Fears of fresh insurgency in Nepal

On July 10, a policeman was killed in the eastern district of Bhojpur, 180 kilometres from Kathmandu, when police personnel and members of the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) group, led by Netra Bikram Chand aka Biplab, exchanged fire. Although the Maoist rebel who opened fire was also killed subsequently, this was the first instance of Maoist rebels killing police personnel in recent years. This incident came after the government security forces killed three senior leaders and arrested over 579 leaders and cadre of the Chand-led Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) from across the country following the government’s decision to outlaw the armed outfit. The Maoist leaders and cadre have gone underground after the government banned the unit through a cabinet decision earlier on March 12 and launched an offensive against them. According to the data by Nepal Police Headquarters, the proscribed group is behind a total 18 instances of bomb explosions, murder of six persons, planting bombs in 95 places and torching and vandalising 10 places. The police have recovered 511 arms from the arrested Maoist cadre.The group has been routinely organising general strikes across the country, extorting businessmen in the name of donations, shutting down schools, torching and vandalising school buses and even making physical attacks against rival party workers in the recent months. Police officials said they have credible information that the splinter outfit of former Maoists is currently working to form its militant wing equipped with sophisticated arms that were looted from security agencies during the insurgency period. The violent incidents that have been occurring in the recent past are a reminder of the beginning of the fresh Maoist insurgency in Nepal. Ordinary people, living mainly in rural Nepal, are worried the fresh start of the insurgency could take a toll on their livelihood as they fear a civil-war situation would break out, as it did in the past. “The failure on the part of the ruling parties to settle the transitional justice issue has actually given rise to impunity. Since no one of those directly involved in decade-long violence was punished, a section of former Maoist leaders seem to have a feeling that violence is [the] only means to get some tangible political returns," said Bishnu Sapkota, a political analyst. Renewed insurgency?Although many people believed the country was headed to peace and stability after the then underground Maoist rebel group led by Pushpa Kamal Dahal aka Prachanda came to mainstream politics following the Comprehensive Peace Accord (CPA), there are renewed fears that Nepal may again plunge into violence and civil war. This apprehension has grown further after the government outlawed a splinter faction of the CPN (Maoist) and stepped up its offensive against the outfit. A ferocious warrior and a key military strategist of the Maoist rebel during the Maoist conflict in Nepal, Chand was able to reorganise disgruntled leaders and combatants of the former Maoist party. Alleging that Chairman Dahal had betrayed their revolution, Chand-led group's political paper emphasised the need to complete the unfinished Maoist revolution in the country through fresh "armed rebellion" with the help of urban working-class people and rural peasants. While its political line is “new people's revolt", the outfit has announced that its political objective is to replace the parliamentary supremacy with "people's government" through "complete revolution".The Chand-led faction of the CPN (Maoist) was formed on November 24, 2014, after splitting from the CPN (Revolutionary Maoist) headed by veteran leader Mohan Baidya. Baidya did not agree with the new political line proposed by Chand, who was the second-in-command. Dismayed with the way Maoist Chairman Dahal was dealing with the issue of the peace process, the senior leaders of the then CPN (Maoist)—Baidya and Chand—had formed CPN (Revolutionary Maoist) shortly after the first Constituent Assembly was dissolved without promulgating a new constitution in June 2012.  Nepal experienced a decade-long bloody civil war in which some 17,000 people lost their lives and property worth tens of billions was destroyed. The conflict came to an end after seven major political parties and the then underground Maoist reached a seven-point understanding to oust the autocratic monarchy and establish a federal democratic republican system through joint peaceful protests across the country. After the success of the popular movement that forced then King Gyanendra to relinquish all the executive powers he had usurped before, the new government formed by the mainstream parties negotiated with the Maoist rebel and reached the CPA to pave way for the Maoist group designated as a terrorist outfit to join peaceful politics. Will insurgency survive?Although the Chand-led Maoist unit has been able to increase its presence in the country through its violent activities, not many people believe that this war will succeed. They argue that the outfit does not have an agenda.Experts said since the political reality at home had witnessed fundamental change following the abolition of a 240-year-old institution of monarchy, it is foolish on the part of the Maoist to launch insurgency through same old tactics.  "Evidence from around the world suggest that [the] success of an insurgency immediately after the similar type of insurgency is hardly possible,” said political analyst Mumaram K

