Submit your Article

US President Joe Biden unveiled a new national security strategy last week. The document talks about closely working with South Asian partners. It states: “No region will be of more significance to the world and to everyday Americans than the Indo-Pacific. As we work with South Asian regional partners to address climate change, the Covid-19 pandemic, and the PRC’s [People’s Republic of China] coercive behavior, we will promote prosperity and economic connectivity across the Indian Ocean region.” The strategy further states that competition with China is most pronounced in the Indo-Pacific, but it is also increasingly global. “Many of our allies and partners, especially in the Indo-Pacific, stand on the frontlines of the PRC’s coercion and are rightly determined to seek to ensure their own autonomy, security, and prosperity.” So what will be the implications for Nepal as this region is primed to become an epicenter of the US-China contestation? Sanjaya Upadhya, Washington-based foreign policy expert, says the document describes China as the only competitor with both the intent to reshape the international order and, increasingly, the economic, diplomatic, military and technological power to advance that objective. “Clearly, this assertion takes the US-China rivalry to a new level. As Washington would have the prerogative of defining what behavior on the part of Beijing is ‘coercive’, Nepal could expect further US assertiveness vis-à-vis our general foreign policy in the period ahead,” he says. The ongoing National People’s Congress of China has indicated how regime security would be an even more categorical concern for Beijing going forward. “In such a situation,” says Upadhya, “Nepal can be expected to experience a stiffer tug-of-war between the two global powers.” Don McLain Gill, Manila-based geopolitical analyst, says the new document highlights two important aspects of US foreign policy. “The first is the realization that China, and no other state, serves as the biggest challenge to the established rules-based order due to its global ambitions and its growing material capacity to back those very ambitions,” he says. “The second realization is the need for the US to pay more attention to the evolving dynamics of the Indo-Pacific region, given its position at the center stage of global geopolitics and geo-economics.” Within the greater Indo-Pacific, Gill reckons South Asia serves as an important sub-region, given China’s increasing strategic footprints and the consequences that have occurred due to its economic engagements that lack transparency and accountability. With a desire to promote a rules-based and fair developmental agenda, South Asian states, including Nepal, may be able to benefit from the desire of the US and other key democratic powers like India and Japan to forge an inclusive cooperative framework that will offer them a more sustainable alternative for growth, development and security. “While similar initiatives have been suggested in the past by the US, the need to effectively coordinate and plan practically based on domestic and external realities is necessary in order to forge a long-term and beneficial roadmap for the region,” adds Gill.

Since 2013, Nepali airlines have been banned from flying into Europe for failing to keep up with the international air safety protocols. The decision to blacklist Nepali airlines from entering the European skies was taken after a series of plane crashes that occurred particularly in 2010, 2011 and 2012.  Nepal has since been urging the European Commission to delist its airlines from its blacklist stating that there has been a substantial improvement in aviation safety. Now, Nepali officials seem hopeful that the commission will lift the ban soon.  In the first week of October, a three-member technical team from the European Union Aviation Safety Agency visited Nepal to discuss the aviation safety issue. Besides holding discussions with the officials from Civil Aviation Authority of Nepal (CAAN), the team also visited some private airlines companies.  The team is set to seek further clarification from CAAN on some issues before submitting its report to the commission, which will then take a final call on whether to lift the ban. Officials in Nepal are buoyed from their talks with the technical team. Jagannath Niraula, spokesperson for CAAN, says the EU representatives appreciated the progress made by Nepal in the areas of aviation security.  “This time we are 99 precent optimistic that the commission will remove us from its blacklist and our airlines can fly to European skies which will be a big boost to our aviation industry.”   The audit reports show that Nepal has indeed made improvements in aviation safety. In April, a report by the Universal Safety Oversight Audit Program, under International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), showed that Nepal’s air safety ratings have improved significantly, achieving a 70.1 percent score, which was 66.76 percent in 2017. The score was eight percent more than the global average of 67.2 percent. Audits were conducted in 2009, 2016 and 2017 respectively.  According to CAAN, Nepal made significant progress in its oversight capability since the initial audit of 2009.  In 2018, ICAO awarded Nepal with Council President Certificate in recognition of its achievement in resolving its safety oversight deficiencies and implementing other international safety standards. CAAN officials have since been doubling down on their effort to remove Nepali airlines from the EU blacklist.  But there is one remaining issue that remains unresolved. Despite improvements in air safety, CAAN has failed to make institutional reforms. Splitting CAAN into two entities, one a regulator and the other a service provider, is a long due issue. A bill in this regard is pending in Parliament and political parties have not prioritized the bill.  Some fear the failure to break up CAAN could delay the delisting process. But CAAN officials, by and large, seem confident that the improvement made in aviation security is good enough for the EU to delist Nepali airlines from its blacklist. CAAN’s Aviation Security Report 2021 states that in the past 10 years, fatalities related to airplanes have registered a continuous steep drop, though the same for helicopter accidents has increased between 2011 and 2021.  During the period of 2011 and 2020, the highest number of plane accidents was recorded in 2016. There were four airline accidents that year. Likewise, the highest number of fatalities was observed in 2012 when 34 lives were lost. In 2020, there was one accident without any fatalities.  The improvement in aviation safety was in large due to the four-year Nepal Aviation Safety Plan implemented by CAAN in 2018. The plan was in line with the Global Aviation Safety Plan and Regional Aviation Safety Plan, which identified several areas of safety and took measures to address them. 

