Nepal and Indo China Relations
September 6, 2010 by Team SAI
Filed under foreign policy, geopolitics
Nepal, the only Hindu Kingdom in the world, underwent major transformation in its political landscape with the overthrow of monarchy ….years ago. The Maoists, backed, motivated and funded by China became a force to reckon with when they started a violent agitation. Ever since overthrow of the monarchy, the democratic process in the country has come under severe strain. Nepal’s two immediate neighbours, India and China have apparently shown keen interest in the likely political outcome – an interest which has guided both the nations to protect their interests in the erstwhile Kingdom.
Nepal has been without a government since June 30, when former prime minister Madhav Kumar Nepal stood down under pressure from the opposition Maoist party to pave the way for a new power-sharing administration. Since then, political leaders have been unable to agree on the shape of the new government and six earlier attempts to choose a new prime minister have failed, with neither of the two candidates securing an absolute majority. The Maoists, who fought a decade-long civil war against the state before transforming themselves into a political party and winning a 2008 election, hold the largest number of seats in parliament, but not enough to govern alone. Now, the political crisis in Nepal further deepened as the Parliament failed to elect the Prime Minister even after the sixth round of the prime ministerialelections on Sunday. Prachanda, Chairman of the Unified Communist Party of Nepal — Maoists (UCPN-M), secured 240 votes, almost double the tally that his only rival — Ramchandra Poudel of the Nepali Congress. However, he fell short of the minimum requirement by 60 votes. The ongoing constitutional crisis has been continuing for the last two months. Both the candidates failed to garner support from the 601-member Constituent Assembly. Prachanda got 240 votes, but 101 parliamentarians voted against him. Poudyal could manage only 122 votes. 206 parliamentarians remained neutral.The date for next round of election has been fixed for September 7.Nepal’s Madhesi ethnic minority who hold 82 of the 601 seats in parliament, enough to secure a victory for the Maoists, hold the key to formation of the government. This is te reason for the “buy” theory.
Amidst reports of a mega Chinese delegation, comprising 21 members, reaching Nepal to meet the political party heads, the political activity after Prachanda’s recent failure to secure the Prime Ministerial post has heated up. The delegation is headed by He Yong, vice-premier and secretary at the secretariat of the 17th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China. This when a wiretap on Saturday alleged that the Maoists have sought Rs 50 crore from China to “buy” lawmakers to get their supremo elected to the coveted post in what is now called the audio tape scandal . In the audio-tape leaked to the media outlets, apparently UCPN-Maoist foreign department chief Krishna Bahadur Mahara is heard holding a conversation with an unidentified Chinese official seeking Rs. 500 million to buy off lawmakers to ensure Maoist supremo’s win in the prime ministerial election. Now the maoists as well as the two largest ruling parties – the Communist Party of Nepal-Marxist Leninist and Nepali Congress – apparently invited the delegation to visit Nepal.
The media as well as the parties’ reaction to the imminent visit shows up the anti-India hysteria building up in Nepal. Even vefore the elections, Prachanda began blaming their current arch enemy Indiafor the failure, accusing India’s external intelligence agency Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) of plotting to ensure Prachanda’s failure in an election already marred by charges of floor-crossing, horse-trading and backstabbing.
When the Indian government‘s special envoy Shyam Saran had visited Nepal last month, it created bitter animosity and accusations of Indian intervention, especially by the Maoists and royalists. Indian commentators underline that Nepal is passing through a very “critical phase” and in such circumstances, China’s interference into the internal affairs of Nepal will not only be a threat to the future of the neighbouring country but also the security of India.
This news, coming on the heels of reports of Chinese military presence in Gilgit Baltistan and their renewed efforts of incresed political and military activity in Bangladesh and Burma is worrisome for India. Indian political parties have asked for a close vigil on the “developments” in Nepal. Some how this vigil is not enough.
China ’s four-fold policy to strengthen its bilateral relations with Nepal has been articulated as: “First, accommodate each other’s political concern. Second, enhance theeconomic cooperation on the basis of mutual benefit. Third, boost people-to-people and cultural exchanges. Fourth, strengthen the coordination andcooperation in international and regional affairs.” This report brings out the extent of Sino Nepal cooperation in all these fields with their attendant security implications.
China is matching its strategy with deeds to gain the confidence of the Nepali people by participating actively in the socio economic changes bringing about a political change. The assistance is graduallybound to manifest in Nepal leaning far too left and creating unmatched security dilemmas for India. There is a suggestion in an article in IDSA that India should invest $ one billion in Nepal, find alternatives to Mahakali agreement and engage in nation building in Nepal to counter the Chinese influence. Despite its sincerity, the article falls short in suggesting that India apparently has already missed the bus in Nepal as it has in Burma and Bangladesh. The smaller nations no longer want a big brother who can not be consistent with its commitments and appears to dominate them without participating in their genuine growth. This when China has pulled all stops to pursue it’s five fingers policy in Nepal.
China does not need Nepal to pursue any military strategy against India. It is well disposed as of now in Tibet but another finger won’t hurt. This needs shift in Indian paradigms of dealing with its neighbours on its periphery to marginalise the impact of the fingers – lest they are used assiduously for ulterior motives. Yes ofcourse, this should be a win win situation for our neighbours but in the long run, this investment is likely to yield high returns. Indian moves have to be borne out of a genuine farsighted policy and not ploys to counter China on its periphery.
As if that was not enough, the Pakistan media is already celebrating the growing Chinese influence over Nepal.
“If the Chinese have complete control of the country, there is no denying the fact that Pakistan will have free access to carry out anti-India activities from Nepalese soil and there is bound to be a chain reaction that in the long run would put immense burden on India to bear” as per a report in merinews.
