China and India Face Off in Nepal

[Guest guest]

Stanley A. Weiss

Articles

 

International Herald Tribune

Thursday, July 21, 2001

 

China and India Face Off in Nepal

 

JAKARTA -- Only a present day William Shakespeare could imagine the

real life tragedy in Nepal when the Crown Prince eliminated an

entire line of a royal dynasty that had ruled that land for more

than 200 years.

 

In killing his father, the King, his mother, the Queen, his brother

and sisters, an uncle - and then himself - the Crown Prince did more

than recreate the most dramatic themes of Hamlet, Romeo and Juliet

and Macbeth. He also plunged Nepal into its most serious crisis

ever - one that can affect the rest of this volatile region.

 

Before last month, Nepal was known in the West primarily for its

small size and remoteness. But in geostrategic terms it is neither

small nor remote. The Himalayan kingdom is sandwiched between the

world's two most populous countries - China and India. Nepal's 25

million people are divided among more than a dozen ethnic groups

that speak 48 languages and dialects. And although the King

relinquished most of his powers in 1990 in favor of becoming a

constitutional monarch with a parliamentary democracy, the monarchy

has been the glue that held the country together. Indeed, in the 11

years of constant political party infighting, there have been eleven

governments and six prime ministers.

 

All of this turmoil has been an open invitation for China - and its

surrogate, Pakistan, to try and extend their influence both in Nepal

and into India's turbulent northeastern states.

 

The hijacking of an Indian passenger plane taking off from Katmandu

by Islamabad-backed Kashmiri rebels two years ago, the arrest of a

Pakistan diplomat allegedly planning to sell explosives to Nepalese

insurgents, and the emergence of Nepal as the passage to India for

Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence furnishes more than enough of

a security reason for New Delhi not to take its ties with the

kingdom for granted.

 

India is by far Nepal's most important economic, military and

political ally. But Delhi expects complete loyalty in this unequal

partnership, especially vis-à-vis China. When Nepal talked of

procuring Chinese anti-aircraft guns in 1988, for instance, India

responded by closing its markets to Nepal, increasing the landlocked

kingdom's economic isolation.

 

Compounding its recent problems, and virtually unnoticed by the

outside world, Nepal has been subjected for the past five years to a

Maoist guerrilla insurgency spreading to most rural districts. The

insurgency's intellectual godfather boasts that like Mao Zedong's

guerrillas, once they control the countryside, the capital,

Katmandu, will fall and, "We will hoist the hammer-and-sickle red

flag atop Mount Everest." Sadly, with the death of most of the royal

family, and the accession of a new king who may use the army to

restore law and order, the nation may find itself in a full-scale

civil war.

 

The oxygen feeding Nepal's instability is its abject poverty. Fully

half of the population is unemployed and living below the poverty

line. That is Nepal's real tragedy. The country could be rich. It

has a crucial natural resource, water. Hundreds of rivers gushing

south between the Himalayas have massive hydroelectricity potential

to serve all of its domestic needs and the growing demand from India

and Bangladesh.

 

So why hasn't Nepal exploited this limitless, renewable source of

energy? A fear of increasing dependence on India, its principal

consumer, has been the prime concern.

 

But with Nepal and nearby Bhutan endowed with enormous water

resources, India with its coal and Bangladesh with its natural gas,

these four neighboring countries could develop a mixed energy system

for all to benefit. And massive investment capital from the West,

the World Bank and the IMF to build the dams and the hydroelectric

plants would surely be forthcoming.

 

Whether concerned about economics or security, there is too much at

stake not to bring peace and prosperity to the kingdom and transform

a Shakespearean tragedy into a happy ending.

 

 

Stanley A. Weiss is founder and chairman of Business Executives for

National Security and former chairman of American Premier, a mining

and chemicals company. He contributed this comment to the

International Herald Tribune.