Spread the love

By P.R. Pradhan

Nepal’s geopolitical position between two major powers—India and China—has historically shaped its foreign and security policies. As the birthplace of Lord Buddha, Nepal has also projected itself as a symbol of peace and non-violence.

The founder of modern Nepal, King Prithvi Narayan Shah, articulated this strategic vulnerability in his Dibbya Upadesh by describing Nepal as “a yam between two boulders.” Through this metaphor, he emphasized a defensive national strategy, advising future rulers to avoid offensive postures while safeguarding territorial integrity, independence, and unity. He also cautioned against antagonizing the northern neighbor while remaining vigilant in dealings with the southern one. This foundational geopolitical thinking has continued to influence Nepal’s strategic outlook.

Following the death of King Prithvi Narayan Shah, Nepal suffered significant territorial losses during British colonial expansion in the Indian subcontinent. Large areas extending from the Tista to the Mechi rivers in the east, from the Mahakali to the Sutlej rivers in the west, and land reaching the Ganga River in the south were lost. These historical experiences intensified Nepal’s concerns over external encroachment and security.

After India’s independence in 1947, Nepal encountered new challenges in its relations with its southern neighbor. Nepal has faced four Indian economic blockades, which severely affected its economy and governance. Nepal faces encroachment of its soil by India in different places. Indian involvement in Nepal’s internal political affairs has frequently been described as micro-management. Critics argue that elements of an imperial or colonial strategic mindset persisted in India’s post-independence foreign policy. This view is reinforced by India’s integration of several formerly sovereign entities, the unresolved Jammu and Kashmir issue, the annexation of Sikkim in 1975, and Bhutan’s status as a state under Indian security protection.

Within this regional context, allegations have surfaced that following the annexation of Sikkim and the division of Pakistan in 1971, Indian leadership authorized intelligence initiatives aimed at destabilizing Nepal, particularly targeting the Tarai region. Former officials of India’s Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) have, at different times, alluded to such intentions. Although these plans did not materialize, they contributed to persistent Nepali apprehensions regarding Indian strategic designs.

Nepali monarchs remained acutely aware of these pressures. Against this backdrop, King Birendra proposed that Nepal be internationally recognized as a Zone of Peace (ZoP) during his coronation ceremony in Kathmandu. The ZoP proposal sought to institutionalize Nepal’s non-aligned posture, promote peace, and secure international guarantees for its sovereignty and territorial integrity. The initiative received substantial global support, with 118 countries—including the United States, China, and all South Asian states except India—endorsing it.

Despite broad international backing, the ZoP provision was removed from Nepal’s constitutional framework in the 1990 Constitution. Understandably, this omission occurred under external pressure during a period of significant political transition marked by the 1990 People’s Movement.

Concerns about sovereignty and external influence have resurfaced in contemporary debates over Nepal’s citizenship legislation. Former Royal Nepal Army General Dr. Prem Singh Basnyat has publicly accused President Ram Chandra Paudel of acting in India’s strategic interest. We also saw Paudel’s approval of amendments to Nepal’s citizenship law, which was earlier been rejected by former President Bidya Devi Bhandari.

The citizenship issue itself dates back to the final years of King Birendra’s reign, when similar legislative efforts were advanced under foreign influence. At the time, King Birendra referred the bill to the Supreme Court to assess its constitutional validity, effectively delaying its enactment. Shortly thereafter, and following his return from attending the inaugural Boao Forum in China, the Royal Palace massacre occurred—an event that remains deeply contested in Nepal’s political discourse.

King Birendra’s Zone of Peace proposal continues to hold significance in discussions on Nepal’s sovereignty, foreign policy, and strategic autonomy. The proposal is often recalled as a diplomatic effort to secure Nepal’s survival and promote peace amid enduring regional power asymmetries.

On his birth anniversary, Poush 14 (December 29), King Birendra’s patriotic contributions are remembered with tribute and respect.