The House of Representatives heard animated remarks on Thursday by lawmakers on Nepal’s plan to implement the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative.

Lawmakers from the main opposition aired their views on the issue a day after China’s Vice Foreign Minister Sun Weidong wrapped up his three-day visit to Kathmandu where he participated in the 16th round of the Nepal-China diplomatic consultation meeting.

Lawmakers from the ruling CPN-UML and the CPN (Maoist Centre) however didn’t speak about the government’s preparations to seal the Belt and Road implementation plan during Sun’s visit. Nepal joined the BRI, Chinese President Xi Jinping’s flagship connectivity project, in May 2017.

Mostly, lawmakers from the Nepali Congress have raised questions, asking the government to present the BRI framework agreement to the House and initiate discussion over it. They have also called for a broad national consensus on its implementation.

Some lawmakers demanded the government clarify Nepal’s positions on the Chinese BRI and the Millennium Challenge Corporation Nepal Compact of the United States.

Speaking in the House on Thursday, former foreign minister and Nepali Congress leader NP Saud said the government should clarify its position on the BRI’s implementation. “We cannot afford loans to build projects under the BRI.”

Saud also raised serious questions about the foreign policy the Pushpa Kamal Dahal-led government is pursuing and urged the prime minister not to “ignite the dynamite” between India and China.

“The government is trying to play a game between India and China. The late king Prithvi Narayan Shah called Nepal a yam between two boulders. That yam was alive and dynamic. Now the government is trying to fit the dynamite between the two countries,” he said.

If dynamite explodes, it will damage the boulders, but the dynamite will not remain, said the former foreign minister. “On the one hand, the prime minister is sending a message to the Chinese that the government is signing the BRI implementation plan, using the BRI as a tool to save his government. On the other hand, the prime minister is also sending a message [to other powers] that we are blocking the BRI,” said Saud. “This is immature and such a card will diminish our credibility with our neighbours and the international community.”

The way the prime minister stated in the House that the government would sign the BRI implementation plan during the visit of the Chinese vice minister, it looks as if national consensus is not necessary to carry forward such an important decision, the Congress lawmaker said. “We [political parties] need to have a common position on [Nepal’s] foreign policy,” he further said. “Why is the government not discussing it with the main opposition?”

He advised the prime minister to secure the confidence of the House and the government to seek a national consensus on it.

Only this week, Prime Minister Dahal also made it clear that the government’s preference is grants, not loans, while executing projects under the BRI. If it is necessary to take loans, the government would seek a rate similar to those charged by the Asian Development Bank and the World Bank and other multilateral and bilateral lenders to Nepal. In most cases, Nepal borrows from multilateral donors at an annual interest rate of one percent.

“If we are going to take loans to execute projects under the BRI, it will be unacceptable to us,” said Saud. Recently, the prime minister promised the House that Nepal will take loans to execute projects under the BRI at rates offered by its other donors.

There should be national consensus on the BRI’s implementation, said Saud.

Another Nepali Congress lawmaker, Rajendra Bajgain, demanded that the agreements the two countries signed on the BRI framework be made public. Nepal and China signed a Memorandum of Understanding on bilateral cooperation under the framework of the BRI in May 2017.

“To me, the BRI and the MCC are not competitive because the MCC is a grant, but we do not know what BRI is. The MCC became an agenda of Parliament and was approved by the House after a long deliberation. So the BRI should also be a subject of Parliament’s discussion,” said Bajgain. “The sovereign parliament should get to read the text of the BRI agreement. It is necessary to read the BRI text because among its five objectives, policy harmonisation and coordination in BRI are objectionable.”

He was of the view that the two independent countries don’t necessarily have uniform policies.

“The issue of policy coordination and harmonisation is serious,” Bajgain said. There is no mention in the BRI framework agreement of the BRI implementation plan “so where did it come from?” he questioned.

Bajgain asked the government to ensure that Nepal does not fall into another debt trap.

Chitra Bahadur KC of Rastriya Janamorcha said that some leaders and lawmakers were trying to build a narrative that Nepal will fall into a debt trap if the country takes a loan under the BRI, which is not true.

“The same party leaders who opposed the MCC are in power now, but they have lost the moral ground to govern,” he said. By opposing the BRI, some sections of the Nepali polity were trying to strengthen the MCC, KC alleged, appealing to the Nepali people to be aware of this.

“We cannot compare the BRI and the MCC,” he said. “If BRI is a loan, then it will only strengthen the MCC in Nepal.” He accused the United States of trying to set up a base in Nepal against China through the MCC compact.

Shanti BK of the Nepali Congress said that since Nepal’s public debt is already too high, the government should be careful about taking loans.

How will Nepal repay the loan, she asked. “Public debt has already reached a saturation point. If the government borrows more, it will create difficulties in debt management and restructuring.”

She said that the government should take grants under the BRI but should be mindful of the situations Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and Gambia are facing due to borrowing.