Nepali Prime Minister K P Sharma Oli’s six-day visit to India took place at a time when bilateral ties between the two countries had reached a low point on account of the Madhesis’ agitation against the newly promulgated Constitution. The agitation has taken the lives of over 50 eople, leading the Madhesis to block all the crucial entry points on borders with India. This in turn resulted in a shortage of essential commodities in Nepal. Unfortunately, the Nepali government felt that it was at the behest of the Indian government that the entry points were blocked, causing serious strain in the bilateral ties. It was in this context that the visit of Oli assumed significance in dispelling the misunderstanding between India and Nepal.
Since the Modi government came to power in May 2014, New Delhi has reoriented its foreign policy to boost bilateral ties with Nepal. For, relations between New Delhi and Kathmandu during the 10 years of the UPA government had reached an all-time low, with all mainstream political parties having raised doubts over India’s commitment towards facilitating the constitution-making process in Nepal, despite the fact that India had played a crucial role in ensuring the success of Jan Andolan-II.
Another reason for the Modi government to engage Kathmandu at the highest political level was China’s increasing investment in the infrastructure, energy and other sectors of Nepal. There is a consensus among sections of Indian strategists and experts that as Pakistan already enjoyed goodwill with some sections of Nepali people, China’s involvement in the Himalayan country could facilitate the emergence of a China-Nepal Nexus against India. The Modi government also rightly realised the need to sustain the dialogue process with Nepal to ensure that the interests of the people of the Madhesi region, who have close cultural and family ties with the people of Bihar and UP, should be reflected in its new Constitution.
The first signal of the new Union government’s desire to deepen the bilateral ties with Nepal appeared at the time when Prime Minister Narendra Modi invited all the heads of the government of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) nations for his swearing-in-ceremony. Since then, New Delhi has taken many steps towards renewing relations with Kathmandu. In July 2014, External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj visited Nepal, setting in the dialogue process between the two countries. Later, Modi became the first Indian Prime Minister in the last 17 years to visit Nepal twice — in August and November 2014. His visit was viewed as historic in elevating India-Nepal relations to a new height, with India making announcements of providing a soft credit line of US $1 billion for purposes of infrastructure development, irrigation and energy projects.
When Nepal faced a massive earthquake in April 2015, India immediately sent its forces to join the rescue efforts in the country. Indian media also went to cover the rescue operation.
However, Nepal did not like the presence of Indian media on its soil, charging the Indian government with indulging in a cheap public relations exercise. The Nepalis described coverage of the earthquake by India media as “insensitive” and “intrusive.” What is more, Indian search and rescue teams were asked to leave Nepal. Indeed, Nepal’s reaction embarrassed India. Yet, the India government acted in a mature manner by not openly expressing its disappointment over the unexpected conduct of Nepal.
Even before the bilateral ties could recover from Kathmandu’s mishandling of the earthquake episode, Nepal faced an unprecedented political turmoil, as people of the Madhesi region — the southern part of Nepal — began an agitation against the new Constitution promulgated by the Constituent Assembly (CA)-II in September 2015. Despite the claim of the CA-II that the constitution, in the making for the last seven years, had not only transformed Nepal from an officially Hindu monarchy to a secular and federal state composed of seven states, but also protected the interests and rights of all communities of Nepali society, the agitators argued that their rights and interests had been completely ignored in it. In particular, the Madhesis and Tharus felt sidelined in the entire constitution-making process. They argued that the boundaries of the states had been demarked in the Constitution in such a way that their voice would be neglected because they were now in a minority in every state. This is evident from the fact that despite their share being more than 50 per cent of Nepal’s population, the Madhesi region got only 65 seats in a 165-member Parliament, while the hill and mountain region got 100, with its share being less than 50 per cent. Further, the new constitution said that only citizens by descent would be entitled to hold the posts of President, Vice-President, Prime Minister, Chief Justice, Speaker of Parliament, etc. This clause was seen as discriminatory for the large number of Madhesis who had acquired citizenship both by birth or naturalisation. Unlike in the interim Constitution, the new Constitution did not accord equal citizenship rights to Nepali women marrying foreigners, in comparison to Nepali men marrying foreigners.
Soon, the political unrest in Nepal engulfed India as well, as the Madhesi people blocked all the major entry points from India to Nepal, bringing a complete stop to goods movement. Nepali media misinformed its people that India had an invisible hand in the blockage of the entry points. In fact, rumours were spread that the Indian government was helping the Madhesi people with the idea that a pro-Madhesi stand would help the BJP in the Bihar Assembly elections. Oli, himself, accused India of creating an “unofficial blockade” in Nepal and raised the issue with UN secretary general Ban Ki-moon. India strongly rejected Nepal’s allegations that it had blockaded the checkpoints, arguing that it was on the Nepali side that entry had been blocked, not on the Indian side. A months-long agitation led to a huge scarcity of essential goods and petroleum products in Nepal. Political parties also started criticising Oli for not acting effectively to end the Madhesi agitation. In addition, Nepal also realised the limitations of China in providing fuel and essential goods on account of poor road connectivity between the two countries. Keeping in mind these factors, Oli agreed to amend the constitution.
Consequently, in January three articles of the new Constitution — Article 42, Article 84 and Article 286 — were amended to facilitate higher representation in government bodies on the basis of proportional inclusion of the Madhesis. India described the amendments as “welcome developments,” hoping that other outstanding issues would be similarly addressed in a constructive spirit. The agitating groups also removed the blockade at the checkpoints, leading to resumption of goods movements. At the same time, India sent a high-level all-party delegation led by Swaraj to pay homage to the late former Nepali Prime Minister Sushil Koirala. India’s gesture further helped in easing the tension between the two countries.
On its side, within hours of the end of the blockade Nepal announced the visit of Oli to India. The visit of Oli has witnessed significant progress between the two countries. While Modi called Nepal’s Constitution a “major achievement,” Oli said that the main mission behind the bilateral visit to India was to “clear the misunderstanding.” Oli also said that his country was and would remain a “reliable” friend of India and that he wanted to “move forward in the relationship, which is not man-made but entirely natural and civilisational.” The two leaders reviewed the bilateral ties and signed seven agreements. These agreements included one on utilisation of an Indian grant of US$ 250 million to Nepal for post-earthquake reconstruction in housing, health, education and cultural sectors. The two leaders also expressed their commitment to not allow the border between the two nations to be misused by terrorists and criminals.
Oli’s visit has significantly mitigated the recent differences between the two countries. The engagement between New Delhi and Kathmandu has underscored the Modi government’s priority towards maintaining good ties with its neighbours. Hence, it can be hoped that the two countries will be able to attain the level of the goodwill generated following the visits of Modi in 2014.
The author is an ICSSR Doctoral Fellow at Pondicherry University
E-mail: sumitjha83@gmail.com