South Asia at a Crossroads The Rise of a Post-SAARC Framework

Amina Jabbar

In a region long plagued by confused rivalries and lost opportunities, a low-key diplomatic meeting in Kunming, China, could mark the start of a new regional era. The recent foreign ministers’ meeting last month between Pakistan, China, and Bangladesh was not widely covered in foreign media, but the possible consequences might be enormous. With SAARC now politically frozen, the vision of a new cooperative paradigm is gaining ground, one which could potentially avoid the obstacles put in place by the India-Pakistan rivalry and provide a more pragmatic, multipolar future for South Asia.

With SAARC now politically frozen, a new cooperative paradigm is gaining ground to avoid India-Pakistan rivalry obstacles.

SAARC had made regional integration promises for decades, but never came to be. Established to promote South Asian solidarity among member countries, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, the Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka, SAARC was marred by chronic political animosities. Foremost among them was the inability of India and Pakistan to cooperate productively with one another, especially in a multilateral context. India, since 2016 has not attended SAARC summits, on grounds of security and politics, as much as suspended the forum virtually completely. Demands to resuscitate SAARC, including recent calls by politicians in Bangladesh, are becoming more and more rhetorical, with no obvious avenue to resuscitate.

India’s attention has shifted elsewhere. By strengthening its alignment with the United States through the Indo-Pacific strategy and taking the leadership of BIMSTEC, a bloc that has most of South Asia except Pakistan, New Delhi tried to position itself in a larger strategic system that is west-oriented and that does not include its main regional competitor. Meanwhile, China is also reformulating its South Asia policy, making room in a region where conventional multilateral options have reached an impasse. Pakistan is not merely Beijing’s aging Cold War ally, but also a strategic partner under the Belt and Road Initiative, specifically through the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), which provides China with strategic access to the Arabian Sea.

Bangladesh’s joining the Kunming talks introduces a new factor. Historically reserved in foreign policy, Dhaka has remained neutral between India and China. But recent changes, ranging from increased Chinese investment to leadership changes, signal a drift towards moving closer to Beijing. If Bangladesh is joining the Kunming talks, then it is ready to try new paradigms for regional cooperation that do not feature India at center stage.

Bangladesh’s participation signals its drift toward China and openness to regional models excluding India at center stage.

This might be the start of a “South Asia Plus” venture: an unofficial and powerful but not formal partnership of Pakistan, China, Bangladesh, and possibly Sri Lanka, Nepal, and the Maldives, all the countries already engaged in China’s Belt and Road Initiative and interested in something more. This grouping would not attempt to supplant SAARC or BIMSTEC in its totality, but provide a platform for economic integration, infrastructural development, climate cooperation, and digital connectivity. Unlike the gridlocked economies of the ancient world, it would be less dominated by political competition and more by common development interests.

It is to be criticized that the policy risks more concretizing the regional divide, the India-Pakistan divide. But that is life: there is already such a divide. Fragmentation prevails in South Asia’s diplomacy. Indo-Pacific does not include China; BIMSTEC has no Pakistan. Instead of deploring such fragmentation, nations have to find elastic, functional frameworks in the interests of the nation’s rather than the rigidity of such outdated alliances.

That is what the region urgently needs. South Asia is about two billion people but remains one of the world’s least economically integrated regions. Collective action is necessary against shared threats, terrorism, climate change, cybercrime, and trafficking in humans. Glaciers melting and sea levels going up do not respect national boundaries. Under such circumstances, a new regional forum on the platform of practical cooperation rather than ideological affinity could be extremely useful.

In addition, such an arrangement would also give rights to minor South Asian countries. Middle and small powers’ agendas are typically dwarfed by India-Pakistan competition within the traditional institutions. The new order would be capable of providing them with a voice in the global sphere, with their capacity to hold ground on issues involving global business, climate talks, and multilateral forums such as the UN.

The new ‘South Asia Plus’ could empower smaller countries and focus on infrastructure, climate, and digital connectivity.

Most importantly, this working framework cannot be exclusionist. India is not yet ready to agree to be a member of such an arrangement, but it need not be excluded. Leaving the door open for eventual Indian accession would demonstrate a commitment to regional inclusiveness and avoid a reading of the errors of other forums, which have engaged in selective closure. An open, refocused bloc pledged to infrastructure, connectivity, and resilience could draw broader support in the long run, even from cynics.

The Kunming summit might have avoided making waves in the news cycle, but its importance must not be discounted. It is a sign of increasing recognition that the region cannot afford to wait for broken mechanisms to self-repair. Rather, nations need to pursue pragmatic partnerships around common objectives. In an era of changing allegiances and greater world unpredictability, the future of South Asia may be determined by what it does to adjust. And that adjustment is already happening—perhaps, in a hushed Kunming room.

The author is an independent researcher based in Islamabad, Pakistan, interested in regional security, terrorism, and counter-extremism. Her research is based on militancy, radicalization, and counter-terrorism policies in South Asia and the Middle East.