Friend Turned Foe

The worst nightmare of the south block has come true, in which a neighborhood, Nepal a Hindu dominant country is giving Indian diplomacy very hard time to solve the riddle. This incident has cleared the water of ‘myth of dominant Hindu country’, which RSS and its political wing BJP forward in its policy making. This have also shown that no matter if the population is dominant Hindu like Nepal or mixed and diverse as in India threat to national security or internal security most of the time rests on the party ruling the country. To understand the present bearing of the ‘Himalayan Great Game’ it is important that a basic knowledge of past relation is known.

Historical Background of Indo-Nepal Ties

The relation of India and Nepal goes back to the times of rule of the Sakya clan and Gautama Buddha. In the 12^th century, during the Mala period and rule of Yakshmala in Nepal, the two nations reached their cultural zenith. The early 1700s witnessed a change in the Nepalese power structure. The subsequent period witnesses both monarchical and prime ministerial rule. In 1846, Jung Nahadur Kunwar established a dynastic rule for the Prime Minister. Know as the ‘Rana’. The Rana rule took hold and continued in Nepal till 1951. Though the Rana regime was not very efficient, it did contribute to social development in the field of schools and education. In the 1920s, as the India freedom struggle progressed, many educated Nepalese people came to India and partook in the struggle. This gave the Nepalese elite an insight into nonviolent struggle. The Nepali elite subsequently launched a movement in Nepal and succeeded in ousting the Rana rule. The most instrumental role in this movement was played by the Nepali Congress (NC), the same party whose support is very vital for passing the bill of new map proposed by the Oli Government.

India and Nepal have open border – a practice that dates to the British times. After the Anglo – Nepal was in 1814, Treaty of Saguli was concluded in 1816. This treaty formed the basis of the border of British India and Nepal. But, there is one major controversy regarding the treaty. The treaty was to be signed by Nepal by the deadline of 17^th December 1815. Nepal refused to sign it by the declared date. The British threatened an invasion of Kathmandu and after a 92 days stalemate, courtier, C.S Upadhyay signed the treaty. The Treaty of Sagauli was not signed by the King and thus, Nepal do not consider it valid then and also in present time.

Dissociative Identity of Oli

When India widen a road in the area near Kalapani, Nepal protested by first releasing an official statement and suddenly in matter of night releasing a new map of the Nepal. The bill approving the new map is still not passed in the parliament but the manner in which the Nepal is posturing itself raise doubt of the intension of Nepal and is definitely one of the low point of Indo-Nepal ties. What is more surprising is that the whole protest is led by Oli, the same man who in the starting of this career favour India. Prior to 2015, if anybody is asked which Nepalese politicians had worked most consistently towards strengthening ties with India, the answer would be K.P. Oli. This orientation and support of Oli was visible from some of his works such as: -

1. In 1996, Mr. Oli split from his own party, the Communist Party of Nepal’s Unified Maoist – Leninst (CPN-UML) fraction, to support the Nepal – India agreement over the Mahakali river water sharing treaty.
2. As Home Minister of Nepal, Mr. Oli cooperated with Indian authorities to pursue wanted criminals who had crossed over the open border between India and Nepal.

This shift in the outlook of Oli have proved that a huge gain (personal or national) is traded by a 3^rd actor in the Himalayan Great Game.

China Angle

China which have occupied Tibet since 1950’s and the acceptance of India after the defeat of 1962, was the first step that China took in the game, later waiting for the opportunity to intervene in the super friendly Nepal, China got its chance in the Blockade done by the Indian government in September of 2015. Nepal accused of India of imposing an undeclared blockade. And this was the time when anti-India feeling peaked in the Hill state of Nepal. Taking advantage of this China approached Nepal and proposed an 8 – point transit and transport facilitation agreement, which Mr. Oli signed in 2016. Back in 2016 the intrusion of China economically in Nepal can be speculated as territory expansionist measure. But, the current backing of China and multiple close door meeting of CPC and Nepal government is a great cause of concern for the Modi government.

The beleaguer of China from the world on the issue of not sharing correct information on the COVID19 virus and influencing the WHO (World Health Organisation) China is trying to show maximum diplomatic and military strength to the world. This is the result that China military have increased its military presence in all the disputed territory which it claimed and also have increased the diplomatic plotting.

New Delhi’s Response

Now since Mr. Oli government have introduced the bill in the Nepali Parliament, the ball is in New Delhi’s court. The short-term challenge in front of south block is to stop the passage of the bill in the parliament and the long-term goal is to stop the Chinese advent in Nepal.

To the short-term, India can concentrate and activate the backchannel diplomacy so that the plight of Tarai region people is highlighted and all the unequal representation problem of the Madhesis. This can stop the passage of the bill as the political parties can start campaign in the country of the unequal representation of the Tarai region and thus project the move as undemocratic.

To achieve the long-term goal of minimise the Chinese influence in Nepal India have to follow diplomatic moves which basically have economic angle. This can be done by not direct economic intervention, but policy intervention should be done so that Nepal feel safe to stay with India. Steps such as  

1. Fast-tracking the BBIN (Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Nepal) agreement.
2. Highlighting the need of self-reliant.
3. Debt-trap diplomacy of China.

These steps can change the public opinion and will further the PtP (People-to-People) contact between both the country which is already very high. Since, the people-to-people contact is very high between both the countries it can be fathomed that the current crisis is political made that too mostly on the part of China. But, it also show the failure of Indian diplomacy, as it failed to achieve the Neighbourhood First Policy, and a friendly country is converted into a potential foe