 |
Kathmandu Thursday September 06, 2001 Bhadra 21, 2058.
|
Motivated trade figures
Nepal-India trade figures furnished by
India’s Directorate General of Commercial Intelligence and Statistics (DGCIS) through
their Kathmandu based mission have surprised the business community and government
officials. There would have been no surprises had the DGCIS-compiled data shown the real
figures. The DGCIS trade figures state that Nepali exports for the year 2000-01 stood at
over 16.12 billion rupees, while the total import was less than 11.00 billion rupees.
These statistics project a trade surplus of over five billion rupees in Nepal’s
favour. However, figures given out by Nepal’s central bank are contrary to what the
DGCIS has issued. The trade with India, according to our central bank, is in deficit to
the tune of over 19.34 billion rupees. The bilateral trade surplus has never been in
Nepal’s favour. In 1987-88, the trade deficit between Nepal and India stood at three
billion rupees in favour of India. This figure rose up to 9.79 billion rupees in four
years’ time. In 1998-99, the trade deficit increased to 19.59 billion rupees. How can
the DGCIS claim that the trade surplus is in favour of Nepal when the truth is so
glaringly to the contrary? Why did DGCIS come up with this twisted statistical picture?
What is the intention behind such obviously motivated trade figures?
One answer is to undermine Nepal’s
argument at the last round of trade talks that the question of surge in particular export
items should be seen against the background of the overall huge trade surplus that India
enjoys with Nepal. By the end of this month a Nepali team will leave for Delhi for the
next round of secretary level trade talks. The twisted figures may also have much to do
with a proposed revision of certain provisions of the trade treaty. Unquestionably, there
could be some differences in figures. Minor discrepancies are understandable, and might
conceivably result from differences of definition and categorisation. But such wide
divergence is inexplicable. Nepal’s well established and consistent trade deficit
with India has apparently been stood on its head, if one is to go by the Indian numbers.
Such suspect statistics would not have been possible had India but conceded the reality of
the perennial trade surplus it enjoys with Nepal. These ill-intentioned figures only show
determination to cap Nepali exports to India of the five so called surge items and
strengthen the Indian bargaining position at the trade talks.
India has never treated the trade treaty signed in 1996 on
reciprocal basis. Rather, in a bid to curtail Nepali exports to India, it has accused
Nepal of violating the treaty terms. It has recently proposed revision and review of
certain provisions of the trade treaty to undermine Nepal economically. India has already
begun imposing anti-dumping duty on Nepali items bound for the Indian market. This started
after the failure of the trade talks in Kathmandu last month over the question of the so
called surge. The anti-dumping duty was in clear violation of the spirit of the trade
treaty. The next round of talks must be taken extremely seriously and backed up with
thorough homework on our part in view of India obviously playing with the figures and the
motives that portend.
Other Stories
|