Growing Chinese military support raises concerns in Nepal and beyond

Kathmandu, Nepal: That Nepal is cosying up to China for its defence needs has been clear over the last 10 years, and more recently last month, when China pledged assistance worth Nepalese Rupee (NR) 2.5 billion for five years to the nation’s Army for humanitarian and disaster relief equipment.For Nepal, a nation traditionally closer to India and the US for military engagements, it is a trend that should be worrisome, for China will look to extract its pound of flesh when the time comes.China’s latest aid was given under a Memorandum of Understanding signed by Nepal’s Defense Minister Ishwor Pokhrel and his Chinese counterpart Wei Fenghe. According to officials, the pact allows China to increase its financial support to the Nepal Army by almost 50 per cent.As a former senior army official of Nepal pointed out, “nothing comes for free”.There are already concerns that such external support to Nepal’s military and other security agencies could eventually make them "dependent" and "heavily influenced" by others in the long run. Strategic affairs experts argue that this should be immediately stopped, as they come with huge security implications for Nepal.An existing example of such reliance on another nation – and its ensuing costs - is Saudi Arabia, a nation whose military has been working in tandem with the US since after the Second World War. Such is the apparent influence of Uncle Sam on the Gulf nation today that President Donald Trump recently declared Saudi Arabia and its king would not last “two weeks” in power without American military support.The US has also been pressuring Saudi Arabia, which heads the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries oil cartel, to increase oil output in the face of shooting crude prices and because the US midterm elections were looming.Closer home, China has been bolstering its influence and soft power on neighbouring Pakistan in much the same way, by deepening military ties, offering aid and getting into economic engagements.Rise of Chinese Military Aid to NepalNepal did not have meaningful military engagements with China as such except for the purchase of some anti-aircraft guns from the nation way back in 1989. Then, a furious New Delhi had resorted to harsh economic sanctions against Nepal for months over the arms purchase, so much so that the Nepalese leadership cautiously avoided military relations with China even after the restoration of the democratic system in 1990.It was in December 2008 that the first military cooperation between the Nepal Army and Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) began, after Nepal’s then-defence minister Ram Bahadur Thapa signed an agreement in which China offered US$2.6 million for the modernisation of Nepal’s Army. During the visit of PLA Chief General Chen Bingde in 2011, China provided military aid worth US$7.7 million to the nation. Since 2008, China has also increased Defence College seats to Nepal Army officers and increased the frequency of visits of the two armies.Besides support to the army, China has boosted financial and other forms of support to the Armed Police Force (APF) that guards the Nepal-China border and Nepal Police. China has also built a state-of-the-art APF Training Academy in Matatirtha in Kathmandu at a cost of NRs 3.6 billion, as per the agreement reached during the visit of Chinese State Councillor Yang Jiechi to Kathmandu in 2011. Senior officials say that besides logistical support, China initially began offering various kinds of training opportunities and exposure visits to Nepal’s senior security officials. Beijing then began deepening military cooperation with the Nepal Army under the framework of the Comprehensive Strategic Partnership.Concerns Over External HelpFormer ambassador and foreign policy expert Dr Dinesh Bhattarai, who also worked as an adviser to late Prime Minister Sushil Koirala and former Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba, believes that what is happening is not good for Nepal."The army remains the most trustworthy institution for people in Nepal. But the way some countries are trying to influence it through various support measures will likely put its credibility in question," said Bhattarai, a career diplomat serving in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for decades.Experts also wonder why military support is being received even when it can be met by Nepal itself. "Nothing comes for free. It is important to assess the implications of such support before receiving it," said a former senior