A new government has been formed on the foundation of the Gen-Z movement dated Sept 8 and 9. Here new imperatives are also envisioned under the foundation of such a movement. A Panglossian diplomatic order is in the pipeline to fine-tune. A beacon of hope in the world order is galvanized and rethought simultaneously and frequently. But no diplomatic stake has yet been declared. It is likely to resemble the haziness of a debut government. Conversations with respected ambassadors are not the only way to determine foreign policy; instead, it needs a crystal-clear commitment to foreign policy with respected nations. A similar type of youth-led movement broke out in Bangladesh, but the people of Bangladesh do not show confidence in Bengali youth leaders. Here, the South Asian effect of the movement catches no momentum.
The executive role of government in defining foreign policy actually not only influences the nation but also sets the minimum benchmark and norm of the state. Due to the volatile situation, the erstwhile government was not efficient in maintaining a permanent policy for the state. The new government with new manifestations needs to predefine an official permanent foreign policy under the foundation of rationality and diplomatic brotherhood. But its value of reciprocity may differ cordially with neighboring and distant nations based on physical navigation, trade & exchange, and cross-border integrity, and more.
How to define it
Mainly, the foreign policy of Nepal is predefined by sovereignty, territorial integrity, non-alignment, mutual respect, non-interference, and more, which are mentioned in Article 5.1 of the recent Constitution of Nepal. On the other hand, directive principles also provide guidelines for international relations that lead to the balanced and coordinated dignity of the state. All of these are mentioned in the Constitution, which is solely under the national interest of the nation. Here, attention must be paid to sweeping statements, which are nowadays becoming hotcakes on social media.
Chandra Dev Bhatta, political scientist and foreign policy analyst from Nepal, expresses, “The state itself is an autonomous entity, not a buffer state. The theoretical version of this buffer state may be correct, but the comprehensive impact may be troublesome in the long run.” Currently, heartache is found upon the issue of a buffer state. So the value of a buffer state is not so crucial and substantial to advocate. Other states may address us as a buffer, but the version of internal factors within the state may be a sweeping statement.
Redefining neutrality
S.D. Muni, professor emeritus of Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU), in his book Foreign Policy of Nepal, which was initially published in 1973, traces some pulling facts about the diplomacy of Nepal. Here he also presents some patent arguments. He added facts on geo-political vulnerability, domestic and foreign policy nexus, and shifting non-alignment imperatives. Later, the enlarged and revised version of this book was published in 2016, adding dynamic features of Nepal in comparison with political changes seen before 2016. Here, elucidations are measured under foreign policy, i.e., diplomacy of the state, which depends upon vested concerns of the citizens.
The moral ground of diplomacy configures the portent of state-to-state cooperation. The value of political influence seems null, but the impact of philanthropy can be easily felt by the general public, as exerted by Henry Kissinger during China–United States rapprochement in the 1970s. Here he also states the phenomena of power balance, long-term interest, and thoughtful table talk. It was in the limelight when Zhou Enlai and Kissinger held secret negotiations.
Is this the new world order?
In the new world order, the concept of public diplomacy also holds a sound role of public participation. It is a regular process of communication that is liable to familiarize, leverage, and inspire foreign communities to advocate and assist foreign policy and goals. Public diplomacy, being soft power, seeks promotion of tourism, Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), mutual cooperation, political harmonization, and reduction of diplomatic disorders, and more. It can be seen in cultural exchange programs, foreign academic scholarships, mass media coverage of global news, and more. The modern school of diplomacy is related to the government-to-people phenomenon. As its relative mechanism, digital diplomacy is also becoming prominent these days.
Fine-tuning of diplomatic order and tendency carries a gigantic ground of reinvention and reformation. It signifies the state of balance between states, i.e., neighbors. Here, this paragraph focuses on China and India’s role in mediation on regular diplomatic issues of Nepal, being its neighbors. This is also an essence of the Gujral Doctrine. Here it is relevant to confer the potentiality of B.P. Koirala and his school of diplomacy towards India and China. In his regular visit to China, when Mao Zedong proposed to grant some aid to Nepal, Koirala accepted the fund lower than that of India because Nepal is an immediate neighbor of India. This may be a strategy of a neighbor-first policy of development.
Other vibrant nations are moving swiftly towards globalization, digitalization, collaboration, and more for further development adjustments. Economic diplomacy is frequently used in strengthening investments gained via hydropower, tourism, IT outsourcing, and more. Super states are involved in climate resource acquisition, technology and human capital transfer, ensuring international trade remains on the benchmark of the Paris Agreement, Kyoto Protocol, World Trade Organization, World Bank, and others. But Nepal, being a member of these regional units, still remains in survival diplomacy. Thus, the diplomacy of the nation needs to be redefined and fine-tuned as per need and time.
The RSP narrative
Here, the soft technique of diplomacy needs to be fine-tuned by the state itself. The old party system seems a fiasco in defining the proper system of diplomatic enhancement. The orthodox system failed by not showing any competence and ardor for core diplomatic sense. Either they obtain public sentiment in the present or they demonstrate a solid diplomatic ideology in the international domain. The nation was under a rod of iron and impunity. The new party system, almost with a two-thirds majority, also seems a fiasco in enhancing diplomatic reformation. The Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP), being a relatively debut ruling force, has many rooms for diplomatic mastery in the path of a transparent, balanced, and broad-based mechanism.
The sight of rationality and the eye of the state over citizens remain equitable, but the uneven destruction of communities without any way out may not be the theme of public diplomacy. The matter is Sukumbasi Basti (squatter settlement) in Kathmandu. The state of homelessness may have long-term effects on general citizens. This may not directly relate to diplomacy but provides an indirect impression on international communities. It may attract the concern of international communities and foreign aid and technical assistance.
In general, the present operation of government is not likely to fulfill gaps between accumulators and losers. Instead, issues of internal migrants, cross-border populations, fragility of government, human rights, along with child and women rights, are prominent now. These are also observed by foreign communities, which may affect global urban policy support, foreign aid, international image, disaster risk diplomacy, and more. Squatter settlement is solely a domestic issue but has clear diplomatic implications. This reflects the phenomenon of internal imbalance and weak international diplomatic standing.
The nutshell of Nepal’s diplomatic standing should amplify foreign investment and tourism. The multi-alignment strategy of Nepal engages multiple power centers simultaneously. The new political force Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) needs to focus on professionalism, vested national interest, transparency, digitalization, and more for further diplomatic amalgamation. Nepal, being economically delicate, has high risks and challenges of geopolitical matters, economic dependency, political instability, and so on. So, being resourcefully strong, we need to align our needs with neighboring states, i.e., India & China, for diplomatic and changing diaspora.
(The author is a young political analyst and a university teacher at Tribhuvan University, Sindhuli Multiple Campus.)
