Submit your Article

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

Amid changing politico-electoral dynamics in India, its relations with immediate neighbors are likely to be transfigured. Nepal-India relations, however, have been mostly centered on “belief”, ‘over-belief”, or ‘crises of belief”, largely swayed by elite rulers.

Beyond government-to-government relations, Nepal can strengthen its relations with the formidable opposition in the Indian parliament through party-to-party ties, or shadow government relations, given the steadfast support Nepal has garnered over the years from the Indian opposition on political, diplomatic, economic, trade, environmental, demographic and geographic issues.

Nepal should use tact and tone rather than counteract emotions to advance its national interests through a variety of avenues, including institutional, diplomatic, public and personal.

Nevertheless, both the neighbors need to broaden their perspectives and lessen the antiquated stereotype of one neighbor over the other by laying emphasis on truth, trust, tone and respect as cornerstones of their relationships for tracing a conscious and concrete relationship roadmap.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly threatened to use nuclear weapons against the West—the US, NATO and the EU—thanks to his country’s tech and nuke strengths. North Korea is threatening the US by flexing its sophisticated defense system; Israel and Iran are threatening each other on the strength of their high-tech missiles and AI drones; while the US and China are intimidating one another with their superior AI and defense-security capabilities.

Amid escalating tensions, what if states use AI to control nuclear weapons, operate fighter planes and deploy AI soldiers on battlefields? If they use AI to control nukes, consequences could go beyond the control of humans, impacting humanity immensely, warn AI pioneers. The sapiens’ decisions to develop AI are precise and constrained, whereas AI’s decisions could go against human indoctrination, triggering imprecise and unrestrained actions. Thus, states should act sensibly and regulate AI through multilateral tech and diplomatic channels. 

Since the end of Cold War I and emergence of a liberal international order, the extent of globalization has profoundly impacted culture and universalized the education system. Nepal is one of the few countries that has been unable to foster its culture or internationalize its education system due to a massive influence of international culture and education. 

While Tribhuvan University, Nepal’s oldest varsity, has adopted a new procedure for choosing officials, it should next build a reliable transnational network and internationalize Nepali education to advance national interests and project soft power for executing public diplomacy, fostering good neighborliness and advancing national interests. A strong education system and a justifiable cultural exchange program help countries understand each other better. Essentially, a high-quality national education system not only boosts productivity but also broadens the spectrum of soft power in foreign policy, leaving a much stronger impression of the country in international platforms.

Over the past few years, China has achieved political, economic and diplomatic feats. No apparent observation, perhaps, can emasculate China’s global march—it is rising so gracefully, smoothly and enormously. China is most likely to grow from being a superpower to a mega-power. But in the evolving international system, it is anticipated to play rational, responsible and equable roles.

The most sensible foreign policy course of action for Nepal at this point of unparalleled rise of its immediate neighbor would be to strategically align with it by building mutual trust, while maintaining a delicate balance with another neighbor. Nonetheless, Nepal ought to maintain a pragmatic economic and security framework through increased mutual trust, strategic partnerships and technological cooperation with both the neighbors. Nepal’s economic, developmental and security architecture, despite many geopolitical challenges, should be guided by a sensible geopolitical assessment and wider techno-economic cooperation with immediate neighbors and other powers.

International order is feeling the collective heat of the intensifying Russia-Ukraine war, the Israel-Hamas conflict and a massive weaponization of technology. Unlike the politico-polarity of the past, techno-polarity is now shaping the international order, while the US and China are navigating the tech and AI world order.

Given a sensitive geo-location, highly susceptible digital space and impact of AI on the world order, Nepal should recognize the gravity of the geopolitical competition between high-tech superpowers—the US and China, or China and India—and implement a logical strategy to maintain balanced relations with all of them.

Nepal must be ready to deal with the fallout of a possible occupation of Taiwan, which might put the country in the middle of a ‘crossfire’ between China and the US and directly affect its security and sovereignty. If unable to tenaciously maintain the geopolitical balance between the rival superpowers, Nepal will suffer on multiple fronts.

While the year 2024 is going to be a grand electoral year in the history of modern liberal democracy, the risks that democracy could witness grave tremors are getting higher.

