 Interest in this session today on Harnessing Regional Cooperation in Asia. My name's Rana Faroohar. I'm the global business columnist for the Financial Times and I'm also a global economic analyst for CNN and it's really a pleasure and quite an honor to be here with these dignitaries and experts in their field. So I'm just gonna briefly introduce everyone and then set the stage and we'll have about 30 to 40 minutes of interaction here together and then we're gonna open it up to questions from you all and so you can feel free to join in the conversation. So I'll just start by introducing everyone that we have here to my left. We have the Honorable Prime Minister Hasina to her left, Minister Sitaram. To her left, the Prime Minister Sri Lanka, Wikmursing, I'm gonna mispronounce it but I almost got it right. Mr. Banga, formerly of Unilever, now working at, I'm going to not remember the exact name of your firm, but Clayton Dubbler and Rice and a young global business leader, Mr. Zarif, Pakistan entrepreneur, Zarif. Zarif is the Iranian economist. Exactly, he's not here last year. That's the one part of the region we've ignored today. Yeah, well, we can do a whole another session on that but that's another time. So let me just start by setting the stage and maybe kind of putting out a few facts and issues in what has become an increasingly complicated part of the world. One of the reasons that the WEF wanted to do this session is that as many of you know, the South Asia Association for Regional Cooperation, SARK, has fallen apart a bit in recent months. Following the attack in Uri in September of 2016, four nations pulled out of the cooperation group. There's been a lot of talk about increasing strife in the region. This is coming at a time when Asia as a whole is having a lot of conflict, not just economic conflict but social conflict. We have a new president in the US that is perhaps adding to some of that conflict. And so one of the things that we wanna really talk about is how can the low hanging fruit in this region be plucked? South Asia is a region in which there is very, very little inter-regional trade. It's just a very small percentage, one of the smallest in the world in terms of inter-regional trade. We wanna talk a little bit about how that might be fixed. What are the challenges but what are the opportunities and where do we see building blocks? A lot of these sessions can become very contentious but we really wanna focus here on opportunities and solutions and some of the space in which dialogue might be created. So I think that I'll start maybe with a question for each of you. And Minister Sitaraman, I'm gonna start with you since India is the largest country in the region. Do you think Sark is dead? Not at all. South Asia is a vibrant and a continuing democracy. And each of the country has contributed immensely to the development of the region and the economic buoyancy that you can talk about when you talk about South Asia. It's something which no country can ignore. So I don't think the question should even arise in anybody's mind. What could be done, let me say, what could be done to bring India back into a leadership role in this community, would you say? Well, I think each of the country has played a very significant role. South Asia particularly looks at each of the member as equals and all of us have really put in our very best. It is to create the ecosystem back again with a lot of vibrancy that we need to spend some time sitting together and talking and ensuring that there is peace and harmony. If that's disturbed, obviously you sit back and start wondering which is the best way to get over the difficulties and start re-energizing. So I think the way to go about it would be, yes, talk about it, talk about the difficulties, but also commit oneself to peace. Commit as a country to peace. If that's appreciated by all of us, I'm sure it'll be better times again. Okay, Prime Minister Asina, I'm gonna turn to you next. Bangladesh has a tremendous amount to gain, obviously, from regional cooperation a lot in terms of trade, in terms of the potential for infrastructure. What's your view on how to put things back together in the region and maybe I'll ask you to comment as well on whether you think Sark is dead and what could be, if not, what could be done to revitalize it? No, well, I'm really surprised about your question because how could you think that Sark is dead? Well, Sark, in 80s, we formed Sark. It is for South Asian country, we cooperate with each other to increase our business trade and many other issues are there. But yes, in the Sark charter, there is a point that we cannot raise any bilateral issues or we cannot discuss it. But as a whole, Sark is still there. Maybe because of some unavoidable situation, the Sark meeting couldn't take place. It doesn't mean that Sark is dead. Beside that, I always believe that in South Asian country, we should get together because what I say, well, what I feel that the people of this region, they are more important to us and our problem, it is almost identical. That's why I always say that we have only one enemy that is poverty. We must eradicate poverty from South Asia. We can do it if we are together and if we can increase our business trade and cooperation. And now, like about Bangladesh, because of our geographical position, we have a very good understanding with all our neighboring countries. As because of Sark, we established in 80s. In 90s, we established BIMStake. And well, recently we have established like Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Nepal, the connectivity. It is just for increase the business trade and cooperation. And what are the lessons, how did you do that and what lesson do you think that others might apply in terms of regional cooperation? I mean, what do you think? Well, I found everybody is very much cooperative. And then other part like Myanmar, India, Bangladesh, China, we have established BCIMEC, Economic Corridor, just to increase the business trade. So that way, Sark is here. And you know, I believe that, well, sometimes it may be some issue raises. It doesn't mean that everything is the end. So it is not end. Well, maybe because of some reason we couldn't hold the meeting, but in future it will also know. And that's why I'm a little bit surprised when I heard that it is dead. You think I'm being too aggressive. So the question does not arise about whether it is alive or dead. It is very much alive. That much I can tell you because I always give more importance to cooperation within our region. Maybe you should have said it's comatose rather than... I'm gonna come to you, but first I wanna ask the Prime Minister, do you agree with this? I mean, do