Connect with us

South Asia

Pakistan and Russia are Shaping New Era of Strategic Relationship

Published

on

Asia is a goldmine of opportunities and choices for the major powers. Significant location of Pakistan in the region attracts major powers as well. Change in geopolitics with opportunities and choices leads regional states towards decisive shift in their foreign policy. Russia is opening eyes and looking to be a regional hegemon. Although Pakistan and Russia have no history of good relationship but the strategic realities gave birth to the current shift which is much positive for both Islamabad as well as Moscow.

Pakistan-Russia has past of adversary but today, both are welcoming the idea of building and stimulating strategic relationship. Pakistan wants to build better relationship with Russia to reduce dependency on United States. Islamabad wants to prove to Washington that it has as another strategic option if there is any tension happens between Pakistan and United States. Washington never likes Moscow’s influence in Islamabad. There are differences between Pakistan and the United States over drone attacks. According to some analysts American hegemony is near to end in the region and Pakistan does not like to become overly ally of United States and dependent on it. In fact, the increasing relationship between India and America motivates Pakistan to look for new friends and alliances. Pakistan also likes to drive wedge between India and Russia by improving relations with Moscow. Pakistan also has an eye of Russian military equipment supply and technology assistance that is better than China. Pakistan wants to gain much commercial incentive from Russia for example Karachi to Lahore Pipeline and Russia is also interested in renovation of Pakistan Steel Mill. According to some reports Russia may join CASA-1000 energy project providing electricity to Afghanistan and Pakistan.

On the other hand, today Russia is interested in Pakistan by its strategic location being very next to Afghanistan and Central Asian states. Although both the countries do not share borders but have same geopolitical space. Moscow has long considered Islamabad as a troublemaker for Russia and supporter of terrorism in the region. Russian motivation is to convince Pakistan to be moderate and subdue Islamic radicalization and militancy in the region. Pakistan is a Muslim state which has great influence in the Muslim world and Russia also has a large number of Muslim populations. Russia thinks that Pakistan can play vital role for the stable Afghanistan. Moscow hopes, after the withdrawal of American forces, Russia will find the strategic place in the region and then it will be able to play better role in the Indo-Pacific region. Russia also hopes that its understanding with Pakistan will decrease terrorism in Afghanistan and the region. It is also building relations with Pakistan to counter alignment between India and United States. Pak-Russia relationship can impede India from getting close United States. Indian tendency toward Israel and United States for advance weapons and technology encourages Russia to look for new markets for her arms sale. Moscow’s proposition to Islamabad, Pakistan can be a part of Russian strategy to play significant role in the region. On the issue of Ukraine, Russia is being isolated and has few friends in the international sphere. The aftermath Ukraine issue Russia is looking for new friends who may help her and challenge the West.

Islamabad and Moscow first time noticed each other in 2009 when Afghanistan, Pakistan, Russia and Tajikistan floated to promote regional security and economics. This quadrilateral idea held three meetings and did not take off due to cancelation of Putin’s expected visit of Pakistan for the fourth meeting in 2012. President of Pakistan Asif Ali Zardari had visited Russia in 2011 and Army Chief visited Moscow during 2012. There were reciprocal visits continued by ministers and high level officials of both the countries.  Russian defense minister Sergei Shoigu visited Pakistan in 2014 since the last 45 years. During this visit the both countries agreed on information exchange on politic-military issues; cooperation for promoting international security, counterterrorism and arms control actives; collaboration in various military fields and other areas of education, medicine, topography, hydrography, cultural and experience sharing in peacemaking efforts were signed. In August 2015, Moscow agreed to provide Mi-35Mhelicopter to Pakistan. Pakistan wished to buy 20 Mi-35Ms over the next year and got four helicopters in 2017. In addition, both the countries enhanced military relations and joint military exercises were made between the two armies under the slogan of Druzhbha (Russian word meaning friendship). Russian naval forces also participated in Aman-17 international exercise in Arabian Sea, hosted by Pakistan in 2017. Further both countries agreed about coordination against terrorism and drug trafficking. Russia had already cooperated in outer-space exploration and helped in launching Pakistani telecommunication satellite Al-Badar in 2001. It also had refurbished the only Pakistani steel mill.

