From Neutral Territory to No-Man's-Land: Nepal's Involvement In “War-Tourism” Through Trenches

We know that it was possible for certain small countries to remain neutral during World-War 1 and World-War 2. In more recent times however, the closest thing to being neutral during a major war is to be a “No-Man's-Land,” which is to be uninvolved in the battle but not exempt from being on the line of fire. Whereas the ultimate decision-makers of a nation's neutrality were the citizens of that nation itself, in the decision to make a nation a No-Man's-Land, external more powerful nations are in-charge. So in one sense the transformation of a nation from neutral to No-Man's-Land has to do with the loss of the ability of its citizens from taking and implementing firm decisions regarding the situation and significance of their own territory.

In the case of Nepal, which would greatly benefit from being neutral in any war, its quite recent experience with war will be emphasized by more powerful nations to suggest that it can cope with or handle the event of a major international war. However, the violent recent history of Nepal will not be emphasized too much, because too much emphasis on that violent history will encourage Nepal to participate in major war by choosing one side, when in fact Nepal is most important in the major war context only as a No-Man's-Land.

The conversion of Nepal into a No-Man's-Land is evident in the many road construction projects ongoing in Nepal. What Nepali citizens believe to be improvements on their roads are rather the construction of World-War-esque trenches, for possible trench warfare between more powerful nations which could begin at any time. International war that occurs these days will be dislocated from disputed territories, in a kind of “war-tourism” when a nation advertises its trenches as ideal for foreign armies to conduct warfare. But the fate of Nepalis is to suffer collateral damage, as bullets meant to hurt a non-Nepali will fly dangerously through Nepali territory.