| Username |
Post |
| noname |
Posted
on 09-Jan-03 06:53 AM
Lobbying: Turning India Positive
The popular jargon in Nepal-India circle: The deep-rooted commonalities in our culture play a significant role to tie up the relation between the two countries. Wrong! These commonalities jeopardize our relation. A large share of population in Nepal believes that India favors only a portion of Nepalese and even that with wrong motives. So far as the individual Indians are concerned, though they do not give a damn about Nepal collectively, the case may be even worse at personal level. Nonetheless, many Indians I have talked with keep information about Nepal but do not have any swaying view. Whereas, when Nepalese are concerned, the issue of India-Nepal relation tops the agenda in every discussion, formal or informal, and stands second only to domestic politics. One of the key issues of our political parties is relation with India. This is so, simply because, it matters for Nepal. A frown from India makes a whole lot of difference in Nepal. Hence it's in our interest to maintain good relation with India, not vice-versa.
Key issues with India
Let's leave aside our commonalities, relation from Vedic era and border sharing from long past. They are all good cause to have negative impact in relation. We should learn from the history that they sound good and effective in cultural exchange packages and literary circle but not when it comes to national policy matters. Our current issues that need to be straightened are old treaties, trade relation, Maoist problem and Bhutanese refugee problem.
But a million dollar question is: What do we really want India to do? As our arguments and views are not based on judgment from technical experts, we do not have national consensus in the issue of scraping old treaties. Kodak experience shows how poor we are when it comes in dealing trade issues with Indian authorities. Under pressure from Indian business community, India did not lift ban on Kodak Nepal products. Time and again, India pledges its support in Maoist problem and assures its non-involvement in Bhutanese refugee issue, and unfortunately neither we are going to buy that nor we are able to press our case. Be it international treaty or internal security, we simply want India to favor Nepal.
Lobbying
But what have we done to make Indian authorities favorable? The Nepal-desk in South-Block determines India-Nepal relation and it's views hardly change with the change that takes place in the government. Medical doctor turned poet turned diplomat Madhup Mohta, dour and authoritative Mira Shanker and the folks looking after Nepal desk are more aware of the situation in Nepal than any politician or even bureaucrats to that matter. Whenever one visits Nepal-desk in South-Block, they do not fail to mention Kalapani, Maoist and Bhautanese issues and it appears that they are hardly influenced by the uproar in the streets of Kathmandu.
But they listen to the voices in the power corridor of Delhi. The only exercise we need to do is to take our voices that far. The acts of raising our fists in Tundikhel and marching towards Kalapani with bare KHUKURI may serve well in entering Singh-Durbar but have no impact in those cynics positioned in a well secured building in Delhi.
The good news is we have many well-wishers who can take our voices to the power corridors of Delhi. What we need to do is to identify them, convince them and persuade them to work for the noble cause. Journalist Bhavani Sengupta, Jug Suraiya and Kuldeep Nair have very positive look towards Nepal. Influential politicians like IK Gujral, RV Paswan, Chandrashekhar, Madhu Dandawate and few others have faithfully demonstrated their support whenever we have asked for. We have many political leaders having a good personal relation with business centers and politicians of India. And obvious are the few religious leaders too who can have positive impact in BJP government. We can use them to put forward our agendas. And this is nothing new in diplomatic circle. India, China and many other countries have very well identified congressman and senior politicians to lobby their issues in the US.
Table talks alone won't yield any results unless they are preceded by a well-orchestrated diplomatic exercise. So, let's first make our cases and activate our well wishers to lobby for Nepal's cause. Bhutanese issue and Maoist problem are the two that can immediately take positive course, shall we
|
| noname |
Posted
on 09-Jan-03 06:55 AM
(..contd)
make effort to venture in this line.
|
| Free Thinker |
Posted
on 09-Jan-03 04:33 PM
Great idea . Hope it materializes. But as you pointed out we need to get our priorities straightened out first and understand what we want from them and that might take a miracle to happen.
|
| noname |
Posted
on 09-Jan-03 06:13 PM
Thanks Free Thinker. You read it and chose to post!
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 09-Jan-03 08:27 PM
nonameji,
It was a very precise observation, and thank you very much for sharing it with us.