An agreement of $2 billion for the North-South gas pipeline was signed in October 2015 which would connect Lahore to Karachi terminal. This agreement was signed on the first visit of Pakistan by Russian energy minister. 1100 kilometer pipeline is anticipated to be completed in 2018. The Russian company will complete this project and will use for 25 years. In the energy sector, both states are collaborating as well and have signed a Memorandum of Understanding in Moscow between Russia’s Gazprom International and Pakistan’s Oil and gas Development Company Limited on July3, 2017.  The project will fulfill the energy requirement of Pakistan. This understanding was for mutual cooperation and joint ventures and use of state of art technology that would aid exploration and development in Pakistan. This is the beginning of commercial ties between these two countries.

The increasing cooperation between Pakistan and Russia should be viewed in the context of Afghan scenario which had created challenges for Moscow. Pakistan is considered an important country for the stabilization in Afghanistan. Without constructive involvement of Pakistan, the problems of Afghanistan and stability are a dream. During the Last six decades, very few Pakistani leaders and officials visited Russia. Whenever whoever visited yielded positive result; Tashkent declaration in 1966 and Pakistan Steel mills in 1970s.Pakistan has revisited her foreign policy during the 21st century and gave impotence to neglected states. When president of Pakistan visited Russia in 2002, a joint work group on strategic stability, counterterrorism and inter-governmental Commission were established. Regular meetings of these groups have been held since then. Russia also seems accommodating Pakistan.  Russia condemned the Salala Post attack by NATO on November26; 2011and issued the friendly public statement. And it also supported Pakistan on closure supply to NATO in Afghanistan through Pakistan. Russia has supported Pakistan to be a member of Shanghai Cooperation Organization(SCO) and to be part of Russian security mechanism. Shanghai Cooperation Organization is an important initiative to counter American influence and to bring peace and stability in the region. The membership of SCO will enhance the strategic and regional importance of Pakistan.

There is a strong potential of Pak-Russia relations in steel production, communication, and space technology and energy sector. Pakistan should embrace these choices because it has much learnt from past errors and mistakes. There is common perception in Pakistan that its policy of ignoring nearer countries and aligning the distant ones cost her politically, economically and strategically. These alliances could not become successful to achieve all ideals of Pakistan such as Kashmir issue and security against India. Washington has enhanced relationship with India and is projecting it as a regional power. It did not fulfill the promise which it had made in the beginning of the relations. It also did not make Pakistan a progressive and modern society but turned in to radical and fragmented society. In fact, the ideal of choosing the democratic west against the authoritative east resulted in long and consistent spell of dictatorship in Pakistan. Comparatively India chose the other way round always had a stable and functional democracy in the country.

Although Pakistan and Russia are being close but Pakistan will never jeopardize its relations with Washington. Washington is providing military aid and financial assistant to Pakistan but getting tension by Pak-Russia romance. Russia understands Indian concerns and believes that Moscow and Islamabad rapprochement will normalize the hostile situation between India and Pakistan. The historical back ground of India-Russia relationship is very strong and Russia will never like to lose India. However, it is expected that there will be a period of much more intensive and extensive interaction between these two countries. Pak-Russia rapprochement should not surprise the regional powers due to current geopolitical churn in global politics. Pak-Russia relationship may become true strategic partnership in future. If Russia improves strategic relations with Pakistan it might be able to influence Pakistan to play constructive role in Afghanistan and not to act against India. This would be a regional interest as regional powers like to see stability in Afghanistan. If Russia goes ahead to defense cooperation with Pakistan it would be detriment to Indo Russia relationship and Pakistan is a smaller market than India for Russia. Russia may lose some major contract which it has made with India recently. Both India and Russia have the history of relationship and India has never openly criticized Russian policies over Ukraine. And both the countries are members of several multilateral organizations like BRICS, RIC and SCO. Although India has expressed its concerns about Pak-Russia growing cooperation on several times but Russia believes that Pak-Russia rapprochement will normalize Indo-Pak hostile attitude. It seems that Pakistan and Russia are going to forge true strategic partnership.

