Submit your Article

The tragic case of Nepali student Prakriti Lamsal, who was compelled to take her own life following continuous harassment by an alleged male acquaintance at KIIT University, has sparked significant discourse. The incident, which took place on February 16, was particularly distressing as Lamsal had lodged a formal complaint with the university administration four months prior, seeking protection. However, the failure to address her grievances in a timely manner led to this unfortunate outcome.

Equally concerning was the response of certain university officials, particularly two women in administrative roles, whose handling of the situation was widely criticized. Their conduct was not only perceived as insensitive but also included remarks that were offensive to the dignity of Nepal and its people. The ensuing protests by Nepali students, later joined by Indian students, underscored the gravity of the issue and the necessity of institutional accountability.

A coordinated response

While the situation was deeply distressing, the manner in which it was managed through diplomatic engagement prevented further escalation. Immediate actions were taken at multiple levels, demonstrating a commitment to justice and the protection of students.

Following the incident, both the Nepali Embassy in New Delhi and the Indian Embassy in Kathmandu actively engaged in addressing the repercussions. Nepali Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli and Foreign Minister Arzu Rana took to social media, urging swift action against the perpetrator and ensuring the safety of Nepali students protesting for justice. Prime Minister Oli also directed two embassy officials to travel to Odisha to assess the situation firsthand and engage with the university administration.

Recognizing the sensitivity of the matter, the Indian government responded by addressing the government’s immediate concerns. The KIIT administration, under mounting pressure, took corrective measures, including the suspension of senior hostel officials and an associate professor who were caught on record making inappropriate remarks against Nepali students. Two security personnel responsible for excessive force against protesting students were also dismissed. Additionally, the university's international relations officer was suspended.

Efforts to contain the fallout

Despite these corrective actions, many Nepali students had already begun leaving Bhubaneswar, citing security concerns. In an attempt to restore confidence, the university's vice-chancellor issued multiple statements, expressing regret and assuring the provision of adequate security for Nepali students. However, the delay in addressing the original complaint and the subsequent mishandling of student grievances had already tarnished the institution's reputation.

The university further attempted to mend relations by formally apologizing and committing to preventive measures, including stricter oversight of student complaints and enhanced security protocols. These steps, though necessary, were widely regarded as reactive rather than proactive, raising broader concerns about the institutional handling of harassment cases.

Broader solidarity

The incident resonated beyond university walls, sparking widespread condemnation across India. Student organizations, including those affiliated with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the Indian National Congress, stood in solidarity with the Nepali students. Their support not only amplified calls for justice but also highlighted the shared concerns of students across national borders.

The issue also gained extensive media coverage, with Indian outlets highlighting the need for greater sensitivity in handling international student affairs. Editorials and news reports questioned the university’s response, placing pressure on educational institutions to prioritize student welfare over administrative convenience.

Importantly, this case did not devolve into a bilateral political controversy. Instead, it was addressed through institutional dialogue and diplomatic channels. India’s Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) publicly acknowledged the seriousness of the issue, reinforcing its commitment to a thorough investigation. The Odisha state government, despite initial criticism, took control of the situation by forming an independent panel to conduct an impartial inquiry.

Long-term measures

The tragedy of Prakriti Lamsal has sparked critical conversations about institutional accountability and the safety of international students in India. Following this incident, KIIT University announced a series of reforms aimed at preventing such occurrences in the future. These measures include the establishment of a dedicated student grievance redressal mechanism, a stronger anti-harassment policy and a commitment to mandatory sensitivity training for faculty and staff.

Additionally, the university pledged to strengthen its support system for international students by providing counseling services, legal assistance and emergency response teams. These initiatives, if properly implemented, could serve as a model for other institutions hosting a diverse student body.

Beyond KIIT, this incident has prompted discussions at the national level in India regarding the need for clearer policies on student safety, especially for foreign students. Universities across the country have been urged to reassess their policies on handling complaints related to harassment and abuse.

The path forward

This case serves as a crucial reminder of the importance of timely intervention, institutional accountability and the role of diplomacy in crisis management. The establishment of a scholarship in Prakriti Lamsal’s name by the university’s founder-principal is a step toward recognizing the need for systemic improvements in student protection mechanisms.

The collaborative approach demonstrated by both Nepal and India in handling this sensitive issue set a constructive precedent. Rather than fueling discord, the incident demonstrated how mutual cooperation and a commitment to justice can lead to meaningful resolutions.

Going forward, both governments and academic institutions must take proactive steps to ensure the safety and dignity of international students. Strengthening grievance redressal mechanisms, fostering inclusive environments and instituting clear accountability measures are necessary to prevent such tragedies.

Importantly, diplomatic cooperation between Nepal and India in this case highlights the strength of people-to-people relations, which remain at the heart of bilateral ties. The mature handling of the crisis facilitated by diplomatic efforts, media scrutiny and civil society engagement set a positive example for future cross-border student issues.

