Bhoj Kumar Dhamala
Recently there was a statement published by CPN regarding the Latin American politics, particularly, Venezuela. As the opposition leader Guaido declared himself the “legitimate president” of Venezuela, the global powers reacted for and against the move. The incident clearly divided the world into two poles--China, India, Turkey, Russia, Pakistan, and Mexico uphold Maduro’s government whereas the USA, Canada, and 21 European nations strongly oppose the legitimacy of current government. They have backed self-proclaimed “president”, the opposition leader Juan Guaido.
The ripples of Latin American political moves were felt with varied perspectives in Nepal too.
The statement expressed by CPN Chairman Prachanda hinted the strong affiliation to leftist fraternity around the world. It not just added fuel to the already ired opposition in the Nepalese parliamanet rather its aftershocks were felt in Whitehouse—the day after its release, the US embassy in Kathmandu demanded the clearest stand of the Nepalese government on Venezuelan case.
The statement issued on 25thJanuary had denounced the role of the USA and its allies for intervening into the internal affair of any sovereign nation including Venezuela.
In fact, the statement that is purely based on the principle of Panchasheel--thee universal principle on respecting any sovereign nations as equals. The statement says, “It’s a serious challenge to the United Nations Charter and Principle of Peaceful Co-existence.
Hence, all nations, of course including the USA, are supposed to respect the principle of non-interference, national sovereignty and peaceful coexistence.” Forceful intervention and economic sanctions simply because of ideological difference is intolerable, and as a sovereign Nepali national Prachanda has expressed his opinion in favor of Venezuelan people which is highlighted as a crime. This has infuriated the USA and the fury is markedly felt, some people think.
Many skeptics blame this statement will weaken development pace of the nation and US will show less interest in Nepal but what I believe is reckoning the USA’s unwillingness in progress of Nepal would be hastily drawn conclusion. The USA wants to watch all the activities of China through nearer arena maintaining proximity with Nepal. For this reason, if not for other, the USA can not withdraw and back itself from Nepal even if it desires.
Nepal knows its limitations though criticized many times for its funky diplomatic relationship.With its reconciliation and non-alignment official policy it will advocate the voice of justice for all and will remain the same till the infinite time. It is not only the land-locked country rather it is land-linked country that bridges the two rising economic powers India and China. Balancing the best relation with these two nations would be the best remedy for Nepal and its overall development, and is always conscious about the consequences by its actions.
Harm should not be anyone’s way. The statement of NCP’s Chairman Prachanda, is interpreted from the new dimension. This shows Nepal does not only linger into its internal affair, it is also watchful about the world politics.
Allies and foes are formed through varied circumstances. There is neither "permanent friend nor permanent foe in international relations".
The matter of political interest and the USA knows it very well. Its interest to include Nepal in the Indo-Pacific link is seen as the key international leap from Nepal side. Nepal is not playing any China card signing the OBOR initiative. Nepal is neither anti-USA nor pro-Chinese. It is always in the favor of national sovereignty, independence, development, and territorial integrity of all nations. Every independent nation has the right to settle its internal disputes itself if it is able to, without external mediation.
The author is a scholar on international affairs