PhD Scholar (Political Science) The Islamia University, Bahawalpur Lecturer at Heritage International College Arifwala

Continue Reading
Comments

South Asia

Why Nepal’s Maoist finance minister is talking about legalizing black money?

Published

on

Despite being the oldest sovereign nation in South Asia, Nepal is also the most unstable nation of the subcontinent. For example since Nepal’s republican era of 2006, Nepal has got 12 Prime Ministers in 15 years. Even during multiparty democracy and constitutional monarchy from 1990 to 2006, Nepal saw 15 Prime Ministers in 16 years. This tendency is reflected even in times of nondemocratic and transitional periods of past. If constant political history is an indication, Nepal is prone to repeated governmental build-ups and break-ups.

Nepal’s volatile governments naturally mean volatile plans and policies, which is reflected in the budgetary announcements. Interestingly, it is only Maoist and Maoist-background Finance Ministers in Nepal who have introduced budgetary provisions making provisions whitewashing black money.

Recently, Janardan Sharma, the Finance Minister representing CPN (Maoist Center) party of the coalition government led by Sher Bahadur Deuba, the President of Nepal’s oldest surviving party Nepali Congress, introduced a controversial provision for black money. On 10 September, while presenting his replacement bill to replace budget announced by erstwhile Government led by KP Sharma Oli, Finance Minister Sharma said investments in mega projects  such as international airports, tunnels, roadways and railways do not necessarily require to disclose their sources of revenues.

Such provision, main opposition CPN-UML leaders and majority of Nepal’s economic experts say, would whitewash all black money assembled by Nepal’s power elites and comprador capitalists.  Nepal’s largest-selling English daily The Kathmandu Post has termed it the ‘Thief’s Route’.  Post editorial has talked about its domestic and international implications. It has written, ”this move comes at a time when the Asia Pacific Group on Money Laundering (APG), a regional, inter-governmental, anti-money laundering body of which Nepal is also a member…. The ramification can be disastrous for Nepal.”

This budgetary provision of incumbent Maoist Finance Minister Sharma has gained critical uproar from all quarters. However, this gains vocal support from Dr. Baburam Bhattarai, the Maoist ideologue and former Vice-Chair of Maoist who defected Maoist in 2015 to form his party. During his tenure as Finance Minister when the Government was led by Maoist’s Chair Prachanda for the first time in Nepal in 2008, Bhattarai has also introduced similar provision. He had legalized illegal property of individuals by self-declaring the worth of their property. This specific program was called ‘Voluntary Disclosure of Income Source’ (VDIS).

Though not implemented owing to widespread ire, Dr. Bhattarai had introduced plans of hydropower investments with no mandatory provisions of revenue source disclosure. Supporting the provision of his former comrade, Dr. Bhattarai has said, ”It is nice to legalize black money. Here is the tendency to do illegal works by black money. Whether it is black or white, it is right to invest in productive and employment-generating sector.”

It was the 180-degree departure in Maoist principle coined by its ideologue Dr. Bhattarai himself.  Before launching 10-year-long Maoist violent armed insurgency in 1996 which resulted in killing of more than 17 thousands Nepali, Bhattarai had handed over 40-point demand to the then PM Sher Bahadur Deuba on 4 February. In 39th. point, Dr. Bhattarai had written, ”Corruption, smuggling, black marketing, bribery and the practices of middlemen and so on should be eliminated.”

This starting demand opposing black money and ongoing defense of the same in the name of ‘productive investment’ displays how Nepali Maoist comrades have deviated from their own principles. Another coincidence is that they are the coalition partner of the Government led by the same Prime Minister Deuba to whom they have put forth their 40-point demand before launching violent Maoist armed insurgency before coming into mainstream politics in 2006.

Why Maoist and Maoist-background leaders are vocal supporters of black money?

