Indo-Pak tensions and Nepal
I guess you hear what you want to hear. Speaking before his parliament on August 6, a day after the Indian government announced the revocation of Jammu and Kashmir’s special constitutional status, Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan highlighted the urgent need to dial down tensions in the combustible, nuclear-armed region. With the ‘racist’ Modi government determined to ‘ethnically cleanse’ Muslims, there will be more home-made Pulwamas in India, he warned. In that case, India will again attack Pakistan, Pakistan will retaliate, and as neither side will back down, nuclear weapons could be used as a last resort. While Khan’s even-toned speech was largely hailed outside India, the Indians heard nothing but the threat of another Pulwama coming from the old arch-enemy. But as by far the weaker of the two powers in terms of conventional military strength, Khan is right that Pakistan will be more tempted to use nuclear weapons, which could then prompt a tit-for-tat response from India. You could argue Pakistan’s future course is not for Khan to decide. Invariably, it will be the all-powerful Pakistani military that will call the shots, including on nuclear weapons. Yet his message deserves a patient hearing.
By unilaterally changing the status of Jammu and Kashmir, India has reneged on its promise to the Kashmiris to allow them to decide their own fate. Chances are that the Hindu-Muslim divide in India will further deepen and as Khan pointed out, there is now a real risk of another confrontation between India and Pakistan. China too has already spoken of its displeasure with the change in the status quo in Ladakh, which has now been designated a union territory that will be directly administered by the center—just like J&K.
It is likely that the RAW spooks and senior BJP leaders who descended on Kathmandu some time ago had intimated to Nepali leaders India’s future course in Kashmir and its implications for Nepal. For one, India fears that after the change in Kashmir’s status, antagonized Muslims from there could make their way into Nepal, and use the open border to do harm to India. Kashmiri Muslims have been coming and settling in Nepal since the time of Prithvi Narayan Shah, to the perpetual discomfort of the Indian security establishment.
The change in J&K’s status, long backed by the RSS, is indicative that the BJP is less queasy about showing off its saffron hues. It is not inconceivable that the emboldened RSS could make another determined bid for the restoration of Nepal’s Hindu status, if not its monarchy. The immediate neighborhood has certainly been spooked. But so have China and the US and other regional and global powers. (American President Donald Trump’s offer of mediation in Kashmir now appears ill-advised.)
The message is that the new Indian leadership is ready to stake its claim in the world, through hard power if need be. Another barely concealed message is that the new India belongs exclusively to Hindus, and Muslims there will have to be satisfied with second-class status. One thing is for sure: the already troubling level of tensions in South Asia is set to further rise. The dysfunctional SAARC may now be the least of the regional worries O
I guess you hear what you want to hear. Speaking before his parliament on August 6, a day after the Indian government announced the revocation of Jammu and Kashmir’s special constitutional status, Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan highlighted the urgent need to dial down tensions in the combustible, nuclear-armed region. With the ‘racist’ Modi government determined to ‘ethnically cleanse’ Muslims, there will be more home-made Pulwamas in India, he warned. In that case, India will again attack Pakistan, Pakistan will retaliate, and as neither side will back down, nuclear weapons could be used as a last resort. While Khan’s even-toned speech was largely hailed outside India, the Indians heard nothing but the threat of another Pulwama coming from the old arch-enemy. But as by far the weaker of the two powers in terms of conventional military strength, Khan is right that Pakistan will be more tempted to use nuclear weapons, which could then prompt a tit-for-tat response from India. You could argue Pakistan’s future course is not for Khan to decide. Invariably, it will be the all-powerful Pakistani military that will call the shots, including on nuclear weapons. Yet his message deserves a patient hearing.
By unilaterally changing the status of Jammu and Kashmir, India has reneged on its promise to the Kashmiris to allow them to decide their own fate. Chances are that the Hindu-Muslim divide in India will further deepen and as Khan pointed out, there is now a real risk of another confrontation between India and Pakistan. China too has already spoken of its displeasure with the change in the status quo in Ladakh, which has now been designated a union territory that will be directly administered by the center—just like J&K.
It is likely that the RAW spooks and senior BJP leaders who descended on Kathmandu some time ago had intimated to Nepali leaders India’s future course in Kashmir and its implications for Nepal. For one, India fears that after the change in Kashmir’s status, antagonized Muslims from there could make their way into Nepal, and use the open border to do harm to India. Kashmiri Muslims have been coming and settling in Nepal since the time of Prithvi Narayan Shah, to the perpetual discomfort of the Indian security establishment.
The change in J&K’s status, long backed by the RSS, is indicative that the BJP is less queasy about showing off its saffron hues. It is not inconceivable that the emboldened RSS could make another determined bid for the restoration of Nepal’s Hindu status, if not its monarchy. The immediate neighborhood has certainly been spooked. But so have China and the US and other regional and global powers. (American President Donald Trump’s offer of mediation in Kashmir now appears ill-advised.)
The message is that the new Indian leadership is ready to stake its claim in the world, through hard power if need be. Another barely concealed message is that the new India belongs exclusively to Hindus, and Muslims there will have to be satisfied with second-class status. One thing is for sure: the already troubling level of tensions in South Asia is set to further rise. The dysfunctional SAARC may now be the least of the regional worries O
Disorderly house
The Nepali Congress and the RJPN, the two main opposition forces in the federal House of Representatives, have been obstructing the parliament since July 9. They want answers to the ‘extrajudicial killings’ of Biplob-led CPN cadre Kumar Poudel (whom the police supposedly killed in a shoot-out) and RJPN’s Saroj Narayan Singh (who was killed in police firing following a violent protest). Both these incidents took place in Sarlahi district. There are discrepancies in the police account of Poudel’s death, and some evidence that he was killed in cold blood. Likewise, the police arguably used excess force in quelling the riot in which Singh lost his life.
