Earlier this month, Nepal and China signed a deal to build a 1,200 MW hydroelectric plant in Nepal to solve their perpetual power crisis. In addition to this, China and Nepal also 'reaffirmed cooperation in the fields of literature and art.' Quite expectedly, India was not happy with these developments because it cemented greater infrastructural and cultural ties between Beijing and Kathmandu. This is a cause of concern for India as China ascends the ladder towards global dominance and Nepal struggles to receive attention in the face of competition between them for hegemony in the region.
Landlocked between the two Asian giants, what makes Nepal unique is its relations with both. Bilateral and multilateral agreements that India and China have signed with Nepal testify to its worth to both the nations. However, disagreements over certain issues also highlight their complex relationships. Quite often, when Nepal, in pursuing its national interest, swings in favour of one of the sides, the other party expresses unhappiness over the issue.
As much as India and China stand to benefit from their ties with the landlocked country, Nepal must also make use of this to secure its interests.
On the one hand, India and China have tried to influence Nepal in ways consistent with their regional and international agendas. On the other hand, since Nepal is a strategically located nation with a great deal of untapped potential, India and China understand that they cannot excessively pressurise it into advancing their interests. Frequent and incessant pressure by either India or China will only induce Kathmandu to align with the other side. Besides, the Nepalese population will view their neighbours as regional bullies interfering in matters outside their sovereignty. Moreover, the possibility that Nepal may side with the other country is a risk that both India and China will not be ready to take.
Hence, it is necessary for both India and China to strengthen diplomatic ties and initiate confidence-building measures to bridge the gap that exists between the two and let Nepal and other smaller countries enjoy more autonomy in the conduct of their foreign policy. An assessment of the recent events in Nepal demonstrates how it is fully capable of making its own decisions. Pushpa Kamal Dahal, popularly known as Prachanda, resigned as the PM over a commitment that he had made with the opposition party, the Nepali Congress. Subsequently, Sher Bahadur Deuba of Nepali Congress was elected as the Prime Minister. This hints at political maturity despite incessant protests taking place in the country.
It is necessary for both India and China to strengthen diplomatic ties and initiate confidence-building measures to bridge the huge gap that exists between the two and let Nepal and other smaller countries enjoy more autonomy in the conduct of their foreign policy.
India is witnessing China's rise as a major power, throttling India's efforts on the global and regional stage. China's support to the Maoists (who view India as one of the imperial powers that has to be stopped from interfering in Nepal's state of affairs), Beijing's veto over India's membership to the Nuclear Suppliers Group and India's insistence to blacklist Pakistani terrorist group, Jaish-e-Mohammed's leader, Masood Azhar, under the United Nations Security Council's terror list has sowed tensions between Beijing and New Delhi. India has also criticised Nepal for not taking a tough stand on terrorism, particularly against terrorists who operate from within Nepal. Further, Beijing's economic aspirations to advance trade and commerce in Asia through the One Belt One Road Initiative, which would pass through Pakistan Occupied Kashmir, are some of the contentious issues that have impaired Sino-Indian ties.
Despite the changing dynamics, India still considers Nepal one of its loyal allies, given their historical, linguistic, cultural and religious links that took root centuries ago. India and Nepal signed a Treaty of Peace and Friendship in 1950 that aimed at respecting each other's sovereignty and facilitating greater economic and socio-cultural ties. Further, in the month of May this year, India became one of the top five development partners for Nepal, surpassing China. In fact, when Nepal experienced one of the worst earthquakes in 2015, India was the first country to provide immediate assistance. Efforts of this kind only serve to strengthen the goodwill that exists between the two countries.
Perhaps, the close relation shared by India and Nepal makes India feel insecure when China deals with Nepal. Nonetheless, China might never be able to replace India's influence in Nepal. In the context of the Madhesi protests which led to a disruption in Nepal's supplies from India in January 2016, the Chinese ambassador to Kathmandu, Wu Chuntai, told the speaker of Nepal's Parliament, Onsari Gharti Magar, that "once India opens its routes, you won't even look towards us." However, this has not deterred China from engaging with its neighbour in the political, economic and cultural spheres.
China might never be able to replace India's influence in Nepal.
As India and China map out their agendas, it is vital for them to understand the restraint they must follow in their engagement with Nepal. First, as much as they believe that they can pressurise Nepal due to their might, Nepal is an independent nation, that is neither Indian nor Chinese sovereignty. Second, it is only natural for Nepal to cater to its own interests even if they do not align with the interests of its neighbours. Third, there is a lesson for the world in Nepal's foreign policy conduct; an ally's enemy is not necessarily your enemy as well. This sounds like a daunting task to execute, yet Nepal has done it well.
The author is a research intern at ORF New Delhi.
The views expressed above belong to the author(s). ORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews.
PREV
