
reproduce the Five Principles, its principles very much embody
the Panchsheel vision.23 Its original tasks focused on
handling boundary issues, tackling separatism, religious
fundamentalism and terrorism. Gradually the functions acquired
significant economic and strategic dimensions. The profitable
utilisation of natural resources of Central Asia, which attracted
the western corporate interests to the region became important
items in the agenda of the SCO framework. In 2004 the SCO set up
two important structures – a permanent secretariat in
Beijing in January and a Regional Counter-terrorism Centre in
Tashkent. The SCO Summit in Tashkent in June 2004 unfolded
several initiatives which showed how the organization was based
on "security and economic cooperation as two wheels of
development." Mongolia was admitted as an Observer to SCO.xxivThe
fifth summit at Astana in Kazakhstan in July 2005 was yet another
landmark in its evolution. India, Pakistan and Iran were also
made Observers at the SCO which led to much speculation about
operation of interest groups. Strengthening solidarity among the
members and cooperation in fighting terrorism remained the focus.
But the highlight was the SCO’s claim to have special
responsibility to maintaining peace and stability in the region
of Central Asia and calling for a time table for withdrawal of
foreign troops in the region . The US promptly reacted by saying
that it had no plans yet until the threat of terrorism persisted.
But the assertion of autonomy was a significant development at a
time when US was still embroiled in counter-insurgency operations
and the military occupation in Iraq. 25
Two pan-Asian initiatives are slowly emerging on the
continental scene, one focusing on security and another on
economic development. The former is the CICA ( Conference on
Interaction and Confidence-building Measures in Asia ) which took
a formal shape with the adoption of the Almaty Act on 4 June
2002. The summit meeting of 22 October 2004 brought heads of
states and governments of Asian countries to the capital of
Kazakhstan which was a significant step forward. The focus of
this initiative was on threat of terrorism, proliferation of
weapons of mass destruction, drug trafficking and handling
regional conflicts. Currently it is essentially a forum to
exchange ideas and create a climate of collective commitment to
peace. The other initiative which had its beginnings in
discussions in Thailand during the past decade has crystallized
as the Asian Cooperation Dialogue ( ACD). It has had four
meetings at the level of Foreign Ministers thus far – the
latest being the one in Islamabad in April 2005 which was
addressed by the visiting Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao. Attended by
26 foreign ministers of Asian countries this can be regarded as
the only official dialogue forum on issues of development in
Asia. India was represented in the CICA summit by the Prime
minister in Almaty but by the Minister of Science and Technology
in Islamabad at the ACD. But neither them have emerged as
effective structures mainly because the collective consciousness
has not been translated into a stable structure as yet in Asia.
This is in stark contrast to the rapid structuration of the
African Union which was launched only in 2001.
Whereas the above aforesaid initiatives are
intergovernmental there are some non-governmental or
semi-governmental forums for regional cooperation. The BCIM is
one such example.
An initiative was taken by the scholars, business groups
and officials in China’s Yunnan province through the Yunnan
Academy of Social Sciences to promote sub-regional cooperation
among the neighboring regions and countries of China's Yunnan
Province. The first conference of scholars and business interests
from Bangladesh, China, India and Myanmar (BCIM) was convened in
Kumming in August 1999. The participants agreed on exploring the
ways to improve cooperation in tourism, transport , connectivity
and border trade. The first round of meetings had been completed
in New Delhi (2001), Dacca ( 2002) and Yangoon ( 2003). The
Government of India had not yet shown adequate interest in this
effort thought it had not shown any hostility to the idea. As
Sino-Indian relations imroved and their trade developed steadily,
security sensitivity in disputed the border area which was also a
region of insurgency began to give place to confident policy
making. So far only academic institutions had been involved in
organising the conferences. The governmental involvement in China
and Myanmar was fairly conspicuous from the beginning. The
Chinese are keen to raise this initiative from 8 track II to
track I so that this effort graduates to the level of the SCO
governments carry on the business of cooperation.. In the
changing Asian environment it is not unlikely to see this grow
into a n intergovernmental organisation for regional
cooperation.
