Kathmandu is the rumour capital of the World In 648, Tang Taizong sent Wang Xuance to India in response to (Buddist converted) Harshavardhana sending an ambassador to China. However, once in India, he discovered Harshavardhana had died and the new king attacked Wang and his 30 mounted subordinates. Wang escaping to Tibet and then mounting a joint of over 7,000 Nepalese mounted infantry and 1,200 Tibetan infantry and attack on the Indian state. In 2017 the Ministry of Agriculture of Nepal released a survey document which shows China encroached on 36 hectares of Nepal’s land on the northern border. China has illegally encroached on 15 bordering districts, including Gorkha, Dolakha, Humla, Darchula, Sindhupalchowk, Rasuwa, and Sankhuwasabha. However, the common Nepalese themselves are probably unaware of the magnitude of the problem. Nepalese officials had stated that their attempts to negotiate with the Chinese side were rendered fruitless and met with hostility. The Chinese security personnel came armed with a tanker, truck and a jeep, asking the Nepalese officials to retreat to the border for talks and clarifications. Chinese Army built a veterinary centre for animal husbandry, first in 2009 and another in 2016, in two Nepal district. Recent reports have revealed that not only Nepalese farmers are facing restrictions on livestock grazing, but also the ban on ‘Hindu and Buddhist shrines’ in the border area has been imposed by China. Villages in Darchula and Gorkha have also been taken over by China, the latest example being Rui village. In September 2020, China also built 11 structures on the remote border of Nepal’s Humla district. In September 2020, there was a protest in front of the Chinese Embassy in Kathmandu regarding the illegal construction of 9-11 houses in the Humla district. The pillars of this district were found to have been demolished and moved by China. A Nepali study has made some recommendations of a strategic nature related to the status of the border pillars. China has claimed alleged violations of Nepal’s geographical integrity by promoting the false narrative that Nepal has no territorial issues with China, but only with India. China’s incursion into Nepal ‘fits into a broader pattern of Chinese encroachment into neighbouring Bhutan's territory’. In a surprising move, for 8 days China’s State media outlet CGTN claims entire Mount Everest (China & Tibet call it Mount #Qomolangma) as the China-Nepal international border (1960 agreement) run next to it, but Nepal Communist Party govt is busy attacking India over the new 80-km-long Dharchula-Lipulekh strategically crucial road link, which was made so that Indian army can access 4 km away from the India-China boundary. Nepal doesn’t face any threat of violent aggression from India, while the tiny road is strategically crucial for India, which faces the threat of Chinese aggression as is visible from the face-off between the Indian Army and PLA Army troops in Sikkim’s Naku La sector. Nepal also came out with a new map showing highly strategic areas of Lipulekh, Limpiyadhura and Kalapani as its territories. However, the Indian troops have been deployed there since India fought a war with China in 1962. Nepali political leaders to keep in mind India’s national security considerations with regard to China. India reacted sharply and called Nepal's move a "unilateral act" and cautioned Kathmandu that such "artificial enlargement" of territorial claims will not be acceptable. The timing of the Nepali moves on its border with India was a matter of security for India. British India and Nepal fought a war in 1814, the Nepalis were sent back across the Kali River in May 1815 and subsequently the Segowli Treaty was signed on March 4, 1816. Article 5 of the Treaty stated: “The Rajah of Nepaul renounces for himself, his heirs and successors, all claim to or connexion with the countries lying to the West of the River Kali, and engages never to have any concern with those countries or the inhabitants thereof.” Buddhi Narayan Shrestha, the former Director General of the Land Survey Department, said the ‘Kali River’ is in fact the Kuthi Yankti river that arises below the Limpiyadhura range and not the one earlier accepted by India, China and Nepal. It is how Nepal began claiming an entire area of Kumaon up to the Kuthi Valley, some 400 km2 in total. Unfortunately, on May 20, 2020, Nepal for the first time released a map that incorporating the Maoist claims; it showed the entire area to the east of Kuthi Yankti river as part of their territory. The Indian map is exactly the same than the one published in 1954. India has said unilateral decisions on border issues won’t be accepted. Nepal seems to have forgotten that the Nepal-China Boundary Treaty, signed by President Liu Shaoqi of China and King Mahendra of Nepal in 1961 also shows the Kali river as per the Indian stand. Article I (1) defined the China-Nepal boundary line, which “starts from the point where the watershed between the Kali River and the Tinkar River meets the watershed between the tributaries of the Mapchu (Karnali) River on the one hand and the Tinkar River on the other hand…”. The watershed principle as well as the land revenues of Gunji village on the Indian side. Sydney Wignall worked for the Indian Military Intelligence. In 1955, led the first Welsh Himalayan Expedition with the intention of climbing Gurla Mandhata, at 25,355ft, a peak dominating the Manasarovar and Rakshastal lakes, not far from Mount Kailash, near the tri-junction between Chinese-occupied Tibet, Nepal and India. There were no sophisticated satellites able to follow the movement of vehicles in these remote areas; ‘human intelligence’ was still the prime source of information. Sydney Wignall witness the existence of Chinese motorable road building activities in Tibet towards Xinjiang. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJdIA6OLyHU&t=24s Nepal Communist League overthrew monarchy and fought from 1996 to 2006.
