Birendra P Mishra, former election commissioner of Nepal. It may be possible to look at Indo-Nepal relations through the prism of Covid-19. Nepal and India have been affected badly by the Covid pandemic. India is managing its crisis with the vast resources, and Nepal is also struggling to cope with this calamity with its limited resources. Nepal with 28 million populations has received a limited supply of Covid vaccines. It has obtained 1 million doses directly from Serum Institute of India and made payment for additional one million doses. After receiving another 1 million in grant aid from India, and expecting 13 million doses altogether from Covax, it extended the area of vaccination to another age group of citizens. About 1.5 million senior citizens above 65 years received the first dose of Covishield vaccines in early March. They are left high and dry, as its additional supply for their second dose is yet to come from India. After receiving vaccines from China Nepal has started vaccinated other age groups of citizens.
In Nepal, the tallies of actives cases of Covid-19 and the death toll are increasing day-by-day exceeding number of eight thousand. Though the entire country is in the grip of the pandemic, the two western provinces are most affected. These two provinces have a great number of the migrant workers in India. Most of them have returned to their villages during the second wave of the pandemic. Sadly, most of them are corona affected. During the first wave they had retuned home and even during the wave they returned to India to earn their bread and butter there. In the second wave of the pandemic the migrant workers again brought this new variant virus, which is affecting every village of these provinces. Kathmandu and other big cities have also been affected and almost entire country is under prohibitory orders restricting the movement of the people completely. With the reduction of the Covid cases, the government is partially lifting the lockdown.
It is a truism that there is no alternative for the Nepalese workers to go to India for their livelihood, as it is difficult for them to make ends meet here. Does India’s concern to meet its domestic needs urgently to curb the spared of Covid, exonerate it from its moral obligations to meet the urgent needs of Covishield vaccines in Nepal to complete the course of vaccination to them who have already been vaccinated earlier?. Significantly, India has lifted restriction on supply of oxygen and there is uninterrupted supply of materials from India even during the pandemic .It seems that the unique relations between Nepal and India, which India often boasts, are on test on account of the pandemic.
The age-old multifaceted Nepal-India relations, at times, blur the normal visions of different stakeholders to perceive and act suitably. Divergent sections of Nepalese and India societies hold different perceptions. Interestingly, politicians view it in one way when in power and reverse it when they are out. Similarly, diplomats, the ruling elite, and the common people too perceive it differently. The perception of Kathmandu elite differs from the perception of Madhesis, who reside on the Nepalese boarders. Their common suffering and happiness, economic, religious, social mingling, day to day purchasing at local hat (Bazaar), social feasting and the marital relation etc., can hardly be realized by Kathmandu.
The twists and turns of the India-Nepal relations have been caused by psychological barriers, which obstruct the normal perception of the people. Barriers are more or less insurmountable obstacles. We perceive or conceive things objectively, yet at times we are forced to look at things in a different way under the influence of some psychological (mental) and external conditions, such as, background or context and meaning, our past experience, socio-cultural inheritance, official positions, interests, habits, ideologies, identities. Personal barriers including weakness, complexes, lack of skill, low intelligence, internal tension, irritability etc.
Interestingly, with regard to the Nepal-India relations, L.E. Rose, who quotes in his popular book ‘Nepal Strategy for Survival’ the unpublished manuscript of the thesis of Bhuwan Lal Joshi, “ Nepali had to reckon with the Indians so long and so often that they are more prone to infer the latter’s intents quickly than to observe their overt behavior. Due to the high degree of intimacy between the two countries through the ages, whatever the Indians do in actual practice is not considered as important as what the Nepalis think the Indians mean. With the Chinese, however, it is a different story.”, concludes “ Indeed, a whole new historical mythos, recently formulated in Nepal, aims at providing that cultural and intellectual influences from China and India have been equally important in shaping Nepali social values and culture. Factually, this is nonsense, but psychologically it makes very good sense.”
Some psychological barriers, which vitiate the relations, are as follows:
1.Perception of Nepal:
Objectively, Nepal, in the present geographic size is the creation of military power exercises in late 18th century by the small Gorkha kingdom ruler Prithvi Narayan Shah and his successors. Subsequently, Kathmandu valley was made the capital of Nepal. Hitherto, Kathmandu valley was Nepal. It is evident from the narration by Colonel William J. Kirkpatrick, who visited Nepal in 1793, called the valley as ‘the valley of Nepaul’(3) He was deputed by Marquis Cornwallis, G-G of the British India to mediate in the dispute between China and Nepal. He described Kathmandu valley as the ‘Valley of Nepaul’ because it was called so. Secondly, he found no trace of Nepalese government in the rest of the areas he visited, and thirdly, he found the whole easern Tarai being ruled by Jorabar Singh, who used to pay a few thousand as land revenue to the Kathmandu establisment. (An Account of The Kingdom of Nepal )
Similarly, in 1905 Slyvian Levy, in his first volume of his book written in French language “ Le Nepal” defines Nepal Valley under the heading ‘Nepal Valley’ in these words, “ Nepal Valley (Nepal) is situated on the midway from the plains of India to the high peaks of the Himalayas” (4) Earlier, Nepal was limited to the present Kathmandu valley itself. Curiously, even during the last 150 years, Kathmandu remained the capital of Nepal and was always called Nepal by virtue of its dominance in every aspect of life. This very contradiction in perception and reality influenced the relations between Nepal and India to a great extent.
