India and Nepal face a common democratic future
Surya B. Prasai
August 23, 2009
Nepal´s Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal has made a remarkable visit to India this week in the middle of the deadly Indian monsoon season. Without Foreign Minister Sujata Koirala who suddenly caught a throat infection and could not join the official delegation, he met India´s top leadership, giving his views on the current state of Nepal-India relations, and hearing in reciprocity, what Indian leaders had to say. As the two countries leaders positively assessed bilateral ties, the relations were indeed excellent with the possibility to do more. However the way Nepal´s elite ruling circles an d academia see it, in the nearly 60 years of friendship and cooperation between Nepal and India, akin to the U.S. and Canada sharing an open border, Nepal has lagged behind in three priority areas: economic development, democratic growth, and attaining a higher quality of life for the Nepali people.
Many young Nepalis forget that Nepal and India started their friendship on an equal footing in 1947. On August 15, 1947, India became an independent country. Many Nepali leaders bravely fought along with their Indian socialist colleagues against the unjust policies of the British Raj. In reciprocity, Indian leaders did support several Jan Andolans in Nepal to help develop a functioning democracy as desired by the Nepali people. In fact, many including B.P. Koirala were known to privately ponder the fate of Nepal, were it colonized, on how Nepali politics would have been shaped, otherwise. The British Raj, according to avid historians who have chronicled that period, also left the best bureaucracy and governance structure in the world while leaving India. This included the disciplined forces, the industrial infrastructure and the Anglo-Indian education system that is among the world´s best.
It is true, some governors of the ex-British Raj did put their sights on the pretty Himalayan ´lass´ that was Nepal, particularly during their elaborate tiger and rhino hunting expeditions in the then Malaria infested Terai jungles in the 1930s and Forties. But thanks to the cunning policy of the Rana Prime Ministers, Nepal´s fate was sealed as an independent country. In exchange for the Gurkhas who fought bravely alongside Indian and British troops during the First and Second World Wars, Nepal could remain independent. This Gurkha connection still exists in India and the U.K though some have desired a more ´modern and sensible´ policy approach in respecting the Gurkhas, especially ex-Gurkha soliders who face the brunt of woes.
In the post-Independence period, India progressed on the ideological merits of the post-Nehruvian Socialist movement , ably led by the Gandhi family and a number of intellectually endowed technocratic PMs. However, it was under Prime Minister Man Mohan Singh that India truly started transforming itself into a global economic powerhouse. In this time capsule, Nepalis continued living modest lives, the majority entrapped in poverty, bereft of international education, cultural exposure, nonetheless happy with their daily plate of ´dal and bhat´. Nepalis were supposedly enjoying their poverty under a simmering Himalayan peace. Two stop gap measures that supported that illusion were the national reconciliation policy of B.P. Koirala and late King Birendra´s Zone of Peace proposal endorsed by 116 countries except India. Some Indian and Nepali foreign policy experts believe, in hind sight, , India never saw the need for such a proposal, sharing as the two countries did an open 1800 km border, which was a region of peace then. On B.P.´s national reconciliation policy, others opine, Nepal would still have been a Constitutional Monarchy with a vibrant democracy, somewhere a middle ranking developing country, had the politicians truly acceded to the people´s wishes.
Contrary to the opinion of most Nepali scholars and media analysts, between 1950-2005, Nepali Kings, P.M.s and senior leaders were highly sensitive to India´s interest. India too reciprocated by supporting Nepali democracy. However, the Nepali people´s democratic aspirations turned to grief when the Maoist civil conflict intervened in 1996 fueled by exacerbating poverty, unequal distribution of foreign aid resources and the lack of development delivery mechanisms under various national development five year plans. Add to it two prime Nepali progress inhibitors, cultural superstition and the prevalent developmental fatalism that obscured donor interests.