“... I remember meeting a woman on our way to Gorkha, who approached BRB suddenly and scolded him, ‘you silly, Baburam! Why did you leave the party and Parliament when you were going to be the country’s next President!’ There were also people who predicted that BRB would henceforth be reduced to a mere Marxist intellectual.”  This is an excerpt from the book, ‘Hisila: From Revolutionary to First Lady,’ penned by Hisila Yami, former Maoist party leader and the spouse of ex-prime minister Baburam Bhattarai.   “As for me, I was glad that BRB had finally left Prachanda, who had always allied with or attacked BRB for his own personal motives and political gains,” writes Yami in her 2021 political memoir.  It’s been more than seven years since Bhattarai ended his 30-year-old relationship with the Maoist chair, Pushpa Kamal Dahal. On 26 September 2015, six days after the promulgation of the new constitution, Bhattarai announced at a press conference that he was leaving the Maoist party.  At the time, Bhattarai had described his old party as a ‘house with a red sticker,’ which is to say irrelevant in the changed political context. He also went on to allege Dahal of indulging in corruption and making alliances with “regressive leaders” like KP Oli of the CPN-UML.  But, as the saying goes, politics makes strange bedfellows. Bhattarai has now resorted to taking Dahal’s side in order to remain relevant in national politics. He has handed over his constituency (Gorkha-2) to Dahal despite his high prospects of winning the elections.  After Dahal fielded his candidacy on October 7 for the upcoming parliamentary elections, Bhattarai said: “I am extremely happy to hand over my electrical constituency to a towering leader like Dahal, which is an historic opportunity for the voters of this district.”  In fact, it was Bhattarai who convinced Dahal to contest the polls from Gorkha, one of the heartlands of Maoist insurgency, where the party made gains in the local elections this past May. After severing ties with Dahal, Bhattarai, who had made his name in the party as the Maoist ideologue, tried to form a new political party. On 12 June 2016, he launched Naya Shakti. He went on a nationwide tour to promote his new party, to no avail. The party met a humiliating defeat in the 2017 elections. Bhattarai was the only leader to win a seat in the federal parliament from Gorkha-2, which was largely due to his popularity in his home district.   Ever since, Bhattarai has tried rather unsuccessfully to form and reform several parties.  Since 2015, Maoist chair Dahal, too, has made some major political departures to rebrand the image of his old party, one of former guerillas, not well-versed in the ways of mainstream politicking.    The popularity of the Maoist party seen right after it joined the peace process in 2006 was short-lived. So Dahal decided to merge his party with the UML in 2018 to form the Nepal Communist Party (NCP). But this new party split in 2021, thus the UML and Maoist were revived.  “We both failed in all our news experiments that we did after the promulgation of the new constitution. So we decided to come together to protect the achievements made by the people’s war,” Dahal said at a public program on September 24.  “We recalled the days of the people’s war and reached a conclusion that we two should come together to develop a model of socialism in Nepal.”   Dahal repeated the same thing after filing his candidacy from Gorkha. According to some Maoist leaders, Bhattarai has almost joined the mother party. They say the official announcement could be made after the November 20 elections.  So what led Bhattarai to give up electoral politics at least for now and rejoin his old comrades?  Some say Bhattarai’s influence and image took a serious hit after quitting the Maoist party. This became evident when his new party did not fare well in the 2017 elections.   On 6 May 2019, Bhattarai’s Naya Shakti united with the Federal Socialist Forum, a Madhes-based party led by Upendra Yadav. But the power tussle between Bhattarai and Yadav led to the party split in 2022.  