Submit your Article

It has been almost eight years since Nepal adopted a new constitution. In this period, the constitution has been amended twice—first in 2016 to address the concerns of Madhes-based parties, and second in 2020 to update the country’s map incorporating the areas disputed with India. The Madhesi and the Janajati communities are still calling for amendments to the charter in order to address their demands, but without strong political backing and representation in federal parliament, their voices are not being heard. It was widely expected that the 2015 constitution would set Nepal on the course of political stability and economic development. But the political climate so far has only but dashed the public hope for a stable, growing nation. People’s frustration against political parties, especially the old, established forces, has reached a tipping point. Politicians and leaders have paralyzed key state institutions such as the judiciary, legislature, and the president’s office. There is a growing tussle between the Office of the President and Office of the Prime Minister and Council of Ministers. Frequent government changes have become a new normal. Nepal has witnessed six governments in seven years. Former chief justice Kalyan Shrestha says all the political dysfunctions and maladies post-2015 are the results of some provisions in the constitution that have cemented heavy political control over state apparatuses. Moreover, he adds, numerous provisions in the constitution including some fundamental rights remain unimplemented. There is a growing demand among some sections of Nepali society and even inside some major political parties for reinstating unitary government system by doing away with federalism. This begs the question: Who is responsible for this situation: the constitution or the political parties? Constitutional expert Bipin Adhikari says while the constitution could be reviewed, we must also consider whether we have a favorable situation for constitution amendment. The experience of last eight years shows that the new constitution has been accepted by wider section of society, adds Adhikari. He personally believes that the problem lies with the political parties and their leaders, rather than the constitution. To date, political parties are not fully committed to some of the key spirits of the constitution, such as federalism, fundamental rights and the issue of inclusion. Adhikari says Nepal’s political parties and their leaders are suffering from a bad case of elitism. Instead of finding faults with the constitution, he adds we must ask why the constitution has not been fully implemented. Political analyst Chandra Dev Bhatta, however, holds an opposite view to Adhikari. He is in favor of reviewing and amending the constitution. Bhatta says we never had problems with the constitution in the past, but only with the political actors. These days we have more problems with the constitution than with the political actors, he adds. That said, Bhatta also strongly believes in changing our attitude. Nepal’s fundamental problem, he says, is lacking the capacity to honor and uphold constitutional behavior. Of course, no constitution is prefect in itself and they can certainly be improved over time, adds Bhatta, but unlike the past constitution, our political parties and leaders have truly upheld the new constitution. Political parties have developed the tendency of explaining and interpreting the constitutional provisions as per their interests and conveniences, says Bhatta. The final arbiter of the law and the constitution is the Supreme Court. But in Nepal, major political parties have reduced the highest court of the land into their playground. Experts are of the view that on the basis of the experiences of the past eight years, there should be an overall review of the constitution, as parties have failed to implement it to the full. The 2015 statute was a document of compromise among traditional parties and the then Maoist rebels. Soon after its promulgation, political parties and the communities based in Madhes staged protests calling for various demands that were unaddressed. They are still clamoring for constitutional amendments to guarantee them greater rights and representation. But constitution amendment is not an easy job. Unless all major parties are on board, there cannot be any amendment to any provision in the constitution. According to article 274 of the constitution, no amendment shall be made to this constitution in manner to be prejudicial to sovereignty, territorial integrity, independence of Nepal and sovereignty vested in the people. Other clauses of the constitution, however, could be amended. For example, a bill to amend or repeal any article of the constitution may be introduced by either house of the federal parliament. Such a bill should be made public within days of its introduction in the concerned house. Some experts, however, say that constitution amendment at this point of time would be tantamount to opening the Pandora’s box, because there are various forces who want to review the constitution on their own terms. If the amendment process is initiated, they say, it would be difficult to meet the demands of various conflicting groups. For instance, royalist forces like the Rastriya Prajatantra Party are pressing for an amendment to reinstate the Hindu state and constitutional monarchy. Likewise, parties like CPN (Maoist Center) are trying to introduce presidential rule and make changes to the existing electoral system. Expert there are too many contradictory demands that could upend the whole system. Here are the views expressed by former chief justice Kalyan Shrestha, former speaker Daman Nath Dhungana and former law minister Nilambar Acharya at a program organized by Tanka Prasad Acharya Memorial Foundation. ‘Centralized mindset will take us nowhere’  Kalyan Shrestha, Former chief justice Federalism was a point of departure for us, but it is unlikely to succeed. Without a creative roadmap, it is unlikely to be sustainable in the long run. The current federal government is more of a ‘centralized’ government rather than a true federal one, as it aims to retain power at the center and is hesitant to devolve power and resources to subnational governments. The tendency to centralize the law-making process and withhold necessary laws from subnational governments is still prevalent. Selling the concept of centralization as federalism will take us nowhere. Furthermore, political appointees hold the majority in our constitutional bodies. This means whatever they say will be the final decision. The work done so far has not aligned with the spirit of the constitution. The 1990 constitution looked good on paper. The new constitution has several provisions from the old one. Unfortunately, due to the centralized mindset of our political leaders, the situation is deteriorating. ‘PM should not have arbitrary decision-making power’  Nilambar Acharya, Former minister It is imperative to review the process of government formation. Perhaps, only the party that secures electoral majority should be allowed to form a government. We need to establish a philosophical basis for this and clarify the provisions in the constitution. It is also crucial to define the rights of the prime minister who has resigned and the prime minister who has not yet received a vote of confidence. Additionally, we should outline the rights of the prime minister after an election has been announced. The current system, which permits arbitrary decision-making from the prime minister, must be rectified. ‘Parties must have courage to amend constitution’  Daman Nath Dhungana, Former speaker The country has experienced radical changes, but the political parties have struggled to effectively implement them. Despite adopting a new constitution, they have not demonstrated the capacity to work in its spirit. There is a lack of a functional apparatus to govern the state. The parties need to have the courage to pursue constitutional amendments. Rather than solely focusing on contesting elections and gaining state power, they should also have a clear plan for governance. We need a broad national consensus.

