Submit your Article

Prime Minister Balendra Shah held a joint courtesy meeting on April 8 with the ambassadors and chargés d’affaires of 17 countries. Distinct from the traditional practice of prioritizing separate courtesy meetings with ambassadors, Shah’s approach signaled a fresh beginning in Nepal government’s handling of foreign relations. Although it was only an initial step, comments and statements from foreign policy experts in local print and electronic media suggested that the government was preparing for a broader shift in its diplomatic approach as well.

Local media described the move as Shah’s attempt to reset Nepal’s diplomatic posture, distinct from years of diplomacy heavily influenced by realpolitik. His joint meeting with foreign diplomats appeared to signal a more conscious and state-driven foreign policy. Even if symbolic, the gesture hinted at what could be taking shape in Nepal’s foreign policy under the new government.

Furthermore, Prime Minister Shah’s decision not to meet US Assistant Secretary of State Samir Paul Kapur and US Special Envoy for South and Central Asia Sergio Gor during their visits to Kathmandu in April and early May—as well as his refusal to grant an appointment to India’s Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri, who ultimately put off his Nepal visit— reinforced the perception that the government was emphasizing process, protocol, and institutional procedure. It also appeared to reflect an attempt to restore a more structured diplomatic culture.

During his direct rule from February 2005 to April 2006, King Gyanendra Shah had also demonstrated a strong consciousness of protocol and institutional hierarchy. At the time, governing meetings and interactions with even high-profile foreign envoys strictly through protocol was often interpreted as a display of rigidity or grandeur.

Typically, a gentle reminder to any new government is that navigating foreign relations requires a different level of statesmanship. Whether under direct rule or democratic governments, Nepal’s leadership has often lacked not only long-term vision but also the statesmanship needed to translate vision into reality through sustained dialogue, engagement, and strategic diplomacy.

For Nepal, nestled within the world’s highest mountains, the idea of Shangri-La in foreign relations extends beyond its literal meaning. It signifies building meaningful bilateral and multilateral relations through dense and continuous dialogue, with the ultimate goal of ensuring the prosperity of the people and the political security of the state. Having observed the intricacies of diplomacy and foreign relations for more than three decades, the ideal of a Shangri-La in Nepal’s foreign policy may appear difficult, but it remains within sight. Countries like Singapore offer examples worth studying.

A closer look at Nepal’s history reveals a recurring pattern of rulers distancing themselves from others through anger, rigidity, or political obstinacy. The more regressive the leadership, the more governance often drifted toward stubbornness both in domestic political rivalries and in relations with neighboring countries. While such assertiveness occasionally appealed to sections of the public, it also caused suffering, humiliation, and instability for the people.

Nepalis have repeatedly borne the consequences of rulers’ obstinacy in governance and diplomacy, especially in managing internal rivalries and external relations. Yet diplomacy itself remains inherently complex. Countries are often overwhelmed when trying to interpret the deliberately abstruse language of foreign relations, particularly when dealing with powerful nations. The complexity becomes even more visible when smaller states engage with major global powers.

For Nepal, the pursuit of ideal bilateral relations is particularly challenging. Diplomatic engagement often begins with unresolved issues, competing interests, and enduring uncertainties. The moment a country steps into the realm of diplomacy, those challenges become evident. A deeper examination of Nepal’s foreign policies and diplomatic practices over the past seven decades reveals both recurring patterns and the structural challenges that continue to shape the country’s external relations.

Cautious to guarded optimism

Many previous governments demonstrated a disconnect between foreign policy and Nepal’s broader national vision of ensuring security and economic prosperity. Diplomacy was often reactive, shaped more by immediate political circumstances than by long-term strategic planning.

However, in a noticeable departure from the past, the current government has shown signs of adopting a more pragmatic approach in governance, including foreign affairs. A degree of cautious optimism is visible in its diplomatic posture. Prime Minister Shah’s joint meeting with diplomats from 17 embassies, along with his decisions regarding senior envoys from key partners such as India and the United States, has been interpreted by some experts as a sign of confidence combined with preparedness for challenges.

