Today (9.10.15) as Nepal Oil Corporation floated a global
tender for supply of petrol to Himalayan nation, the focus of international
community has again shifted to our complex ties with Nepal and has raised some
serious questions with regards to our foreign policy with the Himalayan
nation. As our relationship with Nepal
hit a new low today, it compelled me to get into the intricacies of our
relationship with Nepal and dig out the reasons behind this love hate
relationship between the two countries. This is not the first case of
altercation between the two nations; rather their history has been marred with
skirmishes like these in the past as well.
Nepal which got its independence in 1923 has a history which
has been deeply influenced by its big neighbour’s; India and China. Although
India’s relationship with Nepal goes back to ancient ages, however the year of 1950
has huge importance in the history of both countries. This is the year when
both countries signed India-Nepal treaty of peace & friendship, which in
later years became a thorn in the aspirations of native Nepalese. This treaty
was signed by last Rana prime minister of Nepal, Mohan Shamsher Jang Bahadur
Rana and India’s then ambassador to Nepal, Chandreshwar Narayan Singh. The
treaty not only allowed free movement of people and goods between the two
nations but also enabled the two nations to closely collaborate on the matters
of defence and foreign affairs. But it was not to last forever and as the fate
would have it, just 3 months after this treaty was signed, the rana rule ended
in Nepal and with this the outcry & dissatisfaction over this treaty grew
in political and social circuits of Nepal. Most Nepalese viewed this treaty as
an invasion of its sovereignty and integrity by India.
Although this treaty was initially widely supported by both
Indian political class and Rana rulers of Nepal, however after the advent of
democracy in Nepal in late 1950’s and & 1960”s, Nepal & china forged
better relations and thus Indo-Nepal relations took some beating in that era.
The first instance of relationship becoming cold could be seen when Nepal
forced the Indian military mission to leave Nepal and proposed itself as a
“Zone of peace” between India and China. India however at that time bluntly
refused to endorse this new stand of Nepal. This was the first Instance when
Nepal acted as an opportunist and by all means they had clearly moved on with
their relationship with India. With number of Indian’s living and working in
Nepal growing everyday and the involvement of India in Nepal’s politics
becoming more evident, the discomfort among native Nepalese also started
growing.
In 1969 our relations with Nepal soured as Nepal challenged
the existing mutual security arrangement between the two countries and also
expressed their resentment on India Nepal peace & friendship treaty. India
at that time had to unwillingly withdraw its military mission from Nepal which
was incidentally formed in 1952, when Nepal feared mutiny by the communist lead
and china backed political forces. Tensions came head to head in mid 1970’s
when Nepal openly criticised Sikkim’s 1975 annexation by India. In 1975 King
Birendra Bir Bikram Shah proposed Nepal to be recognised internationally as a
“Zone of peace”. He received support of China and Pakistan internationally and
India was again left red faced with its long term ally. Nepal continuously
raised this issue on international forums and by 1990 it had won the support of
112 countries which included US and UK. India meanwhile continued to endorse
Nepal as a zone of Peace. In 1987, India tried to arm twist Nepal by urging
expulsion of thousands of Nepali speaking people from states that shared border
with Nepal. Nepal reacted by introducing a work permit system for Indians
working in Nepal. During March 1989 to April 1990, because of the failed talks
between the two nations, Nepal was under a serious economic embargo from India.
India stopped all trade ties and treaties with Nepal. To withstand this
pressure Nepal presented its case before the world community which again
infuriated India. Nepal then de regularised India rupee from Nepal which
otherwise circulated freely in Nepal. India retaliated by denying port
facilities in Calcutta, thereby cutting oil supplies from Singapore and other sources.
Nepal which was once a thriving economy in Asia, was reeling under serious
economic problems by 1990. Nepal’s growth rate fell from 9.7% in 1988 to 1.5%
in 1989. Nepal was now quickly slipping into the league of world’s poorest
nations. Nepalese king Birendra had to step down after deepening economic
crisis and was forced to institute a parliamentary democracy. Thus Nepal got its new PM Krishna Prasad Bhattarai
and in June of 1990 during Bhattarai’s visit, India lifted the 13 month long
economic blockade of Nepal, although India agreed to do so, on its own terms
and conditions. In subsequent years the ever fluctuating Indo –Nepal ties
continued to be sweet and sour as it had been in the past. Again the recent
interference from India in Nepal’s constitutional matters has not gone down
well with the Nepalese masses.
