On Indo-Nepal Relationship

Dr. Prakash Chandra Lohani

Indo-Nepal relation is an important area of concern for the government and people of both countries and it should therefore be a topic of discussion and interaction among scholars and intellectuals of both the countries. As two close friends we must be able to discuss our relationship with an open mind and a willingness to understand each other’s national interests and constraints. As the saying goes it is only with good friends that you can open your heart and discuss your problems without the possibility of being misunderstood. Let us try to be open with each other and express our concerns and hopes in our relationship so that it strength the age-old links between the people of our two nations. Indo-Nepal relationship is too important just to be left to the whims of the bureaucracy or the temporary bumps and swings that we may experience as we try to navigate in an increasingly turbulent international order.

In discussing our bilateral relationship we need to be aware of the fact that we live in a world of nation-states where each nation is trying to maximize or achieve what it defines at any particular time period as its national interests. There are more than one hundred and eighty nations and their description ranges from super power, great power, regional power, small power, and tiny power to perhaps marginal power. And the interesting thing is that each country irrespective of its level and ranking in the power hierarchy can be expected to have what could be called as a national interest set that it would like to achieve.

Promoting one’s national interests is the goal of each and every nation in the world today. One could say that there are over one hundred eighty national interest sets. The collection of all these national interest sets could be said to define a universal set and thus the international system. In this system national interests of countries that are super powers or great powers intersects with the national interest calculation of many or all nations in the international system. But the fact remains that in spite of the great diversity there is one theme that all nations have in common: countries have a perception of their identity and a sense of past, present and future all defined within the framework of a conceptualized notion of national interest. Each country in our planet has its own set of national interest and convergence and divergence between and among nations defines the basis of relationship.

In the context of Nepal and India it is important for us to be clear as to what we mean by our national interests. Generally a country’s national interest in its relations with another country could be visualized as consisting of four core elements. They are

Political;

Economic;

Security and

Cultural

All these four elements are important in defining the structure of relationship between any two nations. Generally we tend to emphasize one and ignore the others. The result is a partial perception of the reality and it can lead either to unrealistic expectations or a sense of confusion and disillusionment. Often in our own country we hear some people defining the relationship between Nepal and India primarily on the basis of cultural bond and connections. This is certainly one way of looking at our relationship but it remains partial. Cultural proximity is no guarantee of friendship. If we look at history, nations that share the same civilizations have shown no hesitation in wasting enormous resources in trying to harm each other. This is not to deny the relevance of cultural proximity in the relationship between any two nations. The essential point is that if the other three elements are in place only then does the cultural factor acts as the glue that provides the strength and trust in a relationship.

The political factor

Nepal is a sovereign and an independent nation. It has remained so even in the past when most of Asia was in the clutches of the colonial empire. It is this proud of this heritage and it wants to preserve it as the single most precious gift to the future generation. Preserving its integrity, self-respect and national independence is the vital element of Nepali national interest. On this point both Nepal and India are happily on the same wavelength. India has always remained a steadfast and staunch supporter of Nepal’s sovereignty and independence and it is this commitment that forms the most important pillar of our trust and friendship.

As regards our basic political values there is a broad level of congruence that remains important in the evolution of our bilateral relationship. Both Nepal and India are democratic states that have expressed their commitment to a multi-party form of government within a constitutional framework based on the core principle that sovereignty resides on the people. We in Nepal are in the process of institutionalizing this principle within the framework of a constitutional monarchy—an institution that remains vital to the transformation of our socio-economic system. India’s support to our endeavor forms another pillar of a political relationship that is fully consistent with our national interests. It does provide an overarching political environment for greater mutual trust and confidence between the government of the two countries.

