Submit your Article

What happens to the prominence of national interest when interest of the ‘potentate’ and ‘people’ converse? You may argue that national interest naturally encompasses both sides. But what if the potentate actively sabotages that very interest? What about the standing of a country’s natural interests, while the potentate inevitably violates these truths through a noxious, one-sided monologue? This is a desperate political epilogue—a terminal path where the state and the potentate themselves face total ruin. 

The people’s loyal interest shapes history, and the national interest records it. People’s interests play a crucial role in shaping the state's interest, while the national interest can address people’s interests only when the potentate becomes morally patriotic. People’s interests carry collective national consciousness, largely equipped with patriotic morality, leading to national interest. People’s interest is mostly guided by collective wellbeing and social harmony, which further leads to harmonizing the interests of individuals, people, society, and the nation. People want equitable resource distribution, civil liberties, and institutional accountability. Because civic interest inherently revolves around collective wellbeing, citizens require transparent governance that addresses socioeconomic needs, safeguards individual rights, and facilitates democratic engagement. 

When these fundamental expectations are fulfilled, societal development flourishes through inclusive growth, active public discourse, and the rule of law. Ultimately, anchoring public interest in national wellbeing and social unity successfully harmonizes personal aspirations with broader societal progress. But a state’s deleterious interest—driven harshly by the potentate—can become a delusional, authoritarian, and illiberal epilogue. Fueled by ego, hatred, and injustice, it grows entirely self-serving and heartless. 

Nevertheless, the potentate must inspire unity, social harmony, and nation-building. Political potentates come and go, but the institutions remain forever; protecting national dignity is a non-negotiable duty. The practice of governance and diplomacy ultimately demands profound patience, deliberate caution, structured civility, and an acute sense of emotive intelligence. Essentially, this country needs tact, tolerance, tone, teamwork, tenacity, and truthfulness to secure a sanguine future; otherwise, inner sedition and outer ascendency will cast a dark shadow over the people and nation.

The author is a techno-geopolitical analyst and geo-strategic thinker

Even though modern thinkers cannot entirely disregard the traditional ‘yam’ theory that established Nepal’s geostrategic posture for a long time, the techno-geopolitical paradigm has undeniably changed. The world today is not purely governed by physical borders, while the global balance of power is not in the sole control of state actors. The global order is nearly in a fractured state where the tech giants, big social media companies, AI, cyber systems, emerging technologies and new AI models are playing bigger and more powerful roles to circumnavigate the global equilibrium.

For Nepal, foreign policy involves not only defending its territory and upholding traditional nous of non-alignment, but also traversing the overlapping ‘geo-strategic frontiers’ of the world’s three great powers—China, India, and the US. Despite the extreme polarization and hyperconnectedness of global politics, Kathmandu should exercise diplomacy with caution and make a well-thought-out move for both sovereign survival and strategic thriving.

In the current techno-geopolitical landscape, foreign policy and technology have become mutually connected. The technology is influencing diplomatic maneuverability, while foreign policy is dictating the adoption, development and deployment of technology. For a small power like Nepal, the internal weaknesses and vulnerabilities quickly compound external pressures. As claimed by AI pioneers and analysts, “AI is an immediate and deadliest threat to national security.” The first phase of global war (if it happened) would begin with AI, digital and cyber warfare “that would not only find weaknesses in government systems and other critical infrastructure or disrupt the economy, but also can reinforce war fighting capabilities, enabling the weapons themselves to be more autonomous.” The consequences would go unimaginable and irrecoverable. Thus, the primary national security objective of a nation like Nepal—that is situated in a very sensitive geo-strategic location—should be focused on protecting data, digital infrastructures, communication nodes, cyber security and digital sovereignty.

Navigating the tech polarization of the world's two tech superpowers—China and the US—is an immediate challenge. Both technology and international politics are deeply divided today. As the world advances technologically and economically, it splits further apart ideologically, politically, socially and humanly. The primary driver of this modern polarization is said to be the Sino-American race for tech and AI supremacy, which threatens to divide the global digital landscape into exclusive, competing blocs. And Nepal is on either side of the edges of these blocks—both physically and digitally—which is likely to impact us directly. The crucial challenge for Nepal’s foreign policy is to cautiously operate the “double-edged tech sword.”

