China's Delays, India's Gains: How Nepal's Frustrations With BRI Are Shifting The Sentiment

More than eight years after Nepal signed a ‘Memorandum of Understanding’ (MoU) with China on implementing BRI projects in the Himalayan nation, not a single project has taken off.

Wrangling between Kathmandu and Beijing over the mode of financing the mega projects—China wants Nepal to take loans from it while Nepal wants grants from China—and other issues have held up work on even the ten flagship BRI projects that are often touted as examples of close China-Nepal ties.

Despite efforts by the top political leaderships of the two countries to resolve the complex issues, including that of funding, surrounding the mega projects, no headway has been made. Experts say that it will take at least another two decades, if not more, to see the major BRI projects in Nepal taking shape.

The cross-border projects—a rail link between Kathmandu and Gyirong (in Tibet), a 220 KV transmission line to supply electricity to the high-altitude mountainous parts of northern Nepal—are still a long way off and may not even see the light of day due to disputes over funding, the very high costs of the projects and the extremely difficult terrain through which the proposed rail lines and transmission lines are to be constructed (read this).

Nepal has only recently shared concept papers on the eight other projects with China and is awaiting approval from Beijing. Once that comes through, pre-feasibility studies will have to be conducted, followed by agreements over funding and then preparation of detailed project reports (DPRs). These have to be accepted and approved by both sides before work can start on any of the projects.

This entire process of preparation of DPRs and getting approvals and clearances, experts say, will take at least another five to ten years, if not more.

The long delay of any of the much-touted projects getting off the ground has created a negative perception in the minds of the people of Nepal about China’s intent. The common public perception, admit Nepal’s politicians, is that grand projects are announced in a hurry only to fool people.

India, on the other hand, has gradually sharpened its involvement in Nepal through community projects which deliver tangible benefits to the people of the country. Apart from small infrastructure and other projects drawn up with realistic timelines, India has been concentrating on projects that bring immediate benefits to the people.

India has also won public acclaim in Nepal for providing prompt aid during natural disasters, including supplying vaccines during the Covid pandemic. India’s magnanimous decision to rescue Nepalis, along with Indians, from Iran and Israel (the ongoing ‘Operation Sindhu’) has been widely acclaimed in Nepal.

“We have always remained focused on delivering on our promises and with that in mind, our projects in Nepal have been practical and have been implemented within realistic timelines. We have also remained focused on high-impact community development projects like building schools, providing teaching aids, building and equipping health centres, water supply projects, sanitation and drainage projects,” Rakesh Sood, former Indian envoy to Nepal, told Swarajya. 

China’s long-delayed BRI projects in Nepal

1. Cross-border rail line: The proposed rail link between Nepal’s capital Kathmandu and Gyirong in Chinese-occupied Tibet is the most ambitious of all the BRI projects in Nepal and is estimated to cost nearly US$ 9 billion.

The proposed rail line from Kathmandu will travel north through treacherous mountain terrain to reach Rasuwagadi on the Nepal-China border and then travel to Gyirong on the Chinese side. This 170-kilometre route poses a huge engineering and funding challenge.

China proposes to construct a 540-kilometre rail line linking Gyirong to Shigatse, which is already connected to Lhasa by a 253-kilometre-long high-speed rail link.

Once (and if) the trans-border rail link is constructed, Kathmandu will be connected to Lhasa by rail.

After protracted negotiations, China had offered to carry out a feasibility study for the Kathmandu-Rasuwagadi section (covering 72 kilometres) of the mega project in November 2022.

China had offered to sponsor the entire feasibility study that will cost nearly US$ 27.5 million through a grant assistance, but Nepal dragged its feet and agreed to the study only in 2023. This study is now on and is expected to be completed only by the end of next year.

But no agreement has been reached between the two countries on the funding for the project. Nepal has told China that it simply cannot afford to bear the huge project cost of US$ 9 billion, and so wants China to provide grants.

Even preparing the DPR for the rail line after the feasibility study is completed will take a lot of time and will cost another whopping US$ 313 million. China wants Nepal to bear at least 50% of the cost of conducting the DPR through a loan from China’s EXIM Bank. But Nepal has not made any commitment on this.

Also, China wants Nepal to share at least 25% of the cost of the project; that is, US$ 2.25 billion. However, Nepal simply cannot bear that cost. Nepal’s budget for the 2025-2026 financial year is US$ 14.7 billion, and the country cannot afford to spend 15% (US$ 2.25 billion) of its annual budget on one single project.