Ultimately, this incident highlighted the power of collective action. From students to government officials, media outlets to diplomatic representatives, multiple stakeholders played a role in ensuring that justice was pursued and lessons were learned. The tragedy of Prakriti Lamsal should serve as a catalyst for lasting reforms, ensuring that no student, regardless of nationality, is ever left unheard in their pursuit of safety and justice.

When Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli was embarking on an official visit to China, skepticism was swirling in Nepal’s political circles. Particularly, Pushpa Kamal Dahal tried to label the visit as a ‘China card’, a characterization that was both insensitive and unjustified. Despite adversarial rhetoric and conspiracy theories, Oli’s visit proved to be a landmark, underlining his ability to advance Nepal’s national interests on the global stage.

This marked Oli’s third official visit to China as Prime Minister, and like his previous visits, it carried a profound significance. Oli’s diplomatic engagements with China have consistently focused on diversifying Nepal’s economic and development partnerships. Oli’s three visits to China as prime minister have been a grand success in protecting national interest.  

During his maiden visit to China in March 2016, Oli witnessed the signing of the Transport and Transit Agreement (TTA). This historic agreement sought to break Nepal’s dependence on India for trade and transit, symbolizing Nepal’s aspiration to evolve from a landlocked nation into a land-linked one. It laid the foundation for a more independent trade regime by granting Nepal access to Chinese seaports and overland transport routes. 

However, turning this vision into reality has proven to be a formidable task. Nepal faces significant infrastructural challenges and logistical hurdles that must be addressed to fully operationalize the agreement. Still, the signing of the pact marked a decisive step toward diversifying Nepal’s trade partners and reducing its economic vulnerability. We should understand each step of execution of every project begins with the signing of the document.  

Oli’s second visit to China in June 2018 added another layer of substance to Nepal-China relations, with the signing of a memorandum of understanding (MoU) to explore the feasibility of a trans-Himalayan railway linking Kerung in Tibet to Kathmandu. Though there have been other significant decisions, the feasibility study of railway is one that will have a momentous impact in connectivity if it materializes. 

While this ambitious project will take more than a decade to complete, it represents a transformative vision for Nepal’s connectivity. Feasibility studies have been conducted in two phases in this regard. This time too, both the governments have iterated cross-border railway. The railway is more than just an infrastructural project as it embodies the potential to establish Nepal as a critical transit hub between China and India. Because Raxaul-Kathmandu railway is also in the line sooner than northern railway.  By connecting the two Asian giants through Nepal, the project could redefine regional trade dynamics and offer Nepal unprecedented economic opportunities. 

Oli’s third visit to China in 2024 cemented his legacy as a leader committed to deepening bilateral ties. The highlight of the visit was the signing of an implementation plan for the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), identifying 10 key projects for collaboration. This milestone marked a significant step forward in Nepal’s engagement with the BRI, which had been mired in delays and political debates since its signing in 2017. Under the projects of the BRI, both the sides have agreed ‘aid financing’ model that incorporates both the grant and concessional loan. But as the Prime Minister has clarified, Nepal will only take grants from China. Minister for Foreign Affairs Arzu Deuba Rana has shared the same statement. She further explained that there was nothing mentioned about the loans. 

By finalizing the implementation plan, Oli’s government demonstrated its ability to pilot the complexities of global geopolitics. The move cleared lingering uncertainties surrounding Nepal’s participation in the BRI and reaffirmed the country’s commitment to fostering mutually beneficial partnerships with China. However, it also underscored the need for Nepal to manage its foreign relations prudently, avoiding potential entanglements in geopolitical rivalries. Nepal has been able to convey a message to the global community that it will collaborate with all countries for development and prosperity without allowing foreign intervention in domestic affairs. 

Nepal’s foreign policy has often been characterized by a delicate balancing act between major global powers. This dynamic was evident in the interplay between the BRI and the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) compact with the United States. While the implementation of MCC has already begun, focusing on transmission lines and roads, the BRI has faced prolonged uncertainty.  Nepal will leave no stone unturned for receiving support of neighbors and great powers if they are genuinely offered.  The MCC, a $500m grant from the US supplemented by a $200m contribution from Nepal, has been a subject of intense political debate. The successful initiation of the BRI implementation plan during Oli’s visit signals Nepal’s intent to work with India, China, the US and other great powers on building infrastructure. Nepali leaders philosophically agreed that India and China are first priority and they should be openly called for supporting Nepal’s development. 

One of the most notable aspects of Oli’s recent visit was the unified stance adopted by Nepal’s major political parties on foreign policy matters. This consensus reflects a growing maturity among Nepali leaders in addressing international issues. By setting aside partisan differences, the political establishment demonstrated its commitment to prioritizing national interests in the realm of foreign policy. This collaborative approach has significant implications for Nepal’s diplomatic strategy. It enhances the country’s credibility as a stable partner and strengthens its bargaining position in negotiations with neighbors. Moreover, it underscores the importance of institutional continuity in foreign relations, ensuring that Nepal’s engagements with global partners are driven by long-term strategic considerations rather than short-term political calculations.