Modern technology is a catalyst for domestic growth, but it also poses serious structural threats, such as sophisticated espionage, data breaches supported by the state and political manipulation through digital toolkits. Furthermore, Nepal faces a greater challenge from “the US-China-India triangle,” and Washington’s primary focus in the region is still strongly linked to the ‘China factor’, blame the critics. Nepal faces serious geopolitical repercussions from all directions if it does not appropriately balance its tech and techno-geopolitical infrastructure partnerships with its immediate neighbors, with a long-term strategic goal.

The geography of Nepal makes it a prime target for digital friction between regional and international rivals. As superpower competitions and data-driven rivalries intensify, Nepal faces a real risk of becoming a proxy digital battlefield. Thus, cyber intelligence should be a core defense mechanism. While Nepal has improved its standing on the Global Cybersecurity Index, its institutional approach remains slow and reactive. The country must stop managing digital vulnerabilities through fragmented bureaucratic channels and immediately establish a dedicated, expert-led national cyber intelligence unit such that it could focus on “threat intelligence” as well as “security intelligence” in a proactive manner. Without proper technical shields, a nation faces the threat of data breach, ‘data colonialism’ and foreign digital interference. Safeguarding critical state infrastructure and protecting citizen data is an absolute requirement for protecting national security. 

Technical choices—such as selecting ICT equipment, telecommunications traders, choosing national data storage facilities, establishing data centers or implementing AI governance—must be evaluated through a lens of absolute realism and national interest. Considering the severity of cross-border cybercrimes and other transnational issues, we can approach neighboring countries for tech and cyber collaboration. In the domestic sphere, we can develop sophisticated, state-led cyber intelligence mechanisms to monitor, assess and preempt digital threats before they manifest as diplomatic crises.

Modern sovereignty is no longer contested just on physical borders; it is managed across digital networks. As global powers are likely to weaponize artificial intelligence, cloud infrastructure and data systems, Nepal must maintain strict digital sovereignty. Relying blindly on foreign digital systems and ICT equipment exposes the state to external manipulation and national security threat, making technology a key focus for future diplomacy. Global alignments are no longer built exclusively on conventional military blocs. Instead, they are structured around technological infrastructure and standardizations.

As a world over-reliant on technology can breed division, fear and profound human alienation, the country should focus on devising macroscopic statecraft that directly connects human well-being. Thus, bridging security with greater national well-being is the immediate vital task. The misuse of technology and global information warfare create invisible psychological scars, leading to widespread social distrust and collective trauma. A nation cannot be genuinely secure if its people are digitally connected yet humanly disconnected. True national security goes beyond military strength and firewall protocols. We must encompass ‘soft security strategies’, including ethical governance, psychological resilience and social harmony. To counteract the chaotic noise of global politics, leaders and policymakers must practice responsible, conscious behavior. Integrating a mindful worldview ensures that technological advancements serve human dignity, civic virtues and national development, rather than authoritarian control.

To successfully manage the demands of major-power competition, Nepal must institutionalize a doctrine of “Constructive Neutrality,” “Dynamic Non-Alignment,” and “Expanding Tech and Economic Diplomacy.” Neutrality must not be understood as a passive isolation or looking inward. Future diplomacy requires active, principled engagement. Nepal must use its neutral status to host regional dialogues, champion multilateralism and build credibility as a reliable, independent voice as Switzerland or Singapore do. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs must modernize its diplomatic corps. Deploying specialized tech envoys and economic experts to key global missions will allow Nepal to negotiate international digital standards, secure development aid and attract foreign direct investment without getting entangled in competing military or ideological blocs.