China wants Nepal to take a loan from its EXIM Bank to fund the project, but Nepal is not ready to do so.

Given this lack of agreement over funding the mega project, it is doubtful if it will ever take off.

Economists say that the project is also unviable. “There won’t be much passenger traffic between Kathmandu and Lhasa even in the future and the scope of importing or exporting goods from and to Tibet is also limited. This rail line is a completely unviable project. If Nepal takes a loan from China for the project, as China wants it to, then Nepal will be walking into a debt trap,” warns Kathmandu-based economist Shubham Rana.

2. Cross-border electricity transmission line: This 220KV transmission line from Chilime in Nepal to Gyirong in Tibet to facilitate export of power from Nepal to China is also stuck over many disagreements between the two sides.

The two countries agreed to expedite work on construction of the transmission line during then Nepal Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal’s visit to China in September 2023. But no concrete steps have been taken since then.

Dirghayu Kumar Shrestha, a senior officer of Nepal Electricity Authority (NEA), said “there is still no clarity on how the transmission line will be built and the funding modalities”.

Nepal has only recently prepared a concept paper and sent it to China for study and acceptance. Once China approves, a DPR and environment impact assessment report will have to be prepared and approved by both sides. That, says Shrestha, will take at least five years.

The NEA operates the 22 MW Chilime Hydropower Plant (Chilime is close to the Nepal-Tibet border). Nepal wants Chinese investments to enhance the capacity of the plant and then export power generated from the plant through the cross-border transmission line to Tibet.

In November 2022, Nepal signed a power export agreement with India. “Once the generation of the Chilime plant is enhanced with Chinese investments, we will export some of the additional power generated through our national grid to India,” said Nepal’s power minister Deepak Khadka.

But India has told Nepal recently that it will not import electricity generated from power plants in Nepal that are built with Chinese investments or by Chinese contractors.

“That scuppers our plans to export power generated from the Chilime project both to China and India. If India refuses to import power generated from that plant, the whole project (enhancing the generating capacity of the plant with Chinese investments) will become unviable,” said former NEA director Santosh Ghimire.

Also, Nepal wants China to fund the entire project as a grant, but China has told Nepal very explicitly that the funding will be through a hybrid model—a major part of it through loans taken from China and the remaining through Chinese grants.

“The problem is that such projects are announced with a lot of fanfare but without much thought and planning. And when they don’t take off, a negative impression is created in the minds of the people. Many people, for instance, are now saying that this cross-border transmission line will never happen and it was announced only to make political capital,” said Nepali Congress leader Man Bahadur Gurung.

3. Tokha-Chhahare tunnel road: This project, estimated to cost US$ 365 million, aims to reduce the time taken to travel from Kathmandu to Rasuwagadi on the Nepal-Tibet border and onward into Tibet. This tunnel can reduce the cost of travel from Kathmandu to Rasuwagadi by up to fifty percent.

Nepal Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli wants to put this project on a fast track. “Since the other BRI projects are getting delayed, he (Oli) wants this project to be completed soon so that it can be showcased by him as a milestone in enhancing ties with China,” said Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP) leader Mohan Sharma.

Oli, during his visit to China in December last year, requested the Chinese leadership to prioritise this project. The two countries had, earlier this year, exchanged letters to expedite the construction of this 4.5 kilometre long tunnel and another road project.

But there has been no progress after that. A team of Chinese consultants completed the pre-feasibility study in 2020.

Nepal had allocated US$ 7.2 million in its 2024-2025 budget for starting work on preparation of the DPR and Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) report for this project. But nothing was done and the money allocated to this project was diverted.

Mahesh Bhattarai, joint secretary in Nepal’s Ministry of Finance, said that the funding modality for this project is shrouded in uncertainty.

“A request was made to fund the tunnel construction through a grant. But China hasn’t responded to the request,” said Bhattarai.

Nepal’s Physical Infrastructure & Transport Minister Devendra Dahal told Swarajya that reminders have been sent to China on clearing formalities and expediting the project. “We hope to receive a response soon,” he said.

4. Khandabari-Keemathnka road and bridge project: This is an integral part of the Koshi Corridor project which is touted a ‘national pride project’ that will connect Tibet and India through Nepal. The 158-kilometre-long Khandabari-Keemathnka road and bridge project is the only one in which substantial progress has been made.

