dailyO
Politics

What India can do to not ruin relations with Nepal for good

Advertisement
Nilanjan Mukhopadhyay
Nilanjan MukhopadhyayOct 05, 2015 | 13:35

What India can do to not ruin relations with Nepal for good

It cannot yet be termed as Himalayan blunder but is surely a crater of similar dimensions. By Sunday, New Delhi appeared to be precariously perched on the brink of losing most of the goodwill generated by the two visits of Prime Minister Narendra Modi to Nepal. But more ominous than the erosion of brand Modi, is the fear that India is trapped in reliving the agony of its blunder in Sri Lanka more than a quarter of a century ago. New Delhi now faces the risk of being labelled as being intrusive by the dominant upper-caste hill groups - the Bahun-Chetri on the one hand and apathetic by Madhesis, the Indian-origin inhabitants of the Terai region bordering India.

Advertisement

Nepal's new Constitution has been framed after a torturous and much delayed process and after almost seven decades of the first political resolution that an elected constituent assembly must draft it. But the dispute over it has already claimed more than forty lives in more than a month of clashes between police and Madhesi and Tharu protestors.

But more worrisome than the prospect of civil strife consuming Nepal, is the fear that India will be isolated in parts of the Himalayan kingdom where the Madhesis and Tharus are not in dominant numbers. Already on Sunday Nepal's three dominant parties Nepali Congress (NC), Communist Party of Nepal-Unified Marxist Leninist (CPN-UML) and Unified Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist (UCPN-M) were united in their criticism of India. They accuse India of interfering and taking sides in the debate over the nature of the Constitution adopted by 507 out of 598 members of the constituent assembly.

This sentiment in Nepal stems from the interpretation by politically dominant groups of external affairs minister, Sushma Swaraj. Issued on September 14, the MEA release said that India urged "continuing flexibility on the part of all the political forces so that any outstanding issues are addressed through dialogue and widest possible agreement, in an atmosphere free from violence. A Constitution, which is fully owned by and accommodates the aspirations of all regions and sections of the Nepali society, will lay a durable foundation for a peaceful and prosperous Nepal".

Advertisement

Issued less than one week before the Constitution was promulgated on September 20, this statement was perceived as evidence of New Delhi's interference in the process even after majority of law makers endorsed the Constitution. For almost a fortnight after the promulgation of the Constitution, India was accused of fanning the economic blockade by not allowing trucks carrying essential commodities including fuel supplies. Though the accusation was denied by New Delhi, few in Nepal believed this. Eventually on Sunday better sense prevailed and India used its influence in the area to allow the trucks to roll into Nepal. Yet, the situation remained volatile with reports coming that Nepal was now disallowing these vehicles from returning to India.

In the enthusiasm of Modi's victory in India, there was a sense that little diplomacy was required with Kathmandu and that Hindutva bonding would suffice. Such naiveté was misplaced but after corrective measures were put in place, Modi was more circumspect during his second visit in November. But India's approach remained flawed as far as the process of Constitution making in Nepal was concerned.

Initially, New Delhi was motivated by the assessment that India need not be directly involved and whatever sentiment had been shared in public and private interactions with Nepali leadership would suffice. Thereafter, New Delhi began appearing over enthusiastic at the progress on the process of constitution making instead of scrutinising the direction it was taking. Finally, when New Delhi realised that Nepal was close to framing a Constitution that was not fully inclusive and did not address aspirations of several sections of Nepali society, it opted to intervene. Though this was without much success, but it has done precious little save pushing the dominant Nepali leadership closer to India's adversaries and also alienated Madhesis who feel that New Delhi did not intervene when it could have met with some success.

Advertisement

India is in a tight spot now. It cannot push Nepal government further for reopening the dialogue process on the Constitution because this will be perceived as taking sides in an internal matter of another nation. Yet, a decision to stay aloof will be counterproductive within India and alienate large sections of people from the Bharatiya Janata Party. Because the Madhesis have considerable influence through family links with the people in Bihar, this will have an adverse impact on the BJP's prospects in the state.

New Delhi has little option but to steer clear of belligerence and opt for backroom persuasion. It must return to initiatives that are invisible on the surface and not be led by sections that demand direct action to protect Indian-origin inhabitants. After the poor handling of Tamil agitation in Sri Lanka, India can ill afford to make another similar mistake in Nepal. It needs to work with all sympathetic forces in Nepal but above all abandon the narrative of India and Nepal having similarities because of being bound by religion. Even hardline Hindus in Nepal have different political goals when compared to their peers in India.

Last updated: October 06, 2015 | 15:27
IN THIS STORY
Please log in
I agree with DailyO's privacy policy