The Cost of Being Unprepared: Nepal in the Crossfire of a Fracturing World Order

May 29, 2026

Author: Subheksha Joshi

When Crisis travels without warnings

Waking up to the news of a war thousands of miles away every day feels heavy in the heart and chill through bones.  Every street of Nepal these days acts as a hub for fostering conversations not only about war but also about the price hike, most importantly, about fear. There lingers a strange stillness over a nation that believes it is untouched by the world’s chaos. It is not the silence of peace, but of the distance mistaken for safety. From the unpredictable currents of the Strait of Hormuz to the shifting calculations of global powers such as the United States and Iran, the consequences are already unfolding, heightening tensions on the streets of Nepal. Visible consequences, such as oil routes being threatened, supply chains tightening, and decisions made by global powers, are starting to redraw the boundaries of economic, social, and political stability worldwide (Kumar, M. (2026, Apr 8)). Unfortunately, this story is not only about someone else, but for us too, as it doesn’t wait politely at our geographical borders alone.

Thus, the question strikes: How can Nepal take charge of our own fate, so that a foreign crisis doesn’t debilitate our people?

The Illusion of Distance

If the illusion of the distance is where the problems begin, the absence of institutional readiness is where those consequences deepen. What we are witnessing today is not just a single crisis but a convergence of many such crises. Specifically, the war between Iran and the USA (2026), where the uncertainty revolves around the Strait of Hormuz, is not just limited to the distant geopolitical concerns. But it is the reminder of how fragile the global system has become, where even the possibility of disruption can unsettle entire economies (Partington, R. (2026, Mar 22) The Guardian Global Economy Desk, 2026).

Although a ceasefire was brokered in early April 2026, negotiations over the Strait’s reopening remain unresolved as of late May, with the US maintaining a naval blockade on Iran (CNN, May 2026; CBS News, May 2026). This ongoing instability has already proven how conflict isn’t confined to borders but is moved quietly through oil routes, digital systems, and supply chains that sustain everyday life, including interruptions to communication networks, financial transactions, and data flows. For a country like Nepal, which relies on external digital infrastructure for banking, remittances, and communication, such cascading failures are not hypothetical but a rehearsal.

The Limits of Balance

A nation, while preserving its sovereignty through restraints that stood between the giant, avoiding entanglements, practicing caution, has long taken comfort in the idea of balance. But these days, the ground beneath that balance is shifting. Generally, when a ceasefire is negotiated between conflicting states or when a critical maritime route is threatened and then reopened, the effects of such do not wait; rather, they travel, and they arrive. And this exposes just how little control smaller states truly have over the systems they depend on (Reuters World News, 2026).

To put it plainly, “The history of all hitherto existing small states like Nepal is the history of their subjection to the struggles of great powers, whose conflicts impose suffering without direct war.” A disruption in one part of the world triggers the chain reaction across the governance system as a whole, and the speed at which these consequences unfold is a matter of serious concern for governance systems. In this chain, Nepal often finds itself on the receiving end, not because it lacks resilience entirely, but because of limited preparedness in areas such as digital governance, crisis response, and strategic planning. For instance, reliance on external digital infrastructure, gaps in real-time data coordination, strategic planning, and the absence of a centralized crisis response framework can delay timely decision-making during global disruption (Council on Foreign Relations report on small states or global governance).

Picture credit: The author designed the picture

From reaction to readiness

Because of this, vulnerability in responding to global transnational crises has become visible in Nepal. Although not in a dramatic collapse, but in moments of hesitation, as there lacks the standing mechanism that can respond to the instant rise in global tensions. During the recent disruption, necessary discussions have centered on rationing supplies and arranging emergency responses after the fact, although not sufficiently. While institutions such as MoHA, NDRRMA, along with sector-specific responses like the Ministry of Health during COVID- 19 do exist, they remain mostly reactive and uncoordinated during global crises. Well, this makes sense because in a world that moves this quickly, it often has a delayed reaction.