Revenue nondisclosure provision mainly comes in tenures of Maoist Finance Minister like Janardan Sharma and Baburam Bhattarai. Other political parties have not vocally supported such malicious programs in Nepal.

Many suspects Maoist have huge illegal money grabbed in times of their 10-year-long violent armed insurgency when they did loot banks in capital Kathmandu and other economic centers of Nepal. Maoist had levied their ‘revolutionary tax’ to all working people and business activities in their vast swatches of base area. Forced donations and extortion further increased their revenues.  Bartil Lintner, a famed Swedish journalist-turned-author, in his Oxford University-published book titled ‘China’s India War’described Nepali Maoists as ‘one of the wealthiest rebel movement in Asia.’

Maoists, even after their entry into mainstream politics after Comprehensive Peace Accord of 21 November 2006 and terrorist delisting by State Department of the US on 6 September 2012, have not disclosed their party transactions. Nor there is any extensive research about net worth accumulated by Maoist during their underground violent armed insurgency in Nepal.

This legislation, if implemented, will force Nepal to sleepwalk towards money laundering, black money funneling and possibly terrorist financing. If big chunk of black money is invested in big income-making and employment-generating productive sections, its long-term impacts would be skyrocketed. This results in opaque financial activities.

 As an aid-dependent and remittance-receiving country from almost all economic powers of the world, legalizing black money  does not bode well not just for Nepal but also for its immediate giant neighbors-India and China. Nepal does not deserve to be the South Asian heaven of black investment and terrorist financing in the name of mega infrastructural projects.

Continue Reading

South Asia

Kabul: Old Problems are New Challenges

Published

on

Source: Twitter

It has been some three months since the Taliban seized power in Afghanistan, precipitously and without large-scale bloodshed. This came as a complete surprise for the global community—but for the Taliban just as well, although this was what they had long been striving for. Perhaps, this could explain the contradictory situation in the country as of today.

On the one hand, the Taliban leadership is supremely confident in their ultimate victory, and they are determined to keep the power at any cost. The Taliban proceed from the premise that the way the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan (IEA) existed throughout 1996 to 2001 never ceased to exist, with the last two decades marked by the fight against foreign military intervention and a puppet regime. Accordingly, this is the basis for the Taliban to consolidate their power through rigid theocratic institutions. There is hardly reason to believe they would take a different approach, which means foreign actors could only advocate a certain “liberalization” of these institutions, accounting for the current trends in international development.

On the other hand, the Taliban’s activities tend to ignore the economic aspects, which are still of fundamental significance as they are instrumental to resolve the pressing problems that the Afghani face, while having an impact on the country’s domestic stability and the long-term viability of the regime. So far, the Taliban have mostly been “patching up the holes” welcoming relief efforts from abroad. The recently announced “food for work” programme requires material support rather than mere slogans.

This can be explained by the following reasoning. Caught in the grip of conservative religious, ideological and political views, the Taliban lack any meaningful experience in modern state-building. As for the subjective circumstances that need be accounted for, these include the Taliban’s heterogeneity, contradictions between orthodox believers and pragmatists in the movement’s leadership, and close to none of sufficient control over the Taliban’s “rank-and-file”. The confrontation between the conservatives holding key offices in the government and the pragmatists continues, and it may even grow worse. Further changes in the government’s configuration will testify to the dynamics of Afghanistan’s overall domestic evolution amid the new circumstances.

Persisting historical contradictions between the Taliban (mostly ethnic Pashtuns) and the many ethnic minorities (Tajiks, Uzbeks, Hazaras) are potentially dangerous for the new regime in Kabul. With the Taliban being reluctant to form a truly inclusive government rather relying on one that only purports to be such and with ethnic minorities willing to establish something like a front of resistance to the new authorities, these contradictions are becoming ever more visible.

