Kathmandu, September 3
In light of Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli's participation in the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) in Tianjin, China, opposition parties have banded together to demand a response to Beijing's claim that Nepal has agreed to its Global Security Initiative (GSI) proposal. They have called for a parliamentary response from the prime minister.
Following Saturday's meeting between Chinese President Xi Jinping and Prime Minister Oli, Beijing released a press release stating that Nepal had endorsed the GSI. The issue of Nepal's involvement in the military alliance has become the latest topic of conversation.
During the meeting, Prime Minister Oli made a clear statement about Nepal's position on Lipulekh, taking into account previous diplomatic initiatives and protest notes.
Lawmakers from the Nepali Congress, the main opposition party CPN-MC, and the opposition party CPN (US), however, stated during a special session of the Federal Parliament's Lower House today that PM Oli ought to address the House and provide clarity on China's assertion that Nepal has accepted the GSI proposal.
Prakash Jwala, a CPN (US) legislator, stated that Nepal is not currently involved in any powerful country's military strategy and should not be in the future. However, following PM Oli's meeting with Chinese President Xi, the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs made it clear that Nepal supported the GSI, according to lawmaker Jwala.
"What is the truth? The Nepal government has yet to make public its official position on this issue," said MP Jwala. "The government ought to address the House and provide an answer."
Nepal is committed to a non-aligned foreign policy as per the constitution, he said, and has been avoiding the US Indo-Pacific Strategy (IPS), the US State Partnership Programme (SPP) and China's GSI. "Nepal cannot support any military strategy," Jwala stated.
According to Jwala, if Prime Minister Oli had supported the GSI, Nepal would have risked falling into superpower security traps. "It would be offensive and a diplomatic suicide," he asserted.
Lekhnath Dahal, a CPN-MC legislator, stated that the entire Parliament and country should stand united on foreign affairs.
"Naturally, it can be assumed that some diplomatic immaturity was demonstrated during the visit. However, we can form an official opinion only after the prime minister appears in Parliament and responds officially," lawmaker Dahal stated.
He expressed confidence that the prime minister will make mature decisions on foreign policy. He stated that the Nepali government should be clear about the agreement between India and China to use Nepali territory Lipulekh as a trade route. He also demanded that Parliament take a decision on this issue and move forward. He also suggests that the matter be brought before the International Court of Justice.
Additionally, a lawmaker from the ruling coalition partner, Nepali Congress, Dilendra Prasad Badu, a former minister, stated that the Prime Minister's Secretariat and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs should provide timely clarification on the GSI.
"How and why was it mentioned in the statement that Nepal accepted the GSI proposal, which wasn't on the discussion's agenda?" Badu asked in the Parliament, "The Prime Minister's Secretariat and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs should clarify this matter in a momentous manner."
Badu questioned why the Chinese Foreign Ministry's press note made no mention of Prime Minister Oli's objections to the Lipulekh agreement, which he raised with Chinese President Xi during his visit.
He speculated that China is attempting to reverse Nepal's stance on the agreement with India to make Lipulekh a trade route. "On this sensitive issue, the president of our friendly country, China, has given a clear and deceptive response, saying that this border dispute is for Nepal and India to resolve and that he will not be involved," he said.
On the other hand, reports have emerged that Yuba Raj Khatiwada, an economic and development advisor to Prime Minister Oli who was also a part of the entourage, stated that no GSI agreement was reached, reaffirming Nepal's inability to participate in any country's security strategy due to its non-aligned principles.
