Submit your Article

The entrenched issue of political fragmentation and instability in Nepal are two deep-rooted problems. Over the years, the country has witnessed the emergence of several political parties, many of which have divergent ideologies and national objectives. Due to the difficulty in forming stable, efficient governments as a result of this fragmentation, coalition politics and frequent changes in the political leadership have hampered the creation and implementation of long-term policies.

Political parties have also failed to adequately address the nation’s socio economic problems, such as poverty, unemployment, and infrastructure deficiencies. Because the political system has failed to address these critical concerns, social discontent, and dissatisfaction have grown, which has weakened support for major parties and increased the need for alternative political options.

Leadership questions

Any political party can face serious leadership challenges with an adverse effect on their performance. The characteristics and behaviors of the party’s senior leaders frequently play a role in leadership issues in the context of political parties. The ability of a leader to effectively articulate the concerned party’s vision, objectives, and policies to party members and the general public can be impeded by a lack of strong communication skills. At the same time, a lack of vision among leaders makes it difficult to establish strategic priorities and make wise choices, which undermines the party unity and a sense of direction. A party’s capacity to put on a united face and successfully rule can be undermined by internal rivalries, leadership conflicts, and a lack of cooperation among party members. Certain parties may occasionally be ruled by political dynasties, in which positions of power are passed down within families. This could impede the formation of new, competent leaders and help explain why there is a dearth of creativity and diversity.

Corruption and governance challenges

Nepal has long struggled with issues of corruption and poor governance, which have hampered the nation’s growth and political stability. The several types of corruption include low-level bribery, elites’ embezzlement, and nepotism. Public faith in political institutions is damaged by widespread corruption. A major issue in Nepal has been a lack of accountability in governance. When corruption and the abuse of authority are frequently left unchecked, a culture of impunity takes root. The ineffectiveness, excessive paperwork, and opaqueness of Nepal's bureaucracy have been criticized. Administrative procedures that are too onerous might make it easier for corruption to flourish and delay timely implementation of plans and initiatives. Political parties stifle public institutions’ independence and objectivity by influencing administrative decisions. Political meddling in governmental affairs can result in bias, compromise merit-based hiring decisions, and jeopardize public services. When it comes to delivering justice on time and handling cases of corruption, Nepal's court has experienced difficulties. This could deter people from bringing up corruption and seeking judicial redress, continuing the cycle of impunity.

Institutional feebleness

Political parties in Nepal have had a lot of difficulties due to institutional inadequacies. These flaws affect a number of political institutions, including the legislature, the judiciary, the electoral system, and other governmental organizations. Weak institutions may make it more difficult for political parties and their leaders to be effectively checked and balanced. This may lead to a concentration of power in a small number of people, opening the door for possible abuse of power and compromising democratic ideals.

Daron Acemoglu and James A. Robinson’s book “Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty” makes the argument that institutions are vital in determining a country's success or failure. The laws, customs, and groups that make up a society’s political, economic, and social interactions are referred to as institutions. When a strong elite controls the government, they frequently create extractive institutions in order to preserve their privilege and stifle opposition to their rule. In the case of Nepal, leaders’ poor judgment and shortsightedness in constructing extractive institutions caused the failure of the nation’s overall development.

The public’s trust in institutions has been further eroded because political parties are taking advantage of this circumstance to advance their agendas without being held responsible for their activities. Because of institutional flaws, Nepal has frequently changed governments and coalitions. Weak institutions make it difficult to establish stable governments, which leads to frequent changes in leadership and the direction of policy, which is having an impact on the development and progress of the nation. Because some groups may feel excluded from or underrepresented in the political process, weak institutions can increase ethnic and regional tensions. Political parties in Nepal are taking advantage of these splits to win quick supporters, thus solidifying social and political divides.

