The Pakistani Spectator

India’s Lok Sabha election is being held next month. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) and the Indian Congress-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) are contesting in the polls. Recently, foreign policy has become an Indian election agenda for both the ruling alliance and the opposition. Indian Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee recently disclosed to Al Jazeera that the political developments being seen in Nepal were a result of Indian initiatives. Similarly, Lal Krishna Advani, the NDA’s prime ministerial candidate, said that Indian foreign policy was not serious about containing China’s growing strategic interest and engagement in Nepal.

After the abolition of the monarchy, China has wrought a fundamental policy shift in Nepal from silence to proactive diplomacy. There have been regular high-level Chinese visits to Nepal. Beijing sent a high-profile official of the Chinese Communist Party and the government to take part in a conference of the Communist Party of Nepal (UML) and Madheshi Janaadhikar Forum (MJF) last month. China has handed over a draft of a proposed new treaty to replace the 60-year-old Sino-Nepal Peace and Friendship Treaty. It is commonly taken as a response to India’s agreement to rethink the 1950 Indo-Nepal Peace and Friendship Treaty. More recently, 33 China Study Centres have been established in southern Nepal adjoining the Indian border. China Radio International has launched a local FM radio station in Kathmandu, and it is broadcasting programmes through many local FM stations all over Nepal “to bring China closer and break the impregnable wall of the Himalaya”.

There is an exaggerated and irrational demonizing of and paranoia about Nepal’s engagement with China in India’s foreign policy establishment. India itself is strengthening its relationship with China. However, why is India so cautious about Nepal’s move to strengthen its relationship with China?

Indo-Nepal relations are based on the principles conceived by Nehru and the Panchasheela that comprises mutual respect among nations, peaceful coexistence and non-interference in the internal affairs of others. However, Nehru himself never acted in accordance with the equal sovereignty principle deeply allied with Panchasheela. Nehru wanted Nepal, Bhutan and Sikkim to be protectorate states. Sikkim was annexed to India in 1975. That event distinctly made the small countries bordering India psychologically insecure.

India’s policy towards its neighbours is marked by a sense of “superiority” known as muscular diplomacy. Indian prime ministers and foreign ministers often feel bashful and hesitant to visit neighbouring capitals. There is an importunate shadow of the British imperial mindset in India when it comes to dealing with neighbouring countries. Similarly, Advani’s recent remarks are deeply rooted by “superiority” psychic.

India is the only country on the subcontinent having common borders with all the neighbours. It finds itself surrounded by countries that are going through a serious stint of volatility in the neighbourhood. Its relations with many of the smaller neighbours have remained far from normal. India has either border disputes with Bangladesh, Myanmar, Nepal and Sri Lanka or they accuse India of having a “big brother attitude”. Conversely, China has warm relations with all the capital cities of its neighbours that present an example of its neighbourhood policy.

South Asia needs a strong democratic India to counter-balance communist China strategically. Similarly, India has to play a more effective role to cope with the possibility of Islamic fundamentalists getting their hands on Pakistan’s nuclear weapons which are a serious security threat to Asia and the world. But to fulfil that role, India must respect the territorial integrity and sovereignty of its neighbours. If India wants to assume a bigger role which it aspires to, like China, on the strength of its economic power, it will first have to develop its credibility among its neighbours.

India has traditionally sought to prevent exterior powers from intervening in the region. While not always successful, it has been a mantra for the Indian establishment. Events in India’s neighbourhood are proceeding at such a pace that it is time for policymakers to evolve a new paradigm to cope with the avalanche. It is in the interest of India, given its size and economic and military strength, to give unilateral concessions to its neighbours.

The Gujral Doctrine, that raised the comfort level of its neighbours in relation to India, was an attempt to think along these lines. However, in general, India’s deportment has been distrustful and lacking in self-confidence to grant any concession to its neighbours. If India is to emerge as a constructive and decisive factor in Asian and world affairs, it has to carry its neighbours along by playing a helpful role in their diplomatic engagements with other countries.

Nepal offers greater opportunities to play China off against India being the hyphen between India and China. The open border and deep cultural and religious ties with Nepal are undeniable, but it is time to rescind such relics as the Indo-Nepalese treaty of 1950 which makes it clear that India has legitimate security interests and it is also determined to protect the same.

(The author is executive director of the Nepal South Asia Centre, Kathmandu, a South Asian think tank.)

http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?&nid=186510

BY BHIM PRASAD BHURTEL