While the above initiatives were confined to regions of
Asia two other initiatives have emerged as a pan-Asian efforts
though still in their elementary stages. One is the Asian
Cooperation Dialogue ( ACD ) and the other the Boao Forum for
Asia ( BFA). The ACD which had started as the Chiangmai
initiative in Thailand had its third Foreign Ministers’
meeting in Qingdao in June 2004. India’s Foreign Ministers
of India and Pakistan participated in the deliberations there and
had their first bilateral meetings as well. Chinese Premier Wen
Jiabao addressed the Conference and spelt out a five point
outline for Asian cooperation the first being the Five principles
as the guiding framework for ACD. He also called for developing
economic cooperation and trade, agricultural cooperation and
building a Green Asia, building up mechanism for cooperation by
strengthening existing channels of multilateral cooperation such
as ASEAN, SAARC , Arab League and SCO, expanding people-to-people
cooperation and commitment to the principles of openness and
tolerance to take Asian cooperation to a higher
level.26
During the first three years of its existence the BFA
has emerged an important fulcrum of Asian initiatives which
deserve a detailed examination because it has established itself
as a functioning structure of development dialogue promising to
serve the continent of Asia as a whole.
Boao Forum for Asia since
2001
An initiative taken by former Philippines President
Fidel Ramos, former Australian Prime Minister Bob Hawke, and the
former Japanese Prime Minister M Hoshokawa and others including
former Indian Prime Minister I K Gujral in the wake of the 1997
Asian financial crisis got
enthusiastic response from China in 2000 leading to the creation
of a forum for Asia. The idea was to bring together business
leaders, political figures and academicians from Asian countries
to have an annual conference at a permanent venue to discuss
Asian economic problems and world development issues from Asian
perspective. Boao in China's Hainan Province was chosen as a
convenient venue in terms of distances from various parts of
Asia.. The World Economic Forum at Davos is an inspiration for
this effort though the BFA may have a wider functions as well to
take up economic, social as well as environmental issues. Boao
which was a tiny fishing village until four years ago is now a
fast growing metropolis and a tourist
attraction.27
Inaugurated by the Chinese President Jiang Zemin in
2001, the BFA held its third annual conference in April 2004
where the distinguished guests included the Prime Minister Jamali
of Pakistan, the Cambodian Premier and the President of the Czech
Republic Vaclav Claus. The President of Tajikstan Romanov who was
the key note speaker last year was also present . Former
Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamed who has been an
important champion of third world interests returned to the Forum
after two years. President Hu Jintao made an important speech in
which he summed up the experiences of the past 25 years of
reforms and assured that the 'peaceful rise of China' presented a
great opportunity for peace and development in Asia and the
world. Last year newly appointed Chinese premier Wen Jiabao had
addressed the gathering. Over 1000 business representatives,
political figures and scholars from 35 countries of Asia and the
world including delegates from France, Sweden, UK and US
participated in the conference.
Two visions of Asia have gently crisscrossed at the
annual conferences of the Boao Forum for Asia . One perspective
was clearly laid out by the Secretariat led by BFA
Secretary-General Long Yongtu, PRC's former Trade Negotiator with
WTO who took charge in early 2003 after a short tenure by
Malaysia's Ajit Singh. The organisers of BFA wished to assure the
Western captains of globalisation that this Forum was not
intended as a challenge to the World Economic Forum of Davos and
that it was indeed a complementary initiative in Asia to help the
Asian economies and entrepreneurs to cope with the challenges of
international economic integration.
The other vision emerged from the speeches of some of
the political leaders and a few academics and business executives
which stressed the role of Asia in the movement for a just, fair
and equitable world economic and political order. They too
welcomed the idea of global economic integration, but that should
reduce the gap between the north and the south and enable the
countries to cope with their domestic economic and social
problems. Asia had large poverty-stricken populations who
demanded urgent attention. Economic globalisation had to address
itself to the problems of farmers, workers and peple of backward
regions.