you think that things are actually rosier than people like me, than journalists proceed them from the outside? You know, and in particular with trade and there being so little inter-regional trade, so much conflict. I mean, Sri Lanka has actually come a little bit under pressure from the weft, scoring rather low on the openness to trade issue. Maybe you can comment on that and put the context here from your perspective. Since Sark started, there has been tension, but there has not been war. When Sark started, the worst relationships, the strains were between us and India. But we work on all that. There have been other countries had the strike, but there have been bilateral issues and bilateral relations do impact on Sark. Okay, it also makes us focus on the issues that have to be settled, but it doesn't mean that there, anyway there's both formal and informal contacts going on and in a subcontinent where we have friends and relations, there's so much of other activity, outside government activity that goes on. So now is netted it because Trump has made president-elect Trump has made a statement and there's a difference of opinion on Russia and what happened? This is netted it. It's the same question you can ask. No, NATO will continue with all the strains and they may not meet that often. They will meet in South Asia, despite with Sark also that the informal systems that are working within us, how do we keep it going? How do we try and limit the damage that take place? What has to be changed? But it's focused on the issue. The real problem of Sark has been trade, but then what do we do? Bangladesh and us are biggest exports of apparels and people who go to Middle East. I can't ask people in Bangladesh to come here, our guys to go there. And Vashtyosa was exchanging apparels. Are we all going to wear t-shirts and broad shorts and walk around? So we have to start restructuring our economies and how do we relate to it? India itself just started opening out only in 91, 92. So it's now coming to a critical stage where India can be a powerhouse for change and how do we work in? But rest of us still is basically a colonial economy on which we put some manufacturing activity and send people out abroad. Only India has made a significant change, but there's much more capacity even in India. So now I think we are coming to a critical stage of how do we work out our trade relations? For that, Sri Lanka's approach, even before 2016, September has been, it has to be bilateral. We have to deal with bilateral. And from the shock, we've identified India, Pakistan and Bangladesh as the major countries. And we also want to deal with the other Bay of Bengal countries where we have to trade. We are dealing with the European Union, with China and Japan that we fulfilled. So but if you ask Bangladesh, they'll work in a different way. So let us all do our bilateral relations and see how it works out. There's no other way that we can do this. I want to come back to the idea of restructuring economies because I think that's important. But Mr. Zaidi, let me maybe go back to your idea of the cooperation being comatose. So maybe you can expand on that. Well, look, we had a moment that people like me who've been invested in regional normalization and particularly the Pakistan-India equation. It's not going to be solved in a hurry. Some people think it may never be solved. But I think that there's enough evidence from big countries that have had really difficult issues between them that without resolving those issues, you can still start trading. You can still send t-shirts and Bermuda shorts to one country and import Haldiram and things like that from the other. At, we had a moment in November where we anticipated that there was going to be a Sark Summit in Pakistan. And if that Sark Summit had gone through, a lot of us felt that that could have been the beginning of a transformational moment because a lot of people, particularly Indians, I mean Prime Minister Modi continues to have 80 plus percent approval ratings even after demonetization. So there is an element of transformationalness to what he's doing. So for him to pull out of Sark at that time has really led to this feeling, I think, and it's a, I mean, I didn't frame the question, the World Economic Forum did about whether Sark is dead. But even Prime Minister Wicca Massinio, what he's just said is incredibly important because he's a Prime Minister and of course a very experienced politician. And so he's not going to say things the way that I might say them because I don't have constituency to respond to. But he just said that Sark is dead because he just said that we have to deal with the issues in the region at a bilateral level. And so in a sense he's saying, look, don't drag Sri Lanka into this. We're tired of this. We've been trying to do this for many, many years. Let India and Pakistan either get along or not get along. And if they don't get along and there's no Sark Summit, that's okay. We have to get going with our own growth and development and we're going to relate to China in a certain way, relate to India in a certain way and we're going to keep moving. I think, I don't want to speak for the Prime Minister but since I've done it for Sri Lanka, I should do it for Bangladesh too. I think Bangladesh has made the same choice. So I think that there is an element of comatose to where Sark is today. And I think that brave and resilient leadership and who could be braver and more resilient than the people on stage? Who could be more qualified to take difficult decisions and really face a lot of a probium back home than somebody like Prime Minister Asina. I mean one thing that you didn't mention earlier but that I'm so proud of is that we're sitting on the stage with women leaders from South Asia and we have a great tradition of women leaders in my country in Sri Lanka, in India and in Bangladesh. And so I think that I would encourage the people on stage right now and their bosses in some case. I mean, Sheikh Asina doesn't have a boss other than the Bangladeshi people nor the Prime Minister but back in India, I think that we need to aggressively push, particularly India, to be the big country that it is and that it aspires to be. And to do that, it has to be invested in multilateralism. But I fear that, you know, we just mentioned Trump, I think we're beginning to enter an age where there's a rejection of multilateralism. I mean, it was amazing this morning, President Xi was talking about multilateralism and it was so funny that, you know, here's the Chinese head of state, right? Selling a vision of globalization that originally, you know, came from the Washington Consensus. So I think that, you know, I'm really worried