Nepal currently has diplomatic relations with 178 countries, but maintains residential missions in only 40 of them. The government runs most of these missions from rented properties, for which it spends billions of rupees every year. The costs of maintaining residential embassies outweigh the benefits, say government officials and former diplomats. According to them, Nepali missions are not yielding the desired results, particularly on the economic diplomacy front. There are a couple of reasons for this. An official at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MoFA) says failure of successive governments to appoint the right person for the ambassadorial role is the main reason for the poor performance of Nepali foreign missions. Nepal government assigns ambassadorial jobs to both party loyalists and career diplomats. And in the case of the former, there is always a chance of conflict between them and the MoFA. Political appointees are rarely knowledgeable about foreign policy and international relations, and the host countries do not take them seriously. The MoFA official says foreign governments would rather directly deal with the leadership in Kathmandu, instead of reaching out to unqualified ambassadors. Another reason is political instability in Nepal. Frequent government changes have resulted in ambassadors getting recalled from their jobs before they could complete their tenure, adds the official. A lack of coordination between embassies and the government is also affecting Nepali diplomacy. The ministry official says when there is no clear policy guidance regarding foreign relations, embassies and the ministry work according to their own rules and principles. Besides, the status of some ambassadors to powerful countries like India, China and the United States of America get ministerial status, making them senior to even foreign secretary. The MoFA official says such ambassadors do not want to brief about their activities to the department heads, which are led by joint secretaries, because they feel their position is on a part with that of a foreign minister. Some former ambassadors appointed on political quota, however, blame the MoFA for creating obstacles. Bishwambhar Pyakurel, who formerly led the Nepali mission to Sri Lanka, claims the bureaucracy is not serious about any issues. Ambassadors do not even have the authority to evaluate the performances of staff members working under them, he adds. Career diplomats who become ambassadors are also not faring well. They are scared of taking decisions in order not to create a controversy or anger the government, as it could affect their future promotion. The MoFA official says career diplomats who become ambassadors are happy just to perform their routine work. For instance, Nepali migrant workers, mainly in the Persian Gulf countries, continue to face hardship and exploitation, but our embassies there have not done little to address their problems. With the ambassadors either underperforming or reluctant to perform at all, Nepali embassies are only racking up bills while doing little to justify their existence. Let’s consider the expenses of our embassies, which are ever increasing. According to the report of the Auditor General, in the previous fiscal year, the government spent Rs 906m on rent and upkeep of its foreign missions. The government has taken a policy of purchasing land and buildings for its embassies. But so far, only the Riyadh mission has bought a property for the purpose, for which it paid Rs 527.7m. The government has also bought land to construct non-residential buildings in Canberra, Kuala Lumpur, Colombo, Islamabad, and Beijing, but the properties remain vacant to this day. The government released Rs 101.5m to pay leasing fees for Nepali missions in these five cities in the running fiscal year. This cost would have been saved if they had their own buildings. The MoFA had also allocated Rs 700m to build embassy buildings in Beijing and Canberra this fiscal year. However, the funds were transferred elsewhere, and Canberra received only Rs 1m of the allocated sum, which remains unspent. The Office of the Auditor General has instructed the Foreign Ministry to construct embassy buildings on its land to reduce leasing expenses. The Nepali Embassy in Canberra has leased 6,198 square meters of land for 99 years by paying a fee of AUD 1.2m.  According to Clause 3 (A) of the lease contract signed on March 21, 2018, the embassy was required to initiate building works within 18 months of the contract signing and complete them within 36 months. The Australian Capital Authority had given the Nepali Embassy until May 5, 2022, to begin construction works. However, 50 months since the signing of the contract, the embassy has only come up with the drawings of the building. The embassy has notified that the procurement process will begin once resources for construction are ensured. Similarly, two buildings built on 2,867 square meters of land owned by the Nepal government in Bonn remain unused after the embassy was moved to Berlin after the unification of Germany. But the embassy has been paying 8,626 euros annually as security utility fees for this property in Bonn. In the past 21 years, the government has spent more than Rs 18.6m on the maintenance and upkeep of its unused buildings in Bonn. The OAG has suggested in previous reports that the government should manage the property through sale or other means. The embassy notified the Foreign Ministry only recently that it has begun the process of selling the property. The Nepal government also owns three buildings, including a chancery, ambassador's residence and staff quarters, in Washington DC. About 30,000 square feet of land out of the 0.93-acre property that houses the ambassador's residence remains unused for a long time. The OAG has called on the government to make use of the land at the earliest. Since the government has been paying insurance and other fees for assets that are no longer in use, the OAG has advised that the concerned missions can take needful decisions for their proper management. However, there is a need to establish proper work procedures for the management of such assets. Lucky Sherpa, former ambassador to Australia, says bureaucratic hurdles from the MoFA are the main reason why the embassies are unable to take the initiative to manage such properties.  