 Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Our topic today is strategic outlook for South Asia. What we're looking at is that here is an area which has common cultural heritage, common history, but is the least integrated economically. And it presents, to my mind, a great opportunity. Hi. I know there are lots of issues about politics between our countries. And considering the theme of this conference about the fractured world, we're actually quite a fractured lot in South Asia. So I think it's quite appropriate that we should look at this subject. And I would like that we put politics aside and do some blue-skying, dreaming, thinking that what are the possibilities which can happen in this region? After all, who would imagine after the Second World War and the kind of wars Europe has had between the countries that they would form the European common market? Similar situation has been in our subcontinent. There have been wars. But I think the possibilities of being a common market is something we should think about. Consider the infinite possibilities. The population of 1.67 billion, a middle class of around 400 million, another 150-odd million earning as much as higher than those in the wealthiest central European nations, a population that buys 4 million cars, 21 million two-wheelers, and 200 million smartphones a year. These are just some of the most mouthwatering opportunities for business in South Asia. And the economies of India, Bhutan, Bangladesh are growing around 6% to 7%. Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and Nepal just a shade lower. South Asia could easily double regional trade from the enemic $23 billion, which is there today. Yet this is a region of missed opportunities. It remains one of the world's least integrated regions. Intra-regional trade accounts for only 5% of South Asia's total trade. Exports constitute only around 10% of South Asia's GDP. This is the lowest of all regions barring sub-Saharan Africa. And we don't have to look any further than the Asian to understand how to convert a strong regional and control similarities into infinite possibilities. How an economic grouping of 644 million people reverse the trend of global trade in favor of intra-region trade and generates an annual GDP of $2.7 trillion. So can South Asia deliver on the grand opportunity and how? And you can see that what an enormous opportunity there is if we can get this whole idea going. I have with me a distinguished panel to discuss this. We're not fully represented from all the whole region. But I think that people have studied this subject and will be quite knowledgeable about what we're going to talk about. I have with me Mr. Gaurav Dalmia from India. He is a serial investor in various businesses. He's constantly looking for opportunities. So I think this couldn't be a bigger opportunity for him to discuss. We have Dr. Sanya Nishta, who has done an enormous work in health care and has also been somebody who has almost got elected to the director general of WHO and has studied very closely cooperation, collaboration which can happen between our countries on various aspects, not only medical, cultural, and so forth. I have Mr. Ajay Singh, who is also a serial entrepreneur in aviation, CEO of SpiceJet, somebody who's turned around companies and also has been instrumental and spearheaded Mr. Modi's campaign in 2014, which we all know has been such a success. And he's close to the BJP government. And somebody who's in civil aviation has to have a geopolitical perspective on most things. So I think I'm sure he'll have lots of things to say. And one of the big issues, I think, is connectivity between our countries. We have Vijay Sharma, who is from PTM, an internet entrepreneur into digital payments. Now he's in a bank, a very enterprising person in the business, which is very timely in India because we just went through demonetization and digital payments is the big thing which has been promoted in India. So he's the right man in the right place. And I'm sure he sees opportunities in South Asia. So let me start first with Ajay Singh. I want you to tell us about how you see this opportunities which exist in South Asia. Because connectivity is a very important part of this whole game. And you must have looked at possibilities. You also are part of the kind of think tank of this government. So let us hear your views on this. Well, as you said, the possibilities are endless. 5% of our trade is between the South Asian countries. If you look at the other blocks, NAFTA has more than 50% of the trade happening within NAFTA. If you look at the EU, that's again about 57%, 58% of the trade happening within the EU. So I think it's a great pity that we should not be trading more. We should not be just having more business links with each other. As far as connectivity is concerned, connectivity follows trade, of course. If there was more trade, there would be more connectivity. And while we are connected by air links to most of the South Asian countries, the links are extremely sparse. And we really need to do more. Just as we talk of having a single economic block, we really need to consider if we can have open skies, a system by which airlines from countries within South Asia can fly to each other without restriction. And if we could do that, that would give a huge boost to trade as well as to tourism in all South Asian countries. I think it's a great pity that the most populist countries in the world today, Delhi and Karachi and Lahore and Mumbai, amongst the most populist countries in the world today, have little or no air connectivity at all. So great possibilities for trade and commerce, great possibilities for tourism, great possibilities for air connectivity, connectivity of all sorts, great possibilities for bringing down the cost of our economies by doing business with each other. Very often, business is being done between India and Pakistan through Dubai, the Gulf states, which