While Oli’s achievements in fostering Nepal-China relations are commendable, challenges remain. The successful implementation of agreements such as the Transport and Transit Agreement, the railway connectivity MoU and the BRI projects requires substantial financial resources, technical expertise and continued political will. Nepal must also address domestic constraints, including bureaucratic inefficiencies and infrastructural deficits, to fully capitalize on these initiatives. At the same time, opportunities are immense.  Oli has set the stage for a more confident and assertive Nepal. His efforts underscore the importance of strategic foresight and proactive diplomacy in a changing global order. After the China visit, the Prime Minister will also visit our southern neighbor. I believe, PM’s upcoming India visit would be equally fruitful. 

As an emissary of President Xi Jinping of China, Central Committee Member and Secretary of China’s Qinghai Province, Chen Gang, visited Nepal from 19-21 October 2024. His visit should not be viewed as an isolated event loaded with an agenda but rather as part of a continuing series of exchanges between the leaders of the communist parties of Nepal and the Communist Party of China (CPC). Nepali political leaders, particularly those from left-leaning parties, have frequently visited China at the invitation of the International Department of the CPC, and senior leaders of the CPC have reciprocated these visits.

Chen's visit came at the invitation of CPN-UML Secretary Raghubir Mahaseth, who is also the chief of the party's foreign affairs department. Upon arriving in Kathmandu, Chen engaged in discussions with the heads of major political parties, including Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli and Sher Bahadur Deuba, reaffirming the ties between the CPC and Nepali political parties. He also raised Chinese concerns, apart from sharing decisions made during the Third Plenary Session of the 20th CPC Central Committee.

How, then, should this visit be considered? Here are three key points that outline its significance:

Taking stock of Kathmandu’s mood
Chen’s visit aimed to gauge the mood in Kathmandu following the formation of a coalition government under KP Sharma Oli, president of Nepal’s largest communist party. Beijing likely finds comfort in a government led by leftist parties, but this does not imply that Chinese officials neglect their relations with non-leftist parties. China has adopted a policy of multiparty engagement in Nepal since the abolition of the monarchy. Every delegation meets the key leaders of major parties regardless of ideology or political alignment. The CPC understands that in today's globalized world, mutual respect and benefit take precedence over ideological closeness. China has a policy of shared development and shared destiny. Thus, Chen's visit was a way to take stock of Kathmandu's political situation following the formation of the new government.

Reaffirming support
Chen's visit served to reassure Nepal’s new coalition government of China’s full support. Chinese leaders have closely monitored Nepal's political dynamics and the influence of external powers on its domestic affairs. The world is currently in a state of transition: the old order is being questioned, and the new world order has yet to fully emerge. Although the US-led world order has already lost much of its influence, with China rising as a new global power, the future of world politics remains uncertain. Chinese leaders recognize that Nepal has become a focal point in geopolitical competition. The MCC is now being implemented in Nepal, and both American and European powers are promoting Western narratives that aim to counter China's growing influence in the region. During his visit, Chen discussed global politics and geopolitics, advising Nepali leaders to stay informed about Chinese affairs through official CPC and Chinese government sources.  

The third plenary session
Another important aspect of Chen's visit was to share decisions made during the Third Plenary Session of the 20th CPC Central Committee, recently held in Beijing. The International Department of the CPC and the Qinghai Provincial Committee organized a deliberation and interaction program at the Yak & Yeti Hotel, where Secretary Chen and Chinese Ambassador to Nepal, Chen Song, addressed key aspects of Nepal-China relations and explored potential future partnerships. Secretary Chen presented China's development model, focusing on the use of technology in agriculture, industry and human resource development. 

Qinghai's topography is similar to Nepal’s, and the region has faced seasonal floods and landslides. The Qinghai provincial government has swiftly carried out reconstruction and rehabilitation efforts for those affected. Secretary Chen assured the government of Nepal and political leaders that China is ready to support Nepal in the post-disaster reconstruction process. This was a significant commitment from the Chinese side. However, it is worth noting that both India and China have provided support to Nepal during such disasters, proving that "neighbors in need are neighbors indeed."

Prime Minister Oli and CPN-UML General Secretary Shankar Pokhrel echoed similar views on party-to-party relations between Nepal and China. Prime Minister Oli recalled President Xi's 2019 visit to Nepal as historic and requested the prompt execution of the commitments made during that visit. General Secretary Pokhrel highlighted the lessons Nepali political parties, especially the CPN-UML, could learn from the CPC’s growth and functioning. Pokhrel had visited China last year, including Qinghai, where he observed the region’s ecological development efforts. The CPC and the Chinese government have been transforming Qinghai into an ecological center of China, ensuring harmony between humans and nature. Under Secretary Chen's leadership, Qinghai has made significant progress. In this regard, Chen's visit was important for both Nepal and China.

Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli and his Indian counterpart Narendra Modi met for 30 minutes on the sidelines of the 79th General Assembly of the United Nations in New York. This meeting from the Nepali side marks the first face-to-face interaction between the two leaders since they resumed their roles as prime ministers in their respective countries. 

