Nepal’s Constitution-making crisis
by Sandipan Sharma
Nobody knows what would be more galling for the BJP: Nepal's refusal
to remain a Hindu state and instead turn secular, or Prime Minister
Narendra Modi's inability to influence the Himalayan kingdom in spite of
his two high-profile visits, stirring speeches, liberal economics and
earthquake diplomacy.
Nepal's decision to adopt a new Constitution, in spite of objections
and diplomatic pressure from India, is turning into a major
embarrassment for the Modi government. The sequence of events unfolding
in Nepal has put India in the unenviable position of an intrusive bully
who is being continuously rebuffed by a much smaller neighbour.
The ungainly spat being played out in public has already caught the
world's attention. “Modi makes a lot of overseas trips, but is he a
diplomatic failure with India's neighbours?” asks Washington Post,
arguing that the PM's sojourns have not yielded results.
Ungainly spat
“Just a year after Modi's high-profile visit to Nepal — where he
performed an elaborate prayer ritual at a Hindu temple, gifted
sandalwood worth US$600,000 to the temple, offered a US$1 billion line
of credit and addressed the country's Constituent Assembly — comes the
news that Nepal ignored many of New Delhi's inputs in writing its new
Constitution,” says the newspaper.
Adding to India's discomfort is the Nepalese reaction to the
neighbour's efforts to tweak the new constitution. For two days, the
hashtag #BackoffIndia trended worldwide on twitter, with Nepali citizens
asking Modi to lay off. “Tell Modi don't mess around no more: this time
strictly not,” fumed Samira Sami on the popular Nepal Times website.
India's reported advice to Nepal for making seven changes in the
Constitution has elicited an angrier response. Nepali people have
retorted by advising India to first settle its own internal disputes —
with Kashmiris and Gorkhas — before poking its nose in the neighbourhood.
The relations came to a boil when the Constituent Assembly of Nepal
passed the new Constitution defining the Hindu-majority nation as a
secular republic and divided it into seven federal provinces. The
division is being opposed by people living in the Terai, especially the
Madhesis and Tharus. They believe the new boundaries will lead to their
marginalization in Nepal.
The Madhesis are mostly Brahmins, Bhumihars, Rajputs and people of
similar clans residing in Nepal's central Terai. They are both
originally from Nepal and migrants from adjoining Indian states like UP
and Bihar. They have close social and business links with people in
Indian states. India sees them as a vocal support group and a buffer
against any pro-Chinese tilt by the Nepal Government.
Since the 1980s, there have been sporadic demands in Nepal for a
separate Madhes as a single province. Since this has been ignored in the
new Constitution, the Madhesis believe it is part of a conspiracy to
marginalise them politically.
Pro-China
Apart from the Madhesis, the Tharus in the western plains and the
Janjatis in eastern Nepal are also against the new Constitution. Several
people have died in violent protests across Nepal against the new
Constitution. India fears this may lead to large scale exodus of
Madhesis and their migration to UP and Bihar.
Concerned by the development, India despatched its foreign secretary
S. Jaishankar to speak to Nepal's leaders about the concerns of the
Madhesis. Jaishankar also invited leaders of an alliance of Madhesis,
who have been leading protests against the new Constitution to the
Indian Embassy. Earlier, there were reports that Modi has advised Nepal
against allowing "Five-10 people to decide the fate of the country."
But nothing seems to have worked. The queer Indian response of just
taking note of the Constitution passed by a two-third majority evoked
only anti-India sentiments and public derision. While the incumbent
Prime Minister Sushil Koirla has refused to address India's concerns,
his possible successor, KP Oli, has rebuffed the Modi government
publicly.
“We have not done anything against Nepali people, and why should
anyone bother about it when we have not done anything wrong,” Oli said
at a recent event. He went on to ominously add: "Let no friends be
deluded that they can do whatever they like just because this nation is
small."
History
India seems to have yet again made the classical mistake of ignoring
the neighbour's history, geography and psychology. Nepali people have
always resented India's big brother attitude and intrusion into their
affairs.
They have been wary of Indian support to the Madhesi cause — seeing
parallels between Sikkim's annexation and the unrest in Terai and have
taken pride in their freedom and independence.
The Modi government should have taken a cue from the Nepalese
reaction to the Indian media's coverage of the recent earthquake and our
boasts of providing timely relief to the victims. Perhaps the Indian
reaction to the new Constitution could have been more nuanced and
subtle.
This must be a major setback to Modi, who had energetically pursued a
‘neighbours first’ policy after becoming the PM in a bid to position
India as a regional super power and restrict Chinese influence in the
subcontinent.
After a promising beginning, India's relations with Pakistan have
touched a new low. Unfortunately, Nepal too appears headed in the same
direction.
-First Post
|