In January this year, the Nepal Army achieved a breakthrough by blasting through a cliff that was posing a major obstacle in the 10.5 kilometre long Chyamptang-Ghongghoppa section of the road.

The 390-kilometre Koshi Highway starts at Biratnagar on the Nepal side of the Indo-Nepal border along Bihar and ends at Keemathnka on the Nepal-Tibet border.

However, paving and black-topping the road to make it motorable is yet to begin at most stretches. Project engineers say this is because contractors who have been assigned the project are playing truant. Funds are also not being released regularly for the project.

Nepal’s energy minister Deepak Khadka told Swarajya that work on paving the road will be completed over the next two years.

However, even if that deadline is met, the Koshi Road will not be operational because construction of a few bridges on the road is yet to start.

Nepal has sent a concept note to China on paving the entire road and building the bridges.

Also, a lot of work, especially on stabilising the hill-slopes along the road, remains incomplete. “This requires a lot of expertise and money, and that’s why we have requested China for grants to take up these works to make the road operational,” said Minister Deepak Khadka.

Once again, China is loath to give grants for the project and wants Nepal to avail loans from its EXIM Bank. Nepal, for understandable reasons, is unwilling to take such loans that will surely ensnare the country in a debt trap.

5. Hilsa-Simikot road project: This is part of the Karnali Corridor project — another one given the ‘national pride’ status — that will connect Nepalgunj on the Indo-Nepal border to Hilsa in northwestern Nepal on its border with Tibet.

Though work on the mountainous, 96 kilometre-long Hilsa-Simikot section started more than 15 years ago, the tough terrain with continuous landslides and mudslides, paucity of funds, bureaucratic lethargy and lack of adequate expertise in constructing 17 bridges over fast-flowing rivers has held up early completion of the project.

According to Nepal’s Physical Infrastructure & Transport Minister Devendra Dahal, only 36% of the project has been completed.

“But we are now expediting work on the project. Contracts worth over US$ 29 million have been awarded for the Karnali Corridor project,” said Dahal.

However, this amount is grossly insufficient. “At this rate, it will take another 15 to 20 years to complete the (Karnali) corridor, especially the challenging Hilsa-Simikot section,” said infrastructure expert Suman Paudel who has worked with global infrastructure company Bechtel.

“A project of this scale and in such challenging terrain requires a steady infusion of huge sums of money. Any break or slackening of pace in construction sets back the project due to a number of technical reasons,” said Paudel.

That is why Nepal has requested China for help in this project as well. “We have requested China to fund the project,” said Minister Dahal.

Nepal has requested China to construct a vital bridge on the Nepal-Tibet border at Hilsa and both sides have committed themselves to expediting the project. But uncertainties remain over funding for the project, and that can delay the Karnali Corridor which, when complete, will make it easier for Indians to undertake the pilgrimage to Kailash Manasarovar. Hilsa is about 42 kilometres away from Manasarovar.

6. Kathmandu Scientific Centre & Science Museum: Nepal proposed this project to enhance the country’s scientific and technological development more than a decade ago. But no progress has been made all these years and only recently, Nepal sent a concept paper on this project to China.

Nepal wants China to develop the centre as a hub for research, innovation and capacity building in science and technology with its own expertise.

“China has been requested, in view of its ranking as a global hub of cutting-edge technology, to conceptualise and execute the project. It will be a fantastic example of Chinese help to Nepal and can play a major role in enhancing ties between our countries. We have requested China to bear the entire cost of the project,” said Nepal’s Science & Technology Minister Raghuji Pant.

China is yet to communicate its position on this project.

7. Madan Bhandari University of Science & Technology: China had initially agreed to bear the cost of constructing this new university at Chitlang, about 25 kilometres southwest of Kathmandu.

Nepal had sought a grant of US$ 313 million from China for setting up this university with a capacity of undergraduate and postgraduate courses in science and technology, humanities, social sciences, management and law to 4,000 students.

Chinese President Xi Jinping, during his visit to Nepal in October 2019, agreed to fund the university. A team of Chinese technical experts also visited and approved of the site of the university at Chitlang the same month.

Based on China’s assurance of funds, Nepal started constructing the campus in December 2019. However, last year, China inexplicably raised objections to the location of the university at Chitlang and said that the place was unsuitable for a university.

