Bidhur Dhakal is a seasoned journalist with notable contributions to various media outlets in Nepal. Dhakal’s professional journey includes serving as a diplomatic correspondent at bizmandu.com. He is currently involved with Pan-Himalayan Communication Research Center as Researcher. He further has experience of Teaching Media-Research in Tribhuvan University Kathmandu.
With Bachelor’s and master’s degree in journalism and mass communication from Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu, Bidhur Dhakal hold another master’s degree in public management from the School of Public Administration and Affairs (SPSS) at the University of Electronic Science and Technology of China (UESTC). Currently, Bidhur Dhakal is a Ph.D. candidate at the School of Politics and International Relations (SPIR) at East China Normal University (ECNU) in Shanghai, China. Dhakal’s research interests span a wide range of global topics, including Global Politics, Foreign Affairs, Geo-Politics, Nepal-China-India Relations, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), and Media. For more details you can visit: www.bidhurdhakal.com.
How do you perceive the role of South and Southeast Asia as pivotal regions in the current geopolitical competition between China and the US?
As theatres for economic, military, and diplomatic influence, South and Southeast Asia are becoming more and more important in the geopolitical competition between China and the United States. Their strategic locations, economic vitality, and vital maritime routes—like the South China Sea and the Malacca Strait—that are vital to international trade and energy supply are the reasons for their prominence. In addition, India is a growing force in South Asia and supports the US position in opposing Chinese expansion there. China is South and Southeast Asia's biggest commercial partner, and Chinese investment is expanding in the region through programs including the Belt and Road Initiative, GSI, GCI, and GDI. The US has launched the Indo-Pacific Strategy (IPS), the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF), QUAD, and other alignment options in an effort to counteract this Chinese influence. These programs focus on trade, investments, and the digital economy. The goal of these alignments is to either directly or indirectly offset China's increasing influence in the region.
The United States has strengthened its relationship with India through weapons sales, technology cooperation, and joint military exercises because of its strategic location and its role as a counterweight to China. China, on the other hand, wants to reduce India's ties to the United States and views the region—particularly the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) in Pakistan—as a means of counterbalancing India and extending its influence throughout South Asia.
Future influence in South and Southeast Asia could determine whether China continues its regional dominance or if the U.S. maintains a counterbalancing presence in this geopolitical confront between great powers in the region, which would have a substantial impact on global power dynamics. The ability of countries in the region to weigh the risks and opportunities presented by each superpower will probably determine the outcome of the competition either in form of development or in form of geopolitical struggle and instability in the region.
Therefore, the small and underdeveloped countries in the region should be cautious on maintain the balanced relations with these superpowers and should not enter to the military alignments.
What is the significance of regional cooperation mechanisms, such as SAARC and BIMSTEC, in promoting stability and development in South Asia amid geopolitical tensions?
In light of the growing geopolitical tensions between regional actors and external powers, regional cooperation frameworks such as SAARC and BIMSTEC are essential for fostering stability and prosperity in South Asia. In order to meet the region's economic and security issues, these organizations promote cooperation across industries like trade, energy, security, and disaster management.
Through regional collaboration, SAARC and BIMSTEC seek to address poverty, underdevelopment, and economic inequality. These organizations are essential for creating collaborative solutions that benefit numerous countries through trade and economic integration, especially in light of South Asia's dense population and diverse socioeconomic circumstances. India lacks balancing strength within these organizations and is in a strong position. These organizations are not operating effectively in accordance with their established objectives.
SAARC's progress has been hampered by bilateral disputes, particularly between India and Pakistan. BIMSTEC has been especially helpful for India's Act East policy, connecting it to its neighbors in Southeast Asia while avoiding divisive problems involving Pakistan.
Global powers like China and the United States are very interested in South Asia because of its strategic location and resources, which can lead to competition that destabilizes the area. Member nations should be assisted in pursuing a more balanced strategy by regional organizations such as SAARC and BIMSTEC, which enable them to collaborate on topics of shared interest and fend off outside pressures that could otherwise heighten regional tensions.