In statecraft, a small nation cannot simply react symmetrically to external pressure. Though sovereignty of all nations is said to be equal, the degree of marshalling the power may not be in the same proportion. Nepal cannot afford a reactionary, silent or isolationist foreign policy driven by internal intricacy or external anxiety. Nepal is not in a position to avoid the engagement of great powers or ignore their genuine interest. It, however, can leverage them through strategic partnership, maneuverability and constant deeds. In foreign policy, staring at or insulting even the pets of the powerful nations would leave significant implications; the avoidance of the special envoys of the world’s superpowers may leave a lasting political mark. Even if we became the world's most powerful nation with the largest military and biggest economy, we would, perhaps, never be in a position to directly challenge or circumvent other superpowers, including the neighboring ones, because of our geographical location, proximity and the ever-changing dynamics of techno-geopolitics.

Espousing Nepal’s foreign policy with a national security framework is crucial. By integrating national security with diplomatic intelligence, maintaining a unified national stance and executing a dynamic policy of ‘Constructive Neutrality’, Nepal can gradually step onto the global stage—safeguarding its sovereignty while serving as a peaceful, prosperous connection between giant neighbors. By anchoring its foreign policy in patriotic morality and ethical governance, Nepal can protect its domestic stability from being undermined by foreign proxy rivalries. For this, we can chart out a pragmatic approach with specific strategic tenets, including techno-economic cooperation, bilateral and multilateral engagement, and tech, AI and cyber diplomacy, besides the regular economic, developmental, and diplomatic happenings. 

Nevertheless, Nepal cannot afford “geopolitical adventurism” driven by temporary ideological trends. The normative, reactive, repressive, aggressive and philosophically directed text can no longer govern Nepal’s foreign policy. It requires rational diplomatic textures, tone, tactics, tolerance, along with diplomatic and emotional maturity, while the shift of global power architectures is evidently visible. Essentially, cultivating a strategic art of surviving, thriving and walking alongside the great powers would be a deliberate pragmatic move in Nepal’s foreign policy, no matter to what degree or direction the pendulum of techno-geopolitics is enforced to swing. 

This article is based on the author’s numerous previous works and is partially assisted by AI

The higher the world has advanced technologically and economically today, the greater it has been divided socially, politically, ideologically and humanly. The enduring chaos caused by a callous thought—that is full of ego, reprisal, hatred, fear and self-doubt—is adding fuel for huge distrust, discord and hostility around the globe, The greater the human being is longing for sophistication, the more they are facing crisis to their own sense of intelligence and inviting bigger threat to peace, social harmony, integrity, thoughtfulness, sanctity and visceral connection.

The fluke rise of merciless authoritarian leaders, misuse of power and technology, and the cold-blooded international war have added long-term scars on humanity, health and well-being in every corner of the biosphere. These issues have been at an all-time high for the last few decades, which has caused a direct impact on every individual, family, society, nation and the ecosphere.

While the general public is more concerned about mental, emotional and collective wellbeing in recent years than in previous years, the infused trauma, fear and worry are making many brilliant brains irrational, unproductive and hopeless. These emotional states are endangering the tremendous life energy of tens of millions of youth around the world, claim studies.

Going beyond any lens of AI to define human thinking, it is high time to emphasize human compassion and cognizance, which could lead to humility and progressivism in our collective action. Since the human being is attributed with innate sense of humor, rationality, generosity, morality, sanctity, emotional maturity and societal edifice, these traits need to be re-attuned to think beyond the normal being. Essentially, the ‘being’ of human beings is eloquent once we could realize the human’s innate nature, learn to govern our instincts and start thinking above “our animal nature”. Yet, the pertaining concern is, will the despotic human truly “think beyond human?”

Human thinking is largely constricted today, with many people thoughtlessly running behind money, market, merit, masculinity and muscle, along with a deep-rooted sense of ‘me’, ‘my’ and ‘mine’.

For most of them, the most important thing, perhaps, is to ‘earn’ popularity, rather than to ‘learn’ the reality—the reality of the self and innate nature. Learning of ‘thoughtfulness’ and ‘cognizance’ have been an elective list in many. Human thinking, thus far, is not instinct-rich regarding the “purpose of a profound life” and the corresponding “purity of intention”. Thankfully, a few are precisely thinking about materializing inner energy, stillness, introspection, intellect, insight, thought and forethought. 

