India's new regime, which came to power through a completely democratic channel, is being grossly misunderstood by prominent Nepali commentators. On May 24, Yubaraj Ghimire's piece in the Indian Express, 'What Modi Means to Nepal', had a surprising tone. The piece clearly overlooked the history of India, which has almost never been involved in external aggression, along with the fact that Nepal has never been reduced to a colony, even under the British Empire, which suppressed India easily.

So what made Ghimire fearful that the new government in New Delhi may bring back the monarchy or disrupt ongoing democratic processes in Nepal? He is a senior journalist and one cannot fathom what would lead him to think that a Modi or an Advani would take such undue interest in Nepal, beyond the formal diplomatic levels, to reverse popular aspirations endorsed by the Nepali people.

Cordial talks

Looking at the recent visit of Prime Minister Sushil Koirala to Delhi, the visiting delegation had an engaged time during and after Narendra Modi's swearing-in ceremony. Prime Minister Koirala met top senior leaders of various political parties and was paid courtesy visits in his hotel room by LK Advani and others. So it is inaccurate to say that Koirala was not greeted well in the Indian capital. At a reception hosted by the Nepali Embassy, this scribe had a chance to meet with the PM and ask him about the meeting with his Indian counterpart; Koirala acknowledged that it went well. Moreover, Dinesh Bhattarai, advisor to the PM on foreign affairs and a senior diplomat himself, shared the actual points of meeting between the two PMs, which were warm and full of courtesy.

Modi reportedly said that it is his  'kartavya' (duty) to do his best for Nepal—a country that is closest to India on every count. There was nothing unusual in that. With many flaws but a dependable strength—democracy—India is a crucible of change in South Asia. India is not a nation with a monolithic shape or qualities. It is extremely diverse, so much so that sometimes its own contradictions loom alarmingly large. At least as a nation, India has a good track record of living below its means and has solid moral ground. So the air must be cleared—Nepal's own thinking matters more for its internal condition than what India thinks of it.

Economic interests

Amidst the negative reflections about PM Koirala's visit to India, commentators forgot to recall that the Federation of Indian Cham-bers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI) warmly welcomed Koirala's invitation to the Indian private sector to look positively at investments in Nepali hydropower and the transmission sector. To explore these prospects, FICCI, in collaboration with Nepal's Inve-stment Board, will be working to hold a Nepal Investment Summit in India in the near future.

As of now, energising Indian investment in Nepal is essential to help the country enhance its industrial capacity, leading to a more favourable trade balance between the two neighbours. Sadly, the visiting prime ministerial delegation lacked fair representation from the business community. Instead, PM Koirala's delegation surprisingly included close family members, Sujata and Shashank Koirala, also a few leaders who were adrift from the main purpose of visit. The symbolism of this is important to note. The Nepali political establishment must work to send the message that it really intends to bring the country back on economic track.

The dynamics of the India-Nepal relationship is backed by centuries' old social, cultural and geographic linkages as well as extensive people-to-people contacts. India has been consistent in its commitment to extend assistance for Nepal's economic development. There is mutual recognition that India-Nepal economic cooperation needs to be further strengthened. In India, the general perception is quite positive for Nepal's democracy. Although in the past, India indeed committed blunders by deputing Sitaram Yechury and Karan Singh to hold contradictory talks with both the radicals and the royals. This process contravened India's actual intention.

Friends forgive

As the Maoists' interaction with the establishment power interface increased, Indian leaders' impractical interlocution invited greater anger from the Nepali mass. Anti-India sentiments in Nepal are closely linked to this phenomenon. I reminded Bimalendra Nidhi that India has been an all-weather friend to Nepal and as a country in transition, Nepal should forgive some Indian lapses. And it would do much good for Nepal's leaders to keep pressing the Indian PM for a Nepal visit. Such an official visit would bode well for diplomatic as well business circles.

As Nidhi is in the government, we held a long talk where he acknowledged that the Madhes region is falling from grace. A central hub like Janakpur is not getting proper attention. Its roads are under-maintained; there has been an unprecedented increase in crime; and its industry is locked-out. Is this what democratic movements were aimed for?

On May 23, Kanak Mani Dixit, in The Kathmandu Post, (Convictions and Modi-fications), sounded incisive, recalling both history and the great depth of the relationship between India and Nepal. But in between Yubaraj Ghimire and Kanak Mani Dixit's views, a great level of confusion could be sensed among the Nepali intelligentsia towards their own course of action and the destiny of the nation, which immediately needs a dossier of action rather mere rhetoric and the easy practice of passing the buck to another.

Modi, or anyone else in New Delhi, will matter for Nepal only when Nepali powerbrokers realise what Nepal means for itself. Nepal has greater potential than ever imagined by its politicians. They would do the nation a great service by keeping it capable of resolving its own inherent and supplied shortcomings. Neither India nor China can be detrimental to Nepal's stake in South Asia. It is still not too late to recall that shunning friends or friendship cannot ever be a good idea. The desired beginning would be the completion of a competent constitution, which has been due for long. Is anyone listening?

Thakur is a New Delhi-based journalist (@atul_mdb)