Dhurba Giri
A recent flurry of media reports in Pakistan has reignited an old but critical debate: should a new regional organization be established to replace the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC)? With SAARC largely paralyzed due to long-standing India-Pakistan tensions, some quarters—particularly in Pakistan—are advocating for a new framework that would exclude India and possibly include China as a central player. But can such a China-led alternative become a viable replacement, or is it just a political mirage?
The crux of the problem lies in geography and identity. SAARC was designed to represent South Asia—its culture, history, and regional priorities. China, though a regional power and SAARC observer, is geographically and politically an East Asian nation. A China-led regional bloc would inherently lack the South Asian identity that SAARC was built upon. Unlike ASEAN, the EU, or the Arab League—which are anchored in regional and ideological cohesion—this proposed bloc would be a geopolitical patchwork with unclear alignment.
Strategically, such a development risks deepening regional divisions. Excluding India, which has historically driven much of SAARC’s economic engine, will likely polarize the region into pro-India and anti-India factions. Countries like Bhutan, Maldives, Sri Lanka, Nepal, and Bangladesh have strong economic and security ties with India. Sri Lanka alone received $4 billion in aid from India during its 2022–23 economic crisis. These nations would be hard-pressed to sever ties and shift to a bloc where China and Pakistan dominate the agenda.
Even Afghanistan—often cited as a possible ally in such an alternative group—has maintained a strong development partnership with India. India has invested over $3 billion in Afghan infrastructure, including parliament buildings, roads, and the Salma Dam. Moreover, Afghanistan’s complicated relationship with Pakistan and its preference for sovereignty and non-interference further weaken the case for its inclusion in a China-Pakistan-led alliance.
Supporters of the new bloc argue from an economic standpoint, citing China’s trade and investment potential. However, realist international relations theory warns that survival, not prosperity, is the primary motivator for states. In practice, countries prioritize security and influence over economic gain when the two are in conflict. The example of the European Union (EU) relying on NATO for its security umbrella—thus compromising on foreign policy independence—serves as a cautionary tale.
Moreover, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) already exists as a broader regional forum where many of these countries—including China, India, and Pakistan—are members. Rather than building an exclusionary alternative, reinvigorating SAARC or using existing multilateral frameworks like SCO may offer more pragmatic and inclusive solutions.
while dissatisfaction with SAARC’s ineffectiveness is valid, the idea of a China-led alternative is fraught with geopolitical, strategic, and identity-related contradictions. Without addressing these fundamental questions, the concept risks remaining a political myth rather than becoming a regional reality.