Nepal's Maoists have been considered as a terrorist organization by the United States. When you see the Indian Ocean region, India & Sri Lanka has a very important place, our geographical location is very important. Indian Ocean is interest for China since natural resources such as oil and minerals coming to China are far away and therefore hydrographic survey vessel are being used to map funds and collect data necessary for the navigation of submarines such as salinity and water temperature. Bangladesh joined the BRI in 2016. China’s main interests in Bangladesh are not roads but access to its strategically located ports – Chittagong and Mongla – on the Bay of Bengal. Since then, China has also established itself as the largest trading partner of Bangladesh. Its investments amount to around $26 billion. Trade between China and Bangladesh amounted to about $18 billion. Total Indian investment in Bangladesh is currently around $3 billion. Trade between India and Bangladesh amounted to about $10 billion. America is the storehouse of world-class technology. Military sales has long been a US diplomatic mainstay. There is no country that beats America on this high-end cutting edge technology. One of the problems is the cost. Also, you see their track record-that track record. America would not give its cutting-edge technology to any country, not even to its NATO allies, forget about India. We are not even in an alliance with the Americans. We only have a partnership. As I said, America invests a lot of money in its technology; America is not a country that will give its technology to any country. Full ToT technologies will not be given to anyone in the world. So basically, it is a wild goose chase. When I see the track record, I admire America and American technology, but I am convinced that they will not part with any high-end technology for use in joint ventures. India still sees America as less reliable than other countries such as Russia, Israel, and France on matters related to defence procurement, despite being the go-to nation for world-class and cutting edge defence technology. India should not forget that when India’s Ballistic Missile Defence Programme conceptual stage, Americans had blocked the sale of Arrow 2 ABM. US Policymakers should understand that U.S. need to boost India (we have a very huge military) as a counter to China and that we can’t let India’s relationship with Russia get in the way, rather than outmanoeuvred India to push for US personnel and surveillance hardware being stationed for long duration on Sri Lankan soil. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/cpn-maoist-bans-hindi-films-indian-vehicles-in-10-districts/articleshow/16556905.cms Nepal has now become a major source of Indo-Chinese geo-political rivalry and a source of deep strategic vulnerability for India. Democracies are however notoriously unstable to begin with and need patience and commitment all round. Communist Party CPN-Maoist, supported by China, have captured the majority of seats in Nepal's election. Even the borders of Nepal are looked after by China. According to a confidential document published by WikiLeaks in 2010, China would reward Nepali forces if they handed over Tibetans fleeing across the border. The price is paid by following the line of the Communist Party’s propaganda. For example, China is spending a lot on the propaganda that Lord Ram and Lord Buddha were Nepali, which is untrue. Some private schools in Nepal have reportedly agreed to make Mandarin a compulsory subject in classes in return for China footing the salary for the in return for China footing the salary for the language teacher. India seems to have lost a neutral neighbour. However, geography is in India’s favour. Only national interests dictate good relations between two nations. The Nepalese capital was a fertile recruiting ground of Tibetians. First, Nepal was the only nation still allowed to maintain a Trade Mission and Consulate General in Lhasa. Second, there was a substantial community of ethnic Tibetans who had opted for Nepalese citizenship after 1959, and China had decreed that these Nepalese passport holders were allowed to visit their families or conduct business in Tibet once a year. by 2008, China completely sealed the Sino-Nepal and Indo-Tibetan borders. China’s main security concern relates to anti-China activities by 20,000 Tibetans living in Nepal who are virtually under lockdown during such visits. Nepal decided to shelve the treaty and a few other proposals, particularly to build border roads, at the last minute. Nepal dropped some of its plans "following apprehensions they could infringe on its sovereignty", according to a financial daily. Instead of the extradition treaty, a milder pact on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters was signed, it added. There were apparently apprehensions "in sections of the Nepalese government that the extradition treaty will be used to clamp down against Tibetans and deportation of Tibetans to China," according to the newspaper. President Xi was furious; he warned that those not respecting the 'One China' policy would be crushed. According to Chinese state media, Xi told the Nepali PM during his stay in Kathmandu: "Anyone attempting to split China in any part of the country will end in crushed bodies and shattered bones. And any external forces backing such attempts at dividing China will be deemed by the Chinese people as pipe-dreaming."
