Chapter 3 Contemporary South Asia| Class 12 Political Science Notes

Class 12 Political Science Notes Chapter 3: Class 12 Political Science notes for Chapter 3, Contemporary South Asia, are really important for CBSE board exams. They’re made by subject experts and cover all the main topics like SAARC, SAFTA, and how countries in South Asia get along.

By reading these notes, students can better understand the key concepts and dynamics of contemporary South Asia, which will help them prepare effectively for their CBSE Class 12 board exams. They are a great resource for class 12 students who want to learn more about the world around them.

South Asia is defined as a subcontinent located in the southern part of Asia. It includes the following countries: Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, the Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka. Geographically, the region is bordered by the Himalayas to the north and the Indian Ocean, Arabian Sea, and the Bay of Bengal to the south, west, and east respectively.

While the boundaries of South Asia are relatively clear in the north and south, they are less distinct in the east and west. Discussions about South Asia often include Afghanistan and Myanmar. However, China, despite its significant influence in the region, is not considered part of South Asia.

In terms of governance, the region showcases a diverse landscape. Sri Lanka and India have successfully maintained democratic systems since gaining independence from the British, despite limitations. Pakistan and Bangladesh have experienced periods of both civilian and military rule, with Bangladesh transitioning towards democracy post the Cold War era.

Similarly, Bhutan, still a monarchy, is transitioning towards multi-party democracy under the king’s initiative. The Maldives transformed from a Sultanate to a republic in 1968 and further embraced a multi-party system in 2005, strengthening democracy through subsequent elections.

Despite varying democratic experiences, there is a shared aspiration for democracy across these countries, evident in widespread public support for democratic ideals and institutions. This grassroots backing challenges earlier assumptions that democracy thrives only in prosperous nations, broadening the global understanding of democratic governance.

After Pakistan established its first constitution, General Ayub Khan assumed control of the administration and eventually became elected. However, popular dissatisfaction with his rule led to his resignation, paving the way for another military takeover under General Yahya Khan. During Yahya’s rule, Pakistan faced the Bangladesh crisis, after a war with India in 1971, resulting in the emergence of East Pakistan as an independent country called Bangladesh. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s elected government took power in Pakistan from 1971 to 1977 but was later removed by General Zia-ul-Haq in 1977.

General Zia faced a pro-democracy movement from 1982 onwards, leading to the establishment of an elected democratic government under Benazir Bhutto’s leadership in 1988. Subsequently, Pakistani politics revolved around competition between Bhutto’s Pakistan People’s Party and the Muslim League. This period of elective democracy lasted until 1999 when the army intervened again, with General Pervez Musharraf removing Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. In 2001, General Musharraf assumed the presidency through elections.

Pakistan’s struggle to build a stable democracy is influenced by various factors. The social dominance of the military, clergy, and landowning aristocracy has led to frequent overthrows of elected governments and military rule. The conflict with India has strengthened pro-military groups, arguing that political parties and democracy are flawed, and the army’s intervention is necessary for national security.

Despite these challenges, there is a strong pro-democracy sentiment in Pakistan, supported by a courageous and relatively free press and a robust human rights movement. However, the lack of genuine international support for democratic rule has further emboldened the military’s dominance. Western countries, including the United States, have historically supported military regimes in Pakistan, viewing them as protectors of Western interests against perceived threats of terrorism and nuclear proliferation.

Bangladesh was part of Pakistan from 1947 to 1971, formed from the partitioned areas of Bengal and Assam from British India. However, the people of this region grew increasingly resentful of the dominance of western Pakistan and the imposition of the Urdu language. Protests against these injustices began soon after partition, demanding fair representation and political autonomy. Sheikh Mujibur Rahman emerged as a leader in this struggle, advocating for autonomy for the eastern region.

