Frosty welcome for India in Nepal
By Dhruba Adhikary
KATHMANDU - Those who rule India from their power base in Delhi may not be
wrong to view Nepal as their closest neighbor as well as ally, but whether the
denizens of this largely mountainous country sharing a northern border with
China - through Tibet - agree to such a perception has been a contentious issue
ever since the British left the subcontinent in 1947.
Although the Treaty of Peace and Friendship, concluded in July 1950, sought to
institutionalize the assertive posture Delhi thought it had inherited from its
colonial masters, the Nepalis have consistently challenged this pact,
describing it as an unequal treaty from the very day it was signed. The treaty
has often been
compared with the pact the Soviets imposed on Finland in 1948.
The people of Nepal, although ethnically diverse and politically polarized,
have always been against what they perceive as Delhi's bullying behavior. This
week has been no exception.
First, Indian External Affairs Minister S M Krishna was greeted with black
flags by those protesting against encroachment into Nepal's border regions.
While Krishna's consultations with government leaders were to contain India's
offer of assistance to Nepal during its current democratic transition, his
meeting with the top Maoist leader, Pushpa Kamal Dahal (popularly known as
Prachanda), was utilized to deliver a tough message to restrain anti-Indian
rhetoric used to promote Nepali nationalism.
The customary joint press statement, issued on January 17 in Kathmandu at the
end of Krishna's three-day visit, restricted itself to alluding to "age-old,
multifaceted relations" between the countries. But Krishna's office in New
Delhi released a separate statement saying the visiting minister "conveyed deep
disappointment at the baseless attacks on India by the Maoist leadership". This
statement is indicative of the tough talks that Prachanda had with Krishna.
The Maoist party Prachanda leads commands 40% of the seats in the 601-strong
Constituent Assembly, which is working on a new constitution expected to be
promulgated by May 28 this year.
Krishna's warning was not taken too seriously, as was evident at the start of
the four-day visit to Nepal of the Indian army chief, General Deepak Kapoor,
starting on Tuesday. He, too, felt the heat from the outset at Kathmandu
airport.
Over a dozen Maoist cadres were detained for several hours for waving black
flags at the Indian visitor. On the same day, Maoists staged a rally and held a
public meeting in front of the Indian Embassy. One of Prachanda's deputies,
Narayankaji Shrestha, told the audience that while the Maoists were in favor of
maintaining normal, neighborly relations with India, what they opposed was
Delhi's continuous interference in Nepal's internal affairs.
India officially always denies allegations of interference, but there have been
occasions when such claims have proved true. One such occasion was in June 2006
- shortly after the April uprising against king Gyanendra's absolute rule. An
Indian parliamentary delegation visited Nepal, and one of delegates, S Sudhakar
Reddy, observed after returning home: "Nepal is at the political crossroads and
should be allowed to decide its policies independently without any
intervention." He did not mince words over where the interference was coming
from. "Keeping in view the past experiences with Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, it
is better that we keep away from the internal affairs of that country."
Unlike Nepal's other political parties, the Maoist party has displayed skill at
winning over the public and arousing a sense of nationalism. The leadership has
explained that it has no quarrel with India as a country and its people; its
confrontation is with the rulers in Delhi representing the political elite,
bureaucracy, defense establishment and intelligence agencies.
Kapoor's name surfaced precisely in this context. In a fiery speech he gave on
the last day of a three-day nationwide general strike on December 22, Prachanda
asked how the Indian army chief could "publicly advise" Nepal's army chief,
General Chhatraman Singh Gurung, to reject a proposition aimed at integrating
former Maoist combatants into the national army. (These combatants numbering
nearly 20,000 are sheltered in United Nations-supervised camps.)
It is a sensitive subject and is under official negotiations in line with peace
accords signed ending the decade-long Maoist insurgency (1996-2006). There are
serious apprehensions that if the integration issue is not resolved fairly, the
whole plan for promulgating the new constitution on time might not be achieved.
Nepal could face a constitutional crisis of an unprecedented nature.
After quitting the premiership last May amid controversy regarding his decision
to sack the then army chief, Prachanda has toured various parts of the country,
telling the people about Delhi's excesses with regard to Nepal. The issues he
has chosen to raise include Nepal's notorious and mysterious palace massacre of
June 2001, which claimed the lives of king Birendra, his queen and the crown
prince. Echoing the perceptions of a section of the population, he said the
monarch was killed for being a nationalist. Prachanda has also alluded to the
death of another firebrand nationalist leader, Madan Bhandari, 16 years ago.
Kapoor's remarks to the media came at a New Delhi reception during his Nepali
counterpart's tour of India in December. Although the Nepal army and its
ministry did not react to Prachanda's objection, the Indian Embassy found it
expedient to clear the air on the eve of Kapoor's reciprocating trip to Nepal.
His remarks, an embassy press release said, did not "reflect the government of
India's position" on the issue of "PLA integration" in Nepal army. The Maoists'
annoyance was further exacerbated when their cadres intercepted a caravan of
military vehicles "quietly" entering Nepal. This led them to accuse the Nepal
army of importing weapons that could be used against them, defying provisions
of the peace accords. Later, it was officially clarified that the fleet of 100
vehicles were carrying non-lethal equipment from India.
Indian media reports have said that New Delhi has been embarrassed more than
once by Kapoor's publicly aired thoughts. A seminar speech in which he spoke of
two-front war against China and Pakistan was one such occasion.
MK Narayanan, until recently India's national security advisor, has also
influenced political events in Nepal in recent years. Weeks before Nepal went
to the polls in April 2008, he appeared on television saying that India favored
the Nepali Congress party and its leader, Girija Prasad Koirala. This prompted
other political parties to be apprehensive about Indian designs on Nepal.
Narayanan's statement left room for speculation that Delhi had had a hand in
the sudden creation of new regional parties in the southern plains bordering
the Indian states of Bihar and Uttar Pradesh just a few months before the
constituent assembly election.
That Narayanan, who worked as the chief coordinator of India's intelligence
agencies, was involved in matters relating to Indian policies towards Nepal
surfaced in a recent article in an Indian newspaper. "The Maoist menace at home
and the mess in Nepal bear further testimony to his sterling abilities," said a
reporter from The Pioneer in a January 17 piece reviewing Narayanan's
performance.
In the initial years of Nepal's political crisis, which was accentuated by the
royal coup in early 2005, Delhi, Washington and London used to consult
Kathmandu to find a durable solution. But, over time, both Washington and
London perhaps thought it wise to "outsource" the job to Delhi. And Delhi's
political masters apparently found it useful to depend on the works and reports
of agencies headed by persons like Kapoor and Narayanan.
Is India alone to be blamed for the political crisis in Nepal? Experienced
politicians admit that it is often the Nepali side which, unwittingly or
otherwise, leaves space for India to intervene. One such person is Prakash
Chandra Lohani, a former foreign minister. Some of the politicians have gone
out of the way to "invite" interference, he recently told a radio interviewer.
Who then bells the cat? Maoists claim they can, and they think they actually
have. Regardless, Nepal is entering a crucial phase ahead of the May 28
deadline for issuing the new constitution.
Dhruba Adhikary is a Kathmandu-based journalist.
(Copyright 2010 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please
contact us about
sales, syndication and
republishing.)
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