Every insightful notion, discovery, novelty, and great mission is stirred by profound thoughts. These sentient thoughts are the instinctive thoughts, which help foster greatness, ecstasy, silence, opulence and vastness, leading to a profound visceral connection. One thought—a conscious thought—cannot only re-attune your life but also rectify society, nation, the universe, and humankind. Your thoughts and mind substantially resemble who you are. Yet, you are not your thought. Neither are you in your mind. You may be your conscious thought. In essence, you are your consciousness, preaching some philosophies. Nevertheless, your thoughts will determine who you are going to be. How you think, how you act, and how you behave in the present are the major traits that cannot only recalibrate your life, but also define your ‘future you’. 

“What you think you become”, said Buddha in his teachings. Our becoming is largely directed or shaped by our thought, while “right understanding” comes first. Buddha’s Noble Eightfold Path begins from right understanding and right thought as: “From right understanding proceeds right thought; from right thought proceeds right speech; from right speech proceeds right action; from right action proceeds right livelihood; from right livelihood proceeds right effort; from right effort proceeds right awareness; from right awareness proceeds right concentration; from right concentration proceeds right wisdom; from right wisdom proceeds right liberation.” Subsequently, the precise understanding and conscious thought could lead to emancipation. 

We have been mastering our thoughts since we entered modern civilization. Every thinker and philosopher, since ancient times, believes that, “The human mind is an instrument that solves problems”, while many of them assert, “Quality of thought determines the quality of life”, writes D. Foroux in “Think Straight: Change Your Thought, Change Your Life”. When you observe life through a mathematical lens, your thoughts, actions and behaviors are the inputs to the function of your life. Even if the inputs are subjective, the output would be deterministic (as like computation in a machine). Sensibly, when positive thoughts, actions and behaviors are repeated in life, you are likely to get analogous output in every computation of your life processes, writes M. Tegmark in “Life 3.0: Being Human in the Age of Artificial Intelligence”. Conversely, when the negative thoughts are encoded as input to the mind, the outcome would go adverse or contradictory. The mind, however, loves to be in a visceral state of calmness and consciousness, but your diverse thoughts circumnavigate it into the waves of upheaval. 

Every objective phenomenon of your physical life (called the body) is controlled by an unseen subjective entity (called the mind). Your thoughts navigate the mind, while the mind controls the thoughts. The mind is again controlled by another mind—called “consciousness”, while the conscious mind is again believed to be navigated by “super-consciousness”. Whereas emotions are linked with the body and brain as well.  “Since there is intrinsic mind-body connection, your thoughts, feelings, beliefs, attitudes, and emotions can largely affect the overall bodily biological functioning—both positively and negatively” (Jimenez). The health of the physical body significantly influences the health of our mental state and vice-versa. Positive thoughts, feelings, beliefs and attitude in mind call for good health in the body; and the good health of body recalls positive thoughts, feelings, beliefs and attitude in the mind. This process goes on incessantly recursively as you feed on positive thoughts into your mind, while good thinking begets better thinking.

After all, thoughts control most of the mechanisms in your body such as raising or lowering the heart rate; improving or interfering the digestion; changing the chemical composition of blood; making you happy or sad, alert and aware, or distracted and depressed; making you positive and negative, well or ill, hero or coward, victim or victor, successful or failure, respected or ignored among others, writes B. Tracy in “Change Your Thinking, Change Your Life: How to Unlock Your Full Potential for Success and Achievements”. The actions governed by your thoughts determine your life. Prominently, the thoughts are entirely under your control.