that South Asia is gonna go the Trump way instead of the Xi way and I think we need to go the Xi way. Okay, that's a fascinating. Can I just say one thing? Economically, we have to do our bilateral deals because our markets are different, our investments are different. Politically, the crisis comes when we stop playing cricket with each other. And the critical point hasn't been each day. That's a good point. Mr. Mang, let me come to you and you know, this point about you can trade t-shirts even if you have other political conflicts, social conflicts, you're a businessman, you've worked all over the region with a global company. Where do you see opportunities? I mean, where is the opportunity particularly for trade given that it's so low relative to the amount of people living in this region? Well, the principal reason why I think there's a lot of opportunities because there's so little of it today, it can only go up from where it is. But I want to make a comment. You didn't ask me the question you asked everyone else about Sark being dead. I'm just astonished that one canceled meeting can lead to even a supposition or a preposition of that nature. Let's just look around at this table and if you roll the clock back 10 years and you think about the relationships between India and Bangladesh or India and Sri Lanka, they weren't exactly where they are today. Progress is made and it is made through leadership which is truly thoughtful and mature and wise on all sides. And I think the fact that there may be one particular political relationship which has not yet matured should not lead us to a conclusion that this entire constellation of countries cannot relate. Number one. Number two, let's think about where we are. We're in Europe. Europe had the biggest, one of the biggest conflicts. And where is it today? What has happened? How did they get here? Now they didn't get here overnight. They had many such canceled meetings I can assure you. They had many such false steps that brought Europe to where it is today but it's come through a long, long path. Now back to your question on what business, what can business do? So let's think about South Asia. 1.8 billion people out of this world's population. Excuse me. A very large population therefore, 7% GDP growth as was pointed out earlier, 25% of the world's middle class living in this particular sub-region, this is a huge opportunity. Now, you're right. The total level of intra-regional trade today is only 5% of the total trade that we do. I see that as opportunity. As the world perhaps begins to, a word I learned here today, de-globalize. And that's what I was hearing this morning. If the world does begin to de-globalize, I think all the more opportunity for trade, intra-regional trade, to grow within South Asia. Now how does one do that? I think you have to start small and think really big but you don't have to be in a hurry. You have to go slow and take it in small steps. What is wrong with bilateral trade? It is very rare that you have even in a family of eight. All eight people agreeing on everything. It doesn't happen, it doesn't happen in my home. I can tell you there are only four. It certainly doesn't happen in eight. So start with bilateral, start with three countries, start with four countries. I thought the example of the motor vehicle agreement between India, Bhutan, Bangladesh, et cetera is very positive. You can have movement across those geographies. That will open up a supply chain opportunity. So I would be, I would, I'm all for starting small with bilaterals, with trilaterals, with quadrilaterals. Eventually this mosaic and jigsaw will begin to fill with trade. And I'm a firm believer coming back to Europe that as the economic linkages strengthen, the conflict inherent potential for conflict will reduce. One last point on the supply chain. Back to this movement of vehicles. So today you could have a factory in a SAM which could supply into Bangladesh or you could have it the other way around. This was not possible earlier, but you can do it today. So I think connectivity is a theme that we should really focus on. And connectivity, I keep using Europe as an example, I think free movement of people in Europe has been a huge advantage for trade. And I think, I mean, jokes aside, if it takes you, you have no direct connection between Delhi and Islamabad, it is pretty unlikely that you're going to find it easy to trade. That's why the trade happens via Dubai. So connectivity, direct connectivity, visa on arrival, actually facilitating movement of people is a precursor to good trade. I think there's a lot of opportunity. By your question being centered around SARC, and can I use this word? Ignoring SAFTA. You're actually missing the message which comes out of South Asia. You may compare it with the global trade and say, oh my God, South Asia, between the countries, there's not much of a trade. But actually if you look at the historic partitioning of the region and subsequently the rebuilding of the region, in a matter of 60 years, you have had global value chains which existed in the pre-independence India, pre-independence Pakistan and earlier in Sri Lanka. The global value chain idea was all within the region. And after the independence, after the Second World War, if I can broadly put it that way, many of the global value chains which existed in this region have been so ruthlessly broken down. If you take the case of jute or cotton textiles, the linkage which East Pakistan then, Bangladesh now, India had, is all being redone freshly by Bangladesh, freshly by India, as though they are exclusive now. That happened, let's say, 40, 50 years ago. But today what is happening between India and Bangladesh, for instance, is to reconnect. A lot of things which are happening, the revival of the Chittagong Port, the road, the bridge which is getting built with Tripura, which is one of the states in the Northeast. Our case is very clearly proving that interconnectivity, which is a very important point Mr. Banga made, is being re-established. So it has got to be contextualized. You really can't talk about SARC as though that includes a lot of trade and economy linking matters. SAFTA looks at that. And if you look at SAFTA, the kind of goods which are moving in this region, the imports which come from Bangladesh, the imports that we have from Sri Lanka, are very clearly highlighting how the volumes of trade have grown. In fact, in a matter of 10 years, from 0.6 billion, we've reached 6 billion with Sri Lanka and 6.8 billion with Bangladesh. So trade is, you may cynically look at it saying, oh God, it started from a low base, it's actually picking up, whatever be it. Look at the volume which is being traded in