In “Fixing Failed States: A Framework for Rebuilding a Fractured World,” another intriguing book by Ashraf Ghani and Clare Lockhart, the authors argue that states fail because they lack a flexible framework that can map what voters want and create the means for change. Leaders must also be prepared to make difficult choices in order to address the underlying causes of state failure and be dedicated to prioritizing national interests over personal or factional interests. But we observe in the context of Nepal that leaders are driven to satisfy their objectives through institutional manipulation. Recent instances of manipulation can be seen in the Lalita Niwas controversy, gold smuggling and the episode involving the phony Bhutanese refugee.

External influence

An important feature of Nepal’s political environment has been the involvement of outside parties. Due to its geographic location and historical ties to its neighbors, Nepal is vulnerable to outside interests. India and China have attempted to impose their will on Nepal’s politics and policy choices, frequently resulting in diplomatic wranglings and conflicting interests. Nepal has received support and foreign aid from a number of nations and international agencies. Although financial help is essential for humanitarian relief and development programs, it can also lead to a degree of economic dependency, which may have an impact on policy decisions. To advance their objectives in Nepal, external actors may ally themselves with particular political parties or leaders. These coalitions and political dynamics may be impacted by these alliances, which may result in changes in the balance of power and the direction of policy.

Nepal’s internal politics may reflect India and China’s geopolitical competition. It's possible for these two nations to try to acquire leverage by backing various political groups or adopting various positions on crucial topics, complicating Nepal’s international relations. The involvement of external entities in Nepal’s infrastructure and connectivity projects may have effects on the country’s economy and geopolitics. The country’s economic development and regional connectivity, for instance, may be influenced by projects supported by China’s Belt and Road Initiative or India’s connectivity initiatives. Particularly in relation to cross-border security challenges, external actors may have an impact on Nepal’s security dynamics. External participation in Nepal’s security matters may have an impact on regional stability.

Economic and social challenges

Nepal is dealing with a number of social and economic issues that may affect its growth and people’s well-being. The country has a high rate of poverty, especially in the countryside. Widespread unemployment and underemployment, particularly among young people, are caused by a lack of employment opportunities and limited economic alternatives. For the nation, overcoming poverty and establishing stable livelihoods remain major obstacles. A majority of people in Nepal depend on agriculture for their livelihood. However, the expansion and sustainability of the business are hampered by low productivity, conventional farming methods, and vulnerability to climate change. All across the nation, access to high-quality education and healthcare is still unequal. There are discrepancies in educational and health outcomes because many rural communities lack adequate schools and healthcare services.

Numerous Nepali residents go for employment overseas for want of economic prospects at home. Remittances support the economy, but they can also cause social problems like family dissolution and reliance on outside income sources. Gender discrepancies still exist in Nepal’s political representation, job, and educational opportunities. Girls and women frequently experience societal prejudice as well as restricted access to opportunities and resources. Nepal is also prone to natural calamities like landslides, floods, and earthquakes. Strong disaster management and climate resilience initiatives are required because these calamities represent considerable hazards to infrastructure, property, and human life.

The solution

Political parties must deal with these fundamental problems and seek to create a stable and accountable political system that can successfully address the nation’s difficulties and meet the goals so as to restore public trust and confidence. They must accord top priority to leadership development and foster an environment of accountability and openness in order to overcome leadership challenges. Effective leaders, who can inspire confidence, put forth a compelling vision, and rally party members around shared objectives can be molded by building a collaborative environment, encouraging open communication, and supporting leadership development programs. Ultimately, for the parties to succeed and successfully advance the interests of the people they represent, strong and effective leadership is crucial. Prioritizing equitable economic growth, infrastructural development, bettering access to healthcare and education, and enhancing climate resilience are all necessary in Nepal. Building a more wealthy and equitable society in Nepal also requires advancing gender equality, social inclusion, and political stability.