Philippines' former President Ramos who is the President
of the BFA Board spelt out his vision unambiguously of building a
prosperous Asia as a united family which will contribute towards
creating a stable and equitable international order. This echoed
the sentiments expressed by Jiang Zemin in his inaugural speech
in and by Mahathir Mohamed in his key note speech on the occasion
of the opening of the Forum in 2001. In the first conference in
2002 the Japanese Prime Minister Koizumi stressed the importance
of Asian cooperation and the then Chinese Premier Zhu Rongzhi had
outlined a grand vision for a Win-Win path for Asia which has
become a permanent theme note for BFA. The theme 2003 was : Asia
searching for Win-Win: Development through Cooperation. i.e. how
to ensure that all parties benefit out of the development
process. For 2004 it was :Asian Development Path:A Win-Win
Modality and Commitment
The Secretary-General of the Forum, Long Yongtu was
China's Vice-Minister for Trade who had led the thirteen year
long Chinese negotiations for entry into the WTO that fruitioned
in December 2001. He was also a member of the Chinese Mission at
UN and later a UN official. His vast experience was in action in
the congregation of the top functionaries of WEF, World Bank,
Asian Development Bank and the UNDP who have been prominent
speakers at the various sessions of the BFA conferences . As an
important representative of the Chinese government Long secured
the full participation and support of the top Chinese leadership
in BFA while at the same time bringing in the international
intstitutions. It is believed that the first Sec-Gen Tano Sri
Ajit Singh had faced problems of coordination with the Chinese
government.
The programmes at Boao reflected much care taken by the
Chinese about the Forum's character and diplomacy. In 2003 for
example, the Inaugural session had one political leader,
President Emomali Rakhmonov of Tajikistan and one business leader
from Japan, Jiro Nemoto. Rakhmonov not only brought a Central
Asian perspective into the conference, he called for united
efforts for reducing poverty and regional disparity to advance
peace and sustainable development in Asia . Nemoto referred to
Asian values and declared that economic development and human
development are two wheels of a cart; if one is weak the cart
will be stuck.
At the 2003 conference, a cautious affirmation of Asian
solidarity was the thread running throught the key note speeches
of President Musharaf of Pakistan, Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong
of Singapore and the Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao. Musharaf who
began his state visit to China from Boao urged the Conference to
find out ways to integrate South Asia and Central Asia with the
dynamic economic region of East and Southeast Asia so that Asian
prosperity was not limited to pockets of growth in the Continent
.Goh Chok Tong gave a celebratory account of ASEAN's steady
progress and charted out possibilities of further cooperation
among the ten member states together with their dialogue
partners. Formation of a Free Trade Area of ASEAN with China in
2010, with India in 2011 and Japan in 2012 ,the ASEAN Economic
Community by 2020 and the emerging trends in the economic
cooperation between them figured prominently throughout the
Conference. ASEAN's experience in regional integration, China's
economic success, Japan's trend of recovery and India's IT
industry were some of the strengths on which Asian cooperation
can be designed.
The highlight of the third conference in April 2004 was
Hu Jintao's speech in which he spoke of Asia's rejuvination and
spelt out how China's development could contribute to it. " A
developing China generates important opportunities for Asia',
said Hu, referring to the growth of China as the third largest
importer in the world, with $272 billion imports from the rest of
Asia and Chinese investment expanding fast in Asia. Hu Jintao
presented a much wider vision of Asian cooperation than trade and
investment by presenting a five point approach:i). Enhancing
political trust and good-neighbourliness based on the Five
Principles of Peaceful Coexistence, ii)expanding and deepening
bilateral economic cooperation, iii) accelerating regional
economic integration, iv) promoting cultural interaction and
personnel exchanges and v) facilitating security dialogue and
military-to-military exchanges and setting up a military security
dialogue in Asia. The fourth Conference in April 2005 was
somewhat in a low key as it was too close to the Golden jubilee
of the Bandung Conference. Yet China’s third ranking leader
Jia Qinglin addressed the meeting. India’s official
participation remained limited to its Ambassador though the
Deputy National Security Advisor too attended. While the industry
was represented by the FICCI delegation the business circles as a
whole were still not familiar with this emerging Asian
forum.
The BFA was still in a preliminary stage of Asian
economic dialogue. As Sec-Gen Long Yongtu put it , though it was
developing in the right direction it had a long distance to
traverse before it became an influential forum in world economic
affairs. Governments of Asian countries had not taken enough
interest in it. The organisers still depended more on the retired
leaders and a few other leaders from countries friendly to China.
Government of India sent its Ambassador from Beijing to Boao only
in 2003. Many governments treat it as a Chinese initiative rather
than a multilateral initiative. However, BFA is slowly growing
into an active forum for exchange of ideas and launching of new
initiatives at the Asian level.