In the 1970 elections, the Awami League, led by Sheikh Mujib, won all seats in East Pakistan and secured a majority in the proposed constituent assembly. However, the West Pakistani leadership refused to convene the assembly, leading to Sheikh Mujib’s arrest. Under General Yahya Khan’s military rule, the Pakistani army brutally suppressed the Bengali people’s movement, resulting in thousands of deaths and a large-scale migration into India.

In December 1971, India intervened in support of East Pakistan’s independence, leading to a war with Pakistan that ended in the creation of Bangladesh as an independent country. Bangladesh drafted a constitution affirming faith in secularism, democracy, and socialism. However, in 1975, Sheikh Mujib amended the constitution to shift to a presidential form of government, leading to conflicts and his subsequent assassination.

Subsequent years saw military rulers like Ziaur Rahman and H. M. Ershad, who faced popular protests demanding democracy. Student-led movements and mass public protests eventually forced Ershad to allow limited political activity. Elections were held in 1991, marking the beginning of representative democracy based on multi-party elections in Bangladesh.

Nepal transitioned from being a Hindu kingdom in the past to a constitutional monarchy in the modern era. Throughout this period, political parties and the populace of Nepal have advocated for a more transparent and responsive government. However, the king, supported by the army, maintained strict control over the government and curtailed the expansion of democracy.

In response to a robust pro-democracy movement, the king acquiesced to the demand for a new democratic constitution in 1990. During the 1990s, Nepal’s Maoists gained traction across various regions, advocating armed rebellion against the monarchy and ruling elite, sparking violent clashes between Maoist insurgents and the king’s armed forces. This resulted in a triangular conflict among monarchists, democrats, and Maoists.

In 2002, the king dissolved parliament and dismissed the government, extinguishing even the limited democracy in Nepal. However, in April 2006, massive nationwide pro-democracy protests ensued. The pro-democracy forces achieved a significant milestone when the king was compelled to reinstate the dissolved House of Representatives. Led largely by the Seven Party Alliance (SPA), Maoists, and social activists, the movement was predominantly non-violent.

Nepal’s transition to democracy remains unfinished. Currently, the country is in a unique phase as it moves toward forming a constituent assembly tasked with drafting a new constitution. Some segments of Nepalese society argue for the retention of a nominal monarchy to preserve historical ties.

The Maoist factions have agreed to halt armed struggle and advocate for radical social and economic restructuring programs in the constitution, although not all SPA parties may endorse this agenda. Some political groups deeply suspicions toward the role of the Indian government in Nepal’s future.

Since gaining independence in 1948, Sri Lanka has operated as a democratic nation. However, it has confronted with a significant challenge arising not from military or monarchical issues, but from ethnic conflict, which sparked demands for secession from certain regions.

In Sri Lanka, politics has been dominated by forces representing the interests of the majority Sinhala community. This dominance has led to hostility towards the substantial Tamil population, many of whom migrated from India even after independence.

Sinhala nationalists have asserted that Sri Lanka is solely the homeland of the Sinhala people, advocating against any concessions to the Tamil population. This disregard for Tamil concerns has fueled the rise of militant Tamil nationalism.

How India happens to be a Key Role Player in the Sri Lankan War?

The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), a militant organization, has been engaged in armed conflict with the Sri Lankan army, primarily advocating for the establishment of ‘Tamil Eelam,’ an independent state for Sri Lanka’s Tamil population. This conflict has been ongoing for several decades, resulting in significant loss of life and displacement of civilians.

The LTTE gained control over large parts of Sri Lanka’s northeastern region, where the Tamil population is concentrated. The conflict has not only been confined to Sri Lanka but has also involved people of Indian origin, particularly Tamil Nadu, India. Tamils in India have often pressured the Indian government to intervene and protect the interests of Tamils in Sri Lanka.

Over the years, the Indian government has made various attempts to mediate and negotiate with the Sri Lankan government regarding the Tamil issue. In 1987, India became directly involved in the Sri Lankan Tamil conflict by signing a peace agreement with Sri Lanka and dispatching troops as part of the Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF).