The author is a doctoral fellow of IR in China

When it comes to international relations and security, two economically powerful nations have traditionally placed Nepal’s geostrategic situation at the center of their attention. It has been widely discussed in the academic community that when it comes to understanding the US-China rivalry in current politics, Nepal has not only become a focus for the two countries but also for other significant global players. The norms of the discipline based on the Western school of thought are used to evaluate the politics and foreign policies of the developing world, while the worldviews of smaller states are ignored in international political calculations. According to the realist school of international relations that has notable proponents like Kenneth Waltz and John Mearsheimer, weaker states like Nepal would either join the bandwagon or act as a balance against strong neighboring countries. Global powers and Nepal Landlocked by the two powerful neighbors, Nepal’s political situation is likely to draw attention to how it will fare in the global political landscape. With 37 percent of the world’s population, China and India are the second and fifth largest economies in the world, and are vying to become significant participants in world politics. Populations are one of the factors that determine economic mobility in a free-market society, and on this front, China and India have gained significant privilege. The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, one of the great theses of the early 21st century, posits that states will always strive to amass power and that interstate cooperation is challenging. Mearsheimer underscored that the ‘tragedy’ of great power politics is that even large nations that seek security would nonetheless be obliged to engage in rivalry and conflict with one another. Looking at China and India, we can see that they both engage in cooperation and competition depending on the nature of issues. But in the case of China and the US, we can come to the same conclusion that Mearsheimer’s theory intersects. The US and China are vying with one another to amass power in order to rule the political system in the current international political dynamics. However, the US has been a status-quo superpower since the fall of the USSR in 1991 and has been struggling to maintain its position as a dominant force, while China has been trying to unseat the US from its coveted position and has thus put forward various initiatives to win over the rest of the world. Since Xi Jinping’s ascent in 2013, China has been hurriedly assembling all the necessary paraphernalia to launch a mission for the superpower. A few of the well-known initiatives that have already advanced toward their goals are the Belt and Road Initiatives, Global Development Initiatives, Global Security Initiatives, and the Global Civilization Initiatives. With the aim of lowering China’s dependency on the foreign technology and elevating Chinese technological enterprises in the global market, the “Made in China 2025” strategy plan was introduced in 2015. But from Mao’s China to Xi’s China, each one has come up with the concepts for programs meant to aid China’s development and prosperity. In his vision of the ideal socialist and communist society, Mao saw it as one without oppression or inequality, with enough food and material things. The idea of “invigoration of China” (zhenxing zhonghua) that Deng Xiaoping adopted in 1978 underlines how important it is for China to become more prosperous and powerful. Jiang Zemin advocated for the “great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation” after 1989. “Harmonious society” (hexie shehui) is a narrative that describes the legacy of Hu legacy, who was persuaded to turn to Confucianism to foster harmonious connections both within China and between China and the rest of the world. The phenomenal development of China since the beginning of this decade has generated a lot of attention among other major players in world affairs. This has made a number of US and allies-led programs more effective in the region. In the light of this, Nepal needs to take meticulous and diplomatic measures to protect national interests as we have signed BRI projects (in 2017) and have welcomed the MCC with the Parliament approving it in 2022. Nepal equally has to understand underlying facets between Indo-Nepal relations as both the nations share common culture, religion, socio-economic arrangements and history. It has treasured and maintained the fervor of enduring relationships with its close neighbors for a long period, even amid various changes. India must also approach Nepal more practically. It should not give anything more importance than is required. It should behave more like a partner rather than an overbearing big brother. India needs to continually hone its soft diplomacy, which emphasizes values like democracy, human rights, ethics, and culture. Nepal has always relied on ports like Kolkata in West Bengal for trade with other nations. China is utilizing its engineering prowess to navigate Nepal’s difficult topography and turn it from a ‘landlocked’ to a ‘land-linked’ nation. During KP Oli’s second term as PM, we have seen improvement in relations between China and Nepal as a result of China’s ‘investment diplomacy’, which has placed a heavy emphasis on industrial growth and infrastructural investment—both essential elements of the BRI. The BRI supports the lofty connectivity-related geopolitical and geo-economic goals of a growing China. Way forward Nepal has already experienced a series of dire political situations over the decades. We have spent generations for the cause of political transformation. The nations that were on an equal footing with Nepal 30 years ago have already outpaced Nepal in a variety of indicators. On its part, Nepal has failed to even set up a solid platform for growth and prosperity. Nepal needs to improve its production-based economy, attract foreign investments for infrastructure development, repair its ruptured economy, and adopt the right political orientation. Walt writes that bandwagoning should occur when secondary states partner with the hegemon in response to a perceived threat. On the contrary, Stephens G Brooks and William C Wohlforth argue that balancing is the exclusive strategy where secondary states cooperate with the hegemon so as to avoid potential threat. John Ikenberry introduces the strategy called “institutional binding” which means that states cooperate with the hegemon not because they feel threatened but to achieve mutual gains. Countries like Nepal should understand and identify the geopolitical elements that emerged in the rise of China and other powers in the international political order in the changing context and must opt for the best option that engrosses the conducive euphoria where Nepal can address its national interests. So as to meet the highest level of national interest, Nepal must go with the third strategy. In the interconnected world, as Anne-Marie Slaughter argues, every entity of the global political system must cooperate with each other one way or the other to acquire a win-win atmosphere. Sandwiched between two giant neighbors, Nepal must understand the priorities and preferences of international players, including regional powers for geopolitical gains in an international political order. If Nepal fails to engross the institutional binding with both the states, the rise of these two close neighbors as regional rivals and as zealots of two distinct ideological agendas has a greater chance of gritting Nepal's national interest. It is imperative for Nepal to protect its national interests and to avoid falling prey to pressure from any of the two countries. The author is PhD Scholar at CCNU, International Relations 

