Next Door Nepal: 100 days later

Nepal’s PM is struggling to balance India and China. Resentments are building within

Written by Yubaraj Ghimire | Updated: November 14, 2016 12:23 am
anti graft constitution nepal, nepal anti graft constitutional body, prachanda, maoists in nepal, world news, indian express, Pushpa Kamal Dahal (Source: File/Reuters)

The coalition government comprising two major parties — the Maoists and the Nepali Congress — has completed 100 days in office. Kathmandu has experienced zero load-shedding for the past month, from at least eight hour long power cuts earlier, thanks to the efficiency that the Nepal Electricity Board leadership displayed in detecting illegal leakages and power diversion to undue beneficiaries. A state visit by Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal to Delhi in mid-September, and that of President Pranab Mukherjee to Nepal six weeks later, are the government’s two other major achievements.

One hundred days over also means Dahal has only around 170 days left at the helm. He came to power on an understanding with the Nepali Congress — he would hand over the leadership to its chief, Sher Bahadur Deuba, in nine months. Mukherjee’s visit and its aftermath has shown initial strains in Sino-Nepal relations that seemed to be coming closer during the tenure of the previous government led by K.P. Oli, a period that coincided with the mass anger of Nepalis against India over the border blockade which caused shortages of essential goods in Nepal. There were a large number of comments on social media that said “we have not forgotten the blockade” when Mukherjee arrived here. The bilateral visits — both sides claim — have brought the relations back on track but the absence of political stability and Nepal’s reactive diplomacy may not be the basis for durable and dependable policy. It may have kept China at a distance for now, but the northern neighbour continues to command more trust and respect in Nepal.

China, except in rare cases related to Tibet’s security, is not known to have expressed its displeasure with Nepal, but Mukherjee’s visit getting precedence and priority at the cost of President Xi Jinping’s much-awaited visit in mid-October, is unlikely to be taken kindly. In Nepal, political discourse and media opinion tend to place the country within the shared sphere of influence of its two big neighbours, and political actors go the extra mile to clarify that they are sensitive to the interests of both. However, these remarks hardly ever become part of the “institutional memory” as Nepali actors have the reputation of negotiating in their individual capacity. That is why most Nepali leaders visiting India, officially or privately, and to a lesser extent those going to Beijing, are suspected of “selling out”.

Nepali Congress leader and former prime minister, Sher Bahadur Deuba, is the latest target of such criticism in a section of the media for his alleged meeting with Lobsang Sanghye, prime minister of the Tibetan government in exile, during a seminar organised by the India Foundation in Goa recently. Even Deuba’s party’s general secretary, Sashank Koirala, said sharing the dais with Sanghye will create a misunderstanding with China.

But leaders are not as prompt in their accountability to the Nepali people. Dahal, who secured the support of the Madhesi groups by promising their grievances will be addressed through a constitutional amendment by early November, has failed to bring different sides on board. As per the constitution, the government must hold elections to the local bodies, provinces — the boundaries of both tiers are yet to be finalised — and to the parliament by January 2018. With tensions already high over boundaries at the local level, the election is bound to be a casualty. That will only further the fear that the constitution in the current form is unworkable.

It may not be too late to begin an informed debate on federalism to ensure a larger ownership of the most vexing problem in the way of the constitution becoming acceptable. Some western and Indian thinktanks with clout over Nepali Maoists are keen to bring the Madhesi and ethnic hill groups together so that Nepal’s politics is driven more by caste and ethnicity than by class and political ideology. The Maoists have formed their organisational provincial units on that line, not in conformity with the proposed structure of the provincial units.

While the parties will not think of addressing the basic issues, they will be trying a constitutional amendment, something that will not solve the problem. Resentment against Dahal has already begun to build up. He may be on his way out if the Madhesis withdraw support from the government for not having fulfilled its promise. A frequent change of government is something that Nepalis are used to, and a game that politicians would prefer to play.

 

yubaraj.ghimire@expressindia.com

For all the latest Opinion News, download Indian Express App

  1. A
    Anamika Tripathi
    Nov 14, 2016 at 5:12 am
    Yu
    Reply
    1. R
      Raj
      Nov 14, 2016 at 1:42 pm
      Choose one and stick to them. If you balance them, you will gain neither's trust.
      Reply
      1. B
        Bihari Krishna
        Nov 14, 2016 at 12:59 pm
        The author's suggestion that "It may not be too late to begin an informed debate on federalism to ensure ... consution becoming acceptable" is a very well-taken point and must be taken seriously particularly by the parties in Nepal and by the immediate neighbours, more so the southern neighbour, India. who constantly meddle in political decision-making in Nepal. Two facts should be taken into account about federalisam in Nepal. First, Nepal's unique geography, characterized by the specialized nature of its mutually diverse east-west topographical belts and the compelling interdependence between them north-south--would never permit of breaking up the country into various autonomous federal provinces. Secondly, for this very reason, federalization of the country was never a part of the political debate in the country until Prachanda's party and the handful of first generation Madhesi politicians imported it from India about a decade ago. For all practical purposes in the region, resurgent China is an elephant on the march, and India cannot stop her from making her inroads into Nepal too like she recently did with Bangladesh that has since been designated as her "strategic partner". So, with China as her contiguous neighbour to the north, Nepal can never remain within the exclusive zone of influence of India and, instead, will end up erting her position as a buffer state between these two big countries and her aspirations to benefit from both of them. For the sake of good neighborly relations with Nepal, India, therefore, must appreciate this reality and desist from creating disruptions in Nepal such as inciting Prachanda and the NC to topple the Oli government a few months ago. After all, the imperative of south Asian geography is such that India must look up to Nepal for water and power for all the times to come. For Prachanda too, if he plays too much to the Indian tunes due to the war time abuse card pla by them, his fate too would be no different from that of the CIAA chief Lok Man Singh Karki in that he would be visited by an even worse defeat in the next election than the one he suffered in the last one.
        Reply
        1. G
          Gautam
          Nov 14, 2016 at 5:51 pm
          India is overtly not interfering in Nepal, but some Nepali parties maybe close to some party in India. Believe India has concern is that it doesn't want to loose goodwill in Nepal, having invested since known history in bonding these two countries. Nepal has complete access to whatever Indian people has in India as citizen. Lets continue and strengthen that bond. We Indian and Nepali are also connected in USA /West so it is desirable that we get along. - Virginia, USA
          Reply
          1. V
            Vihari Naidu
            Nov 14, 2016 at 1:34 pm
            Only a snake bites the hand of the person who feeds it milk. When people forget that they are on the Indian side of the Himalayas and not the other side, they should be reminded of ground realities. You can't expect Nepali leaders to spew venom against India and expect India to foot their bills. We take no transit charge for Nepali imports and exports ping through our country. We give access to our ports and it's infrastructure for Nepali trade. And majority of them are emplo in India. People forget things that come free. They need to be reminded of the people who pay the bill every now and then.
            Reply
            1. Load More Comments