Diplomats think Foreign Ministry does not exist - Upendra Yadav

http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?&nid=159828

Foreign Minister Upendra Yadav started his political career as a UML cadre and later switched to the Maoists. He was detained in India for three months along with Matrika Prasad Yadav and Suresh Ale Magar. The BJP-led NDA government extradited Matrika and Suresh to Nepal, but Upendra was released.

Upendra Yadav subsequently joined the Madhesi People's Rights Forum (MPRF), which became a regional political party after the Madhes uprising. He defeated Sujata Koirala in Sunsari-5 constituency in the Constituent Assembly election. Foreign Minister Yadav returned from India after attending a conference of the Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC) in New Delhi.

Yadav spoke with Puran P Bista and Bishnu Budhathoki of The Kathmandu Post on the outcome of his visit.

Excerpts:

Q: How do you assess your trip to Delhi?

Yadav: I attended the ministerial-level BIMSTEC meeting. We discussed how to connect Thailand, Burma, Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Bhutan by air and land. We also talked about sharing power which will bring us closer to each other. I foresee a great potential for economic growth if we share power and raise trade among the BIMSTEC member-countries.

Secondly, we discussed how to increase trade. BIMSTEC acts like a bridge between SAARC and ASEAN. Commerce is the main medium to connect these countries. We also discussed how to raise bilateral trade. For instance, I asked India to provide us a land route to Bangladesh. The Bangladesh foreign minister also spoke with India to provide us an overland way to facilitate commerce with Bangladesh.

We have never been able to do significant business with Bangladesh due to lack of a proper route. Nepal and Bangladesh are separated by barely 60 kilometers of Indian territory. Similarly, thousands of Sri Lankans visit Nepal. They have to come by air via India or through a third country. We need to look for sea connectivity with Sri Lanka. Mangla port in Bangladesh is a choice to establish bilateral trade with Sri Lanka.

BIMSTEC provides us a platform to discuss such obstacles and resolve them. Bangladesh has allowed us to use its Mangla port. It is nearer, very cost-effective and convenient. But we cannot use it unless India provides us a land route. We want India to allow our vehicles to enter Bangladesh so that we can use Mangla port. I have approached India for that facility.Q: What was India's response?

Yadav: India said that it would look into the issue even though it was a security concern. Until now, we have been using Indian trucks to ferry goods between Bangladesh and Nepal. It's a hassle and expensive and time-consuming. Our demand is that Bangladesh and Nepal should be allowed to conduct bilateral trade through this route. We have not been able to do substantial trade with Bangladesh because we have no access to the sea. We can even trade with Sri Lanka if we are allowed to use Mangla port.

Among the BIMSTEC countries, Thailand and India are ahead of us in terms of bilateral trade. We have never been able to conduct any trade with other countries due to lack of access to a sea route. We produce good quality garments, but we have been unable to export them to other countries. As a result, we have been unable to provide employment to our youth. Unless we focus on expanding trade with other countries, we cannot think of economic development. I think India should allow us to use Mangla port.

Q: What did you discuss with the Indian foreign minister in reference to bilateral ties?

Yadav: There are a number of bilateral issues to be resolved. These differences are mere suspicions. They cannot remain obstacles to our trade and bilateral relations. We are confused and look at each other suspiciously. The Koshi treaty or the 1950 treaty is an example. Such confusion has harmed trade. India has agreed to review the 1950 treaty. The foreign minister told me that India was ready to amend it if Nepal deemed it necessary. India is ready to replace the old treaty with a new one as it has done with Bhutan.

We also think that the 1950 treaty should be updated as per our needs so that we can strengthen our bilateral ties and carry out trade without any hassles. But the question is what kind of treaty Nepal wants with India. We have not even discussed it at length. It is now our responsibility to come up with definite proposals. India is open to suggestions. We should decide whether we want to dump the 1950 treaty and sign a new one or just update it as required.

Q: What is in the treaty that needs to be revised or canceled?

Yadav: Just listen to some of our leaders who speak out against India or the 1950 treaty. I call such clamor, which hurts our bilateral relations, cheap propaganda.

But we must keep in mind that the 1950 treaty has created an open border, established better ties and given us free cross-border movement. Our relations with India cannot be compared with other South Asian countries. What we need to do now is clear up bilateral confusion and deepen our trade ties. I do not mean that we should replace the old treaty at the cost of our sovereignty. Both countries must work together for the benefit of their peoples. For that, we should sit, discuss and see that the new treaty fulfills our economic and political aspirations.

