With the formation of an interim government led by Sushila Karki, tasked with holding elections, debates have emerged over how major powers perceive this development and what direction the new government’s foreign policy may take.
In the aftermath of the Sept 8–9 Gen Z uprisings, India swiftly adjusted to the new political reality, expressing its readiness to work with Karki’s administration. Indian Ambassador to Nepal Naveen Srivastav was the first foreign envoy to meet Karki and discuss bilateral relations. Soon after Karki was sworn in, India welcomed the new leadership, expressing hope that it would contribute to peace and stability.
“As a close neighbour, a fellow democracy and a long term development partner, India will continue to work closely with Nepal for the well-being and prosperity of our two peoples and countries,” India’s Ministry of External Affairs said in a statement. The following day, Prime Minister Narendra Modi congratulated Karki on X, signaling India’s keenness to support the new government in organizing elections within six months. Speaking in Manipur, Modi also praised Nepali youth, an act of public diplomacy aimed at the Nepali people.
Karki, for her part, has extended positive gestures toward India even before assuming office. In an interview with Indian television, she said: “First, I will say Namaskaar to Modi Ji. I have a good impression of Modi.” Such remarks suggest New Delhi is likely to invite her for an official visit, an opportunity it denied KP Sharma Oli for over a year.
On Thursday, Modi had a telephone conversation with Karki and reaffirmed India’s support for peace and stability. “Had a warm conversation with Mrs. Sushila Karki, Prime Minister of the Interim Government of Nepal. Conveyed heartfelt condolences on the recent tragic loss of lives and reaffirmed India’s steadfast support for her efforts to restore peace and stability, Also, I extended warm greetings to her and the people of Nepal on their National Day tomorrow,” Modi posted on X.
By contrast, Beijing has responded more cautiously. China has yet to formally congratulate Karki. Its Foreign Ministry spokesperson offered a routine response to a media query, reaffirming that China “respects the development path chosen independently by the people of Nepal” and stands ready to advance cooperation under the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence. The Chinese ambassador in Kathmandu, usually active on social media, has refrained from direct comment, instead amplifying the ministry’s statement. Beijing faces a situation reminiscent of 2008, after the abolition of the monarchy.
Navigating Nepal’s evolving politics could be challenging for China. Its engagement strategy has long centered on a small, left-leaning political elite. Over the past decade, this approach brought Beijing significant advantages—most notably under KP Sharma Oli, who signed the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) framework and attended China’s Victory Day parade. However, with the current cabinet expected to draw from diverse groups, China may find it harder to safeguard its interests in Kathmandu.
In a BBC interview, Karki reassured that relations with China would remain unchanged. Yet, an unusual congratulatory message from the Dalai Lama may have unsettled Beijing, given his silence toward previous Nepali prime ministers. China is likely to urge Nepal to ensure the participation of all political forces in the broader process.
For Western powers, the change of government is acceptable as long as Nepal’s constitution, which enshrined federalism, republicanism, inclusion, and secularism, remains protected. Their concerns continue to center on endemic corruption, persistent political instability, and the growing influence of China in Nepali politics. From their perspective, Karki’s leadership offers continuity, provided that democratic values, human rights, and constitutional safeguards are upheld. Support from the West, along with partners such as Japan and Australia, is likely to hinge on these commitments.
As for foreign policy orientation, the interim government is unlikely to make any major departures. Its priorities will largely depend on the composition of the cabinet, but its mandate is limited to conducting elections. Being a caretaker administration with a narrow scope of mandate, it cannot enter into significant agreements with powerful countries.
