印度封锁尼泊尔背后有其自身利益，为何国际社会缄默不语？-贾亚·拉米查恩

【尼泊尔新宪法2015年9月20日正式颁布，印度22日就以南部特莱平原地区马德西人不满意新宪法举行抗议示威影响安全为由，对尼印边界加强检查，阻止油罐车和运输粮油蔬菜的车辆进入尼泊尔，开始了对尼泊尔第三次经济封锁，造成尼泊尔油荒，封锁延续至今，生活物资和医药供应已经极度紧张。

尼泊尔在遭受425特大地震灾难之后，又遭受印度人为制造的人道主义灾难。国际社会对印度保持了令人难以置信的沉默，迄今为止没有国家对印度封锁尼泊尔表示公开谴责。日前，联合国秘书长潘基文也仅仅对尼泊尔燃料药品短缺“表示担忧”。尼泊尔英语报纸《加德满都邮报》11月10日发表尼泊尔公共卫生专家贾亚·拉米查恩的文章对印度封锁尼泊尔的真正原因予以分析，认为印度旨在控制尼泊尔的水资源，呼吁国际社会打破沉默。

河北经贸大学外语部、河北经贸大学尼泊尔研究中心副教授张树彬翻译全文，以资观察者网读者参考。****】

尼泊尔颁布新宪法的时候，世界上许多国家表示欢迎，认为新宪法是一个里程碑。但是我们的南方邻国印度，却只是“注意”到了尼泊尔颁布新宪法。没有人将印度的所谓“注意”预想为一个迹象，即暗藏着它在未来几天、想要通过对尼泊尔禁运引发人道主义危机的意图。自称为“世界上最大民主国家”的印度，竟然质疑一个主权国家的制宪会议超过90%赞成票通过的宪法。更为糟糕的是，印度甚至还对尼泊尔宪法提出了建议修改条款的清单。

幕后动机

尼泊尔有一个流行的谚语说，看不见自己身体上的水牛却能注意到别人身上的虱子。这个谚语很好地解释了我们邻国印度的行为。当其修改尼泊尔宪法建议的清单被全部拒绝后，印度便诉诸于关闭交通线路、逐步强化对尼泊尔的经济封锁的冷战时期的战略。尼泊尔作为内陆国有权通过印度进行贸易与运输。但是，具有讽刺意味的是，一年前在尼泊尔议会进行HIT演讲的同一个人，现在却正在通过实施封锁、派人渗入尼泊尔南部示威和干涉邻国内政来“打击”尼泊尔[注]。

关键问题是：印度封锁尼泊尔背后的缘由是什么？不像印度媒体所描绘的，这样做是为了保护尼泊尔特莱地区示威少数民族的权利。印度绝对不会这么做，因为这样会对其自己境内的少数民族和邦产生自食其果的不良效果。印度这次封锁行动背后的理由，其实是为了控制尼泊尔的水资源。然而印度的通盘计划被尼泊尔新宪法对公民权的规定和对提议的联邦省的划界挫败了。与之相关的问题是：这两个宪法条款如何挫败了印度的计划？

全是为了水

首先，尼泊尔新宪法关于公民权的条款规定说，男性可以将他们的公民权传给子女，但是嫁给外国公民的妇女却不可以将她们的公民权传给子女，她们的子女只能通过归化入籍成为尼泊尔公民。该条款还规定，归化入籍公民不得担任尼泊尔的高级政治职务和安全部门职务。因为特莱地区与印度有紧密的文化联系，尼泊尔有许多归化入籍的公民，印度希望这些人可以在政治上达到最高层，包括提议中的联邦省和安全部队的首长，以便印度可以控制尼泊尔的水资源。

其次，为了理解水资源政治和特莱地区联邦省划界的关系，必须了解尼泊尔的三大河流——科西河（Koshi）、格尔纳利河（Karnali）和纳拉亚尼河（甘达基河）（Narayani (Gandaki)）。科西河位于尼泊尔东部，流入印度的比哈尔邦（Bihar）东北部和米提拉（Mithila）东部，汇入恒河（the Ganges）。格尔纳利河位于尼泊尔远西部，向东南流经印度的北方邦（Uttar Pradesh）和比哈尔邦，汇入恒河。纳拉亚尼河位于尼泊尔中部，流向东南方向，穿越比哈尔邦的恒河平原（the Gangetic plains）。科西河、格尔纳利河和纳拉亚尼河平均水流量分别为2,166、2,990和1,760立方米每秒。相比之下，埃及尼罗河（the Nile River）的平均水流量是2,830立方米每秒。

