India Nepal Friendship Treaty Review

There have been discussions and calls for a review of the 1950 India-Nepal Friendship Treaty. This treaty establishes an open border between India and Nepal, allowing Nepali citizens to work in India without needing a work permit. They can also apply for government jobs and civil service positions, excluding the Indian Foreign Service (IFS), Indian Administrative Service (IAS), and Indian Police Service (IPS). Furthermore, Nepali nationals are permitted to open bank accounts and purchase property in India. India has historically waived its rights to reciprocity under the treaty as a gesture of goodwill.

The Contentious Core of Indo-Nepal Relations: Examining the Calls for Reviewing the 1950 Treaty of Peace and Friendship

The year 2018 witnessed renewed calls for a comprehensive review of the 1950 India-Nepal Treaty of Peace and Friendship, a cornerstone of the bilateral relationship between the two South Asian nations. This treaty, signed in the nascent years of independent India, has served as the bedrock of Indo-Nepal relations, shaping the contours of their interactions across political, economic, social, and security spheres. However, over the decades, the treaty has also become a focal point of contention, particularly within Nepal, where perceptions of unequal benefits and infringements upon national sovereignty have fueled persistent demands for its revision. Understanding the genesis of this treaty, its key provisions, the evolving geopolitical context, and the diverse perspectives surrounding its relevance is crucial to comprehending the complexities of India-Nepal relations and the potential pathways for their future trajectory.

Historical Underpinnings: The Treaty's Genesis in a Post-Colonial World

The 1950 Treaty of Peace and Friendship was a product of its time, emerging from the geopolitical landscape that followed India's independence from British rule in 1947. Nepal, having maintained its sovereignty throughout the colonial era, albeit under the informal influence of the British Raj, sought to forge a new relationship with its newly independent, and significantly larger, neighbor. India, under the leadership of Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, envisioned a close strategic partnership with Nepal, viewing the Himalayan kingdom as a crucial buffer state against potential threats from the north, particularly in the context of the rising communist influence in China.

The treaty, comprising ten articles, aimed to establish "everlasting peace and friendship" between India and Nepal. Article 1 affirmed that "there shall be perpetual peace and friendship between the Government of India and the Government of Nepal." While seemingly innocuous, the subsequent articles laid the foundation for a unique and deeply intertwined relationship. Article 2 obligated both governments to inform each other of any "serious friction or misunderstanding with any neighboring State likely to cause any breach in the friendly relations subsisting between the two Governments." This provision, while ostensibly aimed at mutual security, was interpreted by some in Nepal as an infringement upon their sovereign right to conduct independent foreign policy.

Article 5, perhaps the most consequential provision, granted Nepali citizens the same privileges as Indian citizens in matters of residence, ownership of property, participation in trade and commerce, and other similar concessions. This effectively established an open border regime, allowing for the free movement of people and goods between the two countries. While this facilitated trade and cultural exchange, it also created anxieties in Nepal regarding the potential influx of Indian migrants and the impact on Nepal's demographic balance and economic opportunities.

Article 6 stipulated that "Each Government undertakes to give national treatment to the nationals of the other in its territory in regard to participation in industrial and economic development of such territory and to the grant of concessions relating to the development of such territory." This provision aimed to foster economic cooperation and integration, but it also raised concerns in Nepal about potential Indian dominance in its economy.

The treaty also included provisions for consultation on matters of mutual concern and for the settlement of disputes through diplomatic channels. However, the absence of a clear mechanism for addressing grievances or revising the treaty terms contributed to the growing dissatisfaction in Nepal over time.

Key Provisions and Their Implications: Unpacking the Treaty's Core Elements

The 1950 Treaty of Peace and Friendship is characterized by several key provisions that have shaped the nature of Indo-Nepal relations. These provisions, while intended to foster close ties, have also been the source of friction and debate.

• Open Border Regime: Article 5 of the treaty established an open border between India and Nepal, allowing for the free movement of people and goods without strict border controls. This has facilitated trade, cultural exchange, and people-to-people connections. Millions of Nepali citizens work and reside in India, contributing to the Indian economy and benefiting from access to employment opportunities. However, the open border has also raised concerns about security, illegal activities, and the potential influx of Indian migrants into Nepal. The porous border makes it difficult to monitor and control the movement of people and goods, leading to challenges in combating smuggling, human trafficking, and other cross-border crimes. Furthermore, some in Nepal fear that the open border could lead to demographic changes and undermine Nepal's national identity.

• Equal Privileges for Nationals: Article 6 of the treaty granted Nepali citizens the same privileges as Indian citizens in matters of residence, ownership of property, participation in trade and commerce, and other similar concessions. This has allowed Nepali citizens to work in India without needing a work permit and to apply for government jobs and civil service positions (excluding the Indian Foreign Service, Indian Administrative Service, and Indian Police Service). They are also permitted to open bank accounts and purchase property in India. While this has provided significant opportunities for Nepali citizens, it has also raised concerns in Nepal about the potential for exploitation and discrimination. Some argue that Nepali workers in India are often subjected to lower wages and poorer working conditions compared to their Indian counterparts. Furthermore, the lack of reciprocity in this provision has been a source of resentment in Nepal, as Indian citizens do not enjoy the same privileges in Nepal.

