|
Indocentric view |
|
Home | About us | Contact Us | Subscribe | FAQs |
|
From Absolute Monarchy to Republic in Nepal: Implications for India Dr. Tridib Chakraborti and Mohor Chakraborty
The recent change of guard in Nepal has drastically altered the geo-political and security considerations of the South Asian region. The economic deprivation of the common masses of Nepal over the years has been a major determinant in leading the Maoist Party (CPN-M) into limelight in the wake of the just-conducted elections. However, what role this Party, under the leadership of Prachanda, will play for moulding the future of Nepal remains the most pertinent question in recent months. India’s experience of the Maoist groups has not been a kaleidoscope of sweet memories. Moreover, its past relations with Nepal have not depicted a sugar-coated portrait in the annals of history, since it was based on mutual suspicion and mistrust. Nevertheless, in the changed political perspective, the manner in which India, being the leader of the South Asian region and an emerging economic power in the new global order, will act with this new leadership in its neighbourhood remains a million-dollar question as well.
Nepal’s Maoists in the Political Mainstream: April 2006 (Jana Andolan II) - April 2008 (Constituent Assembly Elections) Padmaja Murthy
Jana Andolan II of April 2006 marks the beginning of a decisive phase in implementing the agenda of socio-economic-political transformation in Nepal. The events that followed have brought to the fore, people and issues that have resulted in changing permanently the manner in which politics will henceforth be conducted in Nepal. One of the most important developments of this period was bringing the Maoists into the political mainstream. This important process has given rise to certain important developments. First, the Maoists democratic credentials have been tested with mixed results. At times the Maoists have been a factor of stability and on other occasions their actions have led to instability and uncertainty. Second, influenced by the Maoists methods, the marginalised, janajatis and Madhesis organized themselves to effectively influence the course of events and attain definite assurances on an inclusive society. In asserting their demands, many of them resorted to violence. Third, following Maoists persistence, Nepal has been declared a republic and the monarchy has come to an end. Fourth, the antagonistic relations between India and Nepal’s Maoists have changed resulting in trust among the two. Fifth and most important, Nepaesei politics has moved beyond individuals and parties. What has been mainstreamed is an agenda wherein inclusive politics has to be practiced and implemented by whoever comes to power. Despite their many weaknesses, the Maoists can take the credit for being the catalyst to initiate change in Nepal to make it an inclusive society. On a broader canvas, the process of bringing the Maoists to the political mainstream brings out important lessons on conflict management, conflict prevention and conflict escalation.
Dump the ancien régime Pinaki Bhattacharya
While visiting Nepal in mid-June, one could come across numerous members of the Nepalese elite who would look thunder struck and say ‘strange are ways of the common people.’ By that they mean to talk about the electoral verdict the Nepalese people have delivered. Some even lament about the ‘fickleness’ of human nature, which led the long deprived Nepalese to throw out the monarchy; and relegate the traditional parties like NC and the CPN (UML) to what should have been peripheral roles in an otherwise hugely transformative moment of Nepalese politics.
US-NEPAL Relations Esha Pandey
Has the world really come to post-Americanism? Can we do without America? These are some of the integral question, which the “new world” and the intelligentsia are pondering over. For a small landlocked country like Nepal; it is a question of survival. This article elucidates and evaluates US Nepal relations in the light of ‘Peoples’ Revolution’ and forthcoming democracy by focusing on the following issues: US aid, military assistance, Maoist insurgency and human rights concerns.
