Submit your Article

A high-level South Korean official is in Kathmandu to scale up bilateral engagements between two countries.  Jang Sung-min, special advisor for political affairs to President Yoon Suk-yeol, arrived on Sunday as a special envoy  and he is busy meeting ministers and senior government officials. Jang met Foreign Minister Bimala Rai Poudyal on Monday and discussed various areas of bilateral and multilateral cooperation between two nations. He is scheduled to call on Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal on Tuesday. In the meeting with Dahal, he will present a blue-print to enhance  bilateral ties. Speaking with a group of journalists, Jang said his visit marks the beginning of high-level exchange of visits between Republic of Korea and Nepal, as the two countries are set to mark the 50th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations next year. Jang said he was in Kathmandu to discuss what can be done to kick-start a new beginning for the next 50 years of Korea-Nepal friendship. Over the past seven decades, Korea has made tremendous progress, turning itself from an aid recipient country to an aid providing country. Today, it is the world’s 10th largest economy and has adopted an assertive foreign policy. In this context, said Jang, President Yoon feels that it is now Korea’s turn to give back to the world. As Nepal is in the midst of economic development, he added, South Korea could share its success story and offer assistance in the field of technology, education and other areas. Jang said Nepal figures prominently in South Korea’s foreign policy outlook, as the two countries share common values such as democracy, freedom, and free market economy. Jang said Korea wants to engage with those countries that aspire to become a free-market economy. Like South Korea, he noted, Nepal is also surrounded by big powers, making it important to their national interests and national security. He said it would be prudent for Nepal to adopt a balanced policy with all powers to serve its national interests. The high-level visit from South Korea is also noteworthy because it is an important US ally. The country came up with its Indo-Pacific Strategy in January, which has been lauded by the US. Analysts say the strategy, based on three principles of inclusiveness, trust, and reciprocity, shows the Yoon administration’s ambition to make South Korea a global pivotal state amid growing threats from North Korea. Along with Nepal, South Korea is taking a series of measures to increase its interest in the Indo-Pacific region. South Korea is expecting reciprocal steps from the Nepali side to further enhance the bilateral cooperation. Korean officials say they are also looking to enhance collaboration in tourism and culture. Of late, RoK is closely following Nepal's engagement with China and other powers. South Korea’s Indo-Pacific strategy talks about building a free, peaceful, and prosperous Indo-Pacific region by enhancing cooperation with the countries in the region. Under the leadership of the new president, RoK is expanding the breadth of diplomacy throughout Asia as it aspires to make South Korea a critical player in the global stage. According to observers, South Korea’s willingness to expand engagement with Nepal and other countries is an opportunity to bring more assistance and investment to spur economic growth. The Republic of Korea is increasingly becoming an important and reliable partner in Nepal’s economic development. Construction, sericulture development, hydropower development, road and infrastructure development, health science, e-governance are some of the major areas supported by the Government of Korea to Nepal in the past. Of late, RoK has expressed willingness to support in the areas of cyber security.