The Economic factor

From an economic perspective we are living in unprecedented times. I think since the second half of the 20th century it has been possible to think that nations that are poor need not remain so in the future. Even though we are poor we now start with the basic premise that a rising income and wealth is not only desirable but also feasible and within our reach if we are able to harness the ambition and the creative impulse of our people for increasing social mobilization and a high level of investments. Different strategies have been adopted in the past to achieve this goal in the developing countries. IN India the commanding height model that relied on an interventionist government was the paradigm for development for many decades. We know that it did not achieve the results that were expected. Then there was the change and it came after the foreign exchange crisis in the late 1980s. It was a remarkable change in the strategy of development that could even be labeled as a paradigm shift. I think what makes a nation great is its ability for introspection and a willingness and boldness to chart out a new course of action without loosing sight of its core values. India’s economic policies during the last decade has shown that as a great nation its politics and leadership has the vision and strength to move on a new path of action that seems radical and yet consistent with its democratic ethos and the welfare of its people. This is good news for Nepal. The overall economic policy framework of both our countries is in the same direction minimizing chances and friction based on divergence in the strategy of development. India’s shift on the high growth path has potentials for all of South Asia to be in the same bandwagon. For Nepal landlockedness should no longer be viewed as a constraint. In fact I remember a gentleman describing Nepal not as a land locked nation, but as a link nation—a country that has direct land link with two of the most dynamic economies of the world. There is no way that this can be a disadvantage. It may have been in the past but certainly not in the future given that both our countries are moving towards a more liberal trade regime. What I am trying to emphasize is that our economic interests are not in conflict. A strong and prosperous Nepal is in India’s interest and vice versa.

In the future Nepal must keep its house in order so that it becomes an attractive place of investors in India. Basically, Nepal should position itself as an attractive industrial location to cater to the large north Indian market. After the landmark trade and transit treaty of 1996 we did make a great deal of progress in this direction and that explains the dramatic increase in both exports to and imports from India. In the immediate past we have experienced some slow-down of this momentum partly because of our internal problems and partly because of certain procedural complications that may not be in line with the objectives of both the nations. When problems of this nature arise we must examine them for what they are and be ready for corrective solutions.

From a longer perspective, Nepal should be able to take advantage of its micro-climatic variations to push for agro and horticulture related exports including the systematic exploitation of its herbal resources on a commercial scale to cater to the growing India market. Similarly, the possible three stars of mutual cooperation between the two countries are Water Resources, Tourism and Service related sectors like education and information technology.

On water resources, we both need to be serious. We must put some hard work to define a framework for the exploitation of water resources that is based on the principle of equality and mutual sharing of benefits on a fair and equitable basis. In the case of the Mahakali River we did work out a framework that formalized the principle of equal benefits in the waters of the Border River. Unlike other treaties in the past, it was a significant breakthrough in the sense that it was based strictly on the principle of equal sharing of benefits and costs including the joint management of the project. However, we have lagged in its implementation but there are encouraging signs of mutual cooperation in the private sector. Similarly, India has shown its willingness to help Nepal develop its links with Bangladesh through the Kakarbhitta-Fulbari route. This is a gesture of great significance notwithstanding the fact that we have yet to use it in an effective manner. In the mean time, it is also important that we seriously work to operationalise the "growth Quadrangle" concept that was suggested by Nepal about seven years ago. This project needs our attention because this Quadrangle is the poorest region of South Asia.

One author has called Himalayan water resources poetically as "waters of hope" for the whole region. The logic is to transform water into wealth and this can be achieved if we adhere to the principle of equality and mutual sharing of benefits on a fair and equitable basis. We have all been working to achieve these objectives.

On the trade front, we must ultimately aim for the day when the whole of SA could be viewed as one single market. This may seem far-fetched but it is an objective worth striving for. A move in this direction will require some adjustments and a specific time frame for a small neighbor like Nepal but it is in our economic interest and the interest of all the people in the region. In this context the Indian Prime Minister’s call for a single currency shows that India is indeed more than willing to move in this direction. I hope that the upcoming SAARC summit makes some progress in this direction.

The Security Factor:

The term security needs a holistic approach if it is to be analyzed properly because it can range all the way from economic security to border security. In a somewhat narrow sense however one of the most important consideration related to security is cross border movement of people along our open border. Both our countries have to make sure that our open border is not used by undesirable elements to create violence or instability or economic distortion in our respective countries. Nepal, I am happy to say has remained sensitive to this issue. All governments in Nepal including the present one, irrespective of party affiliation have made it a policy to make sure that Nepal is not used as a place for activities harmful to India’s security. The present government has pursued this policy with seriousness and determination. Similarly, we are also confident that certain elements that want to destroy the multi-party constitutional system and the development infrastructure of Nepal will not be able to misuse the hospitality of India towards the Nepali people.

