Nepal was never a failed state and it will never be. I wonder why we are calling Nepal a failed state. There are so many things that need to be taken into account before you conclude. A failed state is 1) States that have lost control over most of their territory and stopped providing even the most basic services to their people. 2) The term is also used in the sense of a state that has been rendered ineffective (i,e., has military/police control over its territory but is not able to enforce its constitution and laws uniformly) by high crime rates, extreme high-level corruption, impenetrable bureaucracy, and other factors. Cameroon and Papua New Guinea are often mentioned in this category. Control over territory :- Tamil tigers control a sizable part of Sri Lanka. Is Sri Lanka a failed state? (I am using Sri Lanka just for the sake of example) Take a look at Sri Lankan economy ? GNI per capita: US $930 (World Bank, 2003) ? Life expectancy: 70 years (men), 76 years (women) (UN) It means control over some part of territory can't be labeled that country as a failed state. 2) The term is also used in the sense of a state that has been rendered ineffective (i.e., has military/police control over its territory but is not able to enforce its constitution and laws uniformly) by high crime rates, extreme high-level corruption, impenetrable bureaucracy, and other factors. Cameroon and Papua New Guinea are often mentioned in this category. Do you think Nepal has such problems compared to above mentioned countries? Remember every country has its own problem. Even USA has one of the highest crime rate compared to other parts of the world. Now it's up to you to decide if Nepal is failed state!