Psychology of invitation


BIRENDRA P MISHRA

International diplomacy

Recently, PM Sushil Koirala visited both India and China. The first foreign trip of the PM was to India to attend the oath-taking of Narendra Modi. His later visited Kunming, the provincial capital of Yunnan province in China, to attend the second China-South Asia Exposition. In 2008 too, the then PM Pushpa Kamal Dahal had visited China to participate in the closing ceremony of Beijing Olympics, leaving thousands of his citizens in the eastern Nepal inundated by the breach of the Saptakoshi embankment in a lurch. Perhaps, the invitation, which was meant for the President, was changed to accommodate him.

But why can’t our leaders say ‘no’ to such invitations? Understandably, it is natural to have an inclination to see new places and enjoy the hospitality of host countries. This is the reason even our bureaucrats can never say ‘no’ to a foreign invite, especially to India or China.

I aim to delve into the very act of invitation extended by our neighbors. Literarily, the word ‘invitation’ means a spoken or written request for someone to do something or go somewhere. Thus, any invitation has three factors, the inviter, the invitee/s, and the reason for invitation, the last of which has two aspects—explicit and Implicit.

Man interacts with others while living in a society. Hence, inviting someone is a natural social phenomenon. One invites others for their participation in family and social functions. In any act of invitation, the role played by the inviter is prominent. The inviter invites someone as per his need. It is commonly thought that only the rich invite others to display their affluence. In contrast, the poor can hardly afford to invite others. Why show poverty to everyone?

Another factor concerns showing one’s power and strength. A strong neighbor invites its weaker neighbor to establish a power balance that might be later leveraged. Of course, in case of a national calamity, no invitation is sought, as it becomes the moral obligation of one country to share the grief of the suffering nation, without any expectation of reciprocity.
The position of the invitee is always secondary, as it merely responds to the invitation extended to it. Interestingly, any invitation from a superior or a stronger friend becomes an order. In the present context of Nepal’s PM being invited by India and China, apparently Nepal is being honored, but in reality, it is asked to register its presence (like an Urdi) as and when they want. India has, for the first time, invited Nepal (as a SAARC member) at the oath-taking ceremony of its Prime Minister, whereas China has been inviting Nepal to attend its exhibitions. Nepalis, who always seems to be very sensitive about their sovereignty, perhaps, forget about it when any invitation is extended from India or China.

But is it mature diplomacy to invite highest dignitaries for small events? Why can’t Nepal ask for the presence of its counterparts from China at our exhibitions? Or to ask the Indian PM to come during the swearing-in of Nepali PM?

Similarly, India’s invitation to all SAARC leaders for oath-taking provided an opportunity for its leaders to interact with all the leaders in neighborhood. Perhaps PM Modi wanted to show them how in a democracy, pluralism and unity in diversity coexist. Or Modi might have thought that he wanted to build personal ties with these leaders.

Significantly, Modi’s invitation overlooked the fact that each of the leaders he invited had to made a careful calculation, not the least Nawaz Sharif, the prime minister of Pakistan. Many of the invitees must have been in a fix: they didn’t want to antagonize India, at the same cozying up to India, the ‘Big Brother’ might not have gone down well with the domestic constituencies. There was another dilemma: accept the invitation too soon, and it would look like obeying an order. But delay it, and again the suspicion of India would have to be countenanced. Thus there are always there psychological undertones to international diplomacy, something which our commentators have overlooked so far.

The author is former election commissione

Leave a Reply