Nepal Army official, asking not to be named. "Our government is also to be blamed for this as it has failed to meet even basic logistical demands of the army."There are equally serious concerns over the likely dependency of security institutions on other countries. "Such support has to be routed through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. It not only increases dependency of security agencies on others, but also has security implications for the country in the long run. They need to be carefully analysed," said Bhattarai, who keeps close tabs on geopolitical and strategic issues in the region.Security and strategic affairs expert Geja Sharma Wagle said India, US and UK began supplying military logistics and arms to Nepal after the start of the Maoist armed insurgency - apparently to increase their influence.“China also began pumping in its support after 2006. Now there is rising competition among India, China and the US to provide military supplies to Nepal. This undeclared competition is not in the interest of Nepal,” he added.Wagle further argued that support measures have significantly increased Chinese clout within security agencies, bureaucracy and political circles over the years. Although senior government officials would not speak about it, media reports suggested that Nepal decided to skip the Bay of Bengal Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC) military drill held in India in September, apparently under pressure from China.Defence and cautionFor every argument against such external aid and influence, there are others who warn against crying wolf.When it comes to India, Nepal has long been receiving assistance from the nation for modernisation of its army through provision of equipment and training. According to the Indian External Affairs Ministry, about 250 training slots are provided every year for training of Nepal Army personnel in various Indian Army institutions. The two armies have also been conducting joint military exercises in each other's country.Similarly, the US has been providing training and logistical support to the Nepal Army for ages. The nation had some time ago announced provision of four Sky Trucks worth US$ 35.5 million to the Nepal Army to help in aid and rescue efforts during disasters. Government officials said they are expected to arrive in Kathmandu by 2020. Similar support to security agencies in Nepal has come from some other countries as well.Former UN ambassador from Nepal Jayaraj Acharya insisted that it is not good to generalise all such support as harmful. "Some of these aids have increase efficiency of our security agencies. Government bodies need to carefully analyse the needs and their implications before receiving such assistance. It is good not to take assistance if it can be met with resources at our disposal," said Acharya.However, the case is different with China - a nation with whom Nepal’s military relations changed after 2006, when the 240-year-old institution of monarchy was abolished. Since then, it has deepened military ties with Nepal through various kinds of assistance, both in cash and in kind, and this was no more evident than when Nepal and China held their first-ever military exercise to combat terrorism this April amid strong displeasure from New Delhi.On Beijing’s recent assistance of NRs 2.5 billion, Nepal Army spokesperson Brigadier General Gokul Bhandari said they are yet to work out what equipment and support to receive from China to boost the army's capacity to respond to humanitarian crises. "The support is being provided for humanitarian and disaster relief equipment. We are yet to work it out," he said.

Nepal flip-flops over Chinese funded projects

As a small landlocked country between India and China, Nepal has always maintained friendly relations with both the countries, inclining a little more towards India. However, Beijing’s current attempt to jostle with New Delhi for its influence is now forcing policy-makers in Kathmandu to confront a difficult choice—whether to go with India or China, which is now heavily investing in the country to enhance the connectivity and infrastructure.One of the worst casualties of this dilemma has been Nepal's mega infrastructure projects—including those related to hydropower like the reservoir-based 1,200 MW Budhi Gandaki Hydro Project in central-western Nepal.The country’s major political players—Nepal Communist Party (NCP) and Nepali Congress (NC)—have contributed towards the casualty. Over the past few years, the two have governed Nepal alternatively and seek to appease one neighbour over the other. While NCP, the newly-formed leftist party, is widely seen as being close to Beijing, the main opposition party, NC, is considered to be a traditional ally of New Delhi. It has been a trend in recent years for both India and China to nudge their "favourable" government in Nepal to revoke or reward contracts of any major development project of their interest, thereby turning the development of major hydropower projects into a victim of geopolitical calculation of