Admittedly, it is too early to define the full scope of this government’s foreign policy priorities based solely on a single joint meeting or a more protocol-driven approach. Nevertheless, these early actions suggest a desire to move away from past practices and adopt a more structured and self-conscious diplomatic framework in dealing with neighboring and partner countries.

Still, there is a fine distinction between cautious optimism and guarded optimism, and in diplomacy even that fine line matters. Guarded optimism requires realistic planning rather than blind confidence in one’s own policy positions. In the context of changing regional and global politics, major diplomatic breakthroughs often occur only when states recognize that old frameworks and assumptions are no longer sufficient to explain new realities.

Prime Minister Shah’s government must therefore remain prepared for challenges, especially once deeper bilateral engagement with Nepal’s two immediate neighbors intensifies. Previous governments have already left behind a stockpile of unresolved bilateral issues that this administration will eventually need to confront. Acknowledging this reality means recognizing that even when conditions appear promising, setbacks remain possible. Preparedness and flexibility are therefore essential.

At the same time, Nepal’s neighbors as well as countries like the United States will have their own expectations from the new government, often shaped by conflicting strategic interests. Yet conflicting interests are neither unusual nor unmanageable in diplomacy. Effective statesmanship lies not in amplifying conflict, but in identifying areas of mutual interest and shared benefit.

Successful diplomacy depends on the astute management of convergence rather than confrontation. It requires recognizing common ground and building reciprocal relationships where all parties feel they gain something meaningful. In that sense, what Nepal needs today is a form of guarded optimism grounded in realism, strategic clarity, and diplomatic maturity. For Nepalis, this means remaining hopeful about positive outcomes while also staying realistic and prepared for potential challenges ahead.

One of the strangest things about modern childhood is how little uninterrupted time children now have to simply be children. Almost every hour is spoken for: school, homework, tuition classes, extracurriculars, structured play, even rest carefully managed between productivity and guilt. Somewhere along the way, unstructured time itself began to feel unnecessary, even wasteful.

And yet, some of the most important parts of childhood happen outside structure entirely. They happen in boredom. In wandering curiosity. In slow afternoons, long conversations, abandoned hobbies rediscovered weeks later, and the freedom to explore interests without the pressure of performance. It is during these stretches of unhurried time that children often begin to understand themselves beyond grades, routines, and expectations.

Which is why the growing discussion around shortening school holidays in Nepal feels so deeply concerning. Nepal’s recent move to a two-day weekend for schools was a long overdue and encouraging shift. What now worries me is the instinct to compensate for reduced school days by trimming already limited holiday periods. It may appear administratively practical. But educationally and developmentally, it raises deeper questions about what we are prioritizing.

Nepal’s schools currently operate for approximately 220 school days a year, comparable to Japan and South Korea, two of the most academically intensive systems in the world. Yet even those systems provide uninterrupted breaks of five to six weeks.

In Nepal, holidays are far more fragmented. End of session breaks, winter breaks, summer breaks and festive holidays rarely extend beyond 2-3 weeks at a time. Altogether, Nepali students receive approximately 7-9 weeks of holidays across the entire year, but very few uninterrupted stretches where time truly slows down.

It is also worth noting that within living memory, the structure of the school year in Nepal was different. For many who went to school a generation ago, long breaks were significantly more extended, often 4-8 weeks at a time, particularly during winter, summer or between academic cycles. Those were periods that allowed for deeper rest, family time, travel and unstructured learning outside formal schooling. Over time, these longer pauses have gradually been compressed into shorter, more fragmented breaks.

That is already significantly lower than many high-performing education systems globally. A 2024 data from the OECD, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, which tracks education systems across 38 countries, shows that the average annual school vacation across OECD countries is approximately 14 weeks. Italy provides nearly 17 weeks, France around 16 weeks, the United States 10 to 12 weeks of summer break alone, and the United Kingdom around 13 weeks. India, depending on the state, typically offers 10 to 12 weeks annually. And yet, despite decades of evidence, we continue to equate more instructional hours with better learning.

