Nepal-India relation in aftermath of Susma Swaraj’s Visit

Yuba Nath Lamsal
Amidst much mistrust and hullabaloo on a host of issues between Nepal and India, Indian minister for external affairs Susma Swaraj concluded a three-day official visit to Nepal with a cautious note of optimism. Prior to departure to New Delhi, Swaraj billed her three-day visit as ‘more successful than she had expected’.  However, it has been taken in Nepal with both optimism and skepticism.  Optimism in the sense, India has at least in principle agreed to review the 1950 treaty, which most Nepalis call an unequal one. Second, no official signing took place on any issue including the proposed power trade agreement (PTA) that India had sent to Nepal almost four months ago, to which cross section of people in Nepal had serious reservation and objection. It gives an impression on the surface that India’s attitude to Nepal seems to have changed with Modi coming to power.
At the same time, there is widespread skepticism in Nepal as to India’s attitude towards Nepal. Many Nepalis are still not convinced that any deal to be reached with India especially on water resources and hydro power will do any good to Nepal. Be it preconceived or real, this perception in Nepal is based on the past track records as the promises that Indian leaders and authorities made in connection with the relations with Nepal were only made to be broken. And all the deals that were signed with India in the past have had detrimental effect on Nepal only benefiting India. It, now, remains to be seen how the tone of optimism that Swaraj expressed during her visit to Nepal would really be translated into action at the best interest of both Nepal and India or it just fizzles out to the lager dismay of Nepal’s expectation as a good neighbor. Some tend to take Susma’s words as the changed attitude of Nepal especially after Narendra Modi rose to power in New Delhi, which, according to them, was reflected in Susma’s ‘ expressions of optimism’. However, it, too, remains to be seen whether Susma’s sugarcoated words are out of India’s changed attitude or just under compulsion. Only time will reveal the reality for which we have only to wait and watch with caution.
Swaraj’s visit was a part of preparatory work for the upcoming visit of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, which is scheduled to arrive at Kathmandu on August 3.As the visit was a part of the move to create conducive atmosphere for Modi’s upcoming visit, Swaraj tried to pacify Nepali sentiments by demonstrating some sort of pragmatism and liberal attitude, as the Indian external minister, during her three-day trip to Nepal, saw and heard furious expressions and resistance on the street and media mainly against India’s past attitude towards Nepal in general and the recent New Delhi’s proposition for a couple of projects including the PTA. Sensing strong reservation and resistance in Nepal, Swaraj had to agree to look  into certain issues positively and address Nepal’s concern. In the 26 point joint communiqué issued at the end of the Nepal-India Joint Commission’s meeting, a provision has been included that states that Nepal and India agreed to review, adjust and update the 1950 treaty, reflecting the current realities, for which a joint committee comprising foreign secretaries of both the countries has been set up. The committee is mandated to make necessary recommendations for the review of the 1950 treaty and also some other treaties that required updating to suit the changed context. The Joint Commission also directed the Nepal-India Boundary Working Group to commence field works at the earliest. Both of these provisions are positive in the sense that India has in principle agreed to review and update the 1950 treaty. Similarly, India had earlier unilaterally prepared a strip border map and had proposed to be signed by Nepal. India has encroached broader in more than 55 points and if signed the India proposed strip map, it would have legitimized India’s act of broader encroachment. Thus, there had been strong objection in Nepal about India’s proposed strip map. Now the joint border committee will look into this issue and come up with a new proposal acceptable to both the countries. These positive aspects need to be translated into action to really create atmosphere of trust and goodwill between these two countries, for which India is required to demonstrate sincerity without trying to play any new tricks to become a good neighbor whereas Nepal has to remain watchful and do good homework in dealing with India for our best interest.
Some observers and analysts are of the view that the Swaraj’s visit has some other positive aspects, which need to be given continuity. According to them, India has now started handling relations with Nepal at the political level and Indian politicians have begun direct dialogue with Nepal’s politicians. They are of the view that Indian bureaucracy and intelligence agencies were largely responsible in handling relations with Nepal, which, often created irritants and multiplied problems between the two countries. With direct dialogue at the political level, the role and interference of bureaucracy and agencies, according to them, will now be diminished paving the way for cordial relations between the two countries.
This is an argument, which may make sense, to certain extent, but not wholly. India has its set policy on Nepal, on the basis of which opinions are built and relationship is handled. South Block and the agencies do not independently handle Nepal relations but do so based on their country’s policy and decisions at the political level. Thus, the views that dialogue at political level would serve and protect Nepal’s interest are flawed. What is needed, if India at all wants to have better relations with Nepal, it must change its colonial policy.