is a huge pity. It's also hugely expensive to do this. So this whole $5 trillion economy that the prime minister spoke about yesterday for India by 2025, that date would probably get advanced if we just had greater links with each other. Thank you. In fact, I read somewhere in a report that it's cheaper for India to trade with Brazil than with Pakistan in terms of just connectivity and so forth. Rapsanya, you've studied this region and looked at various areas of cooperation and collaboration between specifically between India and Pakistan. But let's look at the whole region. What are the possibilities you consider, which could be there, where there could be cooperation and collaboration? And how can we open up these borders? Well, certainly, there are many opportunities. It's a question of how you're willing to tap them. And I think that it's very important to understand what the imperative is. Clearly, Mr. Ajay has talked about the potential of boosting trade and what it would mean for our economies and what it would mean in terms of eradicating poverty, assuming that governments would have the ability to accrue the benefits of that economic growth equitably to populations. There's clearly a huge untapped potential there. But I think we need to recognize the imperative of collaboration, especially at this point in time, because the world is very different from what it was 10 years ago or even a few years ago. I mean, the sustainable development agenda to which all our countries have signed up to has, I should, in a very different paradigm compared to what was the norm in the past. I mean, in the frame of development, the norm in the past was that the developed countries had compacts with the developing world, and they would go and, under the framework of the Millennium Development Goals, have bilateral relationships and multilateral relationships. But the premise of the sustainable development agenda is to focus the systems and processes of the countries to strengthen systems so that the international system can focus on where it has a comparative advantage. So, essentially, that means that the owners of development, the owners of system strengthening, the owners of trade and cooperation is on countries themselves. And regional collaboration and regional institutions are a very important tool for that. Unfortunately, we do not have the convening institutions for us to be able to engage. I mean, last year I was a campaign extensively as one of the finalists for Director General of the World Health Organization. And in that role, you have to study regional institutions very carefully because that's how you seek support and votes. And I have to say our region is, by far, the least integrated. I mean, look at the Caribbean and the Latin Americans and how they've moved on to financial integration, to regulatory, to being on common standards and regulatory collaboration. And so even the smallest countries of the world, those that are least developed, are finding common grounds to convert because they realize that it gives them voice and representation and a seat at the table in the international system and that it boosts trade and is good for their economies and they're able to capitalize on sharing of experiences and pool the paltry resources that they have. And I think that countries of South Asia stand to gain significantly from pooling resources in terms of human capital. I mean, in today's digital age, and I'm sure the expert here will bear me out, I mean, this is a world which has completely changed. We now know for sure that two thirds of the wealth of a country is its human capital. And in fact, in the years to come, the borrowing ability of a country will be affected by its progress on human development. Now that, how do you power economies in an environment like that? So what do you think are the stumbling blocks? I mean, in the sense that how do we move forward on this? We know that all these possibilities exist, the development of human capital and the fact that we should be trading with each other and exchanging far more in cultural terms and considering that we have such a common heritage. What do you think, and you know, India and Pakistan are two big gorillas in the room, right? And they're the ones who don't talk to each other too well. Tell me, what do you think is the way forward and what are the real stumbling blocks in this? So in terms of a tangible way forward, we need to have functioning regional institutions. And fortunately, Sark hasn't taken off in the way that CARICOM did in the way there's so many other regional institutions around the world did, ASEAN. I mean, I can go on with the long list of regional institutions in Latin America alone. So I think we need to have functioning regional institutions that provide a convening space, not just for governments, but people and businessmen and individuals from the social sector. And alongside that, we need to invest in the right, you know, to have the right evidence to bring to the table in terms of the benefits of collaboration. Because whenever there have been exchanges and a proactive stance to get countries of the region together, I mean, there are odd opeds in the news here and there. But there isn't the science-based evidence and you know, drawn from analytical, serious analytical work that brings to bear the benefits of collaboration. And you know, there aren't enough champions who are willing to stand on either side of the border to say, well, we need to step aside from politics and look up and think about the future of, a quarter of the world's population and what regional integration. Well, I know about India and Pakistan. I mean, whenever I traveled to Pakistan, it's a great affinity between the two people. You know, in terms of this visage to leave politics aside, it is a great commonality, affinity, love and desire to do things together. I'm always puzzled of why it doesn't happen. In fact, when I was there during the