India’s stakes in Nepal warrant strategic caution

India cannot afford Chinese assertions in a crisis-hit country where Beijing has expansive influence.

Nero fiddled while Rome burned. This would be a fairly apt way of describing not just the ousted Nepal Prime Minister K P Sharma Oli’s misgovernance but also that of a succession of rent-seeking political leaders in the Himalayan nation who have occupied the prime ministerial post over the last decade.

While India will certainly not shed any tears for the hugely unpopular and pro-China Oli, who gave New Delhi much grief during his four prime ministerial tenures, it will be acutely worried about the volatile situation prevailing in Nepal.

With its huge strategic stakes in Nepal, a country with which it shares an over 2,000 km-long porous border, India knows well that any turmoil in its neighbourhood would have serious ramifications for its own security interests. China has already made deep inroads into Nepal. Reflecting India’s security concerns over the events unfolding in Nepal, Prime Minister Narendra Modi chaired a meeting of the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) on September 9, the day PM Oli was forced to quit.

For now, though, India has no alternative but to adopt a wait-and-watch approach. An anxious New Delhi wouldn’t want a repeat of the Bangladesh situation, where, again, a movement spearheaded by the country’s youth led to the removal of PM Sheikh Hasina in August last year. There is an interim government in place in Bangladesh, but New Delhi-Dhaka ties since her ouster have been extremely strained.

Amidst the evolving scenario in Nepal, India will have to tread extremely carefully to protect its interests in a country where it has vital geopolitical stakes. It cannot be seen as interfering in Nepal’s domestic politics or throwing in its lot with a particular political party – something that it has often been accused of in the past.

For this will only fan anti-India sentiments in a country whose people pride themselves on their sovereignty and who have often accused India, sometimes justifiably, of being overbearing. In fact, New Delhi will need to signal to the people of Nepal that it fully supports their democratic aspirations.

The situation is fluid in Nepal, which seems to be headed for a prolonged period of political uncertainty. However, for now, it has taken a turn with former Supreme Court Chief Justice Sushila Karki being sworn in as interim Prime Minister. But what next? A section of protesters has demanded that the current Parliament be dissolved and fresh elections held.

The transition to a new government, however, is unlikely to be swift, given that the Nepalese people will want a fresh face and a new political dispensation to lead the country, hugely disillusioned as they are with the current lot of leaders. The army is enforcing law and order in the country for now, but an interim arrangement will be needed until a new government takes charge.

Prolonged instability in the neighbouring country will only increase New Delhi’s worries as it would also mean more scope for Beijing to step up its machinations in the strategically located and landlocked nation wedged between the two large Asian rivals. China’s expansive influence in Nepal has been propelled in no small measure by the eager embrace of Beijing by the Nepalese political leadership, cutting across party lines.

For now, Nepal continues to simmer despite Oli’s resignation after at least 30 people were killed in the violence. The killings led to protests taking a violent turn, with capital Kathmandu witnessing unprecedented scenes wherein government buildings, including the Singha Durbar, were vandalised, the residences of top politicians set ablaze, and ministers and other leaders thrashed and manhandled.

The ban on social media may have been the final straw, but there are deeper and more serious underlying reasons for the youth in Nepal to take to the streets of Kathmandu and elsewhere. Indeed, the protests are a manifestation of a deeper malaise within Nepal’s polity, with the country’s youth angry and frustrated with the rampant corruption among the ruling classes, the lack of employment and educational opportunities, and the failure of successive governments to deliver on the developmental needs of its people, particularly the poor.

A race for power

For this, the blame in recent years lies squarely with the three leading political parties and their leaders – Oli of the CPN-UML, Sher Bahadur Deuba of the Nepali Congress, and Pushpa Kamal Dahal ‘Prachanda’ of the CPN (Maoist Centre). Between them, these ageing satraps had held Nepal’s prime ministership over the last decade, merrily playing a game of thrones by changing alliances to cling onto power. With political expediency rather than the welfare of Nepal’s people having been their guiding principle, the eruption of countrywide protests came as no surprise.

In the 17 years since the monarchy gave way to a federal republic, Nepal has had 14 different governments. The hope of stability held out by the new Constitution of 2015 was never met amidst the continuing political circus by the country’s leaders.

With the Gen Z movement having firmly rejected the old guard, Nepal’s political firmament could see fresh faces. The expectations from any new government would be huge, and a business-as-usual approach coupled with corruption won’t work. Any new dispensation in Nepal would do well to remember this. India, on its part, will have to bide its time.

(The writer is a senior journalist)