此图清晰显示了尼泊尔的三大河流

获得对这些河流的控制意味着比哈尔邦和北方邦在降雨量低的旱季也可以有源源不断的水流进行灌溉，在雨季可以控制上游水流以保护这些印度邦不被洪水淹没。此外，这些河流的流域还可以生产25000兆瓦水电。印度需要这些水资源和电力来保证其发展和经济增长。印度的理想是希望整个特莱地区成为一个单独的省，而当这个建议不被尼泊尔考虑的时候，印度又建议在特莱地区组建两个省，以方便印度与这些河流流经的两个省交涉。然而尼泊尔领导层敏锐地洞悉印度这个通盘计划，为了维护国家的完整和水资源的公平分配，他们把联邦省划界为六个省都包含一部分特莱地区。这种联邦结构下，印度通过特莱地区一两个省控制尼泊尔水资源的梦想就粉碎了。

棕色即为特莱地区，主要是平原，人口也最多

而且，在宪法关于省界划分和公民权的规定上的任何妥协，对于尼泊尔的国家完整、主权和全面发展而言都是自取灭亡，因为尼泊尔唯一的依靠就是水资源和农业资源。宪法有瑕疵，政府已经准备好在不影响国家的主权和领土完整的情况下进行必要修改。示威者的一些要求是正当的。然而，印度的干涉和直接支持，以及派印度人在尼泊尔国土上参加示威，降低了这些示威的正当性。

有组织的虚伪

令人震惊的是国际社会和种种权利的提倡者对印度封锁尼泊尔保持沉默，除了几个人之外，几乎没有人敢于针对印度对尼泊尔的严重干涉表达几句反对的意见。他们大多数依然只是这次印度对尼泊尔封锁的表演的看客。印度市场的力量是国际社会保持沉默的主要原因吗？老实说，答案是肯定的。印度因为经济不断发展、人口持续增长，已经是一个巨大的市场。因此，没有人想要通过提出一个被大地震破坏且市场规模很小的经济小国的关切而引起印度的反感。

这使我想起另一个英语谚语，人们必须躬行己说，言行一致。国际社会践行其所倡导的说词了吗？根本没有。在尼泊尔最需要他们的时候，那些高喊人权、主张内陆国的国家主权、发展权和对尼泊尔震后重建许下承诺、表示支持的人们，哪里去了？就国际社会而言，不代表尼泊尔仗义执言，难道不是自私吗？国际社会的沉默有可能被打破，还是在这个全球化的世界上尼泊尔依然不得不独自应对印度的封锁？如果这就是国际社会希望的像尼泊尔这样一个内陆小国的命运，那么所有那些条约、公约和权利的倡导还有什么用？还是国际社会只想把利益送给像印度这样的大国？打破国际社会的沉默能够帮助尼泊尔迅速从国内冲突和大地震的影响中恢复，并且随着宪法的颁布施行，朝着盼望已久的发展前进。

注释：

HIT是指Highway, I-way和Transway三个英文单词的字首字母。印度总理莫迪在就任之后2014年月3日至4日访问尼泊尔，在尼泊尔制宪会议发表演讲时说：“I want to hit Nepal.” [参见《印度时报》报道Modi announces $1 billion concessional line of credit to Nepal] “Nepal needs ‘HIT’ - Highways - Infoways - Transways and we will support you in all these.”[参见尼泊尔《共和国报》报道Modi mesmerizes Nepal with eloquent speech (with major highlights) ]表示印度希望帮助尼泊尔建设基础设施，赢得尼泊尔制宪会议成员的热烈欢呼，也广受尼泊尔民众称赞。——译注

作者贾亚·拉米查恩是尼泊尔公共卫生专家

（河北经贸大学外语部 河北经贸大学尼泊尔研究中心 张树彬 译）

本文系观察者网独家稿件，文章内容纯属作者个人观点，不代表平台观点，未经授权，不得转载，否则将追究法律责任。关注观察者网微信guanchacn，每日阅读趣味文章。

Breaking the silence

India has its own interest behind the blockade but why has the international community not spoken about it?

-JAYA LAMICHHANE

When Nepal promulgated its new constitution, many countries welcomed it as a milestone, but our southern neighbour India only “noted” it. Nobody foresaw India’s ‘note’ as an indication of its intention to trigger a humanitarian crisis through a blockade in days to come. It is an irony that a country which calls itself the world’s largest democracy has questioned a sovereign country which has promulgated its constitution with the approval of more than 90 percent of its Constituent Assembly. To make matters worse, India even provided a list of amendments to Nepal’s constitution.

