|
World Watch
India can become the nucleus for Asian unity
By MD Nalapat
Just as the EU looks first to Europe before meeting any need, Asia needs to do the same and look within our continent for solutions, rather than look only for remedies from afar. It is a mark of the failure of Asian statespersons to understand the historical imperative of Asian involvement in Asian affairs that Afghanistan is today in the situation it is, a client state wracked by insurgency, rather than be a free partner in a united Asia that collectively works to reduce extremism and promote progress.
Asia can rise fastest only if it rises in a more coordinated fashion. We must not allow in our continent a repeat of the same bloodstained road that Europe took till 1945. We must regard the "impossible"-Asian unity-as achievable and learn from the glorious example of Europe which has today escaped from the divisions of the past into a newfound unity that places Europe first.
ALTHOUGH scholars in Asia consider themselves to be experts in Geopolitics-the science of tapping into the synergy between nations-the reality is that the profession in Asia is slave to concepts that have been designed elsewhere and lack relevance in our continent. As a result the policy conclusions of Asian geopolitics experts often serve the interests of a few outside powers rather than the countries that together form the immense ancient continent of Asia.
The continent that is the home of all the great religions of the world- Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism Shintoism and Daoism. The continent that was once the world's knowledge powerhouse, yet which is today contributing less than 9 per cent to the total of major patents and discoveries worldwide. The continent Asia that five centuries ago accounted for 83 per cent of the world's total output, yet today houses more than five hundred million people living in desperate poverty.
Although there is increased talk these days of the "Asian Century", the reality is that the countries of Asia have yet to tap even a small fraction of the synergies that are possible, were they to coordinate their policies in a way that approximates the unity found in the European Union. Should there be an outside interference in any part of the European Union, or any effort to affect the interests of even a small European country, the entire alliance responds to it in a united manner. The components of the EU may differ-and even bicker-amongst themselves, but on core interests vis-a-vis any country in Asia, they are united. In contrast, should a problem crop up in the Middle East, South East, Central, South and East Asia would devote far less attention to it than would North America or Europe. The countries of Asia have been taught to regard themselves as a divided bunch of subcontinents, none of which has any organic relation to the other, much less to the continent as a whole. This has made it easy for outside powers to influence situations in Asia, by focussing on a few parts at a time, without any interference from other parts of Asia to their intrusion.
It is because almost all geopolitical concepts come from outside Asia that the countries of the continent have been conditioned to think of themselves as being separated into different segments, none of which believes it has much affinity with the others. Such a fractionating of Asia is responsible for the fact that almost every country in Asia has closer economic and even cultural ties with faraway countries than with each other. West Asia is taught to regard itself as different from South Asia, even though both share several core elements in culture,and have a two-millenial tradition of working together. South East Asia is told that it is a unique subset, far removed from both South Asia as well as East Asia, although both India and China have played a significant role in developing the composite culture of that part of the world. Central Asia has been similarly conditioned to believe itself a separate unit, whereas in fact, it has close cultural ties to other Asian regions.
The populations within most Asian regions have long been conditioned by outside scholars to regard nearby populations as being less relevant to them than the populations in North America or West Asia. Take the case of two giant neighbours, India and China. In both countries there is far better knowledge of even the smaller countries in Europe than there is about each other. Chinese films are almost never shown in Indian theatres, except during film festivals, while Hollywood is much, much more visible in China's theatres than is Bollywood. This despite the fact that it is Bollywood that is geographically and culturally far closer to China than Hollywood.
This artificial segmentation of Asia into zones treated as mutually exclusive is in contrast to the bunching-together of the European states in scholarly discussions when the reality is that Poland and Germany-for example-are much more different in culture than for example South India is from South China. In the southern parts of both China and India, rice is the common diet and there are several other similarities, including in architecture and in societal relations. Both regions have strong family values and respect learning and tolerance for multiple faiths. There are multiple similarities in architecture. The myriad mosaic of faith in China and India is in contrast to the monochrome quality of religious faith in countries such as Poland where only a particular form of belief is encouraged by the state and others are practically non-existent. Asia has had no event comparable to the horrors of the Holocaust, when the annihilation took place of the overwhelming majority of Europe's innocent and talented Jewish populations, besides the killings of other groups, such as Roma in Europe and Communists in the USSR.
And unlike the long history of uneasy relations between Germany and Poland or between Spain and the UK (for example), India and China have only had a single four-week conflict (in 1962) despite four millenia of contact. It is a testimony to the power of non-Asian geopolitical scholarship that it is regarded even within Asia as natural for Europeans to be united, while it is seen as natural for Asians to be divided. The fact is that Asian unity is inevitable and India needs to work harder to make it happen
Asian countries can and will overcome the obstacles to unity that have been created from outside. The first step needed is to create a Council of Asia which has as its members each of the countries of the continent, except Israel and Turkey,both of which belong to Europe rather than to Asia, but will join the EU on that faraway date when that grouping is ready to admit European states that do not have Christian majorities. In contrast to the EU, which has a single religion that is dominant everywhere, the countries within Asia have multiple faiths, as befits the modern multi-cultural, globalised world.
