Search

This paper critically inquires into the foreign policy of Pakistan during the period (1947-51). British divided India into two sovereign states in August, 1947. Mainly, Indian National Congress spearheaded the independence movement in the Indian subcontinent on the basis of Indian [Hindu] nationalism. The Indian Muslims contested the Congress claim of One Nation Theory. The Muslims presented their own brand of counter Muslim nationalism called the TwoNations Theory. The basic assumption of Two Nations Theory was that India politically, unlike European nation states, was a heterogeneous society. There were two major nations in the subcontinent--Hindus and Muslims. Resultantly, both Hindus and Muslims had a birthright to selfdetermination and separate states. For about fifty years, the Congress seriously contested, both theoretically as well as politically, the genuineness of the validity of Two Nations Theory. The Congress never accepted the theory. It called the Muslim demand of a separate state "a vivisection" of India and would never agree to it. Fortunately, the British did not accept the Congress argument. The Congress did her best to prevent the creation of Pakistan, however, thanks to British fairness, the Indian subcontinent was divided. Then out of utter frustration and revenge, the Congress resorted to 'Policy of Strangulation' to undo Pakistan. The researcher has come up with a non-traditional concept that Pakistan in the early phase suffered from an economic existential threat rather than military. Understandably, the foreign policymakers of Pakistan overplayed the presumed military threat to its existence. However, for the better and realist foreign policy, Pakistan survived the immediate existential economic threat in the early phase. Pakistan confronted the deadly economic context during her infant years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Environmental security concerns have broadened the national security agenda and discourse of international relations. Yet environmental insecurity issues have endured impacts on livelihood, human security, social equity, human rights, internal security, political stability, economic growth and development of the state. Environmental challenges, such as climate change, water scarcity and energy security are shaping development and consumption patterns, which are possible causes of inter-state conflict in South Asia. This paper is an attempt to evaluate the nexus of climate change, energy and water security with conflict and development. Furthermore, we argue for the need for environmental diplomacy in Pakistan within the South Asian context. The argument is that integration of development with environmental factors and peacemaking has potential to achieve sustainable development in South Asia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Regional organizations are playing an active role in world politics as powerful non-state actors. As usual, they have been strongly emerged in the developed world, either it is EU or NAFTA. Third world or specially South Asia desperately needs the regional cooperation. Like other factors, regional cooperation has also been victim of Cold War. The 16th SAARC Summit (Thimpu, April 28,29) is again held under considerable US dictations . India and Pakistan are being pressurised to sit for dialogue and cooperate with each other other. This paper is investigating regional cooperation and US interests in South Asia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents information on a conference "Decentralization and Democratization in Southeast Asia," held in June 2011 at the University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany. Several papers were discussed in the event on the topics including local leaders and elections, law enforcement, social reform. The event was attended by several educationists from South East Asia. It was sponsored and supported by German Federal Ministry of Education and Research.

Regional cooperation is a characteristic phenomenon of the post World War-II period. In other words the idea of "collective self-reliance" through greater economic and technical cooperation has emerged at the regional and sub-regional level. The initial informal efforts towards consolidating regional system of cooperation in South Asia appeared around late 1970s which consequently evolved as the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), in 1985. South Asian states have common problems of hunger, poverty, malnutrition, illiteracy and underdevelopment. There is distrust and suspicion among the states of the region - particularly between India and Pakistan. In order to remove the structural rigidities and to promote cooperation among them, the states of the SouthAsian region resorted to diplomatic channels. So far the diplomacy was confined to the practice in an official form by the rulers of the states (Track-I diplomacy). But the role of diplomacy now practiced by non-state actors as a parallel force is gaining momentum (Track-II diplomacy). But more effective seems Track-Ill dialogues, to be principally 'people-to-people'initiatives which not only focus on contemporaiypolicyissues, but these explicitly function apart from, or beyond, governments. They are composed of individuals and groups looking across national frontiers and states, aiming to build constituencies for peace which can question conventional practices and beliefs and present alternatives to official government positions. The premise of Track-Ill diplomacy is that peace can and must be built form the 'bottom up' as well as from the 'top down'. This paper focuses on the importance of people-to-people contact initiatives as a channel for an overall development and harmony in the South Asian region. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present article attempts to contextualize a discourse on security, peace and conflict from feminist perspectives. It also attempts to revisit the patriarchal theoretical traditions and scrutinize its fallacious understanding of these issues. The feminist perspectives demands for democratisation and feminisation of security and peace agenda. They maintain that conflict and peace are gendered activities. The dominant conflict, peace and security discourses ignore disempowered women's perspectives. Women's role and responses in conflict and peace are different. This paper provides insights into women's narratives of peace, conflict and security in South Asia. It explores the cooperation of gender hierarchy and resistance to it, the nature of changing space i.e. the space disempowered women created for themselves andthe space that was denied to them. It also maps role of women's agency as well as their language of resistance and empowerment in conflict in South Asia. The feminist perspectives and peace studies research have challenged dominant discourse of peace and security. They have advocated for redefinitions of security and peace. They tend to view the notion of peace and security from the perspective of disadvantaged and disempowered women. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Any intervention towards conflict resolution in South Asia turns to be like opening a Pandora's Box, owing to the multitude of complexities associated with it. All meta theoretical interpretations of the problem have been ridiculed to be a parody, by the intricacies of politico-strategic geometry and psycho-cultural dynamics of the region. The democratic-peace hypothesis put forth by the protagonists of liberal internationalism, for exploring avenues for conflict resolution is one such meta interpretation. Their conceptualization of perpetual peace, however, is merely a means to camouflage the impulse for domination of a few powerful countries in world politics and create the entire world into a microcosm of capitalist rubric. So, due to this, it has been argued in this paper that the democratic-peace hypothesis is inadequate to explain the problem. of peace and conflict in South Asia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper makes a comparative study of regional experience in Europe and South Asia. The European regionalism is far more successful, mainly for three important reasons. One is the commonly perceived threat of the USSR, the second is the common urge for recovery from the losses of the Second World War. The third, but not the least important reason is that the 'regional concepts' of France and West Germany, the two biggest European states, while being different in substance, complemented each other very well. Regional experience in South Asia differs much from Europe. First, there is an absence of a common extra-regional threat. Indeed, most smaller South Asian states perceive India, the biggest regional state, as a threat to themselves. The second problem is that South Asian states continue to emphasize on bilateralism despite the formation of a regional organization. The theory of 'New Regionalism' offers another explanation on regional experiences. Europe is a 'core' region, characterized by political stability and economic dynamism. South Asia, on the other hand, is a 'peripheral' region, affected by political instability and regional cold war. Also, while regionalism in Europe poses significant challenges to the sovereign power of the Westphalian states, the principle of non-interference continues to characterize regionalism in South Asia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]