So, right now, what Nepal requires is not just mere awareness but a defined structure. Most probably, a permanent Crisis Response Council would be the better fit for empowering the act immediately when global risks emerge, and this could shift the hesitation into preparedness.  Having this, we would not have to wait for panic to get us; rather, it would coordinate the embassies to work not just as an improvisation but also to empower the responses to be swift. This idea is not entirely new because certain elements of it have already been considered in moments of urgency; however, the drawback lies in their lack of permanence and institutional capacity.

And the same is true for the foreign policy as well. Most often, instead of defining the direction, it drifts with the tide of domestic changes, adjusting the tone alone. But, certainly, diplomacy cannot afford to be seasonal as it requires continuity. To ensure the neutrality that won’t be mistaken for silence but practiced with clarity and intent, a National Foreign Policy Council, built on consensus rather than politics, could advocate Nepal’s position in a shifting world (Council on Foreign Relations Backgrounder, 2025).

Securing the foundations at home

With all this being written, it is also true that the preparation is not only about institutions. It is also about what happens at home with every person because every global conflict eventually arrives in the form of everyday reality. For example, the cost of fuel, the availability of essential goods, and a quiet anxiety that builds when systems begin to strain mark the subconscious level of preparedness among the people. Furthermore, Nepal’s dependency on external supply chains has proven how even a distant instability can create immediate pressure. Short-term measures can indeed buy time, but they certainly do not provide for resilience. For this, investing in expanding the renewable resources, building strategic reserves, and strengthening internal systems is crucial so that external shocks do not translate into internal crises (International Energy Agency Oil Market Report 2025; Bloomberg Global Commodities Analysis, 2026).

Human Dimension of Preparedness

This is where I would personally advocate for being human and our dimension of being prepared. Behind every policy gap, in every moment of crisis, we do not wait for global explanations, we often look for clarity, protection, and presence, but too often we do encounter delays. Assistance came, but too late. The systems function, but only after strain has already taken its toll (Al Jazeera International Desk, 2026).

So, Nepal should have an integrated digital platform that connects people across the world; a platform where help is not searched for but provided. Depending on the effectiveness of such platforms that support early warnings, streamline communication, and coordinate relief, would help remote areas to benefit as well, further helping to connect the people around the world. Though this is relatively a new conception for Nepal, such a system could be especially useful to it, where people in distant areas still struggle to access or benefit from the digital platforms. Similarly, regional cooperation that works not in isolation but swiftly, and financial tools that turn global exposure into national strength will be practical steps toward ensuring that vulnerability is not a defining aspect of Nepal’s place in the world.

Therefore, the question is now not if Nepal is affected by the global crisis but whether Nepal chooses to remain passive in the global system and continues to absorb shocks or becomes an active planner within them and begins to anticipate them. And this choice will define what comes next more than any external events.

A choice that cannot be delayed

Nepal stands today at a quiet but defining crossroads, sheltered by the illusion of safety in a world that is rapidly losing its balance. We often believe that the direct effects of war never reach us, and the distance of such ongoing conflicts protects us, but history has never been so forgiving. Any decisions made in regions like Washington and Tehran can ripple across many nations; the distance is no longer a part of the shield, and silence is no longer a strategy in the case of Nepal.

To be unprepared in such a world where conflicts are ongoing is not merely a policy failure but is an inability to see that sovereignty today is not only defended at borders, but negotiated in boardrooms, data systems, supply chains, and diplomatic corridors where Nepal is too often absent.  Therefore, Nepal should choose to understand our position in the changing world, and we will inevitably be affected by the global conflicts and not just merely react when consequences arrive at its doorstep. Because the cost of being unprepared is not always immediate but gradual and silent. And by the time we fully feel it, it is often too late to respond.  

REFERENCES

Author Introduction

Ms. Subheksha Joshi is a constitutional law student with academic interests spanning jurisprudence, environmental governance, constitutional theory, and international law. Her work and research interests are informed by an interdisciplinary approach to legal inquiry, particularly in understanding how law engages with broader philosophical, governance, and scientific questions, including emerging conversations surrounding Quantum Physics. She is currently pursuing a Bachelor of Arts, Bachelor of Laws (BALLB) at Kathmandu School of Law. Beyond her academic interests, she is engaged in exploring contemporary legal and policy challenges through constitutional and interdisciplinary perspectives, with a growing interest in legal research, public policy, and global governance frameworks.