Only Asian countries should form part of the Council, which would hold summits at annual intervals, official-level meetings at half-yearly intervals and experts meetings each quarter, so as to identify and operationalise significant steps towards tapping into continental synergy. In this context it needs to be emphasised that Russia too should be seen as an Asian country and invited to join the Council, as the bulk of the territory of the Russian Federation lies within Asia. As a first step towards long-term union the school curricula in each country within Asia needs to devote at least as much attention to the other Asian countries as they do to countries in Europe and North America. And rather than go farther away, college students need to be encouraged to visit other Asian countries, thereby recognising the reality that intra-Asia relations are key to the future success of the continent. Tourist and cultural links need to be encouraged through a phased relaxation of visa procedures and easier entry for the cultural offerings of other Asian countries. Joint projects need to be taken up, such as fusion in music and in the movies. Gradually the artificial walls that separate Asian from Asian need to get torn down.
Air travel within Asia needs to be boosted while plans for an Asia-wide network of rail and road needs to be launched. In time, it needs to be considered whether it is feasible to construct a tunnel under the Suez Canal, so that rail and road traffic can move continously from Asia to Africa via Egypt. These may seem like an unrealistic ideas but even the Suez Canal was "unrealistic" when it was first attempted in the 1860s. To take another example from history, there would have been many within the Imperial Court in China who doubted the ability of Admiral Zheng He to go around the globe, when the Ming Emperors gave support for such epic voyages during 1405 and 1433. Yet the admiral led a fleet of more than 300 ships to faraway countries. Of course, it is another matter that the Hongxi Emperor did not take the advantage of naval power, unlike the way the much smaller navies of Spain, Portugal, France and Britain,who did. Today, our generation is still refusing to take advantage of the immense synergies within Asia, and are focussing our attention on the far rather than the near.
It is unfortunate that there been no effort till now to set up pan-Asian institutions such as a Monetary Authority that would encourage intra-Asian banking and finance. An authority that would promote the common use of Asian currencies within the continent, rather than rely on outside paper. Or a chain of Disaster Management Centres that would be tasked with providing assistance during times of catastrophe. Or an Asian Centre for Disease Control that would work to reduce pandemics and find cures for common infections. Because of the lack of effort to tap into the immense synergy within Asia the entire continent is playing a distant second fiddle to Europe and to North America in innovation and technology development, despite the extensive qualities of its own people. The whole world needs to applaud the people of Europe and North America for their many contributions towards knowledge, but the world would be a much better place were Asia to replicate such efforts rather than stand aside as has been happening for nearly four centuries.
Unlike the rise of Europe which saw the enslavement of numerous countries and consequent misery to native populations in Asia, Africa, the Americas and Australia the rise of Asia needs to be a win-win solution for the entire world. This needs peace and for this to be promoted, there is need for all Asian countries to jointly commit to the peaceful resolution of all pending disputes between each other. An ‘Asian No War Pact’ needs to be implemented, including between countries that have repeatedly gone to war with each other in the past. For example, both India and Pakistan need to join in an Asian No War Pact, a treaty that would remove the threat of military force and thereby promote the harmony essential for rapid economic development and social progress.
It needs to be emphasised that "war" denotes both the conventional as well as the asymmetric.
Although the present share of Asia in the creation of advanced knowledge is small in relation to the giant share of Europe and the Americas, yet this can be expanded through partnerships between different Asian countries. This columnist has in the past pointed out the benefits of a Japan-Russia-China-India technological partnership to produce aircraft. Other desirable pairings include a Knowledge Partnership between the Middle East and Central Asia on the one hand and India and the Philippines on the other, to set-up schools and other training facilities to impart proficiency in the international link language, English. In like fashion, India and China can combine to help set-up medical research centres and treatment facilities. There can also be considerable (as yet untapped) synergy between Indian and Chinese traditional medicine. More the pity that these two systems are functioning in isolation from each other
Just as the EU looks first to Europe before meeting any need, Asia needs to do the same and look within our continent for solutions, rather than look only for remedies from afar. It is a mark of the failure of Asian statespersons to understand the historical imperative of Asian involvement in Asian affairs that Afghanistan is today in the situation it is, a client state wracked by insurgency, rather than be a free partner in a united Asia that collectively works to reduce extremism and promote progress
Asia can rise fastest only if it rises in a more coordinated fashion. We must not allow in our continent a repeat of the same bloodstained road that Europe took till 1945. We must regard the "impossible"-Asian unity-as achievable and learn from the glorious example of Europe which has today escaped from the divisions of the past into a newfound unity that places Europe first. The EU with its laser focus on itself has shown the way that Asia needs to take if the different countries within the continent are to collectively create the New Asian Millenium.
(The writer is former editor of Matrubhumi and Times of India.)
|
