Nepal's foreign policy and Gorkha recruitment

Yuba Nath Lamsal

The question of Nepal’s sovereignty has now been raised more prominently and strongly than ever before. This is because Nepal is now in history’s worst political crisis and its political capability has dwindled to the lowest ebb, which has given rise to foreign meddling and interference. Political instability and vulnerability often impair and weaken diplomatic capability which makes the country unable to defend its national interest abroad. Instead various external powers and interest groups get opportunity to interfere and play against our own interest.

This is what exactly has happened in Nepal at present. We have perfectly and successfully proved our inability and incompetence. We have shown the world that we are incompetent to resolve our own problems and have sought help from external forces to settle our differences and solve our internal problems. When we are unable to sort out our problems and seek external help to solve our internal issues, there will definitely be external interference.

Although external interference in our internal affairs is not a new phenomenon, the foreign meddling at present is more acute and more naked. There used to be external interference in Nepal, but it was indirect and applied through coercive diplomacy and other means. Now it is direct and objectionable. Foreigners are now dictating and playing openly in our internal politics and external powers have been catalyst in determining our political course, which is, to a large, extent our own making.

We have the tendency to seek external assistance to settle our problems. In every political change, foreigners have become catalyst and the credit is given to foreigners although all political changes have been brought about due to people’s struggle and movements. When political change takes place, foreigners try to take political dividend for their support to new political actors. Nepal’s political actors/parties, too, trust the foreigners and depend on them more than their own people.

The recent case is our peace process. The peace process had begun with the signing of the 12-point agreement between the insurgent Maoist party and the seven-party alliance (a coalition of seven parliamentary parties) in New Delhi, India. Now New Delhi is reaping benefit for its alleged role in facilitating Nepal’s peace process by bringing together the Maoists and parliamentary parties against Monarchy. The political parties could have met somewhere inside Nepal and signed the deal on their own without seeking help of external power. Here lies the fundamental flaw on the part of our political parties. This also shows that our parties do not have self-confidence and seek others’ support. Even after the success of Jana Andolan II and beginning of the peace process, the parties could have devised their own mechanism to advance all works relating to the peace process including the management of the arms and armies. But they invited the United Nations to do this job. The United Nations is the world government in which Nepal also has its representation. The involvement of the UN is better than brining any other foreign power. But it negated our own initiative. There are very few instances where the United Nations has been successful in handling the peace process in the transitional countries. It repeated in Nepal, as well. Once e invited the United Nations to get involved in our peace process, we lost our own initiative and we miserably failed. The ownership of our peace process went to foreigners. Firstly, India claimed its ownership just for facilitating the signing of the 12-point agreement and secondly the United Nations for taking up the responsibility in facilitating the management of the Maoist arms and combatants. But both India and UN utterly failed in Nepal. Their role further complicated the situation in Nepal.  As a result, the UN mission was asked to pack up and go. But India still continues to claim ownership of Nepal’s peace process and trying to meddle in Nepal’s political affairs. But it seems Nepali political parties do not have guts to do to India what they did to the United Nations.

The history of external interference and domination in Nepal can be traced back to 1816 when the Sugauli Treaty was signed.  The Sugauli Treaty gave the British colonial power in India that had controlled almost entire South Asia a suitable ground to interfere in Nepal’s internal affairs. Apart from losing sizeable territory, Nepal also agreed to grant British colonial power to recruit Nepali Gorkhas in its army and the establishment of the British mission in Kathmandu. The agreement for Gorkha recruitment was a move that continues to have negative repercussion in our national capability, prestige as well as foreign policy. Prior to Sugauli Treaty Nepal was in its mission of expanding the country. The Sugauli Treaty brought Nepal’s expansionist campaign to an end. The British colonial power was so clever that it always sensed simmering threat from Nepal in its dominant role in South Asia. The Gorkhas, despite having been devoid of modern equipment, were amazingly fighting force. By entering into agreement on Gorkha recruitment, British killed two birds with one stone. Firstly, the British got a reservoir of an excellent and professional fighting force upon which they could fully depend in case of any kind of revolt from Indians. The British wanted Gorkhas not only to enhance their fighting capability and also create a force that could be used if any kind of mutiny and revolts took place in India against the colonial power. Secondly, Gorkha recruitment was a clever move of British rulers to weaken Nepal’s fighting power so that Nepal would no longer remain a threat. They were of the view that once the British opened up recruitment for Gorkhas in their army with better facilities and pays, Nepal’s youths would prefer British army than their own Nepali armed force.

The Gorkha recruitment continues even today. Originally, the agreement for Gorkha recruitment had been reached between the Nepal Government and the British colonial power. However, it should not have been valid after British raj came to an end in India. Unfortunately, the practice was given continuity under the so-called tripartite agreement between Nepal, Britain and India.

Nepal had agreed for Gorkha recruitment not on its volition but rather under pressure from British colonial power. Even after the signing of the Sugauli Treaty, Nepali authorities had issued secret instructions the local authorities to do everything possible to discourage Nepali youths to join British Army. In course of time, Nepal could not prevent this practice and Nepalese youths became more interested to join the British army because of better pay and facilities. Moreover, Nepali rulers got more involved in internal and factional struggle and they had no time, energy and even willingness to pay attention to the issue concerning the Gorkha recruitment.

The post-1947 period saw even worse scenario. Lured by Gorkha soldiers’ valor and art of fighting even in the most difficult situation, India, too, demanded Gorkha recruitment. When British raj ended, Britain and India shared the Gorkha troops, to which Nepal also gave its consent in the name of tripartite agreement. It was a mistake on the part of Nepali government.

When British colonial rule came to an end in India, the Sugauli Treaty and all other treaties and agreements made with the British colonial power in India should have been automatically abrogated. Moreover, India claimed to be the successor of British colonial power despite partition out of which Pakistan and Hindustan (India) were born. India claimed to be the successor of British colonial rule simply because it wanted continuity of the colonial rules, systems and practices. After British left India, the position of India should have been like that of pre-British era. This means India should have been decolonized and the status of the states that were later invaded by British rulers should been declared independent. Nepal had lost a large part of its territory to British India during the Anglo-Nepal war in 1814-16 and these lost territories should have returned to Nepal after British left India. But it did not happen simply because India gave continuity to colonial practice and system. As a result, Indians are in the state of colony of a handful of elites and aristocrats, despite its claim to be world’s largest democracy.

The Gorkha recruitment stands as an ample evidence of the continuity of British colonial policy in India even after its so-called independence.  India has used the Nepali Gorkha in the most dangerous zones where Indians fear to go. Nepal has officially adopted non-aligned foreign policy which means Nepal does not have any enemy and does not want to ally with any power bloc in the world. The other salient feature of Nepal’s foreign policy is its strict adherence to five principles of peaceful co-existence, which clearly seeks to refrain from war and conflict with any other country. But Gorkhas fought war against China in 1962 to defend India, they fought with Pakistan and they fought in Kargil and Kashmir. Similarly, Gorkhas were sent to Sri Lanka to intervene in this island nation. This is all against Nepal’s non-aligned foreign policy.  While Nepal seeks friendship and cooperation with all countries in the world, its citizens are fighting against our international friends to defend other countries, which is a great irony of the 21^st century. As long as the Gorkha recruitment continues, Nepal’s independent and non-aligned foreign policy would continue to be violated. It, thus, bode well if Nepal takes up Gorkha recruitment issue with India and Britain and makes sure that this tradition is discontinued for the greater prestige and reputation of Nepal in the community of the nations.