Nepal’s Foreign Minister Calls for Reactivation of Stalled Bilateral Mechanisms

In a surprisingly candid press briefing held in Kathmandu on Tuesday, Nepal’s foreign minister, Pradeep Kumar Gyawali, announced a fresh push to breathe life back into a handful of bilateral mechanisms that have been gathering dust for over a decade. The move, he said, is meant to tackle a slew of pending issues – from lingering border demarcations to water‑sharing disagreements – that have, until now, been stuck in bureaucratic limbo.

“We cannot keep letting these matters sit unresolved,” Gyawali told reporters, his voice punctuated by a hint of impatience. “There are mechanisms that were created with good intentions, but they have become dormant. It’s time we reactivate them, sit down at the table, and work out practical solutions.”

Among the dormant channels he cited were the 2010 Joint Working Group (JWG) on border management, the 2005 Bilateral Trade Committee, and the 2012 Water Resources Forum. All three were originally set up to provide regular, structured dialogue between Nepal and its neighbours – chiefly India – but have seen little activity in recent years.

Gyawali emphasized that reviving these mechanisms does not mean starting from scratch. “We already have the frameworks, the legal bases, and the institutional memory,” he noted. “What we need now is political will and a schedule of meetings that both sides can commit to.”

He also warned that ignoring these unresolved matters could have broader consequences. Unsettled border demarcations, for instance, have occasionally sparked local protests, while unresolved water‑sharing arrangements risk affecting agricultural cycles in the Terai region.

India’s Ministry of External Affairs has not yet issued an official response, but senior diplomats familiar with the situation say that there is a “quiet optimism” in New Delhi about moving forward. The two governments have, in recent months, shown a willingness to discuss trade liberalisation and transit routes, which could serve as a springboard for reopening the dormant forums.

Analysts point out that reactivating these mechanisms could also dovetail with Nepal’s broader foreign‑policy agenda, which seeks to balance relations with its big neighbours while asserting its own strategic autonomy. “It’s a pragmatic step,” says Dr. Maya Sharma, a regional expert at the Institute of South Asian Studies. “Reviving existing platforms is far less contentious than creating new ones, and it signals a mature, constructive approach to diplomacy.”

As the meeting concluded, Gyawali hinted that a formal proposal to reconvene the JWG and other bodies would be sent to India within the next two weeks. He added that Nepal is ready to host the first round of talks in Kathmandu, underscoring the country’s commitment to moving the dialogue forward.

Whether these talks will finally break the deadlock remains to be seen, but the foreign minister’s call for action marks a noticeable shift from passive endurance to active engagement – a change many in the region hope will usher in a more stable and cooperative era.