1 South Asia
Region, history, and politics
Defining and recognising a region is a challenging task. Scholars and political commentators have kept on defining and redefining a region according to their political and economic comforts. Highlighting the difficulty of having a definition of âregionâ, Hagerty and Hagerty (2005) finds that theoretically, everyone has their own vague idea about region whose construction and deconstruction, in reality, a much more volatile affair. For Hagerty and Hagerty, regions are ephemeral and intellectual constructs which keep on changing due to various factors such as technological developments, geopolitical events, demographic flows, scholarly fads and the numerous other dynamics that taken together, constitute human history.1 This challenge aptly explains the situation in South Asia which, over the centuries and decades, has passed through a number definition, construction, and reconstructions.
Whatever the current definition or imagination of the South Asia as a region, it has its genesis during the colonial India when the British established their imperial rule in the region. They set up a single authority and united it into a single territorial and political unit. Before the advent of East India Company, Emperor Ashoka (268â232 BCE) and a few Mughal rulers such as Akbar (1542â1605), Jehangir (1569â1627), Shahjahan (1592â1666), and Aurangzeb (1618â1707), more or less, united such a vast or a large part of the territory under a single authority. During colonial rule, the present India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh were part of British India. Afghanistan (became independent in 1919), Nepal, and Bhutan were indirectly part of British rule. Sri Lanka was under it till 1948 and Maldives, formally, attained independence from the British in 1965.
After the 1857 rebellion of soldiers, the British Crown officially took over rule of India from the East India Company. British India was divided into two major regions-areas which were directly held by the British, and the princely States ruled by the British Crown-friendly Indian princes. In 1947, the British India was partitioned between India and Pakistan while the then princely States had options to join either India or Pakistan. Almost all of those falling in the Indian territory joined India and those in Pakistan joined Pakistan. However, the border States such as Junagadh and Jammu & Kashmir (J&K) remained indecisive till the last days of British rule in India. Junagadh had Hindu majority population under the Muslim prince, Muhammad Mahabat Khan III, who wanted to join Pakistan but eventually the State became a part of India and the prince and most of the other Muslim power elites of Junagadh fled to Pakistan. J&K was a Muslim majority State with a Hindu king. In October 1947, after the tribal invasion backed by the Pakistani army, prince Hari Singh of J&K signed a treaty of accession with India. After the first Kashmir War (1947â48), two thirds territory of J&K came under India and Pakistan got control over a part of J&K while a small portion remains with China.
Different from J&K and Junagadh was the case of Hyderabad. Unlike Junagadh and the J&K, Hyderabad was not a border State between India and then newly created Pakistan. In Hyderabad, Muslims were in majority in the city while in rural areas it was Hindus who are more in number. As the Nizam of Hyderabad, Mir Osman Ali Khan wanted to remain either independent or join Pakistan, violence broke out between Nizamâs private militia called Razakars and those who wanted to join India. To control the situation, the Government of India launched âOperation Poloâ on 13 September 1948 against Nizam and forced his forces to surrender on 18 September 1948.2
At the international level, after the Partition, India emerged as successor State of British India. In 1947, it was thought that the Partition of British India settled all communal differences, disputes, and demands between the Hindus and Muslims, but it has not. Even after 71 years, Partition evokes political sentiments in India and Pakistan. Also, institutional memories of Partition-related communal violence is the major reason for enduring tensions between India and Pakistan.
Although it emerged on the basis of religion, Pakistan could not remain united for a long period, and in 1971 East Pakistan was liberated with political and military help from India. Initially, India and Bangladesh shared cordial relationships, but after the assassination of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman in August 1975, differences began to emerge between the two countries. It improved after Sheikh Hasina came into power in Bangladesh in 1996. Since 2008, Hasina has been in power.
India and Nepal share the same religious majority but differences between the two States remain over a number of political issues. People from India and Nepal have more close relations than between the two governments. Bhutan is regarded as the politically closest neighbour of India.
This chapter examines the bilateral political relationships India has with its respective South Asian riparian neighbours. This will help to understand the nature and reasons for water disputes between India and its riparian South Asian neighbours.
South Asia â a region
As a political construct, the member countries of South Asia Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) are considered as a part of South Asia. This is not only a political definition of the region, but social and cultural factors too have an important role in shaping it. The South Asian countries which share borders with India also share social linkages and cultural bonding with the people living on the borderlands and across the border. For example, Indian Tamils and Sri Lankan Tamils belong to same ethnic group, people from West Bengal and Bangladesh share cultural similarities and language, the Indian Punjab and Pakistani Punjab share language and other cultural traits, and marriages between people from India and Nepal is a common practice, especially from border regions. Unlike them, the other countries may share a border with one or the other South Asian countries, but none form any such close bonding. Myanmar is an exception. It was part of British India till 1935. Myanmar shares a border and culture with India and Bangladesh but is still not considered as a part of political South Asia but of South East Asia.
After the end of the Cold War (1948â1991) in 1991, in the age of globalisation, a new definition of region has emerged. Countries have tried to increase connectivity and find market so that they can reap economic gains. This speed of connectivity has been halted with rise of protectionism, which is entirely opposite to the values of globalisation. In the age of globalisation and race for market, concept of âextended neighbourhoodâ has emerged. For India this âextended neighbourhoodâ stretches from the Suez Canal to the South China Sea, and includes within it West Asia, the Gulf, Central Asia, South East Asia, East Asia, the Asia Pacific, and the Indian Ocean Region.3 Although this concept of âextended neighbourhoodâ is new to meet economic realities of the globalised world, it has been practised by the Indian security establishment since British India days and was inherited by independent India in 1947 from its erstwhile imperial masters. In the immediate neighbourhood, since 1947, as Priya Chacko (2012) finds, India has formulated its own Monroe Doctrine,4 and has enacted policies to maintain its hegemony, as the British did during colonial rule in South Asia.
Other than bonding between the neighbouring countries and pursuing policies to set up an âextended neighbourhoodâ, extra-regional actors too play a crucial role in South Asia and have relevant influence on securitisation or de-securitisation of the region.5 This is not a new phenomenon, but rather has been taking place since the British colonial days. During the colonial period, the British India government used forward policy to check all such external interferences. During the Cold War days the former Soviet Union and the USA have interfered a lot in the matters related to South Asian politics. Virtually, through interferences they shape up and define the region.6 At that time, Pakistan became an ally of the USA while India tilted towards the former Soviet Union. After Indiaâs defeat in the 1962 Sino-India war smaller South Asian countries and Pakistan established close relations with China and invited it in the region, largely, to check India. Consequently, after the end of Cold War in 1991, China gradually spread its wings to fill the vacuum created by the former Soviet Union. After 1991, from being an ally of the USA during the second half of the Cold War, China turned into its global competitor.
Geographical contiguity, necessities of globalisation, growing connectivity, a...