The effort to set up an Asian Development Fund has made
steady progress. China, Japan, South Korea and ASEAN have
contributed $1 billion to set up a fund for Asian Bonds .
Discussion on creating an Asian currency – an Asian Dollar
invited considerable attention in the last conference at Boao. It
was argued that such a currency zone will protect the Asian
economies from the fluctuation of the US Dollar or the Euro,
stabilise the prices of Asian bonds and facilitate the coming of
a zero tariff zone .
Asian Regional Cooperation
– Issues of People’s Rights
At Boao Hu Jintao spoke of the need for bringing about
"five balances" in China's development strategy – a theme
frequently touched by him during the first year of his leadership
of China. In course of economic growth China must aim at
achieving a balance between I) urban and rural development, ii)
different regions of China ( the prosperous coastal area and the
backward Western area), iii) social and economic development (
reducing social inequality and promoting human development), iv)
man and nature ( economy and ecology ) and domestic development
and open door foreign policy. 28 This should be read
together with the recent amendments to the Chinese Constitution
which has added a provision guaranteeing Human Rights and also
adding the building of ' political civilisation' along with
material and spiritual civilisation. In other words, democratic
rights are beginning to be recognized as important goals together
with economic development .
In India too the new government of the United
Progressive Alliance led by Manmohan Singh has adopted a Common
Minimum Programme in May 2004 which focuses on the human and
social dimensions of economic reforms. It was widely recognized
that the National Democratic Government led by Vajpayee lost in
the elections because its reform agenda did not meet the demands
of the farmers and the vast masses of the poor. "Reforms with a
human face" seems to have arrived as a new mantra of the new
generation of the reform leaders in Asian countries. Resistance
to anti-people reforms was the theme of the World Social Forum
and the Mumbai Resistance in January 2004 in Mumbai where social
movement groups had gathered to register their protest against
imperialist globalisation.
But Asian regional forums have yet to show adequate
commitment to these issues. The SAARC Summit in Islamabad adopted
the Social Charter which gave a positive signal to the people of
South Asia. ASEAN – EU Dialogue periodically takes up human
rights issues as well. If NGOs and people's democratic
organizations take the initiative and increase their pressure on
the governments to pursue the goals of alleviating poverty,
promoting rights of women and other oppressed groups and
conceding autonomy to the regions then there can be substantive
progress in the region. Economic growth with equity and justice
for regions and groups is what the Panchsheel vision
implies.
The spatial perception of Asia remains partial if not
conflicting. Because of the economic successes East and Southeast
Asia currently dominante the perception of Asia. South Asia is
the region of poverty and conflict and therefore is often not
given prominence. Central Asia still does not figure prominently
in the consciousness of the policy-makers in many countries
despite its rich natural resources. The oil rich West Asia is the
hot bed of war of aggression, and resistance. It has been poorly
represented even in Boao Forum. Actually all these regions have
legitimate space in the historical notion of Asia. The literature
and culture of each of these regions reflects all the others. It
should be recalled that Nehru's vision of Asia encompassed all
these regions. In the new context the old idea that each region
would have a leader country has lost its relevance. Even though
countries like India, China and Japan and others may play key
role in providing the impetus for Asian cooperation their
economic, technological and professional resources have to be
used so as to create mutual confidence among the smaller
countries. Or else countries would be once again divided into
cold war like formations. This is where the Panchsheel framework
of "equality and mutual benefit" has become crucial to regional
cooperation.29
Asian regional cooperation has sometimes been hostage to
bilateral disputes among countries. Recent developments show that
people's initiatives create strong popular pressures forcing
regimes to take peace initiatives as in South Asia. Larger
regional and continental formations would facilitate
confidence-building measures. Cold war approach is fast giving in
to new multilateral multi- track initiatives because of the
rising democratic consciousness in all countries.
Multilaterism is a democratic idea among nations just as
federalism is within a nation when each unit respects other
units, levels and forms of multilateralism. Any attempt to
counterpose multilateralism against globalism on the one hand and
national sovereignty on the other takes a narrow view of
multilateralism. Today all forms of cooperation reinforce each
other. Bilateralism contributes to multilateralism and
multilateralism creates conditions for fair and just global
formations.30 The globalisers’ claim that all
regional formations are discriminatory and inefficient does not
carry much force any longer as the initiatives for multilateral
cooperation in various parts of the world continue to grow.
