Submit your Article

The term ‘Global South’ reverberated through the halls of power during the recent 78th General Assembly, which came to a close just last week. Vibrant voices like those of India and China, who proudly identify themselves as part of this dynamic Global South, championed its cause.

In the wake of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, the Western world engaged in fervent discourse about the stance taken by Global South nations, many of which chose to remain neutral. Western experts now ponder whether the Global South has emerged as a bona fide “geopolitical continent,” considering the absence of widespread condemnation for Russia’s invasion or support for sanctions.

Stewart Patrick, senior fellow and director of the Global Order and Institutions Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, highlighted this in a striking observation made back in August. He wrote in an article: “When the UN General Assembly voted in February 2022 on a resolution demanding Russia’s immediate withdrawal from Ukraine, the Global South was split, with more than 60 percent siding with Ukraine and approximately a third abstaining. In common usage, the label amalgamates a remarkably heterogeneous group of 130-dd countries representing perhaps two-third of world’s population.”

Ding Long, a distinguished professor at the Middle East Studies Institute of Shanghai International Studies University, also contributed his perspective in an article published in The Global Times on August 4. Long stated that "the rise of the Global South, as the most prominent transformational trend in the international system after the Ukraine crisis, will promote the constitution of a just and reasonable international order." 

He underscored how the Global South had maintained its diplomatic independence and strategic autonomy during the Ukraine crisis, opting for a middle path to assert itself as a burgeoning force in global politics.

In January of this year, India hosted the Voices of the Global South Summit, a gathering that drew participation from ministers and leaders representing 125 Global South countries. Nepal’s finance minister was among those present. India and China, both towering neighbors, are vying for leadership roles within the Global South, while Brazil, too, is asserting itself as the global leader.

Indian Minister for External Affairs S. Jaishankar sent a clear message to the world during his address to the 78th UN General Assembly, warning the major powers to prepare for a contest with the Global South.  

“But for all the talk, it is still a few nations who shape the agenda and seek to define the norms. This cannot go on indefinitely. Nor will it go unchallenged. A fair, equitable, and democratic order will surely emerge, once we all put our minds to it. And for a start, that means ensuring that rule-makers do not subjugate rule-takers. After all, rules will work only when they apply equally to all,” he said.

China, too, echoed this sentiment at the UN meeting. China’s Vice President Han Zheng declared, “As the largest developing country, China is a natural member of the Global South, it breathes the same breath with other developing countries and shares the same future with them.”  China, Han promised, “will remain a member of the big family of developing countries.

Similarly, Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula Da Silva proudly proclaimed: “Brazil is reencountering itself, the region, the world and multilateralism. As I never tire of saying, Brazil is back. Our country is back to give our due contribution to face the world’s primary challenges.”

Former Nepali Ambassador to the UN, Jaya Raj Acharya, acknowledged that Nepal's prominent voice in the Global South had dimmed over the past decade, despite Nepal’s continued advocacy for bridging economic disparities between the North and South. In his address to the UN General Assembly, Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal refrained from using the term ‘Global South’.

According to Dinesh Bhattarai, former Nepali ambassador to the UN, the Global South’s growing vocalization stems from an increasing number of countries actively engaging in global issues, such as climate change, with the African Union's participation in the G20 serving as a prime example. “This shift should also be viewed in the context of Asia's rising influence,” he said.

While Nepal's prominence in the Global South discourse has waned, it is still raising critical issues related to cooperation on international platforms. Foreign Minister NP Saud, addressing the Non-Aligned Movement Summit in July, emphasized the need for deeper South-South cooperation and strengthened multilateralism, particularly at the UN. 

“We need to foster international cooperation within NAM, deepen south-south cooperation, and strengthen multilateralism at the UN at its center to resolve global problems,” he said. “As the champion of social justice and economic empowerment, NAM must advocate for inclusive and sustainable global growth, in which the Global South receives a fair share to eradicate poverty and give their people a decent life.” 

In the ever-evolving landscape of international diplomacy, Nepal's role as a passionate advocate for justice and equity among Global South nations continues to evolve and adapt, guided by the principles of national ownership and leadership and a commitment to global peace and stability.

Bhattarai said Global South is more vocal because many countries are aggressively coming out due to the issues such as climate change and African union being a part of G20 is more enthusiastic. 

The United Nations has set up an office for South-South Cooperation whose principal purpose is to enhance South-South and triangular cooperation as a means to accelerate the speed and scale of actions to achieve sustainable development goals (SDGS). 

In 1974, the United Nations General Assembly, in its resolution, endorsed the establishment of a special unit within the UNDP to promote technical cooperation among developing countries. Its name was then changed to the United Nations Office for South-South Cooperation (UNOSSC) in 2012.

In 2019, the then foreign minister, Pradeep Kumar Gyawali, addressed the second UN conference on south-south cooperation held in Argentia where he highlighted four important principles of Nepal.

