A middle path opens up to Nepal
By Dhruba Adhikary
KATHMANDU - While trade figures continue to depict India and China as countries
that are getting closer by the day, their security perceptions and approaches
to events in the neighborhood - and beyond - remain strikingly divergent,
showing them as competing powers.
New Delhi's increasing affinity with Washington appears to be a matter of
concern in Beijing, and the growing Chinese assertiveness in the region is
making the Indians nervous. ( See
Asia Times Online December 11, 2008.)
By presenting a draft of a proposed friendship treaty to Nepal, replacing the
one signed in 1960 in Kathmandu, China has signaled to India (and its Western
allies) that it is not willing to
allow Tibet to be a flashpoint like disputed Kashmir is between India and
Pakistan.
The Chinese may also be keen, as a longer-term objective, to make their
presence in South Asia more meaningful than it has been. Details of the draft
have not been made public immediately, but there are adequate indications to
suggest that Beijing wants Nepal to give its publicly-declared "one-China
policy" undertaking in black and white in lieu of a pledge to help Nepal
protect its sovereignty and territorial integrity should there be any attack on
it.
"Nepal is not rushing to take a firm view on the Chinese draft until the
country resolves the issue of the 1950 treaty with India," C P Gajurel, head of
the Maoist party's international relations unit, told Asia Times Online.
The emerging scenario reminds observers of the book written by Indian
journalist Girilal Jain in 1959: India Meets China in Nepal. China's
proposal for a new treaty was handed over to Nepali officials by a visiting
minister Hu Zhengyue on February 26. But a hint that something of this nature
was on its way from Beijing was given by Hu's boss, Foreign Minister Yang
Jiechi, when he visited Nepal in December.
Subsequently, Yang broached the subject when Nepal's Foreign Secretary Gyan
Chandra Acharya was in Beijing, where his talk was not confined to "the
traditional friendship" but alluded to China's eagerness to upgrade bilateral
relations. A Xinhua report on February 18 quoted Yang as saying that China
viewed "dealing with and developing ties with Nepal from a strategic and
long-term perspective".
One of Nepal's highly respected diplomats, the late Professor Yadunath Khanal,
wrote nearly 10 years ago that while the Chinese preferred to work with - and
through - kings in those times "it would be unrealistic to assume that they
have no alternative strategy in case the present policy fails". Khanal had a
stint as Nepal's ambassador to China. He earlier served in the same capacity in
India and the United States.
The Chinese expect Nepal's Prime Minister Prachanda to conclude the treaty
during his next visit to Beijing in a few weeks, but Nepali officials think
they need more time to study the draft for possible implications in terms of
Nepal's relations with other countries.
Besides, Nepal is in political transition now, with a Maoist-led interim
government in which the coalition partners have differing views on important
policy issues. Both of Nepal's neighbors are aware of these unsettling
political challenges.
Early friendship
The Treaty of Peace and Friendship signed by prime minister Chou Enlai and
prime minister B P Koirala (Nepal's first elected prime minister) during the
former's visit to Nepal in April 1960 does not contain any provisions which
could lead to it being called an unequal pact. The last article says it will
remain in force until terminated by either side by giving notice of one year.
The treaty laid to rest all of Nepal's claims over Tibet and China's claims
over Nepal. Tibet used to pay a tribute of 10,000 rupees to Nepal every year
until 1953, but the Dalai Lama was unable to continue the tradition after China
effectively took control of the Tibetan administration.
Nepal, too, had a practice of sending a diplomatic mission, with expensive
presents, to China every five years, but this was stopped after 1906. In a book
published in 1939, Chinese leader Mao Tsetung described Nepal, together with
Bhutan and Burma (now Myanmar), as "dependent states" that China lost to
Britain.
The situation took another turn when Nepal's rulers in 1946 found it expedient
to receive a mission from the Nationalist government of China in Kathmandu and
accepted gifts from Chiang Kai-shek for supporting China during the war of
resistance against Japan. Chiang later fled to the island of Taiwan and
established a government there after the communists took over the mainland in
1949.
Nepal sent a reciprocal mission to Nanking in China in April 1947, just a few
months before the British left India for good, as the Nepalese rulers thought
that an independent and democratic India would not be sympathetic to them.
