Contemporary South Asia Class 12 NCERT Solutions

Concept used. Each clue points to one distinctive feature of a South Asian country, its form of government, its geography, or a famous policy. South Asia here means the seven countries named in the chapter: Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, the Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. Match the clue to the country whose political history or location fits it.

1. Nepal. The chapter describes a long triangular tussle in Nepal among the monarchist forces (pro-monarchy), the democrats (pro-democracy) and the Maoists (the extremists), which kept the country politically unstable.
2. Bhutan. Bhutan is landlocked (no sea coast) and, after 2008, became a multi-party democracy under the leadership of its king. Note that Nepal is also landlocked, but the clue multi-party competition fits Bhutan's described change.
3. Sri Lanka. The chapter clearly states Sri Lanka was the first country in the region to liberalise the economy.
4. Pakistan. Pakistan saw repeated military coups, by Ayub Khan, Yahya Khan, Zia-ul-Haq and Pervez Musharraf, where the army prevailed over elected, pro-democracy governments.
5. India. India is located centrally in the region and is the only country that shares a border with most of the others.
6. Maldives. The Maldives was a Sultanate till 1968, when it became a republic with a presidential form of government.
7. Bangladesh. The Grameen Bank model of small savings and credit cooperatives in rural areas helped reduce poverty in Bangladesh.
8. Nepal. A landlocked country that was a Hindu kingdom and then a constitutional monarchy for many years, before the monarchy was abolished in 2008.

(a) Nepal    (b) Bhutan    (c) Sri Lanka    (d) Pakistan    (e) India    (f) Maldives    (g) Bangladesh    (h) Nepal.

Concept used. A wrong statement is the one that does not match the facts given in the chapter. Test each option against what the chapter actually says about the region's politics, treaties and outside powers, then pick the one that fails.

1. Option (a) is wrong. The chapter records a mixed record of democracy. Pakistan has had long spells of military rule, and Bhutan and Nepal were monarchies for much of this period. So it is false that all South Asian countries are democratic.
2. Option (b) is correct. India and Bangladesh signed the Farakka Treaty in 1996 for sharing the Ganga waters, a river-water agreement.
3. Option (c) is correct. The South Asian Free Trade Agreement (SAFTA) was signed at the 12th SAARC Summit held in Islamabad in 2004.
4. Option (d) is correct. China and the United States remain key players in South Asian politics, the US as a moderator in India–Pakistan relations and China through its partnership with Pakistan.

The wrong statement is (a) ``All the countries in South Asia are democratic.''

Concept used. The answer compares the post-independence political journeys of Bangladesh and Pakistan, two countries that were one state until 1971. Commonalities are shared features of their experience; differences are where their paths diverged, especially in the post-Cold War period.

Commonalities:

1. Both countries were part of a single Pakistan from 1947 to 1971, and both have experienced both civilian democratic governments and military rulers.
2. Both have seen the army intervene in politics, with elected governments overthrown by military coups, and in both there has been a strong popular movement and aspiration for democracy.
3. In both, democracy has had to struggle against powerful groups, the military, and has faced instability and the assassination of leaders (Sheikh Mujib and Ziaur Rahman in Bangladesh; the removal of Bhutto and Sharif in Pakistan).

Differences:

1. In the post-Cold War period Bangladesh has remained a democracy: since the fall of General Ershad and the 1991 elections, representative democracy based on multi-party elections has worked there.
2. Pakistan began the post-Cold War period with elected governments under Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif but suffered a military coup in 1999 under General Musharraf; it returned to civilian rule only in 2008.
3. In Pakistan the social dominance of the military, the clergy and the landowning aristocracy, and the conflict with India, have repeatedly toppled elected governments; Bangladesh, after 1991, moved towards a more stable, settled democratic order.

Commonality: both share a divided record of civilian rule and military coups and a strong democratic aspiration. Difference: Bangladesh has stayed a democracy through the post-Cold War years, while Pakistan slid back into military rule in 1999 and returned to democracy only in 2008.

Concept used. A challenge to democracy is any force or problem that blocks or threatens free, representative government. Nepal's transition from monarchy to a democratic republic faced several such obstacles, drawn directly from the chapter.