the two big powers.Saga of Flip-Flop Decision In June 2011, the-then Nepalese Prime Minister, Baburam Bhattarai, announced the Budhi Gandaki Hydropower presenting it as a national pride project. In May 2016, the subsequent government led by K P Sharma Oli decided to levy Rs 5 per liter tax on petrol and diesel to domestically raise the funds necessary for the development of this project. Things were going smoothly until China showed its interest in building the project. In June 2017, the-then Nepal government led by Pushpa Kamal Dahal awarded the contract to China's state-owned China Gezhouba Group Corporation (CGGC). This not only courted controversy back home but also caused a flutter in India—which considers Nepal as its strategic backyard. New Delhi nudged the subsequent government led by Nepali Congress and eventually, the Sher Bahadur Deuba-led cabinet decided to unilaterally withdraw the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) reached with the Chinese company to build the Budhi Gandaki project in November 2017, citing that the $2.5 billion project was awarded without a competitive bidding process.Cut to presentThe latest controversy surrounding the Budhi Gandaki project began after the NCP government, led K P Sharma Oli, revoked the decision of Deuba government in September. This hardly comes as a surprise since overturning Deuba-led government’s decision was one of the major poll promises made by senior NCP leaders in 2017. A cabinet meeting on 21 September decided to give back the project to CGGC on EPCF (Engineering, Procurement, Construction, and Finance) model at the personal interest of PM Oli himself.The decision immediately drew criticism from various quarters including from the Opposition. Though Energy Minister Barsha Man Pun asserted that the deal is a purely commercial one, the geopolitical implications and the inflated cost of the project that may leave the country in debt trap have raised many eyebrows.Former finance minister and senior NC leader Dr Ram Sharan Mahat criticised the government for awarding the multi-billion dollar project to the CGGC in a non-transparent manner without exploring better options. "This is going to push the project cost leading to heavy national debt burden," he claimed.NC spokesperson Bishwa Prakash Sharma said the NC-led government had decided to withdraw the project from China after concluding that Nepal could build it by itself. "The NC decision to award the contract to Gezhouba Group is non-transparent, surprising and objectionable," he said. Sharma also criticised the current government for flouting established procedures to award such contracts. He also argued that the decision of the Oli-led government to award the contract to a Chinese company without any competitive bidding process was an "anti-national" move.Energy Minister Pun, however, said the decision to award the contract to CGGC was taken after the company wrote to the government that it was willing to develop the project. "We have a constraint of domestic resources. Except for the Upper Tamakoshi, no one is working in the project that has more than 100MW capacity. So we trust the company, that has both technical and investment capacity, to carry out the mega-project," he said.Government officials said the project cost may go up to $2.6 billion as the government prepares to hold a fresh round of negotiations with the state-owned Chinese company for its development. Nepal government plans to develop the project as a part of China's ambitious One Belt One Road (OBOR) initiative—which has been vehemently opposed and boycotted by India.Significance of Budhi Gandaki Project to China and IndiaChina's interest toward Budhi Gandaki project appears as a way to make further inroads in Nepal through its overarching OBOR project. This is an additional cause of worry for India since it is also concerned about the water that feeds Gandak Canal, which is used to irrigate over 18,000 lakh hectares of land in Bihar and Uttar Pradesh. Hence, the concerns over possible floods, regulated water and other strategic manipulation are high in New Delhi.Budhi Gandhaki is not the only project wrapped in controversies. Other delayed major projects include the West Seti Hydropower Project and Kulekhani 3 Hydropower Project. Even though the 750 MW power generation West Seti project was awarded in 2012, there was no progress until 2016. Even today, there is no major development on the ground. Kulekhani, which was awarded in 2008 to Chinese companies Zhejiang Jiahi and Sino Hydro, should have been completed in 2012 but it is yet to be operational while the cost has overrun by more than 50%. Various other mega-projects such as Kathmandu-Nijgadh Fast Track and Nijgadh International Airport which are being developed by Nepal itself have also not seen a smooth ride.In order to expedite such projects without much problems, former PM Pushpa Kamal Dahal floated a proposal of trilateral cooperation among India, Nepal and China in 2008. Though the proposal offered both the countries to manage their “security dilemmas” while