WALL STREET JOURNAL
Tuesday, February 15, 2005

Editorial: India's Example for China

Two weeks after Nepal's king assumed dictatorial power, India is setting an example of how a responsible government should react to instability in its neighborhood. New Delhi, Washington and London have formed a coalition of the willing to coordinate their response to King Gyanendra's actions. All three countries have threatened to cut off aid unless the country moves swiftly back down the path toward democracy.

It is India which has been most vocal in denouncing the king's February 1 decision to dismiss the government, place most ministers under house arrest and suspend basic civil liberties as part of the declaration of a state of emergency. Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh refused to attend a key regional summit at which the king would be present, for fear this would be interpreted as conferring legitimacy on his coup.

That demonstrated how badly King Gyanendra may have miscalculated in his fight against Maoist insurgents. The reality is that the king's takeover handed a propaganda tool to rebels who already control much of the country. They used it as an excuse to blockade highways. India is understandably worried that the insurgents, emboldened by recent events, may now forge links with Communist rebels in its own northern provinces.

Already the New Delhi-led international response seems to be having some success. Many of the restrictions imposed immediately after the declaration of the state of emergency have been eased and seven arrested political leaders were released last week, although many more remain in custody. U.S. Ambassador to Nepal James Moriarty has predicted progress toward the restoration of democracy within the next 100 days.

It's not difficult to divine the reason for such concessions. Most trade with land-locked Nepal moves across the frontier with India , a weapon New Delhi has not hesitated to use in the past, notably when it imposed a crippling trade blockade in 1989. So faced with such a determined response from the powerful neighbor that controls his country's lifeline to the outside world, King Gyanendra had little choice but to give some ground. That's a lesson which could usefully be studied by Nepal's other powerful neighbor. Not only has China called the king's coup "an internal affair," but it is thrashing around for a strategy to respond to another crisis caused by another destabilizing state among its neighbors.

If the Nepalese king's actions jeopardize regional stability, the danger posed by North Korea's nuclear adventurism is a hundredfold more serious. Yet Beijing's response to Pyongyang's declaration last week that it has nuclear weapons and will pull out of disarmament talks has been far less robust than India 's response to a more limited threat. China did say over the weekend that it would try to persuade North Korea to return to the negotiating table, but it has so far refrained from any strong criticism of Pyongyang's behavior.

Yet China holds many of the same cards that India does in respect of a troublesome neighbor, including control of a lifeline to the outside world, since most supplies entering and leaving North Korea move across the border with China. The difference is Beijing's unwillingness to act forcefully enough to get results.

From closer cooperation with Washington to an improved international image, India can expect to reap the rewards of acting as a responsible regional power in resolving the Nepal crisis. If China wants to be seen in the same light, it could take a leaf out of New Delhi's book and play a more assertive role in resolving a more serious issue.