Both the new government in Kabul and the global and regional communities are increasingly concerned with the spike in subversive activities in the country perpetrated by militants of various ethnic backgrounds affiliated with ISIS and Al-Qaeda. All this negatively affects the domestic situation, with a potential to undermine the Taliban regime itself, while posing additional risks for regional stability. The situation is gravely exacerbated by the deplorable state of Afghanistan’s economy, which could lead to famine in the very near future. Taken together, these circumstances demand that the Taliban take decisive steps to normalize the situation. As Nikolai Patrushev, Secretary of the Security Council of the Russian Federation, recently noted, events in Afghanistan may lead to a catastrophe if the Taliban do not act in a timely manner.

At the same time, it is obvious that such an Afghanistan would not survive without external aid and assistance. Internationally, the situation is rather favorable for the new Afghanistan regime, particularly with the Taliban engaging in dynamic international activities. It is crucial for today’s Kabul to handle three principal tasks:

  • establishing working relations with the neighbouring states as well as regional and global powers with a view to having the Taliban struck from UN sanctions lists and obtaining official international recognition for the new authorities;
  • securing a positive international image of Kabul under the Taliban;
  • receiving large-scale foreign humanitarian aid.

The Taliban miss no opportunity to make statements at all levels, claiming they are ready to engage with the global community in comprehensive cooperation, abandoning support for international terrorism and extremism and willing to attract foreign investment from a wide range of countries into Afghanistan’s economy.

If we explore the stances taken by various members of the international community as regards the new regime in Afghanistan, we will notice that their positions have several points in common, all of which are important for a peaceful and stable situation in the region. These principles include preventing instability in Afghanistan from exacerbating, the need to form an inclusive government that represents the interests of all ethnic and political forces, building a state on the foundations of respect for contemporary human rights, putting an end to terrorism and extremism proliferating outward from Afghanistan, etc.

At the same time, countries demonstrate significantly different approaches to the Afghanistan profile. The United States and the European Union have taken the toughest stance with regard to the Taliban, although both are ready to launch relief efforts to avoid a humanitarian disaster that is fraught, among other things, with new waves of refugees. Unlike Europe, Washington regards the Taliban issue as more complex and complicated. First, the United States needs to “come to grips,” both politically and psychologically, with the shock and humiliation brought by the inglorious end to the Afghanistan escapade, which delivered a huge blow to the image and reputation of the U.S., both among its allies and worldwide. Washington also needs to resolve the issue of Afghanistan’s assets being relieved as quickly as possible—something that the Taliban, as well as many members of the international community, including Russia, insist on.

As far as Moscow and a number of other countries are concerned, the United States should be the one to provide a significant amount, if not the bulk, of foreign financial aid to Afghanistan moving forward. We should keep in mind that the practical steps taken by the United States concerning Afghanistan will largely serve as a model for the entire collective West. Everyone in Washington is aware of this. However, the United States is still pondering as to the best modes of interaction with the Taliban, exploring the possibility to participate in humanitarian and other programmes in Afghanistan. This is evidenced by the contacts that have already taken place.

Unlike the leading Western nations, many countries in the region, primarily Afghanistan’s neighbours, have de facto begun to foster active and dynamic links with the Taliban. Pakistan has become the main lobbyist for the recognition of the new regime in Kabul, as Islamabad hopes to ensure its place as the primary external influence on the new government in Afghanistan. Beijing has taken a similar stance. Many experts argue that China may come to be the leading external force in Afghanistan, seeing as it is ready to develop economic ties with Kabul provided the latter prevents anti-Chinese Uyghur Islamist militants from penetrating into China from Afghanistan. A stable Afghanistan accords with Beijing’s long-term interest in actively involving the country in implementing its strategic Belt and Road Initiative.

Turkey is now eyeing the opportunities for bolstering its standing in Afghanistan. Central Asian nations, particularly Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan, are visibly active in the area as well. Tajikistan is sounding something of a discordant note, openly proclaiming that it does not recognize Afghanistan’s regime in its current iteration. Dushanbe’s concerns are easy to understand especially if one recalls its negative experiences from the 1990s. However, the OSCE and the SCO cannot help but be concerned over the aggravation in Tajikistan–Taliban relations. India is also wary of the new regime in Kabul. Iran, like Pakistan, has long-standing historical ties with Afghanistan, and it is taking a “favourable pause” while striving to assist in advancing international cooperation in Afghanistan affairs. In the Islamic Middle East, the regime change in Kabul has been met with an equivocal response, ranging from enthusiasm of radical Islamists to restraint and certain wariness.