Indian Foreign Secretary Vinay Mohan Kwatra is arriving in Kathmandu on Monday on a two-day official visit, at the invitation of his Nepali counterpart Bharat Raj Paudyal. Kwatra is scheduled to meet Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal and other senior government officials to discuss various bilateral matters such as connectivity, power trade, agriculture, health and culture. The Indian foreign secretary is also expected to extend an invitation to Prime Minister Dahal for an official India visit. Dahal plans to visit India soon after the presidential election, scheduled for March 9. The Indian side has said the visit is in keeping with the tradition of regular high-level exchanges between the two countries and the priority India attaches to its relations with Nepal under its neighborhood first policy. It added that the cooperation between the two countries has strengthened in recent years, with several major infrastructures and cross-border connectivity projects completed with India’s assistance.  Nepal’s Foreign Ministry said Kwatra’s trip is in continuation of the regular exchange of visits between the two friendly neighbors. The visit will be an opportunity to further expand and deepen Nepal-India ties, the ministry added. Kwatra’s visit comes on the heels of a series of high-level visits from the US. In this context, ApEx asked individuals attached to foreign affairs, politics and business what they think of and expect from the Nepal visit of a top official from India. Show diplomatic maturity Deepak Kumar Upadhyay, former ambassador  Indian Foreign Secretary Vinay Mohan Kwatra’s Nepal visit is regular and routine. But the visit is taking place at a time when Nepal’s domestic politics is passing through a sensitive time, particularly due to the upcoming presidential vote. While I personally think that Kwatra’s main mission is to hand over an invitation letter to Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal for an official India visit, it would be good if the two sides also presented their respective agendas in a free and frank way. But I see lack of immaturity on both sides when it comes to dealing with bilateral issues that demand regular, in-depth and serious dialogue. Some bilateral issues between Nepal and India have remained unaddressed for a long time. This only shows a lack of maturity on both sides. I hope for matured diplomacy from both Nepal and India to overcome the outstanding issues. Push agendas clearly Bhek Bahadur Thapa, foreign affairs expert Visits to Nepal by high-level foreign officials have increased in recent times. Big countries are showing interests in the internal political situation of Nepal. Regarding the Indian foreign secretary’s visit, Nepal and India have always had cordial and close ties. But there are some outstanding issues between the two countries, and they must be discussed during this visit. Nepal should put its agenda clearly and strongly. Prioritize trade issues Rajan Bhattarai, UML leader I think the purpose of the Indian foreign secretary’s Nepal visit is to extend an invitation to Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal for his visit to India. I do not think there will be any concrete discussions on bilateral issues. But, right now, we have some burning issues with India. We have a swollen trade imbalance with India and our foreign reserves are not in good shape. Nepal should take up these issues related to the economy with the Indian foreign secretary. Other priority issues that need attention are the EPG report, border disputes and ensuring smooth energy trade between the two countries. Don’t expect a breakthrough  Lokraj Baral, former ambassador Traditionally, foreign secretary of India takes a trip to neighboring countries after assuming office. So, this visit is by and large a routine affair. There are already several bilateral agencies between Nepal and India, including the one formed to review bilateral development projects. Foreign Secretary Kwatra is likely to get first-hand information on the current political situation in Nepal, but I doubt there will be any major breakthrough on bilateral issues, least of all on the border dispute. Even if the two sides were to touch upon the issue, it will most likely be postponed for future deliberations. Seek more air routes Shreejana Rana, president, Nepal-India Chamber of Commerce and Industry Nepal and India should discuss ways to improve air connectivity. Until now, only one entry point via Simara is made available for Nepal-bound flights coming through Indian air routes. To make the airfare more competitive, other entry points should be made available as well. At least Biratnagar in the east, and Bhairahawa, Nepalgunj and Dhangadhi in the west should get entry permits for Nepal-bound flights. As the Nepal government provides permission to Indian private airlines to enter Nepal, the Indian government should also provide permits to Nepali private airlines to fly to different Indian cities. There should be reciprocal arrangements vis-a-vis air connectivity.

