India has vital stakes in Nepal’s 20 November elections. In the last elections held in 2017, which were seen as a contestation of influence between China and India, the former prevailed.
The alliance of the two largest Communist parties—Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist–Leninist) and the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist Centre)—a grand marriage reportedly promoted by China—had won the largest number of seats, almost two-thirds, in the Nepalese parliament. The democratic alliance, represented largely by the Nepali Congress party, perceived to be backed by India, was rendered to a marginal position in the parliament.
The impact of these elections was not merely symbolic, for China emerged as a strongly visible player in the Himalayan country’s political arena. But how has the situation evolved over the past five years? Has India been able to counter China’s growing influence? And what is the significance of Nepal’s coming elections for India?
These elections are Nepal’s fourth since its peace process began in 2005. This fourth cycle is being hailed as a good sign and a marker of long-lasting peace in the country. Given that India has played a supportive role in Nepal’s peace process since the early days, an amiable completion of these elections can be considered a good return on its investment. The same will also indicate that Nepal’s multiparty democracy has now become relatively stable with regular elections, especially juxtaposed to the times of armed violence, when voting was a big deal for the country. Hence, reinforcement of Nepal’s multiparty democracy, which is a stated pillar in India’sforeign policy for its northern neighbour, should be seen as a positive step forward.
Also read: ‘Shape up, or ship out’—why Nepal’s young politicians are challenging an ageing establishment
An ideologically diverse bloc
Around 18 million citizens of Nepal are eligible to vote for 275 national and 550 provincial parliamentary seats. The ruling coalition, known as gathbandhan and led by Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba, has forged an election alliance with the four remaining parties in the present government. It was formed in mid-2021, following the supreme court’s decision to reinstate the parliament dissolved by then Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli as his behemothic party imploded. The ruling combine, comprising ideologically diverse parties such as the liberal-democrat Nepali Congress and the radical-Left Maoist party, has positioned itself as a defender of Nepal’s new constitution and multiparty democracy. And that is their main election platform.
The bloc’s primary contender is the moderate-Left Unified Marxist-Leninist (UML) party—the largest party in the last parliament even with the split. It continues to be led by Oli who is displaying effective campaign skills and is considered to have a mass appeal among those who prefer a leader with a strong personality. His party has prioritised economic prosperity and a stable government as its key election agendas. Joined in an alliance with Janata Samajbadi Party (JSP) – a southern Nepal party that had left the ruling coalition just days before nomination of candidates – the UML has also raised issues of nationalism, including the border dispute with India.
In the local elections on 13 May this year, Nepal’s ruling coalition bagged the largest number of seats. Now, with JSP defecting to the other side, the competition has become a little tighter. Regardless, most predictions based on local election results show that the bloc is likely to form a new government. A few imponderables could, however, still hit that assumption.
First, a new generation of non-partisan youth has emerged as a visible voting and candidacy force, challenging the current status quo with powerful social media campaigns. Second, the gathbandhan has failed to present a clear prime ministerial candidate. Third, there is a strong anti-incumbency trend in Nepal if the past national election results are any indication.
Also read: In Kathmandu, leaders compete to be ‘different’, make & break ties, as Nepal voters ‘seek change’
Blocking China won’t ensure good relations with Nepal
India this time, for sure, is in a better position than in the 2017 elections. Since the splits within the Nepal Communist Party (NCP) in early 2021, the political landscape in Nepal has tilted in India’s favour. For these upcoming elections too, China’s policy has been to re-engineer a Communist unification.
Though Chinese officials have made several visits recently—including one from Li Zhanshu, chairman of the standing committee of National People’s Congress—China’s plan has not succeeded so far. On the other hand, India’s key strategy for these elections, has been seemingly confined to checking the Communist unification. Till now, India has been successful in its plan to thwart a Communist consolidation. Nevertheless, the more important question for India is this: Does blocking Communist unity to counter China’s growing influence guarantee its long-term interests in Nepal?
There is an impression that India’s approach toward Nepal has shown diplomatic maturity lately, with less high-handedness in its dealings. However, what India has still failed to understand is that as it climbs up in global power and economic prosperity, its open-bordered neighbour – Nepal – cannot be left behind. Unless Nepal is economically secure, there is always a risk of vulnerable unemployed youths being radicalised—as happened with the 1990s Maoists’ armed movement in Nepal.With general discontentment among youth high, such home-grown uprisings can be easily exploited by external forces looking to jeopardise India’s security.
New Delhi has also perennially failed to grasp the core reason for the widespread anti-India sentiment in Nepal. Most Nepalese people feel that India has been blocking Nepal’s economic progress due to its own geo-political insecurities. While India has overtaken the United Kingdom to become the world’s fifth-largest economy, the economic situation in Nepal—the neighbour that it shares the closest social, cultural and economic ties with—has shown little progress. This is despite significant socio-political advances in the last two decades. Given the deep-rooted economic linkages between the two countries at multiple levels—including Nepal’s landlocked status—India cannot convincingly deny its share of responsibility for Nepal’s dismal economic condition.
As a relatively small and economically disadvantaged country, Nepal wants to have good relations with all countries, especially its two giant neighbours. Rather than taking sides in the competition between the two new global powers, Nepal wants to leverage its good relations with both for its own economic advancement. India has to respect Nepal’s wishes and even strategically lead in facilitating and boosting the country’s economic cooperation with China. A prosperous Nepal is necessary for a secure India.
The results of the elections, most likely not displeasing for India, can be a good starting point to recalibrate Nepal-India relations with an eye on long-term interests. If India is successful in partnering with China on Nepal’s economic transformations, the hard daily lives of Nepal’s common people will improve. This is sure to convert pervasive anti-India sentiment into India-friendly attitudes. This, perhaps, would be the best strategy to counter any unwanted influences from Indian competitors—not only China but also the West—on the country’s most closely-connected neighbour.
Shrishti Rana is a scholar in international relations. She has been engaged in research examining Nepal’s peace process from a global security perspective and co-authored a book called ‘Nepal: Votes for Peace’, published by Cambridge University Press, India. Views are personal.
(Edited by Zoya Bhatti)