Content uploaded by Mr. Sunil Thapa
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Mr. Sunil Thapa on May 11, 2024
Content may be subject to copyright.
Realpolitik of Indo-Nepal Relations
Sunil Thapa
Western Sydney University, Australia
max_thapa2005@yahoo.com, 17899680@student.westernsydney.edu.au
ABSTRACT: Substantial political and economic exchanges have marked the historical relationship
between Nepal and India. They maintain their diplomatic relations through high-level visits, trade
initiatives, and financial investments. Moreover, India has assisted Nepal in the domain of
infrastructure development but is motivated by geopolitical considerations and preferences. The
Treaty of Segouli, concluded in 1816 between the Kingdom of Nepal and British India, led to Nepal's
relinquishment of a substantial territorial expansion. This began the emergence of realpolitik in Nepal,
which facilitated foreign intervention in the country's political affairs. India has exerted a significant
hegemonic influence on Nepal's internal and external affairs since its independence from British rule
in 1947. This influence has been particularly evident since establishing the 'Peace and Friendship
Treaty' between India and Nepal in 1950. India has played an active role in Nepal's political
movements, introduced the concept of a common river, and imposed its desires and interests through
river water agreements. Additionally, India has infringed upon Nepalese territories and utilized
Nepalese political parties and their leaders to create a political-economic environment in Nepal that
benefits India. Furthermore, India has a covert presence in selecting Prime Ministers in Nepal.
Therefore, these factors collectively suggest that India's influence and domination infringe upon
Nepal's sovereignty and independence.
KEYWORDS: relations, strategic interests, preferences, hegemonic, sovereignty
Introduction
The relationship between Nepal and India has a long history since centuries, from the Hindu epic
Ramayana and Mahabharata (Embassy of Nepal 2017; Rose 1970, 19). Nepal was a trade transit
to India with Tibet, the Caucasian region, Mongolia, and Russia, and dry ports in the Kathmandu
valley for 2500 years before (Sarwar 2018). By understanding the commercial importance of
Nepal during the British rule in India, they signed a treaty of commerce with Nepal in 1792 and
further in 1801 with its strategic interests to expand their territory beyond the Himalayas via
Nepal and Tibet and promote Trans-Himalayan trade (Aitchison 1936; Ramakant 1976). However,
the realpolitik began in 1816 when the British-Nepal war took place and ended with a treaty of
'Segouli' that checked Nepal's territory expansion program, lost one-third of its territory, and
employed one British officer in Nepal to control the decisions of the Nepalese Government
(Pathak 2010). Hence, Nepal's foreign relations were limited as its dependency on the British Raj
increased, and Nepal came under the influence of British India.
Once Nepal and India established bilateral relations through the Treaty of Peace and
Friendship in 1950, the political environment changed in both countries. The British Raj
ended and established an independent India in 1947, while democracy was established
democracy in Nepal by abolishing the 104 years' Rana regime in 1951 (Rowland 1967). Since
1951, regular high-level visits have strengthened political relations between Nepal and India.
The political visit was followed by the first-ever democratically elected Prime Minister B. P.
Koirala in January 1960 for the intention to cooperate (Mishra and Mishra 1995). Exchange
high-level visits have become a regular process to understand and strengthen the relationship.
So, most of the visits were helpful, as a positive consequence, to improve the bilateral
relationship with several agreements for development assistance to Nepal on establishing
industries (cement, sugar, ancillary engineering), assisting in transportation (road links),
supplying military hardware, developing hydropower (Khanna and Kumar 2018; Thapa
RESEARCHRESEARCH
ASSOCIATION forASSOCIATION for
INTERDISCIPLINAR INTERDISCIPLINARY Y
STUDIESSTUDIES
RAIS
April 4-5, 2024
DOI:10.5281/zenodo.11123236
RAIS Conference Proceedings, April 4-5, 2024
!
97#
2010). However, as a negative consequence, anti-India sentiment is present in Nepal due to
India's heavy hegemonic interferences.
Since 1950, India has been Nepal's largest trading partner, accounting for two-thirds of
Nepal's foreign trade (MEA 2014). Moreover, India surrounds Nepal from three sides, making
Nepal land-locked (India-locked) and leaving no other choices for international trade without
transit excess through India. Similarly, Nepal is a significant market for India. According to
the latest available data, bilateral trade exceeded USD 11005.10 million, with Indian exports
to Nepal totalling USD 9634.06 million, but Nepalese exports to India totalling USD 1371.04
million, resulting in a USD 8263.02 million deficit during 2020/21 (MoF 2020). Furthermore,
India has been Nepal's economic partner, providing grants and aid on an annual basis for
infrastructure development, education, health, and agriculture (Bhattarai, 2005). During
2020/21, Nepal received USD 673 million in aid and support from India (MoF 2021).
