A South Asian "EU" - supranationalism in the subcontinent

[Ironduke]

Need to grab a bit of sleep, but, the process I'm talking about is multi-decade in its scope.

i think u invited flames by starting this thread.look at post of pakistanis,soon they will take the thread to kashmir issue,then to afghanistan,

I cannot control the reaction of other people and the motives and judgments they wish to cast on me - the choice is their own. If they wish to flame on it - that is their choice, and not my responsibility.

My idea is of a serious academic, professional nature. How others choose to react is their choice alone.

 

[Spring Onion]

Ironduke,

You need to put your indian flag on display buddy.
.

Cut the crap . Ironduke is a senior and known admin on other forum and an American with more brain than many of us here


i just wonder why he is promoting this idea here after a LONG LONG time.

 

[rockstarIN]

rockstar,

You misjudge my motives on the issue in question - you've missed the forest for the trees.

There is no personal attack intended, I criticize your very idea, not you. Please understand this...

Again, by pursuing a third way, a different framework, you actually free yourself from the influence of Washington.

Neither Indians nor Pakistanis are not matured to the very idea of yours. It is till easy to create problems among us as we are very very diverse than you think, even in India too. I'm not saying we cant do it, But its skeptical.. even in India, people are asking for more states now.

Right now, there is an arrangement between the US and Pakistan that is counterproductive to Pakistani goals.

First of all, there should be a consensus on goals if you need a south Asian union, like EU. If we are able to coming such a consensus, half of the problems are solved.

If the move toward another framework is indigenous, then it is not under foreign control. It is under the control of the domestic subcontinental actors who wish to pursue it.

What I'm saying it is easy for the foreign elements to lobby, fo e.g USA now need to deal with India and Pakistan, if a union, they can easily lobby with small states than much bigger India and Pakistan.

Your questioning of my ideas is at its roots, cynical and baseless.

It is very very diverse, beyond you thinking mate, I'm sure you will get it once you visit India or Pakistan.

One more thing you should consider the population, its so huge, EU ot any other Unions did not face such huge diverse population.

 

[Developereo]

EU is a bad model. It is basically a temper tantrum by France and Germany to try and counter US dominance.

The EU will disintegrate if there is ever a serious falling out between France and Germany.

Regarding the proposed south Asian union, why would Pakistan want to be absorbed into India to counter, compete, whatever euphemism you chose against China?

 

[JonAsad]

One thing comes in mind... Edit: as rockstar pointed it out.

Divide and Rule.

Sorry mate not going to be get fooled again.

 

[twoplustwoisfour]

The EU model was primarily based on the economics of the regions. EU was proposed to be a viable alternative to the US in terms of economic power, and it has succeeded to an extent. It is just a bunch of smaller countries with similar economies combining hands, or atleast it was when it started out.

Anyone who has been in Europe can tell you that there is nothing like 'supernationalism' over there, rather, most nations are fiercely trying to protect their identities. Politics of a Belgium are much different from a France.

 

[r3alist]

This will suit America down to the ground. There are probably too many to list, but a few of them are, a nuclear Islamic State no longer existing, an effective buffer to China, the ability for the United States to play the new South Asian superstate against the Chinese state, essentially this is a win-win scenario for the united states

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Republic of India already is an union of states with Govt of India being responsible for Foreign Relation and Defence. States can even have their own laws if it's accepted in parliament.

Honestly I think KP(NWFP) and Baluchistan have nothing to do with India and it will be too much overhead for any centralized govt to control those regions. Even during Raj, they had marginal control over those regions.

India should co-operate more with BD and hopefully an EU based economic tie is on the cards.

If I understand the concept correctly, what is proposed would not entail the control of the central government on any of the States, and even foreign relations and defence would, in the short to medium term at least, be only loosely controlled by the 'Center', as is the case with the current EU. For the most part it would be an economic union with open travel and trade between the 'States', and, over the long term, interactions between peoples of the region might result in a more cooperative model with defence, for example, becoming centralized.

 

[Rig Vedic]

Pakistan was founded because of Islam, and is held together by Islam. There is a link with the rest of the Indic civilization - for example Punjabi and Sindhi are Sanskrit-based languages. But in Pakistan, the Punjabi, Sindhi, Pashtun, Balochi identities are not given much encouragement.

