By Ranjit RaeIn a low-key response, the official spokesman of the Ministry of External Affairs merely “noted” the unanimous passage of the constitution amendment bill in the lower House of Nepalese parliament which provided legitimacy to the new map that adds Indian territories of Kalapani, Lipulekh and Limpiyadhura to Nepal. The bill secured unanimous support from the House, including from the opposition Nepali Congress and the Janata Samajwadi Party. It is now expected to sail through the upper House next week and enter into force once it is signed by the President. The boundary issue is symptomatic of a deeper malaise in India-Nepal ties. It arises due to a deep-rooted anti-India nationalist sentiment, particularly amongst the communists ruling Nepal. It also arises from Nepal’s desire to enlarge its space and break free from what it sees as India’s claustrophobic embrace. Hence the policy of balance, the so-called China card. In the instant case, Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli was under considerable pressure from within the Nepalese Communist Party and the general public for his failure on the economic front and in managing the Covid pandemic. There was talk of leadership change. Oli, however, received a temporary respite with the active support of the Chinese. The publication of a new Indian map in November 2019, the inauguration of a section of the Dharchula-Lipulekh road and the comments by our Army chief suggesting that the boundary issue was being raised by Nepal at the behest of a third country, provided a lifeline for the beleaguered Oli government which used this issue to divert attention from its own failures. To be fair, Nepal did seek talks with India on several occasions without receiving a concrete response, and this contributed to the chain of developments leading to the constitutional amendment on the new map. My sense is that even if we had agreed to negotiations, and there was some communication in this regard, Oli would have still gone ahead with his strategy – one that he has perfected over the years – of whipping up anti-India sentiment.For the longer term, India needs to develop a clear and sustained policy on Nepal and particularly on ways and means of addressing the anti-India sentiment, the growing ingress of China as well as the alienation of friends such as the Nepali Congress, whose leaders participated in the Indian freedom struggle and the Madhesi parties. We have to reach out to the youth of Nepal. Our effort should be to strengthen the economic interdependence between the two countries and provide a stake for Nepal in the economic growth prospects of India. As Shyam Saran, a former ambassador, has said, Nepal should look at India as an “opportunity” and not as a “threat”. Following the passage of the constitutional amendment in the lower House PM Oli said he desires talks with India to resolve the issue. His attempt is to enter into negotiations from a position of strength. In my view the appropriate time for talks was prior to the constitutional amendment process. Now we are presented with a political fait accompli. The amendment has made resolution of the problem more intractable. In any event we should not bolster PM Oli’s position by agreeing to negotiate now. Of course, there is no option but to find a negotiated settlement but the time for that would come in the future when a more conducive environment is created.“Noting” the amendment rather than “regretting” or “deploring” it is a step in the right direction.(The writer is former ambassador of India to Nepal)
from Economic Times https://ift.tt/3eenbkU
via IFTTT
No comments:
Post a Comment