Wednesday, 06 August 2014 | Ashok K Mehta |
http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnists/edit/winning-hearts-and-minds-in-nepal.html
Prime Minister Narendra Modi's recently concluded visit to the Himalayan nation demonstrates that country’s strategic centrality for India, and its importance within the larger regional security calculus
Prime Minister Narendra Modi has broken in the perception of the highly suspicious and equally sensitive Nepalese the 17-year-old taboo on an Indian prime ministerial visit to Kathmandu. By praying at the Pashupatinath temple, he has apparently atoned for an omission: Nepal’s historic grouse of being taken for granted. “Why doesn’t India give sufficient importance to Nepal?” King Birendra Bir Bikram Shah had once asked of the then Indian Ambassador to Nepal, General SK Sinha. “Your Majesty, look at the map of the Indian subcontinent. Nepal lies at the top and is its head. All key functions are performed by the head and so Nepal is vital for India’s well-being and stability”, Gen Sinha had replied.
In the late 1970s, I wrote a paper on Nepal, titled ‘Exercise Tribhuvan’. It predicted, among other developments, a Maoist insurgency and noted that Nepal was India’s most important neighbour as it controlled lead avenues for China from Tibet into the strategic Indo-Gangetic plains. With the Chinese having exploited political instability following 10 years of insurgency, the dismantling of the monarchy, and the elusive quest for a new Constitution, by expanding their presence and influence manifold in Nepal, New Delhi has good reason to re-evaluate its security concerns. The hijack of Indian Airlines flight 814 from Kathmandu ended ignominiously at Kandahar for the previous BJP-led Government
To contain the China challenge, Mr Modi first visited Bhutan whose border dispute with Beijing is intrinsically linked with India’s. Reaching out to the neighbourhood is part of the Modi mantra of making India internally strong. When Modi met his Nepalese counterpart Sushil Koirala on the sidelines of his inaugural in May, he told him: “Nepal will be the first foreign country I will visit” even though Indian Embassy officials expressed difficulties in organising two prime ministerial visits in the same year. The Summit for the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation will also be held in Kathmandu in November.
Clearly, Mr Modi overruled the foreign office, and demonstrated that Nepal policy had shifted from what the Nepalese call “spooks and bureaucrats” to politicians. External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj preceded Mr Modi in Kathmandu by reviving a long-defunct inter-Government commission and charting out the Modi visit.
The Nepalese often complain about the lack of Indian goodwill, concessions and magnanimity on outstanding disputes, real or imagined, and wonder why India micro-manages Nepal. The historic anti-India sentiment, much of it contrived and politically motivated, was heightened during the period of Maoist rule. It is now embedded in the hardline Mohan Baidya ‘Kiran’s’ breakaway faction of the Maoists, which has marginalised itself. There is considerable distrust of anything proposed or advocated by India, so conspicuous is the departure from the short-lived era of special relations during the reign of King Tribhuvan Bir Bikram Shah.
The hiatus of prime ministerial visits is not without reason. During UPAI years, the royal coup became a natural deterrent. This was followed by a period of messy politics and regime instability, till the monarchy was dismantled and the difficult political transition process began. All through that period — when Government formations became the political focus, the Constitution could not be drafted and a second election postponed — there was no usable window of opportunity for Mr Manmohan Singh to visit Nepal.
Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee attended the Saarc summit in Kathmandu in 2002, but as working relations between New Delhi and King Gyanendra were so good, a bilateral visit was deemed unnecessary. Former Prime Minister IK Gujral, who touched Kathmandu in 1997, has become the reference point for the ‘Missing Prime Minister’. He was famous for his policy of non-reciprocity with smaller neighbours but travelled more than halfway to meet Nepalese demands over the unequal 1950 Treaty of Peace and Friendship Between the Government of India and The Government of Nepal, the Kalapani and Susta border disputes, and the Mahakali hydro-project.
On the contentious 1950 treaty, despite joint working groups and unending conversations, the Nepalese preferred, in the words of Rashtra Prajatantra Party’s Pashupati Shumshere JB Rana, “to let sleeping dogs lie”. These problems were raised by Nepal’s first ever Left Government, led by Manmohan Adhikari, in 1994, and later reignited with several additional issues by the Maoists. The Maoist insurgency and the political process that followed gave a tremendous fillip to the Maoist-Madhesi combine by spectacularly transforming the political landscape.
