Not new to the games of electoral politics, and buzzing with groups getting more and more conscious of their rights by the day, the people of Nepal are heading towards a political scenario that will be as fractious, as divided and as uncertain as the democracies of our times. India can play a very constructive role if it stays out and plays the role of a neutral arbiter
Incumbent Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli of Nepal finally ran out of luck. For all his bravado, his failure to keep his words caught up with him. He chose to resign after 287 days in office, rather than face no confidence motion. Maoist veteran Prachanda pulled the rug from under his feet. Floored, he is now humming and hawing, blaming it on India in one breath and promising to bounce back some day in another.
The fact of the matter, as brought out by spokesperson of the Indian Ministry of External Affairs, is that it was an internal affair of Nepal, in which India had no role to play — as much as India and Indians must have heaved a sigh of relief, with Oli’s departure. Poor Oli swam against the currents and defied the natural pulls of Nepalese politics for too long, and ignored the transformative pressures released by the unrealised aspiration of a vast section of Nepalese people, let loose by the Jana Andolan II in 2005. A vast constituency of the un-included demanded inclusion.
Prachanda factor
Ironically, Prachanda, who had unleashed this transformative energy, with his firebrand political advocacy of the inclusion of the marginalised, was also acting in concert with Oli, his fellow pseudo-communist colleague, defender of the feudal-order. The inertia of the feudal-royalist politics had numbed their senses perhaps.
Did Prachanda pull out because the realisation suddenly dawned on him that he was straying far too away from his own convictionsIJ Or was it the good old craze for powerIJ Did he expect backing from India, if he would split away from Oli, who had decided to become a thorn in the Indian fleshIJ Did he seek to reinvent himselfIJ Well, people close to him and even his admirers would tell you, Prachanda is far too absent-minded and forgetful of his own promises to toe any line for too long. But they would expect their charismatic leader to stay the course this time round.
Ides of May or July!
As much as Oli and his men would blame the Big Brother to their south for their loss of power, the game of musical chair had started in May. As per the agreement with the Maoist-Centre, Oli had to make room for Prachanda soon. It all started in May.
It was well-known that Prachanda had fallen out with Oli in May and announced his withdrawal from the ruling coalition. He had blamed it on Oli’s inflexibility about sharing power with his party and meeting the aspirations of the people. There was no India factor pulling him out of Oli’s embrace. The die was cast.
Rumour has it that China intervened, calmed down Prachanda’s nerves with threats and inducements. The Maoist leader obliged. Oli was given another lease of life. In retrospect, it seems, Oli goofed it up again. He could neither measure Prachanda’s ambition nor judge the emerging political currents on the streets outside his Baluwatar official residence.
Oli caught in cross-currents
The Federal Alliance or Sanghiya Sanghathan, composed of Madheshi and Janajati groups, was gathering momentum. Another round of street demonstrations was round the corner. The China card was not working, or it would have taken far too long to work, or not at all. Anti-India card had its resonance, but again among a limited group of people. Even those who wore their nationalism on their sleeves in Kathmandu — many of them too well educated and cynical to feel proud to be known as nationalists — told you, the bluff would not work beyond a point, even as they were happy that Oli’s discovery of a new orbit northward for Nepal was not such a bad idea.
Was it Oli’s senility or instinct to commit political harakiriIJ A well-heeled politician of his age, rumoured to be pampered by India in the past, why would Oli do what he was doing against the Nepalese grainIJ A reflexive demonstration of sympathy for anything opposed to India — be it in the wake of a wrong representation of facts about Hrithik Roshan or Madhuri Dixit — does not fully obliterate the massive pull that India naturally exerts from the south, culturally, politically, and otherwise. Is Prachanda aware of this, or will he fall again into the same vortex of India baitingIJ What role can India play to keep Nepalese politics in the safe orbitIJ
Well begun, Prachanda
On his part, Prachanda seems to have begun well, as he always does. However, in politics, well begun is not even half done. He has to have right rhetoric and right approach. Now, it is time for him to try to get a consensus Government afoot.
Dear Prachanda, it is time for you to hide your passion for power and your fear about the growing demands from the Western lobbies clamouring for reopening of old wounds during the Maoist struggle through “truth and reconciliation”. It is time to get these obstacles out of the way through consensus and relaunch the agenda of inclusive politics.
The marginalised Nepal will love you; the privileged Nepal may take time to get used to the democratic ethos. After all, in the name of democratic politics, you cannot run numero-cracy. A new Nepal is well within your reach. It will mature if the over-assertive communities of Nepal learn to live with, and share power with one another. For long, power has been inequitably distributed. Nepal may well tell you how to bring distributive justice through the peaceful process of democratic bargaining.
Indian role and concerns
India has, in a way, been presented with an unexpected gift, thanks to the uncertain course that internal politics in Nepal has taken now. It could not untie the Oli knot, despite his efforts to tentatively reach out to India. His right-wing royalist emissary and Foreign Minister, Kamal Thapa, paid almost one visit every second month to soften India. There were analysts in India who blamed it on Indian haste, complacency and undiplomatic wrath that led to a situation where political entrepreneurs in Kathmandu had a feast on India for months. China was the net gainer. It grabbed the opportunity in both the hands. It has made successful inroads into Nepalese economy and now politics.
If China now manages to complete the Sigatse-Kyrong link by the end of 2017, it will knock off the Himalayan barrier sooner than we imagined, which may have strategic implications for India — more so if Sino-Indian relationship plummets, after stagnation in economic interaction between the two countries, following reappearance of mutual distrust in bilateral relationship. As it is, the Chinese sense of insecurity is deepening fast, because of forward policies of the US in the eastern Pacific theatre (call it re-balance or pivot), and consolidation of India-US relations in its western neighbourhood.
Stopping China is not as easy as engaging it in the right way. With its deep pockets (huge reserves), infrastructure-building and manufacturing capabilities, China cannot be held back from exploring the market and exploiting economic opportunities in countries in its southern and western Asian neighbourhoods. How much of it would translate into strategic capital which could threaten India’s core interests in the region remains to be evaluated, and properly weighed.
Way forward
In the meanwhile, India should shed its habitual aversion of parties and personalities, and learn to pursue its interests with whichever political force that vicissitudes of Nepalese politics throws up during Nepal’s ongoing tryst with democracy. While the long queue of politicians from Nepal, in the wake of every crisis that Nepal faces, may flatter India, it must shun the temptation to fall into their assurances to act as puppets, and engage in “micro-managing” politics and politicians in Nepal, to get the most obliging party or personality in Kathmandu.
Not new to the games of electoral politics, and buzzing with groups getting more and more conscious of their rights by the day, Nepalese politics is going to be as fractious, as divided and as uncertain as democracies of our times. India can play a very constructive role if it stays out and plays the role of a neutral arbiter, as it had done to some extent in 2005. Or else, with China making an unmistakable entry into internal politics of Nepal, India will move from one crisis to another, losing its leverages unnecessarily by the wayside.
Some seasoned observers from Kathmandu would say Oli’s bag is still full of tricks. He has still the President (Ms Bhandari) from his party, who was his nominee. She remains powerful in the existing atmosphere of uncertainty and can play foul if she chooses to do so. Good luck Prachanda, Good luck India.
(The writer is Fellow, Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, New Delhi. The views expressed here are his own)