Bharat Bhushan - Himalayan chessboard: India fishes for advantage in unstable Nepal
A perception that India is supporting ongoing instability in Nepal is likely to alienate its people and political parties. Media reports in India indicate that “political and government sources” prefer mid-term general elections in Nepal. The current political turmoil in Nepal has grown out of a leadership challenge to Prime Minister Khadga Prasad Sharma Oli from within his own party, the Nepal Communist Party (NCP). He has converted it into a larger institutional crisis by dissolving Parliament.
However, Nepal’s constitutionally elected Pratinidhi Sabha
or Parliament can legally continue for its full five-year term. A new
government can yet be formed by either the majority of a single party or through
a coalition of parties. Neither alternative has been exhausted. The Supreme
Court could still uphold the sanctity of the present Parliament. Most
importantly, there is no mass uprising demanding fresh polls. On the contrary,
people on the streets are protesting against Oli’s subversion of democracy.
Then why are mendacious mandarins in Delhi throwing their
weight behind Oli’s misadventure? Do they think he would help to check China’s
growing influence in Nepal? The same officials had demonised Oli just months
earlier for being under Chinese influence. Now they speak of him as being
“reluctant to engage with the Chinese”.
India has floated a test-balloon suggesting that Nepal’s
Chief Justice could be the “acting prime minister” and conduct neutral and fair
elections. Apparently India had used this ploy earlier in March 2013 also by
suggesting such a way out through friendly political leaders. The then Chief
Justice Khil Raj Regmi was appointed prime minister to oversee elections to the
second Constituent Assembly. At that time, the Constituent
Assembly-cum-Parliament’s term had expired and despite being extended for a
year, it was unable to adopt a new Constitution. Today the circumstances are
totally different.
The Supreme Court of Nepal will decide whether fresh
elections are necessary on April 30 and May 10. There are petitions before it
questioning the constitutional validity of Oli’s action in connivance with a
rubber-stamp president, his former ally. Nevertheless, Prime Minister Oli and
his foreign backers seem to be quite confident of being able to control the
streets should the Supreme Court support the dissolution of Parliament as well
as reasonably sure of ensuring a possible election victory. Who could these
forces be?
Speculation will remain rife over India’s overt or covert
role in facilitating an election. A spate of high level visits by Indian
officials prior to the sudden dissolution of Parliament has strengthened
suspicions of Indian support for Oli, who was earlier in the dog-house for hyping
up disputes and differences with India.
There is also speculation that the United States is backing
Oli. His challengers -- Pushp Kamal Dahal (aka Prachanda) and Madhav Kumar
Nepal as well as a large section of the NCP -- had opposed the American $500
million Millenium Challenge Corporation (MCC) initiative in the country while
Oli had approved it. The MCC is an aid programme which is part of the American
Indo-Pacific Strategy meant to counter China’s Belt Road Initiative. Nepal is
the only South Asian recipient of MCC aid. Parliamentary approval for MCC is
still pending in Nepal because of deep divisions within the NCP.
There are also suggestions that the US and India could be
acting in tandem to contain China in
Nepal. The Indian establishment will likely celebrate the imminent split in the
Nepal Communist Party (NCP) as a goal against China which
was instrumental in the merger of the Nepal Communist Party — United Marxist
Leninist (UML) and the Communist Party (Maoist Centre). China has
not yet given up on the idea of a unified NCP either in government or in the
eventuality of polls, the party contesting as one, by side-lining Oli. Oli
perhaps is being seen by Delhi as the last bulwark against Chinese
machinations. How else do we understand the warnings of Indian diplomats that
China’s next move would be to target Prime Minister Oli and “erode his
credibility”?
When Nepal’s parliament was dissolved suddenly, India’s
formal reaction was that it was an “internal matter” of Nepal. Why then should
Delhi suggest fresh elections as a way forward or an interim election
government headed by the Chief Justice or even warn against a Chinese attempt
to erode the ‘credibility’ of Oli?
Some mendacious mandarins in Delhi think that instability in
Nepal provides India with many more pieces and moves on Kathmandu’s chessboard.
However, continued instability is likely to open up many divisive questions
that were closed and fault lines that were largely bridged (or buried) by the
promulgation of the Constitution. These relate to whether Nepal should be a
Hindu nation or a secular state, the division between Paharis (Hill people) and
the Madhesis (the people of Nepal’s Terai), the conflict between Dalits and
Janjatis and the more socially advantaged groups, the nature of Nepalese
federalism and most importantly, the role of the monarchy.
Reviving Nepal somehow as a Hindu nation with a restoration
of monarchy, even in a purely ceremonial role, has considerable appeal to
Hindutva ideologues in India. Crossing over of the Hindutva ideology into Nepal
may be seen as an achievement by the Modi government. But it is unlikely to
give any permanent advantage to India vis-à-vis China. Inevitably every ruler
in Kathmandu, monarchist or Republican, has and will deflect attention from his
troubles by playing the China card against India.
Reopening socially and politically contentious issues in
Nepal would lead to turmoil that could spill over into India. Indian pursuit of
greater influence on Nepal through political instability, therefore, is
short-sighted.
What will increase Indian influence in Nepal is to recognise
that it is a brother nation bound by unbreakable historic, cultural, religious,
and linguistic ties. India should offer it such generous and special social,
economic and political partnership that Nepal chooses India over China. It must
also give a cast-iron guarantee that trade blockades will never take place
again and desist from manipulating Nepal’s politics and politicians.
Bharat Bhushan: The Kashmir valley has rejected PM Narendra Modi's 'Gram Swaraj'
Bharat Bhushan: A hanging in
Dhaka, courtesy Delhi
Bharat Bhushan: Only a non-violent and secular citizenship protest will
succeed
Bharat Bhushan: Has Amit Shah moved from being an asset to a liability in
the Modi regime?
BHARAT BHUSHAN: Cracks
appear in Kashmiri political class as govt seeks middle ground