However, the presence of Indian troops in Sri Lanka was met with resistance from the local population, who perceived it as interference in their internal affairs. The Indian Army and the LTTE ended up in armed conflict, complicating the situation further. Despite efforts by the IPKF, they were unable to fulfill their mission, and the conflict persisted.

The involvement of external actors, including India, in the Sri Lankan conflict underscores the complex nature of the issue and the challenges faced in resolving it.

The Economy of Sri Lanka

Sri Lanka’s civil war continues to persist, despite efforts by international actors, with Scandinavian countries like Norway and Iceland playing significant roles in negotiation attempts.

Despite the ongoing conflict, Sri Lanka has managed to achieve significant economic growth and maintain high levels of human development. Through economic liberalization, Sri Lanka became one of the first developing countries to effectively control population growth. Even amidst the civil war, it maintained one of the highest per capita GDPs (gross domestic product) for many years.

Bilateral ties between India and Sri Lanka were further strengthened by the signing of a free trade agreement. India’s assistance in the reconstruction efforts following the devastating tsunami has fostered closer relations between the two countries.

Following partition, India and Pakistan became embroiled in a dispute over the fate of Kashmir, with the Pakistani government claiming sole ownership of the region.

Two wars between India and Pakistan, in 1947-48 and 1965, failed to resolve the conflict. The Line of Control, established during the 1947-48 war, divided the region into Pakistan-occupied Kashmir and the Indian province of Jammu and Kashmir.

Despite India’s decisive victory in subsequent conflicts, including the 1971 war, the Kashmir issue remained unresolved. The conflict also extends to strategic concerns such as control of the Siachen glacier and arms acquisitions.

In 1998, India conducted nuclear tests in Pokhran, prompting Pakistan to retaliate with tests in the Chagai Hills. This nuclear capability has altered the dynamics of the conflict, reducing the likelihood of full-fledged war.

The Indian government accuses Pakistan of supporting Kashmiri militants with arms, training, and funding for terrorist attacks. Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) is also alleged to be involved in anti-India activities in India’s northeast, facilitated through Bangladesh and Nepal.

Pakistan, in turn, accuses India of fomenting unrest in provinces like Sindh and Balochistan. Disputes over river water, notably the Indus Waters Treaty of 1960, have been sources of tension, though the treaty has endured despite military conflicts.

The demarcation line in Sir Creek, Rann of Kutch, remains a point of contention. Both countries continue to engage in discussions to address these complex issues.

India and its Other Neighbours

India & Bangladesh

• India and Bangladesh have encountered disagreements over various issues, including the distribution of Ganga and Brahmaputra river waters.
• Bangladesh’s reluctance to permit illegal immigration into India and its backing of anti-Indian Islamic fundamentalist groups have irked the Indian government.
• Bangladesh’s refusal to allow Indian troops to transit through its territory to reach northeastern India, as well as its resistance to exporting natural gas to India or facilitating Myanmar’s gas exports, have further strained relations.
• Bangladeshi governments perceive India as a regional bully, particularly in matters concerning river water sharing, alleged support for rebellion in the Chittagong Hill Tracts, natural gas extraction, and trade fairness.
• Despite ongoing border disputes, economic ties between the two countries have improved significantly in recent years. Bangladesh is integral to India’s Look East policy, aiming to link India with Southeast Asia through Myanmar.
• India and Bangladesh frequently collaborate on disaster relief and environmental initiatives.

India & Nepal

• Nepal shares a unique bond with India, enabling citizens of both countries to travel and work without visas or passports.
• Trade disputes have arisen between the governments of India and Nepal in the past. India views the Maoist movement in Nepal as a growing security threat, especially given the rise of Naxalite groups across India.
• Nepal accuses India of interfering in its internal affairs, controlling river waters and hydropower, and impeding its access to the sea through Indian territory.
• Despite these differences, India and Nepal maintain relatively stable and peaceful relations, cooperating in trade, scientific endeavors, resource sharing, electricity generation, and water management.

