Hundreds of containers carrying essentials goods to Nepal from India and vice-versa have been stopped at border points of Panityanki, Raxaul, Sunauli and Rupediya. Nepal Oil Corporation tankers have been denied fuel from Indian Oil Corporation. The blockade has spread public panic in Kathmandu. People are making beelines to get fuels and food items. Some businessmen have started selling goods at exorbitantly high price, taking advantage of the situation. India has not admitted it as such but what it has done to Nepal is an economic blockade.Blockades are hardly ever justified. Sanctions were considered as "human" actions, an alternative to war before World War I. After it, "economic sanctions" started to be taken seriously. The 28th President of US, Woodrow Wilson called it a "deadly force" that could be used as effective diplomatic tool. Later, such economic sanctions were used as means of enforcement in League of Nations.
Use of economic sanction expresses the interest of sender country to interfere in decision making process or any internal affairs of another country. Large nations with big economy often use sanctions as part of foreign policies. The US, UK, Russia, and European Union have used economic blockade or sanctions against Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Yugoslavia for political purpose. Such sanctions are called multilateral economic sanctions. The one that India has imposed on us is unilateral sanction. Economic blockade is against all international laws.
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) advocates providing access to international trade. It restricts trade embargo and justifies it only in case of war and international emergency. UN General Assembly Resolutions 64/189 entitled "Unilateral Economic measures as a means of political and economic coercion against developing countries" describes such actions against UN charter and norms of international law, which undermine the sovereign status of a nation.
Nepal is a landlocked country and enjoys the rights guaranteed under international treaties. UN Convention on Law of Sea (1982) provides "the right of access of land-locked states to and from the sea and freedom of transit." Article 130 of the same provides measures to avoid or eliminate delays/ other difficulties of a technical nature in traffic within transit. It also states that if there is any delay competent authorities in transit and landlocked states should cooperate for their expeditious elimination.
The difficulty in trade, as claimed by India, is not "technical," it is intentional. All these treaties are binding to both Nepal and India who are parties to them. Nepal government is asking for cooperation to import goods stranded at the border points but Indian side is deliberately obstructing supplies to and from Nepal. This is a serious breach of international convention.
Use of Indian soil by agitating parties of Madhesh against Nepali security forces, halting goods supply to Nepal and Indian government's reluctance to take action against them proves them as an act of aggression. Experts advise that Nepal should raise this issue at the United Nations.
Even provisions of South Asia Free Trade Area Agreement (SAFTA) assure transit right of landlocked countries to enhance trade in South Asian region. Bilateral Transit Treaty between India and Nepal states that the traffic in transit shall not be subject to delays or restrictions except in case of failure to comply with procedures prescribed. When all big binding documents have ensured Nepal's right to enjoy freedom of transit by all means of transport, why is India acting against them all?
As a neighboring country India has been our trade transit for centuries. Now it has blocked all Nepal-bound goods citing security risks to Indian transporters though we have not heard of a security threat to Indian drivers. Besides, government of Nepal has, time and again, assured security to all containers and drivers.
There is no security threat and no war going on between Nepal and India. Thus economic blockade is inhuman and illegal. It is an attack on sovereignty of Nepal.
There is no alternative to diplomatic route in settling this crisis. But if India turns deaf ears to our diplomatic efforts and continues with blockade, we must internationalize this case. Nepal and India are parties to Barcelona Convention and Statute on Freedom of Transit which allows to take dispute relating to blockade to International Court of Justice (ICJ). We should not hesitate to knock the doors of ICJ if India does not relent.
In the long run, however, we should try to be independent. For that, we should stop subsistence farming and shift to industrial farming with use of modern scientific tools. Government should promote and support entrepreneurship in trade and business for youth. We should enhance exports and have a good trade agreement with China. If landlocked countries like Austria, Switzerland and Liechtenstein can be economically sound, why can't Nepal? Ultimately it rests on us whether to look up to India for everything or be independent.
The author is Central Committee Member of All Nepal National Free Students' Union (ANNFSU)
Related story
BRI after COVID-19
_20240514180252.jpg)
-1776353206.webp)