For both Prime Ministers, this meeting comes at a pivotal moment. Having taken office for the fourth time, Oli has become one of Nepal's most experienced political figures, though his cumulative time as Prime Minister has only amounted to four-and-a-half years. This current tenure could extend for two more years, depending on the power-sharing agreement between Oli and Nepali Congress leader Sher Bahadur Deuba. If the agreement holds, Deuba will assume leadership in the second half of the government’s term. 

Prime Minister Narendra Modi has been India’s Prime Minister for a decade, serving his third consecutive term. This time, however, he leads a coalition government, which comes with certain constraints, although he remains a strong leader. Modi's leadership has significantly shaped India's foreign policy, and in recent years, his administration has adopted a more cautious, pragmatic approach to regional diplomacy. India's response to developments in neighboring countries like the Maldives, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka reflects this careful balancing act. 

Following the meeting, both leaders took to social media to express their positive impressions. Prime Minister Modi wrote on X (formerly Twitter): "India-Nepal friendship is very strong, and there is a desire to make it stronger in the future. Our discussion was on issues like energy, technology and trade." In response, Prime Minister Oli also posted on X, stating that the meeting was "fruitful" and that various aspects of bilateral relations were discussed. While the meeting was brief and took place on the sidelines of the UNGA, it nonetheless signaled an important shift in tone, where both leaders seemed keen on fostering a spirit of cooperation and mutual understanding.

Though sideline meetings like this one often do not involve detailed agenda-driven discussions, they are critical in building rapport between leaders. Exchanging warm greetings and briefly touching on key issues is often a good first step in clearing any lingering misunderstandings or tensions. The recent Oli-Modi meeting appears to have achieved this, creating a more favorable environment for addressing both long-standing and emerging issues between the two countries.

Reports suggest that the two prime ministers agreed to activate various bilateral mechanisms to resolve pending issues between Nepal and India. Currently, there are more than a dozen such mechanisms in place, many of which have been underutilized in recent years. Reinvigorating these mechanisms could provide a platform for addressing long-standing challenges such as border disputes, trade issues and developmental cooperation.

Over the past few years, Nepal’s perception of India has evolved, with India being seen more as an indispensable partner for development. The once-prevalent anti-India sentiment within Nepal has been visibly diminishing, and there is a growing recognition that cooperation with India is crucial for Nepal's economic growth and stability. This shift in public and political sentiment provides a timely opportunity for both countries to move forward on mutual concerns.

One significant aspect of the meeting, highlighted by Nepal's Foreign Minister Rana, was Oli's formal invitation for Prime Minister Modi to visit Nepal. In a departure from the traditional diplomatic practice of Nepali prime ministers visiting India first, this time Modi will visit Nepal before Oli makes a reciprocal visit to India. This move underscores the importance both countries place on revitalizing their relationship. According to Foreign Minister Rana, preparations for Modi's state visit are already underway, signaling that both sides are ready to engage in more substantive talks in the near future.

The spokesperson for Nepal's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Amrit Rai, further emphasized a positive atmosphere created through the meeting, stating that it has helped strengthen the atmosphere of trust between the two countries. According to a statement from India’s Ministry of External Affairs, Modi took the opportunity to congratulate Nepal for becoming the 101st country to join the International Solar Alliance (ISA). Modi also emphasized the importance of regional cooperation in addressing the shared challenge of climate change.

While the New York meeting was brief, it lays the groundwork for a new normal in Nepal-India relations. Moving forward, the relationship between these two neighbors will largely depend on addressing three key areas: development cooperation, resolving historical disputes, and building trust between their leadership.

Focus on development cooperation: Nepal and India need to orient their bilateral relationship on areas where both countries share common interests, particularly in development cooperation. Nepal, given its economic size and financial limitations, cannot offer direct development assistance to India. However, India's grants, loans and joint ventures are critical to Nepal's infrastructure and energy development. Hydropower projects, in particular, represent a major area of potential collaboration. The goal of generating 10,000 MW of hydropower over the next decade, along with projects like the Janakpur-Ayodhya railway, dry ports and initiatives under the High Impact Community Development Projects (HICDP) framework are all areas where India can play a transformative role.

Nepal must ensure that these development partnerships are implemented efficiently, with proper mechanisms in place to honor commitments. However, India must also refrain from using development aid as political leverage for achieving her strategic goals. Both sides must commit to a spirit of cooperation where development serves the broader goal of mutual benefit rather than political maneuvering.

Dispute resolution: There are long-standing issues between Nepal and India, many of which are legacies from the past. Issues such as border disputes and political map disagreements have been sources of tension, but these matters can be resolved only through diplomatic dialogue. Both sides must be willing to let these issues take the necessary time rather than allowing them to escalate into more serious conflicts. Nepal should also work to address India’s legitimate security concerns, while ensuring the protection of its own sovereignty and interests. Both countries should sit together with the evidence to resolve these contentious issues.  

