By Shashi P.B.B. Malla
There has been a lot of discussion lately about Nepal’s ‘non-aligned’ foreign policy. Commentators and experts have weighed in.
Considering Nepal’s geo-political situation between the two Asian juggernauts, there is, of course, no difference of opinion that the country has to chart an absolutely neutral position between India and China.
In fact, the founder and unifier of the nation, Prithvi Narayan Shah had already laid down the ground rules of our external relations with our two Asian giants. As a great power, China has remained a constant; instead of the mighty British India, we now have had to deal with an Independent India [which is now rising and has great power ambitions – see the world affairs article on page 1].
Besides our bilateral relations with India and China – which also have regional and international ramifications and must be ranked of the highest priority, the next rung are our bilateral relations with our South Asian neighbours: Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Sri Lanka and the Maldives. We have neglected these to a great extent.
Unfortunately, Nepal’s Minister of Foreign Affairs lacks focused leadership and vision. He lacks the education, background and experience (The Annapurna Express, Feb. 5).
He has even not been able to repatriate Nepalese nationals serving in the Russian army against Ukraine.
With India and China, we have to walk the fine line – it must be a policy of equidistance.
In this regard, much remains to be done. India- and China-experts are few and far between. The government has not encouraged independent research by our think tanks. And there are hardly any Mandarin-speakers in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
The Role of NAM in Nepal’s Foreign Policy
With the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, the relevance of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) has started to shrink.
Today, NAM is no longer of importance in international affairs.
Many of its major proponents seek their activity in other international organizations and fora – G-20 and BRICS.
NAM has no ideological relevance anymore. The annual summits have been reduced to talking shops. Nepal’s high-level attendance – by the prime minister himself is a waste of time, energy and money.
Nepal could play a more forceful role in SAARC and the UN’s group of developing countries.
It is, therefore, perplexing that the columnist of The Rising Nepal, Narad Bharadwaj (a former ambassador of Nepal to Qatar) claims: “Shifting geo-political fault lines are again yielding operational space for multilateralism and peace agencies like NAM.”
NAM has not been able to check the naked Russian aggression in Ukraine, nor the depredations of violent, non-state terrorist actors.
It is an illusion to hope that “In the present day world, where the dark clouds of war are hovering over the sky, NAM can emerge as a relevant and resilient agency capable of containing violence and preventing war by promoting peace, equality, inclusivity, collaboration and co-existence which are the fundamental prerequisites for a just world order.”
The problem is that NAM lacks urgency, and also the leadership and the machinery.
It cannot be “a magical foreign policy tool” for safeguarding our vital national interests.
However, as the writer states, there is an urgent need for the world order to make it difficult for unilateralism to gain currency whether on the part of the U.S., China, Russia, North Korea, Iran or Israel. But the path is not through the powerless NAM, but strengthened international organizations, including a reformed UN Security Council.
The writer can be reached at: shashipbmalla@hotmail.com
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect People’s Review’s editorial stance.
Login to add a comment