South Asia is an area with a compendium of paradoxes and distinctive characteristics. It has a shared cultural foundation but differs in language and religion, making it culturally, socially, economically, and politically varied. Throughout the 20th century, democracy has gained acceptance among the general public and ruling elites. However, in the 21st century, there are also questions regarding its viability. The South Asian University, under the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) Charter, must plan to focus the scope of its democracy commitments in critical areas such as good governance, human rights, and socio-economic development. This will increase the impact of initiatives and encourage more efficient use of human resources. Reducing inequality is impossible unless people are healthy, educated, skilled and competitive SAARC policies are devised to deal with the reality of democratic deficit. In SAARC locations where the national governments lack human resources and educational infrastructure, more assistance is required to safeguard and promote the welfare of vulnerable groups or narrow the gap between the governed and the government.
Democracy has the potential to help SAARC nations overcome some of their obstacles, so long as human resources and higher educational logistics are utilized in a way that is consistent with democratic governance procedures. There is a massive chance that the South Asian University (SAU)’s approach with education diplomacy, as per its vision, democracy, will benefit the SAARC area soon. In the contemporary world, disengagement is not an option. Still, the plan should advance the notion that the South Asian University effort is superior to the Global North approach because it has a value-based regional consciousness component for crafting the future of education diplomacy in democracy in South Asia.
SAARC Regional Consciousness
South Asia is an essential frontier for democracy that will influence 21st-century geopolitics. The region’s democratic republics are under growing pressure from a complex web of problems involving political, economic, and cultural factors. The theme “Education Diplomacy and Democracy in South Asia” focuses mainly on the prospects for comprehensive democratization of citizenship under the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) based on the twin narratives of South Asian-ness and regional consciousness. Education diplomacy can undoubtedly keep up with contemporary democracy and rapid worldwide changes. Nothing is certain until it happens by invoking A.J.P. Taylor’s forecasting that the future of democracy is no different. It is difficult to predict the opportunities for democracy, the threats to it, and whether its response will be successful in a world where the Artificial Intelligence (AI) revolution is having profound, positive, and adverse effects on the economy, society, and politics, where millions of people are emerging from poverty in the developing world, where religious fundamentalism is becoming more prevalent in the world, but there is also an increase in non-ideological, secular approaches in other regions, and where more than half of the Global population lives in cities. Will there remain a link between freedom and equality, or will it be severed, or will something new strain their relationship? Will democracy as we know it—a combination of free market capitalism, democratic governance, and the rule of law—endure in a discernible form?
Wither Democracy?
SAARC is regarded as a cradle of democracy in South Asia and beyond since antiquity. However, democracy is under attack in South Asia and beyond. SAARC countries’ many institutions are becoming increasingly dysfunctional. SAARC election systems have lost credibility to their Global North and other rivals in a few decades. With the Machiavellian help of bad actors in SAARC and beyond, the media environment has altered, weakening SAARC’s hold on diversity, pluralism and multi-culturalism. Despite the disdain for the principles of equality, justice, fair play and the rule of law in the region, a robust democracy is pretended to be in place. While technology is advancing some, it is lagging behind many others.
Meanwhile, popular nationalism is returning to the SAARC region due to demographic changes. The future of democracy consists of a list of issues, such as consideration of their ramifications and evaluation of suggested remedies. If South Asia has shown anything, democracy, despite its grave failings, should not be taken for granted. Nevertheless, numerous persons of all stripes, institutions, groups, intellectuals, and citizens have demonstrated their will to protect what is essential to a liberal-democratic society. How may democracy in South Asia be strengthened and made fairer, more responsive, and more equitable?
The State of democracy worldwide has long been a source of great anxiety for scholars and other observers. Global studies on democracy have incessantly demonstrated democratic deterioration, or backsliding, even in stable and established democracies, yet there is still some glimmer of optimism. It has appeared in a variety of ways in all democratic countries. Backsliding in several Western democracies, often seen as having extremely stable democratic institutions, is one of the biggest worries. A prominent instance, exemplified by the US, is the deterioration of election integrity, a fundamental component of contemporary liberal democracies. Furthermore, it shows that young people, in particular, do not appear to accept democratic ideas, even in certain European nations.
According to Freedom House’s 2023 “Freedom in the World” report, there has been a fall in global freedom for 17 years running. The necessity to democratize election-based political practice, which has authoritarian inclinations, is the main obstacle to developing democratic politics in South Asia. Undemocratic political forces have emerged due to the discrepancy between democratic governance theory and reality, endangering electoral democracy. The undemocratic culture of political parties is one of the biggest threats to democracy in South Asia. Although every South Asian State has multiple ethnic, religious, and caste groups, none has considered this diversity. In South Asian nations, social and economic inequality is caused by structural inequities that must be addressed with education diplomacy if individuals are to have a role in protecting democracy against extra-democratic threats.