last Pakistan election and I met at that time a candidate, Nawaz Sharif, and there were great power shortages in Lahore. And he said, why can't India supply us power? I know, I would love to get power from India. The moment you get this kind of connectivity, you're not going to get any kind of wars going on because you're so dependent on each other. But of course that just went up into thin air. Yeah, I don't mean to dominate the conversation, but clearly we need regional institutions. We need to start talking to each other. We need to open a dialogue because without a dialogue, we're not going to be able to come to common grounds on what the problems are and where the solutions need to be. And I strongly feel that we need to invest in institutions that can provide the hard evidence and then we need to have the right communication strategy. So I think in terms of a starting point, the convening platforms would be an absolute prerequisite. Gaurav, you're a man looking for opportunities. What do you see in this? Well, I think as a backdrop, I just want to build on the point just made. People of India and people of Pakistan are not at war with each other. The government of India and the government of Pakistan tend to get into skirmishes all the time. And the test of that really is, and we were talking about this earlier, if you go to New York City, Indian and Pakistani cab drivers live together almost as one community. So given that backdrop, the possibilities of trade and investment and so on and so forth are real. So if you just look at India and Pakistan, there could be a lot of manufactured good exports from India who spoke about power. There could be a lot of things of that type. There could be gas and apparel and stuff like that with Bangladesh. So there are a lot of cross-border synergies which need to be exploited by business people but enabled by governments. Today, the restriction is that there are a lot of barriers to opening up this kind of trade or manufacturing or investment. And I would think it makes sense for governments to act to open this up. And the benefits would accrue almost immediately because of trade. If we don't integrate, look at the worst case scenario. If we don't integrate, the risk is India this region will become a proxy for India-China kind of conflict. If we don't integrate. So it's better we integrate looking that those forces are at play. So what do you think are the stumbling blocks? I think the stumbling blocks are essentially political, trade-related regulations. People will take time to invest because they're not knowledgeable about local markets. But that's beginning to happen. Vijay, what do you see opportunities here in the digital space in terms of banking, financial services, maybe e-commerce? You're in e-commerce now too? Yeah, I think we are totally understanding the opportunity. Look at this, that when India got independent then we worked with sort of few Europeans, Americans and Japanese companies and Suzuki's largest market effectively today is India. So Indian companies, if let's say there is a physical trade barrier, so to say, at least there is no digital trade barrier. I think we are leaving our markets open to Americans, Chinese and other companies to fight us domestic players versus those large conglomerates who can spend disproportionate amount of money and play out. So local opportunities will effectively become global markets and global markets dominated by a few of those who are not necessarily long-term going to contribute in those countries. Digital is a disproportionately bigger opportunity because it doesn't require many other concerns like border cross, physical export and port of those things. You could remotely do this. Cloud services could be the way to distribute things. I think some of us in these regions, considering we are identified while we are known as blue-collar workers at, hard workers at and then even the knowledge economy leaders, the idea is that some of us from India probably or from other neighboring countries should take a stand up and then say that this is our consortium. One of the ride-sharing company, Ola in India, built up a partnership in the region, but it was not Ola-driven, it was a partnership. Ola joined the consortium built by a Chinese company. Effectively, what I'm trying to say is that China has a far more ambition on this reason than this reason has its own ambition on this reason. I think that is something we should be worried about. And while China has ambition and a learning and thanks to the proxies nearby learning and experiences, even Americans and Japanese couldn't left behind. So opportunities, nobody doubts it. Similarities, nobody doubts it. Experience and the linear progression of what we've done in India, what we've done in the region can go. I take a few examples and the question that why it has not happened, and I take a few examples and there is a little bit of learning there. Bahati et al tried Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, and finally came back. Then there are a few companies, I mean, there are regional- Why did they come back? Ultimately, I think what's happening is that it's a particular company case, so less of a pattern here, but at the macro, I could say that. All, so when you are an economy, there are frontier markets below you and there are senior markets above you, so more or less everything below you requires more patience, a disproportionate large amount of patience. Even though Bahati got out of this and went to Africa, which is a little bit confusing, it was better to be here than to be in Africa if there was a growth of market level. The point I'm trying to bring is that we all have to understand that when we go neighboring markets, these will be very small numbers for us. A lot of people want ATM in Nepal, and I'm not sure why should we quote-unquote invest our time. When I say invest in time, it means bandwidth constraints, and what should I not