The Cultural Factor:

From cultural perspective both Nepal and India are a part of what I would label as the South Asian civilization. As a nation Nepal is the source of two great major religions of this world. Lord Buddha the apostle of non-violence compassion, brotherhood and right living for peace and happiness was born in Nepal and made India his Karmabhumi. Similarly the great Hindu sages and saints of South Asia choose this Himalayan Region-our country- as their place to contemplate on the logic and purpose of human existence- the meaning of life and the essence of living. Naturally there is an invisible bond of South Asian Civilization and culture binding us together all the way from the splendor and grandeur of the Himalayas to the vastness and tranquility of the Indian Ocean. It is a legacy of history and civilization something which we must nurture and protect for ourselves and for the generations to come in the future. It is this common cultural resource that we must use to transform our economies and the promotion of national interest of both our nations.

I discussed before four important elements of national interests and certainly the economic linkage is crucial. The interaction of all these four linkages defines the actual content of our relationship at the macro-level all the four elements must not be seen in isolation but in a relational setting. Stressing only one while ignoring the others will be gives us a complete picture.

Finally I feel that our relationship at all the four levels that I have outlined- political, economic, security and culture –remain excellent. The challenge for all of us in to make sure that the interaction among all the four elements in our relationship creates a "virtuous circle" of prosperity, peace and friendship between out two nations for generations to come in the future.

Full text of Acting Prime Minister, Dr.P.C. Lohani’s speech made at a seminar organised by Council of World Affairs on Nepal-India Economic Cooperation held in Kathmandu, Sunday morning-chief editor.

PARADIGM SHIFT IN TOURISM?

– By Krishna Poudel, Kathmandu

Probably tourism industry is the sector that has never looked back, except some minor fluctuations, since Thomas Cook laid the first stone of modern tourism in 1841. Seen against the significant contribution tourism makes in world GDP , the degree of tourist mobility and its ubiquity, it can be said that , borrowing from David Lodge, tourism is tending to be a global religion. In the face of the widening gulf between the developing and the developed world, tourism, owing to more convenient capital transfer than in other sectors, can crucially contribute in bridging the gap and establishing a just economic order, so sought after. In fact, Manila declaration of world tourism organization had held it in explicit terms. We also opened our doors for tourism as remote as 1950s, when we were a mysterious Shangri-La for the world. Now the billion dollar questions are where we stand in world tourism map today, whether the policy attention given to tourism sector is proportionate to the development potential tourism has, whether the tourism can/should be pro-poor and whether the existing paradigm suffices or we need a considerable shift- if not radical one. These questions will be the central loci of this write up.

Out of seven hundred million tourists generated in 1999, our share remained less than half million. This scribe is of the opinion that the tourism potential we have and this pitiable figure are certainly not compatible. It will be rather utopian to maintain that our tourism potential is gigantic enough to be one of the best tourism destinations in the word, at least for some decades to come, but the potential we have is, for sure, strong enough to be the tourism hub of south Asia and favorite destination of Asia. The rare bio diversity per unit land, so diversified tourism products (adventure, sight seeing, mountaineering, trekking, cultural and natural heritages, recreational products, you name it) and the hospitality tradition we posses are the factors that vindicate the point made. And, it obviously implies that the pitfalls and the weaknesses lie in our efforts to promote tourism, in our policy design and attention, and other domestic factors, political instability for example, which are inhibiting and militating against its growth. Although tourism has been considered, of late, the priority sector, it has never been the major thrust of the development strategy. Industrialization and agriculture have remained the central focus rather. It’s not the argument that there haven’t been the efforts in the past and they haven’t paid off, but the way we have

come is not satisfactory and consistent to our tourism potential . And definitely not so in terms of poverty reduction and bringing about the changes in common peoples’ life. So it’s time for a remarkable shift in paradigm of tourism development. These are the major areas we need a revision and alteration; A) giving overriding priority to tourism

B) making tourism pro-poor and encouraging comprehensive participation

D) planning and marketing strategy.

