BJP leader L. K. Advani meets Prime Minister of Nepal K. P. Sharma Oli on February 21, 2016
Source: PTI
Nepal: PM Oli’s visit to mend fractured ties with India
Anasua Basu Ray Chaudhury
Prime Minister Khadga Prasad Sharma Oli’s six-day official visit to New Delhi has been regarded as an initiative to restore Nepal-India relations that have soured since Nepal adopted a new constitution last year. Oli has consulted former premiers, foreign ministers, diplomats, senior politicians and businessmen before leaving for New Delhi.
New Delhi too has given importance to the visit. Unlike his predecessors, Oli will stay at the Rashtrapati Bhawan and not at a five-star hotel. Beside his trip to New Delhi, Oli, as a head of 46-member delegation, will also visit Uttarakhand and Gujarat. The first foreign trip of Oli as Prime Minister to India indicates that relations between the two nations are getting back on track.
It may be recalled in this context that earlier Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist and Leninist) – CPN-UML Standing Committee member Shanker Pokharel said at a municipal level party activists’ gathering held in Kushma Municipality that the Prime Minister’s forthcoming official state visit to India would be put off if undeclared blockade on transit routes is not fully lifted. According to Pokharel, it would not be appropriate for the head of government to go on a foreign visit by keeping the critical situation on hold.
Rough patch
Bilateral relations with India have gone through a rough patch since September, when New Delhi asked Kathmandu to address the concerns of Madhesis, the residents of the Terai region bordering India, regarding the new statute. It is noteworthy here that Oli’s state visit follows lifting of blockade that caused acute shortage of fuel and essential supplies in landlocked nation. The movement led by the United Democratic Madhesi Front (UDMF) and the related blockade of the Raxaul-Birgunj check post, which accounts for up to 70 percent of supplies to land-locked Nepal from India, ended on 5 February.
Follow-up talks
On 16 February, at a Parliamentary meeting, Oli said that his meetings in New Delhi would dwell on taking Nepal-India relations forward for the mutual benefits of both the countries as per the need of the 21st century and removing misunderstandings. “My visit will focus on taking the age-old close relations between Nepal and India forward with a new perspective, and there should not be any misunderstanding between the two countries,” he argued. “This is a visit without agenda. In another sense, it is a visit beyond and above the agenda” he said before leaving the country. Highlighting Nepal’s stands for peace, unity, mutual benefits and dignity, Oli reconfirmed Nepal’s foreign policy of non-alignment and peaceful co-existence in the meeting.
Few days prior to the Prime Minister’s visit, in an interview with media, Deep Kumar Upadhyay, Nepali Ambassador to India, argued that mostly ‘follow-up’ discussions will be held on the issues of various agreements and understandings reached with India in the past to strengthen bilateral ties. Talks are being held at various levels to put the past agreements into effect. The dimension of bilateral relations is hidden in economic prosperity and sustainable development of the Nepali people. Nepalis are still facing hardships with the shortage of petroleum products and medicines.
“It is crystal clear that Nepali people were pushed into hardship though India denied having imposed a blockade. But the existing problem cannot be solved just by talking against India from dawn to dusk. So we have started the process to bring the strained relations back on track”. He further opined that “when people get petrol, diesel and cooking gas easily in the market, they will feel that things are back to normal. Then only will the Nepali people believe that Nepal-India relation has improved”.
Political mechanism
The experts reveal that the fresh demarcation of federal units as demanded by the UDMF remains unresolved, but there is an unofficial agreement on creating a political mechanism to sort out this issue. India welcomed the developments, which in turn led to Oli’s visit.
Prime Minister Oli said at the parliamentary meeting held on 16 February that the proposed political mechanism to sort out differences related to provincial boundaries will be formed prior to his departure to India and the ongoing political deadlock will be resolved once the political mechanism comes in place. Parties had earlier agreed, in principle, to form such a mechanism which will make recommendations on redrawing of provincial boundaries in three months from the date of its formation.
PM Oli argued that differences between the government and the Madhesi parties have been narrowed down and that remaining differences “will be sorted out after the mechanism is formed”. He also talked about the scope for constitution amendment. It is interesting to note that Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Kamal Thapa in his second visit to India in December had floated a four-point plan aiming to address the demands of the Madhes-based parties and formation of a political mechanism was part of that four-point plan.
