Protecting our national interests in view of the growing influence of China and India as well as the engagement of other global powers like the US and EU is Nepal’s most pressing concern.
With the recent formal visit of Nepali Prime Minister Prachanda to India from May 31 to June 3, 2023, this topic has gained even greater attention.
The visit is of utmost importance given Nepal’s faltering economy, which is characterized by falling income, a widening trade imbalance, and meager exports relative to imports (with a ratio of 1:10).
Due to its close closeness to India on a geographical, cultural, and religious level, Nepal needs financial support now more than ever.
Currently, the unexplained balance( unaccounted balance) of the federal, municipal, associations, and committees has increased while Nepal’s gross domestic product has declined by 0.73 percent.
Concerns regarding the efficacy of federalism in Nepal and its detrimental effects on the economy are raised by this worrying trend.
The problem is made worse by the fact that a large number of young people are leaving the nation in search of work and better educational possibilities overseas.
Nepal may choose to focus on boosting use of the Siliguri Corridor, a vital route for Nepal’s economic development with Bangladesh, rather than seeking complete control of the Kalapani region.
Similar to how European and Japanese nations are now doing, Nepal will experience difficulties in attracting foreign labor for economic growth as birth rates decrease and the demographic composition of the country changes.
Furthermore, social media platforms like TikTok have developed into potent instruments for influencing public opinion through populist narratives and general dissatisfaction with Nepal’s governance systems, which is driven by a lack of faith in governmental institutions.
Despite these bleak conditions, there is some optimism because to the involvement of young people in politics.
Major deal during Prachanda’s visit to India
Several significant agreements between Nepal and India were completed during Prachanda’s visit. These agreements cover the construction of the Lower Arun project, the Phukot Karnali Hydroelectric Project, and India’s promise to buy 1,000 MW of power from Nepal every year for the following 10 years.
Additionally, the Indian government has agreed to support the first-ever trilateral power exchange between Bangladesh, Nepal, and India, enabling the export of Nepali electricity up to 40 MW to Bangladesh.
These business agreements are in keeping with the joint vision statement between Nepal and India for cooperation in the power sector (concluded in April 2022), which places emphasis on the involvement of Indian businesses in financially sound renewable energy projects in Nepal.
Through these activities, the use of Nepal’s water resources is subtly barred from other parties, most notably China.
India’s unwillingness to supply explosives for the construction of dams and its refusal to buy power produced by Chinese investments or contracts, as shown by the Bhairahwa International Airport and Pokhara International Airport projects, are examples of this exclusionary posture(India is reluctant to provide air routes that are necessary to operate these two freshly built airports and drive down the cost of flight).
The Indian Ministry of External Affairs’ press release left out any reference to air route problems. This indicates that there were no discussions on the subject during this PM Prachanda’s visit to India.
The future viability of both airports is significantly impacted by the Ministry of External Affairs of India’s Press Release’s exclusion of air route concerns.
The viability of running these airports is severely threatened by the lack of suitable air connections. Furthermore, because Pokhara International Airport bears a 2% debt, Nepal has a significant obstacle in producing the necessary cash.
The generation of Rs 1.5 billion in yearly income is necessary to maintain Pokhara International Airport’s operational sustainability and financial viability. This significant quantity is required to pay operational costs as well as loans related to the building’s development.
The hotly contested Pancheshwor Multipurpose Project (PMP), also known as the Mahakali Treaty, was brought up during bilateral meetings between Nepal and India, with a mutual commitment to finish the Detailed Project Report within a three-month period.
Since the PMP was established in 1996, there have been several difficulties with its execution, most of which are due to misconceptions about the guiding principle of “Water is 50-50 and Mahakali River is common”.
The development of the project has also been hampered by India’s worries about water sharing scheme and its economic advantages as a lower riparian nation.
Power export to Bangladesh and the prosperity of Eastern Nepal
There are glimmerings of promise for Nepal amid geopolitical conflicts, notably in relation to the delivery of power to Bangladesh.
This is a chance to expand international commerce outside India and could boost economic growth in Eastern Nepal.
Biratnagar’s lost grandeur as an industrial and democratic bastion may be revived thanks to the link between the cities of Biratnagar, Dhaka, and the Koshi region, which forms a rare tri-connectivity.
