The parliamentary election scheduled for March 5 has attracted significant international attention. Major powers such as the United States, India, and China are closely watching the development, assessing the possible poll outcomes and their implications for them. Although all have maintained a cautious public stance to avoid the appearance of interference, their interest reflects deeper strategic, political, and economic concerns.
Global scrutiny
The Sept 8-9 GenZ protests were unprecedented in terms of their speed of mobilization and institutional impact. Within hours, key state mechanisms appeared paralyzed. The scale and intensity of the protests surprised observers worldwide. For Nepal’s immediate neighbors, the implications were especially serious. India and China, both of which share borders with Nepal, were concerned about possible spillover effects. India’s concerns were heightened by its open border and deep socio-political ties with Nepal, prompting policymakers to consider how similar unrest might affect its own domestic environment. China, highly sensitive to instability in its neighborhood, also watched the situation closely. Against this backdrop, the international community is now carefully observing how Nepali leaders respond and what direction the country takes after the elections.
The rise of new political forces
The emergence of parties such as the Rastriya Swatantra Party and other alternative political forces signals a potential shift in Nepal’s political landscape. For decades, external partners have worked with fragile coalition governments marked by frequent leadership changes, inconsistent policies, and a widening gap between promises and implementation. Diplomatic and development engagements were often disrupted by ministerial reshuffles and shifting alliances. Many in the international community see the possible rise of new leadership as an opportunity for greater policy coherence, particularly in foreign affairs and economic governance. If new actors form the government, their foreign policy direction and governance priorities will be closely scrutinized. However, new political parties have not clearly laid out their foreign policy priorities in their election manifestos. However, they have recognized that handling the relationship with major powers is a difficult and delicate task. International observers are also watching leadership shifts within traditional parties, including the potential rise of figures such as Gagan Thapa within the Nepali Congress.
The politicization of foreign policy
Several key bilateral and multilateral initiatives have been drawn into domestic political debates. The 1950 Treaty and border issues with India have often been used for political mobilization rather than genuine agendas to be addressed through sustained diplomatic engagement. India will be closely watching how the new political parties or new leaders of traditional political parties handle those issues when they form the government. The Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) compact with the United States became highly politicized, as did discussions around the Indo-Pacific Strategy and the State Partnership Program. Similarly, China’s Belt and Road Initiative faced controversy and delays. For major powers, such politicization complicates long-term planning and implementation. Many international observers believe that new political forces may avoid repeating the mistakes of past leaders by handling foreign policy matters with greater consistency and pragmatism.
Economic reform and the investment climate
Nepal’s strategic location and untapped economic potential have long attracted interest from both major and middle powers. The United States has consistently urged improvements in Nepal’s investment climate to encourage greater private-sector involvement. Under the Trump administration, economic and business interests were prioritized. With the shutdown of USAID, trade, investment, and China-related issues have become central pillars of Nepal–US engagement. China, India, Japan, Australia, and South Korea share similar concerns about Nepal’s business environment. Relationships with Japan, Australia, South Korea and other countries are equally important because they are in a well-position to invest in Nepal. Despite some legal reforms, structural challenges—such as bureaucratic delays, regulatory uncertainty, and weak implementation—continue to discourage large-scale investment. International stakeholders hope that a new government, especially one with a strong reform mandate, will focus on improving the ease of doing business and advancing meaningful structural reforms.
Nepal’s geopolitical balancing act
Nepal has historically followed a policy of non-alignment while expanding diplomatic and economic ties with competing global powers. The international community is closely watching whether the new government that emerges after the GenZ movement will continue this approach or adopt a different strategic alignment. Over the past decade, China’s economic presence and political influence in Nepal have grown, prompting caution in India and among Western countries. The shifting balance of influence in Kathmandu carries broader regional implications. As a result, the upcoming election is viewed not merely as a domestic political event but as a potential turning point in Nepal’s external relations. Traditional political parties have generally adhered to the principle of non-alignment, while newer political forces have yet to clearly articulate their foreign policy positions. In fact, most parties have deliberately avoided taking firm stances on foreign policy issues in their election manifestos. The West will put emphasis on greater transparency, accountability in the new government’s handling of domestic and international issues. Like in the past, they will closely watch Nepal’s dealing with China. China will be more assertive to secure its security and strategic interests along with pressing the new government to implement the past agreement reached between two countries when Xi Jinping visited Nepal in 2019. India’s prime concerns are security, investment, new government’s approach to pending issues, China factor and new government’s approach with the West. The new priorities of the Trump administration in Nepal will be implementation of MCC, trade and investment, security cooperation and Nepal's response to the US policy on human trafficking and illegal migrants.
Conclusion
As election day approaches, major countries are publicly refraining from overt involvement or endorsement. Western nations appear open to the emergence of new political forces, hoping for improved governance and greater policy stability. India has indicated its willingness to work with any elected government, though it remains attentive to how new leaders might shape bilateral relations. China, while maintaining its principle of non-interference, is reportedly cautious about potential shifts that could weaken traditional communist forces in parliament and disrupt policy continuity.