The tech and AI mastery of the high tech superpowers—China and the US—is not only contributing to tech bipolarity, economic rivalry, and geopolitical tensions, but also in democratic antagonism. They are exploiting technology and digital capabilities to contain or dictate each other and are involved in ‘techno-geopolitics’, while the big tech and social media are engaged in ‘disinformation’ and ‘data colonialism’. 

Democracy is in danger not only because of authoritarian rulers, or ethnic (muscular) nationalism, or the risk of disinformation, or influence of AI, but also due to general voters. The voters’ rational behavior/decision could play a significant role in preserving the essence and affluence of liberal democracy as every elector is responsible in making democracy sparkling and functional.

Amid rising geopolitical tensions and escalating international conflicts, North Korea has successfully launched its first ever ‘Spy Satellite” into space to monitor the military activities of its adversaries—the US and its allies—in the Korean peninsula in real-time. More importantly, it would help in making its nuclear plan more precise. Earlier, Pyongyang closed dozens of its embassies, including in Nepal. North Korea has recently pledged to support Hamas in its war against Israel, while the US has blamed it for supporting Russia in the Ukraine war. North Korea is perhaps preparing for a nuke war with the US by claiming that the US could enter the Korean Peninsula with a ‘war-mongering’ attitude following the inducement of chaos in Eastern Europe and the Mideast. The US has deployed a ‘guided-missile submarine’ (nuclear submarine that can contain Ballistic Missile and Cruise Missile) in the Mideast with a message to Iran to not get involved in the Israel-Palestine war. If the flames of the Mideast war, unfortunately, spread to the Arab World, the Korean Peninsula, and to Taiwan, finally, the turmoil will exponentially outstrip beyond imagination or control of any of the superpowers.

While President Xi Xinping and President Joe Biden met face-to-face in San Francisco this week, as two largest economies and great powers of the world, China and the US should not only focus on their bilateral relations, but also think about global issues, including international peace, stability and the world order.

Previously, when the North Korean leader Kim Jong Un met Russian President Vladimir Putin at the Vostochny Cosmodrome near Vladivostok, the Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro met Chinese President Xi Xing Ping in Beijing, while both Xi and Putin avoided the recent G20 meeting hosted by India. North Korea has been close to China and Russia and is constantly threatening the west, particularly the US, by repeatedly testing modern ballistic missiles. The G20 nations were contentious to logically end the Ukraine crisis, while the summit officially remained reluctant to condemn Russia that could have boosted Putin’s morale to further strategize the war. Putin is perhaps optimistic regarding the outcome of US election-2024 hoping that the incoming administration in the White House would revise the US strategy on Ukraine—that could favor him winning the war in Ukraine. China, on the other hand, is widely garnering support for its global political march, while the US is desperately making alliances to counter China. The nuke and superpower’s irrational competition on illicit supremacy is inducing global disorder.

Equally, various terrorist organizations are contributing to making the international system more anarchic and fueling social disorder. Samuel P Huntington remarked in The Clash of Civilizations 

that “Nation states will remain the most powerful actors in world affairs, but the principal conflicts of global politics will occur between nations and groups of different civilizations. The clash of civilizations will dominate global politics. The fault-lines between civilizations will be the battle lines of the future”, which remains relevant even today.

The diplomatic sneering between Saudi Arabia and the US in the past following the killing of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi perhaps played a key role in altering the diplomatic courses in the Gulf. Subsequently, the Arab World got united after China brokered a diplomatic deal, thereby solidifying its presence in the Mideast. The flaring tension in bilateral relations between India and Canada following the killing of Canadian Sikh Hardeep Singh Nijjar could now change the “politico-diplomatic strategies” in the Indo-Pacific, while the said intelligence sharing by the US ambassador to Canada regarding the killing of Sikh separatist leader Nijjar could not only deteriorate India-US relations, but could also dilute the US presence in the region by jeopardizing the future of the Indo-Pacific Strategy (IPS). This could subsequently help reinforce China’s clout in the region and beyond.

