Security is about building resilient institutions, fostering community trust and ensuring Nepal remains a peaceful bridge between its neighbours, rather than a battleground for rivalries
As tensions between India and Pakistan continue to simmer, Nepal is at a critical crossroads. The recent military standoff between its two powerful neighbours, marked by missile exchanges and accusations of cross-border terrorism, is not just a distant headline for Kathmandu,but a stark warning. As India tightens its border security with Pakistan, there is growing concern that terrorist groups, seeking alternative routes, may set their sights on Nepal's long, porous border with India. The lessons from the India-Pakistan conflict are urgent and unavoidable for a country that has prided itself on neutrality and open borders.
Nepal's 1,850-kilometre open border with India has long been celebrated as a symbol of friendship and shared heritage. Yet, this openness comes at a cost. The increasing threat of terrorism in the region, exacerbated by India's heightened vigilance along its western border, means that Nepal could inadvertently become a transit point for those seeking to exploit its relatively lax security. The Bardiya region, with its dense forests and limited surveillance infrastructure, has already become a hotspot for cross-border crime. While joint patrols between Nepal's Armed Police Force and India's Sashastra Seema Bal have intensified in recent months, gaps remain.
The challenge is not just about physical borders. The tragic attack in Pahalgam, which claimed the life of a Nepali citizen, is a painful reminder of the human cost of intelligence failures. Nepal's security apparatus, while committed, remains fragmented. Coordination between the Armed Police Force, the Nepal Police and the National Investigation Department is often hampered by bureaucratic silos and outdated systems. The arrest of a terrorist-linked smuggler in Bardiya last year was more a stroke of luck than the result of a robust intelligence network. In an age where threats move faster than ever, Nepal cannot afford to rely on chance. The country must invest in a unified, real-time intelligence hub integrating data from border outposts, airports and international agencies like INTERPOL. This would allow for rapid response and better anticipation of emerging threats.
The lessons from neighbouring countries are instructive. Bangladesh, after the 2016 Dhaka attacks, implemented a rigorous system of monitoring extremist narratives in mosques and madrassas, particularly in border regions. Nepal, too, must be vigilant. While the vast majority of religious institutions in Nepal are peaceful, the risk of radicalisation, especially in communities that feel marginalised or neglected, cannot be ignored. Community engagement is key. Training local leaders in border districts to recognise and report suspicious activities, as has been done successfully in Thailand with its Village Defence Volunteers, can turn ordinary citizens into the first line of defence.
Diplomacy, too, must adapt to the new security environment. Nepal's traditional policy of non-alignment is increasingly challenging to maintain as India and Pakistan's rivalry intensifies and China's influence grows. The recent visit of a Pakistani military delegation to Kathmandu, coming at the height of India-Pakistan tensions, was criticised as poorly timed and diplomatically tone-deaf. Nepal must walk a tightrope, maintaining good relations with all its neighbours while ensuring that it will not tolerate its territory being used for hostile activities. Bhutan's policy of refusing to harbour terrorists and public condemnations of cross-border militancy offer a model for Nepal. At the same time, Nepal should push for greater regional cooperation on counterterrorism, perhaps through a revitalized regional framework that includes observer nations less entangled in South Asian rivalries.
However, external threats are magnified by internal weaknesses. Corruption remains a persistent problem in Nepal, especially in border regions where law enforcement officers are often underpaid and under-resourced. Criminal networks, some with links to terrorist organisations, exploit these vulnerabilities to traffic drugs, arms and people. The massive heroin bust in Nepalgunj last year, traced back to Pakistan-based syndicates, is a case in point. Nepal needs a dedicated anti-corruption drive focused on border areas to address this, possibly with international oversight. Empowering provincial governments with their counterterrorism budgets and training, as Indonesia has done, would also help ensure that local authorities are equipped to respond quickly and effectively.
Public awareness is another crucial piece of the puzzle. Too often, ordinary Nepalis are unaware of the signs of infiltration or radicalisation. A national campaign leveraging television, radio and social media could educate citizens on how to spot and report suspicious activities so as to foster a sense of collective responsibility.
The India-Pakistan conflict also offers broader lessons about the dangers of unilateral action and ambiguous policies. While effective in the short term, India's recent military operations have heightened regional tensions and increased the risk of escalation. Pakistan's failure to decisively clamp down on groups like The Resistance Front has only deepened mistrust. Nepal must avoid these pitfalls by being transparent in its counterterrorism efforts and ensuring its policies are consistent and principled.
Sri Lanka's response to the 2019 Easter attacks provides a valuable blueprint. By establishing a registry of high-risk groups, auditing religious institutions and enhancing surveillance in vulnerable areas, Sri Lanka was able to reduce the threat of further attacks significantly.
In the end, the security of Nepal is not just about fences and patrols. It is about building resilient institutions, fostering community trust and ensuring the country remains a peaceful bridge between its neighbours, rather than a battleground for rivalries. The India-Pakistan conflict is a wake-up call for Nepal.
By learning from the mistakes and successes of others, investing in technology and governance, and remaining vigilant, Nepal can safeguard its sovereignty and the safety of its people in an increasingly uncertain world.
Peela is a South Asia regional security expert
