Is Nepal quietly rewriting its foreign policy?
![]() |
| Image: ChatGPT/Read 2B HaPPY |
![]() |
| By LB Thapa |
A rather unusual scene unfolded in the recent past when Nepal's newly elected Prime Minister, Balen Shah—a political outsider and the youngest person to hold the office—made a move that is raising eyebrows across the region. Instead of holding conventional one-on-one diplomatic meetings, he invited 17 ambassadors together for a single, coordinated interaction. The envoys represented India, China, the United States, Japan, Gulf nations, and even the United Nations. Such a gathering had never been organized in Nepal's political history.
This was a calculated move by Prime Minister Balen Shah—a clear message to one and all. For decades, Nepal's foreign policy has revolved around a delicate balancing act between its two giant neighbors, India and China. Lean too far toward one, and you risk upsetting the other. Play it safe, and you maintain stability. But Balen Shah appears to be attempting something different.
He is signaling that Nepal will treat all partners—old and new—as equals. No favorites. No obvious tilt. That, of course, is easier said than done.
For a landlocked country like Nepal, geography is not merely a constraint—it is destiny. India surrounds Nepal on three sides, with deep economic, cultural, and security ties. There is an open border, no visa requirements, and decades of interdependence. China, on the other hand, brings infrastructure, investment, and strategic leverage—but also expectations, especially on sensitive issues such as Tibet.
Historically, Nepal's politics has mirrored this divide. Democratic parties have leaned toward India, while communists and Maoists have often played the China card. Every change in government has brought a shift in foreign policy tone.
Balen Shah, however, does not fit that template. He leads a relatively new party with no fixed ideological baggage. More importantly, he enjoys strong political numbers, meaning he does not need to play short-term geopolitical games to remain in power. This gives him room to experiment. His first move suggests he wants to redefine neutrality—not by distancing Nepal from India or China, but by expanding the country's diplomatic horizon.
Notice who else was invited: Gulf countries, where millions of Nepalis work and send back remittances that sustain the economy; Japan and Switzerland, long-term development partners; and the United States, a key strategic player. This is not just balance—it is diversification.
In many ways, this echoes an old idea. Back in the 1970s, the late King Birendra proposed declaring Nepal a zone of peace, staying neutral in a turbulent region. That idea faded, partly because India saw it as a move away from existing security arrangements. Now, decades later, the concept of neutrality has returned—but with a modern twist. Instead of asking global powers for formal recognition, Balen Shah is building that neutrality through engagement, symbolism, and equal access.
The big question now is, can this work? In South Asia, neutrality is
never just a choice—it is a test. For Nepal, balancing ambition with geography
has never been more challenging. But for now, one thing is clear: Kathmandu is
trying to change the game.
WANT TO REPRODUCE THIS ARTICLE?


Comments
Post a Comment