Historical and Geographical Dimensions of India’s Interaction with Southeast Asia
India-Southeast Asia ‘win-win’ Strategy rooted in History and Geography
Download 389.05 Kb. View original pdf
|
Irrigation S E Asian Agri-history 2005, Irrigation S E Asian Agri-history 2005, Hist. Geog Dimensions India’s Interaction S E Asia, Hist. Geog Dimensions India’s Interaction S E Asia
| India-Southeast Asia ‘win-win’ Strategy rooted in History and Geography The rationale behind India’s imperative need for developing a mutually dependable relationship with Southeast Asia is the principle of reciprocity rather a ‘win-win’ strategy. A host of common linkages and concerns as well as complementary features have their roots inhuman geography of India and Southeast Asia, especially in terms of cultural absorption and agricultural 12 practices (Yagama Reddy 2004, 2005, a. As pointed out earlier, there is also indelible semblance in the physical setting and basic economic system, alongside the undeniable age-old cultural affinities. Though the semblance in cropping tended to inhibit the chances for trading in primary products, there are discernible crop-specializations, thanks to the successful efforts of colonial masters in evolving the Southeast Asian economies onto the stage of exporting the agricultural produce of immense commercial value. Thus, the significant complementarities in trade structure between India and Southeast Asia subscribe to the principle of mutually dependable economic cooperation (Wadhwa and Asher 1985, p. Based on the analysis of the statistical data compiled from the recent Yearbooks of Far East and Australasia (Routledge: London, ASEAN has the distinction of producing rubber (80% of world’s total, palm oil (68%) and copra (66%) and also of being a leading producer of cassava, coconuts and coffee (first rank, maize, rice and sugarcane (third rank while India excels in the production of sugar, jute and tea (first rank, groundnuts, sugarcane, rice, tobacco and wheat (second rank. India and ASEAN have their preeminence maintained in the production of some minerals India in steel first rank, crude petroleum, and hard coal (third, while ASEAN in tin (second) and nickel third. If India emerges as ASEAN’s seventh biggest trade partner, ASEAN with a share of 10% in India’s global trade becomes India’s fourth largest trading partner after the European Union EU, the US and China. Though the balance of trade has always been in favour of ASEAN, there was a nine-fold increase in India’s exports to ASEAN and an increase of 17 times in the imports during 1993-2009 period. Further, similarity in drainage characteristics of the Himalayan-origin river- Indus, Ganges, Brahmaputra, Irrawaddy, Salween and Mekong – offers an added advantage to India for the development of river valley projects in the mainland Southeast Asia. The young folded 13 parallel mountain chains of Southeast Asia are simply the extensions of the Tertiary Himalayan Ranges which have branched off from India’s northeastern sector into the Mainland Southeast Asia and further extended through the Indonesian archipelago. Besides broad correspondence in the geological structure and the resultant landforms between India and Southeast Asia, similarity is also well pronounced by the incidence of climatic zones, vegetation pattern and soil types. The semblance in history and geography offers greater scope for India to understand Southeast Asia better than any other and thus forms an edge over other nations in meeting with the expectations of ASEAN. In fact, it is this greater connectivity that has facilitated India’s rapprochement with ASEAN through the application of symbiotic modality and convergence of interests through trans-regional cooperation initiatives, like Bay of Bengal Initiative for Mutual Scientific Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC) (1997), Kunming Initiative (1999) and Mekong-Ganga Cooperation (MGC) (2000). BIMSTEC which is poised to pursue business opportunities and develop linkages in the region,” portrays the concept of extended neighbourhood (Roy and Chakrabarty 2001). As yet another initiative for affirmation of historical, cultural and geographical ties, MGC envisaged tangible economic and social gains motivated by profits and benefits” (Baruah 2000, pandas a document of intent envisaging a symbiotic approach, MGC is also viewed as a complementary effort to exploit the potential of this region. This kind of regional cooperation rather reciprocity, to quote Nagesh Kumar, is imperative because ASEAN and SAARC have failed to exploit the full potential of the regional economic integration. The failure is a direct result of limited scope for intraregional trade either in ASEAN or SAARC owing to limited complementarities at the sub-regional levels vis-a-vis 14 wide range of complementarities at Pan-Asian level (Nagesh Kumar 2002, a Yagama Reddy 2012). Download 389.05 Kb. Share with your friends:
|