The OECD clearly states that the quantity of instructional time has little direct relationship with student performance. The quality of learning matters far more. Finland, consistently among the world’s top-performing education systems, runs school for just four to five hours a day, gives students approximately 14 weeks of holiday a year, and still outperforms countries with far more instructional hours. It is a reminder that educational success is not about stretching time inside classrooms. It is about what those hours actually produce.

And it is, according to neuroscientists, about how students spend their time outside classrooms. During unstructured time, the brain activates what researchers call the default mode network, associated with imagination, reflection and creativity. These are the moments when ideas connect seamlessly, when curiosity emerges naturally and when children begin exploring interests because they genuinely want to, not because they are being assessed.

Psychologists studying creativity and motivation consistently show that intrinsic motivation, doing something out of curiosity rather than obligation, produces deeper learning and originality. Long holidays are often the only extended periods where this can exist without interruption.

Even boredom serves an important developmental function. When children are not constantly entertained, they are eventually forced to ask a simple question: what do I want to do? That question builds initiative, imagination and self-direction.

And then there is the body itself. Teachers and parents often notice children returning from long holidays visibly calmer, more settled, sometimes even physically taller. This is not a coincidence. Research has long established strong links between rest, sleep, and childhood growth.  Deep sleep, which becomes more consistent during less stressful and less rushed periods, is closely tied to physical development, emotional regulation, memory consolidation and overall wellbeing.

Long breaks also create the space for things education systems increasingly claim to value but rarely create enough room for: sports, hobbies, travel, reading for pleasure, family connection, cultural experiences, internships, camps, independent projects. More importantly, they allow children enough uninterrupted time to discover their interest areas and a direction in life that feels uniquely their own. Without this space, many simply move through systems mechanically, follow instructions and eventually graduate without much clarity about what they genuinely want to pursue.

Ironically, many of the same adults who say they want children to become creative, independent, resilient and emotionally intelligent are often uncomfortable giving them the very conditions required for those qualities to develop.

There is another dimension to this conversation that receives far less attention: teachers.

What the public sees is a teacher standing in front of a classroom. What often remains invisible is the emotional and relational labor surrounding that role. Lesson planning, grading, supervision, student support, parent communication, administrative work and curriculum preparation all continue well beyond the school day. A teacher is often responsible not just for students, but for entire ecosystems of communication and care surrounding them.

Globally, teacher burnout and attrition are rising, driven largely by workload pressure and lack of recovery time. UNESCO reports teachers are leaving the profession within their first few years, resulting in severe and growing teacher shortages worldwide. Long holidays are not a luxury in this context. They are often the only meaningful periods for recovery, reflection, planning and preparation.

Of course, there are real challenges for working families during long school holidays. Childcare is a genuine concern. But reducing children’s rest and developmental time is not a sustainable solution. It simply transfers adult logistical pressures onto children rather than addressing them systemically.

If anything, the conversation Nepal should be having is not how to reduce holidays, but how to better support families during them while still protecting children’s need for rest, exploration, and unstructured growth.

The move toward a two-day weekend reflected an important shift in thinking, an acknowledgment that rest is not separate from learning, but is part of it. That same understanding now needs to extend to school holidays as well–because children are not machines that produce better outcomes the longer they remain operational.

Even though modern thinkers cannot entirely disregard the traditional ‘yam’ theory that established Nepal’s geostrategic posture for a long time, the techno-geopolitical paradigm has undeniably changed. The world today is not purely governed by physical borders, while the global balance of power is not in the sole control of state actors. The global order is nearly in a fractured state where the tech giants, big social media companies, AI, cyber systems, emerging technologies and new AI models are playing bigger and more powerful roles to circumnavigate the global equilibrium.

For Nepal, foreign policy involves not only defending its territory and upholding traditional nous of non-alignment, but also traversing the overlapping ‘geo-strategic frontiers’ of the world’s three great powers—China, India, and the US. Despite the extreme polarization and hyperconnectedness of global politics, Kathmandu should exercise diplomacy with caution and make a well-thought-out move for both sovereign survival and strategic thriving.

