Prime Minister Oli’s China visit: Views from social media

In recent weeks, social media platforms are abuzz with suggestions for Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli regarding his official trip to Beijing from Dec 2–6. Although the visit has not been officially announced, preparations are underway, and debates surrounding the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and Nepal-China relations have intensified, often factoring in India’s role in the equation.

On Nov 25, former Prime Minister Baburam Bhattarai shared his perspective on social media, stating that he could not attend Oli’s consultation meeting but wanted to offer advice. “Nepal is the oldest independent and sovereign country in South Asia, and one of the oldest in the world. It has every right and responsibility to assert and maintain its sovereignty, come what may,” he wrote. Highlighting Nepal’s unique geopolitical position between rising powers China and India, Bhattarai stressed the need to maintain friendly relations with all parties for national interests. He advocated leveraging opportunities presented by the BRI, just as Nepal has done with India and the US, to boost its economy. While he supports the BRI, his stance on whether Nepal should opt for loans or grants remains unclear.

Political polarization on the BRI continues, with Chinese Ambassador Cheng Song actively lobbying key political leaders to create a favorable environment for its adoption. As the visit approaches, Indian media and think tanks have weighed in. On Nov 22, Rishi Gupta from the Asia Society published an article in The Print titled “India does not need to sweat over Oli’s China drift—Nepal knows the limits.” The piece sparked reactions in Nepal. Aneka Rebecca Rajbhandari, co-founder of The Arnika Project, criticized Indian analysts for their narrow security-focused lens on Nepal-China relations. Similarly, Akhilesh Upadhyay, former editor of The Kathmandu Post and columnist at Hindustan Times, remarked that Indian analysts suffer from an “imperial gaze” toward smaller neighbors but noted that Chinese attitudes are not significantly different.

Despite the ongoing discourse on the topic, Prime Minister Oli has yet to secure full support for the BRI. While he asserts that loans should not fund BRI projects, key coalition partner Nepali Congress (NC) remains hesitant. On Nov 22, Pankaj Das, who identifies himself as a cadre of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) cadre and observer of Nepal’s geopolitical affairs, noted a shift in NC’s stance. In his post, he said: “When in government, NC opposed the BRI. In opposition, it rejected both loans and grants. Now, as part of the government, it might consider BRI projects if grants are provided.” Das also suggested that NC and the UML have already agreed in principle to pursue BRI agreements.

Prominent voices on social media have added to the debate. Ajaya Bhadra Khanal, a media personality, suggested that Nepal should carefully examine and remove any suspicious provisions in the BRI implementation plan. In a X (formerly Twitter) post directed at NC General Secretary Gagan Thapa, he emphasized the risks of adopting China’s economic model, which may lead to long-term challenges. Similarly, Pramod Raj Sedhain, a self-taught geopolitical analyst, posted on X that public debate and scrutiny, akin to the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) discussions, are essential for BRI projects. He advocated for transparency and parliamentary debates to ensure accountability.

The lack of transparency surrounding Nepal’s BRI framework agreement, signed in 2017, has fueled further suspicion. Although a four-page document is publicly available, its official status remains unconfirmed. Vijay Kant Karna, a researcher in international relations, stated in a X post on Nov 21 that secret agreements on strategic projects like the BRI are unacceptable without broad stakeholder consultations. He called for comprehensive discussions, similar to those held for the MCC, to ensure public trust.

“China’s BRI strategic plan needs comprehensive discussions in all stakeholders like MCC. Secret accord without proper discussions in parliament and political parties will not be acceptable,” he stated.

Comparisons to past foreign aid initiatives have also surfaced. Journalist Prakash Timalsina highlighted how King Mahendra successfully leveraged Cold War-era assistance from Russia, India, and China for projects like the Mahendra Highway and Araniko Highway. In response, journalist Birat Anupam remarked that he supports both the MCC and the BRI, a stance he described as rare in Nepal’s polarized discourse. Meanwhile, former Foreign Minister Kamal Thapa criticized political parties for undermining national decision-making by relying on foreign support for their political and economic agendas.

“Political parties who are taking not just political support but also economic support from foreign powers for their interests are gradually losing the decision-making power for the national interest,” Thapa argued.

Jainendra Jeevan, a political analyst, warned the NC against adopting an overly rigid stance on the BRI. He argued that antagonizing China, a global power, could strain relations with the ruling UML and alienate other pro-China groups. Jeevan added that without hidden political or military agendas, foreign initiatives like the MCC and BRI could benefit Nepal. However, he stressed the importance of balanced engagement to safeguard national interests.

As Oli’s visit approaches, he has intensified consultations with coalition partners and stakeholders. While dozens of bilateral issues could be addressed, the BRI dominates public discourse. Oli’s previous visits to China were marked by major agreements: the 2016 Transit and Transport Agreement and discussions on railway projects in 2018. The 2024 visit is poised to center on the BRI. Although Oli has not explicitly outlined his agenda, he has emphasized the need for tangible outcomes from the trip.

Interestingly, social media trends reveal a gradual consensus even among NC-leaning experts, who now acknowledge the importance of engaging with the BRI while opposing loans. Left-leaning intellectuals, on the other hand, have long advocated for concessional loans under the BRI framework. This evolving sentiment underscores the complexity of Nepal's position. While the BRI offers economic opportunities, its dominance in public discourse has overshadowed other pressing bilateral issues with China.

In the backdrop of these debates, public demand for transparency and accountability grows louder. Citizens, analysts, and politicians alike agree that robust discussions, both in Parliament and the public sphere, are essential for any agreements under the BRI. Lessons from past controversies, like the MCC, highlight the importance of open dialogue and clear communication to prevent misunderstandings and foster trust.

The stakes of Prime Minister Oli’s upcoming visit are high. Balancing the BRI’s potential benefits with its financial and geopolitical implications will require careful diplomacy. At the same time, ensuring that domestic consensus aligns with national interests remains challenging.

Top leaders’ take

“During my visit, there will be no agreements related to loans. However, the claim that Nepal is at risk of falling into a debt trap is untrue. If we ever need loans, we are free to seek them from any source.” - Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli

“Nepal should not take loans from China under the BRI, as the country lacks the capacity to handle such financial commitments. However, we are open to accepting grants.” - Sher Bahadur Deuba, NC President

“Nepal should proceed with the BRI projects, as they align with our national interests. Having already joined the BRI framework, we must move forward to realize its potential benefits.” - Madhav Kumar Nepal, CPN (Unified Socialist) Chairperson

“Consultations between the Nepali Congress and the CPN-UML regarding Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli’s visit to China are ongoing. There are no significant differences between the two parties, and I am traveling to China to assist with preparations for the visit.” - Arzu Rana Deuba, Minister for Foreign Affairs

“Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli is facing pressure during this trip because the ruling coalition partner, the Nepali Congress, opposes certain aspects of the BRI. Specifically, the NC is firmly against taking any loans. It will be interesting to see how China views this dynamic during the visit.” - Jhala Nath Khanal, CPN (Unified Socialist) senior leader

“The agreements signed with China in the past must be implemented during PM Oli’s visit. The BRI projects should be executed in both letter and spirit, and the implementation plan must be finalized during this trip.” - Pushpa Kamal Dahal, CPN (Maoist Center) Chairperson