that region. And to some other parts, the same linkage which is being established reaches up to Southeast Asia. By road, this point of excellence he made about the road connectivity which is getting built and with great effort from all those involved states, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Nepal, India. And then the trilateral highway which goes till Thailand. These are all unbelievable extension of developmental work. And through that, many of those earlier existed relationship between India, Bangladesh, India, Myanmar are all getting built up. So you're missing out on the trade and economic aspects by talking about a SARC which laid a lot of emphasis only on strategic political matters. That might still be there. The point that- Did you wanna add something to that, Prime Minister? No, that's true. And it was the nature of the trade. For instance, if you have a look at the trade between India and Sri Lanka, we can say that there's more Indian imports into Sri Lanka than Sri Lankan imports of goods into India. But if you see the benefit, we are getting out a transshipment cargo, then the picture changes. Then there are other types of trade which in no account. There's a camel trade between Sri Lanka and between Karamban and Chennai. Do you know what the camel trade is? Those are guys who go for the day buy goods in Tamil Nadu, Chennai, and come back and sell in Sri Lanka. And people from Chennai who comes to Sri Lanka buys goods from Sri Lanka and goes back to Chennai in the next flight and sells it bags full. So they are called camels because some of them carry two bags. So the camel trade is never shown in any of our statistics whether it favors us or in Tamil Nadu. I don't know, but there are a whole lot of trade between us from Kalamburu, Tamil Nadu, to Mumbai, to Trivandrum, which is off the records. And similarly, the border hearts, heart is a bazaar. The kind of border bazaars that we opened up with Bangladesh. I'm so happy to say it has changed the very ecosystem of that area. It's like a seaport, although they're all landlocked areas that we're talking about. The kind of economic activity that you see in a seaport where goods come, goods go, some are transit, some are going into the hinterland. It is that kind of a bus you would see in many of these points that we've established now. So trade is actually happening. And it sounds like, I mean, what I'm hearing you say is we need to have sort of three perspectives, a bit of a historical perspective, a bit of patience. And I'm also hearing a focus on infrastructure, which is something that, you know, the region certainly needs and that might be low-hanging fruit for more cooperation. I mean, would you agree with that, Prime Minister? Well, cooperation between our sub-country or regional, then sub-regional. Actually, in the SARC charter, it is also mentioned that you may have regional or sub-regional cooperation. So that way the, well, the business trade, it is increasing. It is not that it is decreasing. And also for education, many children are going from this country to that country and they are getting education. And business group, they are also coming. In Bangladesh, I can tell you that almost from Sri Lanka, India, Pakistan, even Nepal, Bhutan, everybody is coming. And they are doing business trade. This is going on. The economic activities, it is increasing day by day. And we are encouraging them. And the connectivity is very, very important. And that's why we give more importance to that, that we should establish connectivity, the road communication, the waterways. We are also thinking about the waterways. Already we have signs of agreement so that we can do it more because in a very cheap rate you can send goods from one part to another part. So that way we are working on it. And there's the software and also the Sussex that we established. So that way the cooperation, an economic cooperation, it hasn't stopped. I think from India and India-Pakistan, you have also your trade business. It is also going on. You have stopped that. Right? Have you stopped with two points? Yeah. Sorry, go ahead. There are many words that are going on. I know that. The internet connectivity, the global internet connectivity. Yeah. It's a classic example that you should take into consideration for this nature, discussion of this nature. Bangladesh receives through the undersea connection the best of internet connectivity globally. And India and the region, all of us are going to benefit from that kind of internet connectivity. Submarine cable. Yes, submarine cables. And in that, the kind of cooperation which these countries have established among themselves, which is going to reach out to entire Southeast Asia also for better connectivity through this region, are all landmark historic decisions, which probably you don't see in other regions of the globe. That's one thing. Of course, a lot of other things can happen. In India, we've made sure optical fiber connectivity is given to all our villages. We have six lakhs of them. What is six lakhs about? Six hundred thousand. Six hundred thousand, all right? We're giving optical fiber cable connections so that administration can now become completely digitized as a follow-up of the kind of better connection. One thing which I think a forum like WEF should take on board is given the global depressed demand condition, it's very nice for us to talk, oh, Sark is dead, nothing is happening in Southeast Asia, and so on. But what you're doing in the process is ignoring a region which is going to be the engine for reviving global demand. It is here that activity is happening. It is here that you have 7% or more growth. It is here that little changes have now become cumulative. It is here that the population which has the purchasing power exists. And it is here that the middle class, with all the qualification, is ready to serve the world through the services sector. And if the global demand has to be revived, it's not just going to revive by steel endowed somewhere, excess capacity lying somewhere else, a third set of countries which are wanting to exploit their resource. You need the manpower. You need the purchasing capacity. You need the people who can buy it. And in a region which has the group indicators to prove it. So this is a great point, actually. I just want to add with you that already there is a proposal to launch a Sark satellite. There is a proposal. I know you're working on it. So then that will never happen. We are the fastest-growing region in the world. And I think South Asia, together with Myanmar and Indonesia, are going to be the engines of growth. You have to focus on it if you want to look at how, for the world to have a new model. East