In the current techno-geopolitical landscape, foreign policy and technology have become mutually connected. The technology is influencing diplomatic maneuverability, while foreign policy is dictating the adoption, development and deployment of technology. For a small power like Nepal, the internal weaknesses and vulnerabilities quickly compound external pressures. As claimed by AI pioneers and analysts, “AI is an immediate and deadliest threat to national security.” The first phase of global war (if it happened) would begin with AI, digital and cyber warfare “that would not only find weaknesses in government systems and other critical infrastructure or disrupt the economy, but also can reinforce war fighting capabilities, enabling the weapons themselves to be more autonomous.” The consequences would go unimaginable and irrecoverable. Thus, the primary national security objective of a nation like Nepal—that is situated in a very sensitive geo-strategic location—should be focused on protecting data, digital infrastructures, communication nodes, cyber security and digital sovereignty.

Navigating the tech polarization of the world's two tech superpowers—China and the US—is an immediate challenge. Both technology and international politics are deeply divided today. As the world advances technologically and economically, it splits further apart ideologically, politically, socially and humanly. The primary driver of this modern polarization is said to be the Sino-American race for tech and AI supremacy, which threatens to divide the global digital landscape into exclusive, competing blocs. And Nepal is on either side of the edges of these blocks—both physically and digitally—which is likely to impact us directly. The crucial challenge for Nepal’s foreign policy is to cautiously operate the “double-edged tech sword.”

Modern technology is a catalyst for domestic growth, but it also poses serious structural threats, such as sophisticated espionage, data breaches supported by the state and political manipulation through digital toolkits. Furthermore, Nepal faces a greater challenge from “the US-China-India triangle,” and Washington’s primary focus in the region is still strongly linked to the ‘China factor’, blame the critics. Nepal faces serious geopolitical repercussions from all directions if it does not appropriately balance its tech and techno-geopolitical infrastructure partnerships with its immediate neighbors, with a long-term strategic goal.

The geography of Nepal makes it a prime target for digital friction between regional and international rivals. As superpower competitions and data-driven rivalries intensify, Nepal faces a real risk of becoming a proxy digital battlefield. Thus, cyber intelligence should be a core defense mechanism. While Nepal has improved its standing on the Global Cybersecurity Index, its institutional approach remains slow and reactive. The country must stop managing digital vulnerabilities through fragmented bureaucratic channels and immediately establish a dedicated, expert-led national cyber intelligence unit such that it could focus on “threat intelligence” as well as “security intelligence” in a proactive manner. Without proper technical shields, a nation faces the threat of data breach, ‘data colonialism’ and foreign digital interference. Safeguarding critical state infrastructure and protecting citizen data is an absolute requirement for protecting national security. 

Technical choices—such as selecting ICT equipment, telecommunications traders, choosing national data storage facilities, establishing data centers or implementing AI governance—must be evaluated through a lens of absolute realism and national interest. Considering the severity of cross-border cybercrimes and other transnational issues, we can approach neighboring countries for tech and cyber collaboration. In the domestic sphere, we can develop sophisticated, state-led cyber intelligence mechanisms to monitor, assess and preempt digital threats before they manifest as diplomatic crises.

Modern sovereignty is no longer contested just on physical borders; it is managed across digital networks. As global powers are likely to weaponize artificial intelligence, cloud infrastructure and data systems, Nepal must maintain strict digital sovereignty. Relying blindly on foreign digital systems and ICT equipment exposes the state to external manipulation and national security threat, making technology a key focus for future diplomacy. Global alignments are no longer built exclusively on conventional military blocs. Instead, they are structured around technological infrastructure and standardizations.

As a world over-reliant on technology can breed division, fear and profound human alienation, the country should focus on devising macroscopic statecraft that directly connects human well-being. Thus, bridging security with greater national well-being is the immediate vital task. The misuse of technology and global information warfare create invisible psychological scars, leading to widespread social distrust and collective trauma. A nation cannot be genuinely secure if its people are digitally connected yet humanly disconnected. True national security goes beyond military strength and firewall protocols. We must encompass ‘soft security strategies’, including ethical governance, psychological resilience and social harmony. To counteract the chaotic noise of global politics, leaders and policymakers must practice responsible, conscious behavior. Integrating a mindful worldview ensures that technological advancements serve human dignity, civic virtues and national development, rather than authoritarian control.