• First, some members in the South, despite having similar development ambitions, are far lagging behind. They need even more understanding, partnership and cooperation. Principle of ‘leaving no one behind’ should be placed at the core.
• Second, our cooperation should have a clear focus on poverty eradication. SDG 1 is the biggest battle we have and perhaps the most cross-cutting, and therefore a sine qua non for making the world a better place to live.
• Third, gender equality, inclusiveness, concrete steps to mitigate the adverse effect of climate change and social justice, among others, should be the guide posts of development perspectives. Women and youths should be assured of better opportunities and more investment must be guaranteed in education and technological innovations.
• Finally, our development experience tells us that all forms of cooperation should respect national ownership and leadership, and focus on country needs and priorities. And global peace and stability is the prerequisite, because the cost of conflicts mainly goes on the shoulders of the Global South.

Nearly six months after coming to power, Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal embarked on his first diplomatic tour in May, with New Delhi as his inaugural stop. 

In July, Dahal visited Italy to attend the United Nations Food Summit, and in the second week of this month, Dahal flew to New York to participate in the 78th General Assembly of the United Nations. There, he rubbed shoulders with the giants of global politics, including the likes of US Secretary of State Antony Blinken.

After attending the UN gathering, he jetted off to Beijing for an official visit to Nepal’s northern neighbor. This visit was a significant milestone for Nepal, marking the continuation of a delicate balancing act—maintaining strong ties with three major global powers: India, China, and the United States.

Remarkably, during his visits to New Delhi and Beijing, Dahal deftly steered clear of contentious issues that had historically strained relationships. Instead, he pivoted towards economic collaboration and development partnerships. In India, topics like the Eminent Persons Group (EPG) report, border disputes and Agnipath Scheme were set aside. Similarly, in Beijing, projects under the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), China’s new map, Global Security Initiative, and Global Civilizational Initiative were put on the back burner.

Dahal’s strategic focus on development and cooperation was evident. He sought support from all three global powers to expedite Nepal's transitional justice process—a top priority for his government. The international community, particularly Western nations led by the United States, has been urging Nepal to conclude this process promptly.

At the United Nations General Assembly, Dahal highlighted Nepal's transformation from an era of armed conflict to an inclusive and nationally driven peace process over the past 15 years. He made it abundantly clear that transitional justice was the linchpin of his administration's agenda, appealing to the world for support.

However, India and China have not laid out their positions regarding Nepal’s transitional justice process, though New Delhi briefly raised this issue in the UN Human Rights Council in 2015. International community and the UN are concerned mainly on the issue of serious human rights violations on which they believe there should not be blanket amnesty.

Dahal’s Beijing trip was mainly focused on the development and security fronts. While concrete progress on the Belt and Road Initiative remained elusive, Dahal assured senior Chinese leaders of Nepal’s commitment to their core interests, including acknowledging the One-China principle and firmly opposing Taiwan independence and Tibet independence movement. 

With an ever growing geopolitical tension between China and the Western world, Beijing is more concerned about its security interests in Kathmandu than ever. As security gained prominence, China sought bilateral legal treaties with Nepal, including a Mutual Legal Treaty and Extradition Treaty, although Nepal remained non-committal.

The implementation of the Belt and Road Initiative remained a focal point for Beijing. Despite seven years since the initial agreement, the two countries are still working to finalize its implementation plan, with some provisions, particularly those related to security, causing contention. The Global Security Initiative (GSI) and Global Civilizational Initiative (GCI), on which China is seeking Nepal’s endorsement, also remain the topics of debate. However, Nepal showed support for the Global Development Initiative (GDI), as it is implemented through UN agencies and doesn't raise security concerns.

In the realm of energy cooperation, Dahal’s visit to China achieved modest progress. Both countries agreed to enhance cooperation in energy, particularly in hydropower development and cross-border transmission lines. They also announced plans to construct a 220 KV cross-border power transmission line.

Before his visit to China, Dahal had expressed a desire to strike a power trade deal, but the necessary infrastructure is yet to be built. Of late, China has been expressing its concerns regarding India’s “monopoly” in Nepal’s hydropower sector, where the interests of India, China, and the United States collide. 

During Dahal’s visit to New Delhi, a significant development unfolded, with the Indian cabinet deciding to purchase 10,000 MW of electricity from Nepal, creating opportunities for regional energy trade and development. But India’s policy bars Chinese companies from selling the power in the Indian market. 

In his dealings with the United States, Dahal maintained a cautious approach. He refrained from engaging with the State Partnership Program and Indo-Pacific Strategy, instead focusing on the implementation of the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) agreement. The MCC, which came into effect in August with a five-year deadline, encountered hurdles, but Dahal was committed to resolving them. The declarative interpretation, a component of the MCC’s parliamentary approval, remains a point of concern.

The United States, on its part, demonstrated a commitment to expanding its engagement with Nepal through increased development assistance. The USAID pledged $2m to support Nepal’s economic stabilization, job creation, investment mobilization, and democratic progress. Earlier USAID had decided to provide a $6.9m budget for the next five years. The new support was announced during the USAID’s Democracy Delivers event on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in the presence of US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and USAID Administrator Samantha Power.

Strengthening democracy and combating corruption in Nepal were top priorities for the United States, while Dahal’s objective is seeking Washington’s support to conclude Nepal’s transitional justice.