Aristoteles, Aristocles and Siddhartha Gautam were not transformed into Aristotle, Plato and Buddha by fluke. They did not easily gain their introspection just by waking up the next morning; while their consciousness, self-examination, and their ability to think their ‘own thoughts’ were the result of owing their inner voices, writes M. Sigman in “The Secret of Life of the Mind: How our Brain Thinks, Feels and Decides”. People, perhaps, had less or no idea regarding thought, perception, reasoning and consciousness before Aristotle, Plato and Buddha. Their ideas, knowledge and thoughts have been transmitted across an infinite span of space and time, and across our minds, argues Sigman. Later on, Einstein revolutionized our thought and understanding of the universe, space and time; Karl Marx added dynamism in understanding the society and economy; while Mahatma Gandhi introduced a sense in understanding peace and humanity. Subsequently, we all have Aristotle, Plato, Buddha, Einstein, Marx and Gandhi within us today, and we can claim “there I am”. There are several others whose thoughts have significantly contributed in transforming the people, society, nation and the world in our generations too. This is certainly because of their astonishing contribution to human civilization. 

The structural aspects of human thoughts have been gradually transformed due to their input, which has subsequently shaped human civilization today. With time, people have started recognizing their own strengths, inner voice, intellect, potentials and innermost intelligence. 

Yet people had no idea regarding the “working mechanisms of human thinking” nearly a century ago until the two psychologists—Sigmund Freud and Jean Piaget—developed a theory of human development (psychoanalytic theory and cognitive-developmental theory), writes M. Minsky in “The Society of Mind”. Then mathematicians—Kurt Godel and Alan Turing—propounded mechanical theory on computability of machines in the 1930s where they began to study an “abstract machine” that had all the capabilities of today’s computer. By combining these two theories, Warren McCulloch and Walter Pitts started theorizing on machine thinking and learning in the 1940s. 

The Boolean algebra enabled the modern researchers in bringing cognitive and information revolution to the present stage. The grammars or rules associated with logics and ideas are largely rooted in the Boolean algebra. The grammars in today’s highly algorithmic language, which are suitable for computational applications, are considered from the language of Sanskrit grammar formalized by Panini. This grammar is widely applicable for AI due to its ‘highly structured’, ‘logical’ and ‘unambiguous nature’, essentially to operate as a “programming language” for human thought. 

George Boole envisioned to analyze all the cognitions of today’s computer even before the invention of today’s computing devices, while the insights from Boole, Turing and Neumann to the modern understanding of information, thinking and intelligence itself is an amazing combination of Mathematics, Physics, Information Theory and Psychology, writes R J King in the article “Thinking about Thinking”. John von Neumann gifted the concept of mathematics along with Quantum Theory, Automata Theory (Mathematical model of computation in today’s computer), Economics, Defense Planning and Game Theory, which conceptually help invent digital computer (Neumann, Turing and Claude Shannon together materialized the idea of digital computer). 

Meanwhile Alan Turing proposed a mathematical machine called the ‘Turing Machine’ to model brain function, which turned out significantly useful in studying the ‘computability’ and ‘complexity’ of machines (Rosen, 2001). Turing Machines then could address the two important issues of today’s computer—“what can a computer do at all” and “what can a computer do efficiently”—known as ‘computability’ and ‘complexity’ of a computer respectively (Hopcropt, Motwani, Ullman, 2003). The research on machine intelligence started only in the 1950s, while John McCarthy coined the term ‘Artificial Intelligence’ at a Dartmouth Computer Conference in 1956 (Russell & Norvig, 2010). Since then the unprecedented pace of technological change has brought dramatic transformation in human thought, life and civilization.

Though humans have developed highly intelligent machines, their own sense of intelligence is, perhaps, in a critical juncture, today: will humans be able to shape the future of their mind (rationality and critical thinking) and ensure collective wellbeing? 

The second part of this article will appear next week

The Nepali nationals are gradually breathing composed following a harsh national grief in this past week. Perhaps, no rational being would deny that the ill-intention of killing, burning, and looting in the name of change can never be a sensible vision. Even though change is not possible without revolution, yet every upheaval has minimum ethical limitations. The killings and destructions that took place in this revolt are not less than in a cruel war, going beyond the law of warfare. No patriotic national can make the nation suffer to that extent as the country has grieved. 

Amid a very chaotic situation in the country, the sensible role played by the Nepali Army is highly commendable. The national army has not only been a part of domestic peace and stability, but also that of the UN peace keeping mission since long. This institution has played a very patriotic role in restoring order in most difficult times in various courses of history. 

