China and India are emerging as the growth centers of the world. This power shift to Asia based on the growth of China and India has added new dimensions to global diplomacy and a challenge for Nepal to get the best out of its unique geo-strategic location.
The shift has profound implications on Nepal’s multifaceted ties with India and China, which operate on a daily basis at the people’s level, more so in the case of India than China.
One of the important policy debates in Washington DC on whether China is a strategic partner or strategic competitor appears to have entered a new phase. Washington calls China ‘the other global power’ and describes its relationship with the Middle Kingdom as difficult, complex and unpredictable, which is understandable. [break]
Economic reforms in China have been the record success of 20th century, making the country a powerful regional player and a global power. China, the world’s second largest economy, is also the largest energy consumer, a trading superpower and the biggest merchandise exporter. China holds the largest foreign exchange reserves. Its growing number of billionaires is a mark of its spectacular economic success.
On the other side of Nepal’s border, India is the world’s largest democracy. The strength and resilience of its democratic institutions is exemplary. The post Cold War era witnessed a great economic transformation in India. Now the US calls its relations with India “one of the defining partnerships of the 21st century”. President Obama labels India an indispensible partner and has endorsed India’s aspiration for a permanent seat at the UN Security Council. India’s vibrant high tech sector, world-class academic institutions, functioning legal system, social dynamism, and creativity and innovativeness enhance its profile in Asia and beyond. Its economic influence is increasing and diplomatic assertiveness ever growing.
Together, these make Asia the focal point of the world economy, putting Nepal’s neighbors on the pedestal of emerging superpowers. As Asia gains in clout, it will slowly become the epicenter of world affairs. Established and emerging powers remain engaged here comprehensively. Nepal’s advantageous location—with vast resources—between the two powerful neighbors offer great potential for it to emerge as a dynamic country itself. Interestingly, what happens in Nepal has the potential to shape the evolving global order. This calls for deft management of emerging dynamics and dimensions of change.
However, the current scenario looks bleak. Nepal remains embroiled in interminable transition that started in 2006 when the armed Maoists were brought to democratic mainstream. It moved from monarchy to republic through the Constituent Assembly elected in 2008, and is struggling to institutionalize democratic institutions. The prolonged transition has made Nepali politics volatile with its effects pervading all organs of national life.
It is worrying to see growing insensitivity and ignorance to ‘tears, toils and sufferings’ of the people. That has put the country on the map of impunity and injustice. Because of the considerable erosion of state institutions and lack of democratic institutions, Nepal has continuously been a taker, not a maker of any situation. The country is being robbed of its past glory and image. The longer the transition, the more complex will the vicious cycle get. This is worrisome to any peace and democracy loving Nepali.
The situation calls for the creation of an institutional base to promote ties with India and China. For both of them growth alone does not ensure security. Flawed neighborhood is no help to peace and prosperity. Nepal’s neighbors thus need its total support and cooperation as they work their way to great power status. Nepal must work with them in spirit of mutual trust and confidence and assure them that it is fully vigilant and watchful against the infiltration of undesirable elements that are inimical to their interests. If not attended in time, the neighbors’ unpleasant demands will soon pile up. Transitional issues and problems will become inextricably intertwined with neighbors’—and get manifest in uncomfortable ways.
Nepal has been a prime concern of its neighbors. The interests of other powers in the country are no less strong. Ignoring them would be perilous.
Security situation remains the foremost concern in South Asia. There is unusual anxiety as the US prepares to withdraw from Afghanistan in 2014. The American ‘pivot’ focused as it is on the growing strategic significance of the Asia Pacific region, and at China’s growing assertiveness, brings more ambiguity than clarity. Cooperation, competition and distrust characterize Sino-Indian relations.
Cooperation is demonstrated in the volume of their bilateral trade which is expected to top US $100 billion by 2015, and Chinese Premier Li Keqiang’s saying that “If China and India live in harmony and prosper together,” and their markets converge, “it will be a true blessing for Asia and the world at large” (The Hindu, May 20 ). They compete in the neighborhood, various regions, and multilateral forums for influence and raw materials. On the other hand, growing distrust gets reflected in over 150 Chinese incursions into the Indian territories in the last eight months (The Times of India, August 21) and India emphasizing on the maintenance of peace and tranquility in the border areas for cooperative partnership.
Tibet, of course, is the core interest and holds great significance for national integrity of China. Two of the 120 Tibetans’ self-immolations have occurred in Nepal, which has been asked by China to be “vigilant”. The centrality of Tibet in China’s relations with Nepal makes it a foreign and security policy priority. What analyst George Ginsburg wrote about the significance of Tibet all those years ago still rings true: “He who holds Tibet dominates the Himalayan piedmont; he who dominates the Himalayan piedmont threatens the Indian subcontinent, and he who threatens the Indian subcontinent may well have all of Southeast Asia within his reach, and all of Asia.”
In an extraordinary situation, a normal approach does not work. Nepal needs to emerge from the mentality of day to day management, and work for fresh foreign policy initiatives premised on pragmatic considerations. Managing the neighborhood change and adjusting relations accordingly remains the central challenge of Nepal’s foreign policy. Only when the people are at the center of governance and a stable and elected government is in place can the nation successfully navigate this challenge. Will Nepal’s self-centered political players rise to the occasion, stop using foreign policy to further their domestic interests and work to build national capacity and institutionalize democratic foundations, all towards the drafting of a credible foreign policy? One thing is for sure: It won’t be easy.
The author is former Nepali ambassador to the United Nations
dineshbhattarai1@gmail.com
Related story
Nepal has to focus on exporting value-added products than its n...
-1200x560-1779450784.webp)