Since then, a rollback has occurred in the balance of power, restoring traditional political forces with whom India is familiar. Former National Security Adviser MK Narayanan ineptly remarked that India would prefer to see the Nepali Congress in power. Mr Modi’s visit was a timely boost for the Nepali Congress-led coalition Government. The carelessly drafted agreement on energy cooperation, which stirred the hornet’s nest in Nepal, was not the best curtain-raiser for the visit, considering that Nepalese water experts and lay persons have historically charged India with stealing their waters through hydro-power treaties hugely weighted in its favour. That exaggerated perception of wrongdoing has never been corrected.
Mr Modi, through his 30-hour visit to Kathmandu, conquered the hearts and minds of most Nepalese. Even the once-anti India Maoist leader, Prachanda, himself a charismatic and powerful orator, acknowledged Mr Modi’s stirring speech to Parliament, which united Nepal. Mr Modi became the first Indian leader ever to address the Nepalese Parliament — and what a hit it was! He urged lawmakers to draft the Constitution on time. On another occasion, he requested the Madhesis not to indulge in divisive politics. This was a rare remark coming from an Indian Prime Minister. In 2008, when the agreement for One Madhesh One Pradesh was signed, Prime Minister Gujral had said that Nepal was finally unified.
A slew of agreements and understandings were signed during the visit when the word ‘China’ was not mentioned by either side. Tweaking the 1950 treaty to reflect contemporary realities in a mutually acceptable version will not be easy. The energy cooperation, power and trade agreements will come into force only after a political consensus is achieved in Nepal.
With an open border, Nepal-India relations have no parallel in the world. Nepalese nationals can even join the Indian Army and enjoy access to many facilities available to Indians — except join the foreign service. Mr Modi has reset relations with a new Nepal, no longer on the twin pillars of multi-party democracy and a constitutional monarchy, but a federal, secular, democratic and inclusive republic. The Nepal visit is another insightful political initiative to demonstrate Nepal’s strategic centrality for India, and to the regional security calculus. New Delhi can never be seen to take Kathmandu for granted. But even for Mr Modi, the gap between promise and delivery will be hard to fill.
http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnists/edit/winning-hearts-and-minds-in-nepal.html
Prime Minister Narendra Modi's recently concluded visit to the Himalayan nation demonstrates that country’s strategic centrality for India, and its importance within the larger regional security calculus
Prime Minister Narendra Modi has broken in the perception of the highly suspicious and equally sensitive Nepalese the 17-year-old taboo on an Indian prime ministerial visit to Kathmandu. By praying at the Pashupatinath temple, he has apparently atoned for an omission: Nepal’s historic grouse of being taken for granted. “Why doesn’t India give sufficient importance to Nepal?” King Birendra Bir Bikram Shah had once asked of the then Indian Ambassador to Nepal, General SK Sinha. “Your Majesty, look at the map of the Indian subcontinent. Nepal lies at the top and is its head. All key functions are performed by the head and so Nepal is vital for India’s well-being and stability”, Gen Sinha had replied.
In the late 1970s, I wrote a paper on Nepal, titled ‘Exercise Tribhuvan’. It predicted, among other developments, a Maoist insurgency and noted that Nepal was India’s most important neighbour as it controlled lead avenues for China from Tibet into the strategic Indo-Gangetic plains. With the Chinese having exploited political instability following 10 years of insurgency, the dismantling of the monarchy, and the elusive quest for a new Constitution, by expanding their presence and influence manifold in Nepal, New Delhi has good reason to re-evaluate its security concerns. The hijack of Indian Airlines flight 814 from Kathmandu ended ignominiously at Kandahar for the previous BJP-led Government
To contain the China challenge, Mr Modi first visited Bhutan whose border dispute with Beijing is intrinsically linked with India’s. Reaching out to the neighbourhood is part of the Modi mantra of making India internally strong. When Modi met his Nepalese counterpart Sushil Koirala on the sidelines of his inaugural in May, he told him: “Nepal will be the first foreign country I will visit” even though Indian Embassy officials expressed difficulties in organising two prime ministerial visits in the same year. The Summit for the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation will also be held in Kathmandu in November.