The way the situation in Afghanistan will evolve is a matter of fundamental importance for Russia’s national interests, primarily when it comes to ensuring security in Central Asia, within the SCO as well as in the greater Eurasian context. Long-term stability in Afghanistan cannot be ensured without a truly inclusive government and without the Taliban taking on clear commitments to counteract instability, terrorism, extremism and drugs flows spreading outwards and to prevent mass migration into adjacent regions. Kabul and the entire regional community need a peaceful, stable, and neutral Afghanistan, a country that lives in peace and harmony with its neighbours and a nation that is actively involved in economic cooperation in the region.

The international community may benefit from Russia’s experience in promoting domestic consensus in Afghanistan. Several international formats have great importance in this regard, such as the Moscow Format, the extended “Troika” (Russia, the United States, China + Pakistan), which was particularly highlighted by President Vladimir Putin in his recent address at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. It is particularly important that these formats complement each other rather than compete in terms of their influence on the processes.

From our partner RIAC

Continue Reading

South Asia

Is Nepal an Indian colony?

Published

on

photo: Wikipedia

In yet another dictation, India has told Nepal that nationals of other countries will not be allowed to use the new 35-km rail link between Jaynagar in Bihar and Kurtha in Nepal, due to “security reasons” (The Print, November 25, 2021). The 34.9-km narrow gauge section was converted into broad gauge by India and handed over to Nepal in October this year.  Nepal protested India’s dictation resulting in operational delay. Ultimately India softened its “order” to the extent that “third country nationals can travel on the railway within Nepal, but they won’t be allowed to cross over to India,”

Nepal is perhaps the only country where the head of India’s premier intelligence, Research and Analysis wing is accorded a red carpet welcome as he calls on the Nepalese prime minister (amid popular protests). Not only the RAW’s chief but also the external affairs minister and army chief often visit Nepal with a handy list of  les choses a faire (things to be done). For instance when the Indian army chief visited Nepal, he reminded the PM that there are 136,000 pensioners in Nepal whose pension bill is disbursed by India. The army chief freely intermingled with pensioners as if Nepal was a colony and he was viceroy.

There are about 32,000 Nepalese Gorkhas currently serving in the Indian Army’s seven Gorkha Rifle regiments (1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 8th, 9th and 11th), each of which has five to six battalions (around 800 soldiers each).

Nepal resents its image as a contributor of mercenary soldiers to India and Britain. So it wanted to stop sending Gurkhas for recruitment to the two countries by amending the tripartite In 1962, Sino Indian conflict, the Gorkhas stayed loyal to India though  the Chinese used loudspeakers daily against the company of Major Dhan Singh Thapa, PVC,  to withdraw as they were from Nepal. The Nepalese troops returning to their native villages were pooh-poohed on their journey back home.

The total pension bill for the 1, 27,000 pensioners (90,000 defence and 37,000 Central and State Government as well as paramilitary), and serving soldiers remitting home money is around Rs 4,600 crore. It works out to Nepalese Rs.  6400, which is larger than the NR 3601.80 crore defence budget of Nepal.

The Nepalese still resent India’s hand in assassinating Nepal’s king Birendra and his family (‘Indian hand in Nepal massacre’. The Statesman January 11, 2010).

Nepal’s predicament

Nepal is a landlocked country dependent on India in many ways. In the past India blocked supplies to Nepal at least four times forcing it to capitulate to India’s diktat to stave off starvation.

Nepal is contiguous to Tibet. So it has to balance its relation with both India and China. As China has influence on Nepalese communists so India can’t dare subdue Nepal fully. India always regarded Nepalese prime minister Oli a hard nut to crack. It was Oly who amended national map to re- exhibit areas annexed by India within Nepalese territory. India heaved a sigh of relief when Nepalese Supreme Court ousted Oli and appointed Sher Bahadur Deuba as the prime minister until the next general elections.   Deuba remained listless to popular protests against the Supreme Court’s decision.