A leader close to Bhattarai says the party breakup left the latter frustrated. It was around the same time some Maoist leaders started urging Bhattarai to mend fences with Dahal and rejoin the old party. After several rounds of talks with Dahal, say some Maoist leaders, Bhattarai has agreed to return to his old party.  It is said that Dahal has agreed to Bhattarai’s condition that he would be allowed to manage some of his leaders and cadres in the Maoist party. One of Bhattarai’s immediate goals is to elevate his daughter Manushi Yami Bhattarai in the party. A JNU graduate, Manushi was involved in student politics from the Maoist party. She is contesting the November 20 parliamentary elections from Kathmandu-7 as a Maoist candidate.  Since Bhattarai is supporting Dahal in Gorkha, he expects reciprocity from the Maoist party to ensure his daughter’s victory in Kathmandu.  Meanwhile, Dahal reckons this is a good time to have his old comrade back to his fold, given he is not pleased with his current senior leaders.   It is said that Dahal is frustrated by the behavior of leaders, such as Narayan Kaji Shrestha, Janardhan Sharma and Barsha Man Pun. These leaders, a Maoist leader says, were opposing and questioning every decision taken by the party leadership, including the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) and bill to amend the Citizenship Act. “Dahal wants a senior leader by his side. Bhattarai, meanwhile, has a shot at fulfilling his goal of becoming an influential politician if he were to rejoin the Maoist party,” says the leader.  For a long time, Bhattarai had served as Dahal’s deputy in the Maoist party, which he is likely to retain if he rejoins the Maoist party.  Madhu Sudan Panthi, a senior journalist who has closely followed Dahal-Bhattarai relations, says it remains to be seen how the rekindled relationship between the two leaders will pan out.   “During the insurgency the two leaders were rarely on the same page,” he says. “Though they were in the same party, there was always a clash of personality, popularity and domination.”  Most significantly, Bhattarai and Dahal had divergent opinions on the peace process and constitution drafting process. Bhattarai always stood in favor of drafting a new constitution from the elected Constituent Assembly (CA) while the other leaders in the party, including Mohan Baidya, were advocates of an urban revolt to capture the power.  All the while, Dahal, as the party’s supreme leader, had remained in the fence. Bhattarai’s line prevailed in the end, which propelled his image within the party and in the public eye.  In her memoir, Yami describes the relationship between Bhattarai and Dahal as at times complementary and at others contradictory.  “Basically, Prachanda was a pragmatist and BRB was an idealist. They were like two bands of the same river,” she writes. But after remaining apart for seven years, the two leaders seem to be taking a less confrontational and more reconciliatory approach.  Some analysts say since Bhattarai will not be in the parliament, he will not be in the race to become prime minister, much to Dahal’s respite.  Bhattarai has publicly said that he would not claim for the state positions but will continue to work to shape the party’s ideology, a crisis that the Maoist party is facing.  “Bhattarai has this time made it clear that he is not interested in power politics,” says Panthi. “So, a cordial relationship between two leaders is expected.”  He also sees the Maoist rank and file accepting Bhattarai as their leader.  After the elections, Panthi says Bhattarai will likely plan a way to rebrand and rename the Maoist party. That Bhattarai wants to create a new socialist party without a Maoist or communist tags is known to all, but Dahal wants to continue the party’s identity. In the past, Dahal needed Bhattarai to shape the party’s ideology. Similarly, Bhattarai needed Dahal to implement his ideology.  “Without each other, says a leader close to Bhattarai, “they cannot form a strong party.” Dahal is currently facing a serious ideological crisis while Bhattarai is seeking a powerful organizational strength to support his vision to form a socialist party. “I think the two leaders seem to have realized each other’s necessity.”