Hegemonic India
After gaining independence from British colonial rule in 1947, India reinstated its democratic
system. It pursued a foreign policy to expand its influence and dominate the South Asian region,
consistent with its pre-colonial approach (Joseph 2015). Following India's strategic objectives to
leverage and interfere in Nepal's domestic politics, it has actively participated in various political
processes within Nepal. The Indian interest and its involvement in the political struggle against
the Rana regime ended in 1950, marking the culmination of 104 years (Gautam 2005). India
considered Nepal was under its political sphere, so it provided support by relying on monarchy
and democratic forces rather than the Rana regime (Bhandari 2014). In return for India's
participation, Nepal signed a Friendship treaty in 1950 that favored India but left Nepal's
discomfort to this day (Thapa 2010). The treaty in question, which has generated significant
controversy due to its perceived one-sided nature, has granted India a position of influence over
various sectors in Nepal, including politics, economy, security, and technology. In 1969, Nepal
formally requested to abrogate the pact established in 1950. However, India was unwilling to
withdraw as the treaty made Nepal, under its influence and domination, a safer place for Indian
traders, investors and citizens to reside, purchase property, and establish businesses (Whelpton
2005; Sharma 2000). In the early 1950s, Nepal saw a period of significant influence and
domination by India, as the government of New Delhi pressed its decisions on the Nepalese
government (Khanal n.d.). During the 1950s, New Delhi played a significant role as a
representative platform for Nepal in several international forums. In the same way, the Indian
government chose a personal secretary for the King of Nepal from its citizens, while the Indian
ambassador actively engaged in cabinet meetings of the Nepalese government. India continues to
play a significant role in Nepal's political affairs, as seen by its covert nominations for the position
of Prime Minister (Levi 1957; Rose and Dayal, 1969; Brown 1971; Muni 2016).
Moreover, the political landscape in Nepal underwent significant transformations after
the 1950s, resulting in consequential shifts in the political-economic dynamics between Nepal
and India. Despite numerous treaties aimed at recognizing and upholding principles like full
sovereignty, territorial integrity, and independence, it is evident that Indian preferences had a
significant role in guiding the actions of both countries. In the context of military relations
and agreements, India successfully established 17 checkpoints along the northern border of
Nepal with Tibet in 1954. However, Nepal later demanded the withdrawal of these
checkpoints in 1969, asserting that they belonged to Nepal based on the 'Segouli treaty' of
1816 with British-India (Mulmi 2020; Xavier 2020; Nepali Times, 2019; Malik 2004; Kumar
1980; Pandey n.d.). Nevertheless, India still needs to remove its check post from Kalapani,
which includes Limpiyadhura and Lipulekh.
RAIS Conference Proceedings, April 4-5, 2024
!
98#
Consequently, these areas continue to be regarded as a disputed region. Moreover, as
mentioned earlier, India formally opened an 80-kilometer road in the territories on 8 May 2020
(Mulmi 2020; Xavier 2020). Moreover, it is worth noting that India recently released a political
map that ignores the territorial claims of Nepal. Nepal has also published its political map
incorporating these disputed areas in response. This development has had a detrimental impact on
the bilateral relations between Nepal and India (Ethirajan 2020). The issue of territorial
encroachment is a matter of great sensitivity, particularly in the context of Nepal. India has been
observed to have encroachments in 26 locations, leading to the unfortunate loss of around 60,000
hectares of Nepalese territory. This situation has consequently created concerns regarding the
sovereignty of Nepal (Zehra 2020; Paudyal 2014; Adhikari 2013; Das 2008).
India has been actively involved in numerous political movements and transformations
within Nepal, exerting a substantial influence on the country's political landscape. The
political movement Jana Andolan in 1990 transformed Nepal's absolute monarchy into a
constitutional monarchy. This shift was facilitated by the encouragement and backing of the
Indian government, which intervened due to a political confrontation and strained relations
between the Nepalese King and the Indian Prime Minister. Likewise, Nepal saw a political
uprising known as the Maoist insurgency, which spanned a decade from 1995 to 2005, during
which it received support from India. It was revealed that the Maoists resided in India and
offered training; nevertheless, India did not assist the King's imposition of direct rule on 1
February 2005 to manage the domestic political circumstances. India declined to assist the
King, asserting it was not pertinent to India's interests (Shah and Pettigrew, 2009).
