Kathmandu: Experts and political leaders have expressed concerns and raised caution about the possible implications of terrorism for Nepal. Speaking at a seminar on “Terrorism in South Asia and its Implications for Nepal” organized by Centre for Social Innovation and Foreign Policy (CESIF) on in the capital on Monday, they discussed the persistent threat of terrorism in South Asia and its specific repercussions for Nepal, focusing on Nepal’s vulnerabilities and the need for effective countermeasures.
Vijay Kant Karna, CESIF’s Executive Chairperson, emphasized the serious and evolving nature of terrorism in South Asia and its direct effects on Nepal. He highlighted Nepal’s vulnerability as a potential transit point for terrorist operatives, citing instances like the IC 814 hijack, and the victimization of Nepali citizens in terrorist acts, such as the recent Pahalgam terrorist attack and the 2006 Jammu and Kashmir attack on migrant workers.
NP Saud, Member of Parliament and Former Foreign Minister of Nepal, stressed that terrorism in South Asia poses a serious spillover risk for Nepal, warning that “vulnerabilities are no longer only at others’ homes—we are also open to them.” He highlighted systemic flaws in immigration management, referencing past lapses like the IC 814 incident, where Nepal failed to classify the perpetrators as terrorists or coordinate diplomatically with the country of origin of the terrorists. He called for integrated immigration-security mechanisms and cautioned that ad hoc responses yield no long-term protection.
Raj Kishore Yadav, Member of Parliament, noted Nepal’s silence on the Pahelgam attack as a diplomatic misstep and lamented Parliament’s continued failure to frame terrorism as a national issue. He asserted, “Nepal should have been more assertive and explicitly sided with the victim side”.
Shanker Das Bairagi, Former National Security Advisor and Foreign Secretary, emphasized Nepal’s normative commitments to international conventions but admitted that the implementation gap “depreciates our credibility.” He identified immigration and intelligence as critical vulnerabilities and called for institutional reforms to enhance data sharing and deterrence capabilities.
Nepal Army General (Retd) Binoj Basnyat highlighted the shifting nature of warfare in South Asia, shaped by technology, proxy conflicts, and big power rivalries, noting that Nepal’s counterterrorism efforts currently rely heavily on soft diplomacy but lack proactive mechanisms. “We must revisit the way our security is maintained,” he said, emphasizing that Nepal’s experience with past insurgencies does not adequately prepare it for emerging transnational threats.
Madhu Raman Acharya, scholar and former ambassador, strongly urged Nepal to take a principled stance on regional terrorism, particularly in cases like the Pahelgam attack, stating that “Nepal should have clearly sided with India” and used such incidents as diplomatic openings to build trust with India.
Members of panels underscored Nepal’s need to reassess its neutrality-based foreign policy, invest in evidence-based counterterrorism capacity, and elevate national conversations on security beyond the government to include academia and civil society.
The seminar concluded with a unanimous agreement among all the speakers regarding the missed opportunity to clearly and openly stand with India and condemn the terrorist attack on Pahalgam.
Comment