She says ambassadors cannot do anything because the foreign secretary rarely receives their calls. The process of opening embassies is not target-driven. Embassies are opened on the whims of top officials or politicians, not on the basis of necessity and proper evaluation, adds Sherpa. Nepal has bilateral trade with 154 countries, but enjoys a trade surplus with only 33 countries, including Denmark, United States, Algeria, Cambodia, Norway, Romania, Chad, Uruguay, Afghanistan, and Latvia. Most Nepali embassies have not made any progress to bridge the trade deficit. India, United States, Germany, United Kingdom, Canada, Turkey, France, Australia, Japan, and Italy are the top 10 export destinations of Nepal. Nepal’s passport is among the weakest in the world. According to the Henley Passport Index, it ranks on 102nd spot out of 108 countries, below North Korea and Palestinian Territory and one spot above Somalia. Analysts say so long as political instability continues to reign supreme in Nepal, political parties continue to appoint their loyalists to head foreign missions and bureaucracy continues to function with traditional mindset, the country will never prosper and its passport will not get strong. MoFA Annual budget  2022/23: Rs 5.8335bn 2021/22: Rs 6.0507bn 2020/21: Rs 6.5171bn   Nepali missions in numbers Diplomatic relations: 178 Trade relations: 154 Number of embassies: 30 Permanent mission: 3 Consulate general: 7 Honorary consuls: 53 Annual rent fee: 906m Key priority issues 

1. Trade imbalance
2. Passport category
3. Foreign investment
4. Resolving migrant issues
5. Tourism promotion

Preparations are underway for Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal’s visit to India. Although Dahal is yet to receive a formal invitation from India, his team expects it to arrive any day now and they are preparing accordingly. The prime minister’s trip will likely focus on enhancing the development partnership between Nepal and India. The Nepal-India relationship has witnessed several ups and downs at the highest political level in recent years. Contentious issues such as the Peace and Friendship Treaty of 1950, the Eminent Persons' Group (EPG) report, and border disputes have consistently figured in various levels of bilateral talks. These issues are likely to be raised during Dahal’s visit to India. Despite facing challenges and obstacles, connectivity and development projects between the two countries have made significant progress in the past decade. Officials say Prime Minister Dahal’s India trip could be centered on giving further momentum to these projects. Since the 1950s, the Indian government has been extending financial and technical assistance to Nepal for the implementation of large-scale development infrastructure and connectivity projects. These projects encompass various areas such as education, health, irrigation, and rural infrastructure. The 2022 Annual Report of the Ministry of External Affairs of India states that cross-border connectivity projects, such as rail links, roads, and Integrated Check Posts (ICPs), are progressing well. During Indian Foreign Secretary Vinay Mohan Kwatra's recent visit to Kathmandu, too, the two sides reviewed the projects and expressed satisfaction with the progress made. In recent years, Nepal and India have completed several major flagship projects, including the first-ever cross-border petroleum products pipeline in South Asia—from Motihari in India to Amlekhgunj in Nepal. The project was completed in 2019 and is already operational, facilitating the supply of petroleum products. Further discussions are underway to extend the pipeline to Chitwan in central Nepal, as well as to construct a new pipelines in eastern Nepal. Significant progress has been made in improving cross-border connectivity as well. Two Integrated Check Posts (ICPs), located at Birgunj and Biratnagar, are fully operational, facilitating the movement of approximately two million passengers and cargo traffic annually. Furthermore, additional ICPs are under construction, indicating the commitment to further enhancing cross-border trade and transportation. In the field of power transmission, three cross-border power transmission lines have been constructed, supplying 600 MW of electricity to Nepal, which has contributed to the development of the country's energy infrastructure. Road connectivity projects have also gained momentum, with India's assistance in the construction of 807 km out of the 1,024 km-long East-West Highway in Nepal. As of December 2022, all 14 Tarai road packages, completed under Indian assistance of Rs 5bn, have been handed over to Nepal. Several other roads are also under construction. Progress in the development of cross-border rail networks between Nepal and India has also been encouraging. The railway projects between the two countries include the operationalization of the Jayanagar-Bardibas cross-border section and Jogbani-Nepal customs yard rail section. In June 2022, a Bharat Gaurav train was flagged off, connecting the holy city of Janakpur in Nepal with Ramayana circuit locations in India. The Jayanagar-Kurtha stretch of the Jayanagar-Bardibas broad gauge project was also launched and operationalized in April 2022. There has been notable progress in the construction of a 136-km broad gauge electrified railway line that will connect Kathmandu with Raxaul. The Indian side has already completed the preliminary survey, and the location survey tasks are currently underway. It is worth mentioning that this railway line coincides with China's plan to construct the Kathmandu-Kerung railway line, for which a Chinese team is conducting a feasibility study. Likewise, there has been visible progress in bilateral energy cooperation. In 2022, the two countries signed a joint vision statement on power sector cooperation, outlining key pillars for collaboration. These include joint development of power generation projects in Nepal, cross-border transmission infrastructure, bi-directional power trade, coordinated operation of national grids, and institutional cooperation in sharing the latest operation information, technology, and know-how. Furthermore, hydropower projects being executed by Indian companies are progressing well. Large hydroelectric projects, such as Arun III (900 MW), Lower Arun (679 MW), Arun-4 (490 MW), West Seti and SR-6 (1200 MW), and Upper Karnali (900 MW), are currently being developed by Indian companies. In the past, there were criticisms regarding the sluggish progress of these projects, but they have picked up pace in the recent years. Prime Minister Dahal’s imminent India visit also comes at an exciting new development in Nepal. For the first time in history, Nepal has become energy surplus and even started exporting power to India. India has agreed to import more than 400 MW electricity from Nepal. To this end, Nepal exported power worth Rs 6bn in the summer of 2022. Likewise, there has been significant progress in the reconstruction projects after the 2015 earthquake. India extended $1bn to Nepal as part of its long-term assistance for post-earthquake reconstruction in housing, education, health, and cultural heritage sectors. The reconstruction work of over 130 hospitals/health centers, schools, and 28 cultural heritage sites in Nepal is currently underway. Since 2014, there has been a significant increase in exchange of high-level visits, which has greatly contributed to accelerating development projects. According to India’s Ministry of External Affairs, there have been 15 exchanges at the level of Head of State/Head of Government between Nepal and India since May 2014. