Indian pressure on neighbouring countries

New Delhi pretends there are no problems in India’s relationship with its neighbours except Pakistan and China but the tensions, both above and beneath the surface, continue to deepen as far as Nepal, Sri Lanka and Bhutan are concerned.

According to Hindustan Times, there were two decisions which emerged as disturbing signals for New Delhi recently. "Nepal signed an additional protocol on transit with China, which would give the country an access to Chinese ports. It is legitimate for any country, especially for a landlocked one, to seek to diversify its options. But the fact that this happened within an overall context of China’s increased political and economic presence in Nepal raised eyebrows in New Delhi. Second, Nepal — after having signed on to a joint military exercise of Bimstec, which kicked off in Pune — pulled out because of an internal political criticism. An upset New Delhi told Kathmandu that this was not appropriate and has put the grouping in an embarrassing position." The newspaper asked: "So what is going on? Is there warmth and cordiality or distance and a chill in India-Nepal ties?"

In 2017, the Left Front of Mr Oli and Mr Prachanda won the Nepal polls on a strong nationalist platform — with the declared intent of redefining the “special relationship” with India, which meant diminishing ties with India, but deepening it with China. "Oli’s fundamentals — scepticism of India, willingness to cater to the ultra-nationalist sentiments at home, and desire to deepen ties with China — remain the same. New Delhi can pretend that there is no problem. But till it reviews its Nepal policy, even as the warmth for public consumption will continue, the tensions, beneath the surface, will continue to deepen."

On the other hand, a book titled “Machination of RAW in Transitional Nepal” authored by Nepalese scholar Dr Shastra Dutta Pant provides a deep insight into the RAW’s covert and overt onslaughts against the strategically-located Nepal, compelling it compromise its sovereignty in subjugation to the Indian hegemony in South Asia. This book suggests that not only Pakistan but almost all other neighbouring states are fed-up with the overt and covert operations of RAW. Published in 2017, it also partially figures out RAW’s engagement in espionage, subversion, sabotage, and psychological warfare against the South Asian neighbours including, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Maldives, and the regions of Kashmir and Tibet. The book dwells at length at RAW’s micro-management of the Nepalese affairs, specifically after the 1990 political change in Kathmandu, by deepening its dependency exclusively on India.

A conflict-ridden, poverty-stricken, and politically weaker Nepal is a strength for RAW in pursuit of its Great Game Plan in Nepal. Quoting the Indian journalist Ashok Raina, the volume unfolds that Indian security is directly linked to its neighbourhood that renders plausible excuse to RAW in preparing financial and foreign policies, bringing unrest/ disintegration in the neighbouring states. RAW pressurises neighbouring countries to strike unequal bilateral treaties and MoUs as in Nepal. With over 18,000 agents spread all over the world, RAW is believed to have around 12,000 agents just in the neighbouring countries, lending support to non-state actors, secessionists, and pressure groups. RAW’s espionage units named Kargila and Surankote are the most powerful institutions for external espionage, specifically in Pakistan.

Meanwhile, Sri Lankan President Sirisena recently made the claim of an assassination plot by RAW, just days before Ranil Wickremesinghe was scheduled to visit New Delhi. In her most recent article for the Hindu, the Colombo correspondent of The Hindu Ms Srinivasan has reported that the Sri Lankan authorities are seeking “Chinese assistance to tap evidence pertaining to the assassination plot”. This was not the first time that a Sri Lankan leader has accused RAW of interference. Mahinda Rajapaksa had held RAW among those responsible for the change in regime following his defeat in 2015.

The Times of India reported that India is adopting a wait and watch stand on the ongoing political crises in Sri Lanka. However, India is trying to use the media front as a mean to “yellow revolution/ asymmetrical warfare” by projecting that the move to install Rajapaksa as the PM could lead to a constitutional crisis and the president’s action is unconstitutional.

Meanwhile, in the backdrop of Doklam standoff, Bhutan has become crucial for Indian adventurism. In the recently held elections, Bhutanese media and society gave a strong impression that “India is an Elephant in the Room”. Although, all political parties had agreed before the election campaigning that they would not ‘politicise’ sensitive issues like foreign policy, but the “India factor” dominated the polls with rival parties defaming each other on “Indo-Bhutan relations”.

The Indian establishment is, however, worried over the first round defeat of the outgoing ruling party PDP (a pro-India party) and rise of DPT (considered as pro-China party winning 17 seats). The paradox is that while India thinks it is ‘protecting’ Bhutan from the Chinese with its imposing military presence, the Bhutanese want not to be involved in the Sino-Indian rivalry in any way. Bhutan also wants to establish direct diplomatic relations with other countries – a job that is now being done by the Bhutanese embassy in New Delhi – but such a move is strongly disliked by Indian establishment.