PM Oli’s visit good opportunity to revive ties
With Nepalese Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli visiting India from today, it's time for India-Nepal relations to move ahead and not be stuck in the groove of recent past incidents that have strained bilateral relations between the two countries. While it's true that Mr Oli is seen as someone who is sceptical of New Delhi, unlike his predecessor Sushil Koirala who had a good rapport with India, the attitude may be rooted in misunderstandings that can be resolved with this six-day visit. The resumption of free movement of goods vehicles on the India-Nepal border, after a crippling five-month halt as a result of the Madhesi agitation on the other side, is a welcome background to restoring the goodwill that has characterised ties between the two nations. It has been the convention that a Nepalese Prime Minister begins his first official trip abroad with a visit to India. Mr Pushpa Kamal Dahal ‘Prachanda' of the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) had deviated from the tradition by his first trip abroad as Prime Minister to China, although it was later clarified that it was not a ‘state visit'. But that is all in the past, and both Kathmandu and New Delhi must now get to the task of resuming from where they had left soon after Mr Narendra Modi became the Prime Minister. There are many issues that need to be addressed. One of them is the India-Nepal Treaty of Peace and Friendship. Kathmandu has often expressed reservations over certain provisions and called for a fresh document to replace the decades-old one. Mr Modi has already said that India is prepared to endorse any new treaty which Nepal formulates, presuming that it serves the interests of both Kathmandu and New Delhi. It's now for Mr Oli's coalition Government to finalise the document and present it to New Delhi. The treaty will go a significant way in enhancing economic cooperation between the two countries, since it can address Kathmandu's concerns that India has a tendency to play the Big Brother due to its economic clout, in the end leaving a raw deal for Nepal. Nepalese leaders think this is especially true in the case of certain hydro-electricity projects on which India is collaborating with Nepal. While this may not be entirely correct, the belief needs to be set to rest. Despite the belligerence against India, evident in the recent remarks by certain Nepalese leaders, and an attempt by them to play the China card against New Delhi, the fact is that, for largely geographical reasons, Beijing simply cannot be an effective replacement for India. This was highlighted when Nepal signed a deal with China for the supply of 10,000 tonnes of fuel, but could actually access only a small portion of the promised supply. According to reports, despite the blockade, fuel supply that trickled into Nepal from India was more than what Kathmandu received from China.
There is the strategic angle, of course. New Delhi would be wary of China expanding its footprint into Nepal first by enhancing its economic relationship and then using that as a lever of political influence. Given the China-Pakistan nexus, it would not be long before Islamabad too becomes a major player. New Delhi can counter these possibilities by remaining proactive in its sustained engagement with Nepal.