Nepal’s Prime Minister Prachanda has just completed a visit to India that was billed as an important move for the two countries

Nepal’s Prime Minister Prachanda has just completed a visit to India that was billed as an important move for the two countries to re-connect after a series of difficult bilateral developments. Recently there has been quite a bit of turbulence in relations between these closest of neighbours, and both sides showed wisdom in taking steps to restore what must remain a critically important tie for both of them. The previous leader in Kathmandu had experienced difficulties in his dealings with New Delhi which complicated his own task of providing effective governance at home. Earlier, India’s Prime Minister Modi had made a special pitch for strengthening bilateral confidence and his initial visit to Nepal over a year ago was a big success, with the Nepalese public responding enthusiastically to his many spontaneous gestures affirming the exceptional bonding between the two countries. As everyone knows, there is no hindrance in coming and going from one to the other, or in their commercial exchanges, and open borders existed between the two well before the rest of the world began to move in that direction. Their close mutual understanding in all fields has underpinned the strategic harmonisation that they have maintained for so long. Unexpectedly, however, the long running constitutional crisis in Nepal spilt over into bilateral India-Nepal ties, with divisive effect. The prevailing close friendship between the two countries notwithstanding, there have been occasional problems between them, though more of perception than of substance, and at the crunch they have invariably drawn together, but this time lines of division were more deeply engraved. Politically aggrieved groups in mid-Nepal acted to prevent normal movement of goods from India to the interior, which caused great hardship and consequent resentment, and India found it had to shoulder much of the blame. Nepal, always zealous in maintaining its sovereign rights against any perceived slight from its much larger neighbour, felt it was being coerced by the use of an economic weapon that was always potentially available but never employed, while India saw deliberate efforts being made to reduce its profile and seek alternatives to its historic close partnership with Nepal. The most sensitive aspect of the bilateral India-Nepal relationship being its strategic component, at a time of uncertainty it is strategic matters that come in for a shakeup, which more often than not means bringing China into the equation. Nepal’s own strategic significance has much to do with its geographical location between these two large Asian countries, and while its long established lines of communication and cooperation point towards India, this is no longer something to be taken for granted, and opening up to China in a number of development initiatives south of the Himalayan crest line has taken place over the last few years. This could have become a matter of concern to India at an earlier stage but is less of an obstacle to good relations today when India itself is busy opening up the Himalayan region with a number of major development projects. These economic plans will reinforce India’s role as Nepal’s leading development partner but yet some care and caution need to be exercised in the unfolding of intra-Himalayan relationships. Against this background, Mr. Prachanda’s visit was more than the customary courtesy call paid by a succession of Nepali leaders at the commencement of their respective terms of office. The recent jolts to this all-important relationship have been disturbing and have underlined the need for corrective action, which was Mr. Prachanda’s mission for his visit, and he himself said before setting out that his task was to restore confidence and move on from the misunderstandings of the previous months. He seems to have substantially achieved this goal and would have returned to Kathmandu well satisfied with what he accomplished in New Delhi. Both he and his Indian host showed awareness of the need to undo the unhappy experience of the immediate past and made a special effort to set matters to rights: in New Delhi the Indian government took special care to provide a fulsome welcome, including accommodation at Rashtrapati Bhavan, and the joint statement at the conclusion kept studiously clear of any words that could imply anything but a trouble-free and highly cooperative relationship between the two countries. With this, it can be justly claimed that the repair work has been done and relations restored to their customary level of intimacy. Yet though the required repairs were successfully concluded during the Prachanda visit, the matters that had become contentious are not without substance and resolving them may need substantive decisions as much as demonstrations of mutual goodwill. Vexed issues that were the source of much trouble just a short while go may not be much in the public eye at present but can flare up again if matters go awry. The final shaping of Nepal’s newly adopted Constitution is yet to be achieved, and the many conflicting ideas about the shape of this basic document are yet to be resolved, for Constitution-making has been a prolonged and divisive matter and though a final text has been adopted it has not yet received the general backing it needs. The Madhesi population in the Terai portion adjacent to India has been especially aggrieved and has resorted to direct action that has had an unsettling effect. As links across the border in this section are exceptionally close there have been accusations that the agitators have received backing from the other side, which makes for unwarranted suspicion and unnecessary complication of the task of internal reconciliation. What is needed now is to find a way forward and this is the big challenge for Mr. Prachanda. Moreover, this is a matter to be settled by Nepal alone, for advice from any other source, however well-intentioned, can only be a complication. Mr. Prachanda’s successful visit is a reminder that essential goodwill and mutual confidence more often than not are generated at the top; the current aura of goodwill owes much to what the two Prime Ministers were able to communicate to each other when they met. Mr Prachanda has been accused by his critics at home of having become very much of a mainstream politician -- no longer the ideological firebrand of the past but a typical South Asian politician capable of dealing with people of all political complexions, friend and foe alike. If that is so, it is something to applaud, for it should be easier to do business with the new-look Prachanda who has been tempered by experience. He merits the support proffered to him by New Delhi for having restored Nepal’s image as a steadfast partner and friend to India