Given that India has shown interest in Nepali hydropower and that energy transmission from the country’s eastern area to Bangladesh is reasonably priced, giving priority to the building of the Upper Koshi Dam( Sapta Koshi Dam) becomes essential for Nepal’s economic development.
Pointed Map and EPG
The conflict over the regions of Limpiyadhura and Kalapani has not been resolved, as may be seen on the pointed map of Nepal.
However, this matter was not discussed officially during Prachanda’s visit to India. One may argue that Nepal erred on the side of diplomacy by taking this matter up with India after including it in its national map (without mentioning disputed territory status).
After identifying this land as the disputed territory, only then these concerns need to have been brought up in India.
This left the Nepali side in a pickle because there was no use in bringing up the issue with India if it was already shown on our official map as undisputed territory.
In this circumstance, we must advocate for the removal of the army installation from the Kalapani region. But under the circumstances of the present geopolitical situation, this is not feasible.
The Kalapani region is a suitable high hill zone for overseeing Tibet and is strategically much more significant. Given Nepal’s limited military resources, it appears hard for us to get a security guarantee from China for India.
Politicizing these issues will do nothing except impede development. In order to strengthen Nepal’s state coffers and break away from the cycle of poverty, we must approach the “New India” with knowledge and smart strategies, prioritizing economic priorities.
Nepal may choose to focus on boosting use of the Siliguri Corridor, a vital route for Nepal’s economic development with Bangladesh, rather than seeking complete control of the Kalapani region.
The 1947 “non-attacking” treaty that Nepal, India and Britain signed is also significant. This agreement emphasizes Nepal’s historical ties to the two countries while forbidding them from going to war with one another.
India decided to take a quiet attitude after realizing the importance of this pact. Their assessment of Nepal’s inclusion of their region on the official map as an act of “cartographic aggression” explains their strategic approach.
On the other side, Nepal emphasizes the protection of its sovereignty and the defense of its national interests, viewing this issue as a source of pride.
In light of these conflicting viewpoints, India’s decision to keep quiet might be viewed as a strategic move intended to control the complex dynamics surrounding this subject.
The Eminent Persons Group’s (EPG) mission to reform the 1950 treaty and improve bilateral relations has been hampered by the provocative remarks made by a Nepali member of the EPG on the eve of Prachanda’s visit to India, suggesting that India would be willing to annex Nepal and the necessity of constructing a fence along the Nepal-India border.
One of the EPG members made an inflammatory remark, and it was extremely detrimental because no formal EPG issues were raised at the Modi-Prachada meeting. Such claims have brought the EPG to a standstill.
Conclusion
It is important to admit that there are many intricate problems with the relationship between Nepal and India.
Further, it will help to breaks the three-generation-old stereotype of “Bahadur” by preventing rural Karnali youth from becoming stuck in a cycle of restricted options in Indian labor market.
Politicizing these issues will do nothing except impede development. In order to strengthen Nepal’s state coffers and break away from the cycle of poverty, we must approach the “New India” with knowledge and smart strategies, prioritizing economic priorities.
India’s strategic advantage has been boosted by Modi’s leadership, which has taken use of the country’s advantageous location, worldwide clout, and booming diaspora to position it as an up-and-coming world power.
Despite the serious problems affecting Dalits and minorities in India, Modi’s leadership has helped him overtake Pandit Nehru as the country’s second-most admired statesman.
Nehru institutionalized the nation and Manmohan Singh shaped its modern economy at this crucial juncture in its history.
India’s status as an undeniable growing force in the globe has been cemented by Modi’s skillful blending of these factors and worldwide branding enhancement of India’s stature on the world stage.
Given our common cultural, religious, economic, and geographic ties as well as India’s recent cultural and civilizational revival, dealing with this changing India requires a deliberate and intelligent approach.
Economic cooperation must be prioritized if Nepal is to grow sustainably. It aids in income generation for the government of Nepal, breaking the cycle of poverty and allowing people to escape a life of hand-to-mouth subsistence.
Further, it will help to breaks the three-generation-old stereotype of “Bahadur” by preventing rural Karnali youth from becoming stuck in a cycle of restricted options in Indian labor market.
(Note: The writer sought assistance from ChatGPT and other AI platforms to rectify grammatical errors and enhance clarity. The writer hereby declares that the content is original and self-written.)
Comment