Disclaimer: Please note that the views expressed below represent the opinions of the article’s author. The following work does not necessarily represent the views of the Synergy: Journal of Contemporary Asian Studies.
Abstract
As immediate neighbours, India and Nepal have developed their bilateral relations through open borders and deep-rooted cultural connections. The India-Nepal Treaty of Peace and Friendship of 1950 is one of the instruments that has helped in sustaining long-lasting bilateral relations. However, since the last decade, particularly after Nepal’s Maoist-led coalition government in August 2008, demands for revisions to the peace and friendship treaty have been in the spotlight in the context of shifting priorities in bilateral relations and new geopolitical contours. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi recently visited Nepal and reaffirmed India’s support for revising the principles of the treaty. This policy brief analyses the current applicability of the treaty and its impact on strengthening bilateral relations between India and Nepal. The author opines that by recognizing the major loopholes of the 1950 treaty, bilateral cooperation between India and Nepal can be rejuvenated into an enhanced model of strategic partnership that endeavours to bolster regional security, political stability, realignment, and economic flexibility.
Keywords: India, Nepal, Treaty of Peace and Friendship, bilateral relations, strategic partnership
Introduction
The 1950 India-Nepal Treaty of Peace and Friendship is a bilateral treaty between India and Nepal. This treaty is acknowledged as the foundation of bilateral relations between the two neighboring countries. The treaty was signed on 31 July 1950 in Kathmandu by Mohan Shamsher Jang Bahadur Rana, Prime Minister of Nepal, and Chadreshwar Narayan Singh, Indian ambassador to Nepal.[1] The treaty is comprised of ten articles. It envisages eternal harmony and amity between the two countries, and upholds the territorial integrity and national sovereignty of both nations. The treaty consents to the unrestricted movement of individuals and imports between both states, as well as effective cooperation on matters of foreign and defense relations. A major reason behind the signing of the treaty was the advent of China as a one-party communist state in 1949 and its occupation of Tibet, which concerned India and Nepal on issues of regional security.[2]
Background
The treaty has been in the focus of controversy between India and Nepal since 1959, when a confidential document negotiated alongside the Treaty was leaked to the public. The document bequeaths India as the first favorite in Nepal’s natural resource projects. However, Nepal has given many projects to China due to India’s reluctance over this clause. Moreover, the lopsided status of the treaty created resentment in Nepal, because it was signed between the Nepali King Mohan Shamsher Jung Bahadur Rana and the Indian Ambassador Chandreshwar Narayan Singh.[3]
In the opinion of the Nepalese public, the treaty was an insolence to Nepal because the Rana dynasty was not considered representatives of the Nepali people. Some Nepalese academics and political analysts argue that India forced the Rana king to sign the treaty, and that this treaty was a partisan one exclusively inclined towards India’s interests. This treaty enforced many compulsions on Nepal, which disgruntled the Nepalese people over the provisions of this treaty.[4]
The issue of amending a treat deemed to be extremely unfair by most of the Nepalese public was first outstretched in public by Kirti Nidhi Bista in the year 1969. He was the Prime Minister of Nepal at the time, and called for an immediate revision of the treaty. Later, it was the Communist Party of Nepal which officially raised a request to amend the treaty in 1994. The demands gained even more traction during the Maoist insurgency in Nepal in 1996.[5]
In the Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist’s 2008 election manifesto for Constituent Assembly elections, the party assured that it will revoke the 1950 treaty and not allow either India or China to interfere in the domestic political affairs of Nepal. Recently, in reaction to the demands of the Nepalese Communist government for a revision of the treaty, the Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi echoed India’s support to do the same.[6]
Shortcomings in the Treaty
Articles 1 and 2 of the treaty acknowledge mutual respect towards the territorial integrity and national sovereignty of both states. These provisions entail that both governments notify each other of every severe abrasion with any neighboring state that may cause a fissure to their cordial bilateral affairs.[7] However, Nepal argued that India did not inform or consult Nepal during the 1962 Sino-Indian war and 1965 and 1971 wars with Pakistan subsequently. However, these charges were refuted by India, who argued that the Koirala government of Nepal received regular communication regularly from its Indian colleagues on the advances in Sino-Indian affairs.[8]
Article 5 of the treaty reads: “the government of Nepal shall be free to import, from or through the territory of India, arms, ammunition or war like material and equipment necessary for the security of Nepal. The procedure giving effect to this arrangement shall be worked out by the two governments acting in consultation.” Concurrently, the document of exchange held in confidentiality until 1959 reads: “any arms, ammunition or war like material and equipment necessary for the security of Nepal that the government of Nepal may import through the territory of India shall be so imported with the assistance and agreement of the Government of India.”[9] This document makes it clear that this article forced Nepal to take shelter under the security aegis of India. However, this article seems to be obsolete in practice, as Nepal imported arms as it wished from countries such as USA, Belgium, and China. The treaty, however, does not impose limitations on Nepal’s ability to bring in arms from third party countries. Therefore, India violated this section of the treaty in 1988–89 when it imposed an economic blockade on Nepal for making a secret deal with China with regards to intelligence-sharing and the acquisition of weapons, including anti-aircraft guns. As a landlocked country, Nepal was severely affected by this blockade, running deficits on every-day commodities needed to sustain livelihoods.
