Political Checks and Balances

Constituent Assembly becoming rubber stamps of leaders

Yuba Nath Lamsal

Once again India’s ill intention towards Nepal has been exposed more clearly than ever before. Although India’s interference in our national politics and internal affairs has been a recurring phenomenon, which has not only hurt patriotic sentiment of the people of Nepal but also infuriated them. The Indian design and interference has come in a more open and brazen manner this time with a senior diplomat stationed in Indian Consulate office in Birgunj, about 200 kilometer south of Kathmandu bordering India’s Bihar state. SD Mehta, who is working in the political division of the Consulate office, openly told the leaders of some Madhes-based Nepali parties to start agitation against the federal model agreed upon among the major political parties including the Madeshi Front and press for a single Madhes state in the entire Terai.

What can be more shameless interference than this? Mehta’s remarks aimed at inciting violence and agitation in Terai with the objective of creating chaos, anarchy and instability in Nepal. The issue concerning federal model and the number of federal provinces is strictly an internal matter of Nepal to be decided by the Nepali parties and the Nepali people. Foreigners have no right to poke nose and meddle in this affair. Secondly, diplomats are required to strictly abide by international rules of diplomacy. But Mehta not only crossed the diplomatic boundary but also got involved in the act of inciting violence and disturbing communal harmony which is punishable by the laws of Nepal. 

Mehta’s remarks are, thus, totally objectionable and are also against the international norms of diplomacy, for which he must be immediately expelled from the country. Although the government of Nepal has lodged its complaint against what the Indian diplomat said it is not sufficient. The government of Nepal should have declared Mehta as persona non-grata and send him packing. Failure to do this is a weakness on the part of the government. Also the government of Nepal should have sought apology from the government of India for interfering in our internal affairs and violating international laws and norms.

Indian government has tried to cover up this and said that Mehta did not mean what the media have reported. In a press statement, Indian embassy said that Mehta’s remarks were misinterpreted and distorted.  These efforts of Indian government to cover up the misdemeanor of its staff imply that these are the view of the Indian government and Mehta spoke as per the instruction of the South Bloc. If it was not the view of the Indian Government, New Delhi should have initiated probe and punished the diplomat, who made the objectionable and undiplomatic statement. What would have the Indian government reacted and responded if similar remarks had been made on India by Nepali diplomat in New Delhi. Perhaps, the Indian government would have expelled him or her within 24 hours.

Nepal also should have taken up this issue both at the official as well as higher political level. However, Nepal failed to take up this issue strongly. Instead it lodged protest in a mild way as though this was a minor mistake. Failure to take action against SD Mehta is a weakness of the Nepal government.

This is a brazen attack on Nepal’s sovereignty and independence and also a direct interference in Nepal’s internal affairs, which must be condemned in the strongest words by all. Although some political parties have raised their concerns over this issue and sought clarification from New Delhi, their protests was also mere perfunctory. This has become more mysterious and the conspicuous by the utter silence of some parties on this issue.

Patriotic Nepalese people are always skeptical about the role of New Delhi in Nepal and its meddling in Nepal’s politics. The role New Delhi has been playing in Nepal and interfered in Nepal’s internal affairs right after the Sugauli treaty has been objectionable. Nepalese people are patriotic and they always resisted Indian interference and pressure. This is how Nepal preserved its independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity both in principle and practice.  New Delhi often created its own agents and got them penetrated into political parties through whom India pursued and tried to implement its policies and programmes. This has become more visible in recent years. It is perceived and felt that India has penetrated into political parties, institutions and other sectors. As a result, Indian influence and penetration in Nepal so heavy that New Delhi has started interfering in each and every decision of the government.

The recent remarks of the Indian diplomat should also be linked with the genesis of the Madhes movement and their demand for a separate Madhes state. While Mdhesi people seek one single Madhes state in the entire Terai region, they want to split the rest of the country into about one dozen small provinces on the basis of ethnic identity. This makes it clear that the single Madhes state  that is being raised by some Madhes-based parties is not our agenda but is being raised at the behest of foreigners. This can be well substantiated by the remarks of S D Mehta and attempt of Indian government to cover up it instead of probing and taking against him. This is a design to tear apart Nepal into small provinces and also to incite tension and confrontation among these states, which would weaken Nepal’s strength.