Q: Why did India fail to repair and maintain the Koshi Barrage as it was India's responsibility to do so?

Yadav: India has explained that the local people did not allow the Indian team to repair the spurs on time. Obviously, the local residents did create some problems when the Indian team arrived. But India should not have blamed Nepal. It should have approached the Nepali government if the Indian team had faced any problems. The residents demanded money and the Indians were not ready to pay. Instead of informing the Nepali government, they returned thinking that they would settle the matter the following year. Unfortunately, the embankments burst and over three million Indians were driven from their homes by the flood waters.

We also suffered from the deluge. Eastern Nepal has been totally cut off. Over 50,000 people have been rendered homeless. So blaming each other for the Koshi disaster will get us nowhere. We have to acknowledge the blunder and work to prevent further erosion of the embankments.

Q: Do you think that the local people obstructed the repair work? I think the problem was not maintenance. India was well aware of the siltation and the danger it posed.

Yadav: All of us were very much aware of the siltation problem. Nobody had thought that the Koshi would change its course so easily. But had the local people allowed the Indian team to work, things would not have been so bad. The Koshi could have been tamed, and the repair work, if the Indian team had been allowed to carry it out, would have protected the spurs. India insists that Nepali laborers did not allow the Indian team to do the repairs.

But India should understand that the strong nexus between the contractor, engineers and Bihar government officials was responsible for the Koshi disaster, regardless of how India explains it. The people responsible for maintenance work on a commission basis. Once there is talk of commission, the laborers get cheated. We should not only blame the nexus because the Koshi has changed its course. Siltation and a rising riverbed pushed the Koshi back to its old course. Now it cannot be brought back. We were aware of such problems. For the past 15 years, the Indians did nothing to keep the barrage in good repair. That was India's biggest mistake.

Q: How can the Koshi be tamed? Did you discuss the matter with the Indian authorities?

Yadav: We cannot think of bringing the Koshi back to its earlier course. What we need is a detailed study of the Koshi and its tributaries. If we can control the tributaries, then we may be able to lessen its fury. Otherwise, the Koshi will continue to displace thousands of people every year. This is a technical matter. I cannot say what should be done. Currently, we have to focus on rehabilitation. After we have completed the rehabilitation work, we can think of doing a thorough study of the Koshi to work out a permanent solution. Can we divert water from some of the tributaries to reduce the volume of water in the Koshi? This is the key question.

Q: India has been insisting on the Koshi high dam project. Will that be a permanent solution?

Yadav: We did not discuss anything about the Koshi high dam. Unless we conduct a scientific study of the Koshi, we cannot think of building a high dam. We now know that silt buildup was the major reason behind the Koshi disaster. Parts of north Bihar have become a lake. Building a high dam will also be a temporary solution.

In addition, India built the Koshi Barrage at an unsuitable site. Surveyors had proposed building the barrage further upstream. But India erected it near the border with the intention of irrigating Bihar rather than Nepal and Bihar.

Q: One of the cabinet ministers has said that the Koshi Treaty was dead after the river breached its embankment. What do you say?

Yadav: Since the river has changed its course and it cannot be brought back, there is no point in debating on the Koshi Treaty. India built it with mutual understanding. The understanding is no longer valid because the river has taken a new course. However, the Koshi wreaks havoc both in Nepal and India. So the two countries must sit down and discuss how to minimize the impact of such disasters.

Q: For some years, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has been in the shadows. It is not as active as it should be. How are you going to revive it?

Yadav: In the eyes of foreign envoys, Nepal's Foreign Ministry does not exist. Diplomats visit Nepal, but no one knows who meets them. Some diplomats bypass the Foreign Ministry and meet with the prime minister directly. We have been unable to exercise our foreign policy for the country's economic benefit. In the absence of a proper code of conduct, government officials raise irrelevant questions. The other day, the South Korean deputy chief of mission visited me with a complaint which had nothing to do with the Foreign Ministry. The Foreign Ministry's tasks are being done by other ministries. There must be proper guidelines and channels. Officials of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs are competent people. They are preparing a manual to make the ministry more effective and efficient.