Article 6 and 7 of the treaty addresses bilateral economic prospects and national treatment of citizens in each other’s country. Article 6 itself is a contradiction to existing Nepali law that bars foreigners from buying and selling property, a regulation implemented by King Mahendra in 1958. This law also contravenes rules of anti-monopoly according to principles of international trade, which stipulates balanced treatment for companies of all nationalities.[10] In practice, Nepal has not been able to reap benefits from this Article. Nepalese actors have not been competitive in the Indian economy and private sector, while Indian companies are dictating Nepalese markets.
In Article 7, equal rights are to be given with regards to residence, job opportunity and acquiring property in each other’s territory. However, in 1987, Nepal enforced a work permit system for foreigners, including Indian citizens. Nepalese migrants to India also no longer enjoyed the same rights they used to relish prior to 1987. Nepalese Gorkhas recruitment in the Indian Army continues, but there have been many demands to cap the enlistment of Nepalese individuals to increase the intake of Indian Gorkhas instead.[11]
The Maoists’ main case of opposition against this treaty is that the Indian government was tight-lipped when Nepalese citizens were deported from certain states of Northeast India, notably in Meghalaya and Assam in the late 1980s due to the rise of anti-migrant sentiments. Nepalese political analysts argue that India should not expect Nepal to obey the rules of a treaty that India has failed to comply with.[12]
Article 10 of the treaty stipulates that “the Treaty shall remain in force until it is terminated by either party by giving one year’s notice.” Despite this clause and Nepal’s incessant campaign against the treaty, neither Nepal nor India have completed the formality of revision. Both countries have made this issue obdurate, while a similar treaty with Bhutan has been amended with minor changes.[13]
Policy Recommendations
This brief argues that both countries should be clear regarding the articles that require amendments and which changes are indispensable. It is essential to bear in mind that reviewing or replacing the treaty should aim to further strengthen the ties between Nepal and India, rather than to deteriorate them. The amendment in the pact seek to benefit and safeguard the national interests of both countries, and avoid provoking further troubles and complexities.[14] For instance, there are currently more than two dozen open border points between Nepal and India, offering positive business prospects and liberty for movement.
To enhance people-to-people diplomacy, India and Nepal must be determined to fix key border-related concerns, including the disputed territories of Kalapani and Susta. In 2014, both India and Nepal settled on initiating foreign secretary-level dialogues to solve the disagreements over Kalapani and Susta.[15] However, to date, no dialogue on this significant issue has taken place.
Both countries should respect the ethics of an open border, an aspect exclusive to bilateral cooperation. In recent years, various crimes have been committed along the border due to a lack of proper security procedures, constituting a major security threat for both countries. Rather than closing the border, which may a cause a serious rift to the societies and economies of both democratic states, India and Nepal should seek to enhance the security system at border check posts and strengthen bilateral cooperation between respective intelligence networks to thwart any future unlawful activities through the open border.[16]
Mutual respect is the foremost feature of bilateral cooperation, and both India and Nepal must respect each other’s political authority. India should stay away from domestic political conflicts in Nepal, and refrain from creating panic over increasing Chinese investments in Nepal. Simultaneously, Nepal should not blame India for every domestic political crisis, and acknowledge Indian priorities of thwarting terror and criminal activities hatched in Nepal and directed towards the Indian state.[17] Both countries should focus on economic and developmental issues, rather than political gimmicks.
The completion of the Pancheswar hydro project can serve as the dream project of bilateral cooperation between India and Nepal. Until the project’s completion, both countries should strive to develop new initiatives such that more people-centric projects can be fulfilled in the future. India should seek to regain the age-old trust of Nepal by assuring the Nepalese government that it is has no desire to place Nepal under geo-political influence. India’s gesture to seek mutual development must be reflected in its political and diplomatic dialogue with Nepal, such that long-standing bilateral cooperation can be further enhanced.[18]
Recent Developments
Recently, the 9th and last dialogue of the Eminent Persons Group on Nepal-India Relations (EPG-NIR) concluded in Kathmandu. The dialogue highlighted three themes – the peace treaty, treaty on water resources, and trade and transit treaty. Nepal’s urgent demand to re-evaluate Articles 2, 5, 6 and 7 of the treaty was worthy of critical intellection. These provisions violate Nepal’s sovereignty and places it in a position of chiseled discrimination in terms of trade, economic development and movement of people between the two nations.[19]
The Indian side acknowledged the need to further study the unequal provisions in the 1950 Peace and Friendship Treaty. Both sides recognized that the treaty must replaced by a new one that reflects the contemporary domestic, regional and global scenario. This was the first official communication between India and Nepal with regards to the treaty, and the two parties promised to discuss and re-examined all bilateral agreements.[20]
Conclusion
The backdrop under which the treaty was signed has been entirely altered in the contemporary scenario. In fact, China, the most important apprehension when the treaty was signed, has now turned into one of Nepal and India’s most vital economic partners. It is also significant to note that Nepal has always demanded the amendment or termination of the treaty without any concrete proposals. On the other hand, India has reiterated its support for dialogue on revising the treaty, but also has not taken any serious measures. Jayaraj Acharya, former Nepalese ambassador to the United Nations, commented on this issue by stating: “I don’t think people have made serious study of its provisions and the consequences of its revision. Actually, I am worried that Nepalese side is reportedly raising the issue without any serious homework”.[21]
In this way, both countries must bear in mind that this issue is not only about the bilateral treaty. Rather, the underpinning issue of bilateral relations between the governments and citizens of India and Nepal are at stake. Therefore, it is obligatory for both countries to avoid unnecessary political rhetoric and gimmicks, and re-think this issue in meticulous manner.
