Kathmandu can ignore Madhes at its own peril
One of the most striking element of the recent change of
guard in Nepal, after the promulgation of the new Constitution, is once arch
enemies - the 'Royalist' (RPP-N) and Maoists (UCPN-M) joined forces to elect K
P Oli of CPN-UML as Prime Minister trouncing Sushil Koirala of Nepali Congress
- the latter generally perceived to be "India Friendly" and
sympathetic towards the Madhesi cause. It is ironical - to say the least -
RPP-N went to the elections with Pro-Hindu and Pro-Monarchy slogans the very
principles that Maoists had fought against. Power they say is the ultimate glue
- but here the prime motivation seems to have been keeping Indian influence at
bay.
Thus India appeared outmanoeuvred and its concerns on the new constitution - especially the
interests of the Madhesis (the inhabitants of the southern plains of Terai
adjoining India) were ignored. The last
ditch effort of the Foreign Secretary to salvage the situation were rebuffed
and the Constituent Assembly went ahead to promulgate the new Constitution as
per the original draft. The rearguard actions that many believe India prompted
- resignation of Baburam Bhattarai, the second most important
leader and principal ideologue of the Maoists and Sushil Koirala's hurried introduction of
Constitution amendment proposals before the Constituent Assembly was dissolved -
were seen as too little too late.
Critics at home and abroad were quick to view this as a snub
to the Modi Government. Hasty judgements were pronounced on Modi governments
faltering neighbourhood strategy following the initial hope and hype. The
recently strained relationship with Maldives was cited as a parallel.
India's equation with Nepal has been and will always be -
different and cannot be compared with that of any other neighbour. While they
can't be called 'frenemies' - India is a neighbour Nepalis love to hate. And, India - to use the clichéd
'elder brother' analogy - likes to believe it knows what's best for Nepal. This relationship of sibling sentimentality
is age old and cannot be easily changed.
There is
too much at stake for both countries - geographically,
emotionally (socially), economically and diplomatically - to remain disengaged
for long. So if both the countries have an open border and a linked fixed
conversion rate currency - it is not as a matter of choice but one of logical
necessity. Apart from everything else, India will always remain Nepal's largest
market for employment as well for products manufactured in or routed through
Nepal (via official or unofficial channels).
Nepalese
understand this well even while playing the "China Card'. Therefore,
notwithstanding their public posturing and grand-standing in media - Nepali
politicians rush to Delhi at the
slightest sign of tension.
But, that
does not stop them from periodically raising the bogey of the ''Indian
Hand" and the scary spectre of Sikkim-isation of Nepal (however,
improbable). Burning of Indian Flag or effigies of Indian Prime Ministers is
par for the course. This many see as a clever way of ensuring that Nepal's
engagement with India is at their convenience.
All major
political movements of Nepal in recent years have been at least partly hosted -
by default or otherwise - in India. Both the ''Jan-Andolan I'' of 1990 (which
replaced absolute Monarchy with Constitutional
Monarchy) and ''Jan-Andolan 2'' of 2006 - that overthrew Gyanendra's brief tryst with ''Direct
Rule'' (staging a "Royal Coup" as it were - taking advantage of the
political instability caused by the Maoist War) were ''mid-wifed'' by India.
Similarly, it is no state secret that, the Maoist movement underwent a
surrogate pregnancy in the fertile Indo-Gangetic plains and many Maosist
leaders frequently operated out of Indian "safe-houses".
India's imprint was unmistakable in the interim Constitution
that of 2007 - after the elimination of Monarchy and establishment of the
Republic, It was widely considered a progressive and inclusive document - which
the incumbent Constituent Assembly would only improve upon.
In the protracted exercise that followed lasting almost 7 - the
new Nepali lawmakers came up with a document that was good in parts, but
conspicuously short-changing the 'plains people' - Madhesis, Jan-jatis and
Tharus - virtually dismembering of the region by a vertical dissection of the
provinces dramatically reducing their 'Direct Representation' in Parliament.
The political intent of such a retrograde move was not
difficult to gauge. Historically the hills people (especially the Royalty,
Ranas and Upper Classes of Kathmandu) have been scornful towards the Madhesis -
viewing them as "half-Indians" much like illegal immigrants. However,
over time Madhesis have emerged as a very large constituency and at the end of the "Maoist War" - which they had solidly backed - and a political
force that could at some stage challenge the dominance of the Kathmandu
political nobility. Cutting the Madhesis
to size would, therefore, mean limiting India's influence as well.