Above all, Dahal’s key diplomatic priority is to maintain cordial relations with New Delhi to secure his political standing. Hence, he approached his visit to Beijing cautiously, not wanting to upset India by signing deals on BRI, energy trade and other issues. Of late, Dahal has also maintained a good relationship with India’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party.

Graduation from Least Developed Country (LDC) to Middle-Income Country (MIC) status is another pressing issue on Nepal's international agenda. Nepal sought support from the international community to finalize its LDC graduation strategy, raising this matter during discussions in Beijing, New Delhi, and the United Nations General Assembly. In his address to the UN assembly Dahal affirmed Nepal's commitment to a smooth, sustainable, and irreversible transition to MIC status by 2026. 

Nepal’s key international agenda

Transitional justice: Government has tabled a bill related to transitional justice and seeking the support of the international community to conclude the process.

PM Dahal is of the view that the new bill addresses the concerns of the victims, strike a right balance between peace, justice and reparation, and to make the transitional justice process broadly owned by the society. Considering the concerns of the international community, PM Dahal has said that there would not be blanket amnesty. 

LDC graduation: Nepal is graduating from LDC status by 2025 and expressing commitment with the international community to make the graduation smooth, sustainable and irreversible. Nepal is in the process of finalizing the smooth transition strategy of graduation. Nepal is seeking international support in this process. 

Climate Change: Climate Change has emerged as one of the major agenda of Nepal’s foreign policy conduct. Addressing the UN assembly, PM said : Climate vulnerable mountainous countries like Nepal have been bearing the severe brunt of climate change. The Himalayas are the source of freshwater for over two billion people. Global warming has induced rapid receding of ice in our Himalayas, Dahal said,  It has not only eroded the health of our mountains but also endangered the lives and livelihoods of millions of people living downstream.

On Sept 24, former King Gyanendra Shah visited Taleju Bhawani Temple in Bhaktapur, where he was received by a large crowd. The gathering surpassed his previous visits when he was still the monarch, elevating the spirits of royalist forces.

The temple area falls within the territory of the Nepal Majdoor Kishan Party, an orthodox communist group known for its soft spot for monarchy. Amid enthusiastic cheers for the former king, his supporters fervently chanted slogans demanding the reinstatement of the monarchy. Leaders of the pro-monarchy Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP) hailed this assembly as a testament to the growing support and calls for the restoration of monarchy and Hindu state, abolished by the Constituent Assembly in 2008.

Rabindra Mishra, senior Vice-chairperson of RPP, emphasized the political significance of the massive gathering in Bhaktapur through his X (formerly Twitter) post. Mishra, a former journalist, has evolved into a staunch advocate for the reinstatement of monarchy. 

And as economic hardships have fueled frustration among the populace, royalist forces are harnessing this resentment to push their political agenda. They argue that the removal of the monarchy worsened the country’s political and economic situation, making its revival a potential remedy. However, a counterargument questions whether the monarchy, even during its reign, could have addressed these issues effectively, given that over 15 years have passed since its removal.

King Gyanendra, despite his peaceful demeanor after losing the crown, has recently become more active and expressed interest in returning to power. He provides monetary support to royalist parties but maintains distance from direct political involvement.

RPP is the leading advocate for reversing the current political trajectory. Led by Rajendra Lingden, the party secured 14 seats in the national parliament in the last year's election, and has been pushing for pro-monarchy and pro-Hindu agendas 

The party plans to organize protests against federalism, republicanism, and secularism after the Dashain and Tihar festivals.The RPP’s supposed call to arms aligns with mounting criticism of federalism, particularly within the Nepali Congress and CPN-UML. 

While some view the large gatherings at the former king’s public appearances as a sign of support for monarchy, others, like Professor Lokraj Baral, caution against equating it with a desire for monarchy’s return. He argues that people are indeed frustrated with the government, but this doesn’t necessarily translate into support for monarchy.

Baral’s reassuring observation hardly offers any consolation amid the extremely divided political landscape, poor governance, and economic crisis. Security agencies, including the Nepal Army, view identity-based federalism as a security threat. They reckon cases of communal violence, particularly in the Tarai region, are on the rise due to identity politics.

There are still risks of communal tensions in eastern Nepal, mainly in Dharan. Repeated clashes between two communities have also been reported in Malangawa, the district headquarter of Sarlahi. 

While the government and major political parties busy themselves in securing their interests, various religious outfits and anti-federal elements are stoking religious and communal discords.

Recently, teachers and doctors across the country are also in protest with their own sets of grievances and demands. Last week, teachers from across the country gathered in Kathmandu protesting the Education Bill registered in Parliament. While the government has reached a tentative agreement with the agitating teachers, a section of teachers are still protesting.

Doctors and medical professionals are also up in arms against an alarming surge in the incidents of assault on their colleagues. The victims of loan sharks and fraudulent financial institutions are also in protest. All these developments show that the state and its apparatuses are not on top of things. Amid all these pressing concerns, Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal and a number of his ministers are in foreign trips. 