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has visited Nepal five times during his tenure, and prime ministers of Nepal have visited India eight times since Modi came to power. Modi was the first Indian prime minister to visit Nepal after 1997. His first trip to Nepal in 2014 and subsequent visits not only revived exchanges of high-level visits, but also acted as an impetus to long-pending development projects. The ties between the two countries did suffer a serious setback in the wake of the undeclared border blockade enforced by India in 2015 and the border curbs that were put in place during the Covid-19 pandemic. But these issues did not stop the bilateral mechanisms between the two countries from holding their routine meetings. Currently, there are more than 40 bilateral mechanisms between Nepal and India. It is important to continue the development partnership between the two countries, irrespective of the political leadership at the top level.

Gagan Kumar Thapa and Swarnim Wagle were on the best of terms until recently. The former considered by many the future of Nepali Congress and the latter a highly regarded economist and a scholar. Together, they formed a rudder that would propel the Nepali Congress, a party riven by factional politics, long lost and strayed from its democratic vision. For Thapa, who hopes to one day lead the Congress, Wagle was an important ally. So much so that Thapa was even willing to hand over his constituency, Kathmandu-5, to Wagle in the general election held in November last year. Over the past few years, Wagle was trying to establish himself as a national-level politician. To this end, he initially maintained good ties with Congress President Sher Bahadur Deuba and his family members. But he later switched his loyalty and joined the Shekhar Koirala camp in the party. It was during this time that Wagle became close with Thapa. In a way, they complemented each other. Both of them carried the ambition and vision to reform Nepali Congress by ending the monopoly of Deuba and his coterie. As a matter of course, ahead of the November polls, Wagle started projecting Thapa as a future prime minister and a statesman. Wagle’s dream of contesting the general election didn’t come true despite Thapa agreeing to surrender Kathmandu-5 constituency to him. Deuba was in favor of granting the election ticket to Nain Singh Mahar and not Wagle. After being denied the election ticket, Wagle began seeking a vital appointment in a key state institution, but that didn’t happen either. He quit the Nepali Congress in a rather abrupt fashion on March 30, and joined the newly formed Rastriya Swatantra Party. Soon after joining the RSP, he was named the party’s by-election candidate for Tanahun-1, the constituency vacated by President Ram Chandra Poudel after his election. Until a few days back, there was a murmur in the political circle that Thapa was poised to become the finance minister in the Maoist-led coalition government, and his trusty ally, Wagle, would become a de facto finance minister. But overnight they have turned into sworn enemies, or at least acting as such. Thapa seems hell-bent on defeating Wagle in the April 23 by-election. Addressing a by-election campaign rally on Monday, Thapa alleged Wagle of showing petty attitude with his decision to quit the party to contest the election from another party. He also criticized his former friend for joining the Nepali Congress after having held many plum jobs outside and securing a good pension scheme.  Thapa’s vitriol against Wagle didn’t go unnoticed. Many people lambasted his remarks on various social media platforms. Kul Chandra Gautam, former senior UN official wrote on Twitter: “Sad to see this uncivil split between Thapa and Wagle. Gagan’s critique of Swarnim is unwarranted and unfair. Swarnim’s critique of Nepali Congress is totally understandable. They may now be in different parties, but wish they continue to collaborate.” The rivalry between Wagle and Thapa has suddenly made the upcoming by-election more interesting, even though the poll results from the three constituencies are not going to impact the government composition or the national politics, for that matter. The by-election is taking place in Bara-2, Tanahun-1 and Chitwan-2. It is set to be a three-way competition between Nepali Congress (coalition), CPN-UML, and RSP. In the November election, the RSP emerged as the fourth largest party, posing a serious challenge to the traditional mainstream parties. And no party will have more to prove in the upcoming by-election than the RSP. Now, let’s talk about the individual constituency and why they matter. In Bara-2, as a common pick of the ruling coalition, Upendra Yadav, also chairman of Janata Samajbadi Forum, is contesting against Purushottam Poudel of the CPN-UML, Shiva Chandra Kusawaha of the Janamat Party, and Ramesh Kharel of the RSP. Winning the by-election is important for Yadav, who lost the November polls to CK Raut in Saptari-2. Raut is rallying his supporters in Bara to defeat Yadav once again. But it is a tough task, as Yadav has the support of Congress and CPN (Maoist Center) behind him. The constituency was vacated after Ram Sahay Yadav was elected the Vice President. In terms of numbers, Yadav’s prospects of winning the elections are high, but doubts linger if the vote transfers will work his way. The outcome of the general election shows that independent candidates are strong in Bara, so it will be premature to predict the winner. But come the voting day on April 23, all eyes are going to be fixed in Tanahun-1, the home constituency vacated by President Poudel, because Wagle will be fighting against the candidates of mainstream parties. President Poudel was elected from the constituency in the general election with 25,313 votes, defeating his closest rival from the UML, Ek Bahadur Rana Magar, who secured 19,925 votes. A rival candidate from the NC, Govinda Raj Joshi, had received 6,878 votes, and Bikash Sigdel of RSP had garnered 6,032. Besides Wagle of the RSP, the other candidates for Tanahun-1 are UML’s Sarbendra Khanal, a former Nepal Police chief, who had lost the general election in Kathmandu, and Govinda Bhattarai of the NC. It seems that there will be a fierce contest between NC’s Bhattarai and RSP’s Wagle in the constituency. Despite the Congress winning the general election, it is too early to call a winner in the constituency because of chronic intra-party rift in Tanahun.  