What may be possible as a first step is an closer association between India, Nepal, Bhutan and Sri Lanka. Nowadays, Bangladesh has a moderate and secular government - if that can last, then Bangladesh could also join.

 

[rubyjackass]

The same idea was floated by Muhammad Ali Jinnah Founder of Pakistan but it was rejected by Congress of India and thus Muhammad Ali Jinnah changed his stance and asked for separate homeland i.e Pakistan.Look it up - He wanted India to be a country where federal government does not have much power over provinces internal affairs.

Fourteen Points of Jinnah - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

India is doing good without the fourteen points of Jinnah. They create irreversible fissures in the society as they did in Pakistan. Separate electorates are an example, you would never represent India, you would represent only your community. And India has many many bases on which you can call people minorities. Religion, language, caste, subcaste what not. And so the preservation of muslim majority in provinces while protecting other minorities is always not feasible. It is better to let go than to live with that kind of India. The other points are either all acceptable for Congress or involved the federal make-up which are basically ego issues.There is no guarantee that muslims will be protected in a federal set-up and they wont be otherwise. For me there are no serious points except separate electorate. Partition was meaningless on the other points and I don't blame Jinnah for it.

 

[Storm Force]

Too Risky For India to Consider.

Open trade, easy borders is thw worst idea in 21ST cENTURY.

IN ENGLAND WE HAVE massive influx of poor european community workers taking british jobs.

More importantly there is a VERY HIGH terror threat already.

India is doing fine in terms growth IT DOES NOT NEED any South Asian Union of any nature be it trade, culture, poltical or anything else you may think.

 

[LaBong]

If I understand the concept correctly, what is proposed would not entail the control of the central government on any of the States, and even foreign relations and defence would, in the short to medium term at least, be only loosely controlled by the 'Center', as is the case with the current EU. For the most part it would be an economic union with open travel and trade between the 'States', and, over the long term, interactions between peoples of the region might result in a more cooperative model with defence, for example, becoming centralized.

I understood that, however those decentralized states based on linguistic lines will be too weak in case of serious foreign existential threat. A centralized governing system is very much in need considering time and again India has been invaded whenever the power was too much decentralized.

I think after India and Pak going nuclear the equilibrium of South Asia is nicely maintained. PA, as India no more posses existential threat to Pakistan, focused on what armies of that region historically been doing; controlling the frontier. And India is getting more and more focused on the only existential threat to her, ie. China.

A better model for South Asian countries is ASEAN, not EU.

 

[r3alist]

Pakistan was founded because of Islam, and is held together by Islam. There is a link with the rest of the Indic civilization - for example Punjabi and Sindhi are Sanskrit-based languages. But in Pakistan, the Punjabi, Sindhi, Pashtun, Balochi identities are not given much encouragement.

What may be possible as a first step is an closer association between India, Nepal, Bhutan and Sri Lanka. Nowadays, Bangladesh has a moderate and secular government - if that can last, then Bangladesh could also join.

It is not because of Islam that pakistan exists, it is the right to have a prosperous, peaceful and non-discriminatory rule for MUSLIMS which formed the thrust for Pakistan's creation.

 

[Desert Fox]

A silly Idea imo

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

cross-posting:

I don't really see Delhi or Islamabad agreeing to devolve authority to constituent States, beyond what exists now, and in essence 'ending India' (and Pakistan) in favor of ethnic identities tied in through a larger 'South Asian' identity, instead of Indian or Pakistani nationalities.

An economic union of sorts would be a good first step in the direction of the proposed concept, but given that South Asia is yet to see a functional economic partnership, and national identities are strengthening (over ethnic ones), regressing towards ethnic identities, potentially several years down the road when and if a South Asian economic partnership framework is agreed upon and implemented, will be almost impossible to do.

Quite frankly I find any economic union consisting of behemoths such as China and India unfeasible, especially when the other nations in the Union lag behind significantly. A SAARC excluding India would in fact be far more feasible and could potentially progress towards a political union of the sort proposed with greater ease.