South Asia At Sixes And Sevens

Dhruba Hari Adhikary

South Asia is getting further disturbed, thereby raising levels of public concerns in the region and beyond. And it is not just because of longstanding animosity between India and Pakistan. Events in Afghanistan that led to withdrawal of US forces have accentuated these trends, particularly after the Taliban takeover. Lately, it is Sri Lanka which has been radiating distress signals in the vicinity.

Coincidentally, these countries belong to SAARC which has its secretariat in Nepal. The Kathmandu summit, in 2014, had ended with an announcement to meet for the 19th summit in Islamabad two years later. But that has not materialised yet, because India continues to refuse to attend any event taking place in Pakistan, ostensibly in the wake of an armed brawl over Kashmir. Nepal has since then been forced to remain the Chair of a dormant regional body that would have otherwise inched forward with the passage of time. 

Stagnation

Why has this stagnation prevailed in this part of Asia? While the COVID-19 pandemic can be blamed for the latest spell of hiatus, it is a striking reality that arrogance and incompetence of regional leaders have played a role for the current stalemate. And logically, it is the political leadership governing India, the dominant power in the region, which needs to go for introspection. Why hasn’t Delhi’s much-hyped “Neighbourhood First” slogan in its foreign policy produced citable benefits? Why are India’s bilateral relations with its immediate neighbours not warm and friendly despite substantial development assistance it extended to them in the past several decades? The eight-year-old Modi government might find it useful to assess its performance as well as priorities in external affairs.    

Pakistan’s case has been in our midst since the partition in 1947. Why isn’t there warmth in ties with Bangladesh — which received India’s full sympathy and support at the time of its liberation? What has alienated Sri Lanka which is often accused of being friendlier to China? Why is Hindu-majority Nepal not at ease with the Modi-led democratic India? Why does the tiny Maldives hit the international headlines every now and then on coups and counter-coups? What could be Bhutan’s grievances in the context of the border dispute at Doklam? 

Each one of these issues merits serious attention by India which seeks an enhanced global role through a permanent seat at the UN Security Council. India’s political leadership and its bureaucracy should figure out the reasons for alienation if they are palpably different from Delhi’s condescending approach and meddlesome behaviour. Once Shashi Tharoor, a prominent Indian politician, likened Delhi’s policy to one which teaches ‘how to lose friends and alienate people!    

Nepal’s latest woe relates to a report prepared by an Eminent Persons’ Group (EPG). The idea for such a group became a reality in January 2016 when Indian Prime Minister Modi and his Nepali counterpart, KP Sharma Oli, authorised the formation of EPG. Accordingly, an eight member-group (four from each side) conducted a study covering all existing and possible dimensions of bilateral relations, with recommendations suitable for a changing regional as well as international order. Former foreign minister Bhekh Bahadur Thapa worked as coordinator for the Nepali team while BJP leader Bhagat Singh Koshiyari (now governor of Indian state of Maharashtra) led his team of experts. 

As stipulated, the EPG completed its task in two years after holding nine joint meetings alternatively in Nepal and India. According to Yadav Khanal, who worked as the secretary for the Nepali team, both sides agreed to hold the 10th meeting in Delhi, and formally present the report to Prime Minister Modi. Then the report would be submitted to the Nepali prime minister. Koshiyari was to set up an appointment with Prime Minister Modi. But that hasn’t happened yet. Initially, Modi was said to have a busy schedule. COVID-19 pandemic became a subsequent excuse. However, in early April, Modi received his Nepali opposite number, Sher Bahadur Deuba, in Delhi. Six weeks later he paid a return visit — in Lumbini, the birthplace of Buddha.  

That Delhi was looking for a pretext to backtrack from the commitment made at the prime ministerial level (unwilling to accept the report for which considerable time and resources were spent from either side) became evident from what Indian foreign secretary Vinay Mohan Kwatra told the press in Delhi just three days before Modi was visiting Lumbini. “All I would say is that the EPG report will be reviewed once it is submitted. And it is yet to be submitted.” Knowledgeable diplomat Kwatra, Indian envoy in Kathmandu until April, said that he was not aware of issues pertaining to the report! After all, Kwatra is part of the post-1947 India’s notorious bureaucracy. Noted Indian author Brahma Chellaney alluded to an incident, in a May 22 tweet, which bared “the Indian bureaucracy’s neo-colonial mindset.”  

EPG’s recommendations were not to be mandatory. “It has remained a mystery why Delhi has not shown any interest in accepting such a non-binding report,” a comment in The Kathmandu Post said on June 13. Anyhow, Kwatra’s utterances were bound to produce fierce reactions.

Displeasure 

 However, in a sober statement, Nepal’s seasoned diplomat Dr. Thapa expressed displeasure over the way a person holding a responsible position in the government of India implied that the EPG was a non-governmental initiative. This isn’t true. Needless to emphasise, had it been a NGO-type exercise, incumbent prime minister, Deuba, and his predecessor — and now the leader of the Opposition — Oli, would not have engaged in a verbal spat at the national assembly over the EPG report. 

In any case, four long years have gone by since the EPG report took its final shape. Meanwhile, Thapa, 85, possesses frail health and is therefore anxious to make public the outcomes of his team’s work before it is too late. He and his team-mates want to bequeath something to posterity, enabling them to evaluate the hard works of their ancestors who vowed to protect and defend Nepal and Nepali-ness from potential predators and invaders.     

(Adhikary is a journalist active since 1978 and writes on regional issues. dhrubahari@gmail.com)