China’s inroad into Nepal Dr. Anil Kumar Mohapatra
China’s renewed interest in Nepal has been a fact. Gone are the days of 1961 and 1989 when the PRC was found to be in two different roles vis-ŕ-vis Nepal, first as a protector of Nepal when Chinese foreign Minister Chen Yi warned the outside powers not to interfere in Nepal; and second when it disappointed Nepal’s expectations that China could come to its rescue which was then reeling under economic hardships following the Indian trade blockade in 1988.China today has emerged as a great military and economic power in the world. In a changed scenario China’s ‘peripheral policy’ (policy towards its Asian neighbours) has undergone a sea change but its interests in Nepal remains intact. It wishes to see a stable and peaceful Nepal as it believes that would promote peace, stability and development in the entire region including Tibet Autonomous Region in China. China does not wish to see Nepal as a ‘failed state’ as it will have its bearing on Tibet including an insurgency threat and a possible involvement of external forces who might threaten Chinese control over Tibet. The railway line connecting Katmandu is expected to be completed within the next five years. Nepal is being persuaded to provide a transit link between China and India. With the drastic change in the political system and guard in Nepal China remains very watchful in dealing with Nepal which is strategically very important to China. Nepal successfully backed Chinese entry into SAARC as an observer against India’s wishes. The way Nepal is handling the pro-Tibet protest movements are the instances of Nepal’s fidelity to China. Last but not the least, Prachanda (the Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal’s just elected Prime Minister)’s preference in visiting China on 24th August,2008 instead of India (despite Dr. Manmohan Singh’s invitation) has been an instance of ‘tradition break’ which shows how much importance Nepal’s has conceded to China. The trip has been undertaken despite it was conveyed to him that it might send negative message to India. Now it remains to be seen how long this tryst continues between Nepal and China since China was critical of the Maoists until the other day. However very recently, before leaving for Beijing to attend the closing ceremony of the Beijing Olympics Prime Minister Prachanda has indicated that Nepal’s dealing with both the giant neighbours will be based on ‘Panchasheel Principles’ and there will be ‘Panchasheel ties’. ‘Could this stop China’s making inroads into Nepal (?)’- the Future will have the answer.
The Great Transition in Nepal: Implications for India’s Northeast Samir Kumar Das
According to the intelligence reports widely available in the public domain, some neighbouring countries - not quite known for their friendliness towards India - are out to create turmoil in a region that is otherwise strategically crucial for India’s territorial integrity. Now that Gorkha Janmukti Morcha (GJM), as we will see later, is insisting on the inclusion of Siliguri (of northern West Bengal) in the proposed map of Gorkhaland, there is nagging apprehension especially on two counts: First, Siliguri is part of the critical ‘chicken neck’ with its meager 21-kilometer width and provides the only gateway to the already troubled Northeast with its constituent eight states. Second, the demand for the creation of Gorkhaland is regarded as only a preparing ground for complete secession from India and the formation of a sovereign state in near future. If such a state were ever formed, India’s tenuous surface link with the already troubled Northeast will be completely severed. In other words, ‘Greater Nepal’, according to these intelligence sources, is actually part of a greater design of inflicting ‘a thousand cuts’ on India by some of her neighbours who have understandably developed a vested interest in fatally weakening India.
Indo-Nepal Relations: The Economic Dimensions Dr. Bharti Chhibber
India’s small neighbour in the north, Nepal is creating history these days. With the end of monarchy whose last remnants were removed with the stepping down of King Gyanendra, Nepal is moving towards a more democratic process. Economic relations between the two states often go beyond the purely economic reason influenced by the geographical proximity, geo-political issues, historical trade relations, and similarity of culture. On the geo-political front, Nepal is considered as a buffer state between India and China which increases its importance. While trying to counterbalance India’s pre-eminent position in the South Asian region, at times Nepal has tried to be friendlier with China. As for India, its regional security policy is based on the assumption of South Asia as a single strategic area. Moreover, the long open- porous border and non-existence of visa system have created an environment conducive to free trade between India and Nepal. Now with the Maoists chief at the helm of affairs as Nepal’s prime minister it is time for both India and Nepal to work on their political and economic relations with a vision that along with the continuity required also gives it a fresh perspective to make Indo-Nepal ties economically viable and beneficial to both the countries. The globalisation process, access to vast Indian market and the need for better management and exploitation of natural resources, especially for Nepal has increased the need for better relationship between the two countries.
|