As concerns over the government’s inaction on various economic, social, and political issues mount, public protests are only but expected, says Baral. But he reiterates that the current crises in no way can bring back monarchy.  Observers warn as economic condition worsens and social fabric frays, there is a risk of rogue elements exploiting the public frustration. The RPP seems to be doing the same thing. Same goes for businessperson Durga Prasai who has  threatened to bring thousands of people out in the street after the Dashain festival.

Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal, who is currently on a week-long visit to China, has skipped the disputed issues between two countries, a similar approach that he adopted when he visited India in May this year. 

Dahal on Monday completed his official engagements in Beijing. He held talks with Chinese President Xi Jinping, his counterpart Li Qiang and Chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress of China Zhao Leji.  

In the meeting with Dahal, according to Xinhua News Agency, Xi said that China and Nepal have set an example of equal treatment and win-win cooperation between big and small countries. The Chinese leader, like always, also raised the issue of China’s concerns in Kathmandu, mainly of security interests.

Due to the fluid domestic political situation in Nepal and growing activities of Western powers, China is more concerned than ever about its security, according to an official. The two sides should always understand and support each other on issues concerning each other’s core interests and major concerns, and constantly consolidate the political foundation of bilateral relations, Xi told Dahal.

Dahal tried to reassure Nepal's firm adherence to the one-China policy. Both Taiwan and Tibet are inalienable parts of China's territory, and Nepal will not allow any forces to use its territory to undermine China’s sovereignty and security, Xinhua quoted Dahal as saying in the meeting. Another key priority of China was the Belt and Road Initiative, which was prominently figured out in all meetings in Beijing, including with Xi. 

Noting that the two countries have made progress in BRI and the Trans-Himalayan Multi-Dimensional Connectivity Network has taken shape, according to Chinese media, Xi urged efforts from both sides to promote infrastructure connectivity and expand transit transportation cooperation to help Nepal transform itself from a land-locked country to a land-linked at an early date. 

Dahal appreciated the BRI and expressed keenness to join it, but there was no concrete progress on the matter. Of late, there are confusions about China’s BRI in Nepal. China has listed Pokhara International Airport under the BRI on which Nepal disagrees.  A statement issued by Nepal's Foreign Ministry after Dahal's high-level engagement with Beijing leaders, does not mention anything about BRI. Over the past few months, Nepal has refused to mention BRI in the press statement, without providing any reasons behind it.  But, there is a mention of BRI in the joint press statement. 

A report published in The Global Times on September 24 says: “Nepal is also a beneficiary of the China-proposed Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), through which Nepal has become a land-linked country from a landlocked one.” 

The Pokhara International Airport, which the Chinese company China CAMC Engineering Co (CAMCE) helped build in Nepal, is a typical example, the report says, the project started in July 2017, and China provided a soft loan to nepal for this project, which not only created a model of development cooperation but also effectively guaranteed the smooth implementation of the project. 

The much-anticipated deal on energy trade between Nepal and China did not materialize during Dahal’s visit. Weeks before his trip, the prime minister had publicly said that he would sign the energy trade deal with China.  Similarly, the two sides had exchanged a draft of the BRI implementation plan, but the issue was skipped, citing the lack of sufficient homework.  Though Nepal is keen on signing the trade agreement with China, experts say, prospects of power trade between the two countries are very slim. 

Over the past few months, there have been talks about China’s Global Security Initiative (GSI), Global Development Initiative (GDI) and Global Civilizational Initiatives (GCI). Though the two sides touched upon these issues in Beijing, there was no concrete outcome.  Chinese Ambassador to Nepal Chen Song briefly mentioned those initiatives through his X handle: “ … Dahal said that Nepal supports a series of important concepts and initiatives proposed by President Xi and is willing to work with China to promote the development of the international order in a more just and reasonable direction.”  

Over the past few years, mainly after Xi Jinping’s Nepal visit in 2019, China has been focusing more on strategic partnership, a term China often uses in bilateral talks with countries from the Global South.  The Chinese Foreign Ministry said China stands ready to work with Nepal to deepen strategic mutual trust, expand practical cooperation and elevate strategic cooperative partnership to a new height through the visit. 

It seems PM Dahal did not raise the map issue with China despite pressure at home. A new map issued by China a few weeks back does not recognize the new map that Nepal’s Parliament had endorsed in 2020. The statement issued by Nepal's ministry does not say anything about the map issue.

Agreements between two countries

·         Cooperating in the field of science, technology and innovation

·         Letter of exchange on human resources

·         Letter of exchange on providing disaster relief to Nepal  

·         Cooperation in the field of agriculture livestock and fisheries

·         Joint technical working group to review Nepal-China payment agreement

·         Export of plant-derived medicinal materials from Nepal to China

·         Cooperation in translation and publication

·         Handover of certificate of the production and living materials for northern hilly region of Nepal

