{"id":27994,"date":"2026-10-26T07:49:52","date_gmt":"2026-10-26T02:04:52","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/eng.dragonmedia.com.np\/?p=27994"},"modified":"2026-10-26T07:49:52","modified_gmt":"2026-10-26T02:04:52","slug":"the-test-of-diplomacy-nepals-right-to-decide","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/eng.dragonmedia.com.np\/?p=27994","title":{"rendered":"The Test of Diplomacy: Nepal\u2019s Right to Decide<\/strong>"},"content":{"rendered":"

Dragon Media Editorial<\/strong><\/p>\n

Improving relations with India is essential for Nepal. Dialogue with the United States is equally important. But the success of any relationship cannot be judged only by what Nepali leaders say abroad. The real test is whether Nepal states its priorities clearly, defends its position when views differ, and secures tangible benefits for its people. Rastriya Swatantra Party chair Rabi Lamichhane\u2019s visit to India, Finance Minister Swarnim Wagle\u2019s remarks on India, and the arrival of a high-level United States delegation in Kathmandu all raise this question.<\/p>\n

These events should not be treated as one and the same. Lamichhane\u2019s secretariat described his three-day India visit as a private, religious and family trip, with no political meetings planned. Finance Minister Wagle, meanwhile, attended a world summit in New Delhi. He said Nepal wanted to take its relationship with India to a new level and that the era of nationalism associated with anti-India sentiment was over. Wagle\u2019s visit and his remarks at the summit were separate matters, but both have prompted public debate about the government\u2019s policy towards India.<\/p>\n

There is a valid point in Wagle\u2019s argument: cooperation with a neighbouring country should not always begin with suspicion and opposition. India is closely linked to Nepal\u2019s economy through trade, energy, tourism, investment and transit. But presenting Nepali nationalism only as an old outlook tied to opposition to India risks sweeping legitimate public concerns into the same category. Border disputes, dependence in trade, transit vulnerability and questions of sovereignty remain matters of national interest. Seeking friendly relations with India and questioning an Indian policy are not contradictory. Nationalism does not mean hostility; it means recognising the country\u2019s interests and defending them with restraint and resolve.<\/p>\n

Lamichhane\u2019s trip should be understood as private, as his secretariat has stated. Portraying a private religious visit as a state-level diplomatic engagement would be prejudicial. At the same time, public interest in the overseas travel of a ruling-party chair and influential political leader is natural. Clear information about the nature of the trip, its meetings and its expenses can reduce speculation. Asking for transparency is not an accusation; it is a reasonable demand for accountability when travel involves a senior political figure.<\/p>\n

The visit by United States officials to Kathmandu also calls for restraint and clear questions. Published reports say that 21 officials have arrived in Nepal as part of two delegations, including a five-member group led by Senator Todd Young. However, no formal details have been made public about the purpose and duration of the visit or the meetings planned with Nepali officials. The absence of details is not proof of a conspiracy, but neither is it a reason for the government to remain silent. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs should provide appropriate information about the nature of the visit and the subjects for discussion. Any proposals from the United States on development, post-disaster reconstruction, trade, education or security cooperation should be assessed against Nepal\u2019s priorities and interests.<\/p>\n

Nepal\u2019s diplomacy is not a test of whether to choose India or the United States. Nepal can benefit from its open border, trade and close people-to-people ties with India, as well as development and institutional cooperation with the United States. But no partnership should transfer Nepal\u2019s right to determine its own policies to an outside power. The government should report the outcomes of visits, clarify the terms of agreements and demonstrate equality and mutual respect in practice. Patriotic diplomacy means maintaining friendships, expressing differences when necessary, and making decisions according to the interests of the Nepali people.<\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t <\/div><\/div>\n\t\t