Undiplomatic Diplomats: Primitive Foreign Ambassadors in Nepal

Traditionally, ambassadors bridge cultural and economic gaps, strengthen ties with the country they represent and shun making any kind of political comments in public. The basic job of ambassadors is to get their government’s message across. All diplomats should respect the integrity and sovereignty of the country where they are posted. They must possess the ability to comment on negative situations in a tactful manner, to refrain from speaking negatively in public about anyone or anything, and to draw discreet attention to something that is considered wrong or to highlight it through anecdotes.

However, some envoys have been politically active in this country for the wrong reasons. They apparently lack diplomatic etiquette. For example, the Indian ambassador met the prime minister of Nepal thrice even before presenting his credentials. He has not only been making political comments in public, he has gone to the extent of proposing who the president of this country should be and why the Maoists should head the next government. The Indian ambassador’s meeting with different political leaders certainly suggests that he is making a fool out of himself instead of underestimating the government and leaders of this country. No doubt, the Indian factor in setting the political course is evident. But that does not mean the Indian ambassador should set the political course of this country. Similarly, the Chinese ambassador has expressed at a public gathering his resentment against Nepal’s handling of Tibetan protestors. The high-pitched tone of his voice suggested that Nepal should resort to excessive force to clamp down on the peaceful demonstrators. Such political interference points at establishing a wrong precedent which directly affects the political course of this country.

Ambassadors do need public gatherings to express their opinions on issues related to the countries they represent. But they cannot make any comments on the political issues of this country. That Nepal is wedged between the two Asian economic giants needs no elaboration. Nepal needs the support of both India and China for its development. But the ambassadors must realize that they cannot decide the political course of this country though they enjoy every right to discuss such issues in private. The question that arises pertains to how and why ambassadors are breaching diplomatic protocol. Such primitive diplomatic etiquette makes us feel that they are trying to patronize us.

Ambassadors must demonstrate elements of trust and cooperation, which are a precious asset that merits careful conservation instead of making comments in public on sensitive political issues. Let us hope ambassadors cultivate the habit of showing less trivial behavior.

Advertisements

6 thoughts on “Undiplomatic Diplomats: Primitive Foreign Ambassadors in Nepal”

  1. The other ambassadors have been encouraged by the conduct of successive Indian envoys. Over the decades, some Indian ambassadors have interfered overtly, while others have moved in relative obscurity. All, however, have pressed ahead with pitting one power center against the other to create chaos. The Americans, Brits and, more recently, the Chinese have emulated the Indians.
    For a detailed explanation of how India has manipulated Nepal, I urge all to read a new book called “The Raj Lives”. It is written by Nepali journalist Sanjaya Upadhyaya.

    Like

  2. Let us talk about our diplomats dude….
    Maoist ambassdor to Australia is absolute disgrace…

    You would be ashamed for your self and for your country if you listen to his formal speeches in Australia ……..absolute KHATE

    I doubt if he score 4 in IELTS

    but hey…he is Prachanda’s ‘BHITRIYA’..what can you do…. dont say anything
    BEWARE of YCL ‘Karbahi’

    Like

  3. UWB – agreed, true, HOWEVER what were you doing when amabassadors were interfering even during the kings rule, then in the interim period and also Indian MPS like Yechuri hand in glove calling the shots – I believe you were content then – so why the dissent now?

    Like

  4. I think most of Nepali are having Rakesh Sood phobia. We have seen and heard him too much over the months. What is this doing is ailinating india from the heart and mind of Nepali. These are the people who help us hate indian with passion.

    The only remedy to this is that Nepali people should stop inviting them in functions as chief guest. Nepali journalists should cease to seek there openion on various domestic issues of Nepal.

    Like

  5. Read the news below from ekantipur and remember who you are and who is your master????

    Indian leader Tripathi urges NC to withdraw June 17 statement

    By Gopal Khanal

    KATHMANDU, June 20 – General Secretary of the Indian Nationalist Congress Party, Devi Prasad Tripathi has asked the Nepali Congress (NC) to withdraw the June 17 NC statement accusing some Indian leaders including himself of intervening in Nepal’s internal politics.

    Talking to ekantipur on Friday, Tripathi also said that the statement issued by the NC‘s International Department that had accused himself, CPI-Marxist leader Sitaram Yechuri and another Indian leftist leader D Raja of interfering in Nepal’s internal politics had “annoyed” them.

    “We have constantly supported Nepal’s democracy. But I came to know that NC’s International Department criticized us on June 17. I regret this,” Tripathi told ekantipur, “We have a very close relationship with the NC. But no other party from any other country has behaved us in this way. We really feel sad for such behaviours from those whom we consider friends.”

    “I urge Sujata Koirala, who is NC’s International Department Chief, to withdraw the June 17 statement,” Tripathi said.

    He also claimed that none of the Indian leaders mentioned in the NC’s statement ever tried to interfere in Nepal’s internal matters.

    “We support the Nepalese democracy and the Nepalese people. We have never tried to intervene in Nepal. We congratulated the Nepali people for achieving democracy,” Tripathi said, “But we indeed said that the Nepalese political parties should respect the people’s mandate and move forward accordingly. To support the Nepalese people’s mandate is in no way to intervene in Nepal’s internal affairs.”

    Stating that the Nepal Democratic Solidarity Committee, which includes all Indian political parties except the main opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), was the largest committee in India, Tripathi said that they had only supported “the Nepalese people’s wish, as expressed through the recently concluded Constituent Assembly elections, that the next government in Nepal should be formed under Maoist leadership.”

    “All Indian parties except the BJP are in this committee. The NC and UML are important political parties. But the Maoists have emerged as the largest political party in Nepal. We don’t need to keep on saying that the largest party should form the next government.”

    Tripathi also accused Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala of showing “lust for power” by not tendering his resignation to facilitate the formation of next government in Nepal.

    Like

Post your views

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s