Theory P Management

I have always believed that the solution to any geopolitical problem is more in economics than in politics. The problem of the nature of the dispute on Kashmir has had its share of discussion in major political circles and solutions proposed for the problem have ranged from a U.N sponsored government or a joint Indo Pak government to simply independent Kashmir. Feasability of such governments for a trial period of hundred years similar in line to the Hongkong-China case has also been examined. All these proposals have their own set of problems. So will any solution driven by economics.

Let us first have a look at the issues involved with the Indo Pak problem: Kashmir, cross border terrorism, water sharing disputes, Siachen, the recent Baglihar dam case and the fifth "p" of the marketing mix: "people". Let us now drift towards a bit of philosophy. A fusion is always more desirable than a fission. A political union of South Asian countries could be a plausible option. When you are part of the larger cake, you tend to behave yourself as the rottening effect of one part spreads to the whole cake. This should solve the issue of cross borrder terrorism. It is probably not as simple as "no borders...no cross border terrorism" but this is definitely expected to cater to the problem in a significant manner. A South Asian Union will see a huge market for industries. There will be an overall shift from politics to economics. The kind of foreign inflows that are going to take place will provide a platform on the same level as China. Critics are likely to term this as futuristic"....well, the problem NEEDS a futuristic solution....Former world war foes are part of the same economic union today....well that's an "ECONOMIC" union and not a "POLITICAL" one. It is true that it will take a lot for a political union to materialise. The will and the drive from both countries should take care of it. India is possibly going to play the "big brother" in such a union and she will have to grapple with her own fair share of problems. A South Asian Union COULD later materialise into a South EAST Asian Union in the future with China being part of it. The bigger union should have a strong voice in most international lobbies like those with WTO. The muscle involved in such a union will be driving force for economies of scale in the member countries....and the risk is worth taking....as the returns are more than proportionate. But it seems that the "WILL" is simply not there. It is bull headedness to keep egos at high levels and it makes every sense to some together for a fusion... Kautilya in his Arthashastra said that "any neighbour is an enemy or a potential enemy" and it looks like this holds true. But the enemity could be held at controlled levels through common interests in the form of economics.