WHY OVERRIDING PRIORITY?

Manufacturing sector in Nepal has failed to deliver imputed to different things and this is certainly more so when it comes to lifting the large poverty stricken mass. For one thing , everything we produce here becomes more expensive due to our being landlocked and to some extent India’s rather ungenerous policy and for sure due to large scale production and cheapness of Indian goods. Industrialization and ‘trickle down’ of the benefit to the poor and rural areas never occurred, and not likely either under these same circumstances. Agriculture sector though in policy focus almost always , hasn’t yielded to the extent it was supposed to. Instead we became a food deficit country from food surplus country. Our agriculture is subsistence level agriculture and this is not likely to give what economists call ‘big push’ to our economy although agriculture is still the single largest GDP generator. So evidently, as often said ,tourism and hydro sector are the potential sectors having enough steam to facelift the Nepalese economy . In these two too, hydro sector demands for high tech, is capital intensive, and even if we managed, selling it in international market would be not less than a Herculean task. So the option left for us is tourism, that is labor intensive, with considerate planning can be taken to grass root level and by diversifying the ‘attractions’ can bridge the regional disparity. It’s not to forget that there are tens of countries in the world of which the edifices of the prosperity are pillared by tourism, though they don’t have varieties of attractions and the gravity as much as we have. While We can develop Lumbini and Pasupati as Rome and Mecca, conference tourism, sports tourism, eco-tourism, and cultural tourism all are equally feasible in Nepal. Trekking and mountaineering are the wonderful products we have already got fame for. Obviously, the constraints posed by the landlocked ness will have much less impact in tourism. Expedient to this , rising above rather rhetorical attention and perfunctory attitude , we should give a serious thought in developing tourism as the mainstay of our economy.

WHY PRO-POOR TOURISM?

Where almost half sky is afflicted with the poverty and deprivation and where the economy is of dual nature (small modern sector and vast poor rural sector) , any economic activity out of the poor’s reach wouldn’t carry any meaning. Poverty reduction measures have to be essentially integrated with the tourism development. Well said , Nepal is a live global museum , where hundreds of villages can be developed as tourism attractions. As tourism industry has tremendous backward and forward linkages it will help boost other sectors as well as diversify our economy, we are so much in need of. In that direction, decentralized tourism planning, effective harmonization of macro and micro planning and inclusive participation of the people are the prerequisites. From the hands of few hundred entrepreneurs tourism should be taken to common people.

WHY CHANGE IN STRATEGY ?

‘Bolneko pitho bikchha na bolneko chamal pani bikdaina"(its literal meaning is without proper marketing even a good product won’t be sold), this Nepali proverb carries a great sense in our context. Indeed, we are underselling our marvelous products haven’t reached out to the potential tourists, and , that unambiguously fingers at shortcomings and inadequacies in tourism planning and marketing. China, our next-door neighbor, is one of the largest tourist receivers in the world. In 1999 china received 27 million tourists. If we can bring just 2% of that in our country under special arrangement, we can witness a drastic alteration in the status of our economy. Besides, China itself is a large tourist generator. A new air service agreement and memorandum of understanding signed between Nepal and China, of late, is a welcome move and will help promote tourism, however, it has limited impact and much more has to be done yet. As all of the South Asian nations are promoting tourism, special regional package tour can be yet another lucrative way. In fact, several other measures like this can be persuaded.

CONCLUSION

These things won’t materialize overnight, neither is it possible, yet the prospect is very high. With scrupulous planning and aggressive marketing strategy within half decade or so , we can goad our tourism, and the economy thereby, to the desired direction. Consensual political culture and at least the minimum understanding among the political forces not to impair tourism is sine qua non. Above all, it calls for the bureaucratic commitment and the "will" of political leadership.

Headline | 5 Question  | Editorial | 2nd Impression | International | Letter | Past