do? But I think there has to be an understanding that together we stand, we can become a, like you said, in starting off this, that there is an EU, there is nothing. If we together can become one market, at least for digital world, if not for physical world-led things, there is a very big opportunity for all of us to do it. Companies could open up to collaboration, investments. India has large investment now thanks to the attraction of the local market, but we are not going neighboring countries to invest that money. Even Nepal Bhutan, or Sri Lanka, or Bangladesh. Who's the player of financial services there? Another Chinese person. Another other Asian person, not Indian. I think either we have not looked at it like this as a country coming to the stumbling blocks, either we as Indians have not looked at it, that there is an opportunity, we've looked at them as a sort of either an aggressive sibling, or a younger, too younger market that we don't need to bother. Either that is one of the anchor, or we all get emotionally charged first, then rationally business savvy. The topic of China came up. China has ambitions, the obor is coming, India hasn't participated in it. How do you think the Chinese initiatives in this region are going to affect our possible integration of Pina countries? Well, I think it's quite clear that China means to dominate this region. As we all know, China has also applied for membership of the SAC. And they would like to get into SAC and dominate SAC as well. So, I think we need to be careful. We need to ensure that China is not able to use its proximity with Pakistan as a proxy for getting into the SAC. And I think paradoxically, one of the solutions could be to follow what India and China have done in relations between each other, which is to say, look, we have water disputes with each other. Let's put those aside. Let's put those aside. Let's just freeze those disputes in time. And let's focus on other areas where we can collaborate. And if somehow we can start to do that with Pakistan, and let's be under no illusions, the problem with SAC is the relationship between India and Pakistan. That's the biggest problem. And that is what we need to sort out. And if we can, you know, we need to build that trust slowly. It's not something that'll be done, you know, in just a few years' time. So, perhaps what we can say is that, look here, here is a dispute which we just freeze in time, which is the dispute regarding Kashmir and the border. And we focus on trade and work with each other to make sure that both countries can actually benefit. If we can just follow that model, I think that would be absolutely fantastic for this region. And I think, in part, a lot of this India's look East policy and India's engagement with ASEAN is because they're having this trouble on their Western frontier. And so they say, look, you know, let's not waste our time here. Let's go into the ASEAN and let's try and build closer economic links with ASEAN. Lulsanya, how do you see it from Pakistan in terms of the fact that we're not able to open up. Let's look at India and Pakistan, just bilaterally, right? Why is it that Pakistan is not, is there a kind of a fear complex in Pakistan about India coming and dominating in their economy? And that's why they move closer to China. And most of the trade goes through UAE. India's given MFN status, Pakistan hasn't reciprocated. What is your view on this? How will it play out? And why does it not play out? Well, you talked about the fear factor. Certainly there is no fear factor there. I have been part of many bilateral initiatives, you know, of the kind that focus on building cultural and social bridges between the two countries. And whenever there has been, whenever there has been such an initiative, Pakistan has welcomed, you know, communities from the other side of the border with a lot of sincerity at a people level. And with open arms, I myself was the co-chair with Nareesh Trihan, your brother-in-law. We both co-chaired the Health Committee of Amman Ki Asha. And I distinctly recall the intent to collaborate on both sides because we have common problems. I mean, the threat of emerging and re-emerging infections is real and it could potentially devastate the world not to talk about the region. So it is in our common interest to speak to each other as far as surveillance of disease is concerned. Whenever we talk about universal health coverage and we go to international meetings, the Indians and Pakistanis are talking about the same thing. We're talking about the unruly, private healthcare sector that needs to be, you know, whose potential needs to be harnessed. And we're talking about traditional providers and informal providers and the issue of spurious drugs, which is common and whenever we talk about reform, you have the RSBY, we have bar insurance schemes, which are built on similar lines. We have Asha's, you have Asha's, we have lady health workers and you know, the eye clinics and the burgeoning of the various technological innovations in the social sectors are quite similar because our systems have evolved from the same colonial background. So the systemic constraints are similar. The impediments are similar and likewise the solution could benefit from collaborating. So I mean, in Pakistan- So why do these initiatives fizzle out? I mean, they don't end up with much to show at the end. I mean, the one Aman Ki Asha, even the one you did, very laudable things. Things are not politically charged in that sense. They're all about health and culture and so forth. So why do they fizzle out? Why do they not get bigger instead of just tapering off? Well, and I circled back to what I said right at the very beginning. We need convening spaces. We need convening spaces for people to people contact and exchange and dialogue on purely humanitarian and social sector subjects, which have nothing to do with politics. I mean, the people in India and Pakistan and Bangladesh