Why did GSI come between the friendly relations between Nepal and China? Nepal's silence on the GSI issue is not only weakness, it is also a suicide game. Government's accountability and transparency will not be expressed in this, it will prove to be a game, not diplomatic skills for Nepal.
We use Google Cloud Translation Services. Google requires we provide the following disclaimer relating to use of this service:
This service may contain translations powered by Google. Google disclaims all warranties related to the translations, expressed or implied, including any warranties of accuracy, reliability, and any implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, and noninfringement.
Power is the nature of nations, they polarize the world and try to bring as many countries as possible under their strategic umbrella. But the 'strategy' of staying away from every such strategic polarization is a natural choice for a country like Nepal.
During the Cold War after the Second World War, countries like Nepal chose a non-aligned policy when the world was polarized by the US and the Soviet Union. Even in the latest form of polarization, Nepal has been able to preserve its unique identity by following this path. According to its legacy, Nepal also sidestepped the rapid advance of the US to include Nepal in the Indo-Pacific Strategy (IPS). Similarly, there was diplomatic pressure on Nepal to join the Global Security Initiative (GSI) started by China.
Nepal, which has been considering the principle of non-alignment and Panchsheel as a guide for its foreign policy, has been clearly separating itself from the GSI. However, the Nepali society has been shocked after the Chinese Foreign Ministry claimed that Nepal expressed its support for GSI during the meeting between Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli, who is visiting China, and Chinese President Xi Jinping. The government of Nepal has no reaction to China's statement, that is also surprising.
After the meeting between Nepali Prime Minister Oli and the Chinese President, the statement issued by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs clearly states, "Nepal has supported the Global Development Initiative, Global Security Initiative and Global Civilization Initiative proposed by China." As China has said, if Nepal supports the GSI, it is considered to have violated its own principles and constitution. Because Article 51 of the Constitution of Nepal regarding the "directive principles, policies and responsibilities of the state" clearly states that Nepal's foreign policy will be guided by the principles of non-alignment and Panchsheel. No government has the right to override the constitution and push the country into the geopolitical abyss. If that happens, the government should take full responsibility for it. No, if China unilaterally writes otherwise in the statement, it is also the responsibility of Nepal government to send a protest note.
During his speech at the Boao Forum for Asia annual event held in April 2022, Chinese President Xi proposed the Global Security Initiative (GSI). At that time, he questioned the rationale of the US Indo-Pacific Strategy (IPS) and the Quad (US, Japan, Australia and India) and proposed the GSI as an alternative. Although China has repeatedly tried to include Nepal in the GSI, which is said to have been supported by more than 100 countries, Nepal has been sticking to its commitment. It is the responsibility of a country like Nepal not only not to participate in any strategic alliance, but also to criticize such alliances. The world will be more beautiful and prosperous than it is now only with cooperation in trade and development and favoring peace. History and the present show that any style of showing power between each other is fatal for the world.
has been put forward by security or military alliances and programs with many interests in the world. As such, the 32-nation NATO advocates the collective security of its member states. The Quad, comprising the US, Japan, Australia and India, aims to weaken China's influence. The Indo-Pacific Strategy (IPS) launched by the US with the aim of increasing American influence in the Indo-Pacific region is also active with the same objective. There are many such strategic programs, which are formed and expanded with the objective of protecting one's side and neutralizing the influence of the other side. But such forums have been promoting tension rather than peace.
No civilized society can support Russia's attack on the sovereign country of Ukraine. But it should not be forgotten that there was a military alliance like NATO in the background. Nepal should also respect its own and others' sovereignty, but staying away from any such possible adversity is another inevitable responsibility of the state administrator. Therefore, the subject of Nepal's participation in America's State Partnership Program (SPP) in 2022 became very controversial. After widespread criticism within the country, Nepal sent a letter to the US with a decision not to join the SPP. It is objectionable to come up with the topic of supporting GSI in the background that it is clear that Nepal is not trying to fall under anyone's umbrella.
There should be a transparent dialogue on matters related to diplomatic matters. But transparency is not adopted regarding the role of GSI and Nepal. It is ironic that China issued a statement after one meeting and Nepal remained silent. It takes ages to build balance and trust in foreign relations, it can take only a moment to destroy it. Why did GSI come between the friendly relations between Nepal and China? Nepal's silence on the GSI issue is not only weakness, it is also a suicide game. Government's accountability and transparency will not be expressed in this, it will prove to be a game, not diplomatic skills for Nepal. No one has the right to do that.