·         Cooperation in digital economy

·         Cooperation on green and low-carbon development

·         Agreement on implementation of Sijali higher secondary school project

PM Dahal says 

• I am confident and optimistic that China-Nepal relations will be further consolidated, which will reach a new height during my tenure.
• Nepal views China’s development trajectory as an opportunity, with the BRI serving as a suitable platform for enhancing trans-Himalayan multidimensional connectivity. 
• This connectivity has great potential for realizing Nepal’s economic goals while acting as a vibrant bridge between the two largest economies in Asia and also between China and South Asia. 
• A Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) has been signed between China and Nepal, solidifying mutual commitment to the BRI. We are fully prepared to take the maximum benefits from this cooperative framework.
• Nepali people have high expectations for the China-Nepal railway, and they are eager for the railway project to commence as soon as possible
• Nepal's relations with both China and India are guided by principles of good neighborliness, peaceful coexistence, and a non-aligned foreign policy. Nepal deals with China and India independently. 
• Our relationship with one neighbor will not be influenced by our relationship with the other, nor will we seek to play one against the other.
• Both neighbors are close friends and important development partners. We will continue to develop our relationships with both the neighbors on a bilateral basis. 
• If any differences arise with either of them, such issues will be resolved through friendly bilateral negotiations. 
• China’s socialism and Mao’s ideas offer us valuable insights to improve the socio-economic status of the oppressed and economically disadvantaged class of people.
• Our key priorities with China include early and time-bound implementation of previously agreed upon agendas and understandings. At the same time, we want to further boost economic cooperation. 
• Our particular emphasis is to attract more Chinese direct investments in Nepal, promote trans-Himalayan connectivity networks, increase Nepali exports to China, and address Nepal's trade deficit.

An excerpt of Dahal’s interview published in The Global Times

Major points of joint press statement 

Nepal and China have come up with a joint statement after the official talks. Here are the major highlights: 

• The two sides will maintain the momentum of high-level exchanges, deepen political mutual trust, and expand exchanges and cooperation at all levels between the two countries. 
• The Nepali side reiterated its firm commitment to the one-China principle. Recognizing that the Government of the People’s Republic of China is the sole legal Government representing the whole of China, and Taiwan is an inalienable part of China’s territory, the Nepali side is against “Taiwan independence.” The Nepali side reiterated that Tibet affairs are China’s internal affairs, that it will never allow any separatist activities against China on Nepal’s soil.
• Two sides expressed their commitment to accelerate the consultations to finalize the text on the BRI Implementation Plan at an early date. They expressed readiness to exchange experiences on their development strategies, deepen practical cooperation in such fields as infrastructure connectivity, trade, tourism, production capacity and investment, and further deepen and solidify Belt and Road cooperation to deliver greater benefits to their peoples.
• Both sides agreed to accelerate the feasibility study of the Tokha-Chhare Tunnel project, recognizing that the project will elevate the level of connectivity between the two countries.
• The two sides expressed satisfaction over the progress of the feasibility study of the Jilong/Keyrung-Kathmandu Cross-Border Railway, and planned to hold the 8th Working Meeting on China-Nepal Railway Cooperation as early as possible. The Chinese side is ready to help Nepal train railway professionals. 
• . The two sides agreed to undertake joint inspection of China-Nepal boundary
• The two sides maintained that law enforcement cooperation is of great significance to the security of the two countries, and agreed to further strengthen information exchange, capacity building and cooperation on training between their law enforcement institutions. The two sides agreed to expedite the ratification of the China-Nepal Treaty on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters
• The two sides agreed to strengthen cooperation within the framework of the United Nations and other multilateral mechanisms to uphold the common interest of developing countries. The two sides support the multilateral trading system, and oppose protectionism
• The two sides expressed satisfaction over the outcomes of Prime Minister Prachanda’s visit to China, and agreed that the visit is of great significance to advancing the China-Nepal Strategic Partnership of Cooperation Featuring Ever-lasting Friendship for Development and Prosperity. 

One of the recommendations made by the Nepal-India Eminent Persons’ Group (EPG) report prepared in 2018 is regulation of existing open borders between the two countries. While the report has not been made public, some of its drafters say they have suggested regulating the porous border between Nepal and India with a string of approaches, such as use of identity cards, installation of cutting-edge technology and strategic control of border crossings.

The previous leadership of the Nepal Army had also suggested the government to regulate the borders with India, albeit without offering any specifics. Besides several communist parties and left-leaning experts have long been advocating for controlling the Nepal-India border  

Yet, amidst these discussions, the corridors of power have remained eerily silent. The government and major political parties of Nepal are yet to give the border regulation issue a serious consideration. Some communist parties have touched upon the topic in their election manifestos, but they have not ventured beyond this electoral commitment in the form of proper deliberation.  

The debate on Nepal-India border regulation does not stop there. Even the Supreme Court has waded in with its order to the government to regulate the open border. 

A few years ago, advocates Chandra Kanta Gyawali, Bimal Gyawali, Liladhar Upadhaya, and border expert Budhi Narayan Shrestha had filed a case demanding a court order to regulate the border between Nepal and India—their primary concern being the surge in cross-border crimes.

It took almost two years for the top court to come up with the full-text of its order which directs the government to take essential actions based on existing national and international laws for the management and regulation of the Nepal-India border.  

The 25-page  document has explained in detail about the border management system, shedding light on some international experiences as well. According to the court’s order, there are three types of border management systems in the world: open border, regulated border, and closed border.  