1. The monarchy and the army. For years the king, with the help of the army, kept full control and restricted the spread of democracy. In 2002 the king even abolished parliament and dismissed the government, ending the limited democracy that existed.
2. The Maoist armed insurgency. The Maoists believed in armed insurrection against the monarch and the ruling elite. This led to a violent, at times triangular, conflict among the monarchist forces, the democrats and the Maoists, which destabilised the country.
3. Disagreement over the new constitution and the path ahead. After 2006 the parties disagreed on key questions, the role of a nominal monarchy, and the radical social and economic programmes the Maoists demanded, while mutual suspicion (and suspicion of India's role) made consensus hard.

Three challenges: (1) the king and army restricting democracy, even abolishing parliament in 2002; (2) the violent Maoist armed insurgency; (3) deep disagreement among the parties over the new constitution and the shape of the future state.

Concept used. An ethnic conflict is a struggle between communities defined by language, religion or descent. In Sri Lanka the conflict set the majority Sinhala community against the minority Tamils, and the answer must name the players and then judge how far the conflict has been, or can be, resolved.

The principal players:

1. The Sinhala community and the forces of Sinhala nationalism, who dominated politics after independence and were hostile to giving ``concessions'' to the Tamils.
2. The Sri Lankan Tamils, and especially the militant Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), who from 1983 fought an armed struggle for a separate state, ``Tamil Eelam''.
3. The Sri Lankan government and army, caught between Sinhala hardliners and Tamil militants.
4. India, which signed an accord and sent the Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF) in 1987, and other international actors such as Norway and Iceland, which tried to bring the warring groups back to negotiations.

Prospects of resolution:

1. The armed conflict came to an end in 2009 when the LTTE was vanquished by the Sri Lankan army, so the long civil war is militarily over.
2. Despite the conflict Sri Lanka kept a democratic political system and recorded high economic growth and human development, a base on which a lasting settlement could be built.
3. The deeper challenge remains political, addressing Tamil grievances and devolving power so that the underlying ethnic causes do not reignite; a purely military end does not by itself guarantee a just, durable peace.

Principal players: the Sinhala nationalists, the Sri Lankan Tamils and the LTTE, the Sri Lankan government, and outside actors (India's IPKF, Norway and Iceland). Prospects: the armed conflict ended with the LTTE's defeat in 2009, but a lasting resolution still depends on politically accommodating Tamil concerns within a democratic Sri Lanka.

Concept used. The answer lists the confidence-building measures and agreements that India and Pakistan have used to manage tension and build peace, and then weighs whether these add up to a guaranteed friendship. ``Agreements'' here include treaties, peace declarations and people-to-people steps.

Some recent agreements and steps:

1. The two countries agreed to confidence-building measures to reduce the risk of war, including the agreement not to attack each other's nuclear installations and facilities.
2. Leaders met at summits, the Lahore bus journey and Peace Declaration of 1999, and the Agra Summit of 2001, to understand each other better and seek solutions.
3. A number of bus routes were opened between the two countries, trade between them increased, and visas were granted more easily, alongside the long surviving Indus Waters Treaty (1960) on river waters.

Can we be sure of friendship?

1. No, we cannot be sure. Both governments continue to be suspicious of each other: India blames Pakistan for aiding Kashmiri militants and terrorist strikes, and Pakistan blames India for trouble in Sindh and Balochistan.
2. Core disputes remain unsettled, Kashmir, the Siachen glacier, Sir Creek, and the chapter notes that ``in recent times, the situation has changed'', meaning relations remain fragile and can reverse.

Recent steps include nuclear non-attack and other confidence-building agreements, the Lahore and Agra summits, new bus routes, more trade and easier visas. But we cannot be sure of a friendly relationship: deep mutual suspicion and unresolved disputes like Kashmir keep the peace fragile.

Concept used. The India–Bangladesh relationship mixes cooperation (areas where the two states work together) with disagreement (areas of dispute). The answer must give two clear examples of each, taken from the chapter.

Areas of cooperation:

1. Economic and trade relations, which have improved considerably; Bangladesh is part of India's Look East (Act East since 2014) policy linking India to Southeast Asia via Myanmar.
2. Disaster management and the environment, where the two states have cooperated regularly, along with the 2015 exchange of enclaves that settled part of the boundary.

Areas of disagreement:

1. Sharing of river waters, the Ganga and the Brahmaputra, with Bangladesh feeling India behaves like a regional bully over water.
2. Illegal immigration and security, India is unhappy over illegal immigration from Bangladesh and its alleged support for anti-Indian groups, and over Bangladesh's refusal to let Indian troops or natural gas pass through its territory.