India & Bhutan

• India enjoys a special relationship with Bhutan, marked by minimal disagreements.
• Bhutan’s efforts to eliminate guerrillas and militants from northeastern India operating within its borders have been beneficial to India.
• India is Bhutan’s primary source of development aid and is involved in significant hydroelectric projects in the Himalayan kingdom.

India & Maldives

• India and the Maldives maintain warm and friendly relations.
• In November 1988, when Tamil mercenaries from Sri Lanka attacked the Maldives, the Indian air force and navy promptly responded to the Maldives’ request for assistance.
• India has contributed to the economic development, tourism, and fisheries sectors of the Maldives.

Why did India have Problems with its Smaller Neighbours?

In contrast, the Indian government often feels exploited by its neighbors, fearing that political instability within these nations could pave the way for external powers to exert influence in the region.

Smaller countries in South Asia harbor concerns about India’s aspirations for regional dominance.

However, not all conflicts in South Asia revolve around India and its neighbors. Nepal and Bhutan, as well as Bangladesh and Myanmar, have previously clashed over issues such as the migration of ethnic Nepalese into Bhutan and Rohingyas into Myanmar.

There have been occasional disagreements between Bangladesh and Nepal regarding the management of Himalayan river waters.

The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) stands as a major initiative by South Asian states to foster cooperation through multilateral means. Originating in 1985, SAARC unfortunately hasn’t achieved significant success due to persisting political differences.

SAARC members signed the South Asian Free Trade (SAFTA) agreement, envisioning the establishment of a free trade zone across South Asia. SAFTA, signed in 2004 and effective from January 1, 2006, aims to lower trade tariffs to 20 percent by 2007.

Despite the conflict and violence in India-Pakistan relations, concerted efforts have been made to manage tensions and build peace. The two countries have agreed to undertake confidence building measures to reduce the risk of war. S. Enhanced connectivity, increased trade, and eased visa processes are tangible outcomes of these efforts.

While India-Pakistan relations remain a focal point, outside powers like China and the United States also wield significant influence in South Asian politics. Although Sino-Indian relations have improved, China’s strategic partnership with Pakistan remains a contentious issue. Economic reforms and liberal policies have deepened American engagement in the region since the end of the Cold War.

The trajectory of South Asia—whether it remains conflict-prone or evolves into a regional bloc with common cultural and trade interests—rests largely on the actions and policies of the people and governments within the region, rather than external forces.

What are the major regional initiatives in South Asia?

Major regional initiatives in South Asia include the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) and the South Asian Free Trade Agreement (SAFTA). SAARC aims to foster cooperation among South Asian countries through multilateral means, while SAFTA seeks to establish a free trade zone in the region.

What is the objective of SAFTA?

The objective of SAFTA is to reduce trade tariffs among South Asian countries by 20% by a specified timeline. This reduction aims to promote economic integration and cooperation among member states.

What are some concerns regarding SAFTA?

Some neighboring countries express concerns that SAFTA might allow India to dominate their markets and exert influence over their societies and politics through commercial ventures. They fear that increased trade with India might disadvantage their local industries and economies.

How have India and Pakistan attempted to improve relations?

India and Pakistan have undertaken confidence-building measures to reduce the risk of war and improve bilateral relations. Social activists and leaders from both countries have collaborated to foster friendship among their peoples. Efforts to enhance connectivity, increase trade, and ease visa processes have also been made.

What role do outside powers play in South Asian politics?

Outside powers like China and the United States wield significant influence in South Asian politics. While Sino-Indian relations have improved, China’s strategic partnership with Pakistan remains a contentious issue. The United States has increasingly engaged in the region since the end of the Cold War, with economic reforms and liberal policies deepening its involvement.