One more from me: a friend of mine, Arindam, was IIT topper and now goes to Berkeley for Comp Sci PhD. In our casual talk, he asked me about the incident of 1988 embargo. He told me he never knew about that until recently, and he actually 'apologized' for that. His point was: Rajiv Gandhi could have never told about incident to Indian people, and that embargo was rarely reported in Indian media.
Never knew any Indian friend of mine who spoke badly of Nepal. For bad or good reason, they are even proud of Nepal and its Hinduism. There is no denying of the fact that Indo-Nepal relation should be better than what it is now, should be kept out of the whim of some guys in south block.
|
| NK |
Posted
on 09-Jan-03 08:58 PM
Testo lamo ke bhanya huh noname? It *is* startling that Indians did not know about that embargo. Does India really have a democracy or they take a page right from Kim Il of North Korea. Everything state-run and state-controlled? Dhikkar!
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 09-Jan-03 10:02 PM
I don't know what's wrong but I tried to post a message and it just disappeared.
Noname,
A great analysis. Its high time that we change our India policy and foreign policy vis-a-vis changing global context. As you brilliantly pointed out, a lot needs to be done from both sides. But before all that, we need to answer these questions:
1. What do we really want from India?
2. What are the Indian interests in Nepal?
3. What does India want?
4. Are we both clear on our national interests?
all these questions have to be answered by both sides to turn our reklations into really warm relations.
You are right there are people who are very supportive of Nepal in India. Salman Haider, IK Gujral and others, but call it our sheer misfortune that we couldn't take advantage when these people were in power. You are also right when you say, we need to do lobbying. That's probably the best way to push our national interests (if there is any) in India. India is a demoicracy, has many parties and we need to cultivate friends in politcal parties. This is what needs to be done.
I had a written a long reply but it got lost. jhyau lagne yaar.
thanks again for yoiur informed "insider's" perspective on Nepal-India relations.
|
| noname |
Posted
on 10-Jan-03 06:37 AM
Biswoji, NK and IF: Thanks for interacting.
IF, if you ever happen to 'recover' your long posting, do me the favor either to post here or to send in my email. I am old enough in SAJHALAND not to be aware of your critical thinking. In fact, I silently read your posting in SAJHA about India couple of weeks back!
NK, yours is about 'century ahead' than mine (believe me, I counted!) :). But you deserve an excerpt. Here it goes (for NK only!!):
**Abstract **
Two boys were playing in the 'drawing room'. Their mother came with two cakes - one significantly large compared to other - and asked the younger one to pick one cake. The boy picked the large one without hesitation. Irritated, the elder one sarcastically told his 'brother' that he would have behaved differently, were he to choose at the first.
Younger one asked: Which one would you have picked?
Elder: The smaller one!
Younger: You can take it. It's still there.
*****
:)
|
| NirajBS |
Posted
on 10-Jan-03 10:00 AM
NK Says: '? It *is* startling that Indians did not know about that embargo. Does India really have a democracy or they take a page right from Kim Il of North Korea'.
Biswo Says:'He told me he never knew about that until recently, and he actually 'apologized' for that. His point was: Rajiv Gandhi could have never told about incident to Indian people, and that embargo was rarely reported in Indian media.
'
Nepal doesn't get the same kind of coverage that India does in Nepal. But there was quite a bit of media coverage in India during 1988-89 embargo. I remember an op-ed piece in the Times of India written by JNU Professor Arvind N. Das, essentially supporting Nepal's position. (Nepal's trade and transit treaty with India had lapsed beacuse India refused to renew it. India wanted to bundle up both the treaties into a single one while Nepal insisted that trade and transit were separate isuues, each requiring separate agreements. Also under International Law, Nepal was entitled to transit facilities from India, which India flouted with impunity during the embargo.) There was news coverage in other other papers (and one also in 'Debonoir') letters to editor and editorials. The Times of India, which largely functions as mouthpiece of the Indian government, supported the government position, but there were other voices too. Arvind N. Das,for one, even visited Nepal in solidarity.
For those Indians who now might have misgivings about India's treatment of its smaller neighbours, Rajiv Gandhi serves the role of a useful idiot, much like the role Geroge W.