To successfully manage the demands of major-power competition, Nepal must institutionalize a doctrine of “Constructive Neutrality,” “Dynamic Non-Alignment,” and “Expanding Tech and Economic Diplomacy.” Neutrality must not be understood as a passive isolation or looking inward. Future diplomacy requires active, principled engagement. Nepal must use its neutral status to host regional dialogues, champion multilateralism and build credibility as a reliable, independent voice as Switzerland or Singapore do. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs must modernize its diplomatic corps. Deploying specialized tech envoys and economic experts to key global missions will allow Nepal to negotiate international digital standards, secure development aid and attract foreign direct investment without getting entangled in competing military or ideological blocs.

In statecraft, a small nation cannot simply react symmetrically to external pressure. Though sovereignty of all nations is said to be equal, the degree of marshalling the power may not be in the same proportion. Nepal cannot afford a reactionary, silent or isolationist foreign policy driven by internal intricacy or external anxiety. Nepal is not in a position to avoid the engagement of great powers or ignore their genuine interest. It, however, can leverage them through strategic partnership, maneuverability and constant deeds. In foreign policy, staring at or insulting even the pets of the powerful nations would leave significant implications; the avoidance of the special envoys of the world’s superpowers may leave a lasting political mark. Even if we became the world's most powerful nation with the largest military and biggest economy, we would, perhaps, never be in a position to directly challenge or circumvent other superpowers, including the neighboring ones, because of our geographical location, proximity and the ever-changing dynamics of techno-geopolitics.

Espousing Nepal’s foreign policy with a national security framework is crucial. By integrating national security with diplomatic intelligence, maintaining a unified national stance and executing a dynamic policy of ‘Constructive Neutrality’, Nepal can gradually step onto the global stage—safeguarding its sovereignty while serving as a peaceful, prosperous connection between giant neighbors. By anchoring its foreign policy in patriotic morality and ethical governance, Nepal can protect its domestic stability from being undermined by foreign proxy rivalries. For this, we can chart out a pragmatic approach with specific strategic tenets, including techno-economic cooperation, bilateral and multilateral engagement, and tech, AI and cyber diplomacy, besides the regular economic, developmental, and diplomatic happenings. 

Nevertheless, Nepal cannot afford “geopolitical adventurism” driven by temporary ideological trends. The normative, reactive, repressive, aggressive and philosophically directed text can no longer govern Nepal’s foreign policy. It requires rational diplomatic textures, tone, tactics, tolerance, along with diplomatic and emotional maturity, while the shift of global power architectures is evidently visible. Essentially, cultivating a strategic art of surviving, thriving and walking alongside the great powers would be a deliberate pragmatic move in Nepal’s foreign policy, no matter to what degree or direction the pendulum of techno-geopolitics is enforced to swing. 

This article is based on the author’s numerous previous works and is partially assisted by AI

There is a quiet yet undeniable power in the way human beings treat one another. It does not announce itself loudly, yet it lasts far longer than anything material ever could. A simple smile can ease the weight of a long and exhausting day. A gentle word can heal sadness that no one else can see. A small act of kindness can remain in someone’s memory for a lifetime. In a world that is becoming more mechanical, distracted, and emotionally distant by the day, exceptional service is no longer just a professional requirement. It has become a deeply human responsibility. In its purest form, it is an expression of humanity itself.

Many people misunderstand service as something mechanical. They think it is simply about completing tasks serving food, checking in guests, answering calls, or resolving complaints. But true service is not measured by tasks completed; it is measured by emotions touched. Exceptional service goes beyond duty and enters the realm of empathy. It is the ability to make another person feel seen when they feel invisible, respected when they feel overlooked, and safe when they feel unsettled. That is why people rarely remember the luxury of a place or the price they paid. What stays with them is how they were made to feel.

