Revision summary
SAARC needs minimum trust; the Charter's ban on bilateral disputes does not save a summit after a terror strike. Parliament 2001, Mumbai 2008, Pathankot 2016 and Uri 2016 are Indian examples of cross-border attacks linked to Pakistan-based groups. Afghanistan and other members have accused Pakistan of shaping their internal security politics through proxies. India's boycott of the 2016 Islamabad summit, joined by others, showed SAARC cannot meet in that climate. Work then shifts to BIMSTEC and bilateral corridors until terror and interference stop.
Model answer
Introduction
SAARC was set up in 1985 so that seven (later eight) South Asian states could work on trade, food, energy and people-to-people ties. It needs a minimum of trust. Cross-border terrorism against India, and Pakistan's habit of using militants and political levers inside neighbours, destroy that trust. Summits then become a stage for boycott rather than a table for the South Asian Free Trade Area.
Body
Why SAARC needs a peace floor
- Article I of the SAARC Charter lists welfare, growth and collective self-reliance. Article X says bilateral disputes shall not be discussed in SAARC. In practice, a bilateral security collapse still empties the hall, because leaders will not sit with a sponsor of violence against their cities.
- SAFTA, the SAARC Development Fund, and energy or motor-vehicle ideas all need open borders and banks. Terror and interference close borders and freeze bank channels.
Cross-border terrorist attacks in India — examples
- The attack on the Indian Parliament in December 2001, traced to Pakistan-based groups, froze official talk and showed that the core of the Indian State could be hit from across the frontier.
- The Mumbai attacks of 26 November 2008, carried out by Lashkar-e-Taiba operators who came by sea, killed civilians and foreign guests. Pakistan's tardy and partial prosecution of the handlers remains a running wound. No regional club can look normal while that file is open.
- The Pathankot airbase attack in January 2016 struck a military installation after a brief opening in India–Pakistan talk. It taught New Delhi that a 'dialogue plus terror' track is not a stable SAARC path.
- The Uri army-camp attack in September 2016 led India to pull out of the Islamabad SAARC Summit. Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Bhutan also declined to attend. That is the Charter meeting the facts: a summit in the accused capital was not tenable.
- Smaller but repeated infiltration, fidayeen strikes in Jammu and Kashmir, and the use of groups listed by the UN as terrorist entities, keep the Line of Control and the international border hot. SAARC's 'people-to-people' clause cannot outrun a funeral list.
Pakistan's interference in internal affairs of members — examples
- Afghanistan: Pakistan has long been accused by Kabul of sheltering the Taliban leadership and of using militant proxies to shape Afghan politics. An Afghanistan that cannot trust Islamabad will not invest political capital in a Pakistan-hosted SAARC.
- Bangladesh: past decades saw alleged ISI links with extremist outfits and, in older years, shelter for north-east Indian insurgents. Even after a warmer Dhaka–Delhi line, any revival of that pattern would again split the club.
- Nepal and the Maldives have seen political classes complain of intelligence and religious-extremist influence from Pakistani soil or from groups that find space there. Whether each charge is proved in a court, the pattern of distrust is itself a SAARC problem.
- Inside Pakistan's own polity, the civil-military imbalance and the use of jihad as a tool toward India and Afghanistan make a 'good neighbour' pledge hard to believe.
- The SAARC Anti-Terrorism mechanism and the SAARC Terrorist Offences convention exist on paper. They do not work if one member is the safe base for the listed groups.
How this is not conducive to SAARC's future
- Summits become irregular. Without a summit rhythm, the secretariat in Kathmandu is a post office, not a driver.
- India, the largest economy, shifts work to BIMSTEC, BBIN and bilateral connectivity with Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan and Sri Lanka. That is rational, but it leaves SAARC as the empty chair.
- Pakistan's isolation inside the eight makes consensus (SAARC's rule) a veto for the very state accused of bad faith.
- Trade through Wagah and attari stays thin; informal and third-country routes rise. Regional production chains, the real prize of SAARC, never form.
- Smaller members fear taking sides. The organisation then produces declarations on poverty while the security file, which the Charter pretends is 'bilateral', actually decides attendance.
Explain, with a limit
- Not every SAARC failure is Pakistan. India–Pakistan structural rivalry, weak intra-regional trade for tariff and logistics reasons, and India's size fear among some elites also bind the club.