Thus, Prime Minister Man Mohan Singh of India asked his Nepali counterpart Mr. Nepal to work seriously with all political parties in bringing a logical conclusion to the current peace process. India also promised Rs. 32 billion worth of aid to Nepal, which is substantial, to help rebuild roads, bridges, hospitals, schools and give rebirth to every major sector that qualifies. In particular, Nepal´s industrial and agricultural sector took a hard fall in the period 1997-2006 due to the conflict. Nepal´s Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal in the Mumbai leg of his journey has asked Indian entrepreneurs and businessmen to invest in the post-conflict period in Nepal. Nepal and India have signed a new Treaty of Trade and Agreement of Cooperation favorable to both countries, creating newer trade standards with positive bilateral and global implications, and providing employment generation to Nepali youth with the new re-industrialization planned. One should not forget, Nepal´s prosperity is directly tied to India´s globalized economic stature. In 2009, the burgeoning Indo-Nepal trade is expected to reach $3 billion. Nepal is heavily dependent on India from powdered baby´s milk to various food grain supplies, medicines, petroleum, building and construction material, vehicles, machinery and electronics. Nepal, in turn, exports to India vanaspati ghee, yarn, textiles, juice and chemicals.
Overall, the clear message that Nepali PM Madhav Kumar Nepal received during the India trip is that he must now forge ahead with the eight party unity, hold elections to the constituent assembly in a free and fair manner, and pursue smart development projects that will bring an overall sense of relief to the Nepali people. Nepal's Communication and Information Minister-cum- government spokesman Shankar Pokharel described the five-day visit to India of Prime Minister Nepal as a milestone in Indo-Nepal relations. If one considers the chill in Nepal-India relations during Prachanda´s last visit to India, when the Maoists were in control of Singha Durbar, this certainly is a better phase! However Mr. Nepal must move beyond his party´s mandate to encompass a larger national peace and development agenda to also include the Maoists. The reality is the peace process is now stalled, development at a standstill, and, schools and universities facing the brunt of strikes and bandhs. Moreover, the UN Human Development Report for Nepal 2009 launched this fortnight in Kathmandu states that inequality, discrimination and lack of political consensus are the major obstacles to service delivery contributing to the developmental freeze in Nepal. Mr. Nepal must have realized during the visit that India´s prosperity is tied to its rich constitution, full fledged democratic adherence and participation by all political parties contributive to national economic prosperity and growth.
Many young Nepalis forget that Nepal and India started their friendship on an equal footing in 1947. On August 15, 1947, India became an independent country. Many Nepali leaders bravely fought along with their Indian socialist colleagues against the unjust policies of the British Raj. In reciprocity, Indian leaders did support several Jan Andolans in Nepal to help develop a functioning democracy as desired by the Nepali people. In fact, many including B.P. Koirala were known to privately ponder the fate of Nepal, were it colonized, on how Nepali politics would have been shaped, otherwise. The British Raj, according to avid historians who have chronicled that period, also left the best bureaucracy and governance structure in the world while leaving India. This included the disciplined forces, the industrial infrastructure and the Anglo-Indian education system that is among the world´s best.
It is true, some governors of the ex-British Raj did put their sights on the pretty Himalayan ´lass´ that was Nepal, particularly during their elaborate tiger and rhino hunting expeditions in the then Malaria infested Terai jungles in the 1930s and Forties. But thanks to the cunning policy of the Rana Prime Ministers, Nepal´s fate was sealed as an independent country. In exchange for the Gurkhas who fought bravely alongside Indian and British troops during the First and Second World Wars, Nepal could remain independent. This Gurkha connection still exists in India and the U.K though some have desired a more ´modern and sensible´ policy approach in respecting the Gurkhas, especially ex-Gurkha soliders who face the brunt of woes.
