Regular communication with India and other host countries should be re-evaluated by Nepal, which is economically viable for the country in the long run, as it has to survive a major chunk of its economy on remittances.
For some years now, the small Himalayan country of Nepal has been moving through a phase of socio-economic and political transition. It was also going through a phase of recovery from the 2015 earthquake as well as the economic blockade with India has been quite challenging. In this background, China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has provided the much-needed leverage for Nepal, though very few projects under the scheme has been sanctioned.
Consequently, most Nepalis, especially the ones who are trained in vocational courses, are opting out for opportunities abroad. This has provided themselves with better financial stability. In fact, labour migration has been acknowledged in the country as a very conventional and regularised system of economic growth and sustainability.
As has been frequently noted, from 2008 to 2017, Nepal generated around 3.5 million labour permits for migrant workers, frequently travelling to Southeast Asian countries like Malaysia, member-nations of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), and of course, immediate Indian neighbour. In the case of India, easy access through the open border system has always been a boon.
Nepal also received remittances worth NPR 699 billion ($6.5 billion) from this domain alone. The figure works out to more than one quarter of the national GDP. It is also the fourth highest in the world.
Unfortunately at the moment, with the present situation of the COVID-19 engulfing the world, this very specific theatre of employment-generation as well as development has turned out to be the most crucial threat to the Nepalese government. It has also become an even more difficult challenge, with migrant labourers stuck in the destination-countries amidst the coronavirus hullabaloo. These issues need to be dealt with utmost clarity as well as sensitivity.
The recent collaboration between India and Nepal over the presence of the stranded migrant labourers in either country has been well appreciated as a welcome gesture. However, critics have pointed out to Nepalese working in countries that are not located within favourable geographical proximity.
Human rights organisations have taken note of the news of citizens of countries like Nepal, India and Bangladesh (10 per cent of all migrant labour worldwide) stuck in the Gulf countries. According to reports, they are living in camps without the privileges of social distancing or even proper sanitation or medical facilities.
In this regard, the migrants’ rights groups have been voicing the necessity of repatriating and protecting the workers with more flexible policies of returning back, which might not be a conducive proposal, given the dire state of affairs. In keeping with this challenge, suggestions of supporting the families of these workers have also been forwarded to the government.
Furthermore, several biases have also been alleged by the Nepalese who talked about partiality in treatment in hospitals. Such kind of racial insensitivity has also been observed worldwide due to the physical features or appearances of the Nepalese, often being confused as Chinese. As the virus first emanated from the Chinese province of Wuhan, the community has been subjected to worldwide discrepancy and negative or hate comments.
Nevertheless, no concrete information is still available on the position taken by the government in tackling with the issue. This is all the more relevant because even if the people return back to Nepal, whether their own home-country would be able to provide them with the basic medical check -ups is a big question in itself.
Very recently, there was news of concentrated treatment of COVID-19 only in the capital of Kathmandu, whereas the provinces lagged behind in providing the very basic amenities like additional beds in hospitals and test kits for the suspects. In the last two years, not much development has been witnessed in the ministry of public health as most provinces do not have proper infrastructure to host critical patients.
Most of them have to travel to Kathmandu to get their treatment, if not across the border to India. If this scenario continues, Kathmandu shall not be able to handle more entries, thereby resulting in absolute lawlessness, finally culminating into an increase in the COVID-19 cases in Nepal, which may have gone unmonitored due to the absence of proper facilities of testing.
However, the provinces have taken note of this and are arranging to bring about changes in the health setup along with new care centres and hospitals. Given the present economic scenario, how much that would be possible has again been a major concern.
Assistance from India must be considered with utmost sincerity as this is one of the important way to move forward. Not only would it enhance future collaborations in healthcare, but also would help in assisting the migrants living outside, who could come back with the Indian migrants and then move across the border in a much more peaceful process.
Regular communication with India and other host countries should be re-evaluated by Nepal in this process, which on the other hand is economically viable for the country in the long run as it has to survive a major chunk of its economy on the remittance from them.
The time is not ripe to think about the past experiences of blockade or for that matter the issue over the Kalapani border turmoil. This pandemic might bring in some positive aspect of collaboration and negotiation, thereby spilling over bilateral bonhomie in other areas of diplomacy as well.
This commentary originally appeared in South Asia Weekly.
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.
Sohini Nayak was a Junior Fellow at Observer Research Foundation. Presently she is working on Nepal-India and Bhutan-India bilateral relations along with sub regionalism and ...
Read More +
PREV