Building trust: Perhaps the most crucial element in Nepal-India relations is the need to build a strong foundation of trust between the political leadership of both countries. Mistrust has often arisen due to the rhetoric from leaders for domestic political purposes. While political leaders may sometimes make statements to satisfy their domestic constituencies, diplomacy requires a more measured and consistent approach. Both countries need each other’s support to flourish, and this can only happen if their leaders trust and respect one another.

In their new terms, Prime Ministers Oli and Modi have taken the first step toward rebuilding this trust. If they can continue along this path, the future of Nepal-India relations will be mutually beneficial.

Views are personal

Whether in power or not, KP Sharma Oli remains a figure of public interest and discourse. In Nepali political arena, where leaders come and go, Oli has managed to establish a lasting presence. A leader, by definition, is someone who leads society, shaping its politics and future. Politics, in turn, is a reflection of society’s aspirations, mixed with challenges and values. The role of a leader is to crystallize these elements and offer a path forward. But why are some leaders more capable and influential than others? The answer lies in the unique qualities they bring to the table—qualities that resonate with society at large.

KP Oli is one such leader who has carved out a distinct identity amid the often chaotic nature of Nepali politics. Unlike many of his contemporaries and the newer entrants into the political arena, Oli possesses qualities that have set him apart. 

One of Oli’s most remarkable traits is his intellectual curiosity and love for reading. He is known to be an avid reader, someone who not only reads a wide range of books but also internalizes and interprets their content. This habit of deep reading and reflection has allowed him to develop a broad understanding of both society and politics. 

Oli’s library is often described as the secret behind his vision. It is here that he immerses himself in works of philosophy, science, history and more, drawing connections between these disciplines and the political challenges facing Nepal. His ability to anticipate future trends and challenges—an attribute that has earned him the title of a visionary leader—can be traced back to the countless hours he has spent with his books.

For Oli, reading is not a passive activity but an active engagement with ideas. He reads not only to acquire knowledge but also to apply it. This application of knowledge is evident in his speeches and decisions, where he often draws on a wide array of references, surprising even seasoned journalists and political analysts with his depth of understanding.

A recent example

A recent event at the Armed Police Force Nepal’s meeting hall in Halchowk highlighted this aspect of Oli’s personality. The occasion was the unveiling of ‘Into the Fire’, a book by Capt Rameshwor Thapa. Thapa, originally a helicopter pilot, has transitioned into a successful entrepreneur, owning multiple business ventures including the Annapurna Media Network. Yet, beyond his business ventures, Thapa is also recognized as a responsible citizen deeply committed to the political stability and development of Nepal.

During the book unveiling ceremony, Oli spoke about the importance of such contributions to society. He praised Capt Thapa for bringing forward a story that not only reflects individual experiences but also touches upon broader societal and political issues. In his speech, Oli didn’t just focus on the book’s content; he connected it to the larger narrative of Nepal’s political history, particularly the period of the Maoist insurgency, which many refer to in Nepal as ‘Maoist violence’. Capt Thapa flew helicopters during the insurgency to rescue the innocent people and brought hundreds of dead bodies, especially of security personnel shot by the Maoists.    

Oli’s appreciation extended further when he encouraged Thapa to write a second book. Oli suggested that the second book should delve deeper into political geography, offering more detailed observations about the Maoist violence and its impact on Nepali society. Oli’s suggestion was a reflection of his belief in the power of literature to shape public discourse and influence political thought.

The event also highlighted how Capt Thapa bridged political differences between UML and Congress. Capt Thapa’s role in bringing together the CPN-UML and the Nepali Congress to form a new ruling alliance under Oli’s premiership speaks for itself. 

Oli’s influence is not only confined to the political circle; it extends across generations and professions. Whether addressing a group of schoolchildren or speaking at a seminar attended by senior citizens, Oli has the ability to connect with his audience. One of the most surprising aspects of his persona is his breadth of knowledge. He speaks with authority on subjects ranging from philosophy and science to climate change and social issues. This wide-ranging expertise often leaves his audiences in awe, prompting them to fact-check his statements using modern tools like Google or ChatGPT.

Oli’s appeal across different age groups is another testament to his unique leadership style. He understands the language of children, addressing their concerns and aspirations with empathy and clarity. At the same time, he connects with senior citizens, acknowledging their wisdom and life experiences. In a world where many leaders struggle to reverberate beyond their immediate circles, Oli has managed to build a broad base of support that cuts across generational divides.

In many ways, Oli is a leader who defies conventional expectations. He is not content with merely playing the political game; he seeks to redefine the rules, challenging his contemporaries and successors alike to rise to the occasion. His intellectual rigor, combined with his practical approach to governance, has made him a brand in his own right—a leader who is not only followed but also revered.

In the tumultuous Nepali politics, Oli stands out as a figure of stability, vision and inspiration. His love for reading and deep intellectual engagement have shaped his leadership style, allowing him to anticipate challenges and craft policies that address the needs of the present while preparing for the future. Whether in power or not, Oli’s influence is felt across society, making him a true leader in every sense of the word.