Asians are looking at this region very much. Because they know this is where the growth is going to come. And then there is East Africa, which possibility. And you have to realize that the connections that India and Pakistanis have into East Africa, especially the Indians. And you have in Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda, Mauritius, Uganda, all parts. It's tremendous. There's a natural linkage that is there. And when you look at South Asia, we are not something that started like you a few years ago. For 2,000 years, we've been living fighting, being friendly with each other. And we are going to continue. The religions have started here. I mean, we are never at loss. If we are in any part of South Asia, we know how each other is. So that's the difference. Let me. We understand each other. So we have to cut our own path. Let me turn to the businessman for a moment, Mr. Manga. Well, I think you asked about infrastructure. And I think you're dead right. I think infrastructure can be a source of catalytic growth. But it's not just physical infrastructure. Of course, physical infrastructure, whether it's the road, whether it's waterways, which we surely need to connect. With climate change, there's going to be a water challenge in our region. And I think thinking through the agricultural impact, the food impacts, and so on, of water are an essential area for us to think about. So there is the physical infrastructure. But I think there is a knitting together of the social infrastructural needs. All the countries have a common challenge in bringing about greater knowledge, education, fighting disease, and getting people into better nourishment, just getting them to feel physically and mentally better. This is a stage of challenge across all these geographies. And I think, therefore, there can be a lot of collaboration in the social infrastructure as well. And all of that, by the way, is what business can help doing, because this doesn't happen on its own. Education, these are all things that business can help catalyze. What would that mean specifically? Is there a best case model already out there that you would point to? Is there something that is being done at the local level that could be expanded? So think about the power we're discussing here about internet connectivity. Just think about the ability to transform the educational platform and the educational reach across the region through using the internet. You don't have the challenge of having to build brick and mortar schools all over the place with a lot of capital. You don't have a challenge of having to have to recruit hundreds of thousands of qualified teachers. You can do it with a much more economical capital and teacher intensity. That's a great opportunity for the subcontinent to transform the level of education right across all the countries. Do you agree with that? Well, my day job is education. So I run a political campaign that's supposed to bring education to the forefront of the discourse in Pakistan. And I hate to be kind of the troublemaker here. I have no experience in that, but I'll try. I'm a little worried about what I hear, because if the prime minister or the commerce minister were here, and they're both great elected democratic leaders in my country, I think they'd say the same thing. They'd echo exactly the same thing. Pakistan's going to grow at the highest rate of growth. It's grown at in the last 20 years this year. Last year, it was the best year in the stock market in Pakistan in a decade. President Xi's already been twice. There's a constant narrative of this economic corridor, the infrastructure that China is helping Pakistan build all the way from the top of the country, all the way down to the bottom. So it feels like, if we were to take everything at face value, that everything's good. India's doing great. India and Bangladesh are doing great. There's the sub-regional stuff that's going on. Everyone's growing at 7%, and we're all good. And essentially, and maybe this is, I'm not suggesting this is the wrong way to go about it, but essentially we can therefore ignore children getting shot in the face in Kashmir, and we can ignore provocations from terrorist groups that are based in Pakistan. We can ignore all of the things that dominate the national discourses of our country. I think the problem with the idea, and I totally endorse it, but I think the problem with the idea that we can focus on education is that actually we can't focus on education. These four, five, six, seven officially, and then there's more now, seven plus two countries of the region have huge defense budgets. I mean, it's not just Indian Pakistan that have massive defense budgets. I mean, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka also have huge defense budgets. So how are we gonna pay for the high-tech, tablet-driven revolution in math and science learning for middle school girls in Kerala, or in Sindh, or in Kandy? If the entire focus of our national discourses continues to be from 7 p.m. to 11 p.m., the sexy thing to talk about is the Atak Vadi from Pakistan, or the terrible things being done to Muslims in India, and if that's gonna be the nature of it, or Pakistan is complaining about elderly people from the 71 sort of conflict that are being hung in Bangladesh. I mean, these are real issues, and I think that for us to pretend that these issues don't impinge on our ability to engage with each other's countries, to allocate resources in service of the billion-plus people that live below $2 a day, look at the way that the West, and the World Economic Forum is a Western construct, and I think it's shocking for me when you think about it. Malalo Yusuf Zayi, Kailash Satyarati, Muhammad Yunus, look at the people, and slumdog millionaire, look at the moments and the cultural constructs that are rewarded by the West for our region. None of it is for our physics or chemistry or the fact that we discovered the zero or the fact that we're trading with each other. We are recognized not for our potential or for the fact that we're growing, we're recognized for our dysfunction, our pathetic treatment of women, our pathetic treatment of poor people. I mean, that is a regional reality, and for us to pretend, you know, because it's Davos and we have to be nice, that these realities don't exist. I think it's very interesting. To be honest, I don't think any... I don't think this is... Mr. Bank, I have a point. I have a point. You mentioned about the elderly people, but those people, they are the world criminal. When they committed all this crime in 1971, they are not the old people. That time they were young, and they committed many crimes killing people. I mean, they had