In the post-Independence period, India progressed on the ideological merits of the post-Nehruvian Socialist movement , ably led by the Gandhi family and a number of intellectually endowed technocratic PMs. However, it was under Prime Minister Man Mohan Singh that India truly started transforming itself into a global economic powerhouse. In this time capsule, Nepalis continued living modest lives, the majority entrapped in poverty, bereft of international education, cultural exposure, nonetheless happy with their daily plate of ´dal and bhat´. Nepalis were supposedly enjoying their poverty under a simmering Himalayan peace. Two stop gap measures that supported that illusion were the national reconciliation policy of B.P. Koirala and late King Birendra´s Zone of Peace proposal endorsed by 116 countries except India. Some Indian and Nepali foreign policy experts believe, in hind sight, , India never saw the need for such a proposal, sharing as the two countries did an open 1800 km border, which was a region of peace then. On B.P.´s national reconciliation policy, others opine, Nepal would still have been a Constitutional Monarchy with a vibrant democracy, somewhere a middle ranking developing country, had the politicians truly acceded to the people´s wishes.
Contrary to the opinion of most Nepali scholars and media analysts, between 1950-2005, Nepali Kings, P.M.s and senior leaders were highly sensitive to India´s interest. India too reciprocated by supporting Nepali democracy. However, the Nepali people´s democratic aspirations turned to grief when the Maoist civil conflict intervened in 1996 fueled by exacerbating poverty, unequal distribution of foreign aid resources and the lack of development delivery mechanisms under various national development five year plans. Add to it two prime Nepali progress inhibitors, cultural superstition and the prevalent developmental fatalism that obscured donor interests.
Thus, Prime Minister Man Mohan Singh of India asked his Nepali counterpart Mr. Nepal to work seriously with all political parties in bringing a logical conclusion to the current peace process. India also promised Rs. 32 billion worth of aid to Nepal, which is substantial, to help rebuild roads, bridges, hospitals, schools and give rebirth to every major sector that qualifies. In particular, Nepal´s industrial and agricultural sector took a hard fall in the period 1997-2006 due to the conflict. Nepal´s Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal in the Mumbai leg of his journey has asked Indian entrepreneurs and businessmen to invest in the post-conflict period in Nepal. Nepal and India have signed a new Treaty of Trade and Agreement of Cooperation favorable to both countries, creating newer trade standards with positive bilateral and global implications, and providing employment generation to Nepali youth with the new re-industrialization planned. One should not forget, Nepal´s prosperity is directly tied to India´s globalized economic stature. In 2009, the burgeoning Indo-Nepal trade is expected to reach $3 billion. Nepal is heavily dependent on India from powdered baby´s milk to various food grain supplies, medicines, petroleum, building and construction material, vehicles, machinery and electronics. Nepal, in turn, exports to India vanaspati ghee, yarn, textiles, juice and chemicals.
Overall, the clear message that Nepali PM Madhav Kumar Nepal received during the India trip is that he must now forge ahead with the eight party unity, hold elections to the constituent assembly in a free and fair manner, and pursue smart development projects that will bring an overall sense of relief to the Nepali people. Nepal's Communication and Information Minister-cum- government spokesman Shankar Pokharel described the five-day visit to India of Prime Minister Nepal as a milestone in Indo-Nepal relations. If one considers the chill in Nepal-India relations during Prachanda´s last visit to India, when the Maoists were in control of Singha Durbar, this certainly is a better phase! However Mr. Nepal must move beyond his party´s mandate to encompass a larger national peace and development agenda to also include the Maoists. The reality is the peace process is now stalled, development at a standstill, and, schools and universities facing the brunt of strikes and bandhs. Moreover, the UN Human Development Report for Nepal 2009 launched this fortnight in Kathmandu states that inequality, discrimination and lack of political consensus are the major obstacles to service delivery contributing to the developmental freeze in Nepal. Mr. Nepal must have realized during the visit that India´s prosperity is tied to its rich constitution, full fledged democratic adherence and participation by all political parties contributive to national economic prosperity and growth.
Print
Email
