Spread the love

By Dr Janardan Subedi


Nepal’s diplomacy often reads like a story told in a crowded teashop: half rumor, half reality, a mix of frustration and humor. Recently, Bhusan Dahal, one of our country’s most influential television personalities, reminded us why language matters in making sense of politics. Bhusan, from my generation, has consciously developed a lingofranca — a generational idiom that translates political history, diplomacy, and critique into terms understandable by the youngest citizens, the Alpha generation.

In a recent tweet, he exemplified this approach:

“Yo Nepal, what’s good? In ’64, King Mahendra vibed in China for their 15th bday bash, all about unity. But tmro PM Oli’s off to Beijing for a parade marking Japan’s ’45 defeat? Japan’s our homie—decades of support & aid! Let’s stay neutral, & respect our friends.”

What makes this tweet remarkable is not only its humor but its method. Using playful slang, pop-cultural references, and ironic phrasing, Bhusan translates dense historical and geopolitical knowledge into language that resonates with the youth. The message is clear: understand history, learn from it, and see the absurdities of contemporary leadership — all without losing the attention of a generation raised on social media, instant messaging, and visual culture.

Yet the Alpha generation is already inventing its own idiom. Their lingofranca is immediate, viral, and highly visual. Memes, TikTok clips, hashtags, and short-form irony allow them to condense political critique into shareable, digestible forms. Where Bhusan’s generation relied on wit, metaphor, and historical analogy, Alpha youth prefer punchy, often sarcastic symbols that travel across platforms instantly. The critique is the same — calling out hypocrisy, exposing absurdity, and questioning authority — but the vehicle has changed.

It is in this context that we must view Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli’s recent diplomatic performance. His trip to Beijing was presented domestically as a demonstration of Nepal’s sovereign choice of partners. The climax of the visit was China’s September 3 commemoration of Japan’s defeat in 1945. Nepal had no role in that war, and Japan, unlike other powers in our region, has been a steady and reliable partner — contributing to roads, hospitals, hydropower, and disaster relief. Standing prominently in a parade celebrating Japan’s defeat risked offending a genuine friend.

Moreover, the diplomatic backdrop could not have been more critical. India and China recently announced the reopening and expansion of trade through the Lipulekh Pass — territory Nepal claims. Nepal protested, but the message received little acknowledgment in Beijing. According to Nepali reports, when Oli raised the issue, the Chinese response was that Lipulekh is a bilateral matter with India. In other words, the issue was mentioned for appearances but left unresolved.

Nepal’s citizens did not need a diplomatic brief to anticipate the outcome. From the moment Oli boarded the plane, the likely scenario was clear: raise Lipulekh, receive a polite, noncommittal response, pose for ceremonial photos, and return home with grand statements but no tangible protection of sovereignty. And indeed, that is exactly what happened.

If this act — standing in a parade celebrating Japan’s defeat, raising a contested territorial issue and receiving nothing in response — does not count as compromising sovereignty, then one must ask: what would? If raising Lipulekh and receiving a bland “bilateral matter” answer is considered harmless, what level of concession or neglect would actually threaten Nepal’s independence?

The answer, tragically, is that the limits of compromise have become almost meaningless under leadership that equates stubbornness with strategy. We knew before the China visit that nothing substantive would change; the same pattern will likely repeat in India. Ritualistic praise, ceremonial toasts, and platitudes about eternal friendship will replace genuine negotiation. Nepalis can predict the outcome today, tomorrow, and next week — but the leadership continues to perform as if uncertainty still exists.

This is the essence of performative diplomacy: optics are prioritized over outcomes, stagecraft over statecraft. Raising an issue merely for appearance, accepting an evasive response, and returning home to domestic applause might entertain the audience, but it does nothing to secure the nation’s interests.

Nepal once prided itself on non-alignment. King Mahendra’s trips to China and India were carefully calibrated, balancing relations to maintain credibility with both neighbors. Today, neutrality has been hollowed out, replaced with zigzagging symbolism. In Beijing, Oli extolled Belt and Road partnership and “Himalayan gateway” rhetoric; in New Delhi, he will emphasize eternal friendship and cultural ties. Meanwhile, the structural erosion of sovereignty continues behind the scenes.

Our security apparatus — army, police, and Armed Police Force — is left in a precarious position. They are commanded to defend Nepal’s sovereignty, but when leaders themselves dilute it in symbolic gestures, what are they defending? National pride becomes a prop in a performance that serves domestic optics more than international reality.

Bhusan Dahal’s lingofranca reminds us why these stories matter. By translating complex diplomatic and historical issues into playful, youth-accessible language, he ensures that the Alpha generation can understand, critique, and respond. They may not read long op-eds, but they can grasp absurdity through memes, skits, and hashtags. Each generation develops its tools for political understanding; Bhusan’s generation used wit, metaphor, and narrative; Alpha uses immediacy, irony, and visual shorthand. The truth, however, remains constant: empty gestures, however grandly staged, do not protect sovereignty.

Viewed through our generation’s lens, one might write: Oli goes to China, performs statecraft, and comes back with only stagecraft. In Alpha’s idiom, the same event might become a viral clip, a sarcastic meme, or a trending hashtag: “404 Sovereignty Not Found.” Different language, same truth.

Diplomacy is not theatre. It is not about delivering punchlines or winning applause. It is about defending borders, cultivating genuine partnerships, and ensuring that national interest is prioritized over spectacle. The Prime Minister’s visit to China illustrates the failure to distinguish between optics and outcome. Photo-ops, banquet halls, and ceremonial speeches cannot substitute for real policy action or negotiation.

Nepal deserves better. Small nations can command respect if they uphold dignity, consistency, and strategic thought. Bhutan has done so; Nordic states have done so. Size is irrelevant; sincerity and method matter. Leaders who confuse symbolism with strategy, as in this case, leave citizens disillusioned, security forces confused, and diplomacy hollow.

The lesson is clear: every generation must develop its own lingofranca to expose absurdity and demand accountability. Bhusan Dahal’s metaphors reach today’s youth; the youth respond in memes and hashtags; our narrative can capture both, highlighting folly and urging better governance. And in this idiom, we conclude: Oli goes to China, performs statecraft, and comes back with only stagecraft. Different generations, different languages, same truth.

Until Nepal cultivates leaders who prioritize substance over spectacle, who understand that sovereignty cannot be waved like a flag in ceremonial parades, and who respect friendships built over decades, the cycle will continue: the stage will be set, the actors will perform, and the nation will watch, hoping for a leader who actually walks straight.