No doubt these are important concerns. But there is also a self-serving streak to this NC-led house obstruction. Following the restoration of democracy in 1990, the Congress used to complain about the ‘undemocratic’ practice of the then CPN-UML to repeatedly obstruct the house. (In 2000, the UML had obstructed the lower house for 57 days in a row.) But now that the Congress is in the opposition, it is doing the same thing, and it is the former UML party members who complain of the ‘undemocratic’ nature of the Congress. In reality, in the nearly three decades of post-1990 democratic practice, none of our major political parties has been serious about upholding the sanctity of the legislature.
Typically, important decisions are taken behind closed doors by a small coterie of top party leaders, and the parliament is used only to rubberstamp their decisions. Interestingly, only when the opposition has to obstruct the house do their MPs bother to turn up. On most other days, the parliament is deserted, with not even a third of the MPs in attendance. And nearly all the top leaders and ministers are missing as well. In fact, in the broader public imagination, the parliament has been reduced to a venue where there is unanimous agreement on perks and privileges for the MPs—and on little else.
But the parliament is where people’s chosen representatives discuss the problems and concerns of their constituencies. These may be related to lack of drinking water, a faulty transmission line that is disrupting electricity, or a patchy bit of road that is hindering transport—the issues of real concern for most folks. By sidelining these issues our MPs are also abdicating their core responsibility.
Marginal gains
Deputy Prime Minister Uprendra Yadav, who is also the chairman of the Samajbadi Party Nepal, has repeatedly warned of quitting the federal government if Prime Minister KP Oli continues to ignore the demand of constitution amendment. His party co-chairman Baburam Bhattarai has been goading him to do so since the merger between his Naya Shakti and Yadav’s Sanghiya Samajbadi Forum two months ago. Bhattarai believes time has come to hit the street to force a change in the constitution in favor of marginalized groups like Madhesis, Dalits and Janajatis. Yadav is not convinced.
This is partly because there has been no headway in another much-discussed merger between Yadav’s party and the Rastriya Janata Party Nepal, which have 17 seats each in the federal parliament. (They are also the first and second biggest parties in Province 2, respectively.) Yadav is unsure a street action will succeed, especially without the RJPN merger, against the mighty Nepal Communist Party that has near absolute control over government machinery. Much better to continue to nudge the PM to honor his pledge on constitution amendment from inside the Oli cabinet—a position which with all the added perks for himself as well as his party—then quit in haste, giving up the coveted DPM post and pushing his new party into uncertainty.
As things stand, a merger between Samajbadi Party and the RJPN looks difficult. There are far too many big egos to accommodate under a single roof. Even within the RJPN, which has six heads, it is proving to be difficult to maintain unity among the quarrelling lot. Besides, Yadav does not seem ready to quit the Oli government, an RJPN precondition for merger talks. Meanwhile, the RJPN has started engaging fringe ethnic parties to mount a collective struggle for the rights of marginalized communities.
The problem for these small outfits right now is that identity politics is losing ground in Nepal. Marginalized groups have been accommodated in state institutions through reservations and quotas. Leaderships of political parties are more heterogeneous too. Not enough, those batting for identity politics may contend. They may be right, and they may eventually get their chance as the disenchantment with the two-third Oli government grows. Yet with the next set of elections many-many years away, and most of their youthful cadre-base now out toiling in the Gulf, they have no valid way of immediately regaining their lost political ground. The astute Yadav seems to know exactly what he is doing.
Testing times
close relations can be easily strained. The cordial people-to-people and government-level ties and the open border between Nepal and India connect the two countries in a way few other neighbors are bound together. Yet the sheer disparity in their sizes and populations also means they can never have a truly reciprocal relation. One marker of this disparity is what crosses (or does not cross) the open border on a daily basis.
In 2015-16, nothing did, as India seemed determined to teach the Nepali leaders a lesson for not honoring its wishes about the new constitution. Today, even though Indian pesticide-laden fruits and vegetables have been found to be harming the health of Nepalis, they are entering Nepal unhindered. Initially, following a recommendation of the Ministry of Commerce, the government had stopped their import. But after pressure from the Indian Embassy, which accused Nepal of imposing ‘non-tariff barriers’ on its goods, the trucks carrying the greens have been allowed back in. (It remains to be seen whether the latest Supreme Court ruling on resuming mandatory testing is enforced.)
India’s business-like approach to this humanitarian concern is deplorable. In the name of protecting its businesses, it is literally playing with the health of millions of Nepalis. Highhanded gestures like these do grievous harm to Nepal-India ties. To be fair, it was always going to be tough on any Nepali government, however strong, to resist the Indian pressure. Even so, the easy cave-in of the Oli government on this life and death issue was disappointing.
There seems to have been no prior consultations with India on the matter. The new provision mandates that all imported foodstuffs be tested for their pesticide levels. Yet there are few functional laboratories on the Nepal-India border areas to do so. The foodstuffs imported from India had started rotting on the stranded trucks. Ideally, Nepal should have first fully equipped these labs before stopping the edibles from India. But there was also no time to think things through as the health of millions of Nepalis was on the line. Now, rather than pointing fingers at each other, the two sides should sit down and find an amicable solution—and soon. After only just coming back on an even keel, Nepal-India relations cannot afford another rupture. Nor is it right to force people to keep consuming poison