It has been more than five years since Nepal became a part of China’s Belt and Road Initiative, but nothing has come of it yet. The Chinese side has been consistently putting pressure on Nepal’s political parties to make concrete progress on the issue. In principle, all the parties agree that Nepal should take economic benefits from the BRI, but they differ on the modalities of engagement. The Nepali Congress of late has been saying that it prefers grants over loans under BRI. The two major leftist parties, CPN-UML and CPN (Maoist Center), meanwhile, have not made their positions clear. Their leaders, however, say some feasible projects could be implemented. Even as Nepal’s position on BRI remains unclear, China has come up with two new strategies—Global Development Initiative (GDI) and Global Security initiative (GSI). And now Beijing wants Nepal to be a part of these strategic initiatives as well. In April 2022, Chinese President Xi Jinping proposed the GSI, a global governance and security architecture, at the opening ceremony of the Boao Forum for Asia, stating that it is another global public good offered by China. The details of the security initiative are oblique. Chinese media and experts have explained its contents in a vague notional way. Sanjay Upadhya, a US-based foreign policy expert, says while some features of the GSI sound attractive, others are too ambiguous. “The source of ambiguity relates to how the GSI could be implemented as an umbrella mechanism, especially when diverse countries have different security concerns and priorities,” he says. “For a country like Nepal, the GSI also smacks of a China-led security alliance, which our foreign policy has traditionally shied away from. Even if it were a more benign enterprise, the GSI as it is currently articulated is too sketchy for consideration.” While China has tried to brand its security initiative as a way to maintain global peace and uphold the UN Charter, observers say it is no more than a counterweight to the US-led security alliance. President Xi, on the occasion of International Peace Day on Sept 22, sent a congratulatory letter, where he promoted the GSI on a global platform.  He called on all countries to uphold the common, cooperative and sustainable security concept, to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all countries, and to abide by the purposes and principles of the UN Charter. Both GSI and GDI have become major talking points in all high-level meetings between Nepal and China. Some Chinese officials are even going so far as to claim that Nepal is already a part of these initiatives. A statement from China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs following the meeting between Narayan Khadka and his Chinese counterpart Wang Yi back in August said that Nepal endorses the visions of the GSI and GDI, and was trying to find a way to participate in and seek synergy with the two initiatives. A diplomatic source, however, said Khadka had clearly told the Chinese side that Nepal was ready to discuss the GSI only if it is purely a development initiative. “Khadka had also reminded the Chinese side about Nepal’s policy of staying out of military or security alliances,” added the source. Earlier, the Chinese ambassador to Nepal also claimed that Nepal welcomes the initiatives. Such assertions from China have been partly encouraged also by the decision of President Bidya Devi Bhandari to participate in a high-level meeting of the GSI against the advice of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The ministry had written to the Office of the President, saying that Nepal was yet to decide whether or not to join the GSI, and that it would be inadvisable for the president to participate in the meeting. President Bhandari didn’t heed the recommendation and made a virtual address at the GSI event. Political analysts say as Nepal’s non-alignment policy bars it from joining a military alliance, the president’s office committed a foreign policy indiscretion. As far as GDI is concerned, two projects have already gone into implementation. One is Nepal Smiling Children Project under which China Foundation for Rural Development, an implementing agency, will provide food for 3,600 children from poor communities. Another is support to schools and communities in remote areas for pandemic prevention and green recovery. Along with Nepal, this project has already been implemented in more than 70 countries. Arun Subedi, foreign affairs advisor to former Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba, says Beijing hasn’t sent any official letter of request to join the GSI. “As far as I can tell, there has been no official decision for or against the initiative as China has not made an official correspondence on the matter,” he said. Gopal Khanal, a foreign affairs analyst, also says that the discourse on Nepal’s possibility of joining or rejecting the GSI and GDI will begin only after the Chinese side officially approaches the government. “China should also share the contents of the initiatives if it wishes Nepal to join them,” he said. “It will help our parties and the government to come up with a position.” Major components of GSI

•   Vision of common, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable security
• Working together to maintain world peace and security
