India might like to use the Maoist conflict in Nepal as a bargaining chip

P.Kharel, Secretary General, Nepal Press Institute, Lecturer, Dept. of Journalism and Mass Communication, T.U.

Amandine: Is there a nationalist aspect in the anti-Indian feelings in Nepal?

Mr. Kharel: The late King Birendra had told in an interview to Newsweek that regarding the cooperation on water resources, Nepal felt "cheated". It is true to say anti-Indian feelings are widespread in Nepal. But Nepal is in many ways India locked and suffers from large trade imbalances. Regularly there are subjects of frictions regarding Nepalese exports. Indian colonial mentality in fact did not disappear with the withdrawal of the British. Nepal from the Indian point of view can nevertheless be seen in two different ways. The first is to consider that India being a major power and Nepal a very small one, Nepal should be tamed by India. The other possibility is to believe that if India cannot even have friendly relations with Nepal, then how come it could foster good ties with others with greater clout regionally or internationally?

Amandine: Is there an Indian connection regarding the Maoist insurgency? Are the Nepalese Maoists linked with the Naxalite movement ?

Mr. Kharel: It is difficult to say for sure what exactly is the situation. But a question does arise. How to believe indeed that the 5th or 6th world military power, spending so much on intelligence and having so many contacts in Nepal, would not know about the movements of the Maoist insurgents? Actually if Indians did not know, it would be ridiculous. India might like to use the Maoist conflict in Nepal as a bargaining chip. It is to be seen how the Maoists themselves take their stand on this score. India has, however, succeeded in bringing to public debate the question of a Republic for Nepal. India does not champion the cause of democracy as prime consideration, except its own national interests. Its ties with the tyrannical monarchy in Bhutan and the party less authoritarian regime in the Maldives should serve as a telling case in point.

Since there seems to be some link between the Nepalese Maoists and the Naxalite movement in India, New Delhi might have its own reasons to be on the alert over the position of the Maoists in Nepal.

Amandine: Isn’t it possible to have China really balancing Indian influence?

Mr. Kharel: In the next 20 years it is believed that China will be a developed country. It thus will move cautiously, and not give an opinion easily. China in fact trusts the Nepalese monarchy a lot. It is traditionally a balancing power, even if Beijing’s interference is almost nil, especially when compared with that of New Delhi’s. Its capacity to balance India will depend on its own will and calculations as an emerging economic superpower and global player in other contexts.

Amandine: Indians provide arms to the Royal Nepal Army. How far are they involved?

Mr. Kharel: It is true that Indians provide weapons to the Royal Nepal Army, but they are not sophisticated ones. But for sure Indians would like to be involved and would appreciate if Nepalese soldiers were not sent overseas for training.

Amandine: The controversies in 1950 Treaty. What is at stake?

Mr. Kharel: Elsewhere such a treaty would have been scrapped altogether. Actually it was designed under the Rana regime when the latter was on the verge of collapse. Moreover it has neither been signed by the Head of State nor Parliament. But as India is such a big power, Nepalese leaders have not been able to take initiatives to do away with the unequal treaty. The Indian demographic pressure is making it all the more unfair as India’s annual population is equivalent to the entire population of Nepal.

Trade and transit treaties were at one time separated but New Delhi retracted to having a single treaty comprising both the subjects since it saw the revised scheme as a way to dangle a stick at Kathmandu. To what extent the Indian government can go in its attempt at throttling Nepal was demonstrated in no mistaken terms in 1989-90 when it imposed a trade blockade on Nepal.

Amandine: The porosity of the India Nepal open border is now seen as negative for both countries whereas before it was only of Indian concern, with the alleged use of Nepalese territory by ISI and terrorists. Could the border be closed?

Mr. Kharel: The porosity of the border has not so much affected India but has caused problems to Nepal considerably. Indians pretend both countries are suffering. But if it really had hurt them, what would have stopped them from closing the border? Actually the decision largely depends on India. And it is high time the Nepalese leaders took a firm stand on correcting the situation to Nepal’s advantage without affecting international norms and practices concerning the interests of its powerful immediate neighbour.

Amandine: Are Pakistani Intelligence services really involved in Nepal?

Mr. Kharel: Actually this question is only evoked by the patriotic but partisan sections of the Indian media under the influence of the Indian intelligence services. Maybe few people are involved but to a larger scale it is very unlikely, as the Pakistani interests in Nepal are rather limited. The size and dimensions of the respective embassies are a good indicator of this fact.

Amandine: Is there such a thing as an Indian economic domination in the country ?