Conventional state theory as well as international relations
based on the theory of balance of power viewed multilateralism
only in terms of power formations to counter one another. In the
emerging world of self-determination international formations
have to be based on "equality and mutual benefit". Imposition of
a regime by a dominant power is bound to meet with resistance.
That is the trend in the twenty first centry that reflects the
Panchsheel vision.
Accordingly an alternative concept of security is slowly
emerging that focuses on people’s security or human
security that combines economic, political and social conditions
of self-realisation of individuals and groups. More and more
arenas of collective and cooperative efforts aimed at promoting
peace and democracy in world scale will respond to the multiple
urges for self-assertion in the contemporary world. In this
process the role of governments, civil society organisations,
social movement groups and academics is equally important. The
Panchsheel vision no doubt is an important framework for
developing bilateral relations between any two countries. But its
origin and development have made it much more than that. It is an
alternative perspective on international relations and global
political and economic order. It is at the same time a vision
that entails external as well as internal policies aiming at
creating a just and equitable world. If Panchsheel is perceived
not only as a framework for bilateral relations but as a "code of
global conduct" as K R Narayanan put itxxxi or an idea that
should pave the way for " a federation of friendly interdependent
nations" as Indian Foreign Minister Natwar Singh said at the
golden Jubilee celebration of Panchsheelxxxii, then the efforts
for regional cooperation and in fact all initiatives for
multilateral cooperation have to address issues of people’s
rights as much as achieving economic gains for all.*
* Este artículo se encuentra bajo la licencia
Creative Commons.
Asian cooperation and visions of panchsheel and bandung. En
publicacion: Alternativas á globalização:
pôtencias emergentes e os novos caminhos da modernidade.
Manoranjan Mohanty UNESCO, Organización de las Naciones Unidas
para la
Educación, la Ciencia y
la Cltura. 2005.
Acceso al texto
completo: http://bibliotecavirtual.clacso.org.ar/ar/libros/reggen/pp04.pdf
**Earlier versions of this paper were presented at the
APRN Workshop on Asian Regional Cooperation and Human Rights at
Subic Bay, The Philippines on 4-5 June 2004 and the CENESEAS
Forum, OKD Institute in Guwahati on 10-12 September 2004 and
included in the Chinese volume on Panchsheel edited by Rong Ying
on behalf of the China Institute of International Studies,
Beijing (2004) as well as in Panchsheel and the Future edited by
C V Ranganathan ( New Delhi: Sanskriti for Institute of Chinese
Studies, 2005 )
8. Manoranjan Mohanty, "Social Movements in Creative
Society", in M.Mohanty and Partha Mukherji with Olle Tornquist (
eds), People’s rights ( New Delhi: Sage,1998)
9. Pancha Shila : Its Meaning and History – a
documentary study ( New Delhi : Lok Sabha Secretariat, 1955) The
five fundamental precepts of morality mentioned in early Buddhist
scriptures are: I) refraining from injury to livinf beings, ii)
not taking what is not given, iii) refraining from sexual
immorality, iv) refraining from falsehood and v) refraining from
liquor that engender slothfulness. P.2 President Soekarno Five
Principles underlying the foundation of a free Indonesian
republic were: nationalism, internationalism, conferring (
Consultation) , prosperity ( Development ) and belief in God
(Morality).
10. Jasjit Singh (ed) , India, China and Panchsheel (
New Delhi: Institute for Defense Studies and Analyses,
1995)
11. Mira Sinha-Bhattacharjea, China World and India (
New Delhi: Sanskriti, 2001)
12. Manoranjan Mohanty,"Humanitarian Intervention in an
Unequal World : A View from Below ", Social Science Probings (
Winter 2003)
13. Declaration on the new Asian African Strategic
Partnership, Bandung , 23 April 2005, Djakarta
14. Manoranjan Mohanty, Self as Centre in the Twenty
First Century, China Report Vol 38 No 1 ( January 2002), see also
"Creative Self and its Enemies", Perople’s Resistance (
December 2002)
15. Hun Sen, Speech at the Boao Forum for Asia,
People’s Daily on line ( 24 April 2004)
16. Bandung Declaration, 1955
17. Popular perceptions as to what constitutes Asia
vary. For the Californians in US Asia is basically East Asia. For
the Japanese it is East and Southeast Asia. In postIndependence
India when the founders of the Indian School of International
Studies designed Asian Studies under the inspiration of Prime
Minister Nehru in 1955 there was perhaps the first comprehensive
post-colonial grasp of Asian continental space consisting of
South Asia, Southeast Asia, East Asia, Central Asia and West
Asia. This replaced the colonial nomenclature of Far East, Middle
East and Near East – as seen from the West European
capitals.