- The quoted statement is still accurate as a proximate cause of the 2016-type collapse: terror and interference make the next summit politically impossible.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD T[Cross-border terror on India] --> Trust[SAARC trust collapse] I[Pakistan interference in members] --> Trust Trust --> Sum[Summit boycott 2016] Sum --> Alt[BIMSTEC BBIN bilaterals] Ex[Parliament Mumbai Pathankot Uri] --> T
Conclusion
SAARC cannot have a future as a working economic club while Pakistan-based groups hit Indian cities and camps, and while Islamabad is seen to play in the politics and militancy of Afghanistan and others. Parliament 2001, Mumbai 2008, Pathankot and Uri 2016, and the cancelled Islamabad summit are the examples. Until terror is ended and interference stops, India and several neighbours will keep SAARC on hold and build around it.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
What are the aims and objectives of the McBride Commission of the UNESCO? What is India's position on these?
Next question in the 2016 paper (Q20). View answer →
-
Why did other countries join India in skipping the 2016 Islamabad summit?
Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Bhutan also declined. They shared the view that a summit could not be business-as-usual after Uri and amid wider charges about Pakistan's use of militants.
-
Does this mean SAARC is legally dead?
No. The Charter still exists and the secretariat still sits in Kathmandu. Politically the organisation is frozen until members can sit together without a live terror file.
PYQ trend
When UPSC asked this
Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.
-
2023 · Q9 · GS II · 10 marks
'Virus of Conflict is affecting the functioning of the SCO'. In the light of the above statement point out the role of India in mitigating problems. -
2022 · Q10 · GS II · 10 marks
Do you think that BIMSTEC is a parallel organisation like the SAARC ? What are the similarities and dissimilarities between the two ? How are Indian foreign policy objectives realized by forming this new organisation ? -
2021 · Q19 · GS II · 15 marks
Critically examine the aims and objectives of SCO. what importance does it hold for India. -
2020 · Q19 · GS II · 15 marks
'Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (QUAD)' is the transforming itself into a trade bloc from a military alliance, in present times - Discuss.
More from this paper
Q1 · UPSC Mains 2016 · GS II · 12 marks
Discuss the essentials of the 69th Constitutional Amendment Act and anomalies, if any, that have led to recent reported conflicts between the elected representatives and the institution of the Lieutenant Governor in the administration of Delhi. Do you think that this will give rise to a new trend in the functioning of the Indian federal politics?
Federal Structure and Devolution
The 69th Amendment inserted Article 239AA and created Delhi’s Assembly and Council of Ministers, excluding police, public order and land. Ministers aid and advise the Lieutenant Governor, but a difference may be sent to the President, which became the legal hook for file delays. The GNCTD Act, 1991, and control over services widened the gap between the voters’ government and the Administrator. The clash is structural to a national-capital Union Territory, not a new model for the States. Court cases and the 2021 Amendment show competitive, litigated federalism in Delhi rather than a nationwide federal mutation.
Q2 · UPSC Mains 2016 · GS II · 12 marks
To what extent is Article 370 of the Indian Constitution, bearing marginal note "temporary provision with respect to the State of Jammu and Kashmir", temporary? Discuss the future prospects of this provision in the context of Indian polity.
Indian Constitution
Article 370 is labelled temporary in Part XXI and can cease under clause (3), but the State Constituent Assembly never recommended that before it dissolved in 1957. Presidential orders, especially 1954, extended the Union Constitution while keeping the special gateway. Court practice treated the article as continuing, so it was temporary in name and durable in fact until 2019. C.O. 272, C.O. 273 and the J&K Reorganisation Act, 2019, made it inoperative; the 2023 judgment upheld that path and spoke of restoring statehood. Prospects in polity are now about statehood and ordinary federalism, not about reviving the old Article 370 as a living special status.
Q3 · UPSC Mains 2016 · GS II · 12 marks
"The Indian party system is passing through a phase of transition which looks to be full of contradictions and paradoxes." Discuss.
Governance and Policy
The party system moved from Congress dominance to coalitions and then to a new national majority, without erasing State-level regional parties. Presidential campaign style collides with parliamentary collective responsibility. The Tenth and 91st Amendments curb defection and cabinet size but strengthen high commands. National and state party labels under the Symbols Order do not match the mixed federal reality. The transition is therefore full of legal and political paradoxes, not a clean model change.
Toppers' copies
Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.