The new constitution of Nepal, which has been pushed through
by three main political parties –Nepali Congress, Communist party of Nepal and
the Maoists remains a bone of discontent for people living in Terai region of
Nepal. These are mainly Madhesis and Tharus. This is why the whole of Terai has
gone up in flames since the controversial constitution was passed in Nepal
parliament. Madhesis and Tahrus had high hopes from the new constitution as it
would have given them an opportunity to win their rightful share. The Nepal’s
constitution was not just a book to dole out a new political system but also a
new social framework for various ethnicities living in Nepal who till now had
been kept unified under a monarchical system. The divide in Nepal lies between
the hills and the plains. People from both places had different aspirations and
hence the new Nepal constitution could have addressed these issues and
grievances. However that was not the case. Madhesi and Tharu objections to
constitutional provisions were brushed aside. The Kathmandu leadership was
complacent and was caught napping as they never thought that Madhesi and tharu
people will rise up in arms on the issue. And when they did, the Nepalese
establishment resorted to violence and suppression. India had well in advance
anticipated this situation and during PM Modi’s visit in August, while he was
addressing the constituent assembly of Nepal, he spoke about the importance of
writing a sage like (Rishi man) constitution so that views and aspirations of
citizens of all communities and regions can be accommodated. However the Nepali
leadership, including PM Sushil Koirala, choose to ignore this advice. Sushil
Koirala by all means wants to leave a legacy in his name in the history of
Nepal by sticking to the newly passed constitution.
But question arises; Why Nepal would listen to India on its
internal matter? What if tomorrow Nepal starts questioning India’s stand on
Kashmir? What if they start talking about AFSPA of India on international
forums? Is it morally correct for India to dictate terms to Nepal on its
internal dispute.
Therefore Indian government needs to be very careful while
taking any step to get into this Nepali imbroglio. India although is in a
tricky situation as at the same time it cannot ignore whatever is happening in
Nepal. India and Nepal has an open border and therefore conflict in Nepal will
directly impact India as Indian people working in Nepal and businessman having
their base in Nepal will surely fled to seek refuge in border states of UP and
Bihar. India will have to watch out for its long term implication. Also India
would not want the Madhesi crisis to go Tamil way and thus it should by all
means avoid a Sri lanka like situation to take place in its immediate
neighbourhood. This can have a direct bearing on India’s political scene,
particularly in Bihar and U.P.
Though our PM Narendra Modi has been very vocal in his stand
with regards to Nepal and how he wants Nepal to be a strategic partner to India
in its quest to become a regional superpower, Whether or not Nepal will
reciprocate in the same manner remains a million dollar question to be
answered. Keeping in mind the current developments in Indo-Nepal relations and
the ever growing Nepal-China relations, the above aspiration of India certainly
remains a far cry. In fact China has already diluted India’s effect on the
Nepalese economy. Since 2006 China’s commerce with Himalayan nation has
surpassed India by 17 times and China has emerged as the most favourable source
of FDI in Nepal in recent times. India and its businessman have been complacent
and now they will have to sit and watch for their turn. China has already
overtaken India to become the largest contributor of FDI to Nepal. This shows
the influence of the dragon nation is at its all time high.
In this situation India’s overseas policy makers not only
need to be careful about our interference in the Himalayan nation but they also
need to envisage an entirely different policy for future of Indo- Nepal ties.
At the same time India and Indian’s must resign to the fact that it can no
longer play the role of a big boss to Nepal as it has done in the past. The
1989 economic blockade is a thing of past. Times have changed and Nepal has
certainly moved on as far as its ties with India are concerned. PM Narendra Modi may have wanted to help Nepal
by his HIT formula – Highways,, Information technology and Transmission lines –
as he said in his speech at Nepal assembly. However Nepalese are by all means
looking in some different direction. India definitely has a situation at hand
to tackle. Situation is real and the time is running out.
