Round The World
New Delhi, 10 August 2010
Political Infighting In Nepal
NEW DELHI NEEDS TO BE CAUTIOUS
By Monish Tourangbam
Research Scholar, School of
International Studies (JNU)
The recently concluded visit of India’s special envoy and former Foreign
Secretary Shyam Saran to Kathmandu came at a crucial time in Nepal’s beleaguered
politics. Particularly, as the initial jubilation, a result of the Maoist
electoral victory two years ago failed to produce any viable outcome in terms
of real political stability. The country has been in the throes of a political
stalemate for quite some time now. Wherein the Nepali Parliament even after four
rounds of voting to nominate a Prime Minister failed to produce a leader.
As the political impasse in the
Himalayan kingdom continues, India
needs to take steps very cautiously. New
Delhi’s relationship with the influential Maoist Party
and the erstwhile guerilla leader Pushpa Kamal Dahal alias Prachanda can hardly
be called easy. In Nepal’s
nascent Republic, domestic differences continue over the framing of the final Constitution
and governance after the Maoist’s return to mainstream politics making the monarchy
redundant.
Neither the Nepali Congress which
enjoys better ties with India nor the
Maoist Party that accuses India of meddling in the internal affairs of the new Republic
have been able to secure enough majority in Parliament to form a new Government
after the resignation of the former Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal.
The rapidly
deteriorating situation seriously concerns New Delhi. Clearly, developments have
spill-over consequences for India
and weigh heavily in its foreign policy calculations. New
Delhi’s concerns over the Maoist Party’s close ties with competitor
China are palpable and hence
it would not want the Communist party to single-handedly control Nepal’s politics.
India favours a democracy
where there would be enough consultation and negotiation before any decision is
taken. The radical political gestures by the Maoist Party accusing New Delhi of
playing a less optimistic role as Kathmandu falters to find political stability
does not augur well for India-Nepal ties.
On the other hand, New Delhi as the more
developed and bigger neighbour should be magnanimous in its policy. It should
try and win the confidence of all the parties in Nepal which is trying to learn the
first steps to becoming a fully functional democracy. India should
deploy its soft diplomacy to the maximum but simultaneously take due account of
the sensibilities and concerns of the largest party in the Himalayan
nation.
Down south, Sri Lanka has
just come out of the throes of a long civil war and is tracing its steps back
to being an inclusive country. India-Pakistan relations are back on the
diplomatic table after a long hiatus following the 26/11 attacks. The prospects
don’t look optimistic but talks are still on.
At this juncture, New Delhi cannot afford
to open another fissure in its neighbourhood. Therefore, India cannot lose track of the evolving
situation in Nepal.
It has to walk the diplomatic path keeping its interest in mind but at the same
time without appearing to intervene in the affairs of another country.
Of late, New Delhi has constantly
come under accusations for negatively influencing the winds of change in Nepali
politics. As such, incremental steps have to be taken where all factions in Nepal begin to
have confidence in the positive contribution of the Indian economy and foreign
policy, specifically towards its neigbouring countries.
Recall, in 2008 the
Maoists won an unprecedented victory in the elections and came to power, albeit
in alliance with other parties. And desired to form a Government of its own and
establish blanket Communist rule in Kathmandu.
The icing on the cake was Prachanda’s victory with an overwhelming majority
of Parliamentary parties and lawmakers favoring his leadership in the Prime Ministerial
poll.
However, today,
Prachanda is not able to muster enough votes to usher in political stability,
notwithstanding, his rival, Nepali Congress leader Ram Chandra Poudel securing
lesser votes. The smaller Parties reportedly abstained from voting expressing a
lack of confidence in the candidates of both the major parties.
The Maoists
have also rapidly failed the expectations of the people. Moreover, they have
been accused of being bad losers, when their proposals for the new Constitution
were out-voted by the ruling coalition. In addition, the issue of integrating
the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) into the Nepali army has marred the
stability of the fragile democracy, with the army vehemently opposed to an en
masse induction of the Maoist cadres. Probably, the Maoists wanted to control
the army with a large scale integration of the PLA.
It is not rocket science
to discern that New Delhi
will be apprehensive of any move towards totalitarianism in the region. Given
that it has had to grapple with Pakistan’s
military dictatorships. A possible move towards Communist totalitarianism in Nepal would discomfort New Delhi.
Pertinently, Kathmandu has been under a monarchical regime for years,
which finally fell apart in 2006 following an agreement thus paving the way for
the erstwhile Maoist guerilla forces to enter the political mainstream through
democratic means. Importantly, the Maoists brought a historic change in Nepal.
But, recent events
reiterate the fact that democracy is not just about elections and voting.
True, the Maoists brought a change of monumental proportions in Nepal but all
forms of transition need time and painful consensus building process for a
“soft landing”. The Nepali Congress with which India shares good ties has lost its
clout after the death of its influential leader Girija Prasad Koirala.
Considering the long Indo-Nepal
border, close cultural and economic ties and the looming shadow of China, it is naive to expect India to be a
benchwarmer. It is no secret that sections of the political class in Kathmandu
tend to blame New Delhi for its woes and want
closer ties with Beijing
to counter the Indian influence in the region.
As such, New Delhi needs to
express its concerns and maintain its support for democracy and effective
governance, while trying to reassure the people and the Nepalese Establishment
that it has no interest in meddling in its internal affairs. According
to India’s ambassador to
Nepal Rakesh Sood, New Delhi
is concerned about the delay in drafting the Constitution and rehabilitating
the PLA fighters. India
is also reportedly worried about the influx of terrorists through the Nepali
border.
As Nepal awaits a fifth round of
voting in Parliament and people’s confidence in major parties wane, the hope is
that the Parties would emphasise the primacy of the Constitution drafting
process. The Constituent Assembly was elected in May 2008 with a two year
mandate but it was further extended in order to complete the Constitution.
However, as events indicate, little progress has made in the process.
If this political stalemate
continues, the power vacuum created would spawn further uncertainly and
instability in the country and discredit the Parties in the eyes of the public.
This would be fatal for the democratic process in Nepal. ----- INFA
(Copyright,
India News and Feature Alliance)
|