The "Military-Civil Fusion" (MCF) 军民融合 is a national strategy of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Govt. worldwide pick vendors based on lowest price, so getting low interest rates help vendors to quote lower price. Every nation is averse to lending funds for big projects or technology start-ups. Lending institutions are suffering due to bad loans. However, Chinese Govt gives the lowest interest rate loans, but they will only do so if you agree to lock every transactions for your business and your supply chain ecosystem, within their own financial platform and buy & hire only from China. "China seems to be stingy in extending time and reducing interest rates on loans". Infrastructure projects are mushrooming. China emphasised that the cross-himalayan Lhasa to Kathmandu rail connectivity network will help Nepal become land-linked from land-locked. However, a costly railway line from Lhasa to Kathmandu, unless it reaches the border with India, makes little commercial sense. How the Kathmandu-Kyirong rail will connect with the India, given the different railway gauges, is also unclear. One way-trade seems to be the BRI norm. Sri Lanka could not pay back their debt, china control over their deep-sea port (currently, non-military, but it was made to be repurposed into deep port for subs). This transfer was part of a debt swap totalling USD 1.2 billion. When Tajikistan could not pay back their debt, china have built bases in tajikistan-china border, near wakhan corridor on afghanistan-pakistan border. The issue is the cost of cargo between Kolkata and Kathmandu is three times compared to the cost of cargo between Hamburg (in Germany) and Kolkata. China, which currently accounts for just 13% of Nepal’s imports mainly because connectivity is hindered by the Himalayas, has been amping up its operations in the region. China has been investing heavily in Nepal, as Beijing has pledged $8.3 billion to build roads and hydropower plants in Nepal. With 90% FDI and BRI projects into Nepal, Beijing is doing with Nepal what it does in Pakistan or any other country with significant investments, despite the fact that Nepal’s largest trading partner is India. Many nations including Djibouti, Tonga, the Maldives, the Republic of Congo, Kyrgyzstan, Cambodia, Niger, Laos, Zambia, Samoa, Vanuatu, and Mongolia now have debts to China at more than 20% of their GDP. As a result, many of these nations have had to hand over ownership of several investments, and swathes of sovereign territory to the Chinese government. Djibouti, heavily indebted to China, offered Beijing a military base, China's first outside its borders. “Only A Drunkard Would Accept These Terms”, Tanzania President rejected China’s killer loans & has initiated a renegotiation process by pressing the investors to bring down the lease period to 33 years from 99 years. In 2018, Zambia lost the Kenneth Kaunda International Airport to China over debt repayment. Currently, Kenyan government risks losing the lucrative Mombasa port to China should the country fail to repay huge loans advanced by Chinese lenders. It is a strategic foothold along a critical commercial and military waterway. Built at a cost of US$3,6 billion and connecting the Indian Ocean city of Mombasa with Nairobi's capital, SGR is the most expensive infrastructure project since Kenya's independence in 1963. China Exim Bank would become a principle in KPA if Kenya Railways Corporation (KRC) defaults in its obligations. The Inland Container Depot in Nairobi is also at stake, which receives and dispatches freight hauled on the new cargo trains from the seaport. A takeover would also mean thousands of port workers who would be forced to work under the Chinese lenders. Kenya public debt is estimated to be over $49,65 billion, which is more than 56% of its GDP. “We have seen projects which are commercially unsustainable. Airports where aircraft don’t come. Harbours where a ship doesn’t come. So, I think people would be justified in asking themselves — what am I getting into? And, it is obviously in the interest of the country concerned, but it is also in the interest of the international community because bad, unsustainable projects don’t end there… debt becomes equity, and that becomes something else. So there are real concerns out there. So I think it is very important that all of us make informed decisions, but of course, very competitive decisions,” China and Nepal have a direct internet connection now, which means that Nepal no longer has to be dependent on India for the internet. China has installed its Huawei 5G network tower on the highest peak in the world to snoop in India, Bangladesh and Myanmar, and China doesn’t even recognise the fact that it shares the peak with Nepal. When China is consolidating its claims, Nepal govt. has deafening silence towards Chinese expansionism. Clearly, China is exercising more influence over how Nepal prioritises its territorial disputes than Nepal itself. This is