HELLO INDIA, IT'S BEEN TO MUCH DOWN HERE TO BEAR MAN !
Dear All:
|
We should thank Bihari Krishna Shresthaji for his thoughtful analysis on the current political situation. Nepal is facing a very grave crisis at the present time. His comments show that he is not a politician and he is not aligned with any political party. As I know him, he is a retired civil servant and a concerned citizen who writes about his opinions occasionally on this forum. I agree with most of his ideas and comments and would like to share his concern. I would, however, like to express some of my opinions with regard to Nepal-India relations.
I believe, when we talk about Nepal-India relationship, we need to go back and start with the history of Nepal. First of all, comes the unification of Nepal that was started by Prithvi Narayan Shah, Great. Because, had he not started the unification process some 248 years ago, more than likely, there would be no Nepal today.
Unfortunately, however, there are some people in Nepal who call Prithvi Narayan, a villain, aggressor, expansionist, dictator or what not. This kind of accusation has no base and could not come from a person who considers him or herself a Nepali. Because, if Prithvi Narayan had not unified Nepal, the East India Company would have colonized Nepal and merged into India two and half centuries ago. There would be no Nepal and we probably would not be speaking Nepali either. Therefore, everyone who consider him or herself a Nepali in true sense should try to understand some historical facts that affect Nepali politics.
Secondly, after the Anglo-Nepal War of 1814-1816, Nepali politics changed tremendously. The colonialist forced Nepal into an unjust and treacherous treaty which is called "Treaty of Sugauli". This was not a treaty in a real sense. Because when a treaty is signed there are give and take on both side. The colonialist had most of the benefits and Nepal had almost nothing to gain.
More importantly, the British so cunning put such clauses of the treaty that they succeeded in inserting grave limitations on Nepal's sovereignty.
For example, 1) Nepal could not contact any Foreign, European or American National or Government without the consent of East India Company Government, in advance. 2) When Nepal had to purchase arms and ammunition, Nepal Government had to inform the East India Company Government and get their prior consent. Although it was not that important in terms of Trade and Transit in those days, Nepal, basically, became a landlocked country since 1816.
After the Sepoy Mutiny of 1857, East India Company was dissolved and the British colonial Government took over the administration of the entire colony. In Nepal, Jung Bahadur Rana had already taken over the administrative power. Jung Bahadur and his nephews and grand nephews ruled Nepal autocratically for 104 years. The Ranas knew that their rule could survive only with good relation and blessings from the British. They just served them in order to continue one family run autocracy in Nepal.
When the British gave independence, they created India and Pakistan out of their empire, the political dynamics of South Asia changed, dramatically. When they left, they not only divided India into two separate countries but they were also forced to shape Pakistan in two wings as West Pakistan and East Pakistan. East Pakistan later became independent from Pakistan and became Bangladesh on March 21,1971. India played a major role in the separation of Pakistan.
On the other hand, Nepal, unfortunately, was deprived of the opportunity of this geopolitical change. After the end of World War II, Indian Political leaders like Gandhi, Nehru, Patel, Jinha etc. intensified their independence movement and the British granted independence to India and Pakistan. During the period Nepali politicians like BP Koirala, Subarna Shamsher Rana etc who were following the Indian independent leaders in India, got inspired to rebel against Rana regime in Nepal. Thus, Nepali Congress as a political party was born in India.
Before the period of Indian independence, a lot of political agitation, turmoil, negotiation was going on. The main political actors were engaged with the agendas of their interest. Unfortunately, Nepali political leaders were not matured enough to think what was good for Nepal in the long term. Those leaders perhaps did not have the knowledge on Nepal's history or did not have the courage to bring up the issues of "Sugauli Treaty", when the Indian political leadership and the British were intensely negotiating the division of India and Pakistan.
The point is, if the British were willing or were forced to negotiate in creating another country, Pakistan with two wings, East and West Pakistan, why would not they return Nepali land that they had forcefully occupied since the so-called "Treaty of Sugauli of 1816"? In fact, the British would be very happy to return Nepal's territories they had occupied. Unfortunately, there was nobody to make a claim for Nepal.
The Rana regime's most important interest was to hang on to power as long as they could. They were afraid that if they raised the question of lost territories, Gandhi, Nehru and other prominent leaders involved in negotiation for independence would get angry and oppose the idea and would work in shortening Rana regime. Besides, probably the Ranas had the notion that Nepalis living in Indo-Nepal border area would intensify the agitation in removing the Ranas from power, once the regained territory becomes part of New Nepal. Thus, the ignorance or the ineptness of Nepali Congress leaders of late forties on one hand and on the other, Rana regime's self-centered interest, unfortunately, prevented the possibility of Nepal regaining the lost land.
After India became independent from the Britain in 1947, the Indian political parties that have been ruling India has been looking at Nepal with almost the same colonial eyes as the colonialist did to them. They have been trying to keep Nepal under their umbrella. They want to micromanage everything in Nepal.
Until 1950, Nehru disillusioned Mohan Shamsher with false promise for the continuation of Rana rule. After the political change of 1950, Nehru had almost full control of Nepali politics. King Tribhuvan perhaps was helpless because he had to surrender to India in order to regain this throne. He had to pay for Nehru's favour.
Many people will find it very hard to accept or they don't want to agree on some of the historical facts even though they know the truth.