•   Respecting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all countries, upholding non-interference in internal affairs, and respecting the independent choices of development paths and social systems made by people in different countries
•   Abiding by the purposes and principles of the UN Charter, rejecting the Cold War mentality, opposing unilateralism, and shunning group politics and bloc confrontation
•   Taking the legitimate security concerns of all countries seriously, upholding the principle of indivisible security, building a balanced, effective and sustainable security architecture, and opposing the pursuit of one’s own security at the cost of others’ security
•   Peacefully resolving differences and disputes between countries through dialogue and consultation, supporting all efforts conducive to the peaceful settlement of crises, rejecting double standards, and opposing the wanton use of unilateral sanctions and long-arm jurisdiction

The presidential election, slated for March 9, has emerged as a major bone of contention between Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal and his primary coalition partner KP Sharma Oli of CPN-UML. Dahal is having cold feet about supporting UML’s presidential nominee calling for a “national consensus candidate”, much to Oli’s chagrin. UML has already secured the House speakership with the Maoist’s support, and Dahal has promised to hand over the premiership to Oli after 2.5 years. The prime minister is not keen about voting for UML’s presidential pick, which could give Oli considerable political latitude. Maoist leaders say Prime Minister Dahal wants a presidential candidate based on consensus and yet does not want to break the coalition by crossing Oli. As the health of the coalition continues to deteriorate over power sharing tug-of-war, Prime Minister Dahal is reportedly considering three strategies. First is honoring the gentleman’s understanding between him and Oli, and supporting UML’s presidential candidate but with some preconditions. Among the preconditions will be settling the transitional justice process following the spirit of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement, according to some Maoist leaders. Dahal does not want Oli to use transitional justice as a political bargaining chip. Another of Dahal’s fears of having a UML candidate as president is that Oli might conspire to topple the government and push the country toward parliament dissolution. Some Maoist leaders say Dahal is already feeling ganged up on by the UML and other parties in the coalition close to the UML, namely Rastriya Swatantra Party and Rastriya Prajatantra Party. Dahal is currently under pressure to reappoint RSP leader Rabi Lamichhane who recently resigned as Home Minister over citizenship controversy. The issue of Lamichhane’s reappointment has further widened the rift between Dahal and Oli. It is said Dahal wants to replace RSP and RPP with CPN (Unified Socialist) and other fringe parties that remain outside the government despite supporting it. By doing so, the prime minister hopes to reduce UML’s influence in his government. According to one Maoists leader, the onus of creating an environment of trust lies on Oli. If that happens, he said, Prime Minister Dahal might agree to support UML’s presidential candidate who is not Oli's loyalist. Maoist leader Devendra Poudel is of the view that there should be a consensus among major parties including Nepali Congress on the presidential candidate.  He added such an agreement would also ensure cordial ties with the international community. It is said Prime Minister Dahal wants to bring NC on board the consensus boat for the presidential election also to appease India, the US and rest of the Western world — and to shed the “pro-China” label. Dahal’s other strategy is breaking the current coalition and forming a new one with the NC. In this scenario, the Maoist party will support NC’s presidential candidate. It will also pave the way for the Unified Socialist, Nepal Samajbadi Party, and other fringe parties to join the government. If that happens, Dahal could bargain for a full-five-year term as prime minister with the NC, which the latter is likely to agree to. As this paper has previously written, Dahal is seeking NC’s assurance to forge a long-term alliance and to conclude the transitional justice process. The third strategy is to seek support of the major parties to back Madhav Kumar Nepal of Unified Socialist as the next president. If the UML is genuinely committed to the prospects of forming a broad leftist alliance, it should not object to Nepal's candidacy. This could also be an acceptable option for the NC, says a Maoist leader, as well as address the concerns of external powers. Prime Minister Dahal is reportedly discussing these three alternatives with his close aides. Meanwhile, the UML is getting increasingly suspicious of Dahal’s intention. The prime minister’s position on the Home Ministry portfolio and his reluctance to form a political mechanism to guide the government has already miffed Oli and his party. Oli has been meeting Dahal on a daily basis in order to keep the coalition intact. The Maoist prime minister, who got the trust votes from the NC and other parties, is confident of his survival even without the UML.  

