April 29, 2008...6:22 pm
Prachanda Speaks
Nepal’s Maoist leader Prachanda, wants India-Nepal peace and friendship treaty scrapped and other pacts and agreements between the two countries reviewed. Sections of political opinion in Nepal have always viewed the India-Nepal friendship treaty with suspicion. Incidents like merger of Sikkim into the Indian Union in 1974 made the Nepalese uncomfortable but other than that and barring a few times there has been a smooth sailing. Nepal’s Maoist are looking at China for support at the cost of relationship with India but they should have a look at the happenings in Tibet before bending backwards for Chinese support.
This treaty allow Nepalis to freely travel, live, work and buy property in India. No other country enjoys the same benefit. Nepalis in India more or less enjoy same economic and educational opportunities as Indians. Nepali goods enjoy duty- and quota-free access to the Indian market. Scrapping of the friendship treaty and other pacts will lead to a renegotiation and Nepalese citizens may not enjoy the same benefits anymore.
The Indo-Nepal Friendship Treaty of 1950 states that “neither government shall tolerate any threat to the security of the other by a foreign aggressor”. I don’t think this clause has helped the Indian interests much. There have been news about Nepal being used by the terrorists as a base against India . The hijacking of the Indian airlines plane from Kathmandu proved that. There are about 30,000 Nepalese Gorkhas in the Indian Army. Ban on recruitment of Gorkhas will lead to unemployment. Indian Companies have traditionally invested large sums in the Nepalese economy and Indian tourists are a major source of income for the Nepalese tourist industry. Change in rules might hurt that. Maoist leaders should thank the Indians and the Indian democracy. Many Maoists found shelter in India at the height of the insurgency. India assisted elections in Nepal. Prachanda himself enjoyed Indian hospitability( thanks to Sita Ram Yechury and company) during his struggling days. Many senior Maoist leaders have studied in India.
If the majority of Nepalese are in favour of revising the friendship treaty, New Delhi must renegotiate. Although Nepal gets more advantages from the treaty both sides need to think about the implications of going in for a renegotiation. Nepalese economy over the decades has been dependent on India and it won’t be easy to replace India with China. For India it would mean diminishing India’s influence but for Nepal it means a little more than that. Maoists’ have close ties with our Communist parties but it is clear now that their influence in Nepal is limited. Indians have traditionally backed the Nepali Congress and this may go against it. India and Nepal have strong cultural, economic and ethnic ties, no government Indian or Nepalese can ignore that. India’s importance to Nepal is much more than just political implications.
15 Comments
April 29, 2008 at 11:13 pm
well clearly if indians think we have given too many concessions to nepal and nepal does not recognize them.. then we should be more than glad to end them…
in a couple of years the maos won’t be there and the treaty would be restored.
simple isn’t it.. don’t give a gift to someone who does not value it
April 29, 2008 at 11:46 pm
The main problem in nepal is dire poverty, over population unemployment and poor infrastructure
The CPNM cannot sort that out for sure
How much will China help? it would like to encapsulate the whole of North India and will probably first make a rail link to Nepal via Tibet.
These are ominous signs …..
The only Hindu rashtra is Hindu no more -
don’t take it literally -
i meant from the military and diplomatic angle too - Nepal is painting itself red and as in ur pic covering itself with a maoist veil…
The question is how much influence will comerade Karat and Yechuary exert on the CPNM founder leader Bhattarai, the no 2 boss educated in the Naxal Hotbed in Jnu.
The CPNM knows guerrilla tactics and terror and are miniature PolPots sometimes, but do they know governing and administration?
first of all as Ankur says, the Nepalese benefit most from India and secondly they are by nature deeply Hindu. So i think time will heal this problem, that is if Indian leadership don’t mess up big time
April 30, 2008 at 1:27 am
i agree with most of what prax has said. but only deviation from what he has proposed is that
whatever be our problems, we don’t want our neighbors to eavesdrop and then give us solutions. similarly we should not go and offer nepal solutions till they ask for help.
however once they ask for.. we should do the best we can….
its really odd india realizes the power of railways, yet it could never create a rail link from gorukpur to katmandu (which is a short feasible track and won’t be too expensive).
April 30, 2008 at 1:28 am
prerna.. ur picture clearly says not for public use.. then why did u use it?
April 30, 2008 at 10:57 am
Ankur, I didn’t see it.I observed only after you pointed it out.
April 30, 2008 at 2:39 pm
What crap argument! Chauvinism shows through. Big brother mentality.