developing major infrastructure projects, it was not welcomed by India. Ex-foreign minister Ramesh Nath Pandey insisted that Nepal’s policy-makers should be attentive towards the political, economic and strategic interests of India and China. “Our policy makers should be able to make sure that the interests of these two neighbours do not clash if we want to smoothly implement mega projects. Else, our ambition to develop mega-projects could be limited to a painful exercise.”Foreign affairs expert Gopal Khanal said the tendency of India and China to see each other as rivals in South Asia is likely to hamper development endeavours of small countries like Nepal in the region. "Although there are some grounds to be hopeful after the Wuhan Summit between Indian PM and Chinese President, we are yet to see how the relations between India and China evolve in coming days," he said.Meanwhile, locals, who expected a boost in tourism and urbanisation after the development of project, are disappointed with the inordinate delay. Those who will be affected by the project are also questioning if leaving their ancestral village would be a smart option. "Due to lack of consistent government policy, there are serious doubts if this project will actually kick off. Although we are promised compensation for the land that will be inundated as a result of dam construction, we are still confused over what to do next," said Dilli Prasad Pandey, a local in Tripureshwor-8 in Dhading district in central Nepal. Officials said the storage project would affect over 8,000 households in Gorkha and Dhading districts. While the project will submerge as many as 3,560 houses, it will partially affect 4,557 other houses.

Himalayan dilemma as Nepal seeks to implement OBOR projects

Kathmandu, Nepal: Nepal signed a framework agreement on China’s One Belt One Road (OBOR), popularly known as Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), in May last year hoping the collaboration would bring about an economic transformation, particularly through the investment in mega infrastructure projects. But as a section of politicians and policy makers remain sceptical of the desirability of BRI, there has not been any tangible progress in the implementation of major projects under this China-led initiative yet.At the heart of this scepticism is the likely geopolitical, strategic and economic cost Nepal may have to incur in view of the fact that India -- its immediate neighbor in the South -- has chosen not to be part of the initiative until China addresses its legitimate concerns over BRI projects.While China’s debt trap diplomacy is one of the prime concerns, BRI’s naysayers view that Nepal’s decision to expedite mega projects with BRI investment amid New Delhi’s displeasure could be a recipe of political instability, as debt-ridden Nepal may lose bargaining power with China and the strategic balance that this Himalayan nation maintains with the two giant neighbors could go into thin air.In fact, Nepal became a party to the BRI after years of indecision amid India's opposition. The signing of the framework agreement on BRI came just two days before the mega summit on Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation hosted by China on May 14-15, 2017 in Beijing. Then deputy prime minister and foreign minister Krishna Bahadur Mahara led the Nepalesedelegation to the Summit.Although the government identified projects to be financed under BRI framework after repeated nudging from Chinese side and even submitted them for consideration ahead of the official visit of newly-elected Prime Minister K P Sharma Oli to China in June this year, they have not seen any progress on the implementation front, as the two countries are yet to start serious negotiations to settle number of issues including funding modality of the BRI projects.“As President Xi has described, this is project of the century, a great geopolitical initiative. I do not think the implementation of BRI projects will go smoothly [in Nepal], especially with differing views about the initiative,” says Dr Dinesh Bhattarai, former diplomat who served as foreign affairs adviser to two former prime ministers -- Sushil Koirala and Sher Bahadur Deuba.Nepal’s Wish ListThe government led by K P Sharma Oli, who signed 10 different landmark bilateral agreements in his previous stint as the head of the government in 2016, seeks to implement projects that have potential to improve Nepal’s land and air connectivity, raise country’s productivity, promote trade and help the country in economic transformation process under the BRI.The projects identified for implementation under the BRI framework include a cross-border rail corridor project, cross-border energy transmission lines, regional airports and various road, drinking water and irrigation projects. Critical among them, however, is the trans-Himalayan multi-dimensional connectivity network, as a country locked by India on three sides desperately seeks alternative routes to import goods, especially after India’s ‘unofficial economic embargo’ against