a common non-contact war communist strategy to try to misdirect cultural ties, in order to convince them to lose any trust they have built with each other, so that the social unity becomes weak (divide and rule). https://apnews.com/article/china-debt-banking-loans-financial-developing-countries-collapse-8df6f9fac3e1e758d0e6d8d5dfbd3ed6 “Initially, the Red Army Generals were all sweet and honey towards the Tibetans. The Chinese Generals handled the Tibetans delicately and with patience, trying to get them gradually into their fold, trying to win their hearts and minds. It was subtle and hardly visible, and the largesse that poured in was phenomenal…” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmnBf0pwXGI CommunistMLM Communist Alliance (Marxist-Leninist-Maoist), split into two main groups:-
Socialist
Nepal’s unique relationship with India was formalised when Nepal and Britain signed an agreement of friendship in 1923. After India became independent, the traditional close and friendly relations between the two countries with open borders have continued. Independent India avowed its friendly relations with Nepal with the signing of the India-Nepal Treaty of Peace and Friendship (INTPF) in 1950. These treaties opened up opportunities for Nepalese citizens to travel, study, and do business freely in India. The extension of non-reciprocal duty free access for Nepalese goods to Indian markets has huge potential as Nepal develops further. Though Nepal largely gained from this arrangement, over dependence upon India has created an anti-India backlash. Under the INTPF, Nepal agreed to depend upon India for security, as well as seek Indian consent to import arms, ammunition and military equipment from other countries. As Nepal gained greater international exposure, these were seen as signs of Indian domination. As a result Nepal has stopped adhering to such stipulations. Many saw the India-assisted development projects as more beneficial to India than Nepal. On trade and transit issues also there had been the strong differences between the two countries as land-locked Nepal was keen to diversify its trade access to other countries over riding Indian concerns. For most of the twentieth century, Nepal was ruled by the Ranas, a hereditary family of prime ministers who had displaced the Shah dynasty as the real rulers of the country. Then, in the early 1950s, after India gained its independence, King Tribhuvan, with the support of the new democratic Indian government, overthrew the decadent Rana rule and initiated the modern political history of Nepal. King Tribhuvan and his son, King Mahendra, ruled directly throughout most of the 1950s, except during a brief period of multiparty democracy late in the decade, after which King Mahendra dissolved the elected Congress Party government. In 1962, King Mahendra issued a more royalist constitution establishing a new political structure known as the "Party-less Panchayat" system. This single-party rule banned all political parties and created village, district and national level councils, or panchayats, by which the king could rule without significant opposition. Although effective at limiting dissent and organized political parties, over the decades, the panchayat government failed to serve the population. It evidenced little interest in addressing the country's systemic problems of social inequality and severe economic underdevelopment. In 1990, yielding to a variety of political pressures, the panchayat system collapsed and a new multi-party democracy was established under the aegis of a new constitution. This brief period of political liberalization did not last. The new political system, formally a Constitutional Monarchy, was ill-served by many of the political leaders, who fought over power, leading to a new government almost every year from 1990 to 2002. These democratic governments were generally viewed as being extremely corrupt, self-serving and dominated by the same elites as the previous system. Although the period of parliamentary democracy was unstable, it fostered a rapid increase in civil society organizations that had been banned under the panchayat, including political parties, nongovernmental organizations, human rights agencies, newspapers, magazines and other professional organizations. In 1994, the United People's Front, a political alliance of several Nepalese leftist parties, split apart. One of its former leaders, Pushpa Kamal Dahal (commonly known as Comrade Prachanda), founded the Communist Party of Nepal-Maoists (CPN-Maoists, or Maoists), a radical splinter group of the Communist Party of Nepal (CPN). The Maoists claim to be inspired by the revolutionary philosophy of Mao Tsetung. However, China disavows any connection between the Maoists and traditional Maoist doctrines of the modern state of China. The Maoists' model is ideologically similar to Peru's Shining Path movement, claiming to be a voice of the poor and to use violence as a means to fight