Round The World
New Delhi, 17 July 2020
Resetting India-Nepal Ties
NEW DELHI SHOULD INITIATE
By Dr. D.K. Giri
(Prof. International Politics, JMI)
In a desperate bid to stoke the passion of
cultural nationalism, Nepal Prime Minister K.P.S. Oli has kicked off another
controversy with India. He has claimed, ‘Lord Ram was born in Nepal, in Thori
in west Birgunj. The real Ayodhya lies in Nepal, not in India where a temple is
being built after years of political and legal wrangling.’ Oli’s statement has
not been made on the spur of the moment or in passing. As the Prime Minister he
is consciously seeking to bring another dimension in joining issue with India.
Most obviously Oli is under pressure both at
home from his party, and from abroad by the Chinese leadership. The China hand
is visible in its ambassador in Kathmandu brokering rapprochement between Oli
and former Prime Minister Prachanda.
Oli’s anti-India rhetoric and posturing
cannot be attributed only to generation of nationalist fervor, which may prop
him up in power by temporarily overshadowing the cracks within the party. He
has a conscious and consistent anti-India approach at the behest of China. He
pulled out the old and stale issue of Limpiyadhura, Lipuletk and Kalapani
belonging to Nepal. The historical and cartographic facts have been widely
discussed since Nepal re-made its territorial map with legislation in Parliament.
I shall deist here from going deeper into it.
The second anti-India ranting from Oli came
vis-à-vis the territorial claim. He said “the virus coming from India is more
harmful than the virus from China and Italy.” Challenged by his own party on his
non-inclusive style of functioning and anti-India posturing, he came up with
the third tirade against India. He said “his government was being disassembled
by the vested interest conspiring with Delhi”. That brought the roof down on his
own party. His detractors demanded proof of his wild allegation or resign.
The Standing Committee meeting of the ruling
Nepal Communist Party was called to force Oli to resign from the post of Prime Minister,
or give up the position of co-chair of
the party in favor of ‘one person, one post’ principle. The meeting has been
postponed thrice and now sine die, apparently, to bring about reconciliation.
The sensational statement on Lord Ram may
have been prompted by at least three strategic drivers. One, having realised
that his territorial nationalism neither took off in a big way nor did it
divert attention away from his unpopular leadership, he decided to throw a
religious stick to the political cauldron. He perhaps calculates that this
might stoke the fire.
Second, the ruling BJP in India has become
the main adversary of both Chinese, and Nepal Communists at least the Oli
faction. In India too, BJP faces Communists and the Congress as the main Opposition.
The ruling BJP’s rise in electoral politics in the last 20 years has been due
to their rigorous and persistent campaign for building temple for Lord Ram in
Ayodhya in place of the old one desecrated by Mughal invader Babur. The temple
was to acknowledge Hindu faith, and to restore their cultural pride. Oli is
trying to undermine BJP’s political capital with the controversy.
Third, Oli may be trying to puncture the
‘special relationship’ between India and Nepal based on cultural and religious
similarities and interactions from time immemorial. By driving a wedge into the
cultural sameness of the two countries, Oli wants to break the historical
friendship and affinity.
We know the story of Nepal unfolding since it
switched from monarchy to democracy. The increasing interference of China
through projects and loans, to turn Nepal against India is no secret. In the
past, China was content to keep an eye on the activities of Tibetan refugees.
But with the phenomenal growth of their economy, the Chinese Communists harboured
ambitions for world leadership. This is the legacy of Lenin’s slogan “Workers of
the world unite”. The Soviets tried to unite them by militarily invading
Eastern Europe and other countries. China is doing so with its new-found
economic might and flexing its military muscle. Chinese are investing heavily
in co-opting into their sphere of influence, political leaders, the top-brass
in the army, and buying off lobbyists. Nepal, given its need for resources, has
fallen an easy prey to Chinese predatory expansionism.
How does New Delhi plan to counter it? How can
it regain an old and trusted friend like Nepal? In fact, New Delhi has let Kathmandu
slip out of its friendship. In order to fix the problem and reset the ties, New
Delhi must reflect on the recent past that has led to the current hiatus.
It all started in 2015, when Nepal was
writing its Constitution. A year before in 2014, Modi had won the hearts of
Nepalese with a tremendously successful visit. As Madhesis were protesting
their marginalisation in the new Constitution, they imposed a blocked on the
Indian border. New Delhi implicitly supported their demand and the blockade.
That was bad diplomacy. India should have dealt with Kathmandu, not just one
segment, Madhesis. It was their internal matter. New Delhi could have offered
to help in mediation or reconciliation if asked, not support a section of
people, even if they were of Indian origin.
Secondly, New Delhi had been non-aligned
between two super powers USA and USSR, tilting more towards the latter. Small
countries perhaps would like to keep good relations with big powers. But if a
country has to make a choice for a preferred partner, it must do so. India did
not, until today. It was adopting the same tactic between the US and China. The
Chinese dictator is forcing a choice on New Delhi, which, interestingly, in the
longer run, would be good for India. New Delhi showed deferential attitude to China,
certainly in the two informal summits, the second one at Mahabalipuram. New
Delhi’s attempt to placate China sent wrong signals to Kathmandu. They thought,
if New Delhi plays up to China, why not we! From Mahabalipuram Xi Jinping flew to
Kathmandu to sign some 20 agreements.
Thirdly, when Oli was raving and ranting
against New Delhi, redrew the Nepal’s territorial map, New Delhi did not
respond. It has not, till date. On the contrary, the Chief of the Army made a
rather insensitive statement that Kathmandu was making territorial claims at
the behest of Beijing. He should not have said it even though that was the
case. Indian Army chief is Honorary General of the Army of Nepal and vice versa.
It may be a good strategy not to react and let the Nepal domestic politics sort
things out vis-à-vis India. But to ignore a country’s demand or grievances may
hurt their sensitivities.
New Delhi must take fresh initiatives in
re-setting the ties with Nepal. The first step is to make it abundantly clear
than Kathmandu has to make a strategic choice between India and China. The rift
between Beijing and New Delhi is wide open and irreparable until ‘Chinese Empire’
breaks up or the Chinese communist autocracy mutates into a multiparty democracy.
The second step is to regain the emotional bond with Nepalese dispelling any
perception than New Delhi is a bully or a Big Brother. The third step is to let
Kathmandu know that even in terms of national interest, its core interests lie
with India, the biggest democracy not China the biggest autocracy in the world.
The GDP will grow and fall, but its institutions that sustain society, politics
and civilizations. ---INFA
(Copyright, India
News & Feature Alliance)
|