Nepal is set to elect its new President on March 9. This gives major political parties more than a month to nominate their candidates. But there is a rub: the ruling CPN (Maoist Center) and its primary coalition partner, CPN-UML, seem to be headed toward a conflict regarding presidential pick, and it isn’t helping that Nepali Congress is also claiming the post. If Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal were to honor the gentleman’s agreement reached with UML leader KP Sharma Oli, the UML candidate is sure to win the presidential race. As part of a power-sharing deal, Dahal had promised to cede the prime minister’s office to Oli after 2.5 years and back UML candidates for the speaker and president’s posts. UML’s Dev Raj Ghimire was elected the Speaker as part of the understanding between Dahal and Oli on January 19. Prime Minister Dahal, however, is unlikely to back UML’s presidential candidate. Doing so would mean that UML would be heading the House of Representatives, the Office of the President, and after 2.5 years the executive—a terrifying prospect for both Maoist and NC. Dahal has been using the phrase ‘national consensus’ these days when talking about the next president. That’s his euphemistic way of saying that Oli should not have the power to dictate who the president should be. Dahal’s Maoist party has also officially decided to forge a consensus on the presidential election. But there are some leaders in the party who fear that deviating from the agreement with UML could damage the party and Dahal’s image. The position taken by Maoist has fueled mistrust between Oli and Dahal. Some UML leaders already suspect that Dahal could break the current coalition and forge a new one with the NC, which has the most number of seats in parliament. Narayan Dahal, standing committee member of the Maoist party, says this is something that the situation has demanded due to the lack of a clear majority in parliament and an inability of any party to form a stable coalition. It is urgent to elect the president based on national consensus, he adds, noting that if the UML gets the presidency, there will be no one to counter its power in parliament. UML leader Astalaxmi Shakya, however, is of the view that the Maoists should not renege on the power-sharing agreement. She says Dahal should be serious about the consensus, because he got the premiership, which is already a huge achievement for a third-placed party. Dahal apparently has gained the courage and confidence to spurn Oli partly because the NC had given him the confidence vote on January 10. It is clear that NC, which was relegated to the opposition benches despite winning the most number of seats in parliament, wants to break the Maoist-UML coalition and be in the governing position. The NC gave its trust vote to Dahal so that it could bargain for the posts of speaker and president. Having lost the speaker’s seat, the NC is now trying to secure the presidency. If Dahal agrees to throw his weight behind NC’s candidate, it could spell an end for Maoist-UML coalition. And if this scenario comes to pass, it would be a masterstroke on the part of NC leader Sher Bahadur Deuba, who is currently under fire for breaking up the electoral alliance with the Maoists. Despite the risk of imminent rift with the Maoist party, UML’s Oli has rather uncharacteristically kept restraint. He and Dahal have been meeting almost on a regular basis. Keeping the current coalition intact is important for UML. When Oli agreed to back Dahal’s prime ministerial bid, he did so because his party had the upper hand numberwise. Even though the Maoist, third-placed party in parliament, led the government, the UML was in the position to call the shots as the kingmaker. But the situation changed after NC gave its vote of confidence to Dahal. If the UML were to ditch the coalition, Dahal is confident that he will have NC to back him. In such a situation, UML will be out of power both at the center as well as in provinces. Oli knows this very well. If he wants to safeguard the coalition, he better not create a stink about not getting the presidency. At any rate, Dahal is unlikely to hand over the presidency to the UML—that is unless Oli agrees to sacrifice the promised premiership after 2.5 years. Dahal could even be fancying a chance of becoming a full term prime minister if the NC were to join the ruling coalition.

US Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Victoria Nuland on Monday laid out the key issues that America wants to work on with the Pushpa Kamal Dahal-led government. The top State Department official arrived in Kathmandu on Sunday evening as part of her trip to Nepal, India, Sri Lanka, and Qatar. On Monday, she held separate meetings with Prime Minister Dahal, Foreign Minister Bimala Rai Poudyal, CPN-UML Chairman KP Sharma Oli, and Nepali Congress President Sher Bahadur Deuba. The meetings revolved around the topics of US-Nepal bilateral partnership, Nepal’s transitional justice process, and transparency, among others. Speaking to the media later in the day, Nuland said the US wants to enhance long-standing partnership to support Nepal’s economic development. “The US wants to see Nepal as a strong economic power, I am excited to go home and discuss in Washington what happened here in Nepal,” she added. In her meeting with Prime Minister Dahal, the first agenda under discussion was a smooth implementation of projects