The Nepal government quickly suggested an alternative site at Panchkhaal, about 38 kilometres east of Kathmandu. The Chinese approved the new site and, once again, based on China’s assurance of funds, Nepal started constructing the new campus at Panchkhaal.

But, said Education Minister Raghuji Pant, China is yet to release funds for the university. “Some Masters and PhD courses are being conducted at the Chitlang campus, but undergrad courses in various disciplines will be offered at the Panchkhaal campus. We have received a fresh assurance from China on funds for the university. The necessary formalities will be completed soon,” said Pant.

8. China-Nepal Friendship Industrial Park: Nepal and China signed an MoU in early October 2019 to set up this industrial park at Damak in eastern Nepal’s Jhapa district.

According to this MoU, the Lhasa Economic and Technological Development Zone Investment Development Company was to invest in setting up the park spread over 1,422 hectares where units making food products, home appliances, transport equipment, and electrical and communication equipment would be set up.

Nepal Investment Board’s former CEO Maha Prasad Adhikari told Swarajya that the project is slated to be developed in four phases with a total investment of US$ one billion. “This will be a milestone for industrial infrastructure development in Nepal,” he added.

Prime Minister Oli laid the foundation stone of the industrial park in February 2021. But actual work is yet to start on the ground even though Oli has taken personal interest in the project that is located in his home district (Jhapa).

Park chairman Gobinda Thapa told Swarajya that the DPR for the project has been prepared and Nepal has sent the concept paper to China. He added that Prime Minister Oli had, during his visit to China late last year, requested the Chinese to start work on the park.

But there is no word yet from China about when actual construction work on setting up the park will commence.

Retired bureaucrat Sunil Bhandari, who had handled the project during his long stint at Nepal’s Ministry of Industry and Commerce, said that issues of land acquisition and compensation, tax exemptions and geopolitical concerns have bogged down this project.

9. Jhapa Sports & Athletics Complex: This is another pet project of Prime Minister Oli in his home district. It was at Oli’s insistence, and Beijing’s compulsion to keep its proxy (Oli) in good humour, that this project was included in the list of BRI projects by China.

The multipurpose complex with state-of-the-art facilities is meant to promote sports, especially football, cricket and athletics. The US$ 86,000 complex will include a modern stadium and other facilities that can host international events.

The project, like other BRI projects in Nepal, has been plagued by delays in preparation of pre-feasibility report, uncertainty over funding modalities and controversies over land acquisition and consequent displacement of people.

As is the case with some other BRI projects in the country, the concept paper on the sports complex has been sent by Nepal’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs to Beijing. And once again, there has been no word from China on this.

10. Amargadhi City Hall, Dadeldhura: This is another vanity project of Prime Minister Oli in Nepal’s western Sudurpaschim province. Oli got this—the construction of a city hall in the small town of Amargadhi (estimated population: 25,000), which is also the headquarters of Dadeldhura district—included in the list of BRI projects.

Many in Nepal are confounded by this inclusion. “Why such an insignificant project in a small town was included in the BRI project list defies logic,” said Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Socialist) leader Prem Nath Dhakal.

But even this small project has seen no movement. China has not yet responded to the concept note for this project sent to it by Nepal, though Nepal is said to have received verbal assurances that the project is on track. China has also not announced the funding modality for this project.

Disagreement Between China and Nepal Over Funding

An acute disagreement has developed between Kathmandu and Beijing over the mode of funding for the BRI projects. Nepal, with its limited resources and poor economy, wants China to provide grants to fund the projects.

China, however, wants Nepal to take loans at commercial rates from its EXIM Bank for the BRI projects in the Himalayan country. At best, says China, the BRI projects in Nepal can be funded through a hybrid mode: 70 percent loans and 30 percent grants.

“But China does not offer soft loans or interest-free loans like the World Bank or the Asian Development Bank. China’s loans typically have an interest rate between 4.2 percent and 4.5 percent, and have a much shorter grace period and maturity as compared to loans from global financial institutions,” former bureaucrat Narayan Subedi, who had been involved in examining funding for BRI projects during his long stint in the country’s finance ministry, told Swarajya.

Roshan Giri, a senior officer of Nepal’s Finance Ministry’s International Economic Cooperation Coordination Division, told Swarajya that soft loans from global financial institutions have an interest rate of one percent and a minimum moratorium on repayment of ten years, with repayment periods stretching up to even fifty years.