When the Maoists emerged the largest party in Nepal in the CA election, the BJP accepted the outcome on the condition that “Nepal should not be anti-India and anti-Hindu”. Fair enough. But when the Bhutanese fearing Hinduization of Bhutan kicked out 100,000 plus Hindu Nepalis (who had lived there since the 1850s), what did India do to alleviate the plight of the refugees - their Hindu brethern? Nothing. So this talk of “India and Nepal have strong cultural, economic and ethnic ties, no government Indian or Nepalese can ignore that,” doesn’t really wash, does it?
I think the 1950 Treaty should be renegotiated in the context of the changing political scenario in Nepal. India and Bhutan have renewed their treaty. The “unequal” 1950 Treaty needs to reflect the new reality and order. The Nepali Maoists have pragmaticaly changed their language from “annulling the treaty” to “renogetiating the treaty”.
Re: the Maoists’ alleged ties with India’s Maoists, I don’t think that has been established yet. The South Block has pretty much given the Maoist leadership the benefit of a doubt … the only thing is RAW doesn’t buy that. If RAW cannot convince the South Block, then that’s its problem. But certainly the Nepali Maoists will have to keep convincing the South Block that it doesn’t have ties with Indian Maoists. If the Indian Maoists are somewhat inspired by what their “namesake” has achieved in Nepal, then that blame cannot be put at Nepal’s door. If a gangster is inspired by Gabbar singh and goes out and kills an innocent, do you take Gabbar Singh to court?
Nepal’s historical ties to China dates way far back. India wants Nepal to stop its ties with China next door - which is ridiculous. Nepal cannot ignore an elephant sitting in its room. Nepal has often been seen as a buffer between the two giants. This was the corner the two neighbours painted Nepal in. But Nepal is trying to come out of being merely a ‘buffer state’ - it wants to project itself as a “bridge” between the two countries, which is a good thing. With India and China’s economic ties (in today’s world, economic ties trump other ties, cultural or ethnic or otherwise) growing by the day, I don’t think even India will remain very anti-China much longer. Esp. once their border disputes are resolved. See the crackdown on Tibetan protests in Delhi and other parts of India. India doesn’t want to anger China either, yet blames Nepal for becoming friendlier toward China at times. I think the best bet for Nepal would be to maintain an “equidistance” between the two countries. One reason the Nepali monarchy lost its support of the Indian government led by Congress is that it often played the “China card” - sneaking China in as a SAARC observer so that India could bring in Afghanistan as a SAARC member. I think it is for Nepal to stop playing any card - but rather follow the middle path. If India wants a trainline to India, I don’t think there is anything wrong with China building a railway link from Lhasa to northern border of Nepal. The northern belt of Nepal has stronger cultural and ethnic ties with China, and this fact India always ignores.
Last but not least, as Nepal is going through the transition I think it behooves its neighbours to cut Nepal a slack for once.
May 1, 2008 at 12:10 pm
@dhukur,welcome.I had no intention of showing’Big brother mentality’.I read my post many times to see if there was anything offensive about it to the Napalese people.Before answering you let me make it clear that I believe that Nepal is a sovereign country and has a right to make its own destiny the way it wants.
//But when the Bhutanese fearing Hinduization of Bhutan kicked out 100,000 plus Hindu Nepalis (who had lived there since the 1850s), what did India do to alleviate the plight of the refugees - their Hindu brethern?//Did I mention Hinduism anywhere?
//I think the best bet for Nepal would be to maintain an “equidistance” between the two countries// no disagreement on that!Nepal is an independent country.Dealing with a democracy is easier although.
//“India and Nepal have strong cultural, economic and ethnic ties, no government Indian or Nepalese can ignore that,” doesn’t really wash, does it?//Come to Delhi alone and see for yourself the number of Nepalese working here and living here.I am not talking of the servants and watchmen,I know teachers,painters and sculptors who have made India there home and to their credit and ours they live here like one of us.I am not sure if The Maoists scrap this clause what happens to these people.Accept it Chinese won’t be that accommodating.
//anything wrong with China building a railway link from Lhasa to northern border of Nepal//the trouble is Lhasa not rail link.China is using both Tibet and Nepal.
//I don’t think even India will remain very anti-China much longer//two large countries can handle each other but I still think Nepal due to its cultural proximity and democracy gains more by the present arrangement with India.