The mission, led by an army general, conferred various Nepali titles and honors
on the "illustrious president" Chiang and his wife, Soong May-ling. But the
mission failed in terms of the re-establishment of diplomatic relations as
Chiang's government was preoccupied with the war against Mao's communists. When
the Chinese nationalist government collapsed in 1949 and fled to Taiwan,
Nepal's Rana rulers abandoned this northern plan.
They then turned to the south and began negotiations with Indian premier
Jawaharlal Nehru, which led to the conclusion of the to this day controversial
treaty of 1950, signed on July 31 of that year. Unlike the one signed with
China in 1960, it is considered "unequal" by Nepal as it consists of provisions
which give more advantages to India. The century-old Rana regime was abolished
seven months later, but the treaty was not scrapped.
In the period between 1951 and 1955, Nepal remained ambivalent to China's
overtures for establishing diplomatic relations, ostensibly because of a
reluctance to come close to a communist regime. The extra-territorial rights
Nepal enjoyed over Tibet were also lost in the process of China's advance
towards Lhasa. Despite China's desire to include Nepal, Nehru's India sidelined
Nepal when they concluded an agreement with China on Tibet in 1954.
China's change
The reasons for China wanting a new treaty remain a topic of debate. One theory
is that it is merely a message to India that if New Delhi, with which it has a
long-standing border dispute, re-opens the Tibet issue, with the support of
Western powers, China will not sit idly on Kashmir and on northeast India,
where independence movements are active.
An irritant for China is the porous Nepal-India border through which Tibetan
exiles travel back and forth drawing attention of those supporting the "Free
Tibet" movement. The Chinese have taken up this issue in an indirect way by
indicating that, as Nepal's immediate neighbor, China should also get
"visa-free" entry into Nepal for its citizens. In other words, the Chinese are
encouraging Nepal to revise its 1950 treaty with India to include provisions
for a regulated border.
However, Nepal has failed thus far to persuade India to change the treaty to
make room for timely adjustments.
Instead, Delhi has been putting on pressure since 2005 for a new extradition
treaty to replace the one signed in 1953. Giving justification for this, Indian
Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee told parliament on February 26 that a new
treaty was required in view of the changes in the nature of crime and revised
international norms on extradition.
But Kathmandu is hesitant, saying that an interim government is not capable of
taking such a decision as it would have a long-term effect on foreign policy.
The proposed extradition treaty is said to have a provision on arrest of
third-country nationals (mainly Pakistanis and Chinese) for extradition to
India.
In the broader picture, the situation in which India, with Western support,
seemed to be working to encircle China is rapidly changing. India finds itself
encircled by a hostile neighborhood. Pakistan is already a Chinese ally.
Myanmar is also friendly with Beijing.
Sri Lanka, which was once heavily influenced by India, is on better terms with
its rival to the north. "China fuels Sri Lankan war," is how Brahma Chellaney,
an Indian professor, complained in an article published in The Japan Times on
March 4. "Today, India is ringed by turbulent states," said another Indian
writer, Bharat Verma, last week. Nepal, he says, is vulnerable to China's
influence, and its extremists have linkages with the People's War Group
(Maoists) in India. China is slowly building up its influence in Nepal - and
its gain there is India's loss, said a recent BBC commentary.
"We have no policy. We have only friendship," was a traditional expression in
Nepal about its southern neighbor. "The same is perfectly true of our relations
with our great northern neighbor," historian Vijay Kumar Manandhar has quoted
Nepal's prime minister in 1946 as saying. This was in the welcome extended to
the head of a Chinese delegation.
There are Nepalis who think that the underlying meaning of the quoted
expression should still be relevant. Seasoned radio commentator Krishna Prasad
Sigdyal is one of them. Nepal stands to make considerable gains by being a
bridge between China and India, he told Radio Sagarmathaa listeners on Monday.
The rivers that originate in China flow through Nepal and reach India, giving
Nepal an opportunity to harness them for electricity and irrigation. By serving
as a transit nation for two great powers of Asia, Nepal can make a tremendous
contribution to reducing poverty in South Asia.
"Or are we doomed once again to find ourselves regretting lost opportunities?"
Sigdyal wondered.
Dhruba Adhikary, a former head of the Nepal Press Institute, is a
Kathmandu-based journalist.
(Copyright 2009 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please
contact us about
sales, syndication and
republishing.)
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