robber or girls. They been, you know, well, I don't want to mention all these things, but what happened during our liberation war? These people, they were the war criminals. So those who lost their nearest and dearest one, definitely they want their justice. And it is our duty to give them justice. After Second World War, still the war criminals get punishment. Even in 90 years, above 90 years, they are also getting. So it is our internal matter. Nothing with Pakistan. Then why Pakistan should raise the issue and they should condemn it? I'm not condemning it and I'm not Pakistan. I'm just... One comment here and then we're going to have to move on. It is an issue. I mean, all these issues are there. You know, there are problems in Kashmir. There are issues about what happened in the liberation war in Bangladesh. Despite all that, last year and this year, have we inch forward or have we gone back? Exactly. That's the point. We have inch forward. What is slum dog millionaire? That means acceptance of Bollywood as a big film industry. If the Indian government deserves foreign investment to come in, they'll all want to come in, invest in the Bollywood film industry. But your rules are such. No, you won't tell us, but it's becoming international industry. It is that despite all these problems and the fact that from 1947, this is the 17th year of independence for India and Pakistan and for us the next year, we are still going on and we are making progress and we are coming to a stage we all realize that we have to make progress. And one of our biggest problems is the ability to make political structural changes in our own countries. But when I look out, you can see the Bangladesh parliament, Pakistan parliament, Indian parliament, I was, as a British friend of mine said, look, you know, sometimes you beat us when you get up and start talking of precedence and quoting house of common precedence which may not even apply there. So in a way, we are trying to get forward despite the issues. And on one matter, I must tell you, yes, we have a defense budget. We have finished the war. But if we demobilize the army, what is going to happen to those young chaps? They won't have jobs. But as we pick up, they're going to be the managers of the future industries that we have. Only last year that our recurrent, this year, 2000s recurrent expense, our revenue was sufficient to pay our recurrent expenditure. This has not stopped us from saying 13 years of compulsory education, insurance for our kids and tablets for everyone in the last two years. That is our ability to manage the budget and how to find the money and how to go with the private sector on PPP. That is the ability of our government. If you like running a private company. One very quick last point and then we need to move to a question. See, we are here discussing, I thought. I thought. Harnessing South Asian cooperation. Exactly. We're not here to bicker what essentially makes up for a bilateral issue. And as representatives, heads of governments, I think all of us are talking about what is constructively happening in the region. And I would also lift on behalf of everyone here, the fact that our economies are so buoyant, not just for peace, but also for other contribution to sciences, our people have all been recognized internationally. And I don't think if recognition comes for peace, it is playing on our division, not at all. India or any of our countries are all working for the welfare. And I was glad that the Prime Minister, Bangladesh raised that our common enemy should be. And this is what our Prime Minister has also said, even on addressing an issue particularly about Pakistan. Saying our common enemy should be poverty. And we have no business whatsoever with such population in our countries to talk about anything else in any fora. And certainly not in any international fora. So if you're talking about harnessing the South Asian energies that we have, I think we should look at how we can be the engine for the growth of the entire world. Because I've already hopped on the various points of strength that all of us have. And I think the world has to look at us now, more for that which we can give them, rather than play a pass, though it is only in Sark there are issues. You will look at the globe. Issues are everywhere. Even horrendous issues are everywhere else. We are keeping up a certain semblance of unity and harmony. We among ourselves can sort out our differences. I'm sure it'll move forward comfortably. Okay, so just to summarize before we open to questions, very good points here. And the demographic point in particular, very strong. This is one of the few regions that actually has good demographics at a time when that's very important in terms of spurring growth, supply chain opportunities, despite the political differences, opportunities in education, possibly the burgeoning digital economy, maybe empowering small business in a new way as well. And we may want to dive deeper into all of those things. But let's spend the last 15 minutes with some questions here. There's a mic, first question over here. Just introduce yourself. Quick question and make sure there's a question mark at the end of it, please. Hello, I'm Saif Kamal. I'm a global shipper from Dhaka, Bangladesh. Thank you very much for the great panel. One of the key questions was touched on was manpower education and the demographics, what you mentioned. We in South Asia have one of the largest youth population. And the challenges in the frame of where we are, where we are in the forum, we're talking about the fourth industrial revolution, where a number of jobs will be taken back to their countries. We in South Asia work in creating governments and light engineering. With the polarization of the world, Mr. Trump and others will take back their factories back because robots can run them. And what do we do for our youth? Are we in the skills developed in spaces? There is a space. This is a ticking bomb, a space which is we don't recognize right now. But this is going to be not just a country, but a regional instability for all of us. Thank you. Mr. Saidi, do you want to go for that? I would say that developing opportunity for our below 25 populations, we are collectively the only region in the world that is going to enjoy a sustained demographic dividend into 2040 and beyond. I think Pakistan and probably Bangladesh are going to be the last two countries that exhaust their demographic dividend. Last two major countries, there's some smaller African countries as well. So it's very clear and Sef is right to ask because he is a young global shaper and his issues are about the future. I think the point of me raising these ugly issues was not to