Bush fills now for the liberal left in the US.
|
| psvfsolutions |
Posted
on 10-Jan-03 10:11 AM
Do not forget that Nepal's political instability at this time, especially with the king and major political parties that have struggled for years to bring Multi-party Democracy and India has played a major role on their effort. Withour political stabulity the economic aspect has very little effect or sometimes a great waste, all businessness and trade have the same result. There are many plots fabiricated in the country after the massacre of king Birendra and his family and especially after the dissolution of the elected government and Parliament. Royalists are roamming around the country and the globe with propoganda that Multi-party Democracy has failed in Nepal due the lack of skills of the major party like NC and UML. The royalists and king has now trapped the parties in a cage and trying their best to abandon them. India has now to see the truth from the political plots of Nepal and must take stand on the restoration of the Multipary Democracy and have the govt perform general election as soon as possible. India has to realize that the democracy that India helped to bring is in danger in Nepal and see how political plots are fabricate like in the episode II of Star War Trilogy. If India Legacy is to establish democracy in its neighboring countries then Inda must take stand and challenge the king and his one-party system legacy - the legacy of terror.
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 10-Jan-03 05:21 PM
Niraj,
When we read Indian newspapers at the time, we, unconsciously perhaps, 'searched' for news of embargo. Indians, on the other hand, wouldn't do that way. Yes, some people in JNU did support us while AIR's Nepali program was lashing out at us, but a highschool boy growing up in Calcutta would probably not know this thing. Readers pay attention to a report if it is published regularly, or published on the frontpage with some frequency, I guess.
Anyway, lobbying, especially in Indian media sector, is necessary. We can also benefit by lobbying the Indian movie stars. People in India do listen to the voice of movie stars pretty quickly.Unfortunately, we have antagonized a lot of them unnecessarily in the past, or let's put it this way, there has been some kind of misunderstanding between them and us in the past. May be we should try to have one movie actor speak in the support of Bhutanese refugee, just for experiment, and see how it goes.
|
| Rastaman |
Posted
on 10-Jan-03 05:40 PM
Sorry I is not going to say nothing to big thinkers. I is just a simple Rastaman. Them people want rasta to shut up. Where is Suvachintak and Pipaldanda?
|
| suva chintak |
Posted
on 10-Jan-03 05:49 PM
Rastaman,
Right there up with you brother, keep up the good fight! I am glad you decided to get back. Otherwise things get a little colorless and dour.
|
| noname |
Posted
on 10-Jan-03 06:39 PM
Important feedback and information for me! Thanks all. NirajBS thanks for pointing to Arvind N. Das. psvfsolutions, you are right when you say much needs to be done in our front.
>>May be we should try to have one movie actor speak in the support of Bhutanese refugee, just for experiment, and see how it goes.
Invite them to visit Bhutanese refugee camp!
Rastaman, I hear you as Suvachintak is doing! Allow me to quote following lines from Kofi Anan:
"WE CAN LOVE WHAT WE ARE WITHOUT HATING WHAT WE ARE NOT."
|
| nam_p |
Posted
on 10-Jan-03 08:02 PM
Biswo,
Your point about Nepal not getting a sustained coverage during the embargo is true. But while for Nepal, the 1988-89 embargo, was a matter of life and death (it at least helped dislodge the Panchayat system), for India it was, at worst, a misguided policy with few consequences. It had other problems/concerns that would merit its attention. There has been a US sanction against Cuba for over forty years. I don't think many American high school students know/care about it.
My point was, given the ususal media attention that Nepal received (till 1988-89), the embargo did generate some coverage in the Indian print media. And while the state controlled Doordarshan and AIR parrotted the official line, the voices in the print media were varied and interesting.
You earlier talked about Indians wishing Nepal well. But often times, it also comes as patronising. And we as a small nation, also have our set of paronoias living next to a giant neighbour with whom we are virtually dependent.