President Poudel and senior Congress leader Joshi, who filed a rival candidacy in the general election, share a bad blood. There is a chance that the Joshi faction might lend tactical support to Wagle to cut the votes of NC’s Bhattarai, a former student leader. The Congress leadership knows that Tanahun-1 will be a crucial battleground, and that’s why the party has tasked its two general secretaries—Thapa and Bishwa Prakash Sharma—to lead the election campaign there. The by-election in Chitwan-2 will also be interesting, as the RSP leader, Rabi Lamichhane, will be re-contesting there, expecting a back-to-back win. Lamichhane had won from the constituency in the general election, securing a whopping 49,265 votes against his closest rival, Nepali Congress’ Umesh Shrestha, who only got 14, 983 votes. But the RSP leader lost his lawmaker status after it was revealed that he had presented an invalid citizenship certificate to contest the polls. Lamichhane not only lost his seat in the House of Representatives but also his post as the home minister in the newly formed government. Lamichhane hopes to secure another landslide win from Chitwan-2 and shut down his detractors. Although a new writ has been filed against him at the Supreme Court for holding dual passports at the same time, his supporters believe that it is a ploy to discredit him once again. Despite several controversies and allegations, Lamichhane remains a formidable candidate.

The Pushpa Kamal Dahal-led government has completed its 100 days in office. While the government has come up with a long-list of accomplishments, experts and observers rate its performance as dismal. In this context, Kamal Dev Bhattarai  of ApEx sat down with  Bimalendra Nidhi, senior leader of Nepali Congress, a key coalition partner, to talk about the performance of the government, future of the coalition government, and its foreign policy orientation. Excerpts: How do you assess the performance of this government in its first 100 days? I have taken the government's 100-day performance in a normal and comfortable way. While talking about a government’s performance, we have to consider the popular mandate given through elections, as it determines the strength of parties represented in Parliament. This strength has a bearing on the formation of a government. At this point, government formation is an important development. This does not mean that the government has failed to perform well. Usually, experts review the performance of the government after the completion of its 100 days, but we have to accept the reality that we had to invest our time and energy to form the government itself. So, the government’s performance should be viewed from this perspective. There are already questions regarding the future of this coalition. Do you think it will sustain for a full-five-year term? This coalition will remain intact for a full five-year term. There will be changes in the government leadership but the parliament won’t be dissolved before it completes its full term. In our context, we have to accept a slightly different definition of political stability. Parliamentary stability should be the yardstick of political stability, instead of government’s. This is because previously, there was the provision of parliament dissolution before its full term, and such a provision still exists in many countries. But we have adopted a new provision that doesn’t allow the prime minister to dissolve the parliament. I want to assure everyone that this parliament will remain for five years. The current coalition will also remain intact. It’s only that the country will get three prime ministers in the next five years. Incumbent Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal will step down after 2.5 years to hand over the reins to CPN (Unified Socialist) Chairman Madhav Kumar Nepal, who will in turn cede the office to Nepali Congress President Sher Bahadur Deuba. The Deuba government will be in charge when the country heads for next general elections. This is a tentative agreement among coalition partners. What about the foreign policy priorities of this coalition government? Nepal’s foreign policy is not constant because there has always been some disparities and mistakes when a new government is formed. I want to say firmly that Nepal has two neighbors—India and China—and our relationship with India is a special one due to various factors such as language, culture, civilizational linkages, and open borders. These factors make our relationship with India entirely different than that of China. If we compare our relationship with two neighbors, it is obvious, we have to give more importance to India. Why is the relationship with India different from that of China? India has adopted “neighborhood first” policy but what does it really entail?  India should demonstrate this policy in practice. I do not know how this policy was coined but let me put some opinion on how neighbors are taken in our society. In Nepali, neighbor means ‘chhimeki’. With chhimeki, we have both bitter and cordial relationships but we do not take this bitter relationship to the point of enmity.  Relationships among chhimeki are not only about formal meetings and engagements. Informal engagement is equally important, and we engage in personal-level relationships with our chhimeki. On the one hand, there will be a respectful and formal relationship, on the other an informal, open and loose network. But our relationship with neighbors is going to become like a regimented barracks, which is not helpful for both countries. Indian leaders and people have always stood by our side in all our democratic movements. Similarly, Nepali leaders have supported the independence movement of India. We should not take open and frank discussions between Nepal and India as a dispute, or interference in internal affairs. When it comes to our relationship with China, there are cultural, linguistic and other disparities. China is a communist country, Nepal is a democratic country, and so is India. Cordial ties between two democracies are normal, just as China maintains good ties with other communist countries of the world. But since Nepal is not a communist country and is unlikely to become one, China should not conduct its foreign policy with the motive of bringing a communist regime in Kathmandu. It seems that India and China are competing to exert their influence in Kathmandu. What is your view on this?   