The utilitarian role played by the young dissenters in the post-revolt state is equally intelligible as they have strongly underscored the egalitarian values, stimulus of global geopolitics and sensibility of national security and sovereignty. The nature of the this revolution, however, is completely different than in the past, whereas the young protesters have openly claimed that their mission is just to “clean up” the prevailing “corruption”, “favoritism” and “impunity”, rather not to “finish off” the national institutions, democratic values and essence of pluralism. 

The “shadowy forces” must have been ill-intended to “fish in the muddy water” under their said mission—“system change”, claim some protestors who call themselves as the “real” protestor. The general public, to some extent, can accept as true their saying as they have not yet shown any greed for power or position following the revolt. Instead, some are already engaged in a “cleanup mission”. They are expected to be involved in the “rebuilding mission”, next.  While the nation needs massive reforms—from politics to bureaucracy to governance to education, all the young minds, irrespective of political inclination, should voluntarily be involved in “mission nation building” with an immense sense of patriotic morality. 

The hidden coward-interest of some criminal minds, indeed, will gradually be revealed in due course of time, yet many have already noticed them. The history will bring these cowardly individuals to justice and castigate each perfidious based on the degree of respective culpability. Amid national chaos, some so-called representatives emotionally fueled the young protestors with an ill-prospect of rewriting the constitution or transforming the liberal democratic system, which is a very immature and childish vision in contemporary politics. Writing a new constitution is not something like writing a poignant social media post just to amass gigantic likes or comments under the shrewd political stunt. Attaining political stability may not be so easy or smooth if the nation is forced to enter into the state of disorder and lawlessness. 

Every nation should be aware that some foreign political predators could play a vulturine role to influence the nation greater than it has witnessed previously. Thus, with patience, perseverance and prudence, the general voters should elect leaders or representatives having prudent vision and sensible prospects along with immense sense of patriotic morality, spirited civility, emotional maturity, and perceptual stability in the general election ahead. Meanwhile, nobody should undermine the rational role played by the political parties in the history of the Nepali democratic movement. No democracy can sustain without functioning political parties. 

The existing political parties, however, must accept that they have accomplished a “lesson” and also won in the sense that they are getting another chance to rebuild their image, take part in electoral process, win the heart of the general public and come back to serve the nation with a prudent intention. They have to safeguard the nation, national institutions, democratic values, rule of law, sovereignty and territorial integrity as always. 

The political parties, particularly those ardently believe in liberal democracy and pluralism, need to rethink on transforming themselves and, of course, the nation. If the election could not happen on the scheduled date at a time when there is no functioning parliament, the interim government could be liable to enforce national emergency by prolonging its power and presence. This could further induce greater chaos and uncertainty in the country, leading the egalitarian values in a greater peril. Thus, all the stakeholders of the nation—the political parties, bureaucrats, media and the general voters—need to be pragmatic, both by thinking and acting at this moment. 

The national parties and their leaders have additional opportunity to prove themselves as an icon of society, while their every role has to depict a real-sense of integration, social harmony, development prospects, accountability, stability, innovation, and nation building while delivering moral politics. The government or leaders come and go, but the nation and institutions remain forever. So, every responsible politician has a duty to enhance a nation’s sovereign dignity, irrespective of one’s politics or emotions. They must realize the core personality of the nation, nationals and corresponding soft potentials, and together attempt in preserving nation and national interest. 

Considering the country’s sensitive geo-location and super-sensitive global geopolitics, every nation should act with immense sense of patriotic morality and pragmatic prophecy. Every patriotic national has specific responsibility to safeguard the nation, national integrity, law and order, egalitarian values, socio-emotional cohesiveness, socio-national spirit, and the age-old legacy of the nation.

The political leaders should now be groomed with an utmost sense of political morality and culture. The past trend of mistrust, dishonesty and “finishing off” the opponents should now be transformed into collaboration and collectivism. To deliver ‘moral politics’ and move ahead towards socialism, they need to be equipped with a finely tuned sense of emotional and political intelligence. Democracy should not be understood or practiced only as “democracy of politics”, instead, it should be exercised as “politics of morality”. 