and the rest of the world have common problems and we need to be committed to humanitarianism and you know, to bringing improvements and humanity at large and to poverty eradication and to social sector goals that are not controversial from any perspective and those kind of exchanges and dialogues could be insulated from whatever politics entails on both sides. And I think that that will augur trust and peace building and health could be, I mean, narration, I tried very hard to use health as an entry point to peace building between the two countries. I mean, there is, we know that, you know, a lot of Pakistanis seek healthcare in your country. I mean, the liver transplant units, which is something that is in the phase of development in my part, in my country, something that you're quite further along in having deployed and specialized and I think one of the easiest things to do is- Why do the people in power don't realize this? That all these benefits which could accrue to both countries somehow stops somewhere, right? Why is it that civil society is not able to impress the politicians that these are important things that we should move forward on? It's beneficial to everybody. Why does it not move? Well, people in power are not a homogenous community on either side. There are those who would much rather further exchange and communication as an entry point to lasting peace. And of course, on either side of the border, there are others who do not want to see that happening because of narrow interests and we have to be mindful that civil society can really push and the academics in particular and the researchers and reformers can really push for collaboration because there is no other way than to speak to each other. I mean, currently we're just, there's a total impasse. I mean, I'm not taking delegations, Nareesh is not bringing delegations. We're unable to because there's a lot of unpredictability in terms of visas and there are transport impediments which as you know, very well. And our governments are not speaking to each other except for sporadic exchange between the national security advisors and that too on a very sporadic and opportunistic basis. We need to engage each other. I mean, if there is mistrust and if there are concerns and issues, there is no substitute to engagement. And I would very much like that to happen. By the way, I'm not a trade expert and you referred to the MFN status. My sense is that we have given very favorable positions to the other side as well. I mean, when you're across Vagaborder, there are lines of trucks from your side which we welcome. We of course welcome trade from both sides. Yeah, Gaurav. You know, I'd like to make one point. I'm not a geopolitical expert but it's often been said that if India and Pakistan synchronize their elections, half the political rhetoric will stop. And you'll be back in business because sometimes there's rhetoric in India because elections are coming up. That slows down. Then there's election in Pakistan and the rhetoric builds up. Of course the problem in India is that there are elections all the time. So how would you even synchronize anything? No, but I must say that in India, until recently, Pakistan has never been an issue in elections, there's always been some local issues. I don't know whether in Pakistan, India is more of, sometimes more of an issue in terms of... Well, I'm not a government representative at this panel and I'm totally a political, I have no party affiliations but to be fair to all the political parties, India has never factored into election pledges. So nobody will fight an election in Pakistan on an anti-India ticket. So our politicians, regardless of who they are by and large, are very mindful of that. So they don't stoke public support through the anti-India rhetoric. And we're very careful about that. Would you agree with that, Ajay? I think a part of the problem is also the media, by the way. You know, I think that, you know, Joaquin sometimes provokes a lot of trouble as well. There are some channels, and I don't want to name them, who always appear to be pushing. I think, and I guess they exist on both sides of the border, they always seem to be pushing for war. And I don't know if this gets eyeballs or why this happens, but for, you know, the littlest of provocations seem to be blown up and I think this is something that responsible media needs to stop doing and they need to understand that what they are doing is actually taking away from economic progress which can really happen in the region. And a large part of the responsibility, in my view, belongs to India. India is 80% of the South Asian economy and it's more than 80% of the population of this region. And, you know, it's not enough for India to just say that, look, China is encircling us, they are doing this port in Sri Lanka or they are doing this government in Nepal or they are doing something else in Bhutan, in Doklam and all this stuff. I think India needs to go and repair relations with its western neighbor. The disproportionate responsibility belongs to India. And I don't think it is enough for India to say that, okay, we'll engage with just about everybody else in South Asia and try and build links but not do it with Pakistan. So just if you allow me a follow-up or comment on that, I couldn't agree more with you. But in terms of, and as I said earlier, and I reiterate that the politicians, notwithstanding all their other faults on other sides have never stoked this, you know, for their election rhetoric. But in terms of the media, I agree with you that there are inflammatory segments on either side. On either side. I won't defend that. So, you see, we have common problems. So if we were speaking to each other, we were in a dialogue, we would be sitting around the table and saying, well, here is a problem that is common. We have a small faction of the media stoking distrust on either side. What is it that we can do about it? Do we