One more thing must be noted here that the creation of Madhes-based parties, Madhes movement and one Madhes agenda is directly linked with India\'s long-term strategic design in Nepal. Until a few years ago, there was perfectly communal harmony in our country. But the communal seed was sown from Madhes during the Madhes movement. The Madhes-based parties were created after India’s Consulate office was established in Birgunj.

India had been pressing for permission to establish the Consulate office in Birgunj for a long time. Nepal knew the real intention of New Delhi and resisted it for years. But it was permitted under India’s pressure and perhaps with some under-table lucrative deal during the period of the government headed by Surya Bahadur Thapa in 1997.  Ever since the Indian Consulate office was established in Birgunj, political problem started in mid-Terai and other adjacent districts. It was during the period of five or six years, several Madhesi groups—some armed and some without arms— were created through which New Delhi tried to pursue its policy and interests in Nepal. The newly created Madhesi parties were aimed at weakening other mainstream parties, which had not totally capitulated to the Indian interests, although there has been strong and heavy penetration of India into these mainstream parties as well. Its consequence was visible in the Rautahat carnage in which several Maoist cadres, supporters and sympathizers were brutally killed. It did not end there and the design continues even today.

There are three main objectives of the creation of Madhes parties. The first one is to weaken the mainstream parties. Terai is traditionally a vote bank of the Nepali Congress. Although Nepali Congress is a pro-Indian party, it does not totally capitulate to India. Similar case may be with the CPN-UML. UML, too, has both pro-Indian section and patriotic force in it. But India does not fully trust the UML.  The relationship between the Maoists and New Delhi are also not smooth but have undergone many ups and down. It was definitely India’s support that helped broker a peace deal between the Maoists and Nepal’s seven parliamentary parties. India did so in the hope that the Maoists, which had been fighting a decade-long insurgency on the plank of patriotism, would come into New Delhi’s fold and would also support in settling Maoist insurgency within India as well. However, things did not go in accordance with India’s design and plan. The Maoists did not cave in to India’s pressure on several issues and raised the banner of patriotism when they went to power after emerging the largest force in the Constituent Assembly. Although the relations between the Maoists and India are in better place, there is still deficit of trust between them. Thus, India thought it necessary to create its own puppet forces so that New Delhi could always manipulate in Nepal’s politics. The Madhesi parties came in to serve this interest.

Now Madhesi parties are in government as well as on the streets. They have controlled over the government as well they are agitating on the streets. This is a design to control both the government and the street. This happened soon after SD Mehta urged the Madhesi leaders to launch violent agitation to press for a single Madhes state. This clearly tells who is controlling our parties especially the Madhes-based parties.

What SD Mehta spoke is as per the India’s long-term design in Nepal. The design is to initially bring Nepal under its security umbrella.  The second-phase plan is to take control of Nepal’s political power through their agents and puppets and the third one is to ultimately annex Nepal into the Indian Union. The first strategy is called the Fiji process as it is being successfully executed in the small Pacific island nation. In Fiji people of Indian origin are in quite a good number. Indians went to Fiji in search of work and in course of time they settled their and obtained citizenship of Fiji. Now they are being instigated to take over political power for which New Delhi has provided material and moral support. What India has been exercising in Nepal at present is exactly the same as it has done in Fiji. The second strategy is Bhutanization, which seeks to take control of Nepal’s security and foreign policy and treat Nepal as its suzerain state.  And third strategy is called Sikkimization, which includes the design to annex Nepal into Indian union in a similar fashion New Delhi did in 1975. All these designs are at work simultaneously.

But these designs are not likely to succeed as Nepalese people are patriotic and get united when its sovereignty and territorial integrity comes under real threat. But one thing all of us must understand is that whatever S D Mehta said was not his personal view and he did it in conscious manner  under clear instruction and long-term plan of India. At this crucial moment all political parties and patriotic people must be united and condemn India’s ill-intention in the strongest manner.