SAARC's efficacy is constrained by the disputes between India and Pakistan. These organizations were further infused with India's interest in the region, which finally dampened the spirits of BIMSTEC and SAARC. In the face of global power struggles, both systems should emphasize the value of regional cooperation and self-reliance in promoting stability and sustainable progress. Other member states ought to voice their opinions for these reasons. To maintain South Asia's peace and security, no collaboration of any kind, including a security alliance, should exist against China.
In your analysis, how does the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) reshape the geopolitical dynamics in South Asia, particularly in Nepal?
The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which expands China's influence through economic ties and infrastructure development, has profoundly changed the geopolitical landscape of South Asia, especially in Nepal. China has made investments in important infrastructure projects, such as hydropower, railroads, and highways, in an effort to include Nepal and other South Asian countries in its strategic and economic orbit. Additionally, the Chinese investment in various connectivity projects in Nepal will eventually improve connectivity between China and South Asia through Nepal and assist Nepal in developing trade routes that link directly to Tibet, establishing alternate routes that lessen Nepal's reliance on India for transportation and trade.
Nepal, a landlocked nation, has historically been the Indian "Sphere of Influence", mostly dependent on India for infrastructure and economic support. However, the BRI gives Nepal options, allowing it more freedom to make its own economic and foreign policy decisions. This change reshapes the longstanding India-Nepal relationship by enabling Nepal to diversify its alliances and lessen its reliance on India. While being careful not to alienate India completely, Nepal has used its connection with China through the BRI to counterbalance India's influence. Nepal must strike a delicate balance in order to profit from the BRI and keep diplomatic relations with both of the region's superpowers.
With integration into the larger BRI Network, Nepal will become part of a broader regional network that links South Asia to Central Asia, the Middle East, and beyond. This connectivity not only strengthens Nepal's economic prospects but also creates a more cohesive South Asian subregion with deeper links to China's trade routes.
As BRI projects expand in Nepal and neighbouring countries, China's influence across South Asia grows. In Nepal, the BRI has redefined the country's economic trajectory and regional role, providing infrastructure and development opportunities that increase its strategic importance. However, this engagement also places Nepal at the centre of a balancing act, where it navigates the growing influence of China alongside longstanding ties with India. As the BRI unfolds, Nepal's strategic choices will continue to shape the geopolitics of South Asia, reflecting broader shifts in global power dynamics between China, India, and other global stakeholders.
What are the main challenges and opportunities for Nepal in balancing its relationships with both China and India in the context of increasing regional influence?
Nepal's location between China and India places it in a unique position but also brings significant challenges and opportunities in balancing its relationships with these two powerful neighbors, each vying for influence in South Asia. Nepal has traditionally maintained a policy of "Equidistant" or "non-alignment," seeking to benefit from relations with both while avoiding entanglements in their geopolitical rivalry.
Let's first discuss challenges: Due to its geographical position, Nepal is in a position of geopolitical pressure and strategic vulnerability. Nepal faces competing pressures from both India and China, each expecting Nepal's alignment on key regional issues, such as China's BRI and India's regional security policies.
India views Nepal as part of its strategic buffer against China, while China sees Nepal as a gateway to South Asia, particularly through infrastructure projects linking Nepal to the Tibetan Autonomous Region. This puts Nepal in a vulnerable position, where its decisions could impact its sovereignty and national security, as well as its relations with either neighbour. Due to this vulnerability, Nepal is facing political instability domestically, too. While China's BRI offers Nepal opportunities for connectivity and economic growth, India's regional initiatives, such as the BBIN (Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Nepal) framework, also aim to foster regional integration. Nepal faces the challenge of balancing participation in both initiatives without appearing to favour one side, which could risk straining relations with either India or China.
The Nepal's balancing act between India and China has opportunities as well as challenges. On the one hand, managing internal political differences, economic dependencies, and geopolitical influences is difficult. However, Nepal's location enables it to take advantage of economic prospects, bolster diplomatic clout, and seek international collaboration that promotes its development objectives and regional stability. Nepal's leadership will need to take a long-term, practical stance that puts national interests, sovereignty, and sustainable progress ahead of regional rivalries in order to successfully balance these relationships.