under the US’ Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) Compact: construction of transmission line and road upgradation. “We, of course, discussed the next step in finalizing the MCC projects,” said Nuland. Nepal’s parliament endorsed the MCC Nepal Compact in February last year amid protests from some fringe parties on the left. The projects are due to enter their execution phase in August, and the US wants assurance from the Dahal government that they are implemented without obstructions. Despite parliamentary ratification of the compact, some elements are still trying to obstruct its progress. There have been reports about protests in areas where the transmission line under the MCC is to be constructed. Another issue that figured in the meeting between the US official and top Nepali leaders was the long-drawn-out transitional justice process. According to Nuland, they discussed the transitional justice bill, which is under deliberation. The US and other Western powers are of the view that the transitional justice process should be victim-centric. They are against the idea of granting blanket amnesty on cases of serious human rights violations. “The US is ready to provide support to implement the TRC (Truth and Reconciliation Commission) laws,” said Nuland. The US official also took up the issue of investment climate in Nepal. She told senior government and political party leaders that US investors are eager to invest in Nepal, provided there is a conducive environment. Corruption in Nepal remains a key concern for the US when it comes to building a trustworthy investment climate. The Joe Biden administration has come up with the first-ever United States Strategy on Countering Corruption aimed at elevating the fight against corruption, not only at home but also abroad. Foreign visits of top Biden officials are also aimed at enhancing US partnership on global issues, such as the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war, the state of democracy, and the threat of cyber attacks. Nuland said she and Nepali leaders discussed ways to enhance partnership to foster democracy in Nepal. She said the US was ready to provide technical support to Nepal in the field of cybersecurity. Asked about the growing US-China geopolitical rivalry, Nuland advised Nepal to maintain good relations with all neighbors. “We welcome Nepal having a good relationship with all its neighbors,” she said. But while forging economic partnership with neighbors, she said, making a veiled reference to China, that Nepal should pay attention “to protect its sovereignty, ensure that it is good for Nepal, there is no corruption and everything is transparent”. Nuland refrained from making any comments on China’s protest against the MCC. She said the Biden administration was engaging more with China.

Victoria Nuland, US under secretary of state for political affairs, arrived in Kathmandu on Sunday to “engage with the new government on the broad agenda of the US partnership with Nepal”. It will be the first high-level visit of a foreign official since the formation of a new government under Pushpa Kamal Dahal in December last year. According to the US State Department, the primary American objectives in Nepal are strengthening good governance, democratic values, and security and stability. Supporting inclusive, equitable economic growth; a clean, resilient energy future; and helping Nepal become more self-reliant, independent, and resilient as it confronts global challenges are other US objectives in Nepal. A senior US official says Nuland’s daylong visit will focus on all key areas of US-Nepal partnership. Nepal’s parliament ratified the US’ Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) Compact in February last year, and Washington clearly attaches high priority on its successful implementation. The $500m grant is aimed at expanding Nepal’s electricity transmission infrastructure and improving its road maintenance regime. The MCC projects will enter their execution phase from August. Some say the MCC is Washington’s response to Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative. And in the run-up to the MCC endorsement by Nepali parliament, there have been protests, led by pro-Beijing political forces and their leaders, against the US program. The US still suspects that the project development could face hindrances—all the more so because the current government is led by the Maoist party with the backing of CPN-UML, another leftist force, as a major coalition partner.  Nuland’s trip also bears high significance amid growing US-China competition to increase their sphere of influence in South Asia. Nepal, which shares borders with China and India, has strategic importance for both Washington and Beijing. In this context, Kamal Dev Bhattarai spoke to foreign policy experts to solicit their views on Nuland’s visit. Who is Nuland? Victoria Nuland was sworn-in as Under Secretary for Political Affairs in April 2021. Prior to that, she was senior counselor at the Albright Stonebridge Group, a global strategic advisory and commercial diplomacy firm based in Washington, DC.  