Abhishek Mohanty is pursuing a Masters in Politics: International and Area Studies from Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi. He completed his graduation in International Relations from the Central University of Jharkhand, Ranchi in 2017. He is a scholarship holder of BRICS International School 2018, Moscow. His areas of research include critical analysis of foreign policies and global issues of Indo-Pacific and Post-Soviet countries, international and regional institutions, world political history, religion in global politics and international election observation.
References
Karki, Rohit, and Lekhnath Paudel. “Challenges to the Revision of the Nepal–India 1950 Peace and Friendship Treaty.” Strategic Analysis 39, no. 4 (2015): 402-16.
Manhas, Natasha, and Mamta Sharma. “The 1950 Treaty of Peace & Friendship: An Issue of Contention between India and Nepal.” International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications 4, no. 11 (2014): 1-5.
Nayak, Nihar. “India–Nepal Peace and Friendship Treaty (1950): Does it Require Revision?.” Strategic Analysis 34, no. 4 (2010): 579-593.
“Nepal-India EPG Finalises Joint Report.” The Himalayan Times. July 01, 2018. Accessed October 11, 2018. https://thehimalayantimes.com/nepal/nepal-india-epg-finalises-joint-report/.
Patel, Sneha. “A New Journey in the New Context: Nepal-India Relations.” IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science 22, no. 9 (2017): 73-79.
Rajan, Krishna V. “Nepal Today: Bad Politics Trumps Good Economics.” Indian Foreign Affairs Journal 11, no. 2 (2016): 95.
Subedi, Surya P. “Transit arrangements between Nepal and India: A study in international law.” Geopolitics 2, no. 1 (1997): 175-196.
Thapliyal, Sangeeta. “India and Nepal treaty of 1950: the continuing discourse.” India quarterly 68, no. 2 (2012): 119-133.
[1]Nihar Nayak, “India–Nepal Peace and Friendship Treaty (1950): Does it Require Revision?” Strategic Analysis 34, no. 4 (2010): 579
[2]Nayak, “India–Nepal Peace and Friendship Treaty (1950): Does it Require Revision?,” 580.
[3]Manhas, Natasha, and Mamta Sharma, “The 1950 Treaty of Peace & Friendship: An Issue of Contention between India and Nepal.” International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications 4, no. 11 (2014): 1.
[4]Sangeeta Thapliyal, “India and Nepal treaty of 1950: the continuing discourse.” India quarterly 68, no. 2 (2012): 120.
[5]Sharma, “The 1950 Treaty of Peace & Friendship: An Issue of Contention between India and Nepal,” 2.
[6]ibid
[7]ibid
[8]Surya P. Subedi “Transit arrangements between Nepal and India: A study in international law.” Geopolitics 2, no. 1 (1997): 180
[9]Sharma, “The 1950 Treaty of Peace & Friendship: An Issue of Contention between India and Nepal,” 3.
[10]ibid
[11]ibid
[12]Sharma, “The 1950 Treaty of Peace & Friendship: An Issue of Contention between India and Nepal,” 4
[13]ibid
[14]Sneha Patel, “A New Journey in the New Context: Nepal-India Relations.” IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science 22, no. 9 (2017): 78
[15]ibid
[16]Rohit Karki and Lekhnath Paudel. “Challenges to the Revision of the Nepal–India 1950 Peace and Friendship Treaty.” Strategic Analysis 39, no. 4 (2015): 415
[17]ibid
[18]Nayak, “India–Nepal Peace and Friendship Treaty (1950): Does it Require Revision?,” 592.
[19]“Nepal-India EPG Finalises Joint Report.” The Himalayan Times. July 01, 2018. Accessed October 11, 2018. https://thehimalayantimes.com/nepal/nepal-india-epg-finalises-joint-report/.
[20]ibid
[21]Krishna V. Rajan, “Nepal Today: Bad Politics Trumps Good Economics.” Indian Foreign Affairs Journal 11, no. 2 (2016): 95
Leave a Reply