Nepal's misgivings on Agnipath could hurt ties, help China

The brewing Agnipath controversy in Nepal can derail bilateral ties and allow China to make deeper inroads

"India has always been proud to have Nepalese as soldiers in her Defence Forces and has made every effort to ensure that they are looked after and cared for in their twilight years."

This declaration on the Indian embassy in Nepal's website is indicative of the importance New Delhi attaches to Nepalese Gorkhas serving in the Indian Army. But with Nepal having suspended, for now, recruitment of its citizens under India's radical new Agnipath scheme for recruitment of soldiers, a vital element in bilateral ties that bind the two neighbours seems to be in danger of fraying.

This bond extends far beyond the service tenure of the Nepalese Gorkhas, with the Indian Army caring for its Nepalese veterans with pension and other ex-servicemen benefits. Effectively, it means that India continues to earn a tremendous amount of goodwill among the Nepalese, well beyond the years of active service by its citizens.

Also Read: Nepal urges India to suspend recruitment of Gorkha soldiers under Agnipath scheme

But this link appears to be headed towards becoming tenuous, given Nepal's misgivings over the Agnipath scheme. The concerns in Nepal are similar to the ones voiced in India after the scheme was announced in June – the truncated tenure that will allow recruits to serve in the Indian Army only for four years and the consequent absence of any pension and other benefits – triggering aspirants to violently protest here.

The brewing Agnipath controversy in Nepal has the potential to derail bilateral ties that have mended over the last one year after the Nepali Congress-led government helmed by Sher Bahadur Deuba took charge. Under Deuba's predecessor, K P Sharma Oli, relations between the two neighbours had turned decidedly sour over the Kalapani map row.

While both New Delhi and Kathmandu have managed to set aside their differences over Kalapani and move ahead with other issues of bilateral importance, India would do well to ensure it does not allow the Agnipath controversy to fester and should assuage Nepal's concerns about it.

For, it would not bode well for India-Nepal ties if it were to decide to stop sending its men to join the Indian Army as it would mean severing the old and vital link between the two neighbours. Furthermore, any strain in bilateral relations only means giving China the opportunity to make deeper inroads into Nepal.

Already, Kathmandu's decision to suspend recruitments under Agnipath underlines it has doubts about the scheme. Nepalese media reports say Kathmandu remained silent on New Delhi's missive seeking its views on Agnipath after the scheme was announced in June.

Also Read: Indian, Chinese militaries hold talks in eastern Ladakh

Then, Nepal decided to put recruitments under Agnipath, which were to commence on August 25, on hold. The decision was conveyed by Nepal's foreign minister Narayan Khadka to India's envoy in Kathmandu, Naveen Srivastava, when he was called to the foreign ministry last week, a day before the recruitment was to commence.

While New Delhi remains optimistic about being able to continue recruiting Nepalese citizens into the Indian Army, Kathmandu understandably has valid concerns about Agnipath. Just as in India, where there have been concerns about the short-term service of four years with no pensionary benefits, Nepal too has similar worries.

Will Nepalese youth still be as keen to enrol in the Indian Army? What will they do after their four-year stint is over? For Nepal, the absence of pensions will also mean that it will no longer be receiving remittances from India and this in turn could hit its economy.

In the 75 years since India gained independence, Nepalese Gorkhas have been regularly recruited into the Indian Army under the Tripartite Agreement signed in 1947 between Nepal, India and the UK.

The Tripartite Treaty has worked well, thus far despite certain sections in Nepal questioning the need for its citizens to serve in another country's army. There are an estimated 30,000 Nepalese Gorkhas currently serving with the seven Gorkha Rifles Regiments of the 1.2 million-strong Indian Army.

Nepal also has about 1.25 lakh Indian Army veterans. In the years since the Tripartite Treaty was signed, they have been entitled to the same pension and other benefits as their Indian counterparts. In addition, India executes socio-economic projects for their benefit in Nepal, overseen by the Nepal Bharatiya Gorkha Sainik Board, which is chaired by the Indian ambassador to Nepal.

But with India having introduced Agnipath, an arrangement of mutual benefit seems in jeopardy. Already, there are murmurs in Nepal about India having violated the tripartite pact in changing the terms of recruitment. While this doesn't appear to be the case, New Delhi will need to take Nepal's sentiments into account to ensure Agnipath does not impact bilateral ties.

Also Read: Emperor Xi is terrible news for the world - and China

What has further queered the pitch for PM Deuba is that his coalition partner, the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist Centre), has for long opposed the recruitment of Nepalese youth by the Indian Army and sought the scrapping of the Tripartite Treaty.

In such a scenario, the consensus PM Deuba is said to be seeking to forge among Nepalese political parties on the controversial scheme seems like a difficult objective to achieve. More so when parliamentary elections in Nepal are less than three months away, and rival political parties are busy consolidating their own constituencies.

It also seems extremely unlikely that PM Deuba would take a unilateral decision, a politically fraught one, without taking all parties on board, especially with parliamentary polls looming large. Being accused of compromising Nepal's sovereignty, an extremely sensitive issue, is not a charge he would be keen to defend in the months ahead of the elections.

(The writer is a senior journalist)

(Disclaimer: The views expressed above are the author's own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of DH)