This is where probably the Nepali politicians overplayed
their hand or as some would go to the extent of saying - tried to be
"clever by half". As should have been anticipated, this set the Terai
ablaze in an agitation that has already claimed many lives. Then there is the
infamous blockade - which Nepalis believes has been imposed (or, at least,
inspired) by India to choke them of essential supplies.
The Kathmandu political and intellectual elite (yes, Nepal
has its own version of Lutyens' power figures) are pitching this as a 'Nepal Vs
India' stand-off. Luckily not everyone in Nepal are inclined to take such a
blinkered position. Many respected voices - who can't be dismissed as Indian
''agents'', are speaking up on the inequities of the new constitution and also
for the cause of the plains people.
While fingers are being pointed at recent ''mismanagement'' - alleging India
had got its eye off the ball temporarily from its backyard - given other global
diplomatic distractions. - I would venture to suggest the damage was already done in the 2013 elections -
which fractured the Madhesi mandate with various splinter groups emerging in
the region. The Indian establishment could have engaged more proactively at
that stage and use its considerable influencing and persuasion powers to see the Madhesi block remained intact to
have adequate representation in the new Constituent Assembly. India failed to
chaperone to its logical end the journey it was privileged to flag-off in 2006.
It is debatable whether an earlier intervention would have
had an impact given the fact that the major political parties were moving as
per a well aligned plan. Whether India is tacitly supporting or silently
stoking these protests is a subject for another day's debate. But, this
strategy of passive stand-off - is, perhaps, the best India could do in the
present circumstances without taking any other precipitating steps.
Obviously, a lot of posturing taking place - with the Madhesi
leadership threatening an extended battle. While I do not subscribe to the
extreme position that the contempt of the erstwhile Royalty and the
post-democracy political nobility for Madhesis - as that of West Pakistanis
towards the erstwhile East-Pakistanis, Madhes is definitely a distinct and
sizeable ethno-geographic entity that can be alienated only at Nepal's own
peril.
Without the Terai, Nepal can't be a viable economic entity. It
is the most productive region of the country with the majority of the country's
industries. Agriculture . The
main trade corridor of the country stretches from Biratnagar in the East to Nepalgunj.
Whether - Tourism, Gorkha pensions and remittances of Nepalis working abroad
and, of course, Foreign Aid will be able to sustain the hills economy is a
question only Lord Pashupati may be able to answer. Without access through the
Terai - the rest of Nepal would become only more 'land-locked' - as many areas
of the hills can be accesses only by air, arduous treks or via Terai.
As a very senior retired Nepal hand of the Indian government - who must remain
unnamed - wrote to me in a private response to another article::
"While unfortunate, it may have provided the bahun leadership of
the three parties a reality check - even as they were all set to ride roughshod
over the Madhesis- women, Janjatis and Tharus. History may well judge that at
the cost of some popularity, India acted as a welcome catalyst".
In the same vein, Nepali Congress'
decision to contest - albeit unsuccessfully - both the posts of Prime Minister and President is significant -
as it signals there is an alternative viewpoint within the Parliament.
It would be a major political miscalculation by Nepal to
believe India can remain aloof or staved off from developments in a strategically important
stretch contiguous with its heartland. It would also be disingenuous to term
India's interest in ensuring a fair-deal for the people in the Terai planes as
'hegemonic,' interference.
In that direction, Nepal's new Deputy Prime Minister Kamal
Thapa's visit to Delhi - without waiting for ''who blinks first'' - has at
least opened up a window for breaking the impasse. Even after Monday's
unfortunate denouement at Raxaul - when one person of Indian origin was killed
and several injured in police action - Thapa's reactions were encouraging. He
is one person in the ruling establishment who has roots in the Terai - being an
MP from Makwanpur. Hopefully, all
stakeholders will soon get back to the table to rewrite a solution that will
stand the test of time. Years down the line - the blockade will probably be
remembered only as a minor blip in an old familial affair.
Article originally published in +Swarajya Click here to read
No comments:
Post a Comment