Foreign Affairs after CA Polls

The vague concept of ‘equidistance’ between China and India must be clarified to ensure continued harmony and benefit from our differing comparative advantages with them.

BY Dr. Som P Pudasaini

Accomplishment of the agenda of lasting peace, rapid socio-economic transformation and stable democracy must now be gradually in the offing after the successful April 10 Constituent Assembly (CA) election and necessarily after a new constitution comes to play hopefully within two years or so if the people's desire for change and development is to become a reality.

The lack of a majority of any political party and the requirement of the Interim Constitution to form a new government and formulate a new constitution by consensus or otherwise by a two-thirds majority introduces inherent instability in the political process. Emergence of the Maoists and the Terai parties as important new political player is likely to make the political dynamics more complex. Pragmatic formulation and implementation of a number of foreign affairs issues will be critical to attract adequate assistance and prevent unnecessary interferences in the post-CA polls situation.

Specifically, a pragmatic engagement of India, China and the United States is obviously important for both political and development support. Japan and the European Union (EU) will have to be engaged largely to tap financial and technical assistances. The United Nations (UN) has been a partner in development for a long time. More effective use of UN for post-conflict development, peace-building and the ‘peace-keeping’ operations are also issues to be addressed seriously.

Since January 2007 the United Nations Mission in Nepal (UNMIN) has assisted in monitoring arms and CA election. UNMIN's new six month term comes to an end in July. It is interested to continue to assist in arms and army management leading to the integration and rehabilitation of the Maoists army. Extension or termination of its term is still uncertain.

Prachanda says there is "no role for the UN in military integration" but UNMIN's future should be decide by the CA meet and talk with other parties (The Hindu, April 28-29). China and India may prefer its early departure. The US and EU may favour its continuation. It is an important decision for the forthcoming government to weigh carefully.

India was instrumental in promoting the 12-point agreement and for bringing the Maoists into competitive politics. The April 10 election that made the CPN (M) the largest party with a claim to lead the post CA-government and constitution formulation process shocked many, including India. India's desire to see the unified NC to lead the peace and constitution building process got a big jolt.

As a damage control, India promptly welcomed the CA results. As a pragmatic strategy, it organised a dialogue on Indo-Nepal relations in Patna on April 26-27 in collaboration with the Bihar Government with a broad participation of Indian and Nepali heavyweights of the political and professional fields. After a long gap a senior Indian leader and External Affairs Minister Pranb Mukharjee is expected to be in Kathmandu once the CA convenes and a new government is formed.

The bilateral Peace and Friendship Treaty of 1950 has been a big issue in Nepali political landscape all along. Nepali politicians of all hue and colour whip up the issue when they are out of power but conveniently forget when they gain it. Interestingly, no Nepali political party or government has ever clearly tabled what exactly it wants in a new Treaty. The Committee formed in 2001 by the Foreign Secretary level meeting of the two countries for detailed review of the treaty failed to produce any result allegedly due to lack of adequate interest or capacity to suggest specifics on the part of Nepal even though a couple of the Committee meetings were held in subsequent years.

In his interview to the Hindu, Prachanda said "what we want is new unity on a new basis with India" and it is better to have a "new treaty" and also "review all the other treaties". During the Patna dialogue and in various other occasions the Maoists have given impressions that they want a revision not abrogation as insisted by them earlier. Indian Foreign Secretary Menon at the end of April said in New Delhi that they will be "happy to work with Nepal" as the Maoists have spoken about "replacing it or changing it" to raise relationships to a "new and higher level". Is it in Nepal's interest to abrogate or revise the Treaty is a big foreign policy issue still to be analyzed and addressed properly.

Nepal has other important issues to thrash out with India, preferably as quietly and diplomatically as feasible. Border; particularly Kalapani and Susta; easy market access for Nepali goods and services; energy and water resources; and the Bhutanese refugees are among the top ones. India's perpetual suspicion concerning Nepal's "China Card" must be fairly addressed. India can assist further to build post-CA and post-conflict Nepal if we play our diplomacy with consensus and smartness.

Obviously, China is perpetually concerned about Tibet issue and "One China" policy. Increased "free Tibet" fervour across the continents; including agitations in Nepal; leading up to the Beijing Olympic troubles China. The issue of ethnic autonomy with rights to self determination hotly debated in Nepal is obviously a matter of concern to China and even India in view of the Tibet/ Muslims, Kashmir/ NE agitations confronting them. The Chinese perception of fast rising Indian and the US influences in Nepal and its own rising engagement are matters to be seriously analyzed to ensure the best for Nepal.

The US is increasingly engaged. With the emergence of the Maoists as a legitimate force after the CA election its policy is a bit confused and largely under ‘wait and watch’ mode. The likes of former President Jimmy Carter is for recognition of the Maoists. President Carter in his article entitled ‘Pariah Diplomacy’ published in the New York Times on April 28 said after a "surprising victory in the April 10 election" the Maoists are a major force in "writing a constitution and governing" but was disappointed that "they still are terrorists for the US". He also sharply criticised Washington for its policy to "boycott and punish political factions or governments" that refuse its "mandate".

The Bush Administration is yet to remove the Maoists from terrorist list. But it plans to continue assistance even if the Maoists lead the future multi-party consensus government. On May 1 Dell L Dailey indicated a bit of change of heart on the part of the Bush Administration with a statement that the US prefers a "legitimate reconciliation and reintegration politically" in view of their April 10 victory if possible lawfully. Clearly, Nepal may be wise to come up with a policy and development package it expects US to support preferably by the time a new US President takes over in January 2009.

Nevertheless, the foremost need is to build a national consensus on foreign policy as our policies have been adhoc and largely partisan that meets the needs of those in power. Economic diplomacy and post-conflict socio-economic transformation must receive high priority. Competent ambassadors must be appointed. Coordination between the Foreign Ministry and Embassies must be strengthened. The Institute of Foreign Affairs must be professionalized to serve as a foreign affairs think tank.

The vague concept of ‘equidistance’ between China and India must be clarified to ensure continued harmony and benefit from our differing comparative advantages with them.

Undoubtedly, a pragmatic paradigm shift in foreign affairs is long overdue. Post-CA poll government may start the shift to be completed by the government to be elected after the formulation of the new inclusive constitution.

(Editor’s Note: Nepalis, wherever they live, as well as friends of Nepal around the globe are requested to contribute their views/opinions/recollections etc. on issues concerning present day Nepal to the Guest Column of Nepalnews. Length of the article should not be more than 1,000 words and may be edited for the purpose of clarity and space. Relevant photos as well as photo of the author may also be sent along with the article. Please send your write-ups to editors@mos.com.np)

Have your say ! (Registration required)