Few crucial historical events have occurred in Nepal since 1816. We blame Jung Bahadur for installing Ranacracy in 1846 after Kot massacre. But we forget that Jung Bahadur brought stability in the country and saved Nepal from British colonialist. Because, after 1857, British consolidated so much power that they had become so powerful militarily that they could have invaded and merged Nepal with British India easily. But Jung was such a visionary, he established a good relation with the British instead and saved Nepal's sovereignty. Not only that he negotiated with the British and installed border pillars with India and thus avoided possible border dispute with the colonial power. In fact, if Jung Bahadur had not redefined Nepal-India border, encroachment on the border would have been inevitable. For example, we can imagine India's role in view of their encroachment at Kalapani, Susta, lumpia dhura to name a few disputed border areas between the two countries. Besides, it was Jung Bahadur's diplomacy and statesmanship that the British returned four districts of Banke, Bardia, Kailali and Kanchanpur in western Tarai.
In the history of Nepal, King Mahendra has played many important roles. Some people blame him for installing partyless panchayat system. It is true King Mahendra banned multi-party democracy, introduced panchayat system. But we have to study the situation of the time. Nepali Congress was the biggest party when more than 90 percent of the people were illiterate. Nepal was a vassal state of India. Even Nepali currency was not in circulation in the southern parts of Nepal. Indian military was in the check post of Nepal-China border. India had too much interference in every sector of Nepali society. King Mahendra did many good things for Nepal. King Mahendra wanted to present Nepal as a sovereign country in the world. During his reign, Nepal became a member of UN, He established diplomatic relations with all the major countries of the world, made Nepal a member of the nonaligned country. He established the close relation with communist China, He had Nepal and China relation grow to a good friendship. He even made China agree that Mount Everest was in Nepal. Mahendra's non-aligned policy established the good relation with another communist country like the Soviet Union. Like China, Soviet Union gave many economic assistances and established some industries in the country as well. During Mahendra's reign, Nepal made a lot of progress in many fields, economic, social and cultural etc. Above all, King Mahendra brought stability in Nepali politics and stood firmly against Indian hegemony. He established Nepal as a sovereign, independent Nation with diplomatic relation established with more than 50 countries in the world. Had he not been a good ruler who fought for Nepal's national interest, it is doubtful where Nepal would stand now.
Now, with all the forewords and backgrounds, I want to come to the point. No matter who the person is, a dictator, a king, a communist party leader, or a democratic party leader, we must respect those people who had made some contribution to the interest of their country. Jung Bahadur rose to power and was an autocratic ruler, but he did well for Nepal. With the same token, King Mahendra introduced Nepal on the world stage, elevated the prestige of Nepal as an independent and sovereign Nation. After Prithvi Narayan Shah and perhaps Jung Bahadur Rana, nobody has done good things for Nepal than King Mahendra. Let's not be bias, let's see the historical facts and figures before we arrive at a conclusion.
During the recent time from 1990 onward, nobody has done a good thing for Nepal. We have seen numerous political party leaders, about 22 Prime ministership (some same person becomes PM multiple times) over a period of 26 years. However, none has shown the quality of a National leader. Nobody could rise above self-interest. In the name of revolutions for the betterment of country, thousands of Nepalis have been killed, country has been pushed to the state of failure, most of the leaders who roamed the streets like paupers have become multimillionaires and billionaires whereas most the most of the people are getting poorer who have to go to a foreign country for earning a living because of rampant unemployment in the country.
Despite all of this, however, PM Oli has shown some honesty. He seems to have some dreams, some vision to lead the country in a positive way. Most of all, he stood firm against the Indian interference in Nepal's internal affairs whether it be in the promulgation of New constitution, in giving contracts in building road such fast-track highway to and from Kathmandu, airports, hydropower projects etc. He also showed the guts to stand firm against the economic blockade imposed by India in the recent past. He also did sign trade and transit agreement with China. China is Nepal's good neighbor. Unlike India, China has not interfered in Nepal's internal affairs. As a neighbor, China has always maintained good relation with Nepal. PM KP Sharma Oli has taken historic step to move Nepal away from total dependence on trade and transit with India. This is indeed a great achievement of the PM.
Despite Nepali Congress and Pushpa Kamal Dahal's Maoist Party's conspiracy, Nepali people should support PM Oli. Because it has become abundantly clear that India is behind the conspiracy to bring Oli's government down. People should rise against this blatant interference and defeat and drive the foreign interest from Nepal now and forever.
Yet another good thing that PM KP Sharma Oli has done is the establishment of EPG (Eminent Person Group). This is a very good start with regard to Nepal-India Relation. This group must work for the interest of Nepal. Each member of this group must be totally honest for their country, no matter what. They must not be self-centered and must never sell themselves at the cost of the motherland. EPG group that represent Nepal must discuss the treaty of sugauli of 1816, Friendship treaty of 1950 in particular and all other treaties with India in general. Most of these treaties are unequal treaties, most of them have clauses that are more beneficial to Indian than they to Nepal. Therefore, with thorough discussion and review, Nepali group must negotiate for just and fair treaties. For example, 1950 treaty says, "all previous treaties signed by Nepal and British East India company will be null and void". If that is the agreement of 1950, India should have returned all the territories that British occupied since 1816. Although Nepal already lost the opportunity to reclaim the land during the time Indian independence, Nepal can still revisit the treaty. India will not return the lost land, but we can at least start the dialogue and see how they respond. Even if they refuse to return all the Indian-occupied land, we can still negotiate for other concessions like unrestricted trade and transit facilities to Nepal etc. We can also negotiate for them to sign an agreement not to indulge on another blockade to Nepal ever again.
Uttam B. Khatri
Silver Spring, MD
USA
No comments:
Post a Comment