2..Open Border Dispensation
The present border between Nepal and India is the outcome of the Treaty of Sugauli signed in 1816 and the return present four western districts to Nepal by the British in 1860 as a reward for assisting them to subdue the first Indian revolt against the British government for independence, which broke out in India in 1857. Jang Bahadur has reached Lucknow after crushing the rebels on this way to Lucknow, which was the centre of rebellion. He captured Lucknow in February 1858 and remained there till March. Interestingly, there are two British maps, one of 1827 and another of 1879, which show the boundary of Nepal. Significantly, there was some border dispute, which was settled by PM Jang Bahadur in October 1874 when he visited Calcutta in October.
The total length of Nepal-India boundary is 1880 km of which 1240 km is land boundary and 640 km is river and rivulet boundary (fluid boundary). Practically, it was not possible to close the border, as the land boundary is 1240 km. Concrete pillars were built, which were known as ‘Jange pillar’. It was kept open for some obvious reasons. The arrangement of ten-yard no-man’s land was the demarcation between the two countries. There were villages, which were divided between Nepal and India, which can be traced even today. The residents on the border were allowed to move freely for social and individual needs. Hat bazaars were common, lands were cultivated jointly even the ownership of the land was possessed by the citizens of each side. They did not require any citizenship certificates to purchase and sell their lands. Interestingly, Nepal required Indian Currency (IC) to circulate in the country for its trade and commence with India. IC was made the legal tender, which continued till 1959 through out Nepal except Kathmandu. Workers were needed. Workers, especially farm workers from each country were planting and harvesting of crops on each side. With urbanization and Industrialization in India, migrant workers from Nepal are earning their bread butter there in thousands. Now the Nepalese workers are also getting employment in other countries.
The traditional free movement of people of each side became finally a major psychological barrier that irritates the relations. It is related to the anti-Madhesi syndrome that represents a mindset, which holds all Madhesis as emigrants from India and their continued influx causes demographic shift in the country. However, the data of the census reports of the last fifty years clearly proving the increased population in Tarai due to migration of the people from the hills in great number, the mindset persists..
The issue of open border dispensation was raised intermittently by Nepal. For the first time, Dr. Haraka Gurung, a renowned geographer, raised it in the Panchyat regime. He raised the issue of controlling/sealing the border on account of the high growth of population in Tarai region, due to migration of the people from India to this region. Just contrary to his assertion, Rishikesh Shaha in his book ‘ Nepal’s Foreign Policy: Focus on Nepal-India Relations’ writes, “ But if we look at Nepal’s Census figures, it does not appear that there has been an alarming growth of immigrants from India into the Tarai. According to the 1981 Census figures, there has been a considerable shift of population from the Nepali hills. In 1971, 62.39 percent of the population lived in the hills and only 37.61 percent in the Tarai, while in 1981, only 56.33 percent of the polpulation was found living in the hills and 43.67 percent in the Tarai. There has been thus an increase in the Tarai population by 6 percent as a result of internal migration itself. According to the latest 1991 Census, 53 percent of the population is living in the hills and 47 percent in the Tarai. Again if we look at the 1981 Census figures for those who speak the more important Tarai languages of Indian origin, we do not find a normal increase in their ratio to the total population. In some cases, there has been a decline in the numbers” ( 5)
It is worth mentioning here that before the Rana regime was overthrown in 1951, professors, teachers, medical doctors, engineers and other technicians were recruited in India and absorbed in government jobs. Some of them came to Nepal themselves and got settled here. In early 1950s, Indian workers were invited to come to Tarai to clear the dense forest to eradicate malaria from this region to make it worth living and to supply wooden slippers for the Indian railways. Moreover, the process of migration from hill to plains was accelerated with the construction of the East-West Highway together with the policies of the government to settle as much people as possible from the hills to the plains to influence the domination of the local people politically and economically. The process of resettlement of landless people from hills to plains in the forest areas is still continuing. Of course, with the urbanization of Nepal a sizable number of people from Tarai and bordering Indian states came to Kathmandu and other towns to work as carpenters, masons, plumbers, sanitary and pipe-fitters and electrification, as new concrete houses were being constructed. Some of them work in factories to run them.With them some vegetable vendors, hawkers for purchasing empty bottles and waste papers too landed in Kathmandu and other places. Rug-pickers also followed them.
Significantly, during the high pitch of insurgency, the issue was raised more frequently that the insurgents were supposed to have taken shelters in India and got arms and training regularly due to open border situation. However, there were reports that the young people working at Mahendranagar (Kanchanpur) in daytime, used to take shelters at Banbasa (India) fearing from the insurgents who might recruit them forcefully.
Ironically, before 1950s people from Tarai and hills had to obtain visas for entering Kathmandu, as if Kathmandu alone were Nepal and the rest parts of the country were foreign lands.
3. The 1950 Treaty:
Another major psychological barrier is the Treaty of Peace and Friendship, which signed on 31 July 1950, as it formalized the traditional open border dispensation. The 1950 Treaty seems to be the modified version of the Treaty of Friendship signed on 21 December 1923, which had had seven Articles. There were provisions like seeking perpetual peace and friendship and acknowledged respect for each other’s independence, confirming all previous Treaties including the agreements and engagements of the Treaty of Segowlie. There were provisions for preserving peace and friendly relations with the neighbouring States whose territories adjoin their common frontiers to the mutual interests, and allowing all measures to prevent its territories being used for purposes inimical to the security of the other. Nepal was permitted to import from or through British India into Nepal whatever arms; ammunition, machinery, warlike material or stores may be required or desired for the security of Nepal without any custom duties.