NBS
|
| Jah |
Posted
on 10-Jan-03 08:34 PM
Hey No name, them people dont speak for I and I.When was them ever speak for I and I? Have you ever heard of Lain Singh Bangdel? Them people never recognized Bangdel. Them people wanted to kick Bangdel out of da kingdom. Anyone made contribution as much as Bangdel in da field? No because it is them people dont like I and I. And them people call I and I bad when I and I here is just telling the truths. Them people dont even like I and I to be here telling da truth. Them people say I say da same thing. It is not dem same thing. It is different them things. Because them people have more educasion and them learn everyday in the school. But I and Is Korean masta dont teach I and I nothing about them political people. Him say put them coke theya. Him ask you eat lice (rice) in Nepal? So I and I say sorry to all da people for tellin da rasta truth.
|
| suva chintak |
Posted
on 10-Jan-03 10:24 PM
Dear NN and NBS,
Very interesting points about the vexing bilateral relation between Nepal and India. I agree with all of you that Nepal needs to reach the Indian public and show them how unfairly their government treats us. If the influential segment of the public became aware of the unfairness of the system, I think it would make some difference.
But I would not count on the good will of the Indian public alone to solve all our problems..after all, the Indian public is very narrow minded and jingoistic. And an important segment of it clamors to have the whole of South Asia one day as part of the "Akhand Bharat", and this sentiment is not only in the RSS and VJP. We are setting ourselves for a big disappointment if we think the essential goodness of the Indian will one day give our fair share. As someone pointed out earlier, the US public has known what its governement is doing to Cuba for 40 years, and yet nothing happens here.
The best solution to Nepal's indain problem is to educate ourselves of this complex relationship. As far as I can tell there is no consensus about how to articulate Nepal's interest and how to deal with India. NC has its own India policy, UML has its own, RPP has its own, Sadhbhavana has its own, and the Maoists have their own. Add to this a second layer of confusion: all of these parties have two policies with India: one for public consumption, another for realpolitik! So are we suprised that Nepal has been at the wrong end of the deal all these years?
Recall how when ever there is any crisis in Nepal, all the political leaders start making pilgrimage to Delhi Durbar? India just plays one against the other. If their personal interests are satisfied, the leaders are happy to sign off Tanakpur, Mahakali, or Gandaki.
In which other countries have you seen the various political parties having direct foreign policy relations with an outside country? Can we imagine the US Republican and the Democratic party making a separate deals with the Beijing or Moscow? It is simply not done! That is what is called divide and rule. Sure we could have had a better neighbor than India, but the blame does not lie only with New Delhi. It is our political leaders who try to gain Indian patronage to undermine their domestic opponents. When India provide such back up for Nepali contestants (whether it be the king, Girija, Makune, Maoists, Sadhbhavana and others), India naturally expects payback.
And there are those folks who will deny that Tanakpur ever happened, Mahakali ever took place!
So in my humble opinion, the first step into getting a fair and respectful bilateral relationship with India is to have a common stand among the Nepalis. No use blaming the Indian babu, when Nepalis are only too willing to do his bidding! So let's get our house in order.
Humbly Yours!
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 11-Jan-03 12:25 AM
"Table talks alone won't yield any results unless they are preceded by a well-orchestrated diplomatic exercise. So, let's first make our cases and activate our well wishers to lobby for Nepal's cause. Bhutanese issue and Maoist problem are the two that can immediately take positive course, shall we make effort to venture in this line. "
Dear noname,
I wholeheartedly agree with this view. We have to be able to:
a) present our stands clearly
b) do lobbying
These are 2 important aspects of IR and diplomacy. Diplomacy isn't just assuming the post of the ambassador, throwing parties and receptions at nepali festivals, it actually involves a lot of work, which our ambassadors--for the most part--are unaware of. Now, what's the solution? How do we train our ambassadors to India and elsewhere to present our stands clearly, effectively and without offending the hosts and at the same time be active?
These were the questions that I thought about when I was working although nobody asked me to think. My own analysis based after hearing many people is :
We are ultra-nationalists and there is nothing wrong with it. But, when we start using our nationalism to cover our flaws when dealing with india or any nation, then it creates problems. We have to learn to be assertive and persuassive. As you clearly pointed out we need to be persuassive and need to penetrate/infiltrate the power structure. In a democratic country, opposition groups can overwrite the governmnet's decisions, and India is no exception to this. However, we don't seem to realize this when we talk about India policy. We just like to deal with the GOI, not with the parties. This has to go. Let's think about this: The present government in India is a coalition of 18 parties and we haven't beena ble toc ultivate good relations with even 1 party!! Our strategy should be to develop "friendly" relations with the parties in coalition and those who are not in coalition and even regional parties. Also, as you brilliantly pointed out we need to be in good terms with the academia and media.
