Hira Bahadur Thapa

The role of institutional memory in strengthening the government institutions can never be underestimated. Despite the importance of such memory in running public organisations in an efficient manner, where personnel need to be connected to their predecessors to better understand the background of the jobs, it has not been emphasised in practice.
In most of our government organisations we complain against others that they haven’t kept the official records properly which shows our own weaknesses. Such lack of exchange of information on a particular issue compromises our bargaining power vis-à-vis foreign governments. Critics say that Nepal government’s institutional memory is very weak, and this has cost us dearly when we sit for substantive negotiations with the representatives of foreign governments. Nepal’s foreign affairs ministry is no exception. Its different departments have suffered a setback when serious negotiations are held due to absence of proper communication between and among themselves. Given the leadership’s will power to address such problem, there is no reason why this cannot be resolved.

Lack of coordination
While many departments of the government lack coordination, they communicate less transparently among or between colleagues of the same organisation. As a former foreign ministry official, this scribe has bitter experience in connection with our representation at the bilateral, regional and multilateral forums. One memory that haunts me till today is the bilateral negotiations between Nepal and Bhutan on the issue of refugees. How selfish attitude of some diplomats have impeded our negotiating leverage is hardly known to many in the foreign ministry.
Hiding basic information vis-a-vis Nepal’s negotiating position with the Bhutanese delegations on the refugees’ issue used to be the diplomatic tool of someone, who served in the SAARC department for years and took up ambassadorial assignment. Such undiplomatic work style damaged our national interests. Why is this happening for years in our government departments wherever we are assigned to? One of my observations in this regard is that there is a strong feeling among many of us in an exclusively privileged organisation like foreign ministry we intend to pull down our colleagues who would compete with us in every aspect whether in getting promotions or being posted abroad.
The removal of provisions related to competitive examinations that provided opportunities to talented government officers outside the ministry exemplifies the motive of limiting the competitors’ access to such examinations. However, the big shots in the specialised ministry defend their position arguing that some seats are still set aside for such comprehensive competition. This allocation is not enough.
Understandably, Public Service Commission (PSC) is issuing the notice inviting competitors for so-called Aantarik Pratispardha (internal competition) for a single seat of joint secretary in the foreign ministry. This provision of denying outside talent was designed by crooked officials in the organisation, who always fear fair competition because of their own inferiority complex and lack of self-confidence.
In the opinion of critics some careerist PhDs can’t even draft a diplomatic protest note strongly and persuasively, let alone their oratorial skills. If real competitive work environment is to be created, those suffering from such fundamental weaknesses will be overcome. Against such worrying backdrop of erosion of our diplomats’ qualities, may I recall a memory sometime in the past that the PSC could not choose any candidate to another because there were only two candidates when the vacancies were notified for two posts of section officers.
Maybe it was an example of how Aantarik Pratispardha has squeezed the opportunities to favour some good for nothing fellows at the expense of gifted and dedicated government personnel who could have joined the foreign ministry and contributed professionally as exemplified by a few bright officers did in the 1990s, most of them later becoming foreign secretaries and Nepal’s Permanent Representatives to the United Nations in New York.
One may question why Foreign Ministry attracted the most brilliant minds of the society likes of which are Sardar Narendra Mani Aadi, the first foreign secretary of Nepal, followed by Ram Prasad Manandhar, an extraordinarily gifted professor, who stood first throughout his student life, Nara Pratap Shumsher Thapa, another brightest mind and Sardar Yadu Nath Khanal, who was asked to serve as foreign secretary twice by King Mahendra. Professor Khanal served as Nepal’s ambassador in Beijing, Delhi and Washington, the three key diplomatic posts seen from the lens of importance of cultivating then powerful countries.
This scribe had an opportunity of working under Narendra B. Shah, as Minister-Counsellor in the permanent mission of Nepal to the UN, New York. Shah was the ambassador to the UN in the mid-1990s, considered to be another brilliant mind with photographic memory.

Nepal’s priorities
Having joined the foreign ministry through inter-departmental PSC-conducted competitive examination in 1984 topping the merit list, my feeling has been that we tend to lose our good image, prestige and reputation associated with the specialised civil service owing to our own weaknesses. We must strengthen ourselves equipping with the thorough knowledge of not only diplomacy but also by being conversant with Nepal’s current priorities to advance country’s national interests. For making foundational base of the foreign ministry cadre strong, they must attend the 6-month-long pre-service training. This training course should be designed and developed keeping in view the need for Nepali diplomats to be well versed in Nepal’s geography, history, culture and anthropology, among others.
Without such training no one should be sent abroad for serving in the diplomatic missions. Additionally, the class three officers should be provided diplomatic training abroad depending on the suitability of the course for giving them proper international exposure. Complaining that other governmental department colleagues are envying us carries no meaning unless we strengthen ourselves academically, professionally and morally to leave the lasting impression that we are superbly talented with high moral integrity.

(Thapa was Foreign Policy Advisor to the Prime Minister from 2008-09.)