Gayatri Chandrasekaran

The death of nearly 700 persons in a shipwreck in the Mediterranean Sea and of more than 4,000 persons in Nepal bear no resemblance. What happened in Europe was man-made: gangs of smugglers were trafficking humans into Europe from North Africa; Nepal had to bear nature’s fury.

But the consequences of volatility in North Africa and widespread destruction in Nepal might be similar. The wave of illegal migration from Africa is due to a single reason—the state’s failure in many countries on that continent. People living in countries such as Eritrea, Sudan and Libya have nothing to look forward to in their lands. There is no order or economy to speak of.

It might be a stretch to say that Nepalese, too, may try and migrate to other countries. Though that is not about to happen, some facts must be seen in the right context. The coupling of a prolonged Maoist insurgency and a political deadlock for almost a decade has put Nepal high up in the Fragile States Index for 2014 (The index was earlier called the Failed States Index). The country finds itself in the “alert" level in the index, in the company of countries whose citizens are trying to escape to Europe. Nepal is ranked 3, Eritrea stands at 23 and Libya at a slightly better 41.

The earthquake that rocked Nepal has not only killed thousands of people but has also destroyed much of the infrastructure in the Kathmandu valley—the hub of the country’s income-generating tourism industry. A very preliminary estimate of the destruction of infrastructure and other losses is around 20% of Nepal’s gross domestic product (GDP). This is likely to go up and will be too much for Nepal to bear by itself.

Every independent country has to bear the costs of any kind of destruction on its soil—man-made or natural. But increasingly, states are unable to do so, according to data on the Fragile/Failed States Index, for more than a decade now. Most of the “irreparable" countries are located in Africa. But South Asian countries, too, are in trouble. Chief among them are Nepal and Bangladesh. A clutch of troubled or failing countries in its neighbourhood is not good news for India. Before anyone jumps the gun and says that India has a moral obligation to help, the idea should be quickly booted out. Failing states are trouble for strategic reasons and not moral ones.

What should India do?

India needs a “knife’s edge" strategy in Nepal. The immediate task has to be to help and rescue Nepalese citizens. But sooner or later, India will need to chip in with the reconstruction effort in Nepal. Without roads, bridges, hotels and other infrastructure, Nepal will badly lose on its tourism-related income, which is its mainstay. The effects of the loss of income could be highly destabilizing.

1) Once the dust has settled and detailed estimates of loss of infrastructure are carried out, India should get together with other friends of Nepal (China, for example) in contributing to rebuilding the country.

2) Apart from direct monetary contributions, Indian firms should be involved in rebuilding hospitals and communication networks, among other things. But this should be a job for India’s private sector and not the government.

The idea is to help Nepal to the extent that its government and people can quickly start rebuilding their economy and lives. India should avoid any direct, “nation-building" activities: providing money, by all means, and rebuilding through the private sector by farming out contracts. Direct government help should be limited to rescue and relief missions.

Global Roaming runs every Tuesday to take stock of international events and trends from a political and economic perspective.

 

DISCLAIMER:

The views expressed in the Article above are Author’s personal views and kashmiribhatta.in is not responsible for the opinions expressed in the above article.

Courtesy: The Live Mint: 19th May, 2015