Views are personal

Amid speculations about New Delhi’s response to Nepal’s new coalition government under KP Sharma Oli, a warm reception extended to Nepal’s Foreign Minister, Arzu Deuba Rana, by the Indian government in Delhi is being perceived as a positive gesture. This visit closely followed Indian Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri’s visit to Nepal, signaling India’s priority in maintaining strong ties with its neighbor. High-level exchanges like these are often seen as manifestations of friendly relations and a growing understanding between the parties involved. Foreign Minister Rana’s India visit underscores the commitment of both nations to strengthening their bilateral relationship.

India’s response to Foreign Minister Rana’s visit has been interpreted differently by various observers. While some have provided subjective analyses, others have attempted to uncover the strategic implications. Regardless, diplomatic interactions like this are open to multiple interpretations. However, those who are trying to narrate a bad story aiming to destabilize bilateral relations, should be overlooked. Conspirators are everywhere, they should be condemned.   

This article aims to highlight Nepal-India relations, particularly in the context of recent high-level exchanges between the neighbors. It will focus on Kathmandu-New Delhi relations through the lens of KP Sharma Oli’s foreign policy and its approach to neighborly relations.

The importance given to Nepal’s Foreign Minister in India is a reflection of the importance given to the new government of Nepal formed under KP Sharma Oli. This gesture also honors the sentiments of the Nepali people. But the gestures should lead to some concrete action, for which we should wait for a few weeks (at least). Prime Minister Modi and his team are aware that Arzu Deuba Rana is the wife of former Prime Minister and a waiting Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba. They also know that Arzu herself is a leader of the Nepali Congress. In that sense,  Delhi’s response to her might have comprised such mixed posture. But, this time as a foreign minister of Nepal, she was perceived as a representative of the government of Nepal and, by extension, Prime Minister Oli. So, there’s a need to be cautious about possible efforts to create misunderstanding within the coalition by misinterpreting the visit.  

During her meetings with Prime Minister Modi, Foreign Minister S Jaishankar, and other Indian officials, Minister Rana raised several key issues. These discussions covered bilateral relations, development cooperation and economic collaboration. It is important to note that this visit was not heavily loaded with agendas but rather aimed at setting a positive tone in bilateral relations at a time when Nepal’s new ruling coalition has just taken charge. 

Minister Rana’s visit has set the tone for further discussions and future high-level visits. This diplomatic engagement also paved the way for an upcoming meeting between Nepal’s Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Such interactions are expected to address and resolve longstanding issues, fostering trust and understanding between the two nations. It should be remembered here that Oli and Modi have been maintaining close contact and sharing thoughts on issues of mutual interest.  

During the visit, Minister Rana formally extended an invitation from Prime Minister Oli to Prime Minister Modi to visit Nepal, to which Modi responded positively, indicating that he will visit Nepal in appropriate time. This development is significant, marking the potential for reciprocal visits between the two leaders.

In building relations, the chemistry of the leaders and approach to the issues are also important. This is where the foreign policy approach of Prime Minister Oli comes in.   

Prime Minister Oli’s foreign policy has been shaped by Nepal’s geographic location between its powerful neighbors, India and China. He has consistently prioritized maintaining a balanced and fair relationship with both countries on the basis of the principle of “sovereign equality.”  His well-known assertion that “countries may vary in size, but all countries are equal in terms of sovereignty” encapsulates a core tenet of Nepal’s foreign policy and continues to guide the nation’s diplomatic engagements. This approach, in  a way, aligns with India’s “Neighborhood First” policy and China’s “Peripheral Diplomacy,” both of which emphasize the importance of fostering good relations with neighboring countries.

Prime Minister Oli has emphasized that Nepal’s strategic location should be viewed as an opportunity for development rather than a challenge. He has also expressed appreciation for India’s leadership in global initiatives, such as campaigning of Global South, demonstrating the alignment of interests between the two nations. Throughout his previous tenures, Prime Minister Oli has remained committed to prioritizing Nepal’s national interest, navigating the complex geopolitical landscape with a focus on fairness and balance. In his fourth term as Prime Minister, Oli has, once again, openly requested both India and China to support Nepal’s development endeavors.  

In conclusion, Prime Minister Oli’s foreign policy approach, centered on the principles of “amity with all” and “enmity with none,” aims to promote peaceful and cooperative relations with all nations. From the land of Gautam Buddha, Prime Minister Oli has called on the global community to embrace peace and non-violence as solutions to global crises. Nepal, with its rich heritage of peace, stands ready to contribute to global efforts in promoting harmony and understanding.

The recent visit of Nepal’s foreign minister to India should be analyzed by considering these factors.  

Views are personal

Having grown tired of Pushpa Kamal Dahal’s power politics and the constant maneuvering for a ‘magic’ number in parliamentary politics, the chiefs of the two major parties in the country, KP Sharma Oli and Sher Bahadur Deuba, have sketched a new roadmap aimed at ensuring political stability at least until the next general election. In a rare display of parliamentary partnership, the two largest parties in the Parliament have agreed to form a government, though the formal agreement is yet to be made public officially. 