need to speak to our regulatory agencies to bring standards and norms that could be a safeguard against that? So I think I circle back to the issue of the need to have that connection to speak. Because without that, we will be on either side of that red line that we... Ajit, are you saying that India's not trying hard enough? I think we need to try harder, definitely. I think that, you know, we are in this vicious circle where it's become almost fashionable to bash your neighbor. And it is presumed that because so much media is bashing our neighbors, it must be something which is popular with the people and therefore must be something which potentially gets you votes. I think there needs to be a serious dialogue within India about the benefits. And I completely agree with you when you say that, I think these benefits are not really quantified. Nobody really understands. Nobody understands that a closer collaboration, what that might mean to the people of India, let alone the people of South Asia. I think that needs to be studied. That needs to be explained much better. And that needs to be obvious to policymakers. I can tell you that most policymakers do not understand that trade is so abysmal. And actually trade could be really, really significant and could really boost our, you know, or fast forward our national goal of becoming, you know, the world's second or third largest economy. Well, it's ironical that we are having this discussion of integration of South Asia in Davos, which is a conversation we never have in India or in Pakistan. We're always talking about the border and Kashmir and skirmishes and so forth. So I think that's one of the things which needs to be done in this region. We need to talk more within ourselves and media also has a responsibility in terms of what are the benefits of us integrating and creating this possibility that, yes, there is a possibility that we can have a more integrated region where everybody benefits. And I don't think that conversation really happens in India or in Pakistan or any other parts of the region. And that conversation has to be evidence-based. It has to be based on data and science and hard evidence in terms of what the future projections could look like if we... Yeah, I mean, but that's there. I mean, there's a lot of data available of what are the possibilities. So I think it's not focused, yeah. Nobody talks about it as a possibility, even. Vijay, you answer. Mr. Preet, you've seen it for more number of years than probably some of us would have seen because you have a lens of media also and different curves. We just learned two different solutions that media could normalize themselves to different and election could synchronize. What would you say that why Indians find it more fashionable like we just learned? And it is there. And now that social media will allow this to go far away than an editor could decide now. I mean, it's gone beyond handover media now, actually, I would say. Then at the same point of time, these amankasha innovations and such conversations, they sort of have, like we said, pro and con in the city, in any city that you talk about. Is it that we are too emotionally charged as a history of your last 30, 40 years that you say that when we became, or is it that we don't want to forget the history here? Is it some old thing that is not, that is brewing it backward or is it an incremental thing that is an issue? Are you gonna say that before I say it? I just want to say quickly that as you've pointed out, this history existed in other parts of the world. What worse history could be there than Europe and the world war. So we need to forget this history. And I think that we say that we are the youngest nation in the world. Today, 800 million people under the age of 35 in India. I would think that this is a new generation and they probably have fewer wounds of partition and all the problems that have occurred in the past and the wars that have happened in the past. In 1971 when we had a war, most of the kids, most of the people of India were not born. And therefore we need to leave this past behind. I think it's for media and it's for political leadership not to keep reminding people of that past and try and build a common future. And just to pick further on that, I mean, going back to the history of Europe, I mean, the reason why they have left the differences behind was because they started with trade and they were financial interdependencies and ultimately they realized that it was in their common interest to collaborate and forget about what happened in the past. It's entirely possible in our region as well. I'd hope that when the post-partition generation came into power that things would change, right? Unfortunately they haven't changed. Still somehow we're stuck with the same mind blocks. One more thing I think of is we don't think or talk enough about the upside. Take a few anecdotes. Grameen Bank happened in Bangladesh. What they did, our cultural situation, our sociological situation is very similar. Same would be in Pakistan. Just breast practices from Grameen Bank could help us so much if we integrated further. If you just look at the hydropower potential of Nepal, it could transform Nepal. If you looked at the largest motorcycle manufacturers in Indian company, one of the greatest manufacturing hubs for automobiles cars is India. If you look at what transformation could happen to the Indian automotive sector if we integrated and similarly there'll be things in Pakistan. Pakistan's spending valuable foreign exchange and getting importing cars. We don't think about the upside. We think about the so-called dysfunctional aspects which are there in any society. It is the mistrust that is eclipsing the potential to draw advantages from regional collaboration. We'll come back to that in our end to see how to overcome this mistrust. I'll open it up to the audience if people want to ask questions. This is anybody from