In contrast to the Treaty of Friendship of 1923, the 1950 Treaty was named ‘Treaty of Peace and Friendship’. It has ten Articles with a vast canvas. It contains matters related to political, diplomatic, security, and trade-commerce. It provides for continuity to the centuries-old free movement of citizens in each other’s territory, right to participate in each other’s development projects, privileges in the matter of residence, and ownership of property. It acknowledges the sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence of each country. The two Governments have to inform each other of any serious friction or misunderstanding with neighbouring state likely to cause any breach in the friendly relations subsisting between the two governments. Perhaps, the term ‘state’ used here and ‘states’ used in Article 3 of the 1923 Treaty are meant to denote ‘states’ of India and not independent states. It binds both countries to maintain normal diplomatic relations. It authorizes Nepal to import arms and ammunition from and through India. It cancels all previous treaties, and provides for termination of the treaty by any country by giving one year’s notice.
Politicians, diplomats, and Kathmandu elite have been criticizing it as a treaty between two unequal countries. Since the Treaty binds these two countries formally, Nepal cannot close the border arbitrarily. Hence it has no option but to oppose the Treaty that restricts its sovereignty. Though the Treaty can be terminated with one-year notice, Nepal does not seem to end the Treaty unilaterally, as it is scared of losing other benefits guaranteed by the Treaty.
Present status of the Treaty
Considering its implementation in totality, one may confront with the reality that several Articles, including Arts. 6 and 7 have been rendered ineffective gradually. Nepal deliberately scraped the idea of bringing Nepal under the defence-umbrella provided by India by getting the. Indian wireless operators ousted from the posted at the Tibet borders in 1970. Armed vehicles and arms and ammunitions were imported from China and other countries. It nullified the letters exchanged between the government of India and the ambassador of Nepal on 30 January 1965. Further more, no Indians are allowed to keep land and have industries without acquiring Nepalese citizenship. No bank account can be opened without citizenship certificate. No Indians are allowed to work permanently. No Indian companies are getting priorities over other countries in matters of contracts. Curiously, only the privilege of free movement of the people of one country to another for pilgrimage remains effective.
The Treaty has some political dimensions. It was signed by the last Rana Prime Minster to save the oligarchic Rana-rule that was threatened by the active democratic forces on the one hand and by the rise of communist China, on the other. But alas, he failed to perpetuate his rule in the complex context of democratization of the kingdom. During the Panchayat era, the kings were apprehensive about the activities of the pro-democratic elements residing in India. King Birendra’s proposal for declaring Nepal a zone of peace was just to neutralize the treaty. It was proved useless when India did not accept it; though more than hundred countries had accepted it.
Interestingly, the Treaty, which establishes special relations with India has` benefited three classes of people, who still value it. First, thousands of hill origin people living in India for their livelihood and second, the people living across the border( the Madhesi) having blood relation (through marital relations) for centuries. And thirdly, the people who have religious faith, both Hindus and Buddhists, have pilgrimage without any hustle for centuries. However, Maoists at the time of insurgency and some armed groups utilized the dispensation permitted under the Treaty. Before Maoist insurgency, the Nepali Congress started armed struggles twice against the government from the Indian soil.
Reviewing the Treaty
The continuous opposition to the Treaty and the constant demand in Kathmandu by some groups and political parties to form a group of eminent persons(GEP) to review the treaty and recommend their change or reject the Treaty altogether.The initiative of forming the GEP had taken place during the Prime ministership of Dr. Manmohan Singh, when the then Nepalese PM Dr. Baburam Bhattatai’s visit to India. During their meet, it was agreed upon to have a committee, but no such formation could take place. It was PM Modi who took up the thread during his first visit to Nepal and it was decided to form a group of four persons from each side to constitute the EPG.
It is intriguing as to how it remained unexecuted till the late PM Sushil Koirala’s tenure ended. It was not known whether he didn’t take the initiative in this regard or he failed in his endeavour to select four eminent persons where PM Oli succeeded. Did other parties including the Madhesi outfits not accept Koirala’s nominees? PM KP Sharma Oli formed the group during his earlier stint before visiting India. Significantly, Manmohan Adhikari raised for the first time the issue of the treaty during his visit to India as a PM in 1995, which was responded by his counterpart seeking his proposal and the issue lingered henceforth. The government formed the EPG on 27 January 2016 that consisted of Dr. Bhesh Bahadur Thapa (former ambassador to India and foreign minister is the leader of the team), Neelamber Acharya (ambassador to India), Surya Nath Upadhaya (Former bureaucrat) and Rajan Bhattarai (leader of the ruling CPN-UML, now CPN). India, too, promptly constituted its EPG consisting of Bhagat Singh Koshyari, BC Uprety, Jayanta Prasad,and Mahenra P Lama. The first meeting of the group was held in Kathmandu on 4 July 2016,with a provision for a two-year non-extendable term.
The formation raised some eyebrows, as its recommendations may be used as a means to be played in the hands of a few politicians. If recommendations are unrealistic, it will be difficult to be implemented them on the one hand, and it might land the country in another conflict apart from the existing one, on the other, as Madhesis may not accept them. Some skeptics hold that the vastness of the TOR of the EPG may lead to nowhere and it may prove to be a futile effort as eight persons can hardly review objectively the complex issues of cultural relations existing for centuries. It will be hard to adjust the existing relations in the 21st century, when borders are being made irrelevant day by day throughout the world and natural resources are being harnessed for serving the humanity.