Conspiracies to oust Oli

To topple Oli’s government, the Indian embassy in Nepal had been bankrolling corrupt politicians and other members of Nepalese society. Aware of India’s underhand machinations,  Oli

debunked India’s conspiracies during a ceremony to commemorate the sixty-ninth anniversary of the Party’s popular leader Madan Bandari. Oli “accused India of trying to destabilize his government” and alleged “Indian embassy in Nepal was conspiring about the same” He claimed, `Conspiracies were being plotted against him since the constitutional Nepali map amendment’.  He further added, `There is an open race to remove me from the post. No-one thought that a prime minister would be removed from office for printing a map’.

Be it observed that Nepal amended its map when its objections fell flat on India. India’s defense minister Rajnath Singh, went ahead to inaugurate an 80-kilometer-long road connecting the Lipulekh Pass in Nepal with Darchula in Uttarkhand (India). The Indian army chief insinuated that Oli was being prodded by China against India.

India’s ongoing annexation

Besides annexing the three new territories, India had already annexed 14000 hectares (140 km square) of territories in Susta, Tribeni Susta, Lumbini Zone, near Nichlaul (Uttar Pradesh).

Nepal being no match for India could not stop India by the use of force. But, to express its dissatisfaction, it printed 4000 copies of the updated version of the new map and distributed it to India, United Nations, and also Google. Additional 25,000 copies of the map were distributed throughout Nepal.

Concluding remarks

Gorkhas fought well in India’s post-independence wars (Indo-Pak 1965, 1971 and 1999 Kargil War, besides 1962 Sino-Indian War and peace keeping mission in Sri Lanka. Their battle cry is jai maha kali, ayo gorkhali. Three Indian army chiefs (SHEJ Manekshaw, Dilbri Singh and Bipin Rawat) served with Gorkha Rifles.

Nepali citizens have a right to apply for recruitment in Indian armed forces or civil services. Yet, they hate India and find more comfort with China as an ally. Whenever India blockades transit trade to Nepal, the latter fall back upon China for its economic needs. India also forced Nepal to grant citizenship to Indians illegally residing in Nepal.

Despite its economic woes, Nepal is ferociously independent minded. When Oli enacted a new map of Nepal, he was vehemently supported by most politicians including the present prime minister. India is unlikely to compel Nepal to toe its dictates fully. 

Continue Reading

Publications

Latest

Economy16 mins ago

An Uneven Recovery: the Impact of COVID-19 on Latin America and the Caribbean

Employment rates in some Latin American and Caribbean countries have experienced a relative recovery, although in most, rates fall short...

Reports2 hours ago

World trade reaches all-time high, but 2022 outlook ‘uncertain’

Global trade is expected to be worth about $28 trillion this year – an increase of 23 per cent compared...

Tourism6 hours ago

Coronavirus pandemic could cost global tourism $2 trillion this year

The coronavirus pandemic will likely cost the global tourism sector $2 trillion in lost revenue in 2021, the UN’s tourism...

Development10 hours ago

Despite COVID-19 connectivity boost, world’s poorest left far behind 

Some 2.9 billion people still have never used the internet, and 96 per cent live in developing countries, a new UN report has found. According to...

Middle East12 hours ago

Saudi religious moderation is as much pr as it is theology

Mohammed Ali al-Husseini, one of Saudi Arabia’s newest naturalized citizens, ticks all the boxes needed to earn brownie points in...

Finance13 hours ago

How Smart Investing can be a Significant Strategy for Traders

Despite being one of the biggest sources of passive income, the forex market is still unexplored by many. The main...

Finance14 hours ago

Global ICT Excellence Awards rated highly Moscow for the startups ecosystem development

The Government of Moscow won the second place among state structures in the International contest Global ICT Excellence Awards in...

Trending