Political & Electoral Trust
On the other hand, younger generations exhibit better levels of political trust, which is encouraging for democracy’s future. Furthermore, the younger cohorts could have much engagement potential that is not yet manifesting. In the future, ordinary people may choose to participate in democracy through the Democracy of Education Diplomacy (DED) processes. It is necessary to thoroughly analyze research from several scientific fields on the capacity of DED processes to reduce opinion polarization. Since the growing polarisation inside SAARC democracies is rapidly turning into a destructive force, there is a lot at risk. If nothing else, the DED debate could yield a resolution. In other fields, DED processes are defined more flexibly, which does not seem to highlight its impacts as strongly. Only some types of process—well-facilitated and ideally taking place among groups of individuals with disparate political opinions—can prevent polarization. This does not imply that the cards of history have already been rolled for the future of democracy in South Asia. Despite the colonial history, hope exists if post-transitional leaders can maintain democracy as the only game in town. Even the worst colonial legacies can be erased by the routinization of political conduct brought about by years and years of democratic experience. Despite years of colonialism, this is undoubtedly excellent news for several fledgling South Asian democracies that may look forward to a more prosperous democratic future.
However, more discussion might save democracy’s survival, but doing so would need significant adjustments to how representative institutions respond to public demands between elections. An important factor contributing to the present democratic regression is the absence of robust systems that guarantee shifts in the executive branch. Elected state leaders have strengthened their hold on power in SAARC nations that have seen backsliding, which has been bad for democracy. The super-majority standards are a way to increase the difficulty of re-election for incumbents. The general concept is to raise the percentage of votes the incumbents must get to make it harder for them to be re-elected again; however, there are many possible variations. Furthermore, the incumbents may be encouraged to govern in a way that draws in the most significant number of supporters by needing a higher vote share for re-election. This would lessen the likelihood that the incumbents would exploit their support base to assume the role of the autocrats. Given that voting procedures ultimately influence democratic outcomes, it is necessary to examine whether we should be more daring in our reform efforts as democracy suffers worldwide.
Questions & Civic Contract
Democracy is the liberty to ask ‘Questions’ without fear, fright or favour with the guarantees of human dignity. The centrality of Question frames and imagines the idea of democracy, and the death of Question amounts to the death of democracy. The Question defines democracy and construes its foundation, and the liberty to ask Questions germinates democratic and accountable citizenship free from all ideological and non-ideological encumbrances. Democracy can be crystallized with the Aristotlean idea of “Civic Friendship”, which allows a ‘Civic Contract’ based on a set of standards, conduct, and expectations that will enable individuals with different objectives to collaborate to maintain vital common goods. These include building a strong economy that can guarantee the most necessities of life, such as food, shelter, health care, and education, and enabling the level of cooperation required to maintain domestic peace and security against external threats. The official set of guidelines that dictate how choices are made and carried out is known as the civic contract.
Regarding the distribution of goods, the rules decide who gets what. And who has to donate what to ensure that the distribution is equitable enough to win over a sizable majority without violating the minorities’ fundamental rights? For individuals to live with the assumption that they are operating within the bounds of the law, the civic contract needs to be sufficiently strong and secure. However, the agreement must be flexible enough to adapt to evolving conditions. The United States Constitution, which has undergone 27 amendments, shows the formal side of the civic contract. Although it was not flawless from the start, it represents the best deal possible, given the diversity of interests. There will always be criticism of the civic contract. However, it also improves people’s situation, as it would otherwise have been.
Democratic Citizenship and the State
The crucial issue is that democracy is a controversial term, which should serve as a sobering warning to all democracy experts. Views of what democracy means can differ significantly, even in SAARC democracies, which we frequently take for granted as being essentially pretty similar cultures. The overarching proposition is that social metamorphosis requires a shared vision of a democratic future that is worthwhile pursuing. Democracy offers a source of meaning that bolsters the propensity to produce volition. The democratic States also permit the acceptance, in the short and medium term, of unfavourable Questions that are both reasonable and already apparent in terms of the inherent and socio-political consequences of democracy. Furthermore, they offer direction for positive suggestions on institutional architecture that modern democracies need to reintegrate citizens and the State.
South Asia is probably where democracy’s future will be determined by India’s democratic survival, which will be crucial to the cause of democracy if it can maintain its democratic values. It could undoubtedly extend its democratic influence to SAARC and a more accommodating Myanmar. Still, nothing would be more beneficial for India than peace with Pakistan, which would allow that nation to bolster its democratic credentials and neutralize the threat posed by Islamic extremism. Most governments in South Asia and Asia appear to be well on their path to becoming influential and affluent democracies. Singapore has been so successful that it serves as a model for a dictatorship based on economic neoliberalism. Still, recently, it has demonstrated democratizing tendencies and may quickly join the other major democracies in the region: Taiwan, Australia, New Zealand, South Korea, and Japan.
