Most appropriate time for departure from the Gujaral’s doctrine (May 2020)

Inder Kumar Gujaral was a person who was woken up by his colleagues in the midnight, and was told, “get up, you have to sworn in as the Prime Minister of the country”. Such was the level of fortune associated with him. This happened in 1997-98, when Congress decided to remove H. D. Devegowda as the Prime Minister of the country, after his 9-month run. In those 9 months, one such event happened which changed the dynamics of the Indian diplomacy. That was the famous, “Gujral Doctrine”. 
Inder Kumar Gujaral was the Foreign Minister of India, in Devegowda’s cabinet, and being a Foreign Minister, he came up with an idea as how to deal with neighbours. These ideas came to be known as the ‘Gujaral Doctrine’. One of the many ideas in the doctrine was to extend unconditional support to the five neighbouring countries – Pakistan, Nepal, Bhutan, Afghanistan and Myanmar. No other nation than Nepal, made full use of the doctrine. Using the stance of the Indian Foreign Minister, Nepal was successful in asserting its claims on Kalapani District, which has currently resulted in the escalations of Indo-Nepal tensions. To understand is happening today, we need to understand what happened before. 
In 1824, a battle was fought between East India Company and Nepal, which came to be known as the Anglo-Nepal war. The war ended with the ‘’treaty of Sagauli’’. In the treaty, it was decided that the Kali river will be the boundary between the East India Company territories and Nepalese territories. The East India territories were inherited by the British Government, and from them, Indian government. Therefore, the Kali river became and remained the boundary between India and Nepal. The turn in the stance came only when I. K. Gujaral, in the capacity of the Foreign Minister of India went to Nepal and extended his doctrine. Which fool would ignore such offer? Therefore, Nepal grasped the opportunity from both hands. 
Nepal claimed that the Kalapani district belongs to Nepal and not to India, for which he stated some geographical misinterpretations. And surprisingly, the Foreign Minister, without any due consultations accepted the Nepalese claims. 

How the Gujaral Doctrine worked out since then? 

Simply put, pretty bad. India did not cease to follow the Gujaral doctrine, even after I. K. Gujaral cease to be the Foreign Minister and then the Prime Minister (both combined is equal to 1 and half years). Successive governments in the Centre continued to follow the doctrine, and this was not confined to only five countries but was extended to Maldives and few other countries. Due to this doctrine, Indian position was and is being taken for granted. 

What’s wrong with Nepal here? 

Currently, Nepal is going through lot of political instability. The incumbent Prime Minister K. P. Oli’s position is bit shaky. His inclination towards China, followed by smuggling of girls from Nepal to China, hacking activities by the Chinese hackers in the Nepalese database, mishandling of the Covid-19 outbreak has earned him fury of his people. Speculations are being made in favour of Pushpa Kamal Dahal, who is considered to be more leaned towards India than China. In the midst of all the tragedies taking place under Oli’s leadership, anti-India rhetoric, sponsored by China seems to be only way out. 
Not that Nepal enjoys such position through which it can change the status quo and can take control of what it claims its own. But all this gimmickry can do is to divert attention from the present crisis and turn it towards the so called ‘’arm twisting exercise of India’’. 
No one seems to be happier than China in this case, as this whole development lowers the credibility of India as a regional power centre. And this is the reason, why India should now throw the Gujaral doctrine into the garbage bin. As long as Indian position will be taken for granted, every country will continue to create such rhetoric which will lower down India’s credibility. 
India has the opportunity to show everyone of its neighbouring countries that goodwill is not a free food. If you wish to have it from India, you need to replicate it as well. As long as there is reciprocity in the relations, there is no need for diplomatic goodwill. Probably India can achieve it through trade and economy, the nerve centre of the diplomatic relations today. The tactics adopted in the Maldivian crisis, in which a President (anti India) is replaced by a President (anti-China and pro India) wont simply work here. 

Credits: Shubham Rajput