After the formation of a government under the leadership of CPN (Maoist Center) Chair Pushpa Kamal Dahal, various sectors were keen to know what shape Nepal’s foreign policy will take. When a new government is formed, there is always an opportunity to address the many political objectives, among which foreign policy is one. Domestic factors, other governments' actions or policies, or aspirations to achieve particular geopolitical designs all have an impact on how foreign policy is developed. Leopold Von Ranke prioritized geography and external challenges when determining foreign policy, but succeeding writers emphasized more on domestic issues. Foreign policy is frequently defined as being consistent in nature and not being affected by changes in the administration in charge of establishing it. However, in the context of Nepal, we can observe how many regimes have adopted changes in foreign policy in various ways. The Rana oligarchy, according to Professor Bhim Nath Baral, embraced an isolationist strategy. To put it another way, both the Rana oligarchy and the Panchayat Monarch were driven to advance a foreign policy that was centered on their own regimes. Political parties were motivated by party-centric foreign policy after the restoration of multiparty democracy in 1990, although it has been observed that in the democratic republican political system, foreign policy is driven by the motives of the political leadership at large. The propensity to conduct foreign policy within the framework of Nepali politics has failed in general to provide the right orientation in order to achieve the country's aspirations and fundamental mission. Shifting a global power Soft power proponent Joseph S Nye has stated: "Power is changing, and there are two types of changes. One is a change in the balance of power among the states, which can be emphasized by stating the message simply—that it is moving from the West to the East. The second is power diffusion, in which all states, whether in the West or the East, are losing power to non-state actors. After the collapse of the USSR in 1991, the US emerged as the only superpower, and it still sees itself in that position today.  Professor Graham Allison discussed the growth of China and popularized the phrase "Thucydides Trap," which refers to the idea that a rising power's attempt to usurp an existing one will always result in conflict.  In the current global order, we have observed a remarkable rise of the political and non-state players. The US and its allies are now deeply concerned about China's remarkable rise, and they are using a variety of strategies to try and slow it down. When China was only the US’ 24th-largest trading partner shortly after the declaration of its opening in 1978, total merchandise commerce between the two countries was only about $4 billion. However, by 2017, the US-China trade increased to $636 billion. The Industrial and Commercial Bank of China has the largest financial assets in the world ($4.2 trillion), making it a leader in digital innovation, e-commerce, and technology. China is engaging with various regions of the world through the BRI, GDI, GSI, and many more platforms and concepts. Similar to China, India is a major player in South Asia and another developing economic force in Asia. Due to its location between China and India, Nepal has drawn the interest of powerful nations. China and India were the first two countries to extend congratulations to Nepal following the election of Dahal as Prime Minister. A team of Chinese experts arrived in Nepal after Dahal’s election to study the Kathmandu-Kerung railway in depth and to reopen important ports shut for an extended period of time. A series of important visits have been taken from the UK, the UK and India amid these moves from China. This reflects global concerns about the new government’s take on the goals and preferences of major powers in light of geostrategic conflicts. Enhancing soft power The three main factors that influence a nation's soft power, in Nye's words, are its culture, political ideas, and foreign policies. However, economic power is an essential requirement for the majority of soft power. For