When discussing Nepal’s foreign policy, it’s imperative to move beyond a theoretical framework and address contemporary challenges and opportunities.
The current global order, as I perceive it, is grounded in realism rather than idealism or Marxism. It prioritizes national interest, irrespective of one’s political ideology, whether a dictator or a democrat.
This perspective underscores the necessity of viewing foreign affairs through the lens of national interest.
Furthermore, geopolitical theory reveals that Nepal’s role in the world has evolved significantly since 1904 when it was not the heartland of global affairs.
Today, the heartland lies in the Indo-Pacific region, and Nepal is situated within this geopolitical nexus. Recognizing this shift is essential when formulating foreign policy, as it helps us position ourselves effectively.
Considering our priorities and opportunities, Nepal possesses a significant geopolitical advantage.
Despite claims that we are trapped or in trouble, I believe this situation is largely a result of our own choices. Nepal occupies a unique position on the global stage, where the world’s attention is focused on China and the United States.
These global powers are sought after by nations worldwide for partnerships.
Unfortunately, Nepal has yet to fully leverage this geopolitical advantage. Instead of dwelling on challenges, we should be examining why we haven’t capitalized on this opportunity.
Furthermore, our inability to set clear priorities has been a significant hindrance. What should be the paramount focus of Nepal’s foreign policy today?
India, with its burgeoning population nearly on par with China’s, boasts one of the world’s largest markets.
Nepal need not look far to fuel its development; rather, it should foster relationships with these two influential nations in a manner that aligns with its national interests and promotes transparent cooperation.
Regrettably, we have often viewed geopolitics as a challenge rather than an opportunity.
It’s high time we rethink our approach and capitalize on Nepal’s strategic positioning in the world.
“What difference does it make if the leader expresses positive sentiments and follows through on them? Today, Nepal’s soft power is more valuable than its material wealth. This is a fundamental principle rooted in Eastern wisdom, irrespective of what others may say.
Regrettably, recent incidents like the Lalita Niwas scandal involving purported Bhutanese refugees have tarnished Nepal’s global image.
Despite this, we continue to grapple with the stereotype of being among the most uninformed people in the world.
It’s crucial to clarify that we have not deliberately harmed anyone. This message needs to reach everyone.
Even in the realm of cinema or significant endeavors like Chandrayaan, there is a profound connection to our cultural and philosophical heritage, as evident in the teachings of the Gita.
What Chanakya expounded in the past aligns remarkably with Western thought today, underscoring our timeless wisdom.
The Bhutanese refugee scandal may have momentarily strained our adherence to these Eastern principles, but it’s a transient setback.
Shouldn’t we endeavor to strengthen our neighborly ties, particularly with India, which will likely be an even more prominent neighbor in the future?
In the eyes of nations worldwide, we are still perceived as a principled society, and it is imperative to propagate this perception globally.
Currently, we have not made the most of our abundant resources across various sectors.
Have we effectively communicated to the world why they should invest in our country?
Let’s embark on an ambitious cloud project, involving India and China, if willing.
When seeking assistance from India or China, it’s vital to ensure mutual understanding and cooperation.
Rather than succumbing to external pressures, we must engage diplomatically and strategically.
Our actions, like hastily informing China when engaging with America, reflect our agency.
Another challenge we face is the MCC (Millennium Challenge Corporation) and the BRI (Belt and Road Initiative).
We ratified the BRI in May 2017, and the MCC agreement was inked in September. However, questions arise: What were the underlying reasons for these decisions? Why have we not yet implemented them?
Addressing the MCC is relatively straightforward: What have we achieved since signing it? Were we fully aware of the project’s implications at the time of signing?
These are just a few of the pertinent questions that require thorough examination as we navigate these complex investment arrangements.
Furthermore, our inability to set clear priorities has been a significant hindrance. What should be the paramount focus of Nepal’s foreign policy today?
Foreign affairs seem to have slipped from our purview. The timing of the Prime Minister’s visit to China or the progress of agreements with China remains shrouded in mystery to foreigners and, quite possibly, to us as well.
The strained relations between China and India, our immediate neighbors, call for nuanced consideration.
While they may be at odds currently, we must recognize that they are our neighbors.
Shouldn’t we endeavor to strengthen our neighborly ties, particularly with India, which will likely be an even more prominent neighbor in the future?
We must strategically choose our priorities, emphasizing regional and neighborly relationships, as China and India are poised to exert significant global influence post-2050.
Now, turning to the leadership of our foreign affairs, it is apparent that our current approach is weak and ineffective. Discussing this issue may understandably discomfort some ministers.
But it raises a fundamental question: Who has been at the helm of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs?
Foreign affairs seem to have slipped from our purview. The timing of the Prime Minister’s visit to China or the progress of agreements with China remains shrouded in mystery to foreigners and, quite possibly, to us as well.
Why is it that agendas are announced without clear plans for implementation? We need greater transparency and accountability in our foreign affairs.
Let’s engage with various nations without strategic biases. In the past, we have sought developmental assistance without military commitments, but perhaps it’s time to reconsider this stance and achieve a more balanced foreign policy approach that considers India and China’s evolving roles.
Let’s establish an investment model that defines our priorities and outlines areas for investment.
For instance, if a country offers Nepal walkie-talkies, we should carefully assess the costs and benefits before accepting or declining the offer.
Similarly, decisions such as whether MPs should use certain cars should not be made haphazardly.
Transparency is crucial; the use of vehicles should be documented, especially subsidies received from specific sources, to avoid any embarrassment.
We must exercise prudence in all significant decisions, especially when it involves substantial investments.
Regardless of political affiliations, Nepal’s political parties should unite in the pursuit of national interests.
Whether Congress, UML, Maoist, or new parties, the collective focus should be on what benefits Nepal as a whole.
If consensus is elusive, let’s engage in meaningful dialogue to establish equitable priorities, recognizing the universality of our national interests.
I’ve previously advocated for Nepal to adopt a policy of multi-alignment. Non-alignment, in today’s context, means avoiding military alliances, so why not embrace multiple connections?
Let’s engage with various nations without strategic biases. In the past, we have sought developmental assistance without military commitments, but perhaps it’s time to reconsider this stance and achieve a more balanced foreign policy approach that considers India and China’s evolving roles.
(Edited excerpt from journalist Gopal Khanal’s discussion during the ‘Opportunities and Challenges of Nepal’s Foreign Policy’ event organized by the Institute for Strategic and Socio-Economic Research (ISSR) at the Pavilion Hall on Durbar Marg, Kathmandu)
Comment