• Consultation on Security Matters: Article 2 of the treaty obligated both governments to inform each other of any "serious friction or misunderstanding with any neighboring State likely to cause any breach in the friendly relations subsisting between the two Governments." This provision, while ostensibly aimed at mutual security, has been interpreted by some in Nepal as an infringement upon their sovereign right to conduct independent foreign policy. Some argue that this provision gives India undue influence over Nepal's foreign policy decisions and limits Nepal's ability to forge independent relationships with other countries.

  Advertisement

• Lack of Reciprocity: A significant point of contention is the perceived lack of reciprocity in the treaty's provisions. While Nepali citizens enjoy significant privileges in India, Indian citizens do not enjoy the same rights and opportunities in Nepal. This has led to a sense of inequality and resentment in Nepal, with many arguing that the treaty favors India at Nepal's expense. India's historical waiving of its rights to reciprocity has been seen by some as a gesture of goodwill, but others view it as a reflection of India's dominant position in the relationship.

Evolving Geopolitical Context: The Rise of China and its Implications

The geopolitical landscape in South Asia has undergone significant changes since the signing of the 1950 treaty. The rise of China as a major economic and political power has had a profound impact on the region, including Nepal. China's growing influence in Nepal has raised concerns in India, which views Nepal as part of its traditional sphere of influence.

China has invested heavily in Nepal's infrastructure development, providing loans and grants for projects such as roads, railways, and hydropower plants. China has also increased its political and diplomatic engagement with Nepal, offering an alternative to India's dominance. This has provided Nepal with greater leverage in its dealings with India and has allowed it to pursue a more independent foreign policy.

India has responded to China's growing influence in Nepal by increasing its own engagement with the country. India has provided economic assistance, strengthened security cooperation, and promoted people-to-people connections. However, India's efforts have been hampered by perceptions of heavy-handedness and a lack of sensitivity to Nepal's concerns.

The competition between India and China for influence in Nepal has created both opportunities and challenges for the country. On the one hand, it has provided Nepal with greater access to resources and investment. On the other hand, it has also created a more complex and uncertain geopolitical environment.

Stakeholder Perspectives: Divergent Views on the Treaty's Relevance

The 1950 Treaty of Peace and Friendship is viewed differently by various stakeholders, reflecting their diverse interests and perspectives.

• India: India has historically been supportive of the treaty, emphasizing its role in strengthening bilateral ties and ensuring regional stability. India views Nepal as a crucial buffer state and seeks to maintain its strategic influence in the country. India also sees the treaty as a framework for economic cooperation and development. However, India has also been willing to consider revisions to the treaty in order to address Nepal's concerns and strengthen the relationship. India's underlying interests include maintaining regional stability, preventing anti-India activities in Nepal, and promoting economic cooperation.

• Nepal: In Nepal, there are varying opinions on the treaty. Some advocate for a complete abrogation of the treaty, arguing that it is outdated and infringes upon Nepal's sovereignty. Others call for a comprehensive review and revision of the treaty to address perceived inequalities and ensure that it reflects Nepal's current interests and aspirations. There is a general consensus in Nepal that the treaty needs to be updated to reflect the changed geopolitical context and to address issues such as trade, transit, and security. Nepal's underlying interests include achieving more equitable terms of engagement with India, promoting national interests, and reducing dependence on India.

• Political Parties in Nepal: Political parties in Nepal hold diverse views on the treaty, often reflecting their ideological orientations and electoral considerations. Some parties, particularly those with nationalist leanings, advocate for a complete abrogation of the treaty, while others favor a more pragmatic approach of seeking revisions through dialogue and negotiation. The issue of the treaty often becomes a rallying point for political mobilization and can be used to gain electoral support.

• Civil Society in Nepal: Civil society organizations in Nepal have played a crucial role in raising awareness about the treaty and advocating for its review. These organizations often highlight the perceived inequalities in the treaty and call for greater transparency and accountability in Indo-Nepal relations. They also promote dialogue and debate on the future of the relationship.

Calls for Review: A Recurring Theme in Indo-Nepal Relations

Calls for a review of the 1950 Treaty of Peace and Friendship have been a recurring theme in Indo-Nepal relations for several decades. These calls have often been driven by perceptions of unequal benefits, infringements upon national sovereignty, and the changing geopolitical context.

• Historical Grievances: Historical grievances and perceptions of unequal treatment have fueled calls for review. Some in Nepal believe that the treaty was imposed upon them by India and that it does not reflect their interests or aspirations. They also point to instances where India has been perceived as interfering in Nepal's internal affairs.

• Perceived Inequalities: The perceived inequalities in the treaty's provisions, particularly the lack of reciprocity, have been a major source of discontent in Nepal. Many argue that the treaty favors India at Nepal's expense and that it needs to be revised to ensure a more equitable relationship.

• Changing Geopolitical Context: The changing geopolitical context, particularly the rise of China, has also contributed to calls for review. Some in Nepal believe that the treaty limits their ability to forge independent relationships with other countries and that it needs to be updated to reflect the new realities.

