Talking about India from Nepali point of view, there are certain realities we cannot escape. The geo-political compulsion of the two countries to be affected by events in each other’s domains leaves very less room for indifference. Just for an example, the anti-Rana movements in Nepal and the starting point for democratic movement and reform can be seen as a manifestation of the spillover of the Indian freedom struggle into the Himalayan terrain.
There is another reality that we in Nepal need to look upon more seriously without the cynicism we generally attach to it. India’s claim of security concern in Nepal is not merely a façade to create room for intervention or justify its self-glorifying neighborhood politicking, as it is often portrayed in Nepal.
Imagine: If we were a nation of 1.3 billion people so diverse that everything that you can think of can divide its people, if we were fighting a rigorous insurgency in our territory which often is abetted from outside, if we had fought four wars with our neighbors in 60 years; and if we had a neighbor which was supposed to be a friend but the biggest, most represented and most organized political party in that country overtly declares ‘us’ as their principal enemy – how indifferent will we be?
India is justified to perceive an increasing Chinese influence in Kathmandu as a threat and a challenge to what had been its area of influence till now. Seeing the open border between Nepal and India, the geographic connection and the likely equation that is going to develop in future between the two Asian giants, the implication of Chinese influence and access in Nepal cannot be compared with the implications vice versa.
Here’s some scope for a counter point that the meddling that we have been crediting to the ‘Big Brother’ is not new. Rather, the stance taken by the Maoists is a result of this behavior from India. It is true that it has been a mutual affair. The political leadership in Nepal, the policy makers in Delhi and the representatives in Kathmandu are all equally responsible in procreating and nurturing the mistrust which is an example of a lost opportunity for what could have been a great relationship between two neighboring nations anywhere in the world.
If Maoists continue to behave like insignificant radical ideological bulls, external forces will be justified in trying to reduce them to exactly that for guarding their national interests.
A nation’s foreign policy is defined by its aims to guard national interests. Safeguarding the territorial integrity and unity of the nation becomes the primary objective of the state machinery and its policies are an extrapolation of that in different spheres. If India’s actions are motivated by its national interests we cannot blame it till the time it follows certain laws of the civilized nations. The onus is on our leadership to define our objectives clearly, carve out the path to reach those objectives keeping in mind the geo-political, social-economic milieu. Which, we have failed to do till now.
Desperate actions in recent times suggest the inability of both sides to accept some basic truths in the changed scenario. International relations are vibrant and one has to adapt according to the situations.
With the developments in communication, transportations and other technology, India’s traditional leverage in Nepal of a geographic proximity and close communication is withering to some extent. A changed political setup further enhances the effect of this change. Instead of coming to terms with this realization gracefully and confidently, India comes out to be in a desperate attempt to prove its counter-influence and often, overt meddling and brash coercing instead of diplomacy is exposed.
Contributing to this desperation is the Neo-Mccarthyism that is seen in India’s analysis of events in Nepal mainly propagated by the ‘military or security hat’ thinkers who look at everything through the barrel of a gun. And the little bit of power flowing out of the barrel of Mao’s Gun in Kathmandu helps them make it seem real. It’s no surprise then that under such guidance, Delhi gets nightmares of the ideological fraternity between the Maoists of Nepal and the comrades in Beijing. The impacts of the same on the Indian Maoists are also hugely exaggerated.
On top of all this, the Maoists in Nepal keep behaving as an utterly irresponsible group with pronounced un-natural leanings in external fields, impractical stand on the issues of national consensus and never-ending squabbles within the house. The largest political party of the nation has to realize that they are no more some inconsequential dissident political outfit with extremist views on everything and the policies they make public impacts how others look upon the nation and decide on their policies toward it. If Maoists continue to behave like insignificant radical ideological bulls, external forces will be justified in trying to reduce them to exactly that for guarding their national interests.
In the end, for appropriate lessons to be drawn for all concerned, I quote Chanakya, “Out of all kinds of danger, internal danger should be first got rid of; for internal troubles, like the fear from lurking snakes, are more serious than external troubles.”
dinkar.nepal@yahoo.com
Related story
Hello, big brother!
