After returning from India earlier this month, Nepal’s Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal ‘Prachanda’ has kept himself very busy – talking about how successful his trip to the south has been. In doing so, he at times emphasized the extreme importance of the visit, while opposition parties dismissed it as “ritualistic”.
one of the most popular aspects of travel A Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was signed to export up to 10,000 MW of power from Nepal to India over a period of 10 years. Prime Minister Narendra Modi also announced to this effect during a joint press briefing after the delegation-level talks on 1 June. The MoU followed bilateral agreements on construction of at least two hydroelectric power plants in Nepal by India.
However, there’s a catch. Opposition parties and Mr Prachanda’s critics have accused him of cheating Billion dollar projects for India On a platter, without any competitive bidding.
Two other issues that became a source of criticism for Mr. Prachanda were his statement on “swapping” the disputed Kalapani area with India for a strip of land in Indian territory, and An elaborate puja performed by him at the Mahakaleshwar temple in Ujjain, Mr. Prachanda, a former revolutionary who is known for his staunch nationalist stance and never misses an opportunity to stoke anti-India sentiment, is finding it difficult to persuade his critics at home.
Observers say Mr. Prachanda, who has been eagerly waiting to visit India since taking over as prime minister on December 25, 2022, has sought to appease New Delhi after realizing the weaknesses Used his four-day visit from May 31 to June 3. He was standing on home ground.
power politics
Nepali prime ministers have traditionally been known to travel to New Delhi after assuming power. His stated reason is the strengthening of bilateral ties; The two countries share historical and close ties, with a 1,800 km long open border allowing citizens to move freely – a unique feature between any two countries in the modern world. But it is also true that observers say one of his prime goals is to stay in Delhi’s good books to stay in power.
“He is certainly standing on shaky ground,” said author and political analyst CK Lal. “Prachanda knows very well that it is difficult to stay in power without maintaining good relations with India. But Delhi does not trust him.
Mr. Lal says Mr. Prachanda did everything possible to appease the ruling establishment in the south, but signs of frustration are evident, as he is exploring various options, including revival of the Communist group or forming a socialist front. On 20 June, the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist Centre), the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Socialist), a coalition partner, and two other parties outside the government announced a communist front.
Mr. Prachanda’s Maoist Center emerged as the third largest party in Parliament in the November elections. Nevertheless, he was the biggest beneficiary of the continuing political strife in Nepal, which brought him to power for the third time. Despite his promises of good governance, he hardly finds time to govern, as he feels his position is always under threat. The CPN (Unified Socialist), which partners in the government with 10 seats, warned on 10 June that it would not hesitate to withdraw support from the government if it did not “correct” some features of the budget. Nevertheless, she voted in favor of the budget on Wednesday.
feedback in house
KP Sharma Oli, leader of Nepal’s main opposition Communist Party (Unified Marxist-Leninist) led from the front when it came to undermining Mr Prachanda’s visit, as the former prime minister accused the Maoist leader of behaving like a milktoast. Mr. Oli alleged that the prime minister had failed to stand up to India and talk about the installation of a mural map in the new Indian Parliament showing Kapilvastu and Lumbini, which fall within the territory of modern-day Nepal. He also criticized the Maoist leader for making a public statement on the land swap.
Mr. Prachanda has said in his defense that he raised the mural map issue and his comments on the land swap were part of efforts to find a solution to the border dispute that continues to trouble both countries.
Speaking in Parliament, Mr. Prachanda said, “To those who are criticizing my visit to India, I would like to say that the reception I received was phenomenal and I have returned from a successful visit with some important agreements.” “The Prime Minister of India for the first time talking about resolving border issues himself is an achievement in itself.” Kathmandu believes that New Delhi has been ignoring Nepal’s call for a long time to discuss border issues between the two countries, especially the Kalapani area, which both countries claim as their own.
agreement
Among the various agreements signed, which was billed as the highlight of the visit was the MoU on India importing 10,000 MW of power from Nepal over 10 years and exporting Nepali power to Bangladesh through Indian territory .
Commentator Dinesh Bhattarai, who has served as foreign relations advisor to at least two former prime ministers in Nepal, said, “It is a positive result, but we do not yet know the modalities.” “But there is no need to be swayed. There are many important issues that the Prime Minister failed to raise, including the report prepared by the Eminent Persons Group (EPG) on Nepal-India relations. Then there was the issue of the air route, which failed to make any progress.
The EPG was formed in 2016 with four members each from Nepal and India to review the overall bilateral relationship and make recommendations. The group finalized its report in 2018, but it has been gathering dust largely because of Mr Modi’s “busy schedule” – it has to be submitted to the prime ministers of the two countries. Mr Prachanda, on his return, said he did not raise the EPG issue as he did not want to “vitiate” the atmosphere. But his critics say he did not want to risk angering Delhi.
On air routes, especially to Bhairahawa International Airport near the Indian border, Nepal should have been able to strike a deal,” Mr. Bhattarai said. “Yet, Delhi’s reluctance to accept Kathmandu’s assurance that it will resolve [all of India’s legitimate concerns] This shows that there is still a huge trust deficit between the two countries.
However, former ambassador Vijay Kant Lal Karna, who heads a Kathmandu-based think tank, believes there were three major points of departure during Mr Prachanda’s recent visit to Delhi. Mr. Karna said, “Mr. Modi’s acceptance on connectivity including power agreement, border issues and digital payments.” “This shows that Prachanda has been successful in winning Delhi’s trust to some extent. Now that Mr. Modi himself has accepted the border disputes, it has at least opened the door for talks.
stance on religion
Shri Prachanda dressed in saffron robes, worships at Mahakaleshwar Temple in Ujjain Offered enough grain for the talking mills in Nepal. Mr. Prachanda once led a 10-year “people’s war” during which his People’s Liberation Army attacked priests and temples. A major agenda of the war was to transform Nepal into a secular republic. In 2008, when he became prime minister for the first time since a peace deal that ended the war in 2006, his decision to remove Indian-origin priests from the Pashupatinath Temple in Kathmandu was heavily criticized. The response was so overwhelming that they had to retreat.
Many see Mr Prachanda’s visit to a Hindu temple in India as an attempt to please Mr Modi.
“But it is not limited to Mr. Modi only,” said Mr. Lal. “Prachanda is well aware that nationalist Hindutva is a large constituency in India. And so is a Nepali nationalist constituency.”
Mr. Lal believes that worship at the Indian temple was largely aimed at promoting the Nepalese nationalist constituency. “When he was presented with an opportunity that could suit both India and Nepal constituencies, he grabbed it.” Mr. Prachanda, on his part, has said that he believes in secularism, so he has equal faith in all religions.
Mr. Prachanda has responded to the criticism by saying on more than one occasion, “I wore saffron clothes because it was mandatory as per temple protocol.” “If I had refused, it would have meant hurting the sentiments of Indians.”
Mr. Bhattarai, a former advisor to two prime ministers, said that no matter how many times Mr. Prachanda defended his temple visit, it was likely that it was arranged in such a way that he was left with no choice but to oblige.
“And even if he has changed from an anti-religion communist to a religion-loving person, it should be okay. People change,” Mr. Bhattarai said. “The objective of such visits should be to strengthen bilateral relations and bridge the trust deficit rather than to consolidate their position domestically.”
Mr. Karna said that it was a wrong move by Mr. Prachanda to worship in a temple in his capacity as the Prime Minister of Nepal.
“It was clearly part of an exercise to appease a certain constituency for its own political gains,” Mr Karna said. “To say the least, it’s not in good shape.”
Sanjeev Satgainya is a freelance journalist based in Kathmandu