Need to readjust neighborhood policy

Yuba Nath Lamsal

The state of foreign policy of any country is better judged by its neighborhood policy. If relationship of a particular country with its neighbor is hostile, there is something wrong either in its overall foreign policy formulation or there is inherent weaknesses and failure in the conduct of diplomacy.

So far as Nepal’s relationship with its neighbors is concerned, its foreign policy is always vacillating. Prior to the unification of Nepal, there was no foreign policy at all. The concept of foreign policy is a new phenomenon, although the basic tenets and features of dealing with external forces and countries had been devised differently by different countries, it was basically guided by military doctrine.

So far as Nepal is concerned, its foreign policy concept emerged only after its unification almost 240 years ago. But the concept was still in fragile and infantile stage. Nepal’s founder Prithivi Narayan Shaha, in his ‘dibyopadesh’ or ‘ noble counsels’ had defined the nature of its two neighbours China in the north and British colonial rulers in the south. According to Prithivi Narayan Shah, the nieghbour in north was friendly and southern power was clever and cunning and had suggested to deal with them accordingly. Although the situation then and now is totally different, some of the basic conditions have still not changed. The northern neighbour is there as powerful as it was in the past. But changes have taken place in the south. British colonial power is no longer in the south. British ruler shad invaded and occupied several states in South Asia, which they called India. They left India in 1947 but they did not virtually decolonize South Asia. They created two nations out of the entire British colony in South Asia. Prior to British arrival in South Asia, there were dozens of independent countries in South Asia. But while, going they created India and Pakistan out of their colony and accordingly handed over power. Had India been decolonized, British should have restored the situation of pre-British arrival.

Although British left South Asia, India inherited colonial legacy and continued the same British hegemonic policy in the neighborhood policy. In such a case, what Prithivi Naryaan Shah had said is as relevant now as it was 240 years ago.

However, Nepal has not been able to cope with the changes taken place in the world and in its neighborhood when it comes to formulating and conducting its foreign policy. The Himalayan republic is always in dilemma in dealing with its neighbors. Nepal has no problem with its northern neighbor. Nepal and China have friendly and cooperative relations. But Kathmandu is faced with multitude frictions and irritants with India, which has surrounded Nepal from three sides.

Ever since Nepal was created as an independent political entity, it has been finding a tough time in defending its territory and safeguarding national independence. There were some minor frictions with the northern neighbor which triggered Nepal-Tibet war on a couple occasions. But those conflicts were resolved to the best interest of both countries, in which Beijing had demonstrated magnanimity towards smaller neighbor. As a result, the relations between these two nations have been perfectly exemplary in the modern time especially after the establishment of the diplomatic relationship. China attaches greater importance to the relationship with Nepal whereas Nepal considers China as its true friend and development partner.

Nepal has problem only with its southern neighbor-India. Be it under the colonial rule or after independence, India’s policy has caused irritation in neighboring Nepal. Most Nepali people believe that India is the main stumbling block of Nepal political transformation and economic development. When Nepal was in the unification spree, the British India came as the roadblock to Nepal’s mission of its expansion. War broke out between Nepal and British colonial rulers in India. The war ended with signing of the Sugauli Treaty, which resulted in the loss of a significant size of its territory( nearly one -third) by Nepal. The Sugauli Treaty has determined the border between Nepal and India even today.

Despite losing sizable one -third territory, Nepal, somehow, maintained its independence-sometimes by coaxing British colonial power and sometimes by confronting and intriguing. As a result, we can proudly claim to be the citizen of the ancient and independent country which had never been a colony of any county. Nepal is, thus, one of the oldest countries in Asia. Nepal is, thus, not a part of Indian sub-continent but an ancient country of Asia that has its own language, history, culture and tradition.

But India has always ignored this historic reality. Even some historians and analysts tend to subscribe to Indian school of thought which claims that the culture in the entire South Asia is an offshoot of Indian civilization. How can the culture of a young country be a mainstream culture of the entire region when there are quite old and ancient civilizations and cultures continue to exist from the ancient time?

Compared to Nepal, India is a young nation which was created in 1947. India has been dominating its neighbors because of its geographic, economic and military size. India has been trying to manipulate in the internal affairs of smaller neighbors, which is quite aversion to the universally accepted international laws, diplomatic norms and values. As a result, India is the most hated country in South Asia. In all South Asia countries, anti-Indian sentiment is very strong, which is New Delhi’s own making. All South Asian countries have problem with India and these problems are getting complicated every day which are the prime reason for anti-Indian sentiment in South Asian countries. The problem with its neighbors has impacted in creating bad image of India in the international arena.

Since India has border with all South Asian countries except Afghanistan, these countries have to adjust their policy with India. None of the neighbors , in fact, have any ill-will against India and its people but are against New Delhi’s hegemonic policy. Nepal is a case in point that gives the overall picture of India’s policy towards its neighbors and opinion of the neighbors about India and its policy. India has always tried to bully Nepal and create problem. If surveyed scientifically, more than 80 per cent Nepalese would perhaps disapprove India’s Nepal policy. The recent case of open interference in Nepal’s internal politics has further annoyed Nepalese people. It is the direct interference of Nepal that has blocked the process of election for the prime minister. The largest political party of Nepal-the UCPN-Maoist- has more openly and candidly opposed India’s interference and vowed to fight Indian hegemony. But New Delhi has done everything possible to prevent the Maoists from leading the government.

Nepal and India are two sovereign countries and active members of the United Nations and other global and regional forums including the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC). Nepal wants to nurture its relations with India on the basis of equality and mutual benefit. If India, at all, changes its hegemonic policy and genuinely wants to develop relations with Nepal on the basis of five-principle of peaceful co-existence, both the countries would benefit. India has to accept the reality that its Nepal policies have miserably failed, which has created friction with its neighbor. India’s current Nepal policy would ultimately harm New Delhi more than Nepal because Nepali people who have once fought with British imperial power to keep its independence intact, would never accept India’s hegemony and domination. Thus, these two countries now need to begin a fresh to make bilateral relations friendlier, more cooperative and cordial that would be able to face the newer challenges in the present changed international context.

The initiative should first come from New Delhi. To begin with, all unequal treaties and agreements Between the two countries including the 1950 Treaty must be scrapped and replaced by accords made on the basis of equality and mutual benefit. This would be beneficial for both Nepal and India. The ball is, now, in the court of New Delhi and if it genuinely comes up with good intention and with changed policy, Nepal-India relations would be exemplary for the world. Nepal and India are neighbors and they cannot change their geographic location. As the close neighbors, they must cope with one another. If relations continue to get sour, that would not be in the interest of both the countries. If something goes wrong in Nepal, India will also face its fallout because of closeness and open border. New Delhi must realize the fact that the coercive policy that India has adopted so far in Nepal has totally failed and instead created more problem.