However, the Group, which completed its task of preparing its report, is yet to submit it to the Indian PM Modi first and then to the Nepalese PM Oli. Koshyari, leader of the Indian team, is the governor of Maharashtra state of India and Uprety is no more. Interestingly, the inability of the Eminent Persons Groups of India and Nepal to submit their joint report to the Indian PM Modi is a serious matter, as it is believed to have suggested some kind of border regulation, which may not be fully acceptable to India.
4.Water resources
The fourth barrier is related to the utilization of some common rivers and water resources. After India became independent, the top priority for the state and centre governments was to give immediate relief to the people of Eastern India who used to suffer hugely every year, without fail, due to floods. Hence, there were negotiations with the Government of Nepal to tame the big rivers, which flow through Nepal and cause serious flood effects in Bihar. Consequently, in 1950s, Koshi and Gandak projects were signed by India and Nepal.
These projects were largely criticized in Nepal for its water resources were envisaged to harness in favour of India ignoring the interest of Nepal. Though, the Gandak project, which was signed later could address some of the grievances raised by the Nepalese side, it is commonly accepted that Nepal has been deceived by India in Koshi and Gandak river projects, as Nepal has been denied of its rightful share of the anticipated benefits. Really, these were flood-controlling projects. It is a truism that had there been no Koshi project, the economic transformation of the people of the eastern districts of Nepal would not have been uplifted soon or would have been delayed considerably. No doubt, by taming Koshi, the people of Bihar got rid of their enormous sufferings as Koshi was regarded as the “sorrow river”. Comparatively, limited Nepalese areas are also saved from floods.
Perhaps, these projects were signed with a view to harnessing cooperation aiming at human welfare at large, sometimes, ignoring the political border as to which side was benefited more. It was for two reasons. First, the then political leaders were equally concerned about the welfare of India and Nepal since they had their education in India and had also participated in Indian independent movement. Secondly, the rivers’ flow is longer in India than Nepal. And thirdly, Nepal was not in a position to meet the expenses as it had been free from the oligarchic rule of the Ranas hardly a few years ago and it did not have sufficient financial resources to meet the costs of projects
On the contrary, in view of the past experience, Nepal became reluctant to go for any project with India for further sharing of the water resources with India hoping its limited capacity to safeguard its interest in the negotiation, which might again go in favour of India. Hence, deliberate efforts were made to block them even at the cost of pushing the development to the back burner. Nepal seemed to be over-cautious on sharing the use of its water resources. To some, Nepal had become so mush anti-India in this respect that it preferred to keep its people in darkness and poverty than letting India utilized the water resources fully for its own benefit. It seems that it had decided to become one-eyed for making India blind.
Significantly, the Pancheshwar Multipurpose Project, which was conceived under the Mahakali Treaty between Nepal and India in 1996, is yet to takeoff. Even in February 27-28, 2019 the meeting of the experts of India and Nepal failed to prepare the Detailed Project Report (DPR) for want of consensus. The project, apart from generating electricity, will provide irrigation facility to 0.13 million hectares of land in Nepal and 0.24 million hectares of land in India. Perhaps, since India will be more benefited, the DPR is getting delayed.
Moreover, the untamed rivers are causing tension resulted in clashes between the people living on both sides of the border, as rivers change their courses frequently. The deforestation and unbalanced utilization of Sivalik (Chure) hills and rivers have brought the beds of rivers up to cause floods in the areas even with meager rainfall, which causes floods in India. It is really detrimental to India, which has floods every year in the rainy season from the rivers that flow from Nepal to create havoc there resulted in enormous losses.
5.Matter of sphere of influence or Interference in administration.
The fifth barrier is concerned with the matter of sphere of influence that India is directly or indirectly involved in the Nepalese politics, which is tantamount to Indian interference in Nepal. The restoration of power to the Shah dynasty in the name of democracy by snatching power from the Ranas can be considered to be the first diplomatic endeavour by India to interfere in the internal matters of a country. It was viewed differently by different sectors of Nepal. Some held it as an Indian interference in Nepal.It was led by the Nepalese citizens with support from independent India in the interest of the people of Nepal at large, who were deprived of their all political rights. In other words, to establish democratic rule seemed to be the sole aim of the then Indian government. The then Nepalese establishment was maintaining political cohesion with India by assisting militarily in its hour of needs. But circumstances forced India to take a democratic stand for the greater cause of the people distancing itself from the ruling elite of Kathmandu.
The genesis of Indian interference in Nepal can be traced back to the 1950 treaty and “ Delhi Compromise” which allow India to have a say in several matters that pertain to Nepal. It was believed that ministers were appointed on the advice of Delhi. However, it might have continued only till King Tribhuvan survived. His successor king Mahendra did not toe the Indian line and sought Chinese support to neutralize India in which he succeeded considerably. After his demise, his successor king Birendra tried his best to insulate himself from Indian influence and declared Nepal a zone of peace, which was recognized by more than hundred twenty-five nations except India and the result was obvious. The very motive behind the proposal was to restrict India’s influence on facilitating Nepalese leaders to organize their anti-monarchy or democratic movement from the Indian soil. It is generally held the absolute rights of the king were curtailed by the People’s movement of1990, which was indirectly supported by India. It is also believed in some quarters that India was behind the Maoist insurgency, of course, not directly on the logic that the 12-point agreement was reached between the Maoists and the Seven-Part-Alliance in Delhi in November 2005, which paved the way for kick starting the people’s movement-2 to overthrow the monarchy successfully.