Advocate Gyawali, one of the petitioners, proclaims that this ruling has turned a political quagmire into a legally binding obligation. The Supreme Court has unequivocally called upon the government to take the reins in hand, directing them to manage and regulate the cross-border movement, citing national and international laws as their guide.

To control criminal activities, protect Nepali territory, facilitate smooth transit process, and uphold Nepal’s independence, sovereignty and national integrity, the court has directed the government to manage and regulate the open border on the basis of past treaties and agreement. It has also ordered the government to sign additional treaties and agreements with India, if needed, on the basis of mutual equality, respect, and cooperation.

To meet this challenge head-on, the court encourages the adoption of technology – drones and CCTV cameras – for a secure, seamless border. Language training for border personnel and the issuance of identification cards for travelers are also recommended.

Moreover, diplomatic overtures to India are prescribed to clarify disputed border areas, ensuring that future disputes do not disrupt the harmony between the two neighboring nations. 

The court has directed the government to give continuity to the tasks related to the installation of new border pillars and restoration of missing ones, as well as evacuation of settlers from the no-man’s land areas.

Arguing that criminal activities, unchecked human trafficking, drug trade, and counterfeiting were thriving in the border areas, the petitioners had demanded for a robust border security and monitoring mechanism. They had argued that the absence of record-keeping had further compounded these challenges. 

Their plea? Revision of treaties, mandatory ID cards for border crossers, and meticulous record-keeping by the government.

In response to the petition, the Office of the Prime Minister and the Council of Ministers had said that border management falls within the purview of the executive branch.

“In its previous rulings, the Supreme Court has explicitly stated that decisions regarding the nature and type of relationships to maintain with other countries rest with the sovereign country. Such matters fall under the jurisdiction of the state's executive branch,” it said. “The government is actively and earnestly addressing these concerns to ensure the security and interests of the nation and its citizens through diplomatic channels and other appropriate means.”

It added: “People of both countries have traversed this border without hindrance for centuries. EPG formed by the two countries are studying treaties and agreements. Likewise, officials of both countries are holding regular meetings on border management.”

At the time, the Ministry of Home Affairs also issued its own rebuttal.  “Six immigration offices have been opened along the Nepal-India border for management of movement of people and goods between the two countries. Likewise, the Eminent Persons’ Group having experts from both countries are holding discussion on different treaties between the two countries including the 1950 Treaty,” it said. 

“The two countries have been holding meetings under minister, secretary and high-ranking official level on a regular basis to address border management and control crimes, smuggling, human trafficking, use of counterfeit currency, movement of drugs and narcotics.”

Aadvocate Liladhar Upadhyay says: "Now, government has responsibility to implement the mandamus of the Supreme Court. Regulating border is equally important for India to control various kinds of crimes by taking benefit of open cross border between the two neighbouring countries."

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Defence had also joined the chorus for the dismissal of the petition. They too cited cooperative initiatives, joint measurements, and border pillar deployment, and the EPG initiative, asserting that unilateral decisions are not the answer.

However, the report prepared by EPG is gathering dust and chances of its acceptance by India appears slim. 

Nepal-India border management issue has been overshadowed by the map row that erupted in 2020. There was no official response from the Ministry of Home Affairs and Ministry of Foreign Affairs regarding the latest court order. 

Eight long years have passed since Nepal embarked on the journey of crafting a new federal democratic constitution through the Constituent Assembly (CA), a vision held dear by the people since the 1950s.

As per the constitution's mandate, we have seen two rounds of elections for a three-tier government—federal, provincial, and local— with even parties from the Madhes region embracing the constitution, albeit with initial reservations. Today, there is hardly any prominent political force opposing it outright, though many still harbor reservations.

Yet, despite these advancements, the constitution has fallen short of delivering the much-needed political stability. Over the past eight tumultuous years, we have witnessed six governments led by three different leaders—KP Sharma Oli, Sher Bahadur Deuba and Pushpa Kamal Dahal. There was a glimmer of hope when CPN-UML and CPN (Maoist Center) united in 2018, but that optimism was shattered with their subsequent split.

During this period, the parliament faced dissolution twice, and the ruling alliances underwent frequent changes. Provincial assemblies fared no better. Thanks to the electoral system adopted by the constitution, the chances of a single party securing a majority are nearly nonexistent, and the sustainability of such a majority is uncertain. Parties have become engrossed in safeguarding their interests, leaving the people's agenda in the dust. Ideological positions were abandoned as parties displayed a willingness to form alliances with anyone, anytime. 

In these eight years, parties made systematic efforts to control the judiciary and parliament, undermining the crucial separation of powers principle. The constitutional bodies suffered politicization and paralysis.

The constitution has also failed to ignite the economic prosperity and development it promised. Frequent changes in government, a growing economic crisis, corruption, job scarcity, and poor governance have fueled frustration among citizens.

The disillusionment has driven many youths to seek education and employment abroad, with approximately 2,000 leaving Nepal daily. Those remaining in the country are increasingly losing hope for their careers. Opportunistic royalist and anti-federal forces are meanwhile attempting to capitalize on this discontent.

Constitutional expert Radheshyam Adhikari says that the people's growing frustration is not a reflection of the constitution's failure but rather the ineptitude of those in power. 

