Nepal’s Answer to an Ungrateful Zelenskyy: You Named Us, Now Provide the Evidence
Prem Sagar Poudel
Nepal did not seek this dispute with Ukraine. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy himself stood before the United Nations General Assembly and named Nepal among 47 countries whose citizens he said were being used in the war. He said some foreign nationals had ended up in the war through deception and trickery. But he did not disclose how many Nepalis had been identified, what circumstances they were in, or what supported his claim. A head of state who has the courage to name Nepal before the international community should show equal courage in providing the details that substantiate it.
Zelenskyy did not say that the Nepalese government had sent soldiers. Nor did he declare that the Nepalese state was a party to the war. But that does not make his speech any less serious. Naming Nepali citizens in connection with the war against Ukraine, then providing no details concerning Nepal, was careless and irresponsible. Zelenskyy should know what impression a single sentence can leave around the world. If he does not know, that is a failing in a head of state. If he spoke knowing its effect, it is a diplomatic slight to Nepal.
Nepal had previously listened to Ukraine’s concerns. In 2022, it supported a resolution concerning Ukraine at the United Nations. In 2025, it also voted for a resolution on peace in Ukraine. Those decisions prompted debate within Nepal about its non-aligned foreign policy and national interests. But that does not change the fact that Nepal had not disregarded Ukraine on the world stage. When Zelenskyy stood on that same stage and placed Nepal on a list connected to the war, he should at least have presented complete evidence and used responsible language. He cannot take Nepal’s earlier goodwill for granted and use its name to add force to his speech.
Zelenskyy’s remarks immediately raise several questions. How many Nepalis has Ukraine identified? How many of them are in its custody? What evidence supports the conclusion that any of them were deceived? Has that evidence been provided to the Nepalese government? Have any families in Nepal received official information from Ukraine about their relatives? Repeating the large figure of “47 countries” without answering these questions is a display of rhetoric, not a full presentation of the facts. Nepali citizens are not faceless figures to make a speech more forceful. They have names, families and rights.
Nepal’s policy had already been conveyed to the Ukrainian leadership. In April 2026, Foreign Minister Shishir Khanal made clear in a conversation with his Ukrainian counterpart, Andrii Sybiha, that Nepal does not authorise the recruitment of its citizens into foreign armies other than those of countries with which it has traditional agreements. In that same conversation, Nepal requested the return on humanitarian grounds of nine Nepalis held by the Ukrainian military. Before using a world stage to remind Nepal to protect its citizens, Zelenskyy should have asked his own government: What information has Nepal been given about those Nepalis, and what progress has been made towards bringing them home?
If Ukraine has Nepali citizens in its custody, it is responsible for informing Nepal of their identities, health and circumstances. It is also responsible for ensuring contact with their families and treatment in accordance with applicable international humanitarian law. Zelenskyy, who publicly lectures Nepal on protecting Nepalis, should demonstrate that he is fulfilling his own humanitarian obligations towards those in Ukraine’s custody. If there is a gap between the concern expressed in his speech and the help provided in practice, the moral force of his appeal is weakened.
Nepal may be a country of moderate geographical size, but it does not bow its head before anyone. Our dignity is not determined by the place a foreign leader gives us in a speech. Nepal can listen to Ukraine’s concerns, express agreement or disagreement, and demand facts about its citizens. Zelenskyy named Nepal; that does not mean Nepal must accept his remarks without question. We need evidence rather than lectures, and information about the condition of Nepali citizens rather than political appeals.
This does not mean Nepal can leave the problems facing its citizens for others to solve. The Nepalese government must provide verified information to the families concerned and make its investigations and diplomatic efforts within its control effective. But pointing to Nepal’s domestic responsibilities cannot be used to silence questions about Zelenskyy’s public claim. This matter arose because the Ukrainian president named Nepal at the United Nations. The first obligation to answer therefore rests with him regarding his speech and the evidence behind it.
My answer to Zelenskyy is direct. If you are going to forget the goodwill Nepal previously showed Ukraine and place Nepalis on a list in your speech about the war, provide the full basis for doing so. If you named Nepal on the world stage, give Nepal the evidence concerning its citizens. If you are concerned about Nepali citizens, clarify the condition of those in Ukraine’s custody and help them contact their families and return home. Nepal needs no power’s permission to demand answers for its citizens. Do not mistake the size of our country for the limit of our voice. Nepal holds its head high, and our dignity has not wavered to the point that we would accept an absence of evidence and clarity about Nepali lives.
About the Author: Prem Sagar Poudel is a senior journalist and international relations analyst from Nepal. He has conducted in-depth studies on Nepal-China relations, the geopolitics of the Himalayan region, and Asian security issues.
