Nepal–India relations: Review is necessary

By Hans Lückhoff Although Nepal has made efforts to revisit the 1950 Treaty of Peace and Friendship with India for over 20 years now, the Eminent Persons Group (EPG), which is supposed to review all bilateral agreements between the two countries has met in July for the first time. Nepali governments have often stressed that the treaty is outdated and one-sided, but few have made actual proposals for improvement. Without a consensus on a national India policy, the EPG and all other attempts are bound to fail. On the other hand, the review has the potential to be a golden opportunity to improve the damaged relations between India and Nepal. The political situation at the time of the signing of the treaty could not be more different from the situation today, especially in Nepal: India had just become independent, and in Nepal the Rana rulers were in power without democratic legitimacy – the treaty was a part of the struggle to stay in power, the regime wanted to satisfy India and keep them from supporting democratic forces. These ideas of a Rana maharaja cannot be the framework for the democratic powers of today. While India never opposed a review, Nepal never seriously pressured India to rework the treaty. During his first term as PM, Prachandra advocated to scrap the treaty instead of reviewing it, and pushed the discussion about its actuality. Nepali governments have criticised the treaty as unequal for over 20 years and all major political parties are ready for a review. But for years the government just kept complaining without seriously urging for reform. Five years after the first conception of the EPG, it has finally been founded and convened for the first time in July this year. However, in all these years no concrete ideas for real change have been made. India has not brought up a plan and sees Nepal in the initiative, so the government has to come up with something. And if there is no plan, no improvement will be made. This scenario can be really dangerous. If the EPG reviews the treaties, and only rhetorical changes are made, there might be little chance for real improvement future. After that kind of deal, everyone who supports the status quo can say that change has already happened and that there is no further need to renegotiate. The EPG bears great responsibility here – it could waste a big opportunity for change. It took over 20 years from the first complains about the treaty until the formation of the EPG, and the starting point for a second reform can only be worse. This treaty is the basic framework for economic relations with India, and a review without improvement may make it harder to break the continuous stagnation of the Nepalese economy. There is another problem connected to this issue: Is this the right time to redefine Indo-Nepalese relations? The relationship is recovering from an all-time low after the blockade, and anti-Indian sentiment is growing in Nepal. Would it not be better to wait for a time when relations are better and negotiations can be made without grudges? If we look to Europe for example, most of their bilateral treaties of friendship were made after World War II or the Cold War. Diplomatic relations were tense or bad, but these treaties contributed a great deal to the improvement of these relations. This can also work in South Asia as not all of these treaties were made between economically equal nations, for example between Germany and its struggling post-communist neighbours. They set past grievances aside and looked into the future. A new treaty can be a framework for a new start based upon dialogue. Waiting for a hypothetical “good time” which may or may not come is not a solution –  a new treaty is a unique opportunity and an active approach to improve the relations. But also here Nepal must realise that this is an opportunity which most likely will not come back in quite a long time. Many arguments have been made about the necessity, the form and the time of the review. The legal framework of a relationship this important cannot rely on terms negotiated by the Rana rulers, therefore a review is necessary. The founding of the EPG is a step in the right direction. But caution is important: If the talks bring no results, no agreement might be better than a new contract which will keep the status quo. However, if the EPG produces good results, it has great potential to accelerate the important improvement of relations with India and to create a better economic perspective for Nepal. Hans Lückhoff is an intern with FES Nepal Office