Chinese President Xi Jinping is expected to clinch power for a third consecutive term this week. On October 16, hundreds of party delegates—provincial representatives, top military brass, and representation from farmers and minority communities—will assemble in the Great Hall of China to endorse Xi. The gathering will also pick new faces who shall dictate China’s military, economy, and foreign policies. Over the past decade, China has become more assertive, projecting itself as a superpower.  So what can Nepal expect from five more years of Xi?  Since he took office in 2013, like everywhere, China adopted an aggressive policy towards Nepal, particularly to counter Western influence. In 2019, Xi visited Nepal to elevate comprehensive bilateral ties into a “strategic” one. He pledged to transform Nepal from a “land-locked country to a land-linked country”. Since Xi’s trip, China has been pressing Nepal to implement the agreement reached between the two countries. Pramod Jaiswal, who follows China’s South Asia policy, says Xi is one of the few Chinese presidents to visit Nepal so he places a high priority on Nepal. “Xi sees Nepal as a gateway to South Asia,” says Jaiswal. “He views South Asia as a very important region to materialize his pet project, the Belt and Road Initiative. I believe that he is going to further deepen ties with Nepal during this third term.” Soon after taking charge as the president of China in 2013, Xi stressed peripheral diplomacy.  Doing well in peripheral diplomatic work, he said at the time, was necessary for China to achieve the "Two Centuries" objective and realize the great rejuvenation of Chinese nation. In the final days of this second term, Xi dispatched his senior colleagues to Nepal to keep tabs on the Western influence in Kathmandu. With growing tensions between Beijing and Washington over numerous issues, including the human rights issues of the Tibetan community, Xi’s China is likely to adopt a more aggressive approach to protect its security interest. Beijing is already pushing its new campaigns, such as Global Security Initiatives and Global Development Initiatives, which has put Kathmandu in a precarious position. Upendra Gautam, general secretary at China Study Center, says China’s key priorities are security and development. “Nepal can take a lot of economic benefits, but we do not have any clear vision on our engagement with China. We could not even take advantage of what Xi had pledged during his Nepal visit in 2019,” says Gautam. “The main problem is we are unable to take independent decisions when dealing with major powers.” He adds Nepal seldom does enough homework to identify its needs to present them before China. “Nepal should pursue an independent foreign policy. Geopolitical pressures and concerns are always there, but we can handle those issues with right vision and leadership.”

In February this year, Nepal’s parliament decided to endorse the $500 grant assistance from the US under its Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) amid intense uproar from some political parties. Eight months later, the hullabaloo over the US program has subsided. It is no longer a political agenda for the parties who had raised a stink over its ratification. It will take another 10 months for the US compact to formally begin (Aug 23) their five-year time-bound projects. Signed in 2017, the MCC was scheduled to begin in 2019, but it got delayed due to the controversy generated by some political parties and a section of society over some of its provisions. Since its endorsement, the two components of the compact, construction of transmission line and road maintenance, are taking off, albeit gradually. Rajiv Dahal, information officer of Millennium Challenge Account Nepal, says there are no political or security challenges for project implementation. To speed up the construction of the transmission line, he tells ApEx that MCA-Nepal is handling the issues related to land acquisition for the construction of substations, lines, and key towers. Land acquisition process for setting up four sub-stations is almost over. There are some minor issues, but they will not pose a big problem. As for acquiring land for the tower and line, Dahal says the process may take some time because the affected population may raise some issues. Officials doubt the land acquisition process will be easily settled. Another challenge for the project is conducting forest census and clearing trees to erect around 850 towers. But despite the challenges, officials remain hopeful about starting the projects within the stipulated date. For this, they are closely working with the concerned district administration offices. Another component of the MCC is road upgradation. Again, there are a few challenges here. Initially, there was an agreement for carrying out upgradation work on road sections with a combined length of 305 km. But there have been some changes on the original plan. Now, under the pilot program, a 40-km section of the East-West Highway, from Shivakhola to Dhankhola in Dang district, will be upgraded adopting latest technology. Based on the success and experience of this pilot program, the road project could be expanded. Officials say there are no problems concerning the budget. The MCC headquarters that had previously withheld the funds following the program’s controversy in Nepal has been released now. The MCC headquarters, as well as the Nepal government, are releasing the required money for land acquisition and payment to international bidders. There have been some push backs against the MCC compact by fringe communist parties, including the Netra Bikram Chand-led Communist Party of Nepal, but not on a large scale. Meanwhile, China, which had previously expressed strong disdain for the US program, is maintaining a silence. The fact that major parties are not protesting the compact anymore is a respite for the MCC officials, though some politicians are still showing concerns over the 12-point interpretative declaration endorsed by Parliament along with the compact. While Nepal has been maintaining that the interpretative declaration is an essential part of the compact, the US side has not said anything. The current five-party alliance, which endorsed the MCC, is likely to return to power after the November elections. So officials expect the projects under the compact to move ahead smoothly. For more than three years, political parties were sharply divided over the MCC. Now, as the parties are busy preparing for the November 20 polls, the heavily contested topic has suddenly become irrelevant. Binoj Basnyat, strategic affairs analyst and a former Nepal Army major general, believes the MCC projects will move smoothly and that chances of opposition are very low. Once the projects start delivering and people start realizing their benefits, he says, there will be no room for opposition.  

