Nepal: state of international relations

Nepal is currently absorbed and embroiled in its parliamentary sanction of the US compact aid package. Does Nepal’s foreign policy administration operate as usual and assess the state of the country’s international relations lately?

In a sense, his connivance on geopolitical competition is naive to dominate and threaten the very survival of the seat of government in Kathmandu.

Nepal’s crucial relations with India and China are like the winter chill of the hills. And with distant great power neighbors like the US, UK, European countries and Russia abounding with cases of maintaining ties with Nepal in different borders of diplomatic reach and capitalization.

Americans and Europeans promote, support and stabilize democracy in its nascent phase undergoing a protracted transition so that Nepal does not fall into an orbit of authoritarianism of any kind when such a political system endangers freedom, justice and human rights.

This is an epic battle between democracy and illiberal politics in Nepal or any part of a non-Western country in the post Cold War world order.

Nepal has formal diplomatic relations with 173 countries and its presence is growing with the diaspora and migrant workers in different parts of the globe.

Israel is unhappy with Nepal’s double diplomacy to recognize the state by signing diplomatic relations in 1960 as one of the first Asian countries to do so and to refrain or provide reservations of armed activities and solutions to resolve Israeli-Palestinian discord.

Citizens are grateful to the government of Nepal for anti-COVID 19 measures, despite complaints of inefficiency, corruption and abuse of personal protective equipment safety equipment. Nepal, meanwhile, witnessing a series of political instabilities announced after the establishment of democracy is not new in its political history.

Nepal’s current history in this matter is no different and history teaches us lessons that we always forget and do not remember that the ideals of democracy and the conceptual practice of government and governance have suffered severe trials and tribulations given the specific nature of our state. and society.

This cannot be an excuse for achieving excellent politics and improving our human conditions.

Nepal was unable to focus on effective, efficient and equilateral international relations when internal defining episodes undermined it.

Political pragmatism can rectify and modify conduct and behavior in the modus operandi of the state and the bureaucratic apparatus.

Thus, the reconciliation of realism and liberalism saves the country from valid criticism to pursue critical action or critical praxis to contain disintegration, disorder and decadence in the political system.

To meet the challenges of public and international affairs, it cannot happen overnight or in a fortnight to put an end to two recurring salient features of Nepalese politics.

One to end the political dualism that permeates our political perception of democracy versus extremism (communism or hyper-nationalism) and the other to control the political dualism of the polemicist of ideologues on petty political issues to settle scores or avenge their murder.

In recent times, territorial neighbors have perpetuated cartographic anxiety and border intrusion. He violated the sanctity of the peace and friendship treaty with India and China.

As populist authoritarianism is on the rise in many countries and classical powers emerge in international politics, Nepal also needs to rejuvenate its school of international relations theory.

This must align with universal norms and values ​​to pacify the fact that non-Western perspectives are not against the West or against the origins of epistemic practices currently applied around the world.

It raises many questions. How do we see the world of life, external affairs and world affairs? What political incentives do we formulate in deliberative democracy to counter political vectors that are indigenous or local?

How to meet the challenge of exogenous epistemological practices through an indigenizing mix of sovereignty? Why would the Himalayas’ code red make it another Indochinese peninsula in Southeast Asia? Is it true ?

Is Nepal undertaking proactive diplomatic exercises to relieve the country from the weight of geopolitical constraints?

How can Nepal resolve border issues and blockade issues with India and China under the guise and in the context of one or the other reason? These questions, like many others, are serious to consider in the answer.

The 2015 Constitution of Nepal is inclusive and radically democratic. Nepal does not need to reset its bilateral or multilateral relations as this pact is the result of 75 years of political struggles inside Nepal.

Diplomacy based on our foreign policy must be followed and pursued wisely taking into account the changes and dynamics of post-Cold War eras.

Nepal does not need to give in to power politics but to pursue democratic power politics within and beyond immediate and distant borders.

Nepal must forget and forgive the wrongs and hurts that have been done to us in the past by taking risks to advance democracy in this mountainous country. It is Nepal’s magnanimity to revive international relations and launch a new agenda of action for freedom and justice alongside the stipulated national plans, goals, mission and vision.

In the internal affairs of Nepal, the great powers are unnecessarily infringing on the concept of sovereignty vested in the people and preventing democracy from flourishing and its stronghold at the local level. India, China and America are secretly and openly engaged in turning their knowledge products into commodities (aid, trade and building infrastructure).

Nepalese politics has become captive to these agendas, wasting our time to band together to defend our purpose and principles in this space and time.

We celebrate the 75-year Nepal-America bilateral relationship marred by this great assistance program. Likewise, with a longtime ally of Britain, the problem of veterans and Gurkhas in terms of equal pay and the pension system requires amicable solutions to forge a strong bond with the government. Britain and the people to defend a free and open society.

Israel is unhappy with Nepal’s double diplomacy to recognize the state by signing diplomatic relations in 1960 as one of the first Asian countries to do so and to refrain or provide reservations of armed activities and solutions to resolve Israeli-Palestinian discord.

Israel must understand that it has a comparative advantage in trade with Nepal and Nepal has huge migrant workers serving it and in West Asian countries.

Nepal is committed to maintaining international peace and security even when situations of internal insecurity, marked by internal crises, surround us. Similarly, the European Union is active in the development of partnerships and social sectors in Nepal.

Bilateral European countries would channel their aid to this political consortium and reduce bilateral commitments. Nepal has good and affable relations in East Asia where job and education seekers go to South Korea and Japan.

Diplomacy based on our foreign policy must be followed and pursued wisely taking into account the changes and dynamics of post-Cold War eras.

Political ideas become strategic in this regard to strengthen warrior-like statecraft to uphold the belief, purpose and principles of liberalism and democracy in contemporary times. It is a political reorganization in changed circumstances to respond to a situation of malaise in the 3 S’s – status, solutions and strategy.

It is constant to understand and perceive great competition for power in other geopolitical hotspots that also weigh on our space.

A weak point of small states is in economic and political well-being otherwise they become hot spots of great power rivalry.

An ex-prime minister of Nepal used to repeat a grand design by doing is not appropriate but grand strategy is definitely in the spheres of influence.

So, to discern the tensions and pressures of international power politics that disrupt peace, insecurity and prosperity, the record of (inter)national leaders takes this fact and contains untoward events that jeopardize national integrity. , national identity and national interests.

Political ideas become strategic in this regard to strengthen warrior-like statecraft to uphold the belief, purpose and principles of liberalism and democracy in contemporary times. It is a political reorganization in changed circumstances to respond to a situation of malaise in the 3 S’s – status, solutions and strategy.

Foreign and security policy experts to consider geopolitical risks, challenges and opportunities of recent times, to determine FSP solutions based on political legacy, current affairs insights and incisive initiatives in sight , and conjecturing future trends and transformation based on hindsight and political psyche . International relations become commonplace when arguments and discursive battles are open and hidden. History is everything guide, prepare today for tomorrow.