India needs to play it’s cards well by keeping Nepal engaged constructively.
Related Articles
- You: Nepalese parliament’s sixth bid to elect new prime minister fails (earthtimes.org)
- Nepal Fails in 5th Try for Prime Minister (nytimes.com)
- Shyam Saran being sent as special envoy to Nepal (thehindu.com)
- How to integrate Nepal’s ex-guerillas (theworld.org)
The mandarins in the corridors of power must have suffered paralysis by analysis as the Indian neighbours are falling pray to Chinese influence one by one. We need to be alert to the warning signals. India’s foreign policy initiatives with respect to it’s neighbours are far too tardy to the detriment of India’s security and safety. Innimical interests have taken full advantage of this retard in Indian Chalta hai attitude to spread their influence in the region.
No cost is little when managing the periphery as the negatives far outway the investments in time and money – else the economics of the nation will be overrun by security implications emerging out of a disturbed periphery.
The prognosis of South Asia in the future is scary. The phobia derives out of rise of dragon influence in all South Asian countries while the elephant sleeps. Some say elephants have great memory..this one seems to have forgotten to take its vitamin pills and sapped of all energy slumbers in a dreamland of ” Mera Bharat Mahan”.
Who will wake this ivory teethed monster?
Without getting China phobic the following points need consideration:
China-Nepal rail link approved and coming up.
Road links already exist from Nepal to Lhasa (Tribhuvan Highway). China is also doing world class infrastructure development in China and without time overruns.
China has caused serious schisms in Nepalese society and polity and has undermined Indian stakes and credibility.
Nepal is actively interfering with Bhutanese happiness wrt Nepalese refugees ex Bhutan.
Nepal is the centre of fake Indian money enterprises.
The Pakistani ISI has a near free run in Nepal, as has terrorism that is focused on India and is sponsored by Pakistan, China and ( now to a small extent) BD.
These things happen in ones pursuit of national interest. Cuba did all this and more to the USA, using pal Russia’s broad shoulders.
The USA kept matters under check. They called Russia’s bluff in 1962 during the Cuban missile crisis. We need to do the same. Thats all – and without getting into a lather, which is our usual, inane, unsustainable and ridiculous reaction.
The Chinese are, finally, Chinese. They aren’t the smartest beings in the world. We can Chanakya them (subtly torpedo them and their world power pretensions) if we get out of our obsessive pontification and work honestly for a change. Dude Krishna (wot a name!) may be coming of age. What he needs is a meeting of heads; of bright Indians who think of national interest above all other considerations. And time bound action instead of excuses; apathy and academic disdain.
Would China, for instance, want us to get friendlier with Taiwan; with Myanmar, Cambodia, South Korea, Bhutan, Sri Lanka, Maldives, with Vietnam? Would they want us to up the ante in Africa? Should we get Human Rights NGO’s and our great media to discuss Uighur Human Rights and Han invasions of Tibet? Should we accord posthumous sainthood to Johnson? To Ardagh? (They legislated that Aksai Chin was Brit). Should we ridicule the Panchen Lama; a Chinese proxy who is resident in Beijing?
I wonder…I really do.
In a projected nuclear war, there are no winners. We don’t need to worry too much about that part of Chinese posturing.
Nepal’s seventh round of voting for the Prime Ministerial post remained conclusive amidst protests of foreign hand in Nepal elections. The Madhesi’s lost 25 seats to the maoists but thee maoists were still short of the required numbers.
There is a growing feeling amongst Indian neighbours that India’s commitments are fair weather and that a leaning towards China is better. India needs to assuage such feelings and charter a path based on mutual respect and cooperation.
Highlights from today’s editorial in TOI
After seven unsuccessful rounds of voting to elect a new prime minister, Nepal’s Maoists appear to be veering towards a compromise. Last Friday, the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (UCPN) withdrew from the prime ministerial elections, citing the futility of the process. Simultaneously, it struck an agreement with the CPN-UML to work towards the formation of a consensus government. This is indeed welcome. The Maoist candidate, UCPN chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal, was a polarising figure and clearly did not command the support that is needed to head a majority government.
With the Maoists and the CPN-UML resolving to abstain from the eighth round of voting, it would be best for the Nepali Congress and the remaining candidate, Ram Chandra Paudel, to withdraw from the election process. It is clear there can be no winner in this race. The inconclusive elections have meant that Kathmandu has been without an effective government for over two months. Nepal is a fledgling republic and it needs all its political forces to give the country a solid foundation. This can only be achieved through expediting the writing of a new Constitution, which has long been overdue. Besides, it is only consensus that can help provide a permanent solution to contentious issues such as the integration of former Maoist guerrillas with the Nepali army, the return of properties seized during the civil war and the dismantling of the Young Communist League, which the Maoists have been known to use to intimidate their political rivals.
The focus should now shift towards the evolution of a common minimum programme that is acceptable to all political parties. It is on the basis of this minimum agenda that a unity government must be formed. A stable Nepal is desirable for the security and growth of the region at large. The surfacing of audio tapes that indicate Chinese money was being used by the Maoists to buy MPs in the prime ministerial vote is truly unsavoury. Such heavy-handed interference in Nepal’s political process could lead to a nationalist backlash.
The bigger question is whether the Nepal army would accept maoists in their cadres and the madhesis accept a CPN dominated coalition? The way out of the logjam without external meddling is to encourage a Common Minimum Programme as in India – the country with richest experience in coalition governments. Can we do it without offending Nepalese sensibilities, is what needs to be challenged.