Nepali voters will head to the polling stations on Nov 20 to elect their representatives to the federal parliament and provincial assemblies. It will be the eighth general election conducted to elect the House of Representatives (HoR), which is responsible for electing government and law making. The first was conducted in 1959. This week, ApEx reflects on the electoral history of Nepal. 1959 The first general election of Nepal was held in multiple phases, which began in February and lasted 45 days. This was the first election conducted on the principle of adult franchise and secret ballot. The voting took place to elect a bicameral house—House of Representative (HoR) and Upper House. Nine political parties and some independent candidates were in the fray. There were 109 members in the HoR and all of them were elected under first-past-the-post (FPTP) category. Candidates from six parties and four independents got elected. The Nepal Congress (NC) secured a two-thirds majority in the HoR, bagging 74 seats. Following the election, BP Koirala of the NC became the first democratically elected prime minister of Nepal. But King Mahendra dismissed Koirala in 1960. Thus, started the 30 years of party-less Panchayat regime. The monarchy set up a rubber- stamp legislature. One notable election conducted during the Panchayat period was the 1980 referendum between either multiparty democracy or reformed Panchayat regime. 1991 The first general election after the restoration of democracy in 1990 was conducted on May 12, 1991.  The polls took place in 205 constituencies and the number of candidates was 1,345. Eighty women candidates contested in the historic election but only seven were elected to the HoR. The NC won 110 seats to form a single majority government. The party’s immediate rival, CPN-UML, won 69 seats. Leaders from eight political parties and three independent candidates were also elected. Samyukta Janamorcha, Nepal Sadbhawna Party and Rastriya Prajanatra Party (Chand) won nine, six and three seats respectively. Likewise, Nepal Majdoor Kisan Party and Nepal Communist Party settled for two seats each, while the Rastriya Prajatantra Party (Thapa) won just one seat. After the election, Congress leader Girija Prasad Koirala became prime minister. But he dissolved the parliament after three years due to the party dispute, paving way for the mid-term elections. 1994 The mid-term election was held on Nov 13, 1994. Altogether 24 political parties contested in the polls. Five parties and seven independent candidates emerged victorious, with the UML becoming the largest party after winning 88 seats. The Congress came a close second with 83 seats. The Rastriya Prajatantra Party, Nepal Sadbhawana Party and Nepal Majdoor Kishan Party won 20, three, and four seats respectively. UML leader Manmohan Adhikari became the first communist prime minister after the election. He formed a coalition government securing support from royalist parties. Eighty-six women had contested the election but only seven women won. 1999 The 1999 general election was staged in two phases on May 3 and May 17. Out of 39 political parties fighting the election, six emerged victorious to become national parties. The NC became the largest party after winning 111 seats, followed by the UML with 71 seats. The Rastriya Prajatantra Party won 11 seats, while CPN (ML) and Nepal Sadbhawana Party secured five seats each. Samyukta Janamorcha and Nepal Majdoor Kisan Party won one seat each. Twelve women lawmakers were also elected. After this election, NC leader Krishna Prasad Bhattarai became prime minister. 