Nepal’s well-cherished policy of non-alignment now seems to lurch from its chosen path. It is not that the external intricacies have pushed the incumbent government to digress so, but that a grim reality of the worsening domestic political confrontation has driven the country into the current precarious circumstances. Surprisingly, a lull brought by the four-month Maoist ceasefire made the government even to claim better security and that the spine of the Maoists had been broken.

However, the true picture emerged much murkier raising doubts about the claim and the unfolding scenario in recent days gives no signal of a decrease in the conflict but rather indicates confrontation to flare up in days ahead. In fact, predicament and bewilderment wherein the government is unmistakably trapped has made it inert and spineless even in its external dealings. At most, the conduct of foreign policy is now veering within a highly limited circumference. At best, it has been just doing minimal mundane work.

The concern of foreign policy assumes no priority of hig-hest order, but the question of Nepal’s ability to smoothly run economy-related matters sorely depends on the external support and cooperation, as its financial and economic resources are too meagre to meet the soaring needs of the country. Hence, the conduct of foreign policy occupies an apex position and precedes other matters to keep the country at least kicking off in its relations with external world. However, political imbroglio produced by the excessive thirst for power of those in government has put the country in a tight spot.

During the last few months, democratic countries and the international community showed their concern for peace and democratic process. However, their appeals went unheeded and no hopeful indication appeared on the scene, and arrogant and adamant attitudes on the part of the government remained as before. The government’s failure to respond to the parties and to hook up the insurgents for peace process has indeed produced its serious implications in the international community for the country. The embattled government has certainly done a great disservice to the suffering people by not listening to their voice. Consequently, Nepal has been pushed aside from the comity of responsible democratic nations. It would be highly difficult for the politicians at the helm of power to have a position of respect until the government changes its behaviour.

The international community sees the termination of ceasefire as a missed opportunity to restore peace. Some regretted it and India in particular described it as unfortunate as it appeared to play some meaningful role in bringing legitimate political forces and the insurgents together.

Evidently, the stopping of the supply of required weapons by great powers and the diminished foreign assistance from important donors have made the incumbent government turn to China and others for weapons and financial assistance. In view of the current scenario in the interstate relationship between China and India, Nepal’s position vis-à-vis both these neighbours appears to be undergoing some diminished strategic importance. Sino-Indian ties in the last two and a half years are irresistibly growing at a speedier pace, never experienced in the past two decades. This has created a congenial atmosphere of greater mutual trust and collaboration. India and China have indeed ensured multi-sided cooperation in their relationship with an expansive agenda of military engagement despite the wooing of India by the US for security alignment with defence and nuclear pacts concluded last year. With a subtler mind and keener eye, Nepal could not visualise a secure place for itself under the emerging circumstances for well-balanced relationship with them. The international community of democratic countries sees Nepal’s lopsidedness and asymmetrical approach as a compelling consequence of domestic authoritarian policies.

Observers note that recent happenings indicate that the intransigent attitude maintained by those in power in Nepal has certainly entailed their negative impact of broader dimensions on Nepal’s standing abroad, creating the country’s increasing isolation in international dealings. However, shocking is the prevailing situation that the ruling group of a greatly weakened Nepal is ominously determined to rule the country on the strength of armed forces and authoritarian actions. This will affect the already fragile economy of the country and tear apart its social fabric. In reality, Nepal is undergoing an inflicted socio-economic destruction of greater magnitude.

Experts would advise the political actors in power that persuasion not coercion, conversion not annihilation, negotiation not confrontation come as points of priority and work as the centres of attraction. Use of force at home would certainly push Nepali society to become a tribe in limbo estranged from the world community.

Shrestha is ex-foreign ministry official