Hidden agenda

There is a popular proverb in Nepal about not seeing a buffalo on one’s body but noticing a louse on another person. This proverb best explains the behaviour of our neighbour. When India’s list of amendments was rejected outright, it resorted to a Cold War-era strategy of mounting an economic blockade by closing transit routes. Nepal as a landlocked country has rights to trade and transport. But ironically, the same person who lectured on the HIT (hydropower, information technology and transportation) strategy of development in Nepal’s Parliament a year ago is now “hitting” the country by imposing a blockade, sending people to infiltrate the demonstrations and interfering in its neighbour’s internal politics.

The million dollar question is: What is the reason behind this? It’s not, as portrayed in the Indian media, about protecting the rights of minorities who have been demonstrating in parts of the Tarai. India will never want to do this as it can have a boomerang effect in terms of its own minorities and states. The reason behind this action is to control Nepal’s water resources. However, India’s game plan has been thwarted by the provision of citizenship rights in the constitution and the proposed demarcation of federal states. A pertinent question is how did these two things thwart the plan?

All about water

First, the citizenship provision in the constitution says that men can pass on their Nepali citizenship to their children, but women married to foreign nationals cannot do so and their children can become Nepalis only by naturalisation. The provision also states that naturalised citizens cannot assume high political and security offices. As there are many naturalised citizens in Nepal due to their close cultural relations in the Tarai, India wants them to reach the highest levels in politics, including the head of the proposed federal states and the security forces so that it can control Nepal’s water resources.

Second, in order to unders tand the relationship between water politics and the demarcation of the federal states in the Tarai, one has to have an understanding of Nepal’s three big rivers—Koshi, Karnali and Narayani (Gandaki). First, the Koshi lies in eastern Nepal and flows to northeast Bihar and eastern Mithila to join the Ganges. Second, the Karnali in far western Nepal flows southeast through Uttar Pradesh and Bihar to join the Ganges. Finally, the Narayani in central Nepal flows southeast across the Gangetic plains of Bihar state. The average water flow of the Koshi, Karnali and Narayani is 2,166, 2,990 and 1,760 cubic metres per second respectively. In comparison, the average water flow of the Nile River is 2,830 cubic metres per second.

Gaining control of these rivers means an uninterrupted supply of water for irrigation in Bihar and Uttar Pradesh during the low seasons and control of the upstream flow during the rainy season to protect these Indian states from floods. In addition, these river basins have a capacity to produce more than 25,000 MW of hydropower. India needs this water resource and power for its development and economic growth. Ideally, India wanted the entire Tarai to be a single state, and when this was not even considered, two states were proposed in the Tarai so that India could deal with these two states through which these rivers flow. However, the Nepali leadership smartly understood the game plan, and in order to maintain national integrity and equitable distribution of natural resources, they have demarcated the federal states in such a way that the six states are linked with the Tarai. With this federal structure, India’s dream of controlling the water resources through one or two states in the Tarai was shattered.

Furthermore, any compromise on the demarcation of states and citizenship rights in the constitution will be suicidal for Nepal’s national integrity, sovereignty and overall development, which is solely dependent on water and agricultural resources. There are some flaws in the constitution, and the government is ready to make the necessary amendments without affecting national sovereignty and integrity. There are some valid demands of some of the protestors, however, India’s interference and involvement by directly supporting and sending Indians to participate in the protests on Nepali soil has diluted these demonstrations.

Organised hypocrisy

It is shocking that the global community and advocates of rights have remained silent on this situation and no one except a few have dared to express a few words against India’s gross interference in Nepal. A majority of them have remained as mere spectators in this show of blockade in Nepal. Is the power of the Indian market the primary cause for this silence? The honest answer is a yes as India is a huge market because of its growing economy and population. Thus, no one wants to antagonise India by raising the concerns of a small country, devastated by a massive earthquake and with a very small market economy.

This reminds me of another proverb in English which says that you must practice what you preach. Is the global community practicing what it is preaching? Not at all. Where are those voices for human rights, sovereign rights of landlocked countries, rights of development and the commitments and support for reconstruction at a time when Nepal needs them most? Isn’t it selfishness on the part of the world community to not speak on Nepal’s behalf? Is it possible to break the silence of the international community or will Nepal remain a lone warrior against the Indian blockade in this globalised world? If this is the fate the global community wants for a small landlocked country like Nepal, what is the use of all the treaties, conventions and advocacy of rights? Or are they intended to benefit only big countries like India? Breaking the silence of the international community can help Nepal recover quickly from the impact of the conflict and earthquake and proceed towards much awaited development with its new constitution.

Lamichhane is a public health specialist