Education Diplomacy Model
Any effective democracy must have a consistent education diplomacy philosophy that includes universal free education, literacy, fair elections, and chances for adult learners to continue their education, including re-training for new jobs in response to shifting economic conditions. To maintain a general state of balance in politics, citizens also require a diversity of solid institutions. These institutions have a unique role in uniting continents, countries, regions and societies, especially marginalized people and minorities. In South Asia, a culture of silence indicates a lack of democracy. In an accountable, inclusive, and participatory process, democratic government starts with a dedication to and respect for the sovereignty of South Asian citizens, regardless of differences in gender, class, caste, race, or religion. That is why a fundamental reconstruction of government is necessary for democracy to work to enforce the electoral regulations, particularly those about the respect of expenditure limitations on elections.
The idea of accountability to South Asian citizens may be expanded via establishing institutions like the Ombudsmen, which must be the core feature of democratic governance coupled with promoting good governance practices and ameliorating corruption and corrupt practices. The political and democratic spheres must be improved for women, children, and other marginalized groups by strengthening the civil society organizations, and their capability needs to be increased. Women should have more opportunities to participate in decision-making as equal members of society safely and securely by enhancing current thresholds of decentralization and drafting them into local governance structures. The weaker and impoverished segments of the large population of society suffering from rising rates of poverty, flimsy democratic institutions and poor administration, expanding militarism, and sectarianism need to be empowered and reorganized.
There is a need for communication between the people and decision-makers and between the governed and the government for the SAARC nations’ management rather than domination for establishing good governance seriously that will reform the current miasma. The establishment of the South Asian University (SAU) in 2010 in India by the SAARC as an intergovernmental organization with a status of diplomatic mission and duly recognized by the United Nations is a model of education diplomacy. Therefore, the SAU must come out with capacity-building training programmes, good governance practices modules, research publications on democracy, and introduce coursework on “The Future of Democracy in South Asia” at Graduate and Post-graduate levels in an ambience of diversity with equality, multi-culturalism with liberty, and liberal pluralism with cosmopolitanism.
Thus, SAU can envision establishing a “Centre for the Future of Democracy in South Asia” to address all aspects of democracy, incidental thereto, connected therewith or collateral thereon, etc. The SAU’s democracy advocacy will strengthen as democratic institutions and cultures do. SAU requires a more defined plan to advance democratic principles, encourage an open society, and assist grassroots democracy campaigners against authoritarian movements through education diplomacy. The SAU can craft a cluster of policies for bolstering democratic deterrence against democratic backsliding, and it must pursue its goal of correcting and assisting governance architectures in the region. In renewing its efforts, the SAU must promote media freedom, international and local civil society organizations that uphold human rights, and SAARC by increasing financing. They ought to interact with the pro-democracy factions in the SAARC administrations and prepare humane policy strategies and advocacies against those who violate human rights in the region.
Way Forward
Suppose we, the People of SAARC, have the political will and acumen to ensure that our elected representatives and government servants continue to choose the common good over the interests of special interests or themselves. In that case, the long-term outlook for democracy is relatively favourable. The economic crisis has resulted in national, transnational, and global governance in SAARC, and many members of the political class and even the electorate have failed. SAARC must find a solution to its nationally expressed inequality and the rising internal inequality. In SAARC, regional cooperation will serve the common good and can take precedence over national special interests. Particularly in communities with significant economic and social disparities, the sustainability of democracy cannot depend just on objective safeguards to keep us from destroying ourselves. The democratic popular will, or our will, must be allowed to speak up when necessary to protect the people and their democracies from the risks they confront in a world that is changing quickly on a national, regional and worldwide level. Freedom of expression and the free press are two other essential components of democracy that are already being profoundly impacted by new technology. In many ways, information technology and the Internet have made democratization and the proliferation of free expression possible. It is immeasurable how freeing it is for citizens to be able to coordinate action and take part in debates at the national, regional and international levels.
In sum, the future of democracy in the SAARC region will likely employ new strategies and goals, but it will still need to be viewed through the eyes of the ordinary people. By doing this, despite a heightened sense of uncertainty brought on by various crises, including a little greater faith in a democratic political system, the future of democracy does not necessarily become completely disillusioned. Debate and Question have the power to unite individuals who have opposed political opinions and modify current laws to promote the advancement of democracy. The downward trend that has persisted for so long may finally be about to reverse. Moreover, the scale has always been a problem for democracies. SAARC democracies need to grow to compete with other nations, which usually entails increasing the number of informed citizens. More educated and skilled individuals who are highly motivated enhance democracy and make problem-solving easier. However, having a more comprehensive range of interests represented at the negotiating table makes it more challenging to reach mutually beneficial accords. SAARC democracies can successfully manage size by making careful and timely adjustments to their civic agreements—those who do not adjust risk civic unrest and becoming targets of despotic adversaries.