2008 The election to the first Constituents Assembly (CA) was conducted on April 10, 2008. Of the 601 seats in the assembly, 240 were directly contested under first-past-the-post (FPTP) voting system, 335 under the proportional representation (PR) and 25 members were nominated by the Council of Ministers. The CPN (Maoist Center)—UCPN (Maoist) at the time—emerged as the largest party, securing 226 seats and the chairman of the party Pushpa Kamal Dahal became prime minister. After the unification with other fringe parties, the number of Maoist seats reached 240. NC and UML secured 109 and 103 seats respectively. Initially, there were 19 parties in the CA, which later reached 32 due to multiple splits among the fringe forces. Two independent candidates also won the elections, while 25 members were nominated by the Council of Ministers. But the CA was dissolved in 2012 after it failed to deliver on the mandate of promulgating a new constitution.  2013 The second CA election took place on Nov 19, 2013. The government led by the then chief justice Khil Raj Regmi conducted the polls. Altogether 240 members were elected under the FPTP system and 335 under the PR category. Similarly, the Council of Ministers appointed 24 members. The NC emerged as the largest party with 196 seats, while the UML and Maoist party came second and third after winning 179 and 80 seats respectively. Sushil Koirala of Congress became the prime minister with the support of the UML. The second CA drafted and promulgated the new constitution of Nepal in September 2015. 2017 The first parliamentary and provincial level elections under the 2015 constitution were held in two phases on Nov 26 and Dec 3, 2017. Under the FPTP category 55 political parties and under PR 49 political parties participated in the elections; 165 lawmakers were elected under the FPTP system and 110 under the PR category.  The UML emerged as the largest party securing 121 seats, while the NC came second with 63 seats. The Maoist party secured 52 seats. Soon after the elections, the UML and Maoist merged to form the Nepal Communist Party (NCP), the largest communist force in Nepal’s political history. KP Oli then became prime minister. Altogether 10 parties were represented in the HoR. Note: This compilation does not include the local elections, elections of the upper house, and elections held by the erstwhile monarchy during the 30 years of partyless Panchayat regime.  

On March 3, Nepal along with 141 countries voted in favor of a resolution that ‘deplores in the strongest terms the aggression by the Russian Federation against Ukraine.’ Five countries voted against the motion, while 25 countries remained absent. Nepal’s voting led to a souring of the relationship between Kathmandu and Moscow. Immediately, Russia through public and diplomatic channels expressed its displeasure. Domestic opinions were also divided over the government’s position on the Russia-Ukraine war. “We condemned the attack on Feb 24 and voted in the UN as well, and our position remains the same but there is a realization that we need to restore our cordial ties with Moscow,” says a senior Foreign Ministry source.  Despite the Kremlin's displeasure, the official says, Nepal is still on Russia’s friendly list. He goes on to claim that Vladimir Putin himself places high importance to Nepal. Milan Kumar Tuladhar, Nepal’s newly appointed ambassador to Russia, says though Nepal’s position with respect to the Ukraine conflict did not go down very well in Moscow, “our long-standing ties with Russia need to be further developed for our own benefit.”  Tuladhar has extended an invitation to Putin to visit Nepal in 2023 when the Russian leader is scheduled to visit India.   At a time when European and western countries have imposed sanctions on Russia, the Kremlin is keen to deepen ties with Asian countries, which could provide an opportunity for Nepal as well, say officials.  South Asian countries like India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh have already started to expand their areas of cooperation with Russia. Ambassador Tuladhar says this is the right opportunity to deepen collaboration with Moscow in areas such as tourism, trade, and investment.  “Over the past few years, Nepal is facing a chronic problem with fertilizer and we can easily seal a deal on it with Russia to overcome the crisis, says Tuladhar.” “Tourism is another vital area where the two countries can cooperate.”