Indian False Perception
Perhaps, India has a tradition to invite the new Nepalese head of the government whenever there is change of guard in Nepal. Almost all Prime Ministers have visited India in a few months after assuming the office, except a few, like Jhala Nath Khanal. Actually, these visits have only cosmetic value at times with no real implications. They simply satisfy India’s ego. There may not be any causal relation between political changes in Nepal and new Nepalese leaders visits However, they might have in their mind to seek India’s economic support for its development and also to establish or renew personal contact with the Indian establishment.
Some pertinent questions are at times are raised. Does India have any political, economic and other leverages over Nepal to force it to follow the latter’s advices? Is Nepal dependent on India for its existence? Is it psychologically dependent or materially? It is not difficult to find answers to these questions. Despite the treaty of 1950,Nepal is not dependent on India entirely for its military hardware. Its dependence on India for petroleum products and huge gap in the balance of payment in trade and commerce do not force Nepal to toe its line, as Nepal is making payments in foreign currency, which India needs. Nepal seems to be psychologically dependent on India, as it is caused by its past mental impressions.
The conception that India engages itself in Nepal’s political affairs at the highest level does not hold water, as India’s influence has been neutralized gradually by another powerful neighbour China and to a lesser extent by the Western Power Block that are increasingly active in Nepal. Some hold that India has started influencing Nepal at the lower level, as it cannot be effective at the top level.
6.Security:
The sixth barrier is related to security perception. Significantly, the national security dimension acquires prime concern for modern India since its very inception, as it had to deal with Pakistan in its state of Jammu and Kashmir just after its partition. On its realization that high mountains and deep seas cannot safeguard any nation in the twentieth century, it was alert on its northern border too sensing possibility of aggression/ encroachment by the newly born communist China. It did face another challenge in 1962 when there was border conflict with China on the Himalayas and later on with Pakistan in 1965 in full-fledged war in its western and eastern sectors.
India has serious concerns for its internal and regional security. In the past, there was a time when India did really faced secessionist and separatists agitations. In his book ‘India And Nepal’ S.D.Muni writes, “The cases of Assam, Bodo, and Jharkhand movements, Naga, Mizo and Tripura insurgencies, and Punjab and Gurkha troubles may be mentioned here. … India’s security concerns towards China and the fallout of internal turmoil in Assam and Darjeeing may be recalled here. The possibility of Sikh territorists and Bihar and West Bengal based left-extremists (naxalites) seeking shelter in Nepal has occupied attention of India’s security managers.” Even today, India is facing the Maoist insurgency in its several states, which threatens its internal peace gravely. With regard to regional security, Muni holds the changing global and regional strategic environment as the second important variable since India constitutes the main focus of Super Power policies in South Asia, as he writes, “The widening of Sino-Soviet schism and the consolidation of Sino-US rapprochment during the sixties and seventies further strenghtened the need for India and the Soviet Union to co-ordinate their regional strategic perceptions. Needless to say that this impact of global great power rivalry got perfectly linked to the regional South Asian conflicts, between India and China and India and Pakistan.”
India was skeptic about the role of Nepal in the cold war era. Nepal was having good relations with Pakistan, Sri Lanka. Bangladesh and even with China, which were hostile to it to some extent. Interestingly, in response to the proposal of the Nepalese delegation during king Mahendra’s visit to India in August 1963 for reorganization and modernization of the Nepalese Army, the government of India agreed vide its letter dated January 30, 1965 to give all possible assistance with the object of strengthening the security and independence of Nepal was accepted by the then Royal Nepal Embassy, New Delhi through his letter to Y.D. Gunadevia, Foreign Secretary to the Government of India under the heading of ‘Understanding On Import of Arms By Nepal’ . (Appendix-3) However, in 1969, the PM Kirtinidhi Bista denounced the Understanding about the import of arms and ammunition and asked India to withdraw Indian technicians and observers (wireless operators) posted on Nepal’s northern checkposts along the Chinese borders and Military Liaison Officers Group from Embasy, who were. Finally, India with drew these personnel from Nepal in 1970 as per agreement between the government of India and the Nepalese delegation led by the then Foeiren Secretary Yadunath Khanal. Interestingly, King Mahendra declared, in a press interview in October 1970, that Nepal has agreed to:
(a) “ exchange” military information with India on developments harmful to each other; and
(b) permit the posting of a senior Indian military officer in the embassy in Kathmandu for an “ agreed period and job” (11)
Perhaps, India succeeded in getting some relief on keeping its officer in the embassy. But this was the greatest setback in the Nepal-India relations. It seemed to happen partly because of the Chinese influence on Nepal and also due to drastic change in the Nepalese perception on Indian concept of its security and also because of Indian establishment’s support to anti-royal forces like the Nepali Congress. Unfortunately, the deficit of mutual trust still persists as a stumbling block in getting India’s concern over security addressed by Neapl, despite frequent highest-level Nepalese dignatories’ visits to India. And it seems to continue in the days to come too.
Curiously, India perceives that the government of Nepal does not seem to be sensitive towards its security concerns as the Indian fake currency notes continue to come to Nepal from other countries. Terrorists are reported to enter India via Nepal very often. These issues are of vital concerns for India. It is presumed that since security concerns were not taken up by Nepal seriously, its security agencies are assigned to handle its strategic relation with Nepal.
7. Construction of Roads:
China has been constructing roads in Nepal very strategically since it defined its strategy in Nepal. Coincidently, Nepal decided to link itself with China by road when India criticized King Mahendra’s dismissal of the elected government of the Nepali Congress(NC) on 15 December 1960 and the leaders and workers of the party started opposing the royal coup from India soil. It was the period when there was border tension between India and China, which ultimately turned into a bloody conflict in 1962. Against India’s warning of communist regime of China, the king’s famous reply, “ Communism does not travel in cabs” still echoes.
