PM's China Visit: Some Observations

Can anyone become an apprentice for certain skills and adventurism? If "yes", is the answer, Nepal can also be an apprentice--but for the colossal socio-economic transformation(?).

The context here is the China visit of the Prime Minister KPS Oli and its immediate consequences. 

The visits of Nepalese Heads of State as well as the Heads of the Government have been purely customary and with least benefits on nation's behalf. 

However, the latest China visit of Nepalese PM Oli has dimetrically different nature and context. His government has achieved the two-third majority in the parliament and the dream of new Nepal is very vibrant in the Nepalese socialist parties. Also, there is the hope of the relative socio-political stability in the country, at least for another four and half years. So, the bilateral relations beween Nepal and China may not go sour due to the similarities in the ideological frameworks of both CPN and CPI.  

Having been the leader of a communist party, and one of the most powerful communist leaders of the South Asia-Pacific region, at least for few more years to come, PM Oli had also undergone through ultra-leftist revolutionary romanticism during his hey-day youth.

He had been through the versatile political activism from ultra-leftism to the multiparty parliamentarian democracy. He had to fight across the fellow leaders’ ideological differences and constructing incredulous image of so-called nationalist figure—that later on turned into a drastically different pursuits. Such has been the politics of now and especially the politics of South Asia-- the politics of menace or the pork barreling politics.

In history, neither Mao nor Nehru was the socialists who could preserve the so-called classical Marxist socialism—the former was the geopolitician who saved his nation from the imperial Japan and British-led western excursions, the latter did least or nothing at all to inherit the country and the political power--it was the WWII that catalyzed the independence of India.  

Furthermore, neither Chaaru nor progeniter of CPN, Puspalal recieved any strategic assistance from either sides. They marveled at the success stories borrowed from beyond the impenetrable and almost invincible Himalayas. Still, the Chinese socialism is NOT the socialist ideas any vulnerable Nepalese aspirants find in the college riots and the highway barricades; that was coined by the nationalists of early and mid 20th century China--the seed of the so-called "socialism with the Chinese characteristics".

The former CPN UML’s political breed was rooted into the violent extremism or ultra-leftist militancy—inspired and ignited by the then Naxalbary Rebellion of the West Bengal state of India.

The Chaaru Majumdar generation and its pitiful proximate posterity could neither invent the novel but pragmatic ideological bases nor the feasible tactics to achieve most coveted objectives, i.e. the objectives of people’s democratic centrality and equal and just universal humanity.

As one of the Chairpersons of the ideologically abstract and politically unruly party, he has not been capable to cultivate the uniformity in order to unspin the copious intra-party strangleholds generated under the political hatcheries of the leaders’ blocs, their circles of the evils and the losers’ coteries which are the sole responsible for his back-to-back political shortcomings.

Additionally, as an executive head of the nation, he has multifarious inland complexities. He is bogged down into the inter-parties political fora where he has not seen any viable options to mitigate the already expired regionalist and secessionist political outfits.

It had merged the principles of Chinese communist party and her strategic blueprints with the communist armed struggles invented or adopted into the union of India mostly in West Bengal.

The party would have gained the objectives through the means of armed struggles. But the pervasive fear of getting massacred, as the government of India under Indira Gandhi carried out the military oppressions to terminate the communist militancy in different parts of the country.  

It’s believed that any hegemonic nations like China, at the current geopolitical gesture in the Asian security super-complex,  is in a position to affect all sorts of global policies on their be half.

Nepal, as one of the poorest of the poor nations on earth, can do nothing but to pursue a defensive foreign policy complying with the global powers as such, sometimes to the extent of becoming one of the satellite states guarding guiding the core national interest of the hegemons—that is the only viable option for securing the ultimate survival strategies on the global political map.
Hence, neither India nor China can help Nepal to be prosperous that may lead her towards being the regionally influencial one i.e. the obvious threat for the existing hegemons of the regional power equation.

Therefore, Nepal must invent her unique but pragmatic foreign policy so as to cope with with upcoming challenges and dealing with the survival threats against her sovereignty.

The gospel of infrastructural development, financial supports, cultural enhancements and the military back ups sermonized by the regional hegemons have always turned to be the hollow assurance for a development-hungry nations like Nepal.

China at the present context, is still a relatively poor country. She can not positively undertake many international “proletarian obligations”.

Chinese attempts to support the poor nations remain insignificant. As the rule of the thumb, the Chinese state must practise hegemony when she becomes more developed in multifaceted aspects.

In fact, for China, there are only two categories of the peoples, cultures and territories--Chinese and Non-Chinese. Nepal is nothing but the hedge against the “non-Chinese” elements against the parts of the global society other than the Chinese one. 

The current global politics is harassed so badly with bitter consequences of the acts of terrorism, ethnic-regional-civilizational conflicts which go beyond the perceptible ranges.

Volatile states like Nepal, surely engender the chaos. Then the circumstances gets worsened that will unsurprisingly harm internal as well as external security threats for China and the global economy that provides the basis for Chinese prosperity.

However, the PRC is doing too little to respond to this gathering storm. Actually,  Beijing’s past efforts at nation building--some well intentioned and others ignorant of long-term implications for development and stability--have often eroded the legitimacy and capacity of the states they purported to help. 

Fact of the matter is, China needs Nepal, due to her geo-strategic location, as an international ally which can be recruited for certain objectives. China, not only requires socially calm, politically settled and economically stronger Nepal as her immediate bordering country, but also militarily potent one. Chinese presence in international arena  is getting mightier; the global actor China has to forge the alliances across the region and the world at large.

Amazingly, the fundamental Chinese guiding principle for the well- being of the nation, “less talk, more action”, does not look getting replaced with other aggressive one in the foreseeable future.

PRC has been fighting against all socio-political and cultural evils inflicted by all the aggressive forces in history with the means of her own, preserving youths from anti-nationalist elements since the youths are the only ingredient force for constructive actions for the nation. 

Additionally, they always kept their youths at home making them accountable to serve the nations. PM Oli can also get assisited by the history of the socialist countries around the world too. Like the countries with socialism as the guiding principles, Nepal must learn to empower the youths for the prosperity. Untill the youths are neglected, Nepal's dream of being prosperous nation remain nightmare.
In this visit, PM KPS OLI has stricken some deals with Present Xi Jinping that possess the long-term mutual financial growth as well other strategically feasible advancements. He also sought for the ways of micro-state diplomacy like Singaporean politician—Li Kwan Yew.

Nepal actually needs the geopoliticians, not the politicians. Because the politicians, in actual sense, cannot measure the height and depth of the ruling contexts in the region--even Mao and Lenin were the nationalist socialists or the geopoliticians.

To sum up, the PM Oli's attempt to excel as a geopolitician is praiseworthy certainly but, to make Nepal great again, he has to reach out to the political parties with opposite visions and contending social stands, forging alliances among contrasting political spectrums with the local, regional and global concerns. The history of real New Nepal is already underconstruction with the plausible nationalist agenda seasoned with allegories of the prosperity and affluence under the leadership of PKS Oli--the people are expecting much more than the current Nepalese government and its agencies can actually imagine.   

(The writer is the Associate Professor of a University in Nepal; the ideas expressed in the article are writer's individual observations.)