How has political instability in Nepal impacted its foreign policy, particularly in relation to major powers like China, India, and the United States?
The way Nepal handles its two neighbours often polarises the country's political atmosphere. Some groups advocate for deeper connections with India, while others see China as a counterbalance to Indian power. These distinctions sometimes lead to political instability and complicate Nepal's foreign policy. Political instability can make it more difficult for Nepal to effectively manage its relations with China and India since internal power struggles and leadership changes can disrupt long-term diplomatic strategies.
This Nepal's foreign policy has been significantly impacted by political unrest, especially with regard to its ties with superpowers like the US, China, and India. Nepal finds it challenging to establish a coherent foreign policy due to internal party divisions, frequent leadership changes, and conflicting ideology. This hinders Nepal's capacity to successfully negotiate these crucial partnerships. These changes may result in conflicting positions on local matters and create ambiguity in diplomacy. Governmental shifts have resulted in a wide range of approaches to large initiatives, such as the U.S.-led Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) or China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which can cause delays and reassessment of important projects and can strain relations with these nations.
The influence of outside forces on domestic politics has increased as a result of this political unrest. In order to safeguard their interests, China, India, and the US frequently form tight ties with particular political groups; this can occasionally give the impression that outside forces have an excessive influence on Nepal's foreign policy. These ties have caused trust concerns with a major state and complicated Nepal's foreign strategy. Nepal's stance on China's Belt and Road Initiative and associated projects has been erratic due to political unrest. As an alternative to Indian reliance, some regimes have enthusiastically welcomed Chinese investment and infrastructure projects, while others have been more wary, particularly because of worries about debt and sovereignty.
Decision-making on BRI projects is further delayed by the frequent changes of government, since each new administration may request revisions or evaluations of current agreements with China. Beijing is irritated by this uncertainty, which makes it more difficult for Nepal to attract steady and long-term Chinese investment.
Through initiatives including the MCC, IPS, and SPP, the United States has attempted to interact with Nepal. Due to a number of these contradictions, outside forces are pressuring Nepal to oppose China. In addition, this volatility has either increased U.S. strategic influence or jeopardised Nepal's non-aligned status.
Due to its inability to come to an agreement and deal with political sensitivities surrounding perceived foreign interference, Nepal's ability to take advantage of U.S. development prospects is weakened by this ambivalence towards U.S. initiatives. Political parties in Nepal are frequently at odds over foreign policy, which causes internal strife. For example, there may be conflicting foreign policy objectives within the same government when factions within the ruling coalition disagree about whether to prioritise greater connections with China, India, or the United States.
When there is a lack of unity, important agreements and projects involving these powers may be postponed or not completed, leading to policy stagnation. As a result, Nepal can lose out on diplomatic and economic possibilities or ineffectively handle regional security issues. There are long-term economic repercussions when a stable foreign policy cannot be maintained. Nepal's shifting stances towards China, India, and the US have the potential to erode investor trust and impede the advancement of important trade, energy, and infrastructure projects. Nepal runs the danger of losing out on consistent foreign investment that may propel its economic growth and elevate its position in the region if it does not implement stable policies.
It should be noted that Nepal's foreign policy is significantly impacted by political instability, making it difficult to maintain stable ties with big countries like the US, China, and India. Foreign policy changes accompanying every change of government have the potential to sour relations, impede economic growth, and jeopardise Nepal's strategic independence. Nepal would benefit from creating a more cohesive, stable foreign policy strategy that represents its long-term national objectives in order to increase its diplomatic clout and economic resilience. This would allow Nepal to interact with all three powers in the midst of regional rivalry.
Given Nepal’s strategic location, how do external powers’ involvement, such as China and the US, impact its political stability and economic development?