state oppression and police brutality. On February 13, 1996, citing the government's failure to respond to a memorandum outlining its demands-such as the abolition of royal privileges, the creation of a new constitution and renegotiation of the border with India-the Maoists officially launched their insurgency, the "People's War." The stated intention of the "People's War" is to overthrow the constitutional monarchy and to establish a republic through a constituent assembly. The Maoists enjoyed some popular support for their cause. This was particularly true among the lesser-educated rural population, many of whom had had very little contact with the government other than through the police and a very poor health and education system at the village level. Over time, however, the Maoists' increased use of violence, intimidation and brutality has alienated many former supporters. Maoist movement began in the mid-western region, targeting so-called "enemies of the people," such as police, landowners, members of the political parties, teachers, local government officials and others. From the outset, the Maoists have targeted the national infrastructure as a means of destabilizing the country. This has included attacks on airports, bridges, power plants and telecommunications systems, as well as forced "donations" from businesses, organizations and individuals to support their cause. They also carry out general strikes, bandhs, which disrupt trade and transport and cause shortages in food and other essential items by temporarily shutting down major highways, government buildings and schools. Maoist intimidation and harassment of international development agencies to provide forced "donations" has been ongoing for several years, reaching new heights in 2004. The Maoists are also responsible for a range of other egregious abuses against children, as well as adults, such as torture and unlawful killings. In a late 2003 Washington Times article, Maoist Chairman Prachanda claimed that the Maoists control up to 80 percent of Nepalese territory. Unfortunately, in most rural areas, outside of the district centers, the system of elected local governments, known as Village Development Committees (VDCs), is no longer functioning due to earlier political decisions made in Kathmandu to dissolve local governments. In some cases the VDCs have been replaced by a parallel Maoist "people's government" (jan sarkhar) structure. The Maoists are generally believed to comprise 3,000 to 4,000 regular troops and an estimated 10,000 to 15,000 local militia members, according to the Small Arms Survey 2003. However, one estimate printed in the New York Times in 2003, even before the escalation of the situation in 2004, placed these numbers as high as 8,000 regular troops and 40,000 irregular fighters. On November 26, 2001, the government declared a state of emergency in response to the breakdown of the first cease-fire and the first Maoist attack on the RNA. At that time, the government officially authorized the RNA to "disarm" the Maoists. With this declaration, the government also suspended several articles of Nepal's constitution, including those relating to rights of freedom of thought and expression; rights of assembly and movement; the right not to be held in preventive detention without sufficient grounds; and the rights to information, property, privacy and judicial remedy, according to Amnesty International (AI). The government allowed the state of emergency to lapse in August 2002. Over the years, the government's counterinsurgency has taken many forms, including roadblocks, security checks and blockades of food supplies and shipments of essential goods, all of which have had serious ramifications for daily life in Nepal. In this context, the government is also responsible for a range of egregious child rights abuses, such as unlawful killing, torture, forced disappearance and rape. Political disagreements have also ensued within the government itself, such as a major disagreement over the proposed extension of the state of emergency in 2002. As a result, the government has suffered several major political upheavals in recent years, including dissolution of the Parliament by Prime Minister Deuba in May of 2002, followed by the dismissal of Prime Minister Deuba by King Gyanendra in October of 2002 on charges of "incompetence" and the indefinite postponement of elections. Between 2002 and 2004, the king appointed two former panchayat politicians as prime minister, but both governments eventually collapsed. Ironically, in June 2004, King Gyanendra re-appointed Prime Minister Deuba to his position, with the support of other political parties and the stated agenda of restarting peace talks with the Maoists and ensuring elections to take place within a year. Cease-Fires: Two rounds of negotiations were conducted between the government and the Maoists in 2001 and 2003. In both instances, the Maoist demands included the establishment of a