FEATURES NEWS THE RISING NEPAL (DAILY)

Prime Minister’s India Visit
An Air Of Optimism

By Prof. Bishwa Pradhan

THERE has been a mixed reaction to Prime Minister Koirala’s imminent visit to India. Some politicians, academics, law makers, people from different walks of life have made some comments with regard to the efficacy of the visit. Some of them have even questioned about its timing as inopportune in the light of prevailing Nepal-India relations. However, it would be premature to draw any conclusion beforehand.

In diplomatic parlance, such exchange of visits, at a very high level is normally viewed as positive in the promotion of closer ties. On the whole, his forth coming India visit unlike his first official visit, is seen here as likely to mend some fences in the context of overall gamut of Nepal-India relations.

Though Prime Minister Koirala termed this as "goodwill visit", he appears to be more serious to put forth his case before the Indian leaders towards building up better relations by pin-pointing the anamolies and abnormalities that exist in the domain of Nepal-India relations. Towards this end, he apparently seems to enjoy full support and backing from all segments of political stream — right and left — in the shape of "national consensus" to give vent to the prominent issues of national importance. How successful his India visit would be ultimately depends upon the understanding and attitude of the Indian leaders.

The quid pro quo in Nepal-India relations would be best maintained and guaranteed if both sides, recognizing the changed situational context in the region and beyond, act positively in re-structuring a new framework of their bilateral relations. It is no use harping on worn-out, out-dated and archaic methods of political and economic arrangements which are retrogressive and hold no ground in today’s world affairs.

It is absolutely necessary that both the governments of India and Nepal should spare no efforts in initiating progressive moves in the development of harmonious, meaningful and productive base of relationship. A new and dynamic, durable and prolific frame of relationship is the call of the day and therefore most invincible.

Nepal today like India is wedded to the practices of multi-party parliamentary democratic system and the present Nepali Congress government is constituted on the strength of it being the largest majority party in parliament under the leadership of Girija Babu who also happen to be the Congress party chief. Thus, the present government mandated by the popular will is in a better position to seek solutions of the outstanding problems with India.

The political parties in opposition who are equally sensitive to the issues have been responsible enough to show their amenable attitude towards "bipartisan approach" in our foreign policy pursuits in tackling the problems. In a situation like this, let us hope Girija Babu would be able to carry on his mission well in thrashing out some of the irritating problems that unfortunately exist between Nepal and India. Basically, his visit is a goodwill visit. It would be practically out of question for him to dwell on all aspects of bilateralism in detail. However, his preoccupations with his counterpart in pursuing outstanding bilateral questions through the mechanism, of an appropriate political and administrative channels would be tantamount to the success of the visit.

Among those few outstanding issues, the 1950 Treaty of Peace and Friendship is one about which lot of reactions have been posed about its relevancy. Recognizing the urgency of the problem, both the governments of India and Nepal instructed their foreign secretaries to go into the details of reviewing the old treaty thereby exploring a new treaty framework. Many meetings were held at their level but no inkling of their talks came into limilight in the open press. It was rumoured that a blue-print from the Nepalese side was submitted to Indian government.

Nobody knows what has happened to it. Why this tight-lip policy? Was it not a diplomatic debauch on our part not to pursue it with the government of India? Question arises what next after we do away with the old treaty? What was the objective of the draft blueprint? Was it the resurrection of the old treaty or no treaty regime? Was it a revised treaty with necessary changes here and there or entirely a brand-new treaty formulation? The way the secrecy was maintained is beyond comprehension. In a democratic society such important thing should come to the knowledge of general people. The Mechavillean type of diplomacy called classical diplomacy make no sense today. It must be said that apparently their exercises remained incomplete. Would that mean diplomatic pastime within the confinement of the four walls of protocol, alcohol and geritol?

The 1950 treaty, as we all know, has remained obsolete, dysfunctional and out-of-date. In a way it has been a stumbling block in the development of closer relations between Nepal and India. How could that treaty, concluded at the time of Rana autocratic regime dethroned by the popular revolutionary democratic movement, be acceptable to us? The Nepalese people take it as a sign of sheer insult. Such a discredited—characteristically a fraudulent and fractious treaty—a carbon copy of 1923 friendship treaty concluded between the then Pax Britannica (British Raj) and Rana regime hold no legitimacy in today’s Nepal-India relations.

Nepal and India relations are multi-faceted and therefore multi-dimensional. Close geographic proximity, wide open border accessibility, multifarious socio-economic and political factors characterise our extensive and broad-based relationships which evidently mark the complex dynamics of interactions that impinge upon the two governments. In view of this fact, it is incumbent that any bilateral treaty or agreement that would be negotiated and consummated in future with a desire to maintaining and developing friendly relations should be framed on the basis of widely recognized principles of sovereign equality, political independence, non-interference in each other’s internal affairs and mutual benefit - "the Panchsheel doctrine" to which both Nepal and India are fervently attached.

There should not be any hanky panky in the new treaty. The treaty on peace and friendship, by nature should reflect those provisions relating to political contents of the peaceful co-existence on similar pattern that we have with our northern neighbour China signed by Prime Minister BP Koirala and Chou En-Lai in 1960.

Kalapani issue and other territorial questions, finalisation of the DPR of PIDP, Bhutanese refugee problem and some economic issues are equally very important which should be resolved. It is expected that Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala would take up these questions case by case with the Indian leadership. Upon the resolution of these issues lie the future course of Nepal-India relations. The nation is now behind Girija Babu in his search for better relations with India. We wish him all success in this lofty mission.

(The writer is a former foreign secretary to HMG of Nepal, 1983-86)

Other Stories