Revision summary
India–Pakistan conflict is the structural political cause. SAARC consensus turns that dyad into a regional freeze. Asymmetry and China-as-hedge weaken a single market bargain. SAFTA holes and infrastructure gaps keep official trade thin. ASEAN and BIMSTEC show that geography is not destiny; politics is.
Model answer
Introduction
South Asia trades little with itself, builds few regional public goods, and lets SAARC stall. Least integrated is a relative claim against ASEAN or the EU. The causes are political first, then economic and geographic.
Body
The political lock
- India–Pakistan conflict, including Kashmir, nuclearisation, and terror incidents, makes consensus in SAARC a veto machine.
- 2016’s cancelled Islamabad summit after Uri is a symbol, not the only freeze.
- Asymmetry: India is most of the region’s GDP and military weight. Neighbours fear a market that is a hegemon. India fears a club that equals a small State with a large one.
Why ASEAN looks different
- ASEAN found a way to sit together after intra-mural war memories. South Asia never buried 1947–71.
- Extra-regional China offers smaller States a hedge, which thins the incentive to build a tight South Asian market.
- BIMSTEC and BBIN grew as work-arounds, which itself proves SAARC’s failure as the integration vehicle.
Economic and physical barriers
- Sensitive lists under SAFTA, non-tariff barriers, and poor last-mile rail and road keep official intra-trade thin.
- Energy grids and inland waterways exist in pieces, not as a region-wide system.
- Informal trade and third-country routing (often via Dubai or Singapore) show demand that policy blocks.
Identity and people
- Visas, distrust, and communal politics slow people integration even where language and kinship run across borders.
- Cross-border ethnic conflict, as with Rohingya and north-east insurgencies, securitises mobility.
Theoretical reading
- Karl Deutsch’s security community needs trust. South Asia has a security complex, in Barry Buzan’s sense, centred on India–Pakistan.
- Functionalists hoped trade would spill over. Politics here blocks the first spill.
What “least” does not mean
- Some pairs — India–Bhutan, a warmer India–Bangladesh trade patch — integrate more. The regional average remains low.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD IP[India-Pakistan veto] --> S[SAARC stall] AS[Indian asymmetry] --> S S --> L[Low intra-trade] NTB[NTBs visas] --> L L --> LI[Least integrated region] BIM[BIMSTEC bypass] -.partial.-> LI
Conclusion
South Asia is least integrated because India–Pakistan rivalry vetoes SAARC, asymmetry breeds fear, and non-tariff and visa walls keep markets apart. ASEAN’s process success is the foil. BIMSTEC is the bypass, not a full substitute for a South Asian economy.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
How do the constituent states influence the foreign policy making process in India?
Next question in the 2021 paper (Q7). View answer →
-
Would a better road network integrate South Asia?
It would help. Without a political floor, roads become security files. Hardware is not the first missing piece.
-
Is India to blame as the large State?
Delivery delays and market access matter. The Pakistan veto and extra-regional hedges are not only Indian sins.
PYQ trend
When UPSC asked this
Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.
-
2024 · Q6(b) · PSIR GS 2 · 15 marks
Does the idea of the 21st century as 'Asian century' continue to remain feasible given the growing friction between India and China? -
2023 · Q5(b) · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
What are the reasons for lack of 'regionness' in South Asia? -
2023 · Q5(d) · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
Why do ethnic conflicts and insurgencies continue to remain major impediments to regional co-operation in South Asia? -
2022 · Q5(b) · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
Discuss the ways and means to realise greater economic co-operation among the Member States of South Asia. -
2022 · Q5(c) · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
Discuss the steps required to realise hydro-co-operation between India and Bangladesh. -
2022 · Q7(b) · PSIR GS 2 · 15 marks
What are the implications of 'Look-East' Policy on the north-eastern region of India? -
2021 · Q5(a) · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
Discuss the strategic implications of India's Look East Policy transforming into Act East Policy. -
2021 · Q8(a) · PSIR GS 2 · 20 marks
Relations between India and Russia are rooted in history, mutual trust and mutually beneficial cooperation. Discuss
More from this paper
Q1(a) · UPSC Mains 2021 · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
Discuss the political economy approach to the comparative analysis of politics.
Comparative Politics
Political economy joins the study of power with the study of wealth. Marx and Wallerstein locate States in production and in a hierarchical world-economy. Almond’s functions describe roles; they do not explain ownership and dependence. Alavi’s overdeveloped State is a comparative PE thesis about post-colonial bureaucracy. The method compares markets, classes, and external ties, not only constitutions.
Q1(b) · UPSC Mains 2021 · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
"Political parties and pressure groups are sine qua non of democracy." Comment.
Politics of Representation and Participation
Schumpeterian democracy is a party contest for the vote. Almond split aggregation to parties and articulation to groups. Dahl’s polyarchy needs organised opposition, which parties supply. Groups carry specialised claims between elections. Mere organisation is not democracy; pluralism and contest are.
Q1(c) · UPSC Mains 2021 · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
"Marxist approach to the study of international relations has lost its relevance in the post-cold war era." Comment.
Approaches to the Study of International Relations
The USSR’s fall discredited State socialism, not every Marxist question. Waltzian polarity does not explain core–periphery production. Wallerstein and Cox remain usable after 1991. WTO, finance, and a capitalist China keep class and hierarchy on the agenda. Relevance is critique of order, not a second Soviet Union.
Toppers' copies
Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.