In stark contrast, loans from China not only have higher interest rates of 4.2 percent to 4.5 percent, the moratorium on repayment is usually five years and the repayment period is a maximum of ten to fifteen years.

“Also, Chinese bailout loans have a high interest rate of 5 percent and refinancing options are limited. What’s worse is Chinese loans have tough secrecy clauses which prevent the borrower from disclosing details of the loans to third parties. Hence, if a country which has taken a loan from China goes into financial distress, it cannot ask for a bailout from the World Bank or IMF since those global institutions will insist on full disclosure of the distressed country’s finances, including loans from China,” said Giri.

Another major concern is that China does not allow a country to float global tenders for BRI projects. Only Chinese companies get the contracts for executing BRI projects. That way, China retains control over the pace of progress and all other aspects of BRI projects.

“This means that only Chinese companies are benefited and all the money which is given by China for execution of BRI projects goes back to China through the Chinese companies and contractors,” Giri added.

Nepal’s political leadership cutting across party lines is also well aware of the debt trap that many countries got ensnared in after taking loans from China to finance their BRI projects.

“We know what happened to Sri Lanka’s Hambantota port project and some BRI projects in other countries. Those countries were forced to offer many facilities and concessions to China at the cost of their strategic interests and sovereignty. We don’t want Nepal to face a similar situation and, hence, are against taking loans from China at their commercial rates and on their tough terms. If at all we have to take loans, it should be on terms similar to those of global financial institutions,” said senior Nepali Congress (NC) leader Nirmal Gurung.

Leaders of all other political parties, including the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist-Leninist) [CPN-UML], which is part of the NC-led ruling coalition, hold a similar position and are wary of taking loans at extortionist rates and tough conditions from China.

This has put the brakes on the implementation of BRI projects in Nepal. Prime Minister Oli, during his visit to China last December, appealed to the Chinese leadership to provide soft loans on generous terms and grants for the BRI projects.

But the Chinese did not humour Oli, who is known to be Beijing’s proxy (read this).

Soon after forming the coalition government in July last year, the NC and the CPN-UML set up a four-member joint task force to recommend the formula for financing BRI projects in Nepal. China had, by that time, proposed a formula—90 percent of the project cost as loan from its EXIM Bank and 10 percent as Chinese grants—for BRI projects in Nepal.

The task force rejected the Chinese proposal and recommended that all BRI projects in the country should be funded through unconditional grants of at least 80 percent of the project cost and the remaining 20 percent through soft loans at concessional rates of interest, a grace period of ten years for repayment and the repayment period stretching over thirty years.

The Chinese returned Nepal’s proposal replacing the term ‘unconditional grants’ with ‘investments’. But Nepal was not impressed and sought clarity on what constituted ‘investments’.

Oli was explicitly told by NC leaders before he departed for China that he should not agree to any Chinese proposal to fund the BRI projects through commercial loans. But the Chinese tricked Oli into signing an MoU which said that the BRI projects in Nepal would be funded through “aid and technical assistance”.

Oli was led to believe by the crafty Chinese that ‘aid’ was just another term for grants. NC leader and former foreign minister, Narayan Prakash Saud, said that if ‘aid’ means a combination of loans and grants, it will go against the NC’s stance on financing BRI projects in Nepal.

Senior NC leader Arjun Narasingha KC, who was part of Oli’s delegation to China, said that there is no clarity on what ‘aid’ means.

Another NC leader and former chairperson of the National Planning Commission, Govinda Rak Pokharel, said that Oli had been “duped” by the Chinese.

Nepal has asked China to clarify what ‘aid’ stands for. “China has said it would be discussed on a case-by-case basis with regard to specific BRI projects. That is why Nepal has prepared ‘concept papers’ on the BRI projects interpreting ‘aid’ as unconditional grants.”

China is yet to respond to the ‘concept papers’ and has only been issuing statements that it remains committed to implementing and overseeing BRI projects in Nepal “to transform Nepal from a land-locked country to a land-linked country”.

But on the ground, BRI projects in Nepal are yet to take off and the perception that China is big on promises and slow on keeping those promises is gaining ground.

How India Scores in Nepal

India, says former Indian envoy Rakesh Sood, has been a steady and reliable development partner of Nepal since the early 1950s.

