As India battles
the Wuhan flu, China has opened a new front in Ladakh and Sikkim. The troops
from both the countries are engaged in a tense stand-off in Eastern Ladakh
after clashes in Sikkim. Further there are reports of Chinese helicopters
crossing Indian border in Himachal Pradesh. The stand-off between the two
countries is the most serious since the Dolam stand-off nearly three years ago.
Meanwhile, China has opened a new front, an indirect one. They have instigated
Nepal to rake an old boundary issue. The Nepalese government currently ruled by
the Communists are in more ways than one functioning as puppets of China. In
what is the most serious stand-off since the blockade of 1989, the government
of Nepal have redrawn their maps including parts of India as their territory.
This cartographic
aggression perhaps has roots in Chinese instigations behind the scenes but the
immediate provocation is linked to Manasarovar Yatra. The Yatra to the holy
lake of Manasasarovar and Mt. Kailash in Tibet (under Chinese control) takes
place either through Lipulekh pass or through Nepal. The former while
traversing in the Indian territory entailed a long trek which meant very few
Indians were permitted through the said route. Most of the Indian pilgrims
traveling outside the government quota went through Nepal thus possibly high
revenue from tourism. Now, the Indian government has constructed a road to
Lipulekh pass eliminating the trek thus allowing larger number of pilgrims to travel
through the same.
Lipulekh pass
and the Kalapani area around that have long been claimed by Nepal as their own.
Under the treaty of Sagauli of British, the boundary between British India and
Nepal would run along the Kali Ganga River. The dispute was in the origin of
the river which led to different interpretations. Nepal for all its claims had
not shown the same in their maps. In fact, it was only in 1997 during the visit
of the then PM IK Gujral, that the boundary dispute was first raked up. In what
was a major error, Indian government under its Gujral doctrine, accepted the
borders were disputed and set up a commission to examine the same. The current
dispute and the cartographic assertion are linked to this recognition of the
dispute 23 years ago.
Nepal has
probably crossed the Rubicon. It is unlikely that the cartographic changes can
be reversed by any government in the future. Yet Nepal can hardly have its way
given its topography without any external provocation or assistance. If say,
India were to attack Nepal, it would hardly be in a position to defend even for
a few days, despite Gorkha legacy of bravery and valour, unless China
intervenes on its behalf. To China, Nepal would be a further progression to
squeeze India. The Chinese conquest of Nepal, direct or indirect would push the
border to Birgunj and perhaps on more a flatter terrain. To China the buffer
zone of Nepal or Bhutan would likely be in the form of vassals supposedly as independent
countries than any genuine independent Nepal or Bhutan. Their moves in Nepal
would directly threaten the Chicken’s Neck, the road to the North East. In fact,
Dolam was essentially an exercise in the same. While the possibility is low,
China cannot be ruled out to encourage Nepal to send troops or at least attempt
to do in the territories being claimed by Nepal. The worse would be Chinese
troops disguised as Nepali forces seeking to venture into that area. This might
make the border very hot and divert India’s attention from the rest of the
borders. The last thing India perhaps wants is a strong Chinese presence or a
proxy Chinese rule in Nepal or Bhutan (which might be the next Chinese target).
In the context,
it would be interesting to examine the options India commands or can pursue. The
diplomatic statement has been firm yet in some ways not domineering. This was
expected given India is highly unlikely to raise the tensions at least at this
time of the global crisis. Nepal has further provoked by seemingly holding
India responsible for the Chinese virus spread in Nepal. The Chinese
penetration in the Nepali politics has been pretty old but got a boost in the
recent years following the rise of Naxal groups in the region. The Indian
politicians especially on the left and socialist spectrum too have encourage
Naxals to seize power on the pretext of overthrowing monarchy, eliminating the
status of Hindu nation among others. The missionary forces especially after the
earthquake of 2015 have intensified their activities in Nepal.
The options
before India while seemingly diverse are yet limited. In all probability, India
will play the time tested game of overthrowing KP Oli and installing a new
Prime Minister, something which it has done many times in the past. Yet, it
should not stop at a continued exercise of musical chairs of Prime Ministers of
Nepal. It must draw Nepal firmly into an Indian axis by hook or by crook. Nepal
must be made to surrender its independence of foreign policy. If India has to
be a player in the Great Power Game, it must not hesitate to intervene to
protect India’s interests. There is of course a lot of talk on the people to
people relationships and interdependencies. This should be linked to their
support for the Indian endeavours. In Sikkim, the obduracy of the ruler made
India encourage political groups to capture power even through the streets if
required and then merge with India. India perhaps can build on these options which
are likely to favour in the Madheshi belt but would not find support in the
Pahadi belt.
US in its
policies on Latin America have often overthrown rulers either through invasion
or through coups to protect its interests. It is only a Castro or a Chavez who
managed to survive. The Soviets post Cold War began to spread its tentacles in
Eastern Europe. Though the East European countries were deemed independent, yet
they were merely proxies of Soviet rule be it in East Germany, Poland or
Hungary. The ‘revolt’ of Tito made the Soviets even more cautious and ruled by
force if necessitated in these countries. Therefore, with respect to Nepal,
India too must not be averse to these hard options.
At this critical
juncture, when China is somewhat susceptible and thus as a counter-offensive
will try and put India on the mat at multiple fronts, India cannot take it
lightly or defensively. While it may be reasonable in diplomacy, it must be
resolute on the ground. If China is dreaming of taking its boundaries to
Birgunj, India must be pre-empt and take the boundaries instead to Sagarmatha. What
Nepal is pursuing is a Broken Windows theory. If India underreacts, Nepal and
thus China would be emboldened and might engaged in higher stake games. They in
all probability scale up the provocations in increments. Moreover, it gives
China enough room for creeping colonialism, something it seems to pursue
everywhere among its clientele. India simply cannot allow Broken Windows
approach.
Nepal at this
juncture is too important to remain independent. Whether India creates its own
equivalent of Vichy’s France or Anschluss or Soviet model of Eastern Europe or
American model of Latin America, it doesn’t matter. What matters is bringing
Nepal and perhaps proactively Bhutan to the Indian fold without giving them an
option of independent foreign or defence policy. Their independence at this
current juncture would have to Hobson’s choice for them and not for India.
India has to take the war to China’s doorsteps.
Comments
Post a Comment