There should not be competition between India and China in Kathmandu. Veteran Nepali Congress leaders Krishna Prasad Bhattarai, Ganesh Man Singh and Mahendra Naryan Nidhi used to say, “Chinese leaders are ready to provide us economic and other assistance but that is always lesser than what India is providing us.” There was a time when Chinese leaders used to advise our leaders to maintain a cordial relationship with India. I have personally experienced the spirit of such goodwill from senior Chinese leaders during my trip to Beijing in the past. They used to advise us to give due priority to our relationship with India. I can only hope that the Chinese leaders maintain that same spirit of friendship and cordiality today.

Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal has completed his 100 days in office, achieving very little both on domestic and international fronts. Most of his time and energy after coming to power on 25 December last year have gone in dealing with coalition partners and breaking and recomposing his government. Dahal skipped the meeting of LDC5 held last month and deputed Narayan Kaji Shrestha in lieu. He also turned down the invitation by China to attend the Boao Forum for Asia held on March 28-29 apparently in order to not irk India. Dahal has not embarked on any official foreign visit after his election, but it appears that he will do so with a visit to India, honoring the long-standing practice of Nepali prime ministers making their first trip to India first. During his first premiership in 2008, Dahal had broken this tradition by attending the Beijing Olympic Games, a move that didn’t go well with New Delhi. He would later tell his close confidants that it was his mistake to travel to Beijing before New Delhi. So when he became prime minister for the second time in 2016, he made it a point to visit New Delhi first. He is intent on honoring the tradition this time too, as was evident by his decision to not attend the Boao Forum for Asia held in Hainan Province of China. Although Dahal attended the Summit for Democracy, a virtual meet organized by the US, the Prime Minister’s Office saw to it that the meeting was portrayed as a low-key event, unlike in 2021 when former prime minister, Sher Bahadur Deuba, and his team issued a public statement regarding his address. It is said Prime Minister Dahal didn’t want to make a big deal out of the summit considering the current geopolitical climate. At the end of the summit, 73 countries came up with a joint statement but there is no mention of Nepal. Some countries including India have expressed reservations on some of the points of the statement but Nepal has kept mum. The main objective of the summit was to advance a democratic bloc to contain the growing global influence of communist China, and Prime Minister Dahal didn’t want to give any wrong message to Beijing by becoming an enthusiastic participant. Interestingly, a few days before the Summit for Democracy, China had organized ‘The Second International Forum on Democracy: Shared Human Values’, where it had invited politicians, experts, and scholars from around the world. There were no reports about Nepali government officials taking part in the event. The Dahal government faces a tough challenge of balancing ties with both the US and China. There is a dispute between the US and China on what and how democracy should be like. This conflict over the definition of democracy is playing out in countries like Nepal. American Ambassador Dean R Thompson on March 29 wrote a newspaper article to reinforce the importance of democracy, and the very next day, Chinese Ambassador Chen Song published his own opinion piece on the Chinese model of democracy, where he claimed the broadest, truest, and most effective democracy was truly rooted in China. With two global superpowers competing to exert their influence over Nepal, Prime Minister Dahal is treading carefully so as not to irritate Beijing or Washington by making his preference known.   As the US, China, and India are all crucial development partners of Nepal, it explains Prime Minister Dahal’s decision to skip Boao Forum for Asia meeting, his low-key participation in the Summit for Democracy, and his decision to make his first official visit to India. For now, Dahal’s first priority is to make an official visit to India. Time and again, he has publicly said that preparations are underway for his India trip. Soon after he became the prime minister, Dahal had talked about his plan to visit India, but it could not take place due to internal political issues. In February, Indian Foreign Secretary Vinay Mohan Kwatra visited Nepal to make preparations for Dahal’s India visit. Again, the prime minister was caught in internal political affairs. He will most likely visit India once his newly-formed coalition government gets full shape. After India, Prime Minister Dahal wants to visit China, but it is not sure whether Beijing will extend him an invitation. While extending its invitation to Dahal for the Boao Forum for Asia conference, China had expressed its intention of converting his trip into an official one. So, there is still hope that Beijing could invite Prime Minister Dahal for an official visit. It is clear that India, China and the US want to deepen their ties with Nepal on economic, political and military fronts. But for Dahal, balancing expectations of these three countries is going to be difficult, and not just because of their geopolitical rivalries, but also due to internal factors. For instance, Dahal could face pressure, including from the opposition party, CPN-UML, to take up the issues such as revising the 1950 treaty and settling the border dispute with India. New Delhi is certainly not keen on discussing these topics, let alone agreeing to settle them. The Indian side has said repeatedly that it wants sustained diplomatic talks on these issues before forwarding them at the top political level. Instead, India seems more interested in expediting the development partnership with Nepal, focusing on connectivity and hydropower projects. China too has shown its interest in increasing its engagements with Nepal that were obstructed due to the Covid-19 restrictions and the lack of interest shown by the former government under Sher Bahadur Deuba of the Nepali Congress. To this end, Chinese Ambassador Song has adopted an on-the-spot approach on bilateral issues related to trade and development projects. Recently, China also agreed to fully open all border points to ease bilateral trade. For the US, the key priorities are smooth implementation of the projects under the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) Nepal compact, bringing Nepal on board its State Partnership Program (SPP), concluding the transitional justice process, and expediting the activities under USAID.  