The first significant project sponsored and executed by India in Nepal was the Gauchar Airport (now called the Tribhuvan International Airport) at Kathmandu; India started construction in 1951 and handed it over to Nepal in 1954.

The ‘Indian Aid Mission’ in Kathmandu was set up in 1954 to coordinate with the government of Nepal for developmental projects in power, education, health and connectivity, trade, agriculture, capacity building in various sectors, preservation of culture and heritage etc.

Since 1954, some of the major infrastructure projects funded by India in Nepal include Nepal’s first highway (the Tribhuvan Rajpath connecting Kathmandu to Borganj on the Indo-Nepal border), the East-West Highway (also called the Mahendra Highway, the longest in the country spanning the entire length of Nepal), major developments and expansion of the Tribhuvan University and its affiliated institutions, a major water supply project in Kathmandu, airports at Bhairahawa, Biratnagar and Janakpur, hydel power projects, irrigation and drinking water supply projects.

Over the past two decades, India has initiated 573 ‘high-impact development projects’ in Nepal costing over ₹1359 crore and completed 495 of these projects, which cover sectors like health, education, sanitation, power, water supply, infrastructure and public utilities.

“We have always focused on small and medium projects which will impact local communities and improve their lives and livelihoods. And we ensure that all the projects that we take up adhere to strict timelines,” said diplomat Rajesh N Pandey, who had served in a senior position at the Indian Embassy in Nepal.

Pandey, whose job involved overseeing implementation of Indian projects in Nepal and ensuring that they adhered to the timelines, told Swarajya that India’s focus has always been on projects which may be small in size but create a huge impact on the lives of the people.

“An important yardstick we apply is if a project we propose will make the life of a citizen or community better. That’s why you’ll see a number of small water supply and sanitation projects, projects for farmers aimed at improving their yields and making farming easier or helping women become self-sufficient through various livelihood activities,” said Pandey.

In early April this year, India and Nepal signed an MoU to undertake ten high-impact community development projects in Nepal. India will fund these projects in the fields of education, health and culture that will cost nearly ₹63 crore.

These ten projects involve construction of schools, healthcare centres and cultural infrastructure across various provinces of Nepal.

“India does not promise projects worth billions of dollars. Instead, it focuses on projects that cost less but deliver a lot. For instance, it builds libraries, provides teaching aids and school uniforms, gifts ambulances and school buses, constructs drains and village roads, provides expertise and materials for low-cost houses in remote areas, provides human resources in enhancing scientific education, shares expertise on various advanced fields, provides help in healthcare and medical research etc. These make a lot of impact and create goodwill,” said former Nepali diplomat Rajaram Bartaula.

Development economist Shankar Ghimire, who taught at Tribhuvan University in Kathmandu’s Kirtipur, said that India’s projects in Nepal have been very impactful. “India plans well and takes local communities into confidence before finalising projects. This is why Indian projects in Nepal are successful and create a lot of goodwill,” he said.

Senior NC leader Narayan Bisht puts it succinctly: “While there is no saying when, if at all, the rail link between Kathmandu and Gyirong over the mighty Himalayas will materialise, India planned and executed two rail links with Nepal and will execute another major one linking Kathmandu to Raxaul (an Indian town on the border with Nepal) during this time.”

Ghimire told Swarajya that many in Nepal have started harbouring doubts about the true intent of the Chinese.

“The Chinese claim they want to develop Nepal through mega projects. But the conditions it imposes infringe on Nepal’s financial sovereignty and can compromise our security and strategic interests. China’s terms for implementing BRI projects are quite exploitative and designed to ensnare countries in a debt trap,” he said.

Ghimire and many others Swarajya spoke to said that examples of countries that have fallen into a debt trap because of expensive BRI projects abound. “People are not fools, everybody can see what is happening in other parts of the world. So a trust deficit with the Chinese is growing. We don’t really know what their true intentions are,” Ghimire said.

The more the delay in implementing the BRI projects in Nepal, especially the ten flagship projects, the greater will be the trust deficit with China.

India’s nimble-footed implementation of high-impact development projects is evoking comparisons in Nepal between its northern and southern neighbours. This comparison, in which India scores hugely over China, is surely helping India create goodwill in the Himalayan nation.

Also read:

Why Nepal’s Proposed Rail Link To Tibet Will Put The Country On A Slippery Slope

Nepal Prime Minister Oli Wanted To Show Off His Chinese Connection To India, But Was Conned By Beijing