Oli, geopolitics and a look-around foreign policy

While national politics in Europe has witnessed the resurgence of the far-right, an unprecedented congress-communist coalition has emerged in Nepal, with KP Oli playing a crucial role in the country’s political chess game. Oli is considered the most astute political leader in contemporary Nepali politics, second only to King Mahendra, and is thought to have the same level of sensitivity as BP Koirala when it comes to foreign policy and international diplomacy.

Yet, the crucial concern is—can Oli be daring enough to programmatically handle a variety of present-day pressing issues in domestic, regional and external affairs? In the domestic sphere, the most persistent issues that need to be handled with utmost sensibility are the essence of democratic governance, economic prosperity, development, political stability, territorial sovereignty, and national security. On the regional front, the immediate neighbors—China and India—are trying to narrow down their misunderstandings and resolve various pressing issues including the border issues by improving their relations, while both of them are likely to improve relations with Nepal as well. 

They are expected to resolve persistent issues with Nepal as well. China has constantly put Nepal in its development and diplomatic priority, while India has most recently revised its aid policy to Nepal. In this regard, Nepal ought to maintain a balance in its relations with both parties by prioritizing its own national interest, regardless of their covert political agendas. 

Indeed, the Oli government will encounter numerous foreign policy challenges from all sides. The most important concerns, however, will be striking a delicate balance in the country’s relations with China, India, the US and the EU.

With an eye toward the North, Oli himself signed the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) deal with China in 2017, and it is anticipated that his current administration will rationally carry it out. The Oli government has already started facing multiple pressures on foreign policy, including the status of BRI implementation within the parliament as well as from outside. Given that the alliance with the CPN (Maoist Center) was recently crushed, Oli may have to endure pressure from the Chinese Communist Party (CPC) in the name of maintaining communist unity in Nepal. PM Oli should be sensible enough in implementing the past agreements or initiating new ones with both India and China by keeping national interest above all else. In the current tenure, Oli should astonishingly initiate talks with China to grant visa-free travel to Nepali citizens in China. This would not only help strengthen people-to-people contact and enhance trade activity by opening several connectivity options between China and Nepal but also help elevate the global status of the Nepali passport, which would indeed lead Oli at the helm of foreign policy.

While turning toward the South, border and trade issues and the Eminent Persons Group (EPG) report are ever-pressing concerns. Oli has garnered huge support by including in Nepal’s map the territories of Kalapani, Lympiadhura and Lipulekh on the basis of historical evidence like land tax payment papers and historical accounts, and the formation of the EPG, so Oli is expected to be more apprehensive with revisiting, and resolving these issues. India, however, has its own share of problems and foreign policy challenges, as it has recently witnessed unprecedented politico-electoral changes, while the opposition in the Indian Parliament has emerged stronger. Chances of the Indian National Congress winning the next election and forming a government are greater. In light of the impending change of power in New Delhi, the Oli administration ought to strengthen ties with the ruling party along with the opposition in the Indian parliament. This is because the Congress has openly backed Nepal on a number of issues, most notably the blockade in 2015, when Oli was leading the government in Kathmandu. India, however, is carefully balancing its relations with all powers, including the US, China, Russia, and the EU, with the Modi government acting in a very dynamic manner and conducting a shrewd and sensible foreign policy with all of them. The Oli government in Kathmandu ought to do similar stratagem in foreign policy execution with its immediate neighbors to the north and south as well as other powers to the west,

Looking Westward, implementation of the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) and potential pressure on the Indo-Pacific Strategy (IPS) as well as the State Partnership Program (SPP) cannot be ruled out, which will be Oli government’s foremost foreign policy challenges. Meanwhile, the US is on the verge of a presidential election, which might bring dramatic results by shocking not only America but also the entire world. The US election of 2024 is probably going to be a whimsical one, especially with President Joe Biden pulling out and Vice-president Kamala Harris entering the presidential race. Since a failed assassination attempt a few weeks ago, former president Donald Trump has received tremendous sympathy and support—both political and moral—within the Republican Party and outside of it. Since then, Trump has grown braver, stronger and calmer, all of which may help him win the election. Yet, a large section of Americans are worried whether the US would be winning. Nevertheless, Harris’s endorsement has indeed traumatized Trump and his team, as she is considered a strong contender for presidency. Thus far, America has largely suffered from identity and racial politics since its establishment. So, the likelihood that the American people will elect a president of ‘race’ and ‘color’ is minimal, regardless of one's attributes, appeal, strengths, exposure, or charisma. The presidential race is not likely to be so easy for both of them.

Nevertheless, if Harris wins the US presidential election, she is most likely to continue Biden’s foreign policy, including the IPS and Taiwan and Tibet policies. She is also likely to follow the path of confronting China, which will largely affect not only South Asia, but the entire world. 

Her administration will surely support Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan. This means the international war, uncertainty, and chaos will continue, marked by growing US-China rivalry, while Russia will remain the biggest enemy of the West, including the US, EU, and NATO. 