India strategically employed the Nepalese political parties to exert its influence and
establish dominance, effectively ensuring its control over a significant portion of the political
landscape. This control was achieved by forging alliances with major parties such as the
Nepali Congress, Nepal Communist Party, Terai-based Party (representing the southern
region of Nepal), and even incorporating the Maoist Party within its sphere of influence.
During the Maoist insurgency, India's primary objective was to diminish the level of foreign
involvement and military connections with Nepal by integrating the Maoist faction into the
mainstream political landscape of Nepal (Thapa 2010). Furthermore, it is worth noting that
many Nepalese political parties were founded in India during the exile of Nepalese politicians
when the Rana regime existed in Nepal. Consequently, these parties were exposed to and
influenced by India's political landscape (Joshi and Rose 1966). As a result, India has
effectively established a favorable political climate in Nepal and controlled domestic politics
since the 1950s treaty, which accepted Nepal's sovereignty while giving India increasingly
considerable power over Nepal (Pathak n.d.; Vela 2009).
Most political-economic accords were executed based on India's desires and interests.
Most river water sharing accords were established with a primary focus on India's
fundamental security concerns, which are inclined towards favoring India (Jha 2010). The
Koshi River deal, finalized in 1954, facilitated India's barrage construction, submerging a
significant portion of Nepal's landmass. The Gandak River irrigation and power project,
which concluded in 1959, was established to provide shared irrigation facilities to Nepal and
India. However, in 1990, India introduced a new concept of common rivers for Nepal, which
diminished Nepal's leverage in its negotiations with India on collaborative initiatives aimed at
hydroelectric power generation and irrigation distribution (Subedi 2004). The Tanakpur River
Agreement in 1991 and the Comprehensive Mahakali River Treaty in 1996 were established
to provide irrigation to agricultural land in Nepal, particularly during periods of low rainfall.
However, it has been observed that most of the irrigation facilities have been utilized by India
rather than Nepal (Subedi 2005).
India has utilized economic blockades as a political weapon to interfere with Nepal's
internal affairs and obstruct social, economic, and political progress (Subedi 2016).
Additionally, India is always hegemonic in Nepalese politics (Patel 2017). India has
RAIS Conference Proceedings, April 4-5, 2024
!
99#
expressed apprehension regarding the efforts undertaken by China in Nepal and the potential
influence that China may exert over Nepal. For example, when Nepal permitted China to
construct the Arniko Highway linking Tibet of China with Kathmandu, which opened
Nepalese territory Tatopani as a trade route in 1969, India protested the permission of the
Nepalese government and employed an economic blockade. In 1989, Nepal encountered its
second blockade imposed by India due to India's disinterest in procuring a shipment of
Chinese weaponry. In 2015, Nepal saw a third instance of an economic embargo imposed by
India due to Nepal's refusal to heed New Delhi's counsel over modifying the newly
established constitution in alignment with Indian objectives (Subedi 2016; Nepali Times,
2018; Pant 2018). Their interest was to address the demand of people who live alongside the
border between Nepal and India. As they have socio-cultural relations with India, in favor of
them, India demanded Nepal grant Nepalese nationality. Such direct interference in the
internal affairs of Nepal's independent and sovereign country is Indian hegemonic arrogance
(Karki and KC 2020).
The Nepalese political parties and their leaders seek aid and guidance from New Delhi
due to India's significant influence and dominance in the region (Patel 2017). The level of
interference experienced in that particular situation resulted in the Nepalese government's
stability being dependent upon the interests of India. Hence, on each occasion, when a new
government is established in Nepal with the support of India, the Prime Minister undertakes
an inaugural international tour to India. In the recent past, Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal
Dahal' Prachanda' embarked on his inaugural international bilateral visit to India from 31 May
to 3 June 2023 after assuming the position of Nepal's Prime Minister (Ghimire 2023; Indian
Embassy 2023).
Conclusion
The relationship between Nepal and India began in historical times. As independent and
sovereign nations, they engage in political-economic cooperation. Regular high-level political
visits strengthened their relationship, supported by economic aid and grants for infrastructure
development. Both nations are significant trade markets for one another, so the volume of
bilateral trade increases yearly.