Politics, diplomacy and state of affairs need enormous patience, perseverance, peace, prudence, civility and ‘state of mind’ as essential governing attributes. While politics is not only about delivering aggression, incivility and viciousness; it is also about consolidating national accord, promoting national values, articulating a sense of belongingness, and inducing socio-emotional cohesiveness among the nationals. Thus, politics has to be a form of civilization where its stakeholders should work responsible for the greater goodness of people, society, nation, the planet and humankind. Essentially, the politics require immense sense of morality, pragmatism, patriotism, nationalism along with a ‘finely tuned’ sense of emotive intelligence that could play a prudent role in constructing dignified national identity, which would help uphold stately international relations. 

Yet the crucial concern is: How can the country make a marvelous headway—both politically and economically—amid the existing ferociousness? How can the country function efficiently and meticulously? Answering these two questions is key to identifying the systems—both political and bureaucratic—that the country should adopt to accomplish a prospective triumph.

The country has to massively invest in technology, innovation, infrastructure, research and development and wisely capitalize on 'soft powers’ and internal values including culture, civilization, morale, education, history, demography and geography. In effect, a very strict entry standards need to be set into both political and bureaucratic systems along with a sharp focus on building a robust system that could be rooted in a strong academic background, resilient public services, disciplined and systematic working habits, public civility, spiritual vitality, and an immense sense of patriotic morality.

Accordingly, the country needs to aspire to catch up the international development indicators—such as economic competitiveness, political stability, diplomatic influence, social integrity, quality of life, academic recognition, scientific and technological innovation, tech and data sovereignty, public services, and foreign policy. These international metrics can be achieved only when the vision and philosophy are turned into reality with pragmatic policy and action. Essentially, it is high time to be passionate enough to adjust and grasp the pace of transformation—both within and outside—and aspire to thrive by cooperating with the international community, particularly with development partners, including those in close proximity. 

Have you ever wondered what it would be like to have another mind operating our current one, or to playfully place our mind somewhere “outside” the body for a while? This line of thought carries a profound implication: how can we detach the mind from the body? In some traditions, this “outside” is described as “Universal Consciousness.” But keeping the mind at ease doesn’t necessarily require abandoning the body.

Now, you might ask: if the mind has been removed from the body, how can it be brought back? And then wonder wouldn’t it be easier if there were yet another mind to govern this second mind? If such questions frequently arise in you, it may indicate a deeper quest: the search for awareness or higher consciousness.

It’s widely accepted that we do, in fact, possess a second mind to oversee the first—what we call “consciousness.” Beyond this, there is yet another level of mind, often termed “super consciousness.” If our mental consciousness is but a small component of the vast “Universal Consciousness,” then your original idea—of placing the mind into the “Cosmic Mind” and drawing from it as needed—may reflect a deep metaphysical truth.

I’ve had similar thoughts since childhood. And now, after years of teaching, research, reading, and writing, I find myself fully immersed in mindfulness and Vipassana meditation. With that practice has come a sense of urgency to express these reflections. Whatever we have accomplished in terms of development, innovation, and civilization stems from our mind, especially its rational faculties. Yet the mind has also been misunderstood by many and has become a burden for nearly one-third of the global population. One in three people suffer from unhealthy stress, and one in six children live with the trauma of war.

Even today, many including spiritual gurus harbor misperceptions about the nature of the mind. Some assert that the mind’s nature is to “ruminate on the past” or “project into the future.” But the true nature of the mind, perhaps, is to dwell in the present. The mind longs to be present and to act in the present. It is our thoughts, especially those that are conditioned or manipulated, that propel the mind into anxiety or fantasy.

Widespread confusion also exists around the mind-brain relationship. Many people equate the brain with the mind. Even neuroscience is still ambiguous on this matter. Western paradigms often misconstrue the nature of the mind. While the brain may be studied in a lab, the mind must be observed within oneself. You cannot understand the mind through brain scans or mouse experiments alone; you must observe your own mind with deep awareness.