Nepal is a focus point for regional and international powers, particularly China and the United States, looking to increase their influence in South Asia due to its advantageous location between China and India. Interaction with these outside forces provides Nepal with development aid and economic opportunities, but it also has complicated effects on the political stability and general growth of the nation.
Nepal is known as the "Sphare of Influence" in India. In the meantime, China and the US have increased their influence in Nepal, mostly through infrastructure development and financial commitments made under the BRI and MCC frameworks. Pro-China political groups in Nepal have viewed Nepal's involvement in the BRI as a counterbalance to India's influence. However, through programs like the MCC, the US has attempted to offset China's impact. Some political groups perceive this as an extension of U.S. geopolitical dominance in the region, igniting discussions about alignment and sovereignty, while others see it as a beneficial economic alliance. As a result, Nepal's internal politics have become more complicated as various factions dispute over whether the country should be more aligned with the United States or China.
Hope for growth and prosperity has been sparked by the BRI partnership with China. By enhancing trade channels and lowering reliance on Indian transit lanes, the execution of projects under the BRI framework may strengthen Nepal's economy. In the meantime, the United States has diversified Nepal's sources of development funding by providing technical assistance, governance changes, and support for the country's energy sector through the MCC and USAID. However, policy constraints are usually attached to U.S. aid, and Nepal's support for U.S. objectives can occasionally cause tension with China or incite domestic opposition.
Nepal is frequently under pressure to side with one country over the other as China and the United States look to increase their influence. Political instability may worsen as a result of this pressure, particularly if internal factions are already split. For instance, political infighting and protests resulted from the MCC agreement debate, as different factions saw it as either a chance for growth or a possible threat to Nepal's sovereignty.
The United States and China frequently work with particular political figures or parties who support their agendas. While the U.S. interacts with a wider range of groups, including centrist and pro-democracy organisations, China, for example, has maintained strong relations with leftist parties in Nepal. As political leaders vie for outside support, this selective participation can exacerbate internal divisions and foster factionalism, which frequently results in changes to alliances and policies with every change of government.
China and the United States' external engagement presents Nepal with both chances and difficulties. On the one hand, these partnerships offer Nepal the infrastructural investment, economic diversity, and vital development resources it needs to expand. On the other hand, this engagement may put Nepal's political stability under stress, deepen internal conflicts, and increase the risk of dependency, which may restrict its independence and flexibility in policymaking. Nepal's authorities must implement a well-balanced foreign policy that puts the country's interests first, looks for varied alliances, and reduces the impact of outside forces on its internal politics in order to manage these effects.
Considering the historical influence of Buddhism on Chinese civilization, how do you think Buddhism can serve as a soft power tool in modern Chinese diplomacy?
Buddhism has a lot of promise as a soft power instrument in contemporary Chinese diplomacy because of its historical and cultural connections throughout Asia. Understanding Buddhism's impact on Chinese culture and its resonance with many of its neighbours, China has been using Buddhist diplomacy more and more to advance its strategic objectives, improve its international standing, and fortify its cultural and political ties.
China uses a common spiritual and cultural history to forge stronger links with these countries, reducing political tensions and developing respect by advancing Buddhist ties. China's official diplomatic messaging, such as the "Harmonious Society" idea and its encouragement of peaceful coexistence, is consistent with Buddhism's teachings on peace, compassion, and harmony. China aims to lower regional tensions and present a favourable image as a supporter of peace and stability by highlighting these shared principles. Meanwhile, China is bolstering BRI through cultural diplomacy, where Buddhis connect nations and society. The concept of a "Buddhist Silk Road" that emulates the historic Silk Road and strengthens cultural ties along the BRI's path. This project capitalises on Buddhist pilgrimage tourism, which takes tourists to places like Luoyang's White Horse Temple, which is thought to be China's first Buddhist temple and other important historical sites. Through cultural tourism, these initiatives foster goodwill among BRI member nations and assist China in forging economic relations.