undermine the great things that our region has done and I believe can do. I mean, I'm here because I believe in harnessing this potential. But I also think that the potential can't be harnessed with half our foot stuck in the past and half of it pretending to be forward-looking. The points raised by Mr. Bunger are absolutely vital. But if you look at seriously, if you look at public policy in South Asia, there isn't the kind of treatment of the issues in education that would address the issues that Sef is raising. You don't actually have a discourse in South Asia that resembles anything that happened in the Finland in the 1970s or in Singapore in the late 90s. How might that change, do you think? I think I'd like to pick up on both the points that you raise. First of all, for all the rhetoric, I would be surprised if there is a dramatic reversal in the supply chain around the world. It doesn't work like that. I run a big business. It doesn't happen. You have embedded supply chains, not only factories, but you have their suppliers and their suppliers and there's a kind of tertiary value chain. So it's not quite so trivial as saying that, oh, suddenly you're gonna reverse all of this. There may be a different paradigm of growth in the supply chain where robotics and so on may have a different impact. Just think about one thing though. If Mr. Trump is successful in getting manufacturing for robots, he's not gonna create jobs either. So it's not so simple. So let's park that on one side. Your question is, so we have this young population and you're right, it's the youngest population in the world out of 1.8 billion. The opportunity we have today comes out of digital technology. 30 or 40 years ago, if you had to start an endeavor, you needed a lot of capital. You had to build a factory, you had to hire lots of people. You had to make something, sell it and create an enterprise. Today, you have to have a little bit of education, a mind and $5,000 and you can start an enterprise. So I think the answer for young people in our particular subcontinent where people are so strong on numeracy, where mathematics is a core subject where people excel, where for one reason or the other we become the software producer for the world, I just think the opportunity lies for digital entrepreneurship at a scale that no one has seen before. That will be the key for our young people. Yes, sir, if you'll let me. One matter I would like to say. Okay, very quickly. If you look at the manpower and look at what the population of each country will be by 2050, the arc is from South Africa to Indonesia, the Indian ocean that matters. Very quickly on that. We have to make a success of it. Industrial Revolution 4.0. Yeah, I don't think we should worry about it at all. Yes, for economies which need robotics, it might provide driverless car, many things. For a country like India, we have industries which do need that robotics. We will welcome it. But we'll also encourage Industrial Revolution 4.0 in the form of, let's say, the several startups which have come in India, which are doing very well to be able to give us solutions for instant or quick building of infrastructure, for improving our urban facilities. We'd like to have bridges built. We would like to have villages, trunk facilities improved, let's say within a matter of 20 days, one month. We need solutions for that. Industrial Revolution 4.0 can give us answers. And I don't think countries like India can stay away completely from robotics. At the same time, imagine that Industrial Revolution 4.0 is only going to result in unemployment. We should be able to tailor make it to meet our requirements, such as for your infrastructure building, such as your skilling, such as your connectivity, whether it is virtual connectivity or anything else, for building your ports, many minor ports need development in India. We want quick solutions. So I don't think it will result in unemployment. The young man doesn't have to worry. We'll have to be careful how to play it up in our countries. Okay. You have to provide education accordingly. Of course. That is important. The subject you have to choose, which will be needed in the future. And difficult to predict. This should not be all the young children now. There was a question back here. Musharraf, because you said it's Davos, everybody has to be nice, so I'm not so nice. The essential flaw in this panel is that there isn't an official Pakistani voice. You are a decent civil rights person. And civil society person. You can't speak for Pakistan. I won't speak for Pakistan. All I'm saying is the problems with SARC are entirely caused by two bilateral relationships within SARC, India and Pakistan, India and Bangladesh, for which there's been no solution. And in the course of time, everybody has found their way. So SARC actually, and this is a question to all of you, and you can answer it one way or the other. My view is SARC died. But as usually happens in the subcontinent, it's had a new avatar. And it also happens in our subcontinent. Sometimes one dies and two avatars take place. And the two avatars are now the arrangements between India Sri Lanka, India Bangladesh. Afghanistan is coming into sort of a SARC minus Pakistan, whereas Pakistan is moving into CPEC with China. So you have two different SARC is now morphing into two different bodies, regional bodies in the region. Do you all want to comment on that? Prime Minister, go ahead. It looks as if we had some bypasses, but still we are ticking. There are problems. I would say Pakistan faces the biggest problems. And also there are disputes between Pakistan and India, bilateral ones. But what I see, the two prime ministers want to keep something going. And that seems to be working. And within it, we are working our own arrangements out because it's not only politically, but when you look at it bilaterally. We have a large number of bilateral relations at this stage. And how do we go about it? I feel sometimes it may be better than having one major relationship, like you worked out EU every thought. EU is going to be the market. And then you find the UK is leaving it. Others are questioning. I don't think EU will break up. So there has to be different ways while WTO encourages international or regional arrangements to find these going to be a whole series of bilateral arrangements together that is going to make up part of the world, not only South Asia, but I think around the whole Indian Ocean. That'd be a series of bilateral relations. It may be complicated. But nevertheless, it might bring about this relationship you want. You are not going to get a treaty of Rome or a treaty of Lisbon. And it may not be safe to have a treaty of Lisbon. A treaty