More than 2,500 years ago, the Buddha explored the nature of mind, describing it as a process composed of consciousness (viññāṇa), perception (saññā), sensation (vedanā), and reaction (saṅkhāra). Later Buddhist teachings expanded on this, describing “chitta” (mind) as encompassing sense perception, thought (verbal and abstract), emotions, joy and sorrow, attention, concentration, and intelligence.

Some spiritual traditions argue that the subjective mind and objective brain are interdependent, linked by the “nature” and “culture” of information processing and neural activity.

But where does the mind come from? What are its components? How does it function? While you may examine your own mind, can you truly observe someone else’s? Neuroscientist Antonio Damasio poses two vital questions: “How does the brain construct a mind?” and “How does it make that mind conscious?”

Current understandings may still fall short of explaining the complexity of the mind-brain connection. That’s why I encourage you to observe your own mind with careful awareness before accepting external theories.

A thorough understanding of how your mind works—what it prefers, what it resists—can resolve nearly half your life’s problems. All human minds attempt to discern right from wrong. Some are more aware, others less so. Unaware minds struggle to confront their mistaken beliefs, which leads them to generate even more distorted thoughts. This creates a web of negativity—a feedback loop that becomes hard to escape.

In such cases, the mind lashes out, blames others, and becomes abusive. The brain, under such conditions, starts to release harmful chemicals, weakening both mind and body. Yet, escape from this toxic cycle is possible with passion, patience, perseverance, and a deepening awareness.

Buddhist teachings say: one who realizes that negative thoughts harm the heart will only understand that positive thoughts bring joy once the curtain of consciousness is lifted. How often do you feel angry with yourself or others? Anger, after all, is a symptom of a weakened and mistaken mental state.

Those with weaker mental states often harbor malicious thoughts, criticize harshly, and express themselves through anger, aggression, and suppression. Buddha said that those who harbor anger toward themselves and others are incapable of loving themselves. They suffer deeply—mentally, emotionally, psychologically, and eventually physically.

Many of you reading this may have experienced rude or uncivil behavior from teachers, bosses, elders, or partners, whether in academic, professional, or personal life. These interactions may still be sapping your energy, attention, and enthusiasm. I, too, have faced such moments in my life. And at times, I may have also behaved unconsciously. For this, I offer my humble acknowledgment.

Christine Porath, in Mastering Civility: A Manifesto for the Workplace, highlights how incivility at work and in schools is eroding our emotional well-being and weakening human connection—threatening both present vitality and future prosperity. Unfortunately, South Asia’s spiritual marketplace isn’t immune to illusion either. Some self-proclaimed gurus, adorned in dyed hair and beards, glistening with makeup, preach mantras like “Accept the Self” or “Know Yourself,” even though they may not understand their own minds. Still, crowds gather, wash their feet, and revere them as deities.

But “accepting the self” means embracing who you truly are—not who you appear to be after layers of cosmetic manipulation. If you manipulate your appearance, your thoughts and mind are manipulated as well. A manipulated mind can hardly understand or meet the authentic self, let alone attain true awareness. Have you ever felt your mind or body being manipulated, or sensed a thought not your own entering your awareness? In subtle ways, we often receive thoughts as sensory messages. During challenging times, whether in professional, academic, or personal life, the way you manage your thoughts, emotions, and intelligence will shape your growth.

Ultimately, the only person who can truly uplift you selflessly is you. Others may exploit, control, mock, or drain you. But as they grow weaker, your resilience strengthens. Their mental fragility is the root of their negativity.

Emotions and consciousness, or unconsciousness, have deeply shaped world politics too. From the Westphalian order to World Wars, from the Cold War to 9/11 and beyond, mistaken or unregulated minds have played a role. The rise and fall of empires, the unpredictability of leaders like Donald Trump, and today’s global chaos may be less about rational statecraft and more about emotional dysfunction.

Wars in Ukraine, Gaza, and other regions reflect not just geopolitical rivalry but possibly the actions of minds clouded by hatred and fear, not balanced reasoning. While nations are not inherently enemies, statesmen, influenced by negative emotions, become antagonists. Realists often act out of fear and hate, while constructivists might