China’s first move was to link Kathmandu by the Kodari Highway. Unfortunately it was blocked by the last devastating eathquake in 2015 and the Kerung-Rasuwa road has been opened, which was used to meet the petroleum supplies during blockade of Indian border. A few days ago, Kor La road has been cleared in the west of the country by the army, which was assigned to carry out the construction work. Kerung is in the middle and Kodari is in the east. And there are half a dozen road construction projects under consideration of the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative to connect China with India at more than half a dozen points.
There seems to be two reasons for the Chinese interests in roads. First, China may become the first economy of the world superseding the United States within a few years. Therefore, it is interested in enlarging its markets for its manufactured goods in a large scale. Nepal cannot be its market destination, as out of its total 28 million population, about eight million people are out of the country (India and abroad) in search of their bread and butter. Thus the remaining population can hardly become a good market. Hence it has eyed on India as its major market. India, which is also a fast growing economy in Asia, has more than two to three hundred-million population with European standard, can provide a good market for bulk consuming Chinese goods. Moreover, India is its next-door neighbour of China; it may prefer Indian market to the European market. Hence, it is interested in having many routes through Nepal to reach India.
Secondly, there are border disputes between the two largest populations of the world. India lost the war with China in 1962 and it still claims its huge areas, which are under Chinese occupation. Though these two countries have a mechanism to negotiate and settle the disputes, there is no progress on this score so far. Psychologically, India is always skeptic about China’s intention in the region and perceives road constructions by China as a threat to its security, because getting more access to India may be strategically harmful. Interestingly, Nepal has divided its Terai/Madhes, which are the adjoining areas of India, into five fragments in terms of provinces deliberately to make easy for China to reach India through the roads constructed in these provinces, if China so desires.
Nepal, though small in size, has been an Indian market so far. However, it is up to India to see as to how it meets China in Nepal in trade. Significantly, Nepal too will hardly be much benefited by these roads, as theses are just the means to transport goods from one place to another, from manufacturing country to consuming country. Nepal, which simply falls in between China and India, may not be benefited much as its industries and commerce will not pick up speed in between China and India trade, as has happened earlier through Tibet.
8. Recruitment of Gurkhas in the Indian Army:
The British establishment in India was interested in the recruitment of Gorkhalis in its army, especially after the First World War in which they fought courageously. Their bravery, honesty and their dedication to sacrifice their lives as soldiers, impressed them during their wars that they lodged to capture various parts of Nepal much earlier. The issue of the recruitment of Gorkhalis in the British army was the bone of contention between the British and the Shah dynasty. Sometimes, they permitted the British to recruit Gorkhalis when the King or the Regent sought support from the British and the recruitment was denied when there was no favourable King at the helm. Some Rana prime ministers allowed recruitment and some rejected it. In the second World Wars, Gorkhalis sacrificed their lives but with no satisfactory rewards. Some of them sent back home empty-handed too, which helped the overthrow of the Rana regime, ultimately in 1951.
In August 1947, when India became independent from the British rule, the continuity of Gorkhalis in the Indian army was a problem to be addressed by Both India and the British. Hence, a tripartite agreement was reached on the Memorandum dated 7th November 1947 between Nepal, the United Kingdom, and India. The agreement provided for the transfer of all volunteers from Regular battalions of each of the second, sixth, seventh, and tenth Gurkha Rifles leaving the rest with Indian army. There were twenty battalions.
After independence, India too took interest in their continuity, which has been intermittently opposed by the political parties to suit their cause. Even today, the recruitment continues to remain the bone of contention and the Indian establishment has been taking it as a challenge.
9. Madhesis and Madhes Movement
The ninth barrier is the apparent India’s concern and the treatment of Nepalese government to Madhesis and Madhes issues. Historically, the people living on the Nepalese side of the India-Nepal border are being called Madhesis. They have been marginalized for centuries They have been marginalized for centuries, as They are, as they have been frantically craving for their normal and natural identity in the country, which no other communities like Indigenous communities (Janajatis) and Dalits face. Their nationality is always questioned. They have been treated largely as the second grade citizens even when they constitute nearly about forty per cent of the population.
During the last 250 years and specifically in the last sixty years, barring the last two decades, the status of Madhesis have not undergone any spectacular changes. On the scale of political power and position, during the last fifty years, Madhesi leaders could not rise above the post of deputy speaker of the Lower House of Parliament. Of course, in post people’s movement 2 of 2006 period, their position has since been elevated to the post of deputy prime minister. They were being given a few seats exceptionally in constitutional bodies and in the diplomatic service. However, their number is getting increased gradually. Ironically, no one was engaged in the erstwhile palace service. Incidentally, the first Consttuent Assembly elected Madhesi president and vice president in 2008, due to their strategic election on the basis of number game.
Tarai/Madhes is a strip of plain cultivable land with seven to ten km widths. During the Rana regime deforestation was a serious crime. After 1950s the forestation of the dense jungle of 8 to 12 km width (Charkose Jhari) between Sibalik hills( the foothills of the Himalayas), the plains of Madhes or the widths of Tarai/Madhes have been doubled. Madhes is thickly populated region. It is the most productive region and majority of industries are in this region. It not only feeds its inhabitants but also the majority of total population. Its main crop is paddy. Previously, It used to export rice and jute too. Though the area of Madhes has doubled, Nepal is importing rice and other food grains in large quantities from India. At times its surplus production is exported.