18. On the various perspectives on Asian identity see
Philip Yuen-sang Leung, " In Search of an Asian Identity" in N N
Vohra ( ed.) India and East Asia : Culture and Society ( New
Delhi : Shipra and IIC,2002 )
19. South Asia Development and Cooperation Report 2004 (
New Delhi : Research and Information system on Non-Aligned and
other Developing Countries – RIS, 2004) It presents
valuable data and concludes that the region may find it difficult
to achieve the UN Millennium Development Goals. P.100.
20. The Hindu ( New Delhi,31 July 2004) The meeting was
given wide publicity in India unlike in earlier
occasions.
21. The Nation ( Bangkok, 1 August 2004)
22. Amit Baruah,, "Mekong-Ganga Cooperation- An
Assessment", paper presented at the CENESEAS Forum in Guwahat (
10-12 September 2004)
23. The SCO abides by the following principles:
adherence to the UN Charter, respect for each other’s
independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity,
non-interference in each other’s internal affairs, mutual
non-use or threat of use of force, equality among all member
states , settlement of all questions through consultation,
non-alignment and no directing against any other country or
organization, opeing to the outside world and willingness to
carry out all forms of dialogues, exchanges and and cooperation
with other countries and relevant international and regional
organizations. Beijing Review, vol. 47 no.30 ( 29 July 2004 )
p.16
24. ibid. It was believed that the organization decided
not to admit new members for the time being though it is known
that both India and Pakistan had indicated their interest in
joining SCO. There was a view that Afhanistan had a special
relevance, but the situation there did not warrant it at the
moment.
25. Eurasia Daily Monitor, vol
2. No. 130 ( 6 July 2005 ) India’s joining SCO as an
Observer was interpreted as the result of the political
breakthrough during the visit of the Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao
to India in april 2005. It was speculated that this was in return
for a similar possible status for China at the SAARC. That Russia
was strongly supporting India’s case while Pakistan was the
favourite of China for the SCO linkage was not the whole
story.
26. Chinese Premier’s Address to Asian Cooperation
Dialogue, Sina/English/22June2004
27. This discussion is partly based on my personal
observations since I represented the Institute of Chinese Studies
which is an initial member of BFA at its preparatory meeting in
2000 and at the second annual conference in 2003.
28. Hu Jintao’s address to the opening session of
the BFA on 24 April 2004 in
peopledaily.com.cn/200404/24
29. One of the most active Asian leaders for Asian
integration Fidel Ramos seems to reflect this perspective though
he does not directly refer to Panchsheel . See his address to the
conference in Tokyo on 3 June 2004 on "The future of Asia" in
Manila Bulletin 9 June 2004
30. China was one of the early initiators of
multilateral cooperation as part of its reforms and opening up.
India slowly realized the significance and began to take active
interest in the late 1990s. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh
reflected this outlook when he said at the BIMST-EC Summit in
July 2004: " I would like to reaffirm India’s firm
political commitment to regional cooperation for mutual
benefit…"meaindia.nic.in/speech/2004/07/31
31. Revitalising Panchsheel, The Hindu ( New Delhi ,20
July 2004) xxxii meaindia.nic.in/speech/2004/06/ 29 Manoranjan
Mohanty is Co-Chairperson & Hon. Fellow, Institute of Chinese
Studies, CSDS and retired Professor of Political Science and
Director , Developing Countries Research Centre, University of
Delhi Tel/fax 91-11-2399
2166 e-mail: dr_mohanty[arroba]yahoo.co
ics[arroba]ndf.vsnl.net.in 15
Manoranjan Mohanty