According to the agreement, the two parties will alternate leadership of the government between Oli and Deuba over a three-year period. Oli will serve as Prime Minister for the initial half of the tenure, while Deuba will lead for the remaining period until the next general election. Ministries in the federal government will be equally divided, and the positions of chief ministers in the provinces will also be equally shared. Both the parties have also agreed to amend the constitution, especially on the electoral system though it is not an easy job.  

As per the agreement, the Nepali Congress has given a vote of confidence to the Chief Minister of Madhes Province from the CK Raut-led Janamat Party has joined the government there. In other provinces, UML ministers have resigned to facilitate the formation of new governments. Following the power-sharing agreement in the federal government, both the parties have endorsed the deal in their respective central meetings. Leaders of both parties are committed to implementing the agreement sincerely, despite facing various conspiracies and pressures from different quarters. This time, people have given both the parties the benefit of the doubt, overlooking the past.  

On July 12, Prime Minister Dahal is set to seek a vote of confidence in the parliament, though odds are stacked against him. Despite this, Dahal’s decision to face the parliament should be respected as a constitutional right of any Prime Minister. If Dahal had morality, he should have resigned immediately after the CPN-UML withdrew support to him. Shocked and traumatized by the Oli-Deuba alliance formed to sideline him, Dahal will again present himself as a ‘revolutionary’ and ‘progressive’ leader in revenge and might call movements from different fronts. This has been a hallmark of Dahal, who has made compromises with all parties and foreign powers to save his government. Whenever he quits government, he appears as a rebel, but such politics doesn’t work these days. While his next steps remain uncertain, he is likely to be relegated to a weaker position as the opposition leader, marking a turning point in the Maoist party’s decline.

Dahal’s failure to garner a trust vote means UML Chair Oli will become the Prime Minister of Nepal under Article 76 (2) of the Constitution. Some argue that Oli cannot be appointed Prime Minister under the same article again, but the Supreme Court has clearly ruled that the same article can be invoked multiple times if there is a possibility of government formation. Ultimately, it depends on the President under which article he calls upon the parties to form the next government. 

Let the law take its own course.

The major concerns now are political stability and the continuation of developmental works initiated during Oli’s second premiership from 15 Feb 2018 to 13 May 2021. As Oli prepares to become PM for the third time, a sense of hope has spread across the nation. Among Nepal’s contemporary politicians, Oli stands out as a leader with a vision and conviction, having earned the trust of the people. Therefore, the agreement between the two major parties to share power and have Oli lead the government has been seen as a beacon of hope as Nepali people are fed up with deceptive politics.

In the last parliamentary election, no party secured a majority to form the government, leading the third party to control the power dynamics with the so-called magic number. The leader of the third party, Dahal, alternately and deceptively led the government with support from the first and the second largest parties. However, his political maneuvering has come to an end, and he has now returned to the sidelines as a frail leader. Reflecting on this, his former colleague and now leader of a fringe party, Baburam Bhattarai, expressed his satisfaction thus: “You can’t fool all the people all the time.”

Some have speculated that external powers, particularly Western ones, played a role in uniting the two major parties, but these claims are unfounded and baseless. Certain intellectuals often suspect external interference in significant domestic developments, but this is merely a form of self-satisfaction. Neither neighboring countries nor Western nations such as the US contributed to bringing the two parties together. It was Oli and Deuba, who decided to sideline Dahal’s messy and opportunistic politics from within the domestic political landscape.

Foreign interference in Nepal’s internal affairs has significantly diminished compared to the past. Ambassadors from neighboring countries in Kathmandu have maintained diplomatic decorum, engaging with all stakeholders equally. However, political inconsistencies have negatively impacted diplomatic relations. With Oli likely to become the next PM, this temporary strain on diplomatic relations is expected to end. The government formed by the two major parties will be stronger and more stable, fostering harmonious relations with both neighboring and powerful countries while prioritizing Nepal’s national interests.

The new government will address the genuine concerns of India and China, but will also firmly warn them against any interference in Nepal’s domestic affairs. Oli’s administration will maintain a balanced foreign policy, ensuring that Nepal’s sovereignty and national interests remain paramount. Strengthening ties with both India and China, the government will work towards mutual cooperation, economic development and regional stability. Additionally, Oli’s leadership is anticipated to bring renewed focus to developmental projects and economic initiatives initiated during his previous terms. This will not only help boost domestic growth but also enhance Nepal’s strategic partnerships with neighboring countries and international allies.

But, this power alliance of Nepali Congress and CPN UML should not be limited only in form but in substance too. Cornering the CPN (Maoist Center) or Dahal shouldn’t be the sole goal of the alliance, it should inject hope and that should be seen in action, for action speaks louder than words.