Bangladesh, Sri Lanka. Don't want to make it an India-Pakistan debate. Yes, madam. Did you want to ask a question? Thank you. I have a comment, but I also love if some of the panel can also respond. I think the narrative about how China's seeking to dominate the region is a dangerous one, particularly when actually the largest foreign director investment comes from the US and Japan, I believe in India, but also Japan is very effective across the region. And so underpinning that fear, I'm not entirely sure what it is, but I think this is a fantastic opportunity to discuss. And then, of course, prior to Prime Minister Moody coming here, he kind of stopped off in Israel and has now become really good friends with Israel. And so I thought that kind of bilateral relationship is also really beneficial. And just as a last comment, I think China overall, as with any other country that has now sort of opportunities to go abroad, wishes to share. And could there be a more positive, constructive relationship with China as well as many other countries that seeks to support this regional collaboration? Thank you. Anyone else? Do you think we do not, we have border conflict with China, Doklam, you said it. And China has more comfort with Pakistan. Is that the double reason that we fears that China, even though the numbers speak something else? I think so. But irrespective of what is happening at the Doklam border, I think that the two nations are mature enough to say that, look, trade will go on and that we will continue to work with each other on areas of mutual interest. And I think the same needs to be done with Pakistan. I think the way India and China have handled relations with each other has actually been extremely constructive. And while there is concern in India about the circling of India and China would feel that we are perhaps building a relationship with Taiwan or with the countries adjoining China, I think both nations are mature enough to understand that they are going to be global powers and they will not be global powers if the relationship between the two most populous nations in the world doesn't work at a commercial level. Okay, Mike. Sorry, you had something to say? So just a 30-second response to reiterate the importance of what you're saying. I think China is a global player in today's multi-polar world and its interest in the South Asian region and Sarkin particularly should be welcomed. Of course, every country has the right to think about its own interests, but I think that China's interest in the region and in Sarkin particularly is really an opportunity which we should tap. I think it's not mutually exclusive. I mean, you can be friends with China. Absolutely. Everybody should benefit. My question is to Dr. Nishtar and to Mr. Singh. This is because you've been the minister and you're very actively involved in the BJP. Isn't it also about biting the bullet politically, political bulletins, that we can eat each other's salt, we can eat each other's onion, we can take sugar from each other or not? Because that is the starting point of all that because that becomes a huge political hot potato for both the nations whenever there are requirements and then you end up importing via Dubai or via Oman or Qatar or anything like that. So, when these things are discussed within the government, are these things thrown out for want of political willpower? Do you want to go first? Well, I think that biting the political bullet is an issue. But I think that the perception on the Indian side has always been that it's not enough to talk to the politicians on the other side. And there needs to be confidence building with the Pakistani army. And that is an issue that really needs some resolution. If it needs a dialogue with the Pakistani army, then so be it. There'd be a dialogue with the Pakistani army. But there needs to be a dialogue. There is no substitute for dialogue. As Ma'am was saying, you cannot stop talking to each other. You cannot have sporadic dialogue with each other. We owe it to our region to have a framework of consistent dialogue and consistent people-to-people contacts. And I don't even think that this is politically unpopular. I think Mr. Modi, when he was sworn in, actually invited all the leaders of the South Asian countries and they were all gracious enough to attend his swearing-in. After that, on Mr. Nawaz Sharif's birthday, the Prime Minister actually did make a visit to Pakistan. So if this was politically unpopular, he would not have done these things. Clearly it is not. So we just need to find a framework in which this dialogue can happen and can include all interested parties, including perhaps the armed forces. So just follow up on that. Normally there is an issue with political government all over the world. That issue is not specific to Pakistan. It's not specific to India. It's not specific to South Asia. It's germane to wherever governments turn around every five years and have to go into the election mode. By default, their focus is very much on short-term goals to the detriment of long-term thinking about a country's future. And I think the key is to engage stakeholders on either side of the border also, where you can kind of move away from this policy of isolation, which is inherent to change in governments. And those stakeholders also include academics and long-end opinion shapers and individuals who wield influence in the business world and the chambers of commerce and the other business communities. But again, we circle back to the issue of the dialogue and the need for convenience. We don't hear these voices. I mean, even the chambers of commerce I think should be talking more about mutual beneficial trade. And they should be given more visibility and participation in the public discourse in the media rather than having a minority from either side. And I would say that there is certainly the minority on either side who are stoking in mistrust and stoking trouble, rather