At the same time, chances of growing India-Russia proximity affecting India-West relations are higher, which will have a significant bearing in South Asia and beyond. In addition, the risks that Taiwan issues will be heated up cannot be ruled out, which will directly affect Nepal in all aspects—security, economy, politics and diplomacy. While Nepal has already suffered from the Russia-Ukraine and Israel-Palestine wars directly and indirectly, as a significant number of Nepalis  have lost their lives in the Russia-Ukraine war and in Palestinian captivity, Nepal will suffer much more from the Taiwan occupation and corresponding consequences.

Alternatively, should Trump win the US presidential election, the country’s foreign policy will change, affecting not only its friends and allies but also every nation on the planet, including its most formidable adversaries, China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea. In any case, regardless of the winner—Harris or Trump—the US remains in a position where a major shift in its foreign policy will have a substantial impact on the rest of the world, including Nepal and its immediate neighbors.

Nepal’s foreign policy should therefore be utterly sensible, rational, and pragmatic, rather than being influenced by fear-psychoses, imperceptible hypotheses, or submissive philosophy, given the country’s sensitive geo-location and the ongoing competition between global and regional powers in South Asia, especially in Nepal. Thus, it is necessary to pragmatize the conventional approach to foreign policy making in light of realism, facts, data, information, history, intelligence and changing dynamics in techno-geopolitics and international relations. So, it is necessary to establish a robust and all-encompassing intelligence unit at the Prime Minister’s Office, which could supervise various sub-units such as the desks for the US, China, India, and the EU, with foreign policy experts employed to maintain the respective desks and offer the Prime Minister real-time advice and information as well as practical recommendations based on dynamism in international political and diplomatic spheres.

Oli, however, has largely suffered from some problems of “makeover leadership”, such as high vision, big dreams and patronizing expectations. He needs to be more pragmatic and patriotic than nationalistic at the moment, yet the nationalistic agenda can be emphasized based on national consensus. Also, he needs to take every criticism as an input for his mission on nation-building. Oli is said to be an idealist and is believed to be capable enough to inspire the nation, stimulate the citizens, and envision several steps ahead of contemporary Nepali leaders. Subsequently, Oli should be able to take the major political parties into confidence to develop a consensus on significant domestic and foreign policy issues, while democratic governance and political stability need to be at the core of the efforts.

That being said, the Oli government ought to strive not only for economic and political stability but also for the establishment of a prosperous nation, the preservation of Nepal’s territorial sovereignty, and the affirmation of its sovereign dignity. Meanwhile, Oli must once again demonstrate that he is a nationally acclaimed ‘true patriot’ leading the country with a strong sense of economic patriotism, spirited leadership and rational intelligence. He needs to show his distinct charisma to cement friendly relations with foreign leaders through ‘personal diplomacy’, while personal diplomacy can play a significant role in solidifying Nepal’s relations with other nations even when bilateral relations go low. As a patriot, PM Oli must exhibit his valiant persona and immense sense of patriotic morality to stand tall, neck-to-neck and shoulder-to-shoulder with leaders of neighboring and other powers such that he could gear up the momentum of diplomatic and foreign relations to safeguard national interests.

Considering the implications of international political, diplomatic, and security intelligence, the government must view intelligence through a wider lens, examining it from military (or security) intelligence to political intelligence to diplomatic intelligence to emotional intelligence (of the leaders and diplomats). Political and intelligence culture can help understand foreign policy and military and security affairs in depth. The powerful countries frequently practice astute intelligence and counterintelligence, while some of them also regularly push political and diplomatic propaganda to influence countries like Nepal. Where are the diplomatic intelligence systems in Nepal? Can foreign policy succeed without any significant intelligence mechanisms?

Nepal should rationally invest in intelligence, especially political and diplomatic intelligence such that it could rationally enhance diplomatic engagement with its friends and strategic partners. The National Security Council and National Investigation Department (NID) need to be strengthened with regards to expertise, resources and responsibilities. Diplomatic intelligence, a pragmatic approach in contemporary diplomacy, needs to be potently exercised so that there won’t remain ample ground for diplomatic mishaps. When it comes to foreign policy and diplomacy, a careful calibration of words matters. Most significantly, emotional intelligence—the capacity to identify, comprehend and control one's own emotions as well as understand, identify, and influence the emotions of others during bilateral negotiations—is highly prized in diplomacy and diplomatic relations.

Even with all of these persistent challenges on both domestic and foreign fronts, PM Oli cannot bring about a radical change in the nation on his own. A comprehensive ‘political culture’ is necessary to pledge domestic political stability, envision perpetual democratic governance and advance national interest, while a strong “intelligence culture” is necessary to safeguard territorial sovereignty and national security. Essentially, these goals can only be achieved through broader national consensus among major political parties as well as the cohesive will of the people, society, intelligentsias, constitutional stakeholders and the nation.

The author is a techno-geopolitical analyst/geo-strategic thinker. Views are personal