of Rome may have worked, but Lisbon, others didn't. You could see it come apart. So let's work at our stage. Because historically, we've had a lot of trading relations on which we have to build, separately from what is happening politically. We know there are major problems. We are not saying there isn't, but still we are ticking. So there seems to have been some bypasses where the blocks came. Some of them seem to be functioning. I'm going to just, we've got time for maybe one more question. So if anybody wants to ask the last, over here, last question. And then we'll wrap up. Hello, everyone. I'm Sohara. I'm a global shaper from Dhaka, Bangladesh. My question actually is about an issue that's integral to most people of my generation. It's climate change. It's also very relevant to this region, because some of the most climate vulnerable nations appear to be situated in the Saharic region. So I work with the government. And there's an increasing understanding and recognition that government resources and development sector resources are no longer enough to address this issue. And there's a need to mobilize the private sector, not only to contribute in the form of finance, but also to take steps for mitigation and adaptation. So my question to all of you is, given that we're here in Davos, which has the congregations are the best top leaders of the private sector, what strategy can we all adopt to actually convey this message to them and encourage them to act? And also to Honorable Prime Minister Sheikh Haseena, what can we do domestically to encourage private sector to pick up this burden in addition to the government, in addition to the civil society? Thank you. Well, as you know that already before climate change, after the COP 15 summit, we have taken our own program. Already we have established our own trust fund. From our budget, we allocated money. And also we have taken about 100, perhaps 136 programs for mitigation. We are not amateur, but I know because of this global warming, our country will be more affected. So we didn't wait for anybody's assistance. We started by our own money, own effort, own program. But definitely after Paris Agreement, now we are hopeful that some assistance will come. But already we have taken our steps. But now the private sector, if they want to contribute or do something, they can do it. There is no bar. So if anybody in the private sector. Let me jump in because Bangladesh has come under some pressure about using coal, about putting coal plants in sensitive areas. The whole planet, all over the world, there is coal plant. Sure. But I mean, how do you and all planets understand that countries should feel that they're being singled out. But what's the way forward, do you think, from that? Well, you see, we had a scarcity of power. When I formed government, the first time, 1996, we had only 15 or 1600 megawatt power generation. Then we take initiative. And for the first time, I passed the law and allowed the private sector to establish power plant. That has started it. We increased about 4,300 megawatt up to that. But then the government changed. After eight years, when I become prime minister again, then I found that it become 3,200. It reduced after eight years. Then I had to take initiative. Now we produce about more than 15,300. And also we're buying power from India. It's the first time we are buying power from other countries. I mean, trans-border transmission started. But we need more. Because we have our aim that we want to establish Bangladesh as a middle-income country. And for that, within 2021, we need at least 24,000 megawatt. And that's why now we have some nuclear power plant we are doing and also the coal base. But we have taken all the measures so that it should not affect our environment. Mr. Bangan, I'm going to turn to you in the interest of time. I think that you have to really change the language. Unfortunately, much of the language from the Northern Hemisphere to the developing countries and certainly to South Asia is, oh, because there's climate change, please consume less. And this comes from people who are at a very high per capita level of consumption of everything. I think that's where the dialogue breaks down. Because then you get a glass wall in front of your eyes and you say, excuse me, I've got to grow my economy. How can I do that? You did that, by the way, to get where you did. If you change the lens and you think about sustainable business from a business point of view, I spent a long time in Unilever. I used to lead the sustainability agenda. Sustainability is about doing more with less. It's as simple as that. It's about using your resources, natural resources, to get much more productivity. Once you understand that and you come at that, then actually affordability is key in these geographies. Business ingenuity is all you need to do more with less. And when you position it that way, you'll find that actually the examples of sustainable business coming out of India, out of Bangladesh, out of Sri Lanka, out of these countries is very, very high. And I think that's the dialogue. Rather than don't consume, you've got to say do more with less. And I think that's where you've got to encourage business. There are enough examples. OK. Very final point. Again, I would say we've ignored. I mean, I think we started with the climate agenda, but we're ignoring the water issues in our region. Particularly, again, we can say it's just a bilateral issue, but the bilateral issue then seeps into so many other things. And even if we ignore all that's happening with the Indus Water Treaty, just the drawdown of resources in terms of groundwater and what that's doing to the potential thirst index in both India and Pakistan, particularly in the areas that are called the border regions, is something that public policy, either unilaterally within countries or bilaterally between countries or multilaterally on the Sark level, we've not tackled this. And so I would end with an appeal to Sheikh Hussiena, who's such an amazing leader, and to Prime Minister Wicker Masinghe, and to Minister Sitaraman. And of course, I do this back home, and I'll make sure that I repeat this as well, is that especially on climate, there have to be some things that can be ring-fenced from our political and strategic issues that we can work on together. And maybe climate, it's so good that a young shaper brings us up, maybe climate and water might be one of those areas. So let me, this is a positive note to end on. We've covered a lot of ground, certainly more to say, but I want to thank you all for your perspectives and for being so open to discussion, and thank you all for being here. Congratulations to the panel. Thank you.