two reasons: first, people aspire to be like those in prosperous countries rather than those in poorer ones, hence the bulk of soft power is based on and made possible by economic wealth. As a result, at this point, our main focus must be on using our resources to increase national wealth. The United States has Hollywood, famous brands and businesses, and a mission to ‘evangelize’ democracy; the European Union has a romantic and touristic allure, a shaky sense of supranational unity, and a comprehensive foreign assistance program; and other soft powers exhibit peculiar attributes in an international order. China is now heavily investing in soft power projects. Now, China has become the third destination for overseas students. According to the Liz Economy, China has a three-pronged approach. The first step is to develop the soft power of China, followed by more traditional concepts of culture, such as Confucianism, art, music, and literature. The creation of the means by which China can project its soft power is the third component of the plan. The Confucius Institutes are a means of disseminating public diplomacy, much like the Alliance Française, the British Council, and many US projects. People in Africa have favorable perceptions of China as a result of its development of commerce and investment on the continent and the proliferation of infrastructure projects spearheaded by China. Allow me to highlight some of the imperatives that must be brought into effect in engrossing national wealth.  We have abundant water resources, natural resources, mines and cultural diversity. We have been talking about our water resources for ages but we are not positioning the right use of it.  Beyond hydropower generation, we can harness our water resources and capitalize them into different forms. Water from the Himalayas can be exported abroad for drinking and ritualistic values. How can we motivate others to make our water occupancy in different forms is up to us. There are several untapped religious tourism destinations. Places like Khaptad, Ramaroshan, Badimalika, and so on across Nepal can be transformed into religious hubs as well as tourist destinations. We can introduce Vedic University and research centers in Khaptad, Badimalika and other such places. Tourism University can be established in Ramaroshan and Rara. We can identify other potential agricultural areas and develop them into large-scale production universities and research centers. We do not have a state-owned Gurukul in this sacred country. By establishing Gurukul Universities, we can attract people from different countries. These are some of the untapped ideas through which the country can generate considerable national wealth, which can be used for soft power projection. Path ahead The rise in the economic might of two regional powers, India and China, economic allies on the one hand and geopolitical rivals on the other, has changed the nature of regional politics. This puzzling relationship between them has created space for ambiguity in the regional order, making South Asia's geopolitics highly unstable from a strategic standpoint. To contain China and its geo-economic strategy, including BRI, GSI, and GDI, the US and its allies have launched a number of economic and geostrategic initiatives, including B3W, IPS, and AUKUS. An intense struggle between these powerful nations, which is "strategy-loaded," has reshaped the geopolitical landscape. This is unlike the Cold War era, when two blocs competed for power and attempted to contain one another. Nepal must be very careful in choosing the preferences and choices based on its national priorities, comparative advantage, rather than reiterating the old rhymes of non-alignment. Multiple actors, emerging from the dawn of the 21st century in the current international political order, have their own priorities and preferences. Foreign policy must be developed on the basis of national consensus in which all political parties, specialists and stakeholders reach an understanding that prioritizes national interest under the guiding matra of “Comparative Advantage”. The author is PhD Scholar at CCNU, International Relations, China