Mr. Kharel: There exists an overwhelming domination of the Indians in one way or the other. Trade figures make this loud and clear. They have many fronts in Nepal, who serve as proxies and their penetration in various echelons of important institutions in Nepal is no big secret.

Amandine: Regarding water issues, is the failure of cooperation due to a political approach in Nepal whereas Bhutan has adopted an economic approach?

Mr. Kharel: Water exploitation has helped Bhutan a lot. However, the Bhutanese population is very small. If Nepal had such a small population, it could have done much better with proportionate resources in terms of its population. It may be noted that Nepal’s annual population increase is equal to Bhutan’s entire population if Thimpu’s officials figures are any indication. In reality, Bhutan is a poor recipient. It has lost a lot in this deal whereas India has been successful but the authoritarian monarchy is willing to trade Indian domination on its resources and foreign policy matters in exchange for New Delhi’s silence over the lack of democracy and human rights in that country.

Amandine: Threat perceptions are, according to some scholars, only the products of imagination. But aren’t they also built on realities such as the blockade imposed by India on Nepal?

Mr. Kharel: There is no threat perception from India as far as direct rule by New Delhi is concerned. Actually Nepal’s border with China is so long that New Delhi would have had to deploy ten times more troops along the Nepal-China border than what it has been deploying in Kashmir today. Therefore India will not do such a thing. But in the economical field, New Delhi would like to Nepal functioning as its economic satellite. It would also like the Nepal government to take match the positions that India takes on major international issues.

Amandine: Is the Nepalese Diaspora in India promoting Nepal-India friendship?

Mr. Kharel: This influence is very small, apart from what little ties Nepalese political parties have. In fact, Nepalese in India hardly talk about Nepal, as they fear being treated as anti-Indians there.

Amandine: Are general and local elections possible, given the existing situation in the countryside?

Mr. Kharel: Elections should be held in order to provide at least some representation. Even if few people are able to participate, it would be better than no elections. Actually there is no other solution to put an end to the current situation. UML does not want the Maoists to have a big say, as it fears that it would lose sizeable votes that would go to the Maoists. Even a small loss would make a big difference as a difference of 3-4 % votes in past elections changed the electoral fortunes of political parties in a major way.

It is interesting to note that in three consecutive general elections in Nepal the left parties have appeared as either the second-largest or the single-largest party in parliament. No communist party in any other democracy can boast of such a record at the national parliament.

Amandine: Is there a possible foreign military involvement in Nepal?

Mr. Kharel: Such an involvement is unlikely without India’s approval, and if India gets involved it would like to have the monopoly, which again would not be approved by China and perhaps other major powers in the Western world as well.

Amandine: What is the position of the Maoists regarding the caste system? What do you think of the ambiguity of a movement led by young Brahmins when they are supposed to free lower castes?

Mr. Kharel: The roots of the movement are to be found in the so-called lower castes. Statistically it has clearly helped the movement to grow, and the ideologues among the Brahmin leaders generally appear to be honest. As the movement develops, other casts are joining it.

Amandine: What are the reasons for the difficulties of democratic transition in Nepal?

Mr. Kharel: Firstly, there are economic and education problems. Especially the women are suffering from the situation. Widow marriages are still very rare in Nepal. If they could have a guarantee to employment, they would achieve economic independence and get education. However, the problem is that industrial development is sluggish or even worse.

Secondly, most major political parties are dishonest and some of them even corrupt. They are not faithful to the cause they profess to champion. The CIAA is quite effective but there are loopholes, and a democratic, functioning political culture is lacking. Many parties are not functioning democratically. Dictatorship of a single leader or his clique should not be allowed.

Quite a few of Nepalese NGOs also need to reform the way manner in which they are functioning. Their accounts are not properly audited and mostly work as wings of the political parties. And many INGOS and other foreign agencies report to their headquarters that the work they are doing through local partners has been above average. This is done to earn better ratings of their own performance back at home and also to justify their presence in Nepal. Most Nepalese in general are very critical of these NGOs.

Today half of the population in Nepal is leading a life no different from what it was for their forefathers 50 years ago. Obviously such a situation cannot go on and on. Either things will have to change for the better and within a reasonable frame of time or something dangerously unpredictable might occur for better or worse. For people’s patience is fast wearing thin.

(Amandine is a French student of M.A Political Science currently an intern at The Telegraph Weekly conducting research on Nepal-India Relations)

Headline | Opinion | National | Dateline | 5 Question  | Editorial | Letter | 2nd Impression | International | Past