Although India respects Nepal's independence and sovereignty, it is theoretically
interested in one way of ensuring its safety. It continues to implement the pre-independence
policy of influencing and dominating by following India's strategic interests and preferences
within its political-economic sphere to become a global powerhouse or, failing that, a regional
powerhouse in the current multipolar era. India's hegemonic role in Nepal governs the
relationship between Nepal and India. India's hegemonic role is interfering with Nepal's
internal and external affairs, ultimately raising questions about Nepal's sovereignty and
independence.
The Nepalese constitution mandates that international relations be directed towards
enhancing the nation's standing in the international community by sustaining relations based
on sovereign equality while protecting the country's freedom, sovereignty, territorial integrity,
and independence. However, under the influence of India, Nepal's foreign policymaking has
exhibited a long-standing pattern of shifting foreign policy orientation with each change in
government. To pursue national interest, sovereignty, and international dignity, Nepal must
prepare a comprehensive foreign policy capable of dealing with the hegemonic conduct and
pressure of regional powers such as India so that one-sided bilateral agreements with India
can be revised.
RAIS Conference Proceedings, April 4-5, 2024
!
100#
References
Adhikari, G. 2013. “Nepal-India agrees to find missing border pillars, enhance security.” [online], The
Hindu.com. Available at: http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/south-asia/nepalindia-agree-to-
find-missing-border-pillars-enhance-security/article4778679.ece.
Aitchison, C.U. 1936. “A collection of treaties, engagements and sanads.” Calcutta, pp. 105- 108.
Bhandari, S. 2014. “Self-determination and constitution making in Nepal: Constituent assembly, inclusion, and
ethnic federalism.” Springer, XXIII, 2014.
Bhattarai, B.P. 2005. “A PhD dissertation on ‘The effectiveness of foreign aid: A case study of Nepal’.” Sydney:
Western Sydney University.
Das, P. 2008. “Towards a Regulated India-Nepal border.” Strategic Analysis 32 (05), September 884.
Embassy of Nepal. 2017. Rt Hon President’s Meetings with Indian Leadership. Press Release, New Delhi, April
18, 2017.
Ethirajan, A. 2020. “India and China: How Nepal’s new map is stirring old rivalries.” BBC News [online],
available at: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-52967452, on 10 June 2020.
Gautam, R. 2005. Nepali Congress. New Delhi: Adroid Publications.
Ghimire, Y. 2023. “The personal and the political: From Nepal, reading Prachanda’s visit to India.” [online]
Indian Express, on 2 June 2023, available at: https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/explained-
global/the-personal-and-the-political-from-nepal-reading-prachandas-visit-to-india-8639541/.
Indian Embassy. 2023. Visit of Prime Minister of Nepal Rt Hon’ble Mr Pushpa Kamal Dahal ‘Prachanda’ to
India, [online] on 2 June 2023, available at:
https://www.indembkathmandu.gov.in/news_letter_detail/?id=351.
Jha, H. B. 2010. “Nepal’s Border Relations with India and China.” Accessed on March 30, 2020, available at:
http://src-h.slav.hokudai.ac.jp/publictn/eurasia_border_review/Vol41/V4N104J.pdf.
Joseph, N. 2015. “An analysis of foreign aid and development in developing countries: A case study of Nepal.”
Master’s dissertation. Montreal: Universite de Montreal.
Joshi, B. L. and Rose, L. E. 1966. Democratic Innovations in Nepal: A Case Study of Political Acculturation.
University of California Press, GGKEY: 5N30S3HU9BC.
Karki, K.K. and KC, H. 2020. “Nepal-India relations: Beyond realist and liberal theoretical prisms.” Journal of
International Affairs 3(1): 84-102. Tribhuvan University, Nepal, DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3126/joia.v3i1.29085.
Khanal, G. n.d. “Foreign policy of Nepal: Continuity and changes.” Journal of APF Command and Staff
College. Vol 2. No. 1. Retrieved from
https://www.nepjol.info/index.php/JAPFCSC/article/download/26749/22141/.
Khanna, V.N. and Kumar, L.K. 2018. Foreign policy of India. India: Vikas Publishing House Pvt Ltd.
Kumar, D. P. 1980. Nepal: Year of Decision. New Delhi: Vikas Publishing House.
Malik, V. P. 2004. “India-Nepal Security Relations.” In India-Nepal Relations: The Challenge Ahead, Edited by
Rupa in association with Observer Research Foundation, 82-86, New Delhi: Rupa.