Who takes a final call on Nepal’s foreign policy matters?  Obviously, it is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The Office of the Prime Minister and Council of Ministers can only offer advice, or, to some extent, dictate some issues pertaining to foreign affairs.  But our leaders, senior officials and ministries always tend to bypass the Foreign Ministry in the decision-making process. The latest example of this is President Bidya Devi Bhandari’s participation in a high-level meeting of Global Security Initiatives (GSI), a global governance and security architecture unveiled by Chinese President Xi Jinping at the Boa Forum for Asia in April. As Nepal has not made any position on GSI, the Foreign Ministry had advised President Bhandari not to participate in the meeting. The letter sent to the Office of the President by the ministry, which has been leaked to the public reads: “Discussions are under way at the high-level whether to participate in GSI and there is not a concrete position on it so it is appropriate not to participate in it.”  Yet, the president went against the advice and joined the meeting anyway. Her decision, many foreign policy experts say, goes against the stated position of not joining any military alliances. This has raised a serious question on who advised Bhandari to attend the meeting or whether she deliberately defied Foreign Ministry’s advice. “The ministry should be at the center of all external engagements and communication but this is not happening which must be immediately corrected,” says Ramesh Khanal, career diplomat and former Nepali ambassador to Germany.  According to a high-level political source, Bhandari did not take the decision on her own. Top leaders of major parties including Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba advised her to attend the meeting, saying that discarding the invitation will not send out a good message to China.  Nepali leaders and high-ranking officials have long been ignoring the input of Foreign Ministry. Just a few months ago it was revealed that the then Nepal Army chief Rajendra Chhetri had written a letter to the US expressing willingness to join America’s State Partnership Program (SPP) without informing political leadership and the ministry. Similarly, the country’s leadership had sidelined the Foreign Ministry from the entire process of America’s Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) project.  The mess in the conduct of foreign policy has become more evident after the formation of the current five-party-coalition in July 2021. Members of the ruling coalition are not on the same page on the issue of international relations. They have their own vision and priorities.   Prime Minister Deuba is more inclined toward the democratic world and less keen on engaging with China, while Pushpa Kamal Dahal, leader of CPN (Maoist Center), prefers more close ties with China. Meanwhile, President Bidya Devi Bhandari, who comes from the main opposition, CPN-UML, is reportedly unhappy with several decisions related to foreign affairs taken by the Deuba government. A high level source tells ApEx to appease Dahal, Prime Minister Deuba has taken some unpleasant decisions on foreign affairs.  Arun Subedi, prime minister’s foreign policy advisor, also admits there are gaps when it comes to coordination among key state institutions and they are working to fix it.   As big countries like the US and China are coming up with new strategies in order to counter each other in the Indo-Pacific region, institutions like the Foreign Ministry should be strengthened.  “Our leaders should strengthen Foreign Ministry and its subordinates, including government think-tanks to study the strategies of big countries,” says a senior official at the ministry. “And to avoid controversy, they should speak or take position on the basis of the report prepared by the think-tanks.” But politicians, who lack nuanced understanding of critical geopolitical decisions, have hijacked the decision-making process of the Foreign Ministry, creating more problems than resolving them. One example of this is Nepal’s position on the Russia-Ukraine war. A senior official at the Foreign Ministry says though they had advised the political leadership to stay neutral in the UN voting, the government decided to vote against the Russian invasion. Since Nepal’s institutions are not strong and lack the habit of coordinating among one another, representatives of big countries directly contact their favorable leaders or government ministries whenever they need something from Nepal. For instance, China relies on CPN (Maoist Center) to convey its key messages to the government, while other countries have a direct approach in Baluwatar. Instead of visiting the Foreign Ministry, ambassadors are often seen frequenting the residences of politicians, ministries, Baluwatar and Sheetal Niwas with their agendas. “Ideally, each and every issue relating to external affairs should be cleared from the Foreign Ministry but in Nepal, it seems like other ministries have a free hand to take decisions,” says former ambassador Khanal. According to a ruling party leader, Deuba and Dahal take decisions on key foreign policy matters in mutual consultation these days.  “Many of the Deuba’s foreign policy, be it America’s SPP or India’s Agnipath, were shaped by Dahal’s position. Deuba simply relented due to keep the coalition intact,” says the leader.  Meanwhile, Minister for Foreign Affairs Narayan Khadka, who can play a vital role to ensure the coordination among the major actors, has not been showing much enthusiasm in his work.   He has been known to delegate his duties to others. The source at the ministry says Khadka keeps visiting his electoral constituency in Udayapur, ignoring his ministerial responsibilities.  In fact, ever since his appointment, Khadka has barely agreed for an interview with the press.  Former ambassador Khanal says Foreign Ministry’s role should be further expanded and strengthened in order to address the current mess.   “Had the ministry been allowed to play its role properly, so much of the controversies regarding MCC and SPP could have been avoided.”