Brave new world, almost
For two days in late April, the information ministers of the SAARC region (except those from Bhutan and Maldives) met and discussed information. Theirs was quite a progressive agenda, and at least at the rhetorical level there seemed to be recognition among these high personages of the proper path to take in information-sharing in South Asia.
There was recognition, but is there commitment? SAARC meets, after all, have always been long on proclamations and declarations and short on follow-up. And South Asian countries are quite good at signing any treaty or agreement on social issues put before them merely because it is the right thing to do. Take the case of the child labour declaration that SAARC social welfare ministers signed a couple of years ago in Rawalpindi, promising to eradicate all hazardous forms of child labour by the turn of century and all forms of child labour just a decade thereafter.
On 26 April, the SAARC information ministers did what they are good at, that is in adopting a "comprehensive strategy for cooperation and a SAARC plan of action". While it is grandiose, the 18-point action is worth repeating for the "in-principle" understanding that it represents.
The plan calls for: ensuring free flow of information, newspapers, periodicals, books and other publications among the SAARC countries; reducing postal and telecommunication rates for media transmission and information materials; increasing cooperation amongst news agencies of SAARC countries; facilitating easier travel for "media persons" within the region; working towards a SAARC recognised "Regional Media Forum"; holding an annual conference of editors and working journalists; enhancing exchange of data through email and the Internet; and arranging regular exchange of television and radio programmes.
Further, the SAARC ministers called for joint production of documentaries and films; holding of periodic SAARC film festivals; training programmes for media people (including something called "SAARC orientation modules" in the syllabi of national media training institutes); improving the programmes under the SAARC Audio Visual Exchange (SAVE) programme; evolving model guidelines on satellite broadcasting; examining the feasibility of launching a "SAARC satellite"; exploring the setting up of a "SAARC Media Development Fund"; and discouraging negative projection of member countries by media.
Promoting more media exchange and encouraging the transfer of periodicals across borders, easier travel for journalists and promotion of documentaries are welcome words to come out of an officious declaration. But with due respect, some of the other ideas in the Dhaka action plan are non-starters. The sheer costs and logistical challenges in lobbing up a SAARC satellite make it a pie in the sky. Also, as there will be little room for government- led media outlets in the future scheme of things, we hold little hope for the SAVE programme or the idea of news agencies (all of them either state owned or controlled) coming together.
The proper role of governments in South Asia would be to meddle least with their own media mechanisms and make it easier for independent media in each country to interact, collect and sell information to the other. Among the other things they did in Dhaka, "in principle" at least, the information ministers seemed to understand this point. Thank you. Now, would you please do something about it?