• Domestic Political Considerations: Domestic political considerations often play a role in calls for review. Political parties may use the issue of the treaty to gain electoral support or to mobilize public opinion against India.

Potential Implications of a Treaty Review: Navigating a Complex Landscape

A review of the 1950 Treaty of Peace and Friendship could have significant implications for Indo-Nepal relations across various domains.

• Political Implications: A review could lead to a renegotiation of the treaty terms, potentially altering the political dynamics between the two countries. It could also impact the political stability of Nepal, depending on the outcome of the review process and the reactions of various stakeholders.

  Advertisement

• Diplomatic Implications: A review could lead to adjustments in diplomatic relations, with both countries seeking to redefine their roles and responsibilities in the relationship. It could also impact their relations with other countries, particularly China.

• Legal Implications: A review could lead to changes in legal frameworks governing border regulations, employment, and property rights. This could have significant implications for the lives of Nepali citizens working in India and for Indian citizens residing in Nepal.

• Security Implications: A review could have implications for border security and management, potentially leading to changes in border control measures and security cooperation. It could also impact the security environment in the region.

• Humanitarian Implications: A review could impact the livelihoods and opportunities for Nepali citizens working in India, potentially leading to displacement and economic hardship. It could also have implications for the rights and welfare of Indian citizens residing in Nepal.

• Economic Implications: A review could have economic implications for both countries, particularly regarding trade and investment. Changes in border regulations and employment policies could impact the flow of goods and people between the two countries.

Alternative Frameworks and Potential Solutions: Charting a Path Forward

Given the complexities and sensitivities surrounding the 1950 Treaty of Peace and Friendship, it is essential to explore alternative frameworks and potential solutions that could address the concerns of both India and Nepal and foster a more equitable and mutually beneficial relationship.

• Comprehensive Review and Revision: A comprehensive review and revision of the treaty, conducted through a transparent and inclusive process, could address the perceived inequalities and update the treaty to reflect the changed geopolitical context. This would require both countries to be willing to compromise and to address each other's concerns.

• Bilateral Agreements on Specific Issues: Instead of attempting to renegotiate the entire treaty, both countries could focus on negotiating bilateral agreements on specific issues such as trade, transit, security, and water resources. This would allow them to address specific concerns without reopening the entire treaty.

• Joint Institutional Mechanisms: Establishing joint institutional mechanisms to address issues of mutual concern, such as border management, security cooperation, and economic development, could foster greater trust and cooperation between the two countries.

• People-to-People Exchanges: Promoting people-to-people exchanges, such as cultural programs, educational scholarships, and tourism initiatives, could strengthen ties between the two countries and foster greater understanding and empathy.

• Tripartite Cooperation: Exploring opportunities for tripartite cooperation with China on projects of mutual interest, such as infrastructure development and connectivity, could help to reduce tensions and promote regional stability.

• Addressing Historical Grievances: Acknowledging and addressing historical grievances could help to build trust and improve relations between the two countries. This could involve offering apologies for past mistakes or providing compensation for past injustices.

• Promoting Reciprocity: Promoting reciprocity in the relationship, where both countries offer similar rights and opportunities to each other's citizens, could help to address the perceived inequalities in the treaty.

  Advertisement

The Path Ahead: Navigating a Complex and Evolving Relationship

The relationship between India and Nepal is complex and multifaceted, shaped by historical ties, geographical proximity, cultural affinities, and economic interdependence. The 1950 Treaty of Peace and Friendship has been a cornerstone of this relationship, but it has also been a source of contention. As Nepal seeks to assert its sovereignty and pursue a more independent foreign policy, and as China's influence in the region grows, it is essential for India and Nepal to find ways to address their differences and to build a more equitable and mutually beneficial relationship.

The calls for a review of the 1950 treaty reflect a desire for change and a recognition that the relationship needs to evolve to meet the challenges and opportunities of the 21st century. By engaging in open and honest dialogue, by addressing each other's concerns, and by exploring alternative frameworks and potential solutions, India and Nepal can chart a path forward that strengthens their ties and promotes peace, stability, and prosperity in the region.

The future of Indo-Nepal relations will depend on the willingness of both countries to adapt to the changing geopolitical landscape and to address the concerns of their respective populations. It will also depend on their ability to manage the complex dynamics of their relationship and to find ways to cooperate on issues of mutual interest. By working together, India and Nepal can build a stronger and more resilient relationship that benefits both countries and contributes to the stability and prosperity of the region.

The discussions surrounding the 1950 treaty are not merely about legal clauses and diplomatic protocols; they are about the very essence of the relationship between two nations bound by geography, history, and culture. The challenge lies in finding a way to reconcile the legitimate aspirations of Nepal for greater sovereignty and equality with the strategic interests of India in maintaining a stable and friendly neighbor. The path forward requires a nuanced understanding of the historical context, a sensitivity to the diverse perspectives of the stakeholders involved, and a commitment to finding solutions that are both equitable and sustainable. Only then can India and Nepal truly realize the promise of a relationship based on mutual respect, trust, and cooperation.