These diplomatic worthies invariably maintain that their being entrusted with such dignified responsibility is a well-deserved recognition of their political/academic services to the nation and an opportunity to demonstrate their diplomatic talent and distinction. Such arguments might hold good in some past cases when a few illustrious personalities, picked up from different sectors of national life other than the regular Foreign Service cadre, demonstrated exemplary diplomatic acumen, skills and prescience in promoting the cause of Nepal’s long-term national interests through bilateral as well as multilateral diplomacy and helped introduce the country to international community. Rishikesh Shah, Keshar Bahadur KC, Y N Khanal, Vedanand Jha are some of the diplomatic stalwarts who served during the Panchayati era, an anathema in today’s political context though. Their unflinching dedication, uprightness, scholarship and professional maturity are worth emulating for our current generation of diplomatic envoys.
However, in view of the dismal performance of today’s Nepali ambassadors, ranging from staff nurse to traders and party financers, sport council members to political hangers-on, indiscriminately selected on political considerations by myopic leaders of the constituent political outfits of the ruling coalition, the above contention would simply border on self-delusion, to say the least. In making a mockery of the country’s diplomatic service, the Nepali Congress (NC), the CPN-UML and the Rashtriya Prajatantra Party (as demonstrated during its fortuitous incumbency in the late nineties), are equally responsible. Propriety and professional expertise were never taken into consideration while making appointments. Accountability is a word that does not exist in their lexicon.
In 1992, the NC government, under some inscrutable circumstances, nominated an academic as Nepali ambassador to Myanmar. But the nationality of this gentleman was reported to be of questionable authenticity and the then chief justice refused to administer him oath of office at the royal palace. However, in the face of an irresistible external pressure, the Koirala government managed to complete the prescribed formality through the second senior most justice of the apex court and the controversial envoy eventually became Nepal’s ambassador ‘extraordinary and plenipotentiary’ to the Union of Myanmar. Similarly, there are rumors going around that a Nepali currently serving envoy under the UML quota is believed to be pretending to hold a PhD degree, which in fact is an honorary title never to be used officially under any circumstance. There are some instances of Nepali envoys refusing to leave the station even after their recall, thus putting the host country in an extremely embarrassing situation. List of such diplomatic anomalies is pretty long and depressing.
Going by a news scoop brought out a couple of weeks ago by one of the English dailies published from Kathmandu, a new set of recommendations, prepared by a selected group of Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MoFA) mandarins under the rubric ‘Organization and Management Report’, is awaiting the final approval of the lame-duck cabinet. If so, it is undoubtedly heartening to know that some one is at least realizing organizational deficiencies of the diplomatic mechanism and a dire need to infuse into the flagging institution some innovative measures and recalibrate the nation’s foreign policy guidelines. However, given the schizophrenic political leadership of the institution, there is no room for optimism.
With a very few exceptions, Nepali envoys in general have failed to live up to expectations and their tour of duty is simply a blissful spell of four years. To legitimize their failure, they always resort to the same habitual escape hatch of not getting proper support and cooperation from the MoFA. If some one ventures to voice that Nepal’s diplomatic missions abroad, particularly their heads of mission, should undergo a strict performance auditing at regular intervals vis-à-vis the outrageous costs involved in maintaining them, he would be stirring up the hornet’s nest. The leading political gladiators of the country would construe it as a serious affront to them. In fact, they are the ones who have ruined the nation’s highly-crucial and sensitive branch of bureaucracy by monopolizing it as if it were an exclusive repository of rewards and bonuses to be given away to their political favorites and financers. They have simply given continuity to the same feudal legacy, in a different mode and fashion though, handed down from the Panchayati days when the diplomatic service remained an exclusive domain of a limited caucus enjoying a close proximity with the power centre, for that matter the royal palace.
It has become an essential part of the diplomatic ritual to make some highly-palatable resolutions and promises by every ambassador designate, be it a political appointee or a career diplomat, before his/her departure for the country of accreditation. Such announcements range from boosting Nepal’s export trade to promoting tourism, inviting foreign investments to augmenting the volume of economic assistance and cooperation from the host country. They hardly miss to take recourse to the newfangled jargon of ‘economic diplomacy’ in support of their quixotic assertions. These promises are so unhinged from the ground reality that no envoy has ever succeeded in translating them into reality. At the end of the day, they all turn out to be verbal deceptions designed for cheap popular consumption.
Therefore, while refusing any credit to our diplomats based in the crucial countries and the principal stakeholders operating the political levers at home, one has to summarily conclude today that Nepal’s diplomatic farsightedness is irretrievably lost amid many intriguing questions. The man in the street feels that the country’s external relations are not guided by long-term national interests but short-term individual or political benefits of some specific part/parties determine their nature and scope. Notwithstanding the occasionally rehashed and refashioned rhetoric that they have been parroting from behind the podium, the country is in fact lying like a cadaver to be successively dissected by international community, especially the nuclear neighbors, as and when they wish to do so.
Diplomacy as an instrument employed by the state to achieve certain aims and objectives is an integral part of the whole rationale of international relations. However, as the legendary Austrian statesman/diplomat Prince Klemens Metternich puts it: ‘The nature of domestic political disposition determines the state’s behaviour internationally.’ Similarly, to promote, foster and preserve the basic structure of international relations of a country, peace at home is the pre-requisite and without having a legitimate rule, peace is as elusive as will-o’-the-wisp. This is the dilemma Nepal is confronted with for several years now. Even after a lapse of four years since the fall of the royal regime, the political dynamics of Nepal remains highly-volatile, murky and hard to predict. With the tremendous deficit of public trust in the government, nearly every day brings a new surprise.
Writer is a retired Foreign Service official
Related story
Himalaya Airlines becomes the first certified safety-audit oper...