The idea of linking Lumbini with Chinese towns was put out in two sessions this year. This year, a peace conference was organised in Lumbini in April in cooperation with the Chinese embassy in Kathmandu. Through the BRI framework, China is promoting Buddhist history, which builds goodwill and trust among nations where Buddhism is widely practised. China hopes to increase the BRI's attractiveness to Buddhist nations like Sri Lanka, Laos, and Nepal by associating it with cultural values and a common history.
Buddhism is a soft power strategy used by China to promote a positive international image and combat Western influence. China's advocacy of Buddhist values offers a distinctive "Asian" perspective on ideals like peace and tolerance, acting as a counterbalance to Western ideology and influence in areas where Buddhism is prevalent. In Asian nations that share Buddhist traditions and sometimes feel cut off from Western cultural narratives, this strikes a particularly deep chord. China has the chance to frame its overseas help and humanitarian aid through the prism of Buddhist compassion. China has framed its help for natural catastrophes and humanitarian crises using Buddhist principles, which is consistent with the idea that Buddhism is a kind and selfless religion. This has improved China's reputation as a good global actor.
In order to strengthen ties with these countries and increase its influence in the area, China is employing Buddhist diplomacy. Global acknowledgement of China's contribution to conserving Buddhist history is facilitated by its sponsorship of Buddhist heritage sites as UNESCO World Heritage Sites. By showcasing a dedication to legacy preservation, this cultural diplomacy strategy strengthens China's soft power and attracts favourable international attention, which makes working with foreign cultural institutions easier. The World Buddhist Forum, which unites monks, academics, and laypeople from all over the world, has been held in China. By highlighting Buddhist principles as universal, China positions itself as a responsible global player and a pioneer in spiritual and cultural diplomacy.
China uses Buddhism as a powerful soft power tool in its contemporary diplomacy, enabling it to fortify its leadership in Asian cultural diplomacy, fortify its relations with nations with a Buddhist majority, and portray itself as an advocate for peace and harmony. This approach helps China develop a favourable international image in opposition to Western influences, in addition to supporting its Belt and Road Initiative and Indo-Pacific involvement. China uses Buddhism's lasting impact to accomplish its geopolitical, cultural, and economic goals throughout Asia and beyond by portraying itself as a guardian and promoter of Buddhist history.
Do you think China's "soft power" strategy has been successful globally? As China rises on the global stage, how do the superpowers like the U.S and EU responding to the challenges posed by China's values and governance model?
Globally, China's "soft power" approach has had varying degrees of success. Many Western nations are still dubious about it because of worries about transparency, censorship, and human rights. However, it has gained sway in places like Africa, Latin America, and portions of Asia through programs like the Belt and Road, Confucius Institutes, and cultural diplomacy. China has developed better goodwill in areas where it more closely corresponds with local development requirements and cultural links. However, overall, these larger challenges continue to complicate and undermine China's worldwide image.
The U.S. and EU have responded to China's ascent by advancing their ideals of democracy, openness, and human rights, frequently forging partnerships to offset China's sway. Along with competing in sectors like technology and infrastructure through initiatives like the EU's Global Gateway and the U.S.-led Indo-Pacific strategy, they also place a strong emphasis on economic alliances that put free-market principles, environmental standards, and development assistance first. These responses are meant to appeal to countries who are leery of China's state-centred approach by providing an alternative to its governance model.
As a conclusion, how could China improve its image on the global stage?
By increasing transparency, particularly in areas like infrastructure projects, data privacy, and business procedures, China may improve its reputation internationally and gain the trust of its partners. Openly addressing human rights issues and advocating for more impartial narratives may also aid in fending off international criticism. Perceptions could also be enhanced by actively participating in international humanitarian and climate projects, promoting fair trade policies, and funding real people-to-people interactions rather than just state-sponsored cultural initiatives. Its standing as a responsible global power would be further enhanced by forming alliances founded on respect for one another and concentrating on locally advantageous, sustainable development.
To increase trust and counter the challenge posed by the US and EU, China should increase people-to-people contact. Most of the Western criticism against China are directed by the political ideology. China should increase its soft power diplomacy to counter these criticisms.
Comentarios