A new political generation is reshaping Nepal’s future. For decades, the Himalayan nation has been caught between India and China, both vying for influence through patronage and investment, but those familiar formulas might no longer work.
Nepal’s location has long made it a geopolitical prize for New Delhi and Beijing. Landlocked between the two, it has been the object of endless courtship, but also manipulation. Successive governments have often tilted toward one giant neighbor or the other, but the nation’s deepest political crisis in years is disrupting that playbook.
Cities across the country were scenes of chaos last week. Young and angry protesters ransacked and burned down government buildings, including the parliament. The immediate catalyst for their rage was a short-lived social media ban imposed by Nepalese Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli’s government, but grievances run much deeper. This generation is fed up with what it views as endemic corruption and a lack of economic opportunities in a nation run by long-entrenched elites.
Illustration: Constance Chou
Oli resigned and the former Supreme Court chief justice Sushila Karki was sworn in as interim leader, the nation’s first female prime minister.
Both India and China were quick to congratulate her, but have refrained from commenting further.
Patience is wise. There is nothing to gain by meddling at a time of instability.
India and Nepal are bound by trade, geography and history. The two share South Asia’s only truly open border, with visa-free movement and deep people-to-people ties. Political goodwill with Kathmandu is crucial for Indian security, with New Delhi wary of cross-border drug flows, terrorism and other threats. Nearly all of Nepal’s third-country trade and gasoline supplies flow through India, which also provides significant development aid.
New Delhi should not mistake proximity for power. This generation of Nepalese do not feel unduly indebted to their more powerful neighbor. Instead, their memories are laced with resentment. India’s 2015 blockade, which resulted in huge shortages of fuel and medicine, despite conflicting accounts on both sides over who was responsible, is just one example.
India’s missteps were a boon for China, which has positioned Kathmandu as a critical link in its massive overseas infrastructure investment program, the Belt and Road Initiative. A shared border is also critical for Beijing because of Tibet, which it annexed in the 1950s. Beijing is particularly sensitive to more Tibetan refugees in Nepal, as its worried about any threat to its claims to the autonomous region.
To extend its influence, China has been investing in projects such as road construction, tunnel development, hydropower and communications initiatives. The strategy appeared to be working, up until this latest bout of political turmoil at least. In December last year, in a break from tradition when newly appointed leaders typically go to India on their first state visit, Oli made a four-day trip to China.
These tactics will not work with a generation fed up with the old power structures and a flagging economy. Youth unemployment is estimated at about 20 percent, while Transparency International consistently ranks Nepal poorly — it is no surprise that young people feel the system is stacked against them.
If India and China continue treating Nepal primarily as a geopolitical pawn, they risk alienating future leaders. They need to understand the new power brokers would require a different approach, said Puspa Sharma, a visiting senior research fellow at the Institute of South Asian Studies at the National University of Singapore.
“They should remain disengaged in the political discourse,” Sharma said. “Instead, focus on aid, reconstruction, any kind of job-related support they can provide.”
Stepping back from political meddling and focusing on tangible benefits would be prudent. New Delhi could lean into its traditional advantages, and continue with uninterrupted fuel and food flows. It could also offer more youth apprenticeships and exchange programs, and speak directly to the kinds of issues that this generation of Nepalese say are important.
Beijing could offer smaller job-rich projects, to deflect criticism that its infrastructure program is exploitative. It could also align scholarships in sectors young people want, such as technology, medicine and renewable energy.
Nepal’s immediate task is to prevent the political dynamism from turning into prolonged chaos. This new generation needs stability, jobs and accountability. For India and China, the temptation to interfere is strong, but restraint is far more productive.
Karishma Vaswani is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering Asia politics with a special focus on China. Previously, she was the BBC’s lead Asia presenter and worked for the BBC across Asia and South Asia for two decades. This column reflects the personal views of the author and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) sits down with US President Donald Trump in Beijing on Thursday next week, Xi is unlikely to demand a dramatic public betrayal of Taiwan. He does not need to. Beijing’s preferred victory is smaller, quieter and in some ways far more dangerous: a subtle shift in American wording that appears technical, but carries major strategic meaning. The ask is simple: replace the longstanding US formulation that Washington “does not support Taiwan independence” with a harder one — that Washington “opposes” Taiwan independence. One word changes; a deterrence structure built over decades begins to shift.
Taipei is facing a severe rat infestation, and the city government is reportedly considering large-scale use of rodenticides as its primary control measure. However, this move could trigger an ecological disaster, including mass deaths of birds of prey. In the past, black kites, relatives of eagles, took more than three decades to return to the skies above the Taipei Basin. Taiwan’s black kite population was nearly wiped out by the combined effects of habitat destruction, pesticides and rodenticides. By 1992, fewer than 200 black kites remained on the island. Fortunately, thanks to more than 30 years of collective effort to preserve their remaining
After Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) met Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing, most headlines referred to her as the leader of the opposition in Taiwan. Is she really, though? Being the chairwoman of the KMT does not automatically translate into being the leader of the opposition in the sense that most foreign readers would understand it. “Leader of the opposition” is a very British term. It applies to the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy, and to some extent, to other democracies. If you look at the UK right now, Conservative Party head Kemi Badenoch is
A Pale View of Hills, a movie released last year, follows the story of a Japanese woman from Nagasaki who moved to Britain in the 1950s with her British husband and daughter from a previous marriage. The daughter was born at a time when memories of the US atomic bombing of Nagasaki during World War II and anxiety over the effects of nuclear radiation still haunted the community. It is a reflection on the legacy of the local and national trauma of the bombing that ended the period of Japanese militarism. A central theme of the movie is the need, at
RSS