Nepal's convulsions, lessons for India: Rethinking South Asian integration

There have been half-hearted efforts to remake South Asia in the image of the European Union or at least the Asean, but now they seem to have been given up entirely

The common thread among the recent eruptions of popular violence in Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal, has been the lack of development and employment opportunities among a younger generation that is more educated, more exposed to regional and global currents, and more connected and engaged, both among themselves and with the wider world, thanks to the internet and social media. These produce eddies and currents that may have no real focus but allow the venting of frustration and resentment, even while providing a platform for celebration of dance and music and for expressions of creative energies.

 

 According to one estimate, 73 per cent of Nepali households own mobile phones and 55 per cent of the population uses the internet regularly. As in most developing countries, the proportion would be much higher among what is now being called Generation Z (or Gen Z). This is an empowered generation, but not always an enabled one, whose energies could be directed towards nation-building, towards the economic and social reform of their societies, and towards a consciousness of being part of a larger humanity.

 

That requires a quality of political leadership that is sadly missing. It is important to realise that the convulsions we have witnessed among our subcontinental neighbours and even beyond, for example, most recently in Indonesia, have occurred in countries that are democracies, however flawed they may be. It would appear as if the default tendency among democracies is to drift towards oligarchy and sometimes towards autocracy, even if their electoral system remains functional. Given the increasing use of money power in elections and the use of political office as a means of enrichment and for mobilising even more funds for the next electoral exercise, it is not surprising that an enriched and entitled elite begins to lose touch with the popular condition.

 

The “Nepo-baby” meme that went viral in Nepal drew attention to the rich and luxurious lifestyles of the progeny of the country’s political elite, even while the youth had no jobs or economic opportunities. It is generally the case that if threats of popular opposition do arise, these can be deflected, for a time, by appeals to narrow nationalism or arousing anxieties over identity. We have seen this in Nepal where strong people to people relations and deep cultural affinities between our two countries have sometimes been overwhelmed by a deliberate stoking of anti-Indian sentiment. It is a measure of how far things had gone in Nepal that in this upheaval, the usual Indian conspiracy angle was missing. Deflection as a political instrument it seems also has its limits.

 

It is important to understand this before a reverse tendency, which invariably looks for that invisible foreign hand as the key factor in what may be happening in our neighbourhood, takes hold. It is as if the people of those countries are devoid of all agency. This attitude precludes any sober and informed analysis of what forces may be at work in a periphery that is so critical to India’s interests.

 

What should be India’s approach while political transition takes place in Nepal?

 

One, remain aligned with the sentiments of the people of Nepal. Prime Minister Narendra Modi did the right thing in welcoming the assumption of office by the interim government led by former Chief Justice Sushila Karki and for praising the Nepali youth for helping to clear the massive debris from the streets of Kathmandu. It was important to distinguish between violent rioters and looters and Nepali youth. That strikes the right note.

 

Two, the temptation to insert oneself into this process should be avoided. There are times when getting out of the way is a more prudent policy. Be ready to offer support and advice when asked for.

 

Three, be ready to contribute to the monumental work of reconstruction and economic revival without which a successful political transition will inevitably run aground and create conditions for another upheaval.

 

We should take a leaf out of the relative success of India’s response to the recent political transitions in the Maldives and Sri Lanka. India’s prompt support to Sri Lanka during the dark days of its deep economic and financial crisis has enabled a more positive turn in the bilateral relationship, despite the coming into power of a political party with a history of hostility towards India.

 

In the Maldives, India did not rise to the bait when an “India Out” campaign swept the current President to power, instead allowing the logic of proximity and economic interdependence to play itself out. Relations are on an even keel for now.

 

In both Bangladesh and Nepal, there has been criticism that India was caught unawares, that warning signals had been ignored, and that no diplomacy was conducted to prevent, or at least anticipate, what had admittedly been brewing for some time. To think that India has the power and influence to prevent such political eruptions is debatable. But this also exposes the lack of sustained political engagement at multiple levels that India needs to keep itself plugged into developments in its periphery. The political engagement, including at the leadership level, is episodic, triggered mostly by crisis. The rest of the time, it is bureaucratic management that sustains these relations. Even bureaucratic management is strained due to a lack of both human and material resources. “Neighbourhood First” has remained an aspiration, but the actual conduct of our foreign policy has not reflected its priority.

 

India’s relations with its neighbourhood have both a bilateral and a regional dimension. The subcontinent is a single geopolitical, geoeconomic, and security space. There is a shared history and culture, along with ethnic and kinship spillovers across political boundaries. India, as the largest, most powerful country in the region, has much to gain from regional integration. There have been half-hearted efforts to remake South Asia in the image of the European Union or at least the Asean (Association of Southeast Asian Nations), but now they seem to have been given up entirely. This is a mistake. To repeat, there is a running thread among the recent political upheavals in our neighbourhood. A regional perspective is as indispensable as nurturing bilateral relationships to a Neighbourhood First policy.

 

The author is a former foreign secretary