The truth is: India has recently realized that its neighborhood policy in general and Nepal policy in particular is flawed. As a result, India’s image in the neighborhood is being tarnished very badly and anti-Indian sentiments are growing in the neighboring countries more than ever before. Its benefit is going to China as Beijing is considered and regarded in all South Asian countries as a benevolent neighbor that is willing to cooperate with the neighbors for their development needs without any conditions and interference. Even Indian intellectuals and analysts have realized and started raising this issue. In a recent piece of analysis in the Indian Express, C Raja Mohan has pointed out this saying ‘India promises, China delivers’. Against this background, Indian Prime Minister Narednra Modi appears to be at least trying to show that he was interested to change India’s image in the neighborhood and also in the world. However, this cannot be achieved by mere rhetoric but by concrete action. If Modi is really interested to change India’s image it has to change its bullish neighborhood policy in black and white as well as in practice.
As far as Nepal is concerned, India has set Nepal policy, on the basis of which relations with Nepal is being conducted and handled. Unless, New Delhi brings about changes in its policy and attitude, Nepal-India relations cannot be smooth. If India is really serious and sincere for having better, friendlier and neighborly relations, it must change its Nepal policy to suit the changed national and international situation. Nepal, too, needs to lobby through effective diplomatic acumen for such a change. For this, Nepal too needs on its part needs to do a plenty of homework to ensure that our interests are protected abroad. But Nepal has its serious weakness in handling foreign policy in general and India policy in particular. In the first place, Nepal does not have any country-specific policy. In the absence of clear cut India policy, Nepal is losing in the diplomatic dealing and communication with India. Against this background, Nepal needs to prepare out India policy with clear cut definitions of our interests with India and our bottom line on every issue and matter.
One very striking point that needs to be mentioned here in connection with Swaraj’s visit is the India’s attitude towards Madhesi parties. Nepal’s Madhesi parties are the creation of India’s external intelligence agency, the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), as New Delhi’s trump card in Nepali politics. But Sushma Swaraj seemed not to have given much attention to them, which is being analyzed as India’s diminishing interest with these Madhesi parties and politicians. According to media report, Swaraj even refused to meet Madhesi leaders individually; instead she met with all Madhesi leaders belonging to all political parties in a group.  Reports have it that Susma Swaraj, in response to the complain by Madhesi leaders that they were treated in Nepal as the second class citizens, is reported to have counter- questioned, ‘since Madhesis have become President, Vice President, Home Minister and Foreign Minister, how could be Madhesi treated as second class citizens?’ She is also reported to have told them that India was interested to nurture relations with Nepal but not with Madhes. If it was at all true, this is a most striking and positive attitude.

Despite this, skepticism and suspicion continue to prevail in Nepal about India’s attitude and behavior. Thus, India needs to change its policy in black and white and accordingly put it into practice. As the decision has been made to set up a committee comprising foreign secretaries of both the countries to work for the review of 1950 treaty, this has to be expedited. Secondly, instead of entering into a new agreement on any new water resource related project, the already agreed projects need to be implemented and completed. It has been almost 17 years, since agreement was reached to construct Pancheswar multi-purpose project. It was agreed that the detailed project report would be prepared within six months of the signing of the agreement. But the work has not started even in 17 years. This is because of India’s unwillingness that Pancheswar project has not started. Thus, the Pancheswar project has to start at the earliest before signing any other new project on water resource. Similarly, India had agreed during Prime Minister Puspa Kamal Dahal’s visit to New Delhi to construct Naumure hydro power project. But it, too, has not taken off. Thus, there has been general impression among the people of Nepal that India is not willing to construct hydro power projects in Nepal, rather it only wants to hold them. If India has really changed its attitude and wants to help Nepal, it has to firstly and immediately start the construction of these two projects. Similarly, Nepal has been cheated in all the previous water resource related treaties including Koshi and Gandaki agreements, which also need to be renegotiated along with the 1950 treaty to ensure that interest of both the countries is equally protected. This is also high time that Nepal should raise the issue of renegotiating Koshi and Gandaki agreements protecting Nepal’s upper riparian rights.
These are some of the issues that have marred Nepal and India relations. If India wants to have bilateral relations with Nepal smooth, it must address these concerns of Nepal. As the Indian Prime Minister is visiting Nepal in the long spell of 17 years since IK Gujral last visited in 1997, Indian side has claimed that it would be historic event in Nepal-India relations. However, Modi’s visit will be meaningful from bilateral perspective only when he (Modi) takes the issues raised by Nepal with utmost seriousness and addresses them to the satisfaction of Nepal. Else it will matter the least for Nepal as far as its interests are concerned.