The Plight of Madhesis
A few years ago, Madhesis had to go to India, especially to Punjab and Haryana for planting and harvesting of food grains there to earn money. The practice has almost stopped when young people started going to gulf countries and Malaysia as migrant workers. Ironically, the fertile land of of Madhes is turning gradually into desert due to deforestation and land erosion taking place by the frequent changes in the courses of rivers, which remain untamed.
Strikingly, there was a change in the attitude of the government since 1970s towards Madhesi students who preferred to go to India for getting education. The government without realizing there genuine difficulties, started penalizing them for preferring education in India to Nepal. The government started deducting ten marks from their total marks they obtained in the interviews who applied for government scholarships to have technical education, like B.E. and M.B.B.S. etc. This deduction deprived many talented students of getting scholarships.
Madhes Agitation
Even after 1990s when democracy was restored, the plight of the youths of Madhes has hardly improved. Most of them remain unemployed and do not get jobs in government and semi-government services. The younger generation remains frustrated, as its future appears to be uncertain. Accepting proportional political participation as the only way out to get justified share in political structure and power, they revolted against the establishment through the Madhesi Uprising of 2007 to get Madhes Pradesh to have justified share in the administration. It forced the government to raise the number of seats to be elected for Constituent Assembly proportionally at the cost of more than four dozen innocent lives who were shot dead by the security agencies. The Uprising forced the government to fix quotas on seats for Madhesis in the government services.
The publication of the first draft of the constitution negating the proportional sharing of seats in parliament met with agitations and protests that continued even after the adoption of the constitution by the second Constituent Assembly. Again, more than four dozen of protesters were killed mercilessly by the security agencies leading to ‘sit-in’ protests at all transit points at the Nepal-India border, causing blockade of the border. It was believed that it was directly supported by India for the cause of Madhesh. Nepal holds India responsible for the border blockade and calls it an Indian blockade and never accepted it as Madheshi driven blockade. Finally, the constitution was adopted in September 2015, despite India’s request not to pass it in haste without making it inclusive. As a result India did acknowledge the passing of the constitution but could not express its pleasure or acceptance on it. It is still a bone of contention between the two.
Misconception about Madhesis
Ironically, the status of the ordinary Madhesi is sandwiched between Indian and Nepalese perceptions. Some foreign scholars and researchers for various reasons overlooked the issue. Either they did not have any interests in knowing more about them as it might not come under their scheme of research or deliberately did not go deep into the problem. The situation still continues today. It is evident from the observation of Leo E. Rose, who finds the presence of Madhesi “the large proportion of the Nepali population (20 to 25 percent) which is of recent Indian origin,” a problem with both ideological and cultural terms for Nepal’s national identity. Surprisingly, he does not take the trouble in tracing back the history of old settlement of Madhesi community,who were there much before Prithvi Narayan Shah captured those areas from different small kingdoms.There was Simrawn Gadh civilization in Bara district much earlier. Richard Burghart, in his book ‘The History of Janakpurdham’ refers to some copper plate inscriptions depicting that some rulers of the Makawanpur kingdom made land grants to the abbots of different temples. Abbot Ram Das of Janaki Monastry had received land grants from Manik Sen in 1727. Abbot Sital Giri of Kuwan Monastry received grant of land from Sujagat Sen in 1740, and Abbot Sital Giri received grant of land also from Hem Karan Sen in 1753. There was Sakya dynasty to which Gautam Buddha belonged at Lumbini more than two millennia ago.
In contrast to his views, during the British days, the British were almost indifferent towards the original inhabitants, as they did not interfere in their movement from one side to another. They were never particular about their citizenship as they had to recruit Nepalese citizens to their army. India, after independence, considered Madhesis as Nepalese citizen formally but hardly acknowledges their plight. Nepal never accepted them as real inhabitants or bona fide citizens, considering them as Indians or of Indian origin. It is the stark reality that the government of Nepal issues citizen certificates to them very reluctantly and under compulsion when laws permit them to have it.
Of course, in recent years, some constructions projects have come up in Terai/Madhes region with Indian aid. Actually, the Indian job is commendable, as these projects, which were over due, could not attract the attention of the Nepalese government. India always favoured leaders from hills and kathmandu to those of Madhes, as they always remain at the helm of affairs of the country. Of course, some leaders from Madhes were patronized by the Foreign Ministry of India in the past and may be some in the present. Despite Indian appeasement to the ruling elite, India is perceived to favour Madhesis and is always apprehended as a danger, as it may help Madheshis’ demand to have a separate country in the long run.
10.Ownership of Buddha
The tenth barrier, which is more emotional in nature, is the Nepalese citizenship of Buddha. It is an undisputed truth that Buddha was born in Lumbini, which falls under the present political boundary of Nepal. He was born about 2550 years ago. At that time, there was no country like India and definitely Nepal border was not extended to that area. It is a fact that Buddha attained Buddhatva (enlightenment) at Bodha Gaya, now in Bihar state of India. Buddha addressed his disciples for the first time explaining the Dharma Parivartana Chakra, at Sarnath in Uttar Paradesh, India. Buddha breathed his last at Kushinagar, which too falls in Uttar Pradesh. Before it was confirmed that Lumbini was the birthplace of Buddha, it was being referred to that India was the birthplace of Buddha. Though it has been confirmed and accepted world over that Nepal is his birthplace, Nepal still has a bad feeing about India on its previous claim on his birthplace.
