The over-a-decade-long transi­tional politics saw an enormous increase in outside interest in Nepal. True, help from outside was invaluable in the mainstream­ing of the warring Maoists, even though the work was largely done by Nepalis themselves, as the foreign actors involved therein would be the first to acknowledge. As Nepal was making the transition from a constitutional monarchy to a fed­eral republic, there was also a wide range of inputs, many of them pos­itive, in the process of writing the new constitution. But as the Nepali state progres­sively weakened, with the transi­tion dragging on and on, foreign actors sought to actively influence the political course here, instead of playing the supportive role expected of them. Some European countries got into controversy for support­ing an ethnic agenda, ‘wrecking’ Nepali politics in the process, as some alleged. India in this period became more high-handed; and the Chinese more assertive.

 

PM KP Oli seems eager to reassert the primacy of Nepali actors. His quick and unambiguous rebuttal of the European Union’s recent elec­tion report is a case in point. Wheth­er the new constitution is flawed or not, and if and when it should be amended, is up to Nepali actors to decide. The EU itself is far from an ideal and inclusive entity, and has a checkered record in Nepal.

 

The bottom line: In the new Nepal, only Nepalis get to shape the national polity.

 

.........Full story https://theannapurnaexpress.com/news/the-hypocrisy-of-eus-inclusion-pitch-209