Things can be achived without any hassle from the bureaucracy, if we learn the ways to get things done. One example is of the 1978 trade and transit treaty. KB Malla knew that Morarji Desai was favorable to Nepal so he pushed the matter forward and we ended up with 2 treaties.So, political leaders and their decisions do affect the workings of the South-Block. There are other examples too. Regarding mahakali treaty, people in Nepal scream their throats off saying that its against our national interests, but no, anyone who has read the treaty would say the opposite. Its probably the best treaty we signed with India n the last 20 years. And the political scenarion/leaders of the two countries were able to overwrite the decisions of the Indian bureaucracy and come up with a treaty favorable to Nepal.
Also, I don't agree when people
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 11-Jan-03 12:45 AM
Also, I don't agree when people say that Rajiv Gandhi was against Nepali interests. Rajiv Gandhi was a hard liner, but the thing is, its easy to deal with the hardliners than with liberals like IK Gujaral. Gujral was way too liberal when it came to dealing with the neighboring countries, which was very nice of him but he did not know how to persuade his own bureacuracy to follow "Gujral Doctrine" of non-reciprocity. And he was out of the office before the neighboring countries, Bangladesh and Nepal could even draft traeties/agreements based on his "non-reciprocity" doctrine. His doctrine went to trash. But, look at the policies of hard-liners, the Indian Bureaucracy still favors those and has been continuing the legacy of Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi. This means, if we had a cut a favaorable deal with any of those two PMs, the Indian bureaucracy would wholeheartedly follow that and make things easier for Nepal. Who is at fault for not being able to persuade the hardliners? Us. Its our mistake because we never realize that:
a) diploamcy is putting the dirties thing in the sweetest possible way
b) negotiations are in fact give and take process
c) political leaders can overwrite the decisions of the bureaucracy
d) nobody ever sells or buys nations
The problem in Nepal is this: IF somneone goes to India and signs treaties/agreements/MoUs, then sooner or later that person is labelled "desh bechuwa". Nobody wants to be labelled that so whoever heads the Nepali delegation wants the talks to fail. The Indians sometimes put tremendous pressure, demand things than cannot be fulfilled and just withdraw from the talks. This has been the trend. The Indians follow the British legacy and we are following our Khukuri-Never Invaded-Bir Gorkhali legacy, and how can you expect things to resolve when the both sides go to talks with strong defensive nationalism and fear?
aaru pachi lekhchu..sorry, if its dry or boring and without any order.. everything's just lumped in one paragraph..
|
| makar |
Posted
on 11-Jan-03 03:04 AM
throw all the bahuns, ranas, and shahas of nepal into Bagamati and let them be washed up to Ganges, nepal's all problems with india will be solved overnight. Real nepalese have no differences with real indians.
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 11-Jan-03 06:50 AM
"The best solution to Nepal's indain problem is to educate ourselves of this complex relationship. As far as I can tell there is no consensus about how to articulate Nepal's interest and how to deal with India. NC has its own India policy, UML has its own, RPP has its own, Sadhbhavana has its own, and the Maoists have their own. Add to this a second layer of confusion: all of these parties have two policies with India: one for public consumption, another for realpolitik! So are we suprised that Nepal has been at the wrong end of the deal all these years? "
You hit the bull's eye! This is exactly what happens. Yes, there is no consensus among the political parties regarding India/India policy. Forget consensus among the various parties, the parties don't even have a consistent India policy. Sometimes, the UML is supportive of the Mahakali treaty, other times, its against the treaty. Congress and RPP also do not have a consistent party line on India. The "non-paper" incident on 1950 treaty is a very good example of this.
Also, i agree with you when you say that leaderrs say one thging for public consumption, another for realpolitik. Yes, that's what's been happening in Nepal. With the lack of notekeeping/recordkeeping and national consensus, the leaders push forward their own--or their parties'-- agendas in their meetings with the Indian leaders. And its hard to find out who said what unless you ahve acess to the MoEA in Delhi.
|