Nepal in 2015.Ahead of the official visit of Prime Minister Oli to China in June, Nepal submitted its wish list to China. The countries concluded an MoU for building a cross-border transmission line and trans-Himalayan railway and finalized the text for Protocol to Agreement on Transit Transport, which would provide Nepal access to Chinese seaports.The progress since then, as mentioned by PM Oli, has been limited to discussions. At a conference titled ‘BRI: Opportunities and Implications for Nepal and the Region in Kathmandu’ last week (September 12), Oli said connectivity remained the core area of his discussions with President Xi Jinping on both his visits in the capacity of the head of the state. “Our two countries have started discussions on various BRI related projects,” he announced.Chinese ConcernsAs Nepal begins negotiation on various projects under BRI, the Chinese side seem concerned over the slow pace of implementation of the projects. Media reports, quoting Chinese officials, suggest that China remains unsure of Nepal’s support to the BRI, even as the two signed a framework agreement.Nepal chose to send a delegation headed by then deputy PM Krishna Bahadur Mahara to an international conference on BRI last year, even as the Summit was participated by head of the government and the state of 30 countries.Although China plans to invest massively in Nepal as it has been doing elsewhere, including in Pakistan, funding modalities in Nepal remain a bone of contention.What has made Chinese additionally concerned is the withdrawal from Chinese firms of projects which were proposed to be constructed by China under BRI. A contract to build a 1200-MW Budhi Gandaki hydropower project was withdrawn from China’s Gezhouba Group by the erstwhile Sher Bahadur Deuba-led government, citing that the deal was not legal and transparent.Although the ruling Nepal Communist Party (NCP) promised to revoke the decision during election campaign for parliamentary and provincial assembly polls, it has failed to do so keeping in view the potential backlash from people. The Chinese company had signed an MoU with Nepal government in June 2017 to build the hydropower project, which was estimated to cost over $2.5 billion.Additionally, another Chinese company -- China Three Georges International (CTGI) -- ended up quitting 750-MW West Seti Project that Nepal proposed to build under BRI, citing low rate of return as a reason. Analysts believe one reason behind CTGI abandoning the project is frustration among the Chinese that Nepal is not serious towards implementing BRI projects. Investment Board Nepal and and the CTGI had signed an MoU to develop this hydroelectric project located in the far-western region of the country in February 2012.Concerns at HomeAs Oli-led government appears expediting negotiations on BRI projects to bring them into implementation, there are concerns already that Nepal could slip into “debt trap”, resulting into economic over dependence that would lead to the country losing its bargaining power. There are also apprehensions that the Chinese are known for putting forth strong demands that often force a country to compromise its sovereignty and its independence in foreign policy.As per the MoU on cooperation in the railway project signed between Nepal and China, a pre-feasibility study completed recently showed that extending a 72-kilometer railway line from Kyirong of Tibet to Kathmandu would cost around Rs 257 billion.Since Nepal has been asked to finance the project through subsidized loan or other alternative methods, experts warn that this would put the country with a meager $24.47 billion GDP into huge debt trap. “There seems to be a feeling that the Chinese will pour in money and we will be well-off with that,” says Dr Bhattarai.The former diplomat laments that Nepalese policy makers lacked clarity on how do they want to benefit from BRI.“Our policy makers do not seem to have clarity on this. We are running on their [China] terms and conditions when it comes to implementing BRI projects,” he says, adding, “We should be cautious that BRI should not in any case substitute our national development.”Another major concern around Nepal’s participation in the BRI is how the country maintains balanced relations with India and China, while ensuring its strategic autonomy, after China puts in billions of dollars in investment under the umbrella of BRI. As both India and China are likely to jockey for their influence in Nepal given its strategic and geopolitical sensitivity, there are fears that Nepal could transform from backwater to strategic epicenter -- something not good for its peace and stability.Strategic affairs analyst in Kathmandu feel that Nepal had started giving importance to China over India after it signed the BRI MoU last year.“While Chinese influence is on the rise, India’s influence in Nepal seems spiraling down. If this diplomatic and strategic imbalance continues further, this could be nothing but a recipe for political instability in Nepal,” warned geopolitical analyst Geja Sharma Wagle.