“Obviously, people are frustrated because of the working style of the rulers who have failed to deliver. Rule of law has been undermined and economic issues remain unaddressed,” he says. “A constitution is just a tool, not a solution. It is the political parties who must mend their ways.” 

Adhikari adds while there are flaws in the constitution, it can always be redressed after thorough and objective analysis, underscoring that there is no alternative to this constitution.

Another constitutional expert, Nilambar Acharya, shares a similar sentiment. He sees no reason to blame the constitution for the country's current state. 

“Weaknesses and loopholes can be amended, but the constitution itself is not at fault. It's the actors and parties that have made mistakes,” he says. 

The 2015 constitution was a result of compromise among major political players, including Nepali Congress, CPN-UML and CPN (Maoist Center), and various ethnic groups. Madhes-based parties initially disowned the charter, leading to the first amendment to partially address their concerns. Eventually, most Madhes-based parties abandoned their original agenda to join the government.

After eight years, one would expect the constitution and federal structure to have strengthened. However, doubts are emerging about the constitution's sustainability and core principles. Even within major parties, voices are growing in favor of scrapping the federal structure.

Secularism faces more threats than ever, with major parties wavering in their commitment. Pro-Hindu forces are pushing for a return to a Hindu state, and social harmony and religious tolerance are under strain. Recent incidents in Dharan and Lahan serve as examples, where tensions flared. The only way to quell anti-constitution sentiments is through effective governance and action from political parties.

Despite these challenges, it is high time to review the constitution and assess the performance of political parties. This doesn't mean the constitution must be discarded; rather, parties need to course-correct immediately. The constitution was a step toward progress, but the journey requires the right guidance and determination to succeed.

The world’s attention will turn to New York this week as the 78th UN General Assembly takes center stage. Yet, it's notable that several prominent world leaders have chosen to bypass this crucial gathering, citing their busy schedules.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Chinese President Xi Jinping, UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, and French President Emmanuel Macron are conspicuously absent from the inaugural session of UNGA. Experts say this glaring absence of key leaders, responsible for addressing pressing global issues such as climate change, the Russia-Ukraine conflict, food crises, and achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), underscores the waning influence of the UN as a multilateral platform.

However, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres maintains a resolute focus on action rather than attendance. He emphasizes that what truly matters is what gets accomplished, especially in revitalizing the lagging SDGs. This year, alongside the customary speeches by heads of state and government, there are five high-level summits slated to tackle the burning issues plaguing our world.

According to the UN, the Climate Action Summit, set for Sept 23, aims to amplify ambitions and hold countries accountable to their international commitments under the 2015 Paris Agreement, particularly in reducing global warming. The summit's key priorities include a global shift to renewable energy, development of sustainable and resilient infrastructure and cities, promoting sustainable agriculture, responsible forest and ocean management, resilience and adaptation to climate impacts, and aligning public and private finance with a net-zero economy.

On the same day, the UN will host the first high-level meeting on universal health coverage, aptly tagged “Moving together to Build a Healthier World”. This meeting is touted as the most significant political gathering ever held on this crucial subject. With over half of the world’s population lacking access to essential health services, and nearly 100m people pushed into extreme poverty due to health costs annually, this event is a pivotal opportunity to secure political commitment from global leaders to prioritize and invest in universal health coverage for all. All nations have pledged to work toward achieving universal health coverage by 2030, encompassing financial risk protection, high-quality healthcare services, and access to safe, effective, quality, and affordable essential medicines and vaccines.

On Sept 24 and 25, the SDG summit will take center stage, marking the first such event since the adoption of the SDG agenda in 2015. Despite some progress toward achieving the 17 sustainable development goals, challenges like climate change and financing gaps have hindered overall progress. Small Island Developing States, least developed countries, and landlocked developing countries are falling behind on their SDG targets. To bridge this gap, significant investments, primarily in developing countries, will be a focal point of this year's discussions. The UN estimates that annual investments ranging from $5trn to $7trn across all sectors are needed to realize the SDGs.

From Nepal, a high-powered delegation led by Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal, accompanied by Foreign Minister NP Saud and Foreign Secretary Bharat Raj Paudyal, is attending the 78th UNGA. Prime Minister Dahal’s primary objective for this visit is to garner international support to conclude Nepal's long-drawn-out transitional justice process. Before embarking on his journey to New York, Dahal made efforts to advance a bill related to transitional justice that had been languishing in the Legislation Committee of Parliament. Although the specifics of international support are not fully disclosed, it's evident that Dahal seeks some flexibility in the bill to allow for amnesty in addressing human rights issues.

Dahal has held talks with the UN Secretary-General Guterres, covering a broad spectrum of issues. These discussions touched on pressing global concerns, from climate change to sustainable development goals, and emphasized various aspects of Nepal-UN cooperation, including peace efforts. Guterres expressed gratitude to Nepal for its active engagement with the United Nations, especially its substantial contribution to peacekeeping. The two leaders also delved into shared concerns related to climate change, challenges faced by Landlocked Developing Countries (LLDCs), and the crucial role of the government's leadership in Nepal’s journey toward graduation from Least Developed Country (LDC) to developing country, according to the UN spokesperson.