than them if we had the sustainable convening space for individuals who had the ability to draw on evidence and bring to bear the right narrative, which would bear fruit for the future of both nations. It would be in our interest. No, I just want to say about, you've talked about the media and I agree with you the media should have responsibility in this. And our anchor general is going to war every evening with Pakistan. I think it's a reflection also of what's happening in India in terms of this, we have become more fractured. And the fact that taking a stand against Pakistan has become a popular thing to do. And it gets a lot of these people where people start shouting and abusing each other, gets TRPs and there's no doubt about this. And I think that's how the media get its ratings. So we have to go fundamentally back to some of the core parameters that need to change. I mean, how are the media ratings built up and what factors into that calculation and what is the motivation of the political system to, you know, to brew up a certain narrative. And of course, what is the value of these media ratings compared to the value of trade between the nations? A figment of our imagination. So it's very difficult to forget things going on when there's real bloodshed happening on both sides. I mean, bloodshed has to stop before a conversation can start. Yeah, nobody would disagree with that. Yeah, so. But you're still an important opinion maker of your country. So as an important opinion maker, how would you feel if everybody knows that he's a perpetrator of 2611 Mumbai attacks and yet your prime minister refers to him as G and he will not be, no court will be able to ever, you know, put him in jail or something. If a prime minister refers to like that, how do you expect a confidence building measure on the other side of the border? Like I am, my father was born in Pakistan and we were never taught hatred and we grew up listening to Punjabi songs but how do, we can forget partition but there has to be some action following the statements or following all these very good things about confidence building measures and all that stuff. So I just want to take on that. Thank you. I don't know which particular incident you're referring to in terms of the. No, when you talked about the prime minister but these things are not going to be solved unless we speak because we need to deliberate on the evidence, we need to explain to you what the difficulties are in terms of the, in terms of the time lag, in terms of the conviction. So all these, we have to be on the table to be able to talk about these things so that we can explain to you where our judicial system is in the process of that particular case that you're referring to. Before we end, maybe I'll just take a round in terms of, I know always ends up as an India-Pakistan debate, inevitably but still just I'll ask each one of the panelists to say how hopeful are they about that this movement of economic integration is going to take place in this region? Maybe give a timeline, five years, 10 years, one year or give some kind of a rating to see that where are we heading in this direction or how would you see the future here? Aaron, I think we are integrating and we will continue to integrate. I just don't think it's happening as fast as the potential of integration is and that's where the disappointment lies but I think the trend is on the right side and as new generations of leaders come in as we've already seen, some of the hygiene factors that have been at play will dissipate. Oksana? So integration is an end point whether it is for financial integration or monetary integration or regulatory integration and harmonization but in order to get to an end point you need to have a process in a certain set of outcomes and in order to set up processes you need institutional arrangements and currently we do not have the processes in place and currently we do not have the institutional arrangements in place so I think I'll end with what I started with in the beginning. We need to start talking and we need to have the convening space that can be instillated from political interference on either side and that would be the first entry point to making progress. Ajay? Well, at this time things don't look so great but we are always optimistic and economic logic is a very powerful logic. So eventually just the sheer economic logic will drive integration. I'm just concerned about the pace of it. I think that if all stakeholders get together this can happen a lot faster and can bring benefit much, much, much more quickly than you and I can imagine at this time. Ajay? I'd say that we as Indians will integrate far more closely and faster with other neighboring economies, Nepal, Bangladesh, Lanka and others. Versus Pakistan I believe that this has become like we all understood a significantly political and Ajay added an angle there that there is a little bit ahead of political conversation there. I'm significantly less hopeful. I still believe we'll be 10 years forward and we still might be doing a business via Dubai or some Middle Eastern country. Sorry, what did you say? We still will be doing business that way because like we all are talking pace, it's so small and the rate is so less that even 10% progress is a very large number to achieve in 10 years. Okay, I can only say that we all recognize the huge opportunities which is there and the great benefits which would apply which would accrue to all the countries involved. Politics is of course the big stumbling block between India and Pakistan and these two countries have to overcome this as Ajay has said, put this, if they can put the politics aside and start talking about trade, start improve connectivity, I think this would help in terms of not only the politics part of it but of course the economic benefit which will accrue to the whole region. So I wanna thank my panelists for the comments. Thank you. Thank you all. Thank you.