Geopolitics

Nepal Policy A Monumental Blunder?
Star Rating Loader Please wait...
Issue Vol 22.2 Apr-Jun2007 | Date : 24 Nov , 2010

The CPN (M)- Prachanda-led Maoists- which attended the CCMPOSA, along with eight other Maoist outfits of South Asia, was a party to the following decisions:

  • The CCOMPOSA would deepen and advance the new democratic revolutions in different countries of South Asia turning into a flaming field of people’s revolutionary urges and “burn to ashes imperialism (particularly US imperialism), Indian expansionism and all reaction in the region. (emphasis added)
  • Called on the oppressed people of South Asian countries to join the struggle against Indian expansionism and particularly against the main enemy US imperialism.
  • On Nepal, the resolution said that US hatched up conspiracies with Indian expansionism to kill the new democratic revolution in Nepal have been blocked

All this has risen to natural apprehensions that Prachanda may be following the typical Maoist path – during the second world war, Mao Tse-Tung joined the so-called United Front with the Chinese nationalists led by Chiang Kai-Shek; but once the war ended and the Japanese were defeated, he fought and drove away the nationalists to Taiwan. Now that the King has been literally overthrown, the democrats of Nepal could well be Prachanda’s next targets.

As it is, the present arrangement between the seven party-alliance and the Maoists and the consequent interim constitution do not reflect the aspirations of all the Nepalese. Besides, critics have pointed out major flaws in the interim constitution. For instance, through gerrymandering, it gives disproportionately high representation to certain regions of the state while denying the people living in the Terai Region, derogatorily referred to as ‘Madheshis’, their rightful share in governance. They are believed to constitute more than fifty per cent of the population of Nepal. If true representative elections were to be held in Nepal, these Madheshis would surely hold the levers of power. However, whereas the hill constituencies with hardly six to eight thousand voters send one representative to the Parliament, almost seventy to eighty thousand voters elect one representative in the Terai region.

Administratively present day Nepal is divided into 75 districts. Out of these 55 districts are hilly and snow clad, and despite being larger in size, are sparsely populated. The northern border of many of these districts have borders Tibet. The 20 Southern districts have common borders with West Bengal, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and Uttaranchal in India. The mother tongue of the sons of the soil in these 20 districts is Maithili, Bhojpuri, Avdhi, and other dialects of Hindi, but they interact with each other in Hindi and have Hindi as their common language of communication. These people not only speak Hindi but are also culturally and ethnically closest to India. And this is something that has not gone well with the dominant political elites of Nepal, including the Maoists. Policy makers in Nepal and India must not lose sight of imperatives of geopolitics. While the main threat that Maoists held was the siege or capture of capital Kathmandu, the Madhesis can economically strangulate Nepal as most of the supply arteries from India passes through the Terai region. Geographically, the other neighbour of Nepal, China, is ill-placed to be an effective alternative. Incidentally, the Maoists have relatively lesser influence in the Terai region; they are more powerful in the hilly countryside. As a result, there are organisations like Madheshi People’s Right Forum and (MPRF) and Janatantrik Terai Mukti Morcha, which are not happy with the “flawed” interim constitution. They have regularly organised “bandhs” and paralysed the normal life as a matter of protest. They demand genuine devolution of power and rights to preserve their language and culture. How, then, the Leftist-dominated Nepalese polity, which obviously does not like Terai region’s special affinity with India, will reconcile with these demands is going to be a major challenge as far as peace and stability in Nepal is concerned.

This brings, finally, the question of the India-factor. The relationship between India and Nepal is always unique, given the fact that the two share an open border. And this border has been used by anti-India elements to access India. India’s concerns arise from the fact that eastern Nepal which borders the narrow sensitive Siliguri corridor connecting the entire north-east to the rest of India, is being used by Pakistan’s ISI to sponsor insurgency in the north-east and transfer small arms and contraband. In other parts of India too, it is reported that the large quantities of weapons and ammunition seized, including RDX, have been traced to the Nepalese route. Secondly, and this we have already noted, the Maoists of Nepal have always had close relations with their counterparts in India, particularly the dangerous Maoist Communist Centre (MCC) in Bihar and the People’s War Group (PWG) in Andhra Pradesh. With the twin forces of the ISI and Maoists, who now rule the country, in its territory, Nepal will attract all the more attention in India now onwards.

Prachanda, of course, is thanking India these days for its positive role in legitimising the Maoists in Nepal. But, will he reciprocate? Given the above-mentioned resolution of the Fourth Conference of CCOMPOSA, that is doubtful. Besides, Prachanda’s recent statements that “the Kashmiri people should also get their right of self determination – the right to decide their fate and this applies to the people of north-east India” (though he made it clear that self determination does not exactly mean separation) and that “Nepal should maintain equidistance from India and China” – something that would defy history – are certainly food for thought for India.

1 2
Rate this Article
Star Rating Loader Please wait...
The views expressed are of the author and do not necessarily represent the opinions or policies of the Indian Defence Review.

About the Author

Prakash Nanda

is a journalist and editorial consultant for Indian Defence Review. He is also the author of “Rediscovering Asia: Evolution of India’s Look-East Policy.”

More by the same author

Post your Comment

2000characters left