Clearly, Mr Modi overruled the foreign office, and demonstrated that Nepal policy had shifted from what the Nepalese call “spooks and bureaucrats” to politicians. External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj preceded Mr Modi in Kathmandu by reviving a long-defunct inter-Government commission and charting out the Modi visit.
The Nepalese often complain about the lack of Indian goodwill, concessions and magnanimity on outstanding disputes, real or imagined, and wonder why India micro-manages Nepal. The historic anti-India sentiment, much of it contrived and politically motivated, was heightened during the period of Maoist rule. It is now embedded in the hardline Mohan Baidya ‘Kiran’s’ breakaway faction of the Maoists, which has marginalised itself. There is considerable distrust of anything proposed or advocated by India, so conspicuous is the departure from the short-lived era of special relations during the reign of King Tribhuvan Bir Bikram Shah.
The hiatus of prime ministerial visits is not without reason. During UPAI years, the royal coup became a natural deterrent. This was followed by a period of messy politics and regime instability, till the monarchy was dismantled and the difficult political transition process began. All through that period — when Government formations became the political focus, the Constitution could not be drafted and a second election postponed — there was no usable window of opportunity for Mr Manmohan Singh to visit Nepal.
Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee attended the Saarc summit in Kathmandu in 2002, but as working relations between New Delhi and King Gyanendra were so good, a bilateral visit was deemed unnecessary. Former Prime Minister IK Gujral, who touched Kathmandu in 1997, has become the reference point for the ‘Missing Prime Minister’. He was famous for his policy of non-reciprocity with smaller neighbours but travelled more than halfway to meet Nepalese demands over the unequal 1950 Treaty of Peace and Friendship Between the Government of India and The Government of Nepal, the Kalapani and Susta border disputes, and the Mahakali hydro-project.
On the contentious 1950 treaty, despite joint working groups and unending conversations, the Nepalese preferred, in the words of Rashtra Prajatantra Party’s Pashupati Shumshere JB Rana, “to let sleeping dogs lie”. These problems were raised by Nepal’s first ever Left Government, led by Manmohan Adhikari, in 1994, and later reignited with several additional issues by the Maoists. The Maoist insurgency and the political process that followed gave a tremendous fillip to the Maoist-Madhesi combine by spectacularly transforming the political landscape.
Since then, a rollback has occurred in the balance of power, restoring traditional political forces with whom India is familiar. Former National Security Adviser MK Narayanan ineptly remarked that India would prefer to see the Nepali Congress in power. Mr Modi’s visit was a timely boost for the Nepali Congress-led coalition Government. The carelessly drafted agreement on energy cooperation, which stirred the hornet’s nest in Nepal, was not the best curtain-raiser for the visit, considering that Nepalese water experts and lay persons have historically charged India with stealing their waters through hydro-power treaties hugely weighted in its favour. That exaggerated perception of wrongdoing has never been corrected.
Mr Modi, through his 30-hour visit to Kathmandu, conquered the hearts and minds of most Nepalese. Even the once-anti India Maoist leader, Prachanda, himself a charismatic and powerful orator, acknowledged Mr Modi’s stirring speech to Parliament, which united Nepal. Mr Modi became the first Indian leader ever to address the Nepalese Parliament — and what a hit it was! He urged lawmakers to draft the Constitution on time. On another occasion, he requested the Madhesis not to indulge in divisive politics. This was a rare remark coming from an Indian Prime Minister. In 2008, when the agreement for One Madhesh One Pradesh was signed, Prime Minister Gujral had said that Nepal was finally unified.
A slew of agreements and understandings were signed during the visit when the word ‘China’ was not mentioned by either side. Tweaking the 1950 treaty to reflect contemporary realities in a mutually acceptable version will not be easy. The energy cooperation, power and trade agreements will come into force only after a political consensus is achieved in Nepal.
With an open border, Nepal-India relations have no parallel in the world. Nepalese nationals can even join the Indian Army and enjoy access to many facilities available to Indians — except join the foreign service. Mr Modi has reset relations with a new Nepal, no longer on the twin pillars of multi-party democracy and a constitutional monarchy, but a federal, secular, democratic and inclusive republic. The Nepal visit is another insightful political initiative to demonstrate Nepal’s strategic centrality for India, and to the regional security calculus. New Delhi can never be seen to take Kathmandu for granted. But even for Mr Modi, the gap between promise and delivery will be hard to fill.
No comments:
Post a Comment