Views are personal

Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs, Narayankaji Shrestha, returned home after concluding a nine-day visit (March 24-31, 2024) to the People’s Republic of China, upon the invitation of Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi. During his stay in China, he engaged in bilateral discussions with his Chinese counterpart and paid a courtesy call on Chairman of the National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), Wang Huning. 

His itinerary comprised high-level meetings primarily in Beijing, the capital city of China. However, beyond the diplomatic engagements, DPM Shrestha ventured to three strategically significant locations in China, vital for Nepal's interests. Concluding his engagements in Beijing, he visited Chongqing, Tibet, and Sichuan, situated in the southwestern part of China. These regions, emerging as pivotal trading hubs in southern China, hold considerable potential for bolstering bilateral trade ties with Nepal.

Upon arrival at the international airport, DPM Shrestha convened a press conference alongside senior officials from the ministry. He asserted that the visit had been ‘highly successful’ and had elevated bilateral relations to new heights. It's a common diplomatic practice for ministers returning from foreign trips to portray their visits in such positive terms, often using phrases like ‘newer heights’ to describe the outcomes. In Nepal, it has become a fashion statement.  

Despite the vague language used to describe the achievements of the visit, DPM Shrestha emphasized that the primary focus was on extending trade, fostering economic cooperation, and building trust between the two nations. In light of Shrestha's remarks and the outcomes of his visit, one significant progress emerges: the visit has played a role in restoring understanding and trust between Nepali and Chinese governments. This suggests that the meetings and events during the visit have contributed to strengthening the foundation of bilateral relations.

When KP Sharma Oli and Pushpa Kamal Dahal formed a new coalition led by leftist parties, breaking away from previous alliances under the Nepali Congress, rumors began making rounds that China may have played a significant role in this surprising political maneuver. Nepal’s volatile political landscape often gives rise to such rumors and gossip, and it was widely speculated that the formation of a leftist-led government in Nepal could only have been possible with the initiation and support of China, given its communist ideology. DPM Shrestha might have shared such comments and feedback with Chinese officials. And, he certainly clarified that the new coalition will try to address genuine concerns of neighbors without tilting to any side.   

Whether India sought to maintain the previous government or whether China supported the formation of the new alliance remains a question best left to be answered in due time. But in domestic political developments, Nepali political parties should stop dragging India and China as parties involved in the process. We should keep in mind that India and China have greater roles to play in a fast-changing global context beyond the neighborhood. It is completely an ignorance that New Delhi and Beijing always contemplate about intervening in Nepal’s internal affairs. This thought is just the byproduct of deficiency syndrome of Nepali general psyche.   

When the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) entered into force last August, it was perceived as a significant setback for China, especially since the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), signed four months prior to MCC, had not seen any tangible implementation. This development was seen as a blow to Beijing, indicating that the US had successfully advanced its project in Nepal while China had yet to materialize its plans under the BRI. Chinese leaders viewed MCC as part of the Indo-Pacific strategy, interpreting its entry into Nepal as a strategic move of the US aimed at countering China’s influence. While the signed document denies China’s claim that MCC is part of the IPS, Nepal’s stance should remain impartial vis-a-vis the strategic rivalry between the US and China. As a sovereign nation, Nepal should maintain cordial relations with both of its neighbors. 

This visit should be seen in the backdrop of growing mistrust between Nepal and China during the previous coalition. In that sense, the primary concern from the Nepali side was to openly exchange thoughts on bilateral cooperation and bridge that gap. DPM Shrestha has worked on it. “The visit has been instrumental in strengthening mutual harmony, respect and trust between Nepal and China,” he narrated.  DPM Shrestha is recognized as one of the few Nepali politicians with a deep understanding of foreign policy and international relations. He has demonstrated an ability to conduct diplomacy in a balanced manner that respects the sentiments of Nepal's neighbors. While maintaining relations with China, he must have kept in mind that his policy and action shouldn’t be perceived as unnecessarily loyal to any neighbor.  

During the discussion, he reiterated the importance of connectivity between Nepal and China requesting the opening of the 14 traditional trade routes that have remained closed since the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic, eliciting a positive response from China. This issue has surfaced in previous meetings as well. As soon as China opens all major routes for trade and transaction, it would be beneficial for China too. Nepal and China also agreed to establish a joint commission at the level of foreign ministers. This is a positive development. According to the report, this commission will play a crucial role in regularly reviewing various aspects of the existing friendly relations between Nepal and China, signifying a commitment to deepening bilateral ties through continuous dialogue and collaboration.

The much-awaited agreement on the implementation plan of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) was not finalized during the visit, though discussions were held to give a final shape to the plan and advance it toward the execution phase. This demonstrates the ongoing commitment of both the parties to work together on BRI and reflects their shared interests in enhancing connectivity and cooperation. Debate has been there about the modality of financing the projects under BRI. The Nepali side has been asking China to provide grants for some major mega projects while in the rest of the projects Nepal would be ready to accept the loans. China should consider the proposal of Nepal. Given that Nepal shares borders with two emerging economies and rising global powers, it is imperative to seize opportunities while avoiding unnecessary challenges.