KATHMANDU: To begin with, it would perhaps not be injudicious to postulate that the practice of “awarding” ambassadorial posts to unqualified individuals is ingrained in Nepali politics.
Whether or not this write-up reaches out to those who do not make a head or tail of the ambassadorial nominations, this, perhaps, can be an aide-memoire for people who comprehend the practice.
So far as this scribe’s notion is concerned, a country’s ambassador is a powerful asset for its diplomacy, a right person who can establish trade or business relationships between two countries, and is capable of improving a foreign public’s perception of Nepal.
And in this case, what if, the government appointed an unfit or unprepared diplomat as an ambassador based on favoritism, nepotism, or money (financial backers?
The answer: Such an ambassador will do nothing well but damage the country’s credibility.
Moreover, such a practice will most likely break the trust between the two countries, and the country’s foreign policy-making becomes even more challenging.
Why I thought I should raise this issue is because the Government of Nepal recommended 20 ambassadors, including eight from foreign service and 12 from political appointments last week.
The ambassadorial appointments, mostly political appointees may or may not have the knowledge to which they are assigned, or are not prepared for an ambassadorship because of their lack of knowledge, language ability, negotiation skills, ethics and foreign-policy experience.
Whether or not it is mentionable, the nomination includes the party’s top leaders’ brother-in-law, and relatives.
As usual, instead of nominating on the basis of quality, capability and experience, recommendations have been made to reach out to the leader’s relatives and those who can influence the government, the ministers, and the top party leaders of the ruling coalition.
For instance, Kailash Pokhrel nominated as ambassador to Australia is the brother-in-law of Unified Socialist Chairman Madhav Kumar Nepal.
Another fortunate nominee Basudev Mishra, nominated as the ambassador to Sri Lanka, is the brother-in-law of Minister Pampha Bhushal.
Milan Tuladhar, who has been nominated as ambassador to Russia is a relative of Unified Socialist leader Jhalanath Khanal, and Dilliraj Poudel recommended ambassador to Malaysia is a relative of Nepali Congress senior leader Ram Chandra Poudel.
It’s been revealed that Dr. Shashank Koirala has recommended the name of Kanta Rijal as ambassador to Israel.
Since the majority of the nominees are politically-backed, these nominees are most likely to be approved by the powerful Parliamentary Hearing Committee, and will be appointed as ambassadors in different foreign countries representing Nepal, which has currently embassies in 30 countries and three permanent missions to the United Nations.
As a continuation of the established practice, a string of gaffes has cast a spotlight on Prime Minister and Nepali Congress President Sher Bahadur Deuba’s tendency of staffing embassies with people (relatives of coalition partners, influential personalities, and manpower agents) who, undoubtedly, lack qualifications.
This time, too, PM Deuba has disdained the capable ones for their expertise –a corrosive gesture to Nepal’s diplomacy and damaging to our (young?) democracy.
One fortunate nominee is Sharmila Parajuli Dhakal, who has been recommended as Nepali ambassador to Spain.
Call her fortunate because she has been nominated ambassador by three governments – first by the then KP Oli-led government in 2073 BS, second nomination and appointment by the subsequent coalition government of the Nepali Congress and the Maoist Center as Ambassador to Oman, and third, this time as Ambassador to Spain by the PM Deuba-led government.
However, her first nomination was withdrawn due to public outrage.
Interestingly, the next government led by PM Oli called back all the ambassadors appointed by the previous government except Parajuli.
Unfortunately, they either do not get an opportunity or get weeded out through the parliamentary hearing process paving the way for the same unqualified ambassadors, who cannot nurture relationships with the country they are stationed in.
Here, what is to be noted is that Nepali ambassadors carry responsibility in their roles as chief diplomats as they represent the country and all Nepalis besides overseeing embassy operations with which Nepal maintains diplomatic relations.
These ambassadors are also entrusted with promoting national interests, maintaining diplomacy, welcoming visitors and supporting resolutions.”
Therefore, their performances will show how foreign governments and their citizens view the country.
The ambassadorial appointments, mostly political appointees may or may not have the knowledge to which they are assigned, or are not prepared for an ambassadorship because of their lack of knowledge, language ability, negotiation skills, ethics and foreign-policy experience.
There are some political supporters or electoral campaign financers who make fine diplomats, and who have the quality to represent Nepal but is it that these people do not go noticed?
Perhaps they go unnoticed merely because they lag in influencing the top-notches with money.
Unfortunately, they either do not get an opportunity or get weeded out through the parliamentary hearing process paving the way for the same unqualified ambassadors, who cannot nurture relationships with the country they are stationed in.
Comment