//Bhutan kicked out 100,000 plus Hindu Nepalis (who had lived there since the 1850s)what did India do-were you expecting something from India.We have issues with Bhutan too.There were anti-India insurgent groups working from Bhutan.That issue was recently sorted out.I don’t think we can give anything but moral support.In Tienanmen square more than a thousand Chinese were murdered,nobody in the world could do anything.What is happening in Tibet is visible to everybody? Chinese are ruthless and you can see that even with your eyes closed.
The Nepalese people have a right to decide what to do with their country.They have a democratically elected government headed by Communists ironically.They will soon understand what politics is.We know and suffer politicians everyday but everybody learns by experience and that is how it should be.
‘Wo waqt bhi dekha tareekh ki ghadiyon ne;
Lamhon ne khatah ki thi,sadiyon se saza payee.
May 1, 2008 at 1:21 pm
Prax,
//The question is how much influence will comerade Karat and Yechuary exert on the CPNM founder leader Bhattarai, the no 2 boss educated in the Naxal Hotbed in Jnu.// Karat and Yechury are good for nothing when it comes to Indian interests.At least I don’t expect anything from them.
//The main problem in Nepal is dire poverty, over population unemployment and poor infrastructure//this is the reason for the communists coming to power.In India also Maoists are gaining ground in the areas where is too much poverty like eastern UP, Bihar,jharkhand and Orissa.It is against the Communist interest to alleviate poverty.Chinese Communists will feel the heat gradually as the poverty levels come down.
Ankur,I agree with you//we should not go and offer nepal solutions till they ask for help.
however once they ask for.. we should do the best we can….//
May 1, 2008 at 5:11 pm
Cant say for certain
but during the extreme phase of the maoist insurgency which almost made a lanka like situation - if u remember prachanda etc got an secret open invite from the pmo and he talked with the cream of the polibureau
All in all it is in cpims interests to exert influence on the cpnm - there are the plusses as the darjelling and other provinces have lots of gorkha population
May 2, 2008 at 12:57 am
it might be a lanka like situation.. but that does not mean india should send out a peace keeping force and lose a few thousand soldiers.
honestly lets be indifferent for a moment.. we have too many of our problems to solve before we can even start thinking of solving theirs
May 2, 2008 at 10:25 pm
ankur
i honestly believe that it doesnt make sense to meddle in others affairs - i dont know why u judge me as interventionist…
Rajiv made a royal mess in lanka no two bones about it …
but as a nation u cannot forever have a laissez faire policy if it affects ur interests- on the other hand it is useless beating about like g bush
i was stating facts this election was possible because of closed door diplomacy and talks in India between senior communist interlocutor i think it was yechuary and the cpnm and ruling nepali parties via goi
else it would surely be almost civil war like in srilanka
but if it was a success time will tell
May 3, 2008 at 3:38 am
I think an interesting strategy for Nepal would be to be closer to one country than the other (India probably, but communism brings them closer to China in a way) but keep all possibilities open to both sides, and above all remain independant, so Nepal can become a strategic interest for both Giant countries, and hence benefit (economically, etc) from that position.
Maybe that’s what they’re trying to do in a way, with this uncertainty.
May 5, 2008 at 10:19 am
@prax…
well anybody who advocates against the philosophy of laissez faire is interventionist…
do you remember the massacre in royal family 2 years ago.. it was over the issue that the crown prince wanted to marry an Indian….. we might have not done something really bad to trigger that amount of hatred and distrust, but over the past 60 years we are guilty of not doing anything that would enable us regain back their friendship.
May 5, 2008 at 11:49 pm
ankur this is ridiculous
tell me can u run foreign policy like that?
nyways how is the royal massacre linked to the Indian state? - so what if she was indian - the king was not opposed to the marriage because she was Indian but for 0ther reasons …
we might have not done something really bad to trigger that amount of hatred and distrust…
i find ur attitude childish
the isi has been on that job for the last 3 decades.
do u remember the Nepali mla crone of isi and cable magnet of katmandu who also helped dawood ? He was bumped off by chota rajan…
May 6, 2008 at 1:02 am
my whole problem is that india cannot do anything….
it cannot send the army over to overthrow the govt…
the carrot and stick philosophy of getting concessions in lieu of capital for infrastructure development does not seem to work…
when Nepal had asked for arms to crush Maoist movement, india suddenly started the philosophy of Lassie faire.. net result is that the mao ran the administration outside katmandu and now overthrew the govt….
so that also did not work….
the only sensible thing we can do now is wait and watch. and the second problem is that outside UP, people hardly care about what happens to Nepal
Leave a Reply