She was also a non-resident senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, distinguished practitioner in grand strategy at Yale University, and a member of the board of the National Endowment for Democracy. A US diplomat for 33 years, Nuland served as assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian Affairs from September 2013 until January 2017 under President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry. She was State Department spokesperson during Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s tenure, and US ambassador to NATO during President George W. Bush’s second term (2005-2008). Nuland served as special envoy and chief negotiator on the Treaty on Conventional Arms Control in Europe from 2010-2011, and as deputy national security advisor to Vice President Dick Cheney (2003-2005). In addition to two tours at NATO in Brussels, she has served overseas in Russia, China and Mongolia, and in various assignments at the State Department in Washington. Nuland has a BA in history from Brown University. Reading into the high-profile visit Engaging Maoist-led govt  Sanjaya Upadhyay, US-based foreign policy expert I believe the underlying message the United States wants to send to Nepal at this juncture is that Washington is fully vested in securing its interests in this country. In that regard, Nuland’s visit is aimed at engaging the new Maoist-led government, especially amid suspenseful circumstances of its formation. She can be expected to convey the US commitment to strengthening its bilateral partnership with Nepal in all its dimensions. Washington might want to gauge Nepal’s commitment, specifically the extent of the importance the disparate coalition government attaches to relations with the United States. Washington is anxious to see the smooth implementation of the Millennium Challenge Corporation Nepal Compact along with other projects the United States has funded in the country. Nuland can also be expected to affirm her government’s desire to see a strengthening of the democratic process in Nepal amid growing popular disillusionment here. She might want to nudge Nepal toward completing the long-delayed task of promoting transitional justice. Advancing the cause of deprived and disadvantaged communities, and ensuring the rights of refugees as an intrinsic part of the democratization process could also be part of her message to the new government. Heightening US competition with China in recent years gives the US greater strategic incentives to strengthen its engagement with South Asia, where Chinese influence has been growing. Long-term engagement Mrigendra Bahadur Karki, executive director, CNAS Since the establishment of ties between the two countries in 1947, the US has been continuously and consistently engaging with Nepal, despite repeated regime change in Nepal. The US has a long-term vision and has a recorded history of how it wants to engage with Nepal. In Nepal, we view our relationship with the US through the prism of some specific events and phenomenon, which is flawed. Regarding the US engagement with Nepal, the importance of our geopolitical location is already there. As far as the visit of Nuland is concerned, her major purpose is to convey the US position on bilateral, regional and international issues and read the mind of the newly-formed government under Pushpa Kamal Dahal. At this point, it is a major responsibility of both Nepal and US governments to fully implement the MCC and complete it within the five-year deadline. Geopolitics at centerstage Chandra Dev Bhatta, geopolitical analyst Nepal's engagement with the US has increased in recent years in more ways than one and at various levels. This demands frequent exchanges of visits not from one side but from both sides, which sadly has not been the case. Yet, it certainly becomes important for a superpower like the US, for whom all the countries are equally important irrespective of their size, to maintain the status quo, and Nepal certainly cannot be left out in that context. Likewise, evolving geopolitics in Asia further demands US engagements to look into the re-emerging power relations in the Himalayan Asia, where Nepal remains an important country. This particular visit is taking place at a time when Kathmandu has a new government and the MCC project is just underway with more initiatives in the pipeline. With the new government in Kathmandu looking very shaky, chances are such that many things may either fall apart or would not move into the right direction. The current state of affairs in Nepal and the evolving geopolitics in the region demands better understanding of the situation, which makes this visit only natural. An assessment visit Rupak Sapkota, foreign policy expert Before the November 20 elections, it was widely presumed that the Nepali Congress-Maoist coalition would remain intact. But that didn’t happen. External forces are keenly watching the foreign policy priorities and orientation of the new government. I think the key purpose of this visit is to read the mind of the new government regarding its policy toward America. As a key coalition partner of the erstwhile government, Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal facilitated the endorsement of the MCC. So, I think the US is ready to work with the new government. In a way, it is an assessment visit from the US side. America seems confident that the US-Nepal bilateral relationship will move ahead under Dahal’s leadership. The prime minister and other leaders should convey their clear message that Nepal wants to stay away from the US-China geostrategic rivalry and wants to engage with all powers on economic terms. From our side, we have to be frank and candid about our priorities.

