By Devendra Gautam
Expressions such as ‘buffer state’, ‘sandwiched between two giants’ and ‘our backyard’ ring alarm bells for countries like Nepal as they show a deeply-ingrained worldview that rejects the sovereign equality of nations.
At a time when the term ‘buffer state’ has surfaced in an official document—the National Commitment Draft issued on April 16—and sparked debate, alongside fresh reports of border violations in areas such as Kanchanpur, this observer chose to immerse himself in books in a quiet library, seeking a moment of distance from the noise.
If burying your head in books during great difficulties brought about by soaring fuel prices and escalating market prices resulting from hostilities in the Persian Gulf and Eurasia is akin to an ostrich burying his head in the sand, then so be it.
Days after an hours-long reading and note-taking session, this observer keeps wondering as to what exactly stopped our governments from running a well-resourced library at such an important intersection of arts, culture, trade and commerce. Granted that tyrannical regimes feared that a well-read citizenry would bring a hasty end to their regimes, but our democratic systems had nothing to fear, least of all a conscious citizenry, right?
Leaving this question to a wizened citizenry, let this observer share random notes he jotted down during the leisurely reading session and later.
Sudhir Singh (PhD), the editor of India’s Foreign Policy Modi 2.0 Opportunities and Challenges, takes us back to the prime ministership of Jawaharlal Nehru (August 15, 1947-May 27, 1964). He remarks in the introductory chapter that Pakistan raised the Tibet issue at the UN as Nehru did not want to upset China. How times change: Look at the China-Pak dynamics these days, how they get on like a house on fire!
Interestingly, despite historic animosity, two neighbours seem to get on quite well when it comes to undermining Nepal’s historic claims over a parcel of land in the Far-West on the basis of the Treaty of Sugauli (1816), which dismembered her following a war with the Brits in which a poorly-equipped people fighting for their homeland—women, children, senior citizens and soldiers—were even denied water. While the two reached a 40-point deal to resume trade through the Lipulek pass in 2015, they have pledged to walk the talk from June this year after a series of parleys and preparations, despite official objections from Nepal.
By the way, do our next-door neighbours think that the Asian Century will come via a troubled road paved by ignoring vital interests of countries like Nepal?
In the introduction section of Kathmandu Chronicle Reclaiming India-Nepal Relations, K.V. Rajan (former foreign secretary of India and India’s ambassador to Nepal from 1995 to 2000) and scholar Atul K. Thakur ponder over the whys and hows of the past while navigating tumultuous ties marked by fluctuations, fathom present challenges and prospects for the future in an increasingly uncertain post-Covid-19 world.
The book came out in 2024, well before the destruction of almost all vital organs throughout the country on September 8-9, 2025 and a subsequent change of guard post-March 5 elections.
Much water has flown down our rivers since then, but scars—and key questions—remain.
What were our state mechanisms doing in the run-up to the protest? What was the status of intel coordination, at home and beyond?
These questions will seek answers even as Nepal moves on.
Back to the ‘buffer state’ analogy. The term also features in a section of ‘Diplomatic Gleanings’ (page 58-59) where Rajan makes mention of a much-contested “suggestion” from (King) Tribhuvan to Nehru for Nepal’s “merger” with India, at a time when the latter was in post-independent turmoil and security personnel from Nepal had just helped restore order in response to a request from Delhi.
Rajan’s account raises a basic question: Did the prisoner of Hyderabad House have the luxury to think and act as a free man?
In ‘Diplomatic Gleamings’ (page 60), Rajan maintains that India was allowed to station its military mission, maintain checkpoints along the Tibetan border and harness the Gandak (Gandaki in Nepali) and Koshi for ‘mutual benefits’. Somewhere in the book, he sees nothing wrong with the Mahakali Treaty.
If this section was meant to fester old wounds, this observer fears, it has done exactly the same.
Page 10 (Diplomatic Gleanings) offers a bold way to reset bilateral ties, given Nepal’s yawning trade deficit with India that is likely to widen further as fossil fuel prices keep rising, jeopardising further an economy that runs primarily on dirty fuels.
Rajan recalls an advice from the then External Affairs Minister, Pranab Mukherjee, before his stationing as New Delhi’s man in Kathmandu: A duty-free access to the Indian market for all goods manufactured in Nepal, irrespective of their domestic content. His reasoning was that such a deal will ultimately benefit India and Nepal.
Let this observer wrap up with two central questions that the esteemed authors have raised:
Is India losing South Asia? or Is South Asia losing India?
Not being a citizen of an empire-sized country spares you the trouble of delving into such tough questions. Nonetheless, this observer’s reading is that the sixth largest economy (per IMF rankings released this April) and the fourth most powerful military may end up incurring considerable loss if it loses the region or vice-versa.
The esteemed writers know what’s at stake for their country, so they go: “….If there is one country with which India needs to make a first beginning, it is Nepal.”
Let a new chapter begin in our adjectives-laden bilateral ties, warts and all, and less loaded regional linkages.
Gautam is a desk editor and columnist.
Login to add a comment