constitutional assembly and a new constitution, while the government protected its interest in sustaining the monarchy and argued that it cannot hold parliamentary elections as violence continues. What the myth-makers of Kathmandu failed to understand was that the Nepali polity was comprehensively anachronistic, based on a narrow system of accommodation of the urban and rural elites, and unable to deliver even the most rudimentary form of welfare to the vast majority of impoverished rural Nepalis. Left to fend for themselves after a series of betrayals that saw people being deprived of the agrarian livelihood thanks to World Bank-International Monetary Fund reforms, deprived of the water and natural resources thanks to Asian Development Bank-led developmental destruction, denied even basic services such as electricity and a decent education, ordinary Nepalis voted in large numbers for a political force that had articulated a new radicalism in Nepali history and underwent severe hardships to give a voice to peoples' aspirations in the course of the 10-year old civil war. The mainstream political parties were themselves unable to overcome their ideological paralysis and formulate a clear vision of their politics that would at least have neutralised the loss of credibility that resulted from their craven conduct during the years that they managed the polity between 1991 and 2004. They were unable even to take a definite and categorical position on the question of monarchy and the army, both of which had caused immense damage to rural Nepal through their depredations. In short, when the Maoists articulated politics more relevant to a larger number of Nepalis, the political forces defending the outdated polity became proportionately more irrelevant. This is why the Maoists won despite India's success in ensuring that the two major left forces, the Maoists and the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist - Leninist), fought the elections against each other. While supporting the Nepalese monarchy, India also gave refuge to the Nepali Congress party for decades and helped the democratic movement. This often led to tension and friction between Kathmandu and New Delhi. In 2005 New Delhi helped broker the 12-point understanding between the Maoists and Nepal's other political parties enabling the rebels to emerge from the underground. India also played a key role in convincing King Gyanendra to step down. Instability in Nepal is likely to have an adverse impact on India’s political, economic and security interests. India was instrumental in the conclusion of the 12-point Agreement, which mainstreamed the Maoists in the political process and led to the elections in 2008. However, in the meanwhile, anti-India sentiments have grown substantially in Nepal. There is a deep-rooted suspicion, partly fuelled by the Maoists now, that India is trying its best to stop the Maoists’ rise to power. In the recent past, the Maoists have tried to use China to counter-balance Indian influence. They neither hide their suspicion of India, nor conceal their desire to play the China card against India. Moreover, their linkages with the Indian Maoists remain a constant source of worry for India. Interestingly, there has been an increasing attempt by China in recent years to engage the government, the political parties and the people of Nepal. All this has raised Indian concerns regarding the Maoists and Nepal. India is faced with difficult choices. Any constructive attempt by India to salvage the situation in Nepal through proactive involvement is likely to be interpreted as unnecessary intervention in the internal affairs of Nepal. But passive indifference to developments in Nepal will be misconstrued as shirking of responsibility by observers at home and abroad. Prime Minister Wen Jiabao of China, who had cancelled a scheduled visit to Nepal in December for unexplained reasons, halted in Kathmandu for a little more than four hours on January 14, 2012, while on his way from China to Saudi Arabia for an official visit. This is the first time a Chinese Prime Minister had visited Nepal since the visit of the then Chinese Prime Minister Zhu Rongji in 2001. There have been a number of high-level visits of political and military figures from Nepal to China since the Nepalese Maoists came overground, suspended their insurgency and joined the power structure in Nepal, but reciprocal visits from the Chinese side to Nepal were very few. China kept away from getting involved in Nepal’s internal affairs even during the height of Maoist civil war. Actually, it had supplied arms to King Gyanendra when India had not come forward to do so. However, the Chinese have considerably stepped up assistance to the Nepalese since the end of the monarchy in 2008 and established a "comprehensive and cooperative partnership" with Nepal in 2009. It has strengthened its relationship taking advantage of the pro-Chinese leanings of Maoists. China has strong security concerns