Nepal’s key priorities 

• Climate change: Loss and damage, climate finance 
• UN peacekeeping 
• LDC graduation 
• Rights of land-locked countries 
• SDGs

Earlier this week, Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal sought cross-party advice to shape the agenda for the 78th UN General Assembly taking place in New York from Sept 18-26. Dahal’s plans extended beyond the formal assembly proceedings; he wished to gather insights for the high-stakes meetings he is slated to hold with influential world leaders on the assembly’s sidelines. His journey doesn’t end there—he’s also gearing up for a rendezvous with Chinese leaders in Beijing, where he will fly next after attending the UN meeting.   

The gravity of Dahal’s presence in New York cannot be overstated. Since 2018, no Nepali prime minister has graced the UN General Assembly with their physical presence. In the intervening years, the world witnessed virtual addresses by the prime minister and the occasional foreign minister attending on Nepal’s behalf. The Covid-19 pandemic only exacerbated the situation, where remote participation was encouraged.

This year, Dahal is set to make history by addressing the general debate of the 78th UN General Assembly. World leaders will convene to deliberate on how best to confront the multifaceted global polycrisis and expedite the realization of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) will take center stage, rallying leaders and communities alike to reaffirm their commitment to these goals at the halfway mark to 2030.

Another marquee event is the Climate Ambition Summit, scheduled for Sept 20. This presents an invaluable opportunity for leaders to collectively demonstrate their resolve to tackle the ever-escalating climate emergency, as emphasized by the UN.

In the United Nations chamber, Dahal is poised to advocate for several crucial issues. He intends to spotlight the devastating impacts of climate change and the intricate challenges posed by Nepal’s transition from a Least Developed Country (LDC) to a Middle-Income Country, particularly in the realms of international trade and a gamut of socioeconomic concerns.

Crucially, Dahal will strive to reassure the international community regarding the culmination of Nepal’s transitional justice process, aligning it with the Supreme Court’s verdict and international norms. He was planning to present the transitional justice bill in Parliament before his departure to New York, but  the main opposition, CPN-UML, didn’t cooperate.

But  Dahal has to understand that even as he endeavors to advance his vision, the international community remains skeptical of the current bill, challenging his resolve to forge ahead.

Of late, the Dahal government is under immense pressure to expedite the transitional justice process. During a visit by US officials to Nepal, they inquired the Nepali leaders about the transitional justice process, perhaps prompting Dahal to feel the heat.

In New York, the prospect of Dahal holding high-level meetings remains uncertain, with the exception of a photo opportunity with US President Joe Biden. Dahal is at a crossroads, navigating between his pursuit of a blanket amnesty and the resolute international opposition. 

The Beijing leg of his journey presents its own set of challenges, particularly concerning the contentious map issue and the broader development agenda. While he may not have broached this topic during his New Delhi visit, mounting pressure from opposition parties and civil society might compel Dahal to address the map issue unequivocally, at least for domestic consumption.

To further complicate matters, Dahal grapples with other pressing priorities. He must finalize the implementation plan of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) while navigating the delicate terrain of Nepal’s stance on China’s evolving claims regarding the BRI, Global Security Initiative, and Global Civilization Initiative. 

Dahal has long sought to make progress in his dealings with China but exercises caution, especially given security considerations embedded within the proposed plan. His coalition partner, the Nepali Congress, has reservations about embracing the BRI, further complicating matters. With Nepal’s acceptance of the US Millennium Challenge Cooperation fund under the Indo-Pacific Strategy, Beijing is pressuring Dahal to make headway on the BRI.

Last week Dahal also talked about inking a deal on power trade with China, but the chances appear slim. He recognizes the pivotal role played by continuous support from New Delhi and Washington in sustaining his government. Both India and Western powers closely scrutinize Dahal’s China policy. Unfortunately, substantial preparations for his Beijing visit appear lacking, with Foreign Minister NP Saud notably absent from Beijing preparations in favor of the New York leg.

As a prelude to the visit, Nepali Ambassador to Beijing Bishnu Pukar Shrestha engaged with Liu Jinsong, the director-general of the Department of Asian Affairs of the Chinese Foreign Ministry. Their discussions centered on deepening mutual understanding and trust, underscoring Nepal’s unwavering commitment to the One-China policy. Nepal aims to fortify traditional friendship and expand cooperation across diverse domains including the BRI with China. Yet, for China, security remains paramount, and Dahal’s visit presents an opportunity to seek reassurances on this front.

The shadow of the Chinese map issue and the Chinese ambassador's recent comments regarding India cast a pall over Dahal’s visit preparations. Beijing may not harbor high expectations this time around, appearing more amenable to New Delhi. Nevertheless, they favor the continuity of Dahal’s government over the Nepali Congress, recalling their ‘bitter experiences’ with the previous Sher Bahadur Deuba-led administration. Incremental progress and reaffirmations of past agreements may be on the agenda, but transformative breakthroughs seem unlikely. Dahal, now seasoned and matured since 2008, must balance his overtures to Beijing to prevent a change in government—a recurrent theme in Nepali politics dating back to the Panchayat era.