MEA. 2014. “India-Nepal relations, India: Ministry of external affairs.” Available at:
https://www.mea.gov.in/Portal/ForeignRelation/Nepal_July_2014_.pdf.
Mishra, S. G. and Mishra, A. 1995. “Indo-Nepal relation (1951-1991).” Proceedings of the Indian History, Vol.
56, pp. 846-856.
MOF (Ministry of Finance). 2020. Nepal foreign trade statistics- 2019/20. Kathmandu: Ministry of Finance.
MOF (Ministry of Finance). 2021. Development cooperation report- 2019/20. Kathmandu: Ministry of Finance.
Mulmi, A.R. 2020. “What is the way forward in India-Nepal border dispute?” Aljazeera, [online], available at:
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/05/india-nepal-border-dispute-200528085916240.html, on 30 May
2020.
Nepali Times. 2018. “Remembering the 1989 blockade.” [Online], available at:
http://archive.nepalitimes.com/article/from-nepali-press/Remembering-the-1989-blockade,2651.
Nepali Times. 2019. “Territorialism, Nepali Times.” [Online], on 12 Nov 2019 available at:
https://www.nepalitimes.com/editorial/territorialism/.
Pandey, C.L. (n.d.). “Impact of Nepalese domestic politics on Nepal-Indo foreign relations.” Academia [online],
available at: https://www.academia.edu/6038992/Impact_of_Nepalese_Domestic_Politics_on_Nepal-
Indo_Foreign_Relations.
Pant, B. 2018. “Socio-economic impact of undeclared blockade of India on Nepal.” Research Nepal Journal of
Development Studies, vol 1, issue 1, 2018 May.
Patel, S. 2017. A new journey in the new context: Nepal-India relations.” IOSR Journal of Humanities and
Social Science (IOSR-JHSS), Vol. 22, Issue 9, Ver. 11 (Sept. 2017), pp. 73-79.
Pathak, B. n. d. “Nepal-India Relations: Open Secret Diplomacy.” Available at: http://www.transnational-
perspectives.org/transnational/articles/article492.pdf.
RAIS Conference Proceedings, April 4-5, 2024
!
101#
Paudyal, G. 2014. “Border Dispute between Nepal and India.” Researcher: A Research Journal of Culture and
Society 1(2): 35-48.
Ramakant. 1973. “Geography as a factor in Nepal’s foreign policy.” South Asian Studies, Vol. 8, No. 2, July,
1973, pp. 19.
Rose, L. E. 1970. “Nepal’s strategy for survival.” Berkel: California University Press.
Rowland, J. 1967. A History of Sino-Indian Relations: Hostile Co-existence. New Jersey: D Van Nostrand
Company.
Sarwar, L. 2018. “India and Nepal relations: An analysis of bilateral relationship through the prism of history.”
India: Asian Journal of Research in Social Sciences and Humanities.
Shah, A., and Pettigrew, J. 2009. “Windows into a revolution: ethnographies of Maoism in South Asia.” Dialect
Anthropol 33: 225-251, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10624-009-9142-5.
Sharma, G. 2000. Missing elements in the development of thinking. New Delhi: Calcutta Offset Press.
Subedi, S. 2016. Academia, available at: https://www.academia.edu/33773541/ Economic_Blockade_2015.pdf
Subedi, S. P. 2005. Dynamics of Foreign Policy and Law: A Study of Indo-Nepal Relations. New Delhi: Oxford
University Press.
Thapa, R. 2010. “Nepal’s strategic future: Following India or China or middle road.” Master’s thesis. USA: The
U.S. Army Command and General Staff College.
The Times of India. 2022. “Nepal PM Sher Bahadur Deuba arrives in India for 3-day visit.” The Times of India,
[online] on 1 April 2022, available at: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/nepal-pm-sher-bahadur-
deuba-arrives-in-india-for-3-day-visit/articleshow/90591918.cms.
Vela, J. 2009. “China-Nepal ties reach new heights.” Asia Times online, available at:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/KC17Df03.html.
Whelpton, J. 2005. A History of Nepal. New York: Cambridge University Press
Xavier. C. 2020. “Interpreting the India-Nepal border dispute.” Brookings, [online], available at:
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2020/06/11/interpreting-the-india-nepal-border-dispute/, on 11
June 2020.
Zehra, I. 2020. “India’s Infringement over Nepal Border Area.” Global Research, January 02, 2020, accessed on
April 4, 2020, available at: https://www.globalresearch.ca/indian-infringement-nepal-border-
area/5699368.