(Dr Anasua Basu Ray Chaudhury is a Fellow at Observer Research Foundation, Kolkatta)
Sri Lanka: Broad-basing India ties beyond ethnic issue and fishers’ row
N Sathiya Moorthy
Aiming at finding a quick-fix solution to the India-Sri Lanka ‘fishers issue’ ahead of the Assembly polls in southern Tamil Nadu in May, India’s External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj undertook a visit to Colombo in February. However, even though the subject did come under discussion(s), the visit in fact helped the two nations on another front — to diversify and broad-base bilateral discussions beyond this one – and the near-eternal ‘ethnic issue’ in the island-nation.
It was thus that Swaraj addressed Sri Lanka’s trade and industry representatives, inaugurated an exhibition on ‘Digital India’ in Colombo, where she also announced India’s offer to set up an IT park in the country, to help attract investments. In the past, then Union Commerce Minister Anand Sharma (under then Prime Minister Manmohan Singh) India had proposed an SEZ for pharmaceutical industry in Sri Lanka, but this is the first time that an External Affairs Minister is donning multiple roles such as this.
In turn, this could help the Indian High Commissioner(s) in Colombo to take up future plans, proposals and projects more directly with the ministries and ministers concerned in Sri Lanka than already – and thus help fast-track them. As is known, most economic ministries in India are under the care of junior ministers, designated as ‘Ministers of State’ (MoS). Swaraj, both as a senior member of the Cabinet of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, could throw the weight of her seniority and personality to fast-track bilateral commitments – which has also been among the problems for friendly neighbours like Sri Lanka.
This is not the first time however that India has shown interest in developing an IT Park in Sri Lanka. At the end of ‘Eelam War IV’ then President Mahinda Rajapaksa had invited Infosys promoter N R Narayanamurthy to Colombo, to help promote the IT industry in the country, aimed at job-creation and increased export earnings. It did not go far following the HR-centred protests back home. It was the case with the then Government’s efforts at coordinating with the M S Swaminathan Research Foundation, Chennai, to re-launch farming operations in the war-torn Northern Province. Ultimately, agencies of the Government of India undertook the task.
‘Innovative solution’
The ethnic issue and the fishers’ row were at the centre of the bilateral discourse(s) during Swaraj’s visit. In separate meetings and at the Joint Commission discussions, President Sirisena, Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and counterpart Mangala Samaraweera thanked India for helping to address the ‘ethnic issue’. They also briefed the visitor on the current course of the UNHRC resolution on ‘accountability probe’ attending on the larger question of ethnic reconciliation, and the road that the proposed Constituent Assembly would take.
On the fishers’ row, Minister Swaraj called for an ‘innovative’ solution. She could not have mooted anything better. The fact also remains that even the ethnic issue required an even more ‘innovative’ solution, if permanent peace, based on power-devolution, has to return to Sri Lanka. India may have ideas, but from experience from the IPKF era and otherwise, it has been cautious enough, not to push specific solutions. Instead, it has since left it to the Sri Lankan stake-holders to find answers to their problems, with the clear commitment of support, wherever required and whenever called for.
It is a different matter that Sri Lanka has not reached a stage where they could take up serious discussions, within the government and with the ‘Opposition’ Tamil National Alliance (TNA) on a political solution to the ethnic issue. The proposed Constituent Assembly is expected to be the forum where these answers are expected to take – and be given – a final shape. India is aware of the opportunities thus available to the Sri Lankan stake-holders and the limitations on itself and the so-called international community in pushing any specific course or proposals.
Re-balancing
The broad-basing of bilateral relations has not stopped with the ethnic issue and the fishers’ row. On the crucial ‘China factor’ the new government in Sri Lanka has ‘rebalanced’ relations in ways to address India’s security-related concerns and apprehensions, without losing China as a development partner. The change-of regime in Sri Lanka was enough in a way to reassure India. That also seems to have been the best part, thus far.
For long, India has not had serious issues with neighbourhood nations taking developmental assistance from China. India’s concerns have mostly been about China hedging them for security-related favours. In Sri Lanka’s case, going beyond normal developmental assistance, the Rajapaksa regime permitted Chinese submarines to use near Indian Ocean waters and also berth in its port, not far away from Indian waters and coast.
