Why it’s in India’s interest to quell the political crisis in Nepal

A bizarre political scenario is unfolding in Nepal even in the midst of a raging pandemic. The health minister has been replaced. A government, which announced general elections in November this year and not secured a vote of confidence of the lower house of Parliament, has now been expanded to include three deputy prime ministers. Some ten Madhesi leaders from a faction of the Janata Samajwadi Party (JSP) have been sworn-in. A further expansion is awaited as key portfolios such as home and defence remain unfilled. The erstwhile foes of the establishment have become uneasy bedfellows. There is a compromise of values and principles on all fronts in the quest for cold power and norms of constitutional propriety and principles of democratic governance are being consigned to the dustbin in the country.The facts speak for themselves. Within six months, the lower house of Parliament was dissolved twice. After the first dissolution was ruled unconstitutional, a series of questionable steps were taken that ensured the continuation of the current Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli.Even as Oli lost support of the reinstated House, he was reappointed prime minister as leader of the single-largest party and given 30 days to seek a vote of confidence. Neither did Oli seek the vote, nor did he resign. Sanguine in the belief that an alternative government is not possible, given the deep fragmentation witnessed in several political parties, he recommended that a clause relating to the appointment of an individual member of Parliament, who has the backing of the majority, be invoked. medium nocaption83363217Despite having publicly acknowledged that he did not have the majority support within his own party, the Communist Party of Nepal (UML) or UML – the group, led by former Prime Ministers Madhav Kumar Nepal and Jhalanath Khanal, which had parted ways with Oli – and the JSP – which has a faction loyal to Madhesi leaders Mahant Thakur and Rajendra Mahato, who support Oli as well as Upendra Yadav and former PM Baburam Bhattarai – Oli rushed to President Bidya Devi Bhandari claiming support of 153 MPs.Rival Sher Bahadur Deuba of the Nepali Congress, accompanied by a large number of MPs, including former PM Madhav Kumar Nepal as well as Upendra Yadav, submitted a list of 149 signatures to the President and staked claim to the post of the prime ministership. The list comprised MPs from the NC, NCP (Maoist Centre), led by Prachanda, and the Madhav Nepal and Upendra Yadav factions of the UML and JSP respectively. Instead of inviting Deuba to form a new government, the President rejected both claims on the grounds of overlapping names, thereby allowing Oli to continue as PM. Also, on the recommendation of the cabinet, she promptly dissolved the House in a late night presidential declaration, plunging the country into yet another political crisis. The matter is now being heard by a constitutional bench of the Supreme Court.There’s a widespread perception prevalent in Nepal that PM Oli has India’s backing. The participation of the Mahant Thakur faction of the JSP, which has traditionally been close to India in the Oli government (even though he has brought an ordinance on citizenship that meets some concerns of the Madhesi leadership) as well as a series of high-level India visits, starting with secretary (R), army chief, foreign secretary and the head of the foreign affairs cell of the BJP to Nepal, and the visit of the Nepali foreign minister to New Delhi, all in quick succession, are cited in support of this view. Statements referring to the ongoing political developments as ‘internal matters of Nepal’ have also further strengthened this perception.While it is necessary for India to work with whichever government is in power, it cannot ignore the long-term damage by Oli-led governments to bilateral relations, particularly with respect to the border. The Oli regime is also responsible for the significant expansion of Chinese presence and influence in Nepal, including in domestic political matters and for unleashing anti-India nationalist rhetoric since 2015. India should also not ignore the other political actors, in particular the democratic forces such as the Nepali Congress, with whom India shares a friendly relationship cemented over several decades. Oli’s attempts to undermine the structure of constitutional governance and his autocratic behaviour have also not added to his domestic popularity. medium nocaption83363262Furthermore, even though the dominant Communist alliance may have splintered in Nepal, with China suffering a temporary setback, there is no guarantee that the situation will not be reversed given that China is a long-term player. During the pandemic, even as India grapples with its own shortages, China’s role has increased with its supply of vaccines. It has also held four meetings of a sub-group of SAARC countries that are all participants of the Belt and Road Initiative to discuss the Covid crisis. It is also keen to explore synergies and best practices emanating from the implementation of BRI projects. Nepal under Oli is a key partner in this exercise.India must reach out to all political forces in Nepal and dispel the widespread public perception that it is taking sides and backing an autocratic and increasingly unpopular regime. Our long term strategic interests lie in a peaceful, stable, prosperous and democratic Nepal. India must continue to support all efforts towards this end. Views expressed in the piece are personalThe writer is former Indian Ambassador to Nepal