11.The Duality of Minds of the rulers:
Primarily, those who always assert the edominance of Kathmandu, dominate the government. The eleventh barrier is the mindset of the ruler and the ruling class. It was a reality that once Nepal had conquered several small kingdoms (principalities) in both east and west of modern Nepal. Mahesh Chandra Regmi in his book ‘Imperial Gurkha’, states that the state of Kumayun was captured in 1791 and Gadhwal in 1804-9 and the areas upto Tista in 1777 during Prithvi Narayan Shah. These were taken over by the British in 1815-6 under Sugauli Treaty. It confirms that the province of Kumaun was under Nepal for 24 years, Garhwal was for a decade and the areas in the east were for nearly four decades(43 years). Nepal, which occupied these areas for very limited periods, still holds that these areas belonged to Nepal, as these were conquered once forgetting the reality that these areas were independent for centuries. The very psychology also plays some role in defining Nepal-India relations.
Interestingly, Nepal lost vast portions of the conquered land under the Treaty of Sugauli signed in 1816. Of course some portion of the lost areas were restored to Nepal in 1860 after it helped the British capture Lucknow in 1857.
The psychology is a kind of superiority complex from which Nepal suffers. As a matter of fact, a superiority complex is a coping mechanism to deal with an inferiority complex, as someone with a superiority complex asserts one’s own feelings of inferiority, which sometimes prove self-delusional. These complexes, which are related to individual human mind, seem effective on social and national psyche too. The Nepalese elite feels inferiority complex with India in regard to its vastness of area, population, developmental stage, social engineering, education and scientific achievements, agricultural self-reliance and providing livelihood to thousands of Nepalese citizens. It has a huge deficit in trade with India and it depends on India for supply of essential commodities. The duality of mind of the rulers of Nepal often affects the Nepal-India relations.
12.Politics of Language:
The twelfth barrier is the supremacy of one language in Nepal. After capturing Kathmandu valley, the first job of Prithvi Narayan Shah and his successors was to impose Nepali language in administration replacing local Newari Language, which is called ‘Nepal Bhasha’. Sylvain Levi, accepting the predominance of Hindi in Terai, writes, “In spite of the predominance of Hindi in Terai, the Gorkha languge, a mixture of Indian and hilliy elements, continued to spread over far off regions of Nepal by dint of the administration and the army.”
Significantly, in Tarai Hindi has been spoken as a common language, as it was difficult for a Madhesi from the east to communicate himself with another Madhesi from the west. In Tarai Hindi was the medium of teaching. Being the lingua franca, it has unique strength of uniting almost all 20 districts of Tarai/Madhes to form a block. It was the medium through which government officials and educated persons used to communicate with an ordinary person in Tarai/Madhes and it still continues to be so because it is difficult for them to communicate themselves either in Maithili or Bhojapuri or in Abdhi. The pervasiveness of Hindi not only made the ruling elite of Kathmandu including the government scared but also the entire Nepali speaking community. Hindi was regarded as an obstacle, which may come on the way of unifying Nepal through Nepali language in the form of a monolingual country. They also apprehend that in the future, Hindi may be a dividing factor of Nepal on the lines of language. Thus, through government policy, Hindi was removed as the medium of teaching in schools and colleges. But it failed in separating and dislocating the blood relations that exit between the peoples of both sides. Hence, the politics of language forms a barrier to have fruitful diplomacy.
13. Border Dispute:
The last psychological barrier is the border dispute between Nepal and India. Significantly, Nepal and India are facing a cartographic standoff over 335 sq.km of land on the northwestern borders of Nepal after India published its political map depicting the area Nepal claims. However, Nepal is also fighting an extra psychological battle to show that it will not be bowed down by India to accept its dictation. It is a perennial complex with which Nepalese leadership and Kathmandu elite have been suffering. As a result, in early June 2020, it hurriedly amended its constitution to incorporate the area on its map to have its legitimate claim over it. India has shown the areas its own on the Indian map, which was released in November 2019.
Curiously, the area under dispute is uninhabitable half of a year. It was one of the crucial routes for trade with Tibet during the British rule for one and half centuries. It is the shortest route to Kailash Mansarobar. It became a strategic point for independent India in 1962 after it had border conflict with China. The possession of the land has now become a national issue for Nepal and it wants to get back the land from the Indian military possession at the earliest.
Nepal and India had set up the Nepal-India Technical level Joint Working Group in 1981 to resolve boundary issues, demarcate the international border, and manage the boundary pillars. By 2007, the group completed the preparation of 182 strip maps signed by the surveyors of the two sides, covering almost 98% of the boundary, all except the two disputed areas of Kalapani and Susta. It also ascertained the position of 8,533 boundary pillars.(16) Since the demarcation on Kalapani and Susta areas have not finalized, the maps are not getting signed by the designated authorities of both sides keeping the entire international borders uncertain.
Conclusions
In the present pandemic, every life has to be saved and it is possible only through vaccines. Since corona virus is a new virus that mutates easily, no suitable medicines have been developed so far. Vaccines, which have been developed hardly six months back by a few manufacturers, who have a monopoly on the supply. Moreover, it is in short supply, as their production is limited and these are demanded by all countries to vaccinate their citizens. Nepal is in dire need of Covishield vaccines from India for its senior citizens, who have already been vaccinated in the first week of March. The supply should have been resumed to meet the dead line of vaccination. It seems to be an immature decision to stop supplies of vaccines at this juncture.
Though, the Nepal-India relations will not be affected by this act of India, it would definitely create a kind of disrespect for India among those who are waiting for it. When we need to remove those psychological barriers, such disrespect will not be helpful for overcoming them.
( partially based on his book ‘Essays on Indian Diplomatic Dilemma in Nepal’, pub. in 2019 by Adroit publishers, Delhi).