Cooperation: (1) growing economic and trade ties (Look East / Act East); (2) disaster management and environmental cooperation, plus the 2015 exchange of enclaves. Disagreement: (1) sharing of the Ganga and Brahmaputra river waters; (2) illegal immigration and security, including transit and natural-gas issues.

Concept used. External powers are big states from outside the region, mainly China and the United States, whose interests shape how South Asian neighbours deal with one another. ``Bilateral relations'' means ties between two countries; the answer shows how an outside power tilts those ties, then gives one example.

1. No region exists in a vacuum. The chapter says South Asia is influenced by outside powers no matter how much it tries to insulate itself, and that China and the United States remain key players in South Asian politics.
2. The United States has good relations with both India and Pakistan after the Cold War and increasingly works as a moderator in India–Pakistan relations. Economic reforms and liberal policies, large South Asian diasporas in the US and the region's huge markets all deepen American involvement.
3. China influences relations too: Sino-Indian ties have improved, but China's strategic partnership with Pakistan remains a major irritant for India, shaping how India and Pakistan deal with each other.

One example: In India–Pakistan relations the United States acts as a moderator. As the cartoon shows, with the US ``umpiring'' between the two, an outside power has come to influence how this most important bilateral relationship in the region is managed.

External powers, mainly the US and China, strongly shape South Asia's bilateral relations. Example: the US increasingly acts as a moderator in India–Pakistan relations (the cartoon shows it as the umpire), while China's partnership with Pakistan colours India's ties with both.

Concept used. SAARC (the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation) is the region's main body for building cooperation through multilateral means, working with all member states together. A ``short note'' should state its role, its main achievement (SAFTA), and its limitations.

Role of SAARC:

1. SAARC, begun in 1985, is a major regional initiative by the South Asian states to build cooperation and friendly relations through multilateral means.
2. Its most important economic step is the South Asian Free Trade Agreement (SAFTA), signed in 2004 and in force from 1 January 2006, which promised a free-trade zone and aims to lower trade tariffs so the whole region can trade more freely.
3. The hope behind SAFTA is that a region which trades more freely will also cooperate better on political issues.

Limitations of SAARC:

1. Because of persisting political differences (above all between India and Pakistan), SAARC ``has not had much success''.
2. Smaller countries fear SAFTA is a way for India to ``invade'' their markets and influence their societies and politics through commercial presence.
3. Some in India feel SAFTA is not worth the trouble, since India already has bilateral free-trade agreements with Bhutan, Nepal and Sri Lanka.

Role: SAARC (since 1985) builds multilateral cooperation, and through SAFTA (2004, effective 2006) aims to lower tariffs and create a free-trade zone. Limitations: persisting political differences, especially India–Pakistan, smaller states' fear of Indian dominance, and Indian doubts about SAFTA have kept SAARC from achieving much.

Concept used. The question asks for a balanced judgement, not a yes or no. We weigh the reasons neighbours feel dominated against the facts of India's actual conduct and the structural reason (its size and central location) behind the impression.

Why the impression exists:

1. Given India's size and power, and because it is located centrally and borders all the others, the smaller countries are bound to be suspicious and fear India wants to be a regionally dominant power.
2. There are real grievances: Nepal resents alleged interference and designs on its rivers and access to the sea; Bangladesh complains India behaves like a ``regional bully'' over river waters; Sri Lanka disliked the IPKF's 1987 intervention as interference in its internal affairs.

Why the impression is not fully correct:

1. India often feels exploited by its neighbours in turn, and after 1987 it shifted to a policy of disengagement from Sri Lanka's internal troubles, the opposite of constant interference.
2. India has helped its neighbours: post-tsunami reconstruction and a free-trade agreement with Sri Lanka, big hydroelectric projects and development aid in Bhutan, and a quick military response in 1988 to save the Maldives from a coup attempt.
3. Many disputes flow simply from geography, India is the only country bordering all the others, so it is naturally involved in most regional issues, which is not the same as deliberate domination.

The impression is only partly correct. India's size, central location and past interventions explain why smaller neighbours feel dominated, but India has also disengaged (Sri Lanka), given large aid and help (Bhutan, the Maldives, post-tsunami Sri Lanka) and itself feels exploited. So the impression is understandable but exaggerated.