While India, China and the US seem to have made their priorities known, Nepal has no clarity on how to deal with the interests shown by these countries and how to benefit from them. Nepali society remains sharply divided over some of the programs and projects launched by the US and China, largely due to the fear sowed by the political parties. It is up to Prime Minister Dahal to convince all sides. This will be his biggest challenge, especially when the political ideologies and foreign policies of his coalition partners are at odds with his own party.

In a next few days, Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal will complete his 100-day honeymoon period in office. And it is almost certain that his performance evaluation report is not going to be a rosy one. Even if one were to argue that Prime Minister Dahal had to deal with a lot of political entanglements and thus he was unable to focus on the works of his government, he cannot be spared from criticism. The Maoist prime minister came to power with the support of the CPN-UML even though his party had forged an electoral alliance with the Nepali Congress. He then went on to ditch the UML within two months and once again sided with the NC. As a result, Dahal had to take the vote of confidence on two occasions after being elected the prime minister on December 25 last year. His government is yet to get a full shape. While some of his Cabinet members, including Minister for Physical Infrastructure and Transport Narayan Kaji Shrestha, have come up with a three-month progress report of the government, and the Prime Minister’s Secretariat is also planning to publicize its own performance report, any independent observer will tell you that the Dahal government has very little to show for. The overall performance of the government has been dismal. After the UML, Rastriya Prajatantra Party and Rastriya Swatantra Party quit the government, some of the key ministries were left without their heads. As a result, the works of the ministries and their line agencies were affected. At one point, Dahal was in charge of 16 ministries. In the first week of January, a week after taking charge of office, Prime Minister Dahal issued a 30-point directive to government secretaries, urging them to take immediate steps to improve service delivery at government offices. He went so far to give a 30-day ultimatum to the secretaries to make the services smooth or face action. The slew of instructions did little to change the historically sluggish bureaucracy of Nepal. Prime Minister Dahal declared at an event on Wednesday that his government was on track to deliver better services to the people and that they will get better after the Cabinet expansion. He also assured that he will remain in power for a full five-year term, even though his coalition partners, NC and CPN (Unified Socialist), have been saying that there will be a change of premiership after two years. The new coalition government is busy giving final touches to its Common Minimum Program (CMP), but there is little hope that it will buoy the people who burdened by inflation, high cost-of-living, unemployment, and failing economy. Prime Minister Dahal and his key coalition partner Sher Bahadur Deuba of the NC have yet to show the political willingness to address the problems that the country is facing today. The ruling parties are busy in talks for the expansion of the Cabinet, and there are doubts that Dahal can manage the 10 parties and deliver good and stable governance. Since being elected the prime minister, Dahal has spent most of his time in political negotiations and attending public programs here and there. He hasn’t provided enough time to look after the affairs of the ministries under him. The ongoing Cabinet expansion talks will likely cause a serious discord inside the Maoist and the NC because there are many ministerial aspirants, says one Maoist leader. He fears the government’s time and energy could be spent on managing the disputes within and between the ruling parties in the days to come. The Dahal government has also failed to provide business to Parliament. Raghuji Pant, leader of the opposition party, UML, says the House is without business not because of the lawmakers, but because of the government and its ministers who are neglecting Parliament. The government did recently present the bill to amend transitional justice laws, but it is facing stiff opposition. Similarly, the Dahal government has also not taken any measures to address the problem faced by the country’s judiciary, which is without its head for a long time. On foreign policy front, too, Prime Minister Dahal seems undecided. Two of Nepal’s key neighbors, India and China, have been closely following the activities of this government, but Dahal so far seems content managing the internal power struggle. He is expected to visit India soon but the date has not been fixed yet. After his India visit, the prime minister is likely to visit China—then again, nothing has been decided so far. Soon after the formation of the government under Dahal, there was a flurry of visits to Nepal from high-level officials of major countries. But the government could not create an environment of trust to attract foreign investment and assistance. Despite the increased visits and interests of major powers, Nepal’s foreign assistance is declining. Even after three months in power, Dahal has not even appointed a foreign policy advisor, which says a lot about his attitude toward international relations. Political analyst Puranjan Acharya says it is hard to be optimistic about the Dahal-led government. The main thing, he says, is that Prime Minister Dahal does not have a strong mandate to lead the government because his party polled third in the general elections. Despite strong backing from the NC, the largest party in Parliament, it is hard to believe that this government can bring positive changes, he adds.

