Correcting the Indian Media Narrative on Nepal’s Pro-China Posture

Nepal is a sovereign country, and promoting and expanding its foreign relations fall under its sole rights. However, such extensions and promotions should not harm its immediate neighbours, India and China. Nepal must be aware of its red lines, and its immediate neighbours must respect these limitations. For instance, in 2015, when India and China bilaterally decided to develop Lipulekh commercially, Nepal immediately protested, asserting that it is a territory at the tri-junction and that Nepal’s consent must be obtained before any decisions are made.

Honorable Prime Minister K.P. Oli visited China from December 2 to 5, 2024, on a state invitation from Chinese Premier Li Qiang. During his visit, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) Implementation Framework was signed under the ‘Aid Financing and Technical Assistance’ financing modality. Under this model, Nepal is set to receive aid, grants, and technical assistance from China. However, given China's usual modus operandi, it predominantly provides loans for financing infrastructure-related projects. Each project under this framework will have its own terms and conditions, with negotiations carried out accordingly.

Nepal-India-China Economic Ties

For Nepal, both neighbouring countries are significantly important for its economic and social development due to its extensive border sharing with India (1,751 km) and China (1,389 km). According to the latest update from Nepal Rastra Bank (2024), the total share of international trade with India, China, and the rest of the world is 62.3 percent, 18.3 percent, and 19.4 percent, respectively. As of June 2024, Nepal is India’s 17th-largest export destination, climbing up from the 28th position in 2014. These factors highlight many aspects of Nepal’s ties with its two immediate neighbours, as well as its trade and geographical dependency on them. In terms of foreign direct investment, India and China continue to be major contributors.

Nepal also maintains a strong economic relationship with both India and China. The Indian border is open to Nepali citizens, with no significant practical barriers between the two countries. Similarly, the northern border with China is open to a certain extent for local households. These harmonious arrangements with both neighbours are exceptional. However, disruptions such as India’s unofficial blockade in 2015 and China's restrictions following the COVID-19 pandemic caused supply chain difficulties in Nepal, particularly affecting the availability of daily essentials. Even these few examples suffice to demonstrate the socio-economic importance of India and China to Nepal.

Nepal has a significant trade deficit with India and China, which is partly attributed to Nepal’s internal production limitations. In the case of India, open border that allows Indian goods to flow freely and massive production capabilities, cheaper goods, and cost-effective labour have ensured a steady supply of Indian products to the Nepali market. While these supplies have helped fulfill the basic necessities of Nepali consumers, this dynamic has also negatively impacted Nepal’s internal production capacity, as the country struggles to produce goods on a similar scale and at competitive prices.

Despite these challenges, Nepal remains committed to addressing this critical economic issue with India through established trade mechanisms. Indian media should also acknowledge the economic losses and benefits that Nepal is currently experiencing in its trade relations with both India and China.

BRI Projects and Pro-China Narrative

In this context, many retired Indian four-star generals, analysts, and former diplomats have alleged that the projects signed under BRI framework are part of a strategic counter to India using Nepal as a route. For example, Indian analysts and media have claimed that the Nepal-China railway project, part of the Trans-Himalayan Multidimensional Connectivity Network, is a strategic project intended to connect the Indian border via Nepal for transporting military convoys and logistics during future conflicts. Indian media have concluded that Nepal is becoming a pro-China country. This narrative is not correct. In the past, there have been several projects funded by China in Nepal, none of which were used against India. For instance, the Kathmandu-Tatopani Highway, built in the 1960s, was Nepal’s first transnational road network with China. Despite its strategic nature at the time, this road network never violated Indian interests; instead, it promoted cross-border connectivity and facilitated India-Nepal-China trade, benefiting Indian businessmen/women too.

As a sovereign nation, every country expands and fosters ties with its neighbours without compromising the interests of others. This principle also applies to Nepal. Media narratives are powerful in shaping foreign policy, and their impact is amplified through social media. The widespread consumption of false narratives produced by Indian alternative media damages the social and cultural fabric that Nepal and India have shared for millennia. It is concerning that young emerging thinkers, analysts, and youth politicians in India increasingly view Nepal through a purely “strategic” lens, deviating from the traditional Nepal-India unique and special relationship. The shared cultural heritage rooted in the Vedas, Puranas, Upanishads and the sacredness of the Pashupatinath Temple, Janaki Temple, and Muktinath Temple stands as symbols of religious and socio-cultural ties between Nepal and India. The gravity and depth of this ties must be recognized by analysts.

Turbulence

The regional political instability has heightened Indian suspicions about anti-Indian activities originating from Nepal. However, both countries have successfully navigated such challenges in the past. A classic example is the December 1999 hijacking of Indian Airlines Flight IC-814, after which flights between Nepal and India resumed within seven months.

Although Nepal is committed to the One-China Principle, this commitment requires Nepal to support China on matters related to the principle. The One-China Principle is also included in the BRI Framework. However, the Nepalese government has maintained certain exceptions to it. For example, in the first week of December 2024, the Nepalese government cancelled the visit of China’s 15th Panchen Lama at the last moment, citing its position of 'religious neutrality' The government made this decision considering that the China-appointed Panchen Lama might cause dissatisfaction among thousands of followers in Nepal and India who regard the Dalai Lama, living in exile in Dharamshala, India, as their spiritual leader.

Reading between the lines, Nepal has demonstrated the ability to make exceptions to specific terms and conditions agreed with China, based on reason and national interest. Therefore, alleged claims against Nepal following its signing of the BRI are not true.

Way Forward

The narrative that Nepal is becoming 'pro-China’ as propagated by Indian media is not correct. While certain branches of Nepal's communist political factions have traditionally been closer to China, this does not undermine Nepal’s priority of fostering balanced ties with both of its neighbours without compromising either’s interests. Although trust deficits exist between Nepalese and Indian leadership circles, continuous engagement through think tanks, ministers, business personnel, and leadership exchanges can help dismantle such false narratives. The “Scaling-Up Target Rating Point and Clickbait” that alternative media usually propagate should not make Nepal-India bilateral relations a vulnerable entity.

(The paper is the author’s individual scholastic articulation. The author certifies that the article/paper is original in content, unpublished and it has not been submitted for publication/web upload elsewhere, and that the facts and figures quoted are duly referenced, as needed, and are believed to be correct). (The paper does not necessarily represent the organisational stance... More >>