Syndicate content

Add new comment

I cannot for the life of me understand why a region that is troubled with internecine strife continues to have the imperative of fighting terrorism and conflict elude it. I captured these sentiments in a piece I wrote about SAARC's "existential angst" in which I wrote: "I come from a region where regional security has been put on a pedestal on account of the internecine conflicts that engulfed the region in the 1990s. Despite the hegemon of Nigeria, the oil-rich country rarely ever became an obstruction in the development of peace in the ECOWAS region. Nigeria was instrumental in providing significant financial capital towards ECOMOG--the peacekeeping wing of ECOWAS. In 2007, ECOWAS has transformed from a Secretariat to a Commission with commissioners leading on the major issues pertinent to the region. Bottom line? ECOWAS, for all its problems and challenges, has moved on. That is not to say that things cannot be done better, and mindsets changed. For what it's worth we see developments. Very little changed can be said for SAARC. Not to deny SAARC having golf tournaments, but I find it ludicrous that a regional organisation with the size that SAARC has (seven members, excluding Afghanistan which joined recently) cannot get its regional organisation going!" from: http://regionswatch.blogspot.com/search/label/saarc I still believe SAARC should get its act together; its performance on combating conflict is execrable; it should learn some lessons--no matter how hard it might want to avoid it--from the AU that is developing a substantial Peace and Security Architecture that is worthy of emulation in South-East Asia...