The critics of Business relations among regional cooperation
Before making an analysis on the specific case
of SAARC as a regional integration process, we can highlight the connotation of
region and regional integration which is significant in this context. There is
no denying the fact that on collective research regions are used in shorter
sense having encountered external cooperation among regions in the field of
trade, commerce, economics, export and import. But regional integration may be
used in broader sense as because integrations is needed in order to manoeuvre
the basic cooperation system in relation to the relevant regions in which the
respective fields of regions are settled down virtually.
Regional integration has become a very common
way of co-operation among states in present day international relations.
Generally a ‘region’ is an area where some geographically proximate states join
together to achieve their common objectives. As I mentioned earlier, in the
present time more or less every nation-state, strong or weak, is a
member of a regional system. But there are some states which exist on the
borderline between two regions. That is one of the reasons for those
states not joining in any regional co-operation
arrangements. Although geographical considerations are an important factor for
the formation of a region, other
factors-for example, social, economic, political, historical, and
organisational - are also important. So we can say that a region consists of
two or more proximate states and interacting states which have some
common ethnic, linguistic, cultural, social, and/or historical bonds, and whose
sense of identity is sometimes increased by the actions and attitudes towards
those of states external to the region (Cantori and Spiegel 1973: 335-353).
The member states of SAARC are geographically
proximate with each other. These states have something in common. For example,
they have some common social and historical bonds. These states have common
colonial past. Those states (for example Nepal )
who were not under colonial rule have also been influenced by that rule owing
to geographical proximity with India .
There is some cultural commonality among the SAARC states. But where the region
ends-for example, on the eastern side-Burma is neither a member of SAARC nor
yet of ASEAN. On the western side Afghanistan neither belongs to the Middle
East nor to the South Asian group. These states exist on the
borderline between two regional systems.
Comments
Post a Comment