On Feb 19, the CPN-UML launched ‘Mission Grassroots’, a campaign designed to strengthen and expand the party organization across the country. Under the program, the party has deployed its central leaders in all 753 local units. The UML came up with the campaign soon after the general elections of Nov 20 last year. Despite the electoral alliance between the Nepali Congress and the CPN (Maoist Center), the UML performed fairly well, coming in second after the NC. Compared to other parties, mainly the NC and the Maoists, the UML already has a strong organizational base from central to local levels. The party wants to get stronger with the latest campaign, which will run until April. The party has deployed its leaders outside their home constituencies so that they could better identify where the problems are and come up with ways to fix them. Even the party chair, KP Sharma Oli, and other senior leaders are attending the programs being held at the local level. A high-level team consisting of the party vice-chairman, general secretary and other office bearers is overseeing the campaign. According to an official document of the party, based on the key findings of the campaign, the team will prepare a review report and submit it to the party leadership. The UML will then prepare for the annual party program based on the review report submitted by the team. The mission has a simple task, says UML leader Raghuji Panta, which is to involve more youths in the party. As one of the largest political parties, it is difficult to run the party’s affairs smoothly, he adds while noting that the mission like this helps the UML connect with the people at the grassroots. The mission aims to bridge the gap between youths, laymen, and the party leadership, enabling the party to work for the people more effectively, says Panta. The UML has become the first party to run its affairs in a systematic way after last year’s general elections.  Two other major parties—the NC and the Maoist Center—meanwhile are riven by factional politics and caught in an organizational mess. Asked why the UML felt the need to connect with the grassroots, leaders say a couple of factors forced them to pay special attention to the way the main party and sister organizations were functioning across the country. First is the vertical split in the UML after its former leader Madhav Kumar Nepal went on to form his own party, CPN (Unified Socialist), in 2022. If not for the split, the UML was confident of becoming the largest party, ahead of the NC. With the campaign, the UML leadership hopes to bring back the party supporters and cadres who defected to the Unified Socialist. Second reason behind the UML campaign is to assuage the discontent among the voters. Among the political parties, there is a tendency to ignore the grassroots level once the election season is over. This has created a serious public dissatisfaction against mainstream political parties. The UML wants to placate the public by sending its leaders to the grassroots to bridge the divide between the party and the ordinary voters. In the last election, the UML had many problems including intra-party betrayal and non-cooperation from voters at its own political base, which eventually cost the party the election in some constituencies. One UML leader says the party wants to rule out the repetition of such problems in future elections. Another factor that prompted the UML to launch the campaign is the emergence of new political forces like the Rastriya Swatantra Party, and the revival of old ones, like the Rastriya Prajatantra Party. A chunk of UML and NC votes were lost to the RSP in last year’s general elections. The RSP managed to win 20 seats in the Parliament, which is a lot for a new party. If the party does not get serious about reviving the people’s trust, it will lose more supporters in future, says a UML leader. As the UML’s efforts to unite, or at least forge a working alliance with the Maoist party have already failed twice, the party is planning to contest all future elections alone. The party leadership is planning to secure a majority in the upcoming elections without the help of an electoral alliance. UML Chairman Oli told the party supporters at his home constituency in Jhapa recently that the mission was launched with the purpose of securing 51 percent votes in the next elections. Some UML leaders say as the party has been relegated to the opposition benches with the latest decision of Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal to ally with the NC, they now have time to focus on building the party’s organizational strength. They are of the view that as the coalition government led by Dahal will not be able to deliver much, its failure will play in favor of the UML. Major purposes of the campaign

•   Distributing and renewing party membership
•   Identifying local problems
•   Identifying internal issues
•   Encouraging youths to join UML
•   Strengthening party committees