“Our main agenda is the restoration of the Hindu state and scrapping the federal structure. For this, our impactful presence in the government is necessary. Now our agendas will get traction in parliament as well.” This is a part of speech delivered by Rastriya Prajatantra Party Chairman Rajendra Lingden, also the deputy prime minister and home minister in the Pushpa Kamal Dahal-led coalition government, in his hometown Jhapa on January 23. Previously, another RPP leader and Law Minister Dhurba Bahadur Pradhan had said in a TV interview that the federal structure should be dismantled. Prime Minister Dahal learned about the RPP’s long game of doing away with federalism and secularism—two cornerstones of the 2015 constitution—when he attended the National Assembly meeting on January 24.  At the meeting, NA member from the Nepali Congress, Anita Devkota, raised an objection to the statement made by Minister Pradhan. In response, the prime minister assured the Upper House that his government was fully committed to federalism. He even vowed to seek clarification from the concerned minister(s) for making anti-federal statements. Dahal did not seek any clarification from Pradhan, nor Lingden for that matter. Doing so would shake the precariously balanced coalition of seven parties. Political analyst Binoj Basnyat says Prime Minister Dahal saying that he will demand explanation from his minister for making anti-federal remarks is a mere posturing to show that he has the confidence of continuing this government without the support of fringe parties. Besides, he adds, Dahal does not want to appear as a weak leader before his party. The truth, however, is that Prime Minister Dahal is not in a comfortable position to rattle the coalition, which is a disparate collection of political parties with opposing ideologies. RPP is a pro-monarchy, right wing Hindu party that opposes secularism and federalism, and Dahal leads the Maoist party that led a decade-long armed insurgency to overthrow the monarchy and bring a federal republic system in Nepal. The newly emerged political force, Rastriya Swatantra Party led by Rabi Lamichhane, is also known for its disdain towards the federal system. The party did not field its candidates in the provincial assembly elections. Though the party has not made any formal stance regarding federalism, a bulk of its leaders and cadres want to reinstate unitary government. Without the RPP and RSP, which together hold 34 seats in parliament, Dahal knows his government will collapse. Dahal has said that his key priority is to fully implement the constitution by strengthening the current federal structure and concluding the peace process. But he faces opposition from within his own government. Haribol Gajurel, Dahal’s political advisor, says that the prime minister is fully committed to the 2015 constitution by fully implementing federalism. How he will do that with parties like RPP and RSP in the coalition nobody knows. RPP and RSP will enjoy the role of kingmakers even if Dahal’s CPN (Maoist-Center) parted ways with its current main coalition partner, CPN-UML, to form a government with the Nepali Congress. Their support will be decisive even if the UML and NC were to form a government without the Maoists. Dahal fears the anti-federal sentiment will seep into the general public, not from outside but from his own government partners. He is not even sure of the UML, as KP Sharma Oli has made abundantly clear that he is not happy with the current political system. In recent years, Oli has been building his party on nationalist plank and he sees federalism as a hurdle. When Dahal became the prime minister in December, this paper had pointed out how he would have a tough time managing the conflicting interests of his coalition partners. Within a month into his premiership, it seems that the coalition unity is fraying. Prime Minister Dahal is also under pressure from Madhes, Janajati, Tharu, and other marginalized communities to address their concerns. Already, Nagarik Unmukti Party and Janata Samajbadi Party are threatening to withdraw their support if their demands are not addressed. Dahal has a herculean task of managing his coalition partners. Political analyst Bijaya Kanta Karna says managing the right-wing parties in the coalition remains the single-most challenge for Dahal. The prime minister does not want to dent his image as a champion of republicanism, federalism, inclusion, and secularism, but he has been thrust in a position where he must take a tough position with the parties that oppose these ideas, adds Karna. One way to offset the influence of RPP and RSP for Dahal is to bring Janata Samajbadi Party, Nagarik Unmukti Party, Janamat Party, and Loktantrik Samajbadi Party on board. This is easier said than done, says Karna, for there is a risk of the UML pulling support from the government. The UML had played an important role to bring RPP and RSP on board the coalition. Prime Minister Dahal must tread with extreme caution in order not to irritate the UML by pushing away either RPP or RSP.