Bilateral matters are internal affairs of nations, but the “hate crimes”—embedded in religious beliefs—can have spillover effects and cause ethnic war, instigating huge losses to human civilization, if not handled with utmost sense of rationality.  The religious radicalism—that is emotionally rooted to socio-cultural belief—could not only divide communities, but also largely rift humanity. It could also create space for the emergence of additional terrorists and criminal groups. The historical records or incidents of various civilizational clashes show that religious conflicts have always resulted in lose-lose outcomes. 

Conversely, both the states and their regimes want to cash in on ethnic nationalism for immediate political gains. However, both the state and their democratic strength suffer in the long run. 

South Asia is highly sensitive to religious or ethnic violence because the region is believed to be a Hindu-dominated civilization along with mixed minority religious groups, including Muslims and others that have been often witnessing domination from the former since ancient times, blame the critics. The minority groups sometimes outburst with grievances, ego or prejudice and encounters with the majority ones, which subsequently could escalate to civilizational clash leading to ethnic cleansing.

India, Pakistan and Bangladesh have been constantly witnessing ethnic violence or terrorist attacks that are deep-rooted to religious radicalism. Nepal has also been witnessing instances of social and ethnic differences, particularly hatred sentiments or pursuits against Hindu beliefs or Hinduism, in recent times. Some internal and external actors are trying to sow the seeds of social disharmony in the Nepali society in the name of globalization of culture, perhaps, with shrewd hidden interests. On the other hand, social order is being constantly challenged due to social irresponsibility of some so called communally recognized individuals including people’s representatives, social frontrunners and Opinion makers. Various studies show that the major source of knowledge or information to the new generation has become ‘short clips’ or ‘posts’ from social media— that rarely have depth of information, facts or evidence, data or statistics, and data analysis regarding the content. Likewise, some Opinion makers in mainstream media dig deeper only into the problems just by criticizing, blaming and inducing negative emotions to the general public for the sake of immediate popularity, instead of identifying possible solutions, ideas, innovations and sense of socio-emotional cohesiveness by incorporating facts, data, discussions, critical analysis and integrity. Accordingly, the inheritance of superficial knowledge or disinformation could induce misperception leading to adverse incitements in the mind of young readers, which could result in substantial ‘knowledge deficit’ when knowledge is transferred from one generation to another. Consequently, this could weaken ‘national knowledge power’ causing huge loss to the nation in the long run.

Nevertheless, the innovative technology, advanced society or antique democracy alone cannot bring significant transformation in human life, civilization or political affairs, a “conscious and responsible behavior” is essential in every human being including tech users, technocrats, policy makers, social and political actors. The tech, diplomatic and political policies and strategies should reflect democratic values that advance liberty and humanity, and respect human rights as well as people’s personal sovereign dignity. The AI, big tech and social media first need to be democratized so that they can contribute to a democratic order. Most importantly, a trustful multilateral (diplomatic) channel should be established so as to enable countries to develop responsible and ethical technology, while honest and ethical use (or practice) of AI technology, social media, or cultural beliefs will indeed advance people’s life, society, democracy and state-to-state relations. Technology however has brought about great transformations in human life, economy and the state of affairs; social media undeniably is one of the momentous entities of liberal world order when it complies with ‘ethical norms’, ‘comity’ and ‘civism’.

Primarily, domestic issues are entirely sovereign internal affairs of nations, while no foreign nationals or government can perhaps raise objections against their domestic laws and constitutional provisions. Yet, the concerns—tech, social and democratic—are highly sensitive due to the impact they may have on the region and beyond. Thus, it’s high time to restore trust and harmony among nation-states and nationals of distinct communities by initiating “rational civic dialogue”. The stronger and cohesive the social accord in a country, the higher the prospect of political stability, economic prosperity and democratic enlivening. 

Essentially, nation-states require truthful, collaborative and cooperative action among governments, civic community, multilateral organizations, universities, NGOs, think tanks and creative individuals to inject a specific ‘gene’ consisting of ‘harmony, humanity and civility’ into political leaders in the generations to come. 

The leadership endowed with this gem of a gene, let’s hope, will be able to course through a complex techno-socio-democratic order.  

This is the last piece of a three-part series

The author is a geopolitical analyst