Nepal-India ties could benefit immensely if India took a position on monarchy after Nepal’s political process is over.

The Indian foreign minister Pranab Mukherjee’s visit to Nepal took place at a time when there is a realisation amongst the political class of the new range of relationships that India and Nepal are entering into. India has been seen amongst the political class as a country that balanced its approach towards the people with its approach towards the King. The famous twin-pillar theory of constitutional monarchy and multiparty democracy that sustained India’s foreign policy in Nepal lay in tatters after the royal coup of February 1, 2005.

Historically, post-1950, India’s attempts to nudge Nepal onto the democratic path had been carefully finessed by the reigning monarchs of Nepal. King Mahendra, for example, played the China card against India in the early 60s and effectively subverted the nascent democratic movement in Nepal.

King Birendra was more subtle and pragmatic but to a large extent he continued with the policies of Panchayat Raj until 1990 when a popular democratic movement forced his hand. The period of democratic play from 1990 to 2005 was chequered and unstable but no one can doubt the spread of democratic aspirations in the country during that period. It is in this phase that the aspirations of the common Nepali came to the fore. The key to the Jana Andolan II in April 2006 was people’s participation. The seven party alliance (SPA) along with the CPN-Maoists led a major thrust against a blinkered power-hungry monarchy which made Jana Andolan II a huge success.

The critical role played by the Nepali people during this changed context took many countries by surprise because almost all countries looked at Nepal through the prism of a monarchy and a multiparty democracy. After February 1, 2005, the King in a sense became an obstacle to the genuine aspirations of the Nepali people instead of being their spiritual representative. The lag between foreign policy as stated by mandarins in different countries and facts on the Nepali ground was seen in the actions of these countries. China, for example, said that the coup was an internal matter of Nepal. The position of the US was clearly against the King but it vacillated between the so-called stability that a monarchy would provide as against the perceived anarchy of a government in which the Maoists were present.

Perhaps India’s approach was firm yet pragmatic. Probably for the first time, India understood the rationale of democracy in Nepal being a self-actualised system which did not require foreign fuel to run. India was forced to do a massive course correction post the first declaration by the King by making its foreign secretary Shyam Saran say that India was only going to abide by the wishes of the people of Nepal. This clearly was an acknowledgement of the fact at the highest levels in South Block that monarchy in Nepal had overplayed its hand and India needed to take a stand which was in consonance with the voice of the people of Nepal.

Subsequent events have shown that Indo-Nepal relations have now reached a maturity where give and take is based on the needs of both the countries. The recent visit of Indian foreign secretary Shiv Shankar Menon was important with regard to one thing that was said during his visit — India was prepared to review the entire 1950 treaty.

There has been a significant movement on hydropower projects in Nepal to be developed with Indian help. What’s interesting to note is that while Nepal is seen to be a promising hydropower rich nation, it is India that has promised to supply power to Nepal during the dry season. Now economic diplomacy is likely to take centrestage between India and Nepal. Hydropower is just one area of co-operation between the two countries. The other is likely to be infrastructural development. The services sector, too, is likely to receive a massive boost once the political situation settles down in Nepal.

Indian foreign minister Mukherjee’s visit was important in this context. India and Nepal have to come out of the old paradigm of what binds the two nations together. While cultural ties do make the relationship unique, what is now important is that there is an economic glue that holds the two countries together. This economic glue is also strengthened by India’s commitment to the Nepali people and their aspirations. This commitment now needs to be carefully nurtured at all levels.

One of the critical issues facing Nepal is the political uncertainty on the future of the monarchy in the country. Instead of trying to pre-judge the issue, it would probably help Indo-Nepal relations immensely if India takes a position on the monarchy after the current political process in Nepal is over. This would help remove any mistrust that still remains in the minds of the people in Nepal vis- a-vis India.

Sadanand is a New Delhi-based research scholar specialising in foreign policy