in Nepal due to the presence of about 20,000 Tibetan refugees in Nepalese territory and their support to His Holiness the Dalai Lama and the radical Tibetan Youth Congress (TYC). Nepal signed a deal with China to join China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) in 2017. Its long term plan appears to be to link Nepal with Tibet’s large network of road, rail and air infrastructure. This would give a big boost not only to trade but also neutralise India advantage in having better strategic access to Nepal. In 2007-08, China began construction of a 770-kilometre railway connecting Lhasa, the Tibetan capital, with the border town of Khasa in Nepal. Nepal had requested the link to be extended to Kathmandu. When China completes the ambitious project, it would significantly improve China’s strategic access to India’s borders as Chinese are involved in other communication projects underway beyond Kathmandu. Wen reportedly pledged $140 million in aid to Nepal of which US $ 20 million would be spent on consolidating the peace process and US $ 2 million for strengthening the police. Nepal has reportedly sought Chinese assistance for a modern airport at Pokhra, for the development of its railway network and for the construction of three hydel power stations. During Nepal’s period of political instability from 2006 to 2011, despite occasional glitches India had wielded its influence carefully and positively to ensure the peace process is not derailed. In appreciation of this, Prime Minister Bhattarai on the eve of his recent visit wrote “India played a positive role in the peace process in Nepal, and during our transition towards democracy. My visit [to India], at this juncture when we are at the last stage of completing the peace process, assumes special significance.” This probably reflects the growing realisation in UCPN(M) how Indian influence could be useful to achieve win-win results in stabilising democracy. India has also reciprocated this welcome change in the attitude, during the October visit of Prime Minsiter Bhattarai with the signing of two agreements with Nepal. The Bilateral Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement (BIPAA) was a long awaited one; it would smoothen and encourage the flow of Indian investments in Nepal. Bhattarai had apparently chosen to ignore the objection of hard line faction of his party in signing the BIPAA as evident from the black flag wielding party cadres who greeted him on his return to Kathmandu. However, many analysts in Nepal consider this development as success of the country’s economic diplomacy. The other agreement relates to extension of $250 million Dollar credit line from EXIM bank of India on highly concessional terms (1.75% interest with repayment in 20 years). This will be used to finance infrastructure projects including highway, bridges, railway, irrigation, hydro-power etc. Bhattarai had called this development as historic and a major step towards removing distrust in the bilateral relations between Nepal and India. More important from Indian security point of view, both countries have agreed to check cross-border crime including smuggling of fake currency into India which had been a major cause for concern to India. India has also agreed to facilitate the speedy execution of construction of roads, rail and Integrated Check Posts along the border areas of Nepal and India. Hiccups in trade and transit issues are also scheduled to be discussed at the ministerial level. India has also agreed to the use of Vishakapatnam port to facilitate Nepal’s third-country trade. It has also conceded Nepal’s demand for importing 200 MW of power from India. China has opened "Chinese study centres" on the Nepalese side of the open border with India, and that these are engaged in fearmongering about India. Such propaganda can pose a security threat by turning the local population hostile to India. Since 2015 Republic of Nepal is no longer 240-year Hindu kingdom. Ancient Nepal has no links with China but with Tibet. Tibetans are not Han Chinese. Soon, China will say Sita was actually Chinese! There over 55 million veterans, ranging from those who fought in the Korean War (1950-53) to those involuntarily dismissed during the 2015 round of personnel reductions. The problem is not that many veterans are victims of corrupt local officials but that the Internet, despite heavy government censorship, has enabled the veterans to get in contact with each other and organize large demonstrations in the capital. For the government, this type of protest is the most embarrassing. The veterans complaints are basically the same as most other Chinese; corruption, broken promises and officials who appear to ignore legitimate complaints. Since the government has been going to great lengths to ensure the loyalty of the military to the CCP (over anything else) angry veterans have to be handled carefully.
0 Comments
Your comment will be posted after it is approved.
Leave a Reply. |