[lbo-talk] US looms large in Nepal

Ulhas Joglekar uvj at vsnl.com
Mon Jun 23 17:39:46 PDT 2003


The Hindu

Wednesday, Jun 18, 2003

America looms large

By C. Raja Mohan

KATHMANDU: In a city that revels in stories of intrigue and theories of conspiracy, the rising profile of the United States in the Himalayan Kingdom has generated great excitement among the chattering classes.

Smaller countries do tend to have an acute sensitivity to geopolitics. "Nepal is a yam between two stones." That was the famous dictum of Prithvi Narayan Shah, founder of modern Nepal. Sandwiched between India and China, Nepal mastered the art of balancing the two giants. But now there is a third stone, the U.S. that is adding to the complexity of Nepal's strategic environment.

The new American interest in Nepal after September 11, 2001, has given an extra edge to the debate here on the role of external powers. When the U.S. Secretary of State, Colin Powell, came here in January 2002, it was the first visit by a high-ranking American official in nearly three decades. In June 2002, the then Prime Minister, Sher Bahadur Deuba, was received in the White House by the President, George W. Bush.

The unveiling of arms supply and training to the Nepali army by Washington as part of its global war on terror has had India and China taking notice of the unprecedented American activism in Nepal. Is the American interest in Nepal merely about countering terrorism or part of a new Great Game in inner Asia? Is it aimed at containing China? Are there plans in Washington to undercut the perceived Indian primacy in Nepal?

Local analysts here cannot stop telling visitors that the new American interest in Nepal, small though it might be in absolute terms, is indeed strategic and might be aimed at both China and India. * * * The American Embassy here is at pains to disabuse the public perception of a grand design behind the new U.S. moves in Nepal. American diplomats say the purpose of the small American programme of military support to Nepal is to prevent the country from becoming a haven for international terrorism. In interviews to the local media, the U.S. Ambassador, Michael Malinowski, works hard to refute suggestions that the U.S. has a strategic interest in Nepal, or that Washington is seeking military bases in the mountain kingdom. The U.S. economic assistance to Nepal dates back to 1951 and adds up to about $700 million. But the urgency of improving the economic conditions in the Kingdom led the U.S. to offer last year $38 million, the highest annual package ever. But it is the American military assistance to Nepal that grabs the headlines. The U.S. has announced military assistance to the tune of $17 million, including the supply of M-16 rifles and training for the Royal Nepal Army.

Anywhere else in the world, this small amount of military assistance would have been seen as trivial. But in the context of Nepal, this has acquired a larger than life dimension. * * * Western diplomats here point to the difficulty of sustaining the current American interest in Nepal given the short and fickle attention spans in Washington on any issue. And not all attention from Washington is positive. Just when Nepal seemed to get into the good books of Washington, the move by Kathmandu to deport 18 Tibetan refugees to China deeply angered the powerful supporters of the Dalai Lama in the U.S.

There are new threats in the U.S. Congress to cut off assistance to Nepal. These moves need not necessarily translate into law. But the fact is that Nepal might be making some enemies in Washington.

Nepal, of course, has had no choice but to comply with the Chinese demands, despite knowing the price it might have to pay in the U.S. America might be powerful; but it is far away and China is next door. The fact that the deportation of the Tibetans was no secret affair and was implemented in the face of a public request from China tends to demonstrate the political clout Beijing wields in Nepal. * * * Asked by a local newspaper recently about New Delhi's response to the growing American presence in Nepal, the Indian Ambassador, Shyam Saran, said, "the Government of India is in close touch with the U.S. Government concerning the developments in Nepal, since both are friends of Nepal". He added: "There is no competition or rivalry between India and the U.S. in Nepal."

Western diplomatic sources here say that there has been continuous contact and consultations between India, the U.S. and Great Britain on the current peace process in Nepal. But India and the U.S. are some distance away from achieving a substantive level of political comfort in thinking and working together in Nepal.

The nature of the American arms being supplied and their consequences as well as other operational issues often raise questions on the Indian side. This is not surprising since New Delhi and Washington have not had the experience of cooperating on security issues in the subcontinent or anywhere else for many decades.

It is only through transparency and continuous reassurance from the high political to the operational levels that New Delhi and Washington can deepen mutual trust and make the cooperation in Nepal a model one.

Copyright © 2003, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list