Here’s what Prime Minister KP Oli told the parliament on Monday, saying he was giving the address for a “special” reason: “Nepal wants to maintain neighbourly relations as a good neighbour, not a petty, scheming neighbour…Nepal wants a similar behaviour on the part of its neighbours.”

He pursued this line of argument, implying that India is wishing ill on Nepal, imposing on Nepal’s sovereignty and interfering in its independent status and policy. He then told the parliament that he would present the issue at the United Nations General Assembly.

It basically amounts to saying he will complain to the UN about India’s behaviour.

What a petty idea.

Given his inherent character trait, PM Oli will find it difficult to develop trusted relations with India in the short term. His only option is to be diplomatic, predictable and consistent. So far, he’s not been able to do that. It does not bode well for Nepal’s foreign policy, which is the most important means of pursuing Nepal’s current priorities, including jobs, growth and climate change.

Calculated relations

Oli’s statement in the parliament indicates at least three things. First, his expectations from India have not been fulfilled. Second, his communications with the country have broken down. And third, he thinks India may be working to undermine his political authority.

Let’s look at his expectations from the southern neighbour. Oli wants to hold high-level talks with PM Modi of India and build trusted relations.

In the past two weeks, media reports and opinion pieces have discussed whether Oli would be invited to India or not. It has almost become customary in Nepal for a new prime minister to visit India first before embarking on other high-level visits. Such a custom indicates the value politicians accord to India, especially if they want their government to be stable.

The second indication is that Oli is finding it difficult to communicate with people who matter in India. When you begin to communicate your feelings about India through the media, it indicates that your direct communications have either broken down or are ineffective.

Behind Oli’s statement is an obvious intention to play the blame game or rally the public. India may be at fault for many things, but blaming India does not absolve him of inconsistencies on his part or the sheer inability to conduct diplomacy in a dignified manner.

The third indication is even more significant. Oli has consistently promoted anti-Indian nationalism, and India finds it difficult to trust him. But would that alone be enough to undermine his government?

Throughout history, India has had a significant influence on Nepal’s political process and decision-making. Through its influence on individuals who’ve received gifts, benefits, and resources, some at the highest levels, India holds significant leverage over political decision-making and, by extension, over policies and processes.

An old playbook

India’s calculated relations with the Nepali state came to the fore in August this year when Foreign Minister Arzu Rana Deuba visited India. New Delhi turned her visit into a high-profile affair even though she was unprepared to represent Nepal’s interests. Her visit, rather than building political trust, ended up creating more mistrust between Oli and New Delhi as well as between the Foreign Ministry and the Prime Minister’s Office.

Although it is a matter of speculation, there are strong grounds to argue that such a courtesy would not have been extended to someone from the CPN (UML). It generates the question, at least in the public’s mind, whether India accorded special treatment to FM Rana as a “special” individual who happened to be the foreign minister and not as a representative of Nepal.

Whether real or not, the perception that India is unhappy with Oli has fuelled the notion that the current government coalition is unstable.

Throughout Nepal’s modern history, whenever top leaders are forced out, they tend to seek India’s support to regain power. I have heard firsthand from top political leaders that India used to put a pre-condition: First, demonstrate that you have people's support, then we will use our leverage to help you. Thus, the political leaders would launch a political campaign and hold mass meetings throughout the country. If the broader political environment favoured a political change, then India made the additional push.

Now, as Pushpa Kamal Dahal tours the country, blaming a corrupt network of power brokers, we are reminded of this old playbook. During mass meetings, an embittered Dahal frequently alleges that “middlemen, brokers, and big cronies have gotten together, and with the strength of so-called numbers, have tried to strangle truth, justice…and good governance.” He also tells the public that his government was ousted because the investigations on corruption were leading to Budhanilkantha (Deuba’s residence) and Balkot (Oli’s residence).

Oli’s inherent anti-Indian streak

For Oli, an inherent anti-Indian streak in his psychological make-up and an affinity with the Communist Party of China makes rapprochement with India difficult.

In the last 10 years, Oli has made countless petty statements intended to rile and irritate India. He has also accorded China greater space in Nepal.

In his book, former deputy PM Kamal Thapa expresses distaste at the way Oli made an unscheduled visit to China Gezhouba Group Corporation and disappeared for one and a half hours for a private meeting with Chinese Communist Party officials during his visit to China in 2016.

Another issue is the Eminent Persons’ Group report, which Oli raised during the launch of Thapa’s book. “It would be good to receive the report,” he said during the programme. He made more anti-Indian remarks at another similar event.

At present, any talk of the EPG report is viewed as an irritant by India, because it has consistently sent a clear diplomatic message that the report is dead. The unwillingness of a section of the Nepali populace to accept the message, including the CPN-UML, has not gone well in India.

In a recent discussion programme, a former ambassador of India to Nepal indicated that the EPG report had become a new irritant in Nepal-India relations. He said that instead of insisting on the acceptance of the report, Nepal could pursue the individual issues identified. Trends in the last two decades indicate that instead of really trying to address the outstanding issues in Nepal-India relations, Nepali leaders are just interested in politicising them and gaining personal mileage.

Nepal’s relationship with India has become more and more of a paradox. Nepal’s dominant ethno-nationalism is anti-Indian. Indeed, Nepal has many unresolved issues with India, but it’s economic development hinges on closer connectivity with India, which in turn hinges on trusted political relationships and ability to untangle complex issues.

Snubbed by India, Oli is now headed to the US, where he could still get to meet a lukewarm Modi. He hopes to gain stature and make an impression at several forums including the UNGA, where he is scheduled to deliver speeches. We can only wish our PM well.