As predicted in October 2009, the plot over Nepal’s international relations is thickening. Nepal is caught in the whirlwind of international cross-currents of outgoing China and the resistant US in letting its super-power position erode. Nepal till that time managed one-nation intervention at a high cost to its basic interests. But to deal with multidimensional interests Nepal was not mentally and, let alone, physically prepared. However, Nepal finds itself elevated in importance but not in diplomatic skill to accept the challenge therein.

It was then said, “It has been a uni-dimensional affair. Our political leaders approached India for resolution of our domestic disputes especially after the fall the Rana regime. The tradition is continuing even today. But a new dimension is opening up making a foreign intervention in our internal affairs complicated. As China is showing increasing interest in Nepal’s political stability with its obvious fallout effect on stability in the Tibetan region of China, things won’t remain as simple as before.”

It was to avert the inevitable controversy that Nepal government has kept hitherto mum over this new role that Nepalese never thought of. However, keeping quiet over the rising contention of the big powers at home and abroad is neither an excuse nor a way out of this impasse. Nepal is being dragged in a tug-of-war that was seen coming years earlier.

In 2019, just after a decade, the complication has appeared before us. Many nations have joined the competition. It is the time when China has boldly launched the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) program of which Nepal has agreed, and accordingly signed the document, to be a partner. Nepal stands to gain from its participation by way expanding its connectivity with neighbors and countries beyond them, serving as a transit point for the big traders on both sides of its border, importing and exporting commodities at a cheaper and competitive price and augmenting people-to-people contacts with many countries thereby. They have stood valid only in theory so far. They are yet to show the results in practice.

On the other hand, Nepal has been lured to join actively the Indo-Pacific grouping that has emerged to halt the outgrowth of Chinese influence outside its borders. Nepalese are yet to understand what does the ‘central role’ means, which it was assigned in Washington DC, in the group.

It was to avert the inevitable controversy that Nepal government has kept hitherto mum over this new role that Nepalese never thought of. However, keeping quiet over the rising contention of the big powers at home and abroad is neither an excuse nor a way out of this impasse. Nepal is being dragged in a tug-of-war that was seen coming years earlier.

The actual showdown took place in Nepalese soil during the recent visit of US Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for South and Southeast Asia Joseph H Felter. He made a remark: “Some of the activities of China as a part of the BRI had been a matter of concern for all. It is our interest to have constructive relations with China. But to be clear there are some activities that China is engaged in have been the cause of concern.”

While citing examples of the Maldives, Sri Lanka and Malaysia, Felter said that some activities associated with the BRI have been seen very much in the interest of China, but not necessarily in the interest of the host countries. He welcomed investment from China. “But the bottom line is that it has to serve the interest of Nepal. We welcome constructive relations with China,” he said.

“We have shared common mountains and rivers. We are the neighbors. But some of the countries far away from this region, they only speak something but never do something. But what we are doing is better for our neighbor or our friends,” she said.

Felter expressed hope that China would improve transparency and quality of its investment and ensure that its activities support the interest of countries like Nepal just as its own. “Let us encourage China to change its policy. We welcome China to participate in this rule-based international order. The Indo-Pacific Strategy is all about safeguarding this rule-based order,” he added.

There was a sharp and prompt retort from the Chinese ambassador, Hou Yanqi. She first clarified that it was not China but Nepal that selects projects to be implemented under BRI. Both countries are discussing new projects. All these new projects are determined by Nepal, not determined from China. She said some of the reports said the projects will only be in the interest of China. That is quite ridiculous.

The envoy also clarified that projects requested by the Nepalese side are selected on the basis of the needs and priority set out by the Nepal government. She said it was not good for a country thousands of miles away to comment about relations between two immediate neighbors. “We have shared common mountains and rivers. We are the neighbors. But some of the countries far away from this region, they only speak something but never do something. But what we are doing is better for our neighbor or our friends,” she said.

It was very unusual for the Nepalese in Nepal to find big powers making a row in Nepalese territory. Nevertheless, the Chinese embassy minced no word to hide its annoyance at the American visitor’s comments. It spoke its mind and said, “Some irresponsible comments on China-Nepal Belt Initiative cooperation by the US official make them surprised and confused, and that these remarks are unpopular and have no market. If a country cannot provide help for developing countries, should, at least, refrain from obstructing others from assisting these developing countries, even less hurting the benefits of these people to serve its own political needs and sowing discords.”

The embassy also alleged that the US had played up the so-called issue of non-transparency of China’s investment and increasing the debt burdens through BRI to serve its political needs. It attempts to interfere [in] the friendly cooperation between China and Nepal which is very ridiculous.

It was interesting to note that Nepal was dumb-founded in the whole process of verbal recriminations between the American and Chinese representatives. It was evident that Nepal either did not foresee what lay ahead of its future that I had warned of 10 years ago or has not developed acumen to grapple with a situation like this. This is however just a beginning of the complex relationship that Nepal will have to confront in the coming days. The choice is either you develop a capacity to tackle it or be swamped in the international quagmire.