The advent of the Sirisena-Ranil government in the country by itself has come as a reassurance for India on the China-related security front. Yet, they have not given up on continuing with China-funded development projects, whether old or new. Though pre-poll the duo-led alliance had talked about cancelling the China-funded Colombo Port City project, started by the Rajapaksa regime, they are continuing with the same, as was only to be expected.
National consensus
It’s indicative of a ‘national consensus’ of some kind over developmental funding from China – and the possible violation of the attendant India-related security concerns by the Rajapaksa regime. Not to be seen as a tit-for-tat initiative, India’s aircraft-carrier, INS Vikramaditya, touched down at Colombo Port only weeks after Swaraj’s visit, on a west-east circumnavigation of Sri Lanka, to participate in the prestigious International Fleet Review at Vishakapatnam.
South Indian States do not have a deep-sea port that can accommodate huge container vessels and large oil tankers. Much of South India’s sea-bound trade is carried out through the Colombo Port. It is also true that over 70 percent of all business at Colombo relates to merchandise relating to India. Hence, it’s on the maritime security and naval presence and participation, India feels concerned about adversarial presence in the shared waters with Sri Lanka.
The port-of-call by the Indian carrier now may have put paid to the Rajapaksa regime’s argument that India was always welcome to send its naval vessels but did not find the need, as those from faraway nations required. Yet, there was also truth in the past Sri Lankan belief that India was possibly the only nation of its size that could rush emergency relief, both humanitarian and military, without having to require a military base on the island. This belief was strengthened in particular by the double-quick Indian assistance rushed through those early hours of tsunami, and the immediate withdrawal of Indian Navy and Air Force immediately thereafter.
Rajapaksa’s ‘Mahinda Chintanaya’ election manifestos of 2005 and 2010 provided for promoting Sri Lanka as a maritime and naval hub, mainly as a forex-earner. The development of southern Hambatota Port with bunkering facilities also flowed from such perceptions and planning. It was again a product of a ‘national consensus’ of some kind, though not necessarily put down in words, as such.
Suffice is to point out that PM Ranil too recently referred to developing Sri Lanka as a maritime and naval hub. He did not say – and did not have to say – that it would be done without stirring India’s concerns, or after providing to address India’s concerns. At the very least, Sri Lanka would have ensured that India did not have any concerns from any quarters whatsoever, when it came to the use of Sri Lankan waters and ports, including airports – over which the Rajapaksa regime was reportedly talking about Chinese development of a hangar facility in eastern Trincomallee.
Hurdles, internal
Today, the security or bilateral problems for India-Sri Lanka relations, if any, come not from outside, per se. On bilateral economic front, there is still opposition from the Sri Lankan medical professional bodies on the one hand, and the left-moderate JVP on the other, to the revival of negotiations on the unsigned Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA). If there were plans/hopes for the two sides signing Economic and Technical Cooperation Agreement (ETCA) during Minister Swaraj’s visit, it did not happen. Further negotiations are likely to be revived in the light of internal apprehensions and based on whatever might have transpired during the ministerial visit(s) through the past year and more.
The main thorn in bilateral relation remains to be the fishers’ issue. From the Indian side, the Tamil Nadu fishers, polity and government have been differently and differentially pressing ‘traditional rights’ in ‘historic waters’, and constantly protesting SLN arrests. Post-war, the Tamil fishers of Sri Lanka’s Northern Province in particular have begun agitating more openly than in the past over their Indian brethren ‘stealing’ their ‘food and livelihood’. They keep constantly comparing their plight, suffered through the three decades of war, with the Indian fishers’ ‘thoughtless greed’ of ‘scooping away’ not only their livelihood but also the ‘breeding grounds’ of fishes.
The official position and posturing, by the provincial and national governments, too have been stronger than under the Rajapaksa regime. In the past, all issues India were handled personally by the Executive President or select aides, without reference to the affected fishers or the larger political class. Now, for the first time in years/decades, Parliament discussed the issue, though no formal resolution of any kind has been adopted, yet. PM Ranil on the one hand, his Fisheries Minister Mahinda Amaraweera and other colleagues on the other have been at it too, both inside Parliament and outside.
No comments:
Post a Comment