No joint statement has been issued after the recent India visit of Prime Minister (PM) Sher Bahadur Deuba just as it had happened after the visit of the then PM KP Sharma Oli in February 2016 following the Indian blockade.
The two sides generally issue a joint statement after visit of the head of the government to the other country and had issued one even after Oli again visited India two years later in capacity of the powerful chairman of ruling CPN with almost two-third majority in the House.
The three-day visit of Deuba was the first India visit by a Nepali PM since Nepal issued a new map including the territory of Kalapani, Lipu Lekh and Limpiyadhura encroached by India. Deuba held a one-on-one meeting with his Indian counterpart Narendra Modi and a dialogue between the delegations headed by the respective PMs on Saturday. He urged Modi to resolve the border dispute between the two countries through a bilateral mechanism during his meeting.
The two PMs also jointly inaugurated Janakpur-Jayanagar railway network, Solu Corridor Transmission Line and launched India's RuPay payment card in Nepal on Saturday. Deuba visited the holy city of Varanasi on Saturday and offered pooja at different temples there. He also laid foundation stone on an old-age home built by the Nepal government.
An official with the Prime Minister's Office had stated that a joint statement will be issued even after Deuba returned to Delhi from Varanasi but it was not issued even as Deuba landed in Kathmandu Sunday evening.
Kamal Thapa, who was foreign minister when Oli visited India after the southern neighbor lifted the blockade it had imposed over its displeasure on the Constitution that Nepal promulgated in September 2015, told Setopati that the joint statement was not issued after the six-day visit of Oli due to differences over the Constitution.
"Everything was well when we went in 2016. But they wanted to keep words sending a message that they will take our promulgation of the Constitution positively but the dissatisfied lots should also be taken together while talking about issuing a joint statement. We did not agree on that," Thapa confided with Setopati.
He revealed that he talked with the then Indian counterpart Sushma Swaraj after differences in the language of joitn statement. "I said the Constitution is our internal matter and should not be included in the joint statement. We reached an understanding to not issue joint statement as both the PMs had already jointly addressed and the respective foreign ministries had also issued separate statements."
Foreign Minister Narayan Khadka gave similar answer when asked about lack of joint statement this time at the Tribhuvan International Airport (TIA) Sunday evening pointing that it was not issued as both the sides reached an understanding to issue their own statement about the visit.
The border dispute seems to be the reason for nonissuance of joint statement this time.
The Indian Ministry of External Affairs issued a statement on Saturday and the Foreign Ministry issued a 17-point statement on the same day. The two statements were similar otherwise but the Nepali statement included that Deuba raised the issue of border dispute while the Indian statement did not mention the border dispute.
"The two Prime Ministers discussed the boundary matters. The Prime Minister of Nepal urged the Prime Minister of India to resolve the boundary matters through the established bilateral mechanisms," read the 10th point of the Nepali statement.
Deuba had spoken about the issue even during the joitn presss conference with Modi at the Hyderabad House on Saturday but Modi did not talk about the issue.
So how was the India visit of PM Deuba considering nonissuance of a joint statement?
"This was a traditional visit at a time when there was no visit for a long time. Nothing new happened. Visit has started. Joint statement may not be issued at times. How fruitful this visit was will be decided by the results that will arrive," former foreign secretary Madan Bhattarai pointed.
Chief of the foreign affairs department of the main opposition CPN-UML Rajan Bhattarai stated that the visit failed to resolve the longstanding serious issues on the one hand while PM Deuba indulged in controversial things on the other.
"Serious issues between the two countries were seen to not even get an entry during the PM's visit. The first thing is about border. The agreement to resolve the border dispute through a biltareal mechanism was reached by former foreign minister Pradeep Gyawali and his Indian counterpart S Jaishankar. But there has been no dialogue until now. The Indian side has not mentioned that issue even during this visit of PM Deuba," Bhattarai said.
"The economy of Nepal currently is under pressure. There seems to have been no dialogue on what can be done to reduce the trade deficit with India and to provide relief to the citizens. Mechanisms of the two countries had inspected different districts to study about inundantion in tarai but there was no talk even about that."
He also pointed how there has been no progress during this visit on the Indian side receiving the report prepared by the Eminent Persons' Group formed by the two countries to provide recommendations about different dimensions of the bilateral issues including review of the 1950 Treaty.
"Both Nepali Congress and UML have a role in formation and work of EPG. Talks about moving the EPG works were held when both Congress and BJP were in power even in India. But the Indian side has refused to receive the report until now. Nepal should have talked about India receiving that report and working in accordance to that report. But that was not said," Bhattarai, who was a member representing Nepal in the EPG, said.
He claimed that India did not take this visit seriously as PM Deuba did not hold proper preparations inside Nepal before the visit. "There is a practice of the PM holding discussion with all the parties and intellectuals especially before going for India visit. Such discussions send a message that Nepal has arrived after complete preparations but Deuba did not discuss with anyone this time whether due to lack of time or other reasons."
He argued that PM Deuba also committed a mistake by visitng the BJP headquarters despite the claim of Foreign Minister Khadka that Deuba visited the BJP office as NC president and not in capacity of the PM. "The board kept there mentioned PM of Nepal and not NC president. Ministers from other parties also went to the BJP Office along with the PM. Why had the ministers from other parties gone along if it was inter-party relation?"
He, however, called the Joint Vision Statement on Power Sector Cooperation issued during the visit positive. "Details about what have been included in that vision have yet to arrive but things like exporting Nepali electricity to India and cooperation for energy with Bangaldesh and Bhutan are positive."
The last Nepali envoy to India Nilambar Acharya said the visit should not be underestimated as it came at a time when there was no bilateral visit. He, however, stated that the two countries failed to broaden the path forward by raising the contentious issues due to their respective weaknesses.
"I see weakness of both the sides in this. Our PM went without full preparations inside the country on one hand. He did not hold consultation with anyone. He did not raise issues he should have. India on the other hand has been saying one thing and doing another. It has been saying it will hold dialogue on border dispute for eight years but there has been no dialogue. It says it will receive the EPG report but has yet to receive it," Acharya stated.
He also called visit of BJP Office by Deuba without meeting Indian opposition leaders abnormal. "Ours is a relation with India not just with the Indian government. If we don’t meet opposition leaders and intellectual communities even when our top leadership is there, that visit does not represent the broader aspects of our relation," he pointed. "Our PM went to the BJP headquarters to pay respect to BJP president instead of the president of the Indian ruling party coming to pay respect to our PM . That is not a good thing."
He said that raising of border dispute between the two PMs, however, has raised hopes that there can be dialogue on that. "Listening to Indian Foreign Secretary (Harsh Vardhan Shringla) also shows that border issues have been raised. This has raised hope, albeit faint, that there can be a dialogue."
