Peace and Security Review, Vol.1 No. 2 - International Centre for ...

84 Peace and Security Review Vol.1, No.2, Second Quarter, 2008
hostility over Kashmir dispute, ethno-separatist movement in Sri Lanka and
dispute over Ganges water and tribal insurgency in areas that were contiguous.
This widening rift between states helped in a very direct way to overshadow
the common cultural and civilisation bond that South Asia remained in
inheritance of and blocked all ways of achieving a common value that would
have a binding role.
Asymmetry manifests in the governance of South Asian countries. The
salience of a regime with open and liberal economy (Kindleberger, 1976) is
crucial in curbing out a strong independent region as the classics of international
relations confirm. Most South Asian states apart from India lack “any
established bourgeoisie hegemony” (Cox, 1987: 218) and hence remains
politically vulnerable to non-democratic and dictatorial rule, demonstrated
in the history of Pakistan and Bangladesh. India’s deep-rooted liberal tradition,
embedded in its political system has given leverage to India in contrast to
others. This liberal order upon which India’s politics and the location of
power remains embedded, favourably allows it to develop a political order
in which politics replaces confrontation. Military dictatorial rule endemic to
Pakistan has put an enormous constrain on the process of democratic changes
in Pakistan. Underpinned by a long spell of military rule in its earlier history,
democracy in Bangladesh has faltered, and the growth of political participation
and representation, accountability and transparency remain suffocated.
Ethnic issues, which remain unresolved in Sri Lanka, have also led the
country to a long drawn civil war between the Tamils and the Singhalese, de
facto dividing the nation into two parts. Nepal’s new found democracy
remains immature and uncertain and Bhutan where monarchical system still
prevails, remains politically tensed by simmering disagreement between
supporters of liberal democracy and the rule of the king. This asymmetry
between democracy and non-democratic regime tells upon the management
of terrorism and violence regionally; in signing treaties of non intervention
between Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, and make South Asia
reliant on various unknown and contesting factors.
IV. ASYMMETRY AND THE HOBBLED REGIONAL
ORGANISATIONS
It however seems paradoxical that despite deep asymmetry no hegemonic
power has come to exist in South Asia. This has significantly obstructed the
possibility of initiating and maintaining economic and political institutions,
designed to deliver collective good. While India’s economic, geographic and
socio-cultural preponderance has been beyond doubt; such overwhelming
presence has not resulted in any hegemonic role for her to exercise. Its long
Vol.1, No.2 2008 pp.77-93