We live in a time when emotional exhaustion has quietly become normal. People wake up already burdened, carry invisible pressures throughout the day, and go to sleep with thoughts they cannot fully express. Many are fighting silent battles, loneliness never spoken about, financial worries hidden behind polite smiles, heartbreak carried quietly in public, and stress that never fully disappears. In such a time, even the smallest moment of kindness becomes powerful. Exceptional service does not simply meet a need; it becomes a brief refuge from life’s heaviness.

Human beings are not driven by logic alone; they are deeply shaped by emotion. Long after words fade and transactions end, feelings remain etched in memory. That is where the true art of service lives.

Yet many people working in the hospitality and service industries underestimate the impact of their actions. A warm greeting at a hotel entrance may feel routine, but to a guest who feels invisible, it can mean everything. A glass of water offered without being asked may seem insignificant, but to someone who has endured a difficult journey, it becomes comfort itself. A patient ear offered to an angry or frustrated customer may not appear extraordinary, but to that person, it may restore their belief that kindness still exists. At its highest level, service is not just interaction; it is emotional healing disguised as everyday work.

The hospitality industry exists because of human connection. Buildings, interiors, and luxury may attract attention once, but they cannot create loyalty on their own. People return to places not because they were impressed, but because they were emotionally touched. A simple restaurant with modest furniture can feel more welcoming than a luxurious dining hall if the people inside make guests feel they belong. When someone remembers a guest’s name, sincerely asks about their wellbeing, or serves with genuine warmth rather than routine politeness, they create something no design or marketing budget can replicate: emotional belonging.

Exceptional service begins the moment we stop seeing people as “customers” and start seeing them as human beings carrying invisible stories. Every guest carries something we cannot see. The quiet man sitting in the corner may be carrying grief. The impatient guest may be exhausted by the pressures of life. The traveler checking into a hotel may be escaping stress they cannot explain. When service professionals recognize this truth, something shifts within them. Their responses become more patient, their tone more understanding, and their presence more compassionate. They no longer simply react; they connect.

As the modern world is increasingly being dominated by machines, automation, and digital systems, human warmth has become rare and therefore priceless. Technology can answer questions and complete processes, but it cannot comfort a tired heart or recognize unspoken sadness. Only a human being can do that.

Behind every smooth guest experience are individuals carrying invisible emotional weight. Hospitality employees often stand for long hours, smile through fatigue, work during holidays, and manage emotional challenges guests rarely see. They absorb frustration, calm tensions, and maintain warmth even when personally exhausted. This emotional labor is one of the most underappreciated forms of strength..

Exceptional service also reveals character. It shows who a person truly is when comfort disappears and pressure rises. It is easy to remain polite when everything is calm. But true professionalism is tested when situations become difficult when guests are upset, mistakes happen, or emotions run high. In those moments, remaining calm, respectful, and compassionate is not just a skill; it is maturity. It is the understanding that every reaction has the power either to hurt or to heal.

One of the most powerful truths about service is that people may forget words, but they never forget feelings. A single negative encounter can destroy trust instantly, while one deeply positive experience can create loyalty that lasts for years. This is why exceptional service is not merely a skill; it leaves a lasting impact on human memory and emotion.

These days companies invest heavily in advertisements and promotions to attract attention. Yet the most powerful form of marketing has never changed: genuine human experience. A truly satisfied guest becomes a storyteller. They share their experiences with friends, family, and even strangers. Kindness spreads naturally without needing a budget. Discounts fade from memory, but emotional experiences endure.

At its core, exceptional service is about dignity. Every person regardless of status, wealth, or background deserves to be treated with respect. When service is delivered with sincerity and equality, it becomes more than professionalism; it becomes humanity in action. Sometimes, a simple respectful interaction can change someone’s entire day. Sometimes, it can even change how they see themselves and the world around them.

In the end, the art of exceptional service is not about perfection, luxury, or procedures. It is about the heart. It is about creating moments in which people feel valued for who they are. Years may pass, places may change, and details may fade, but people will always remember how they were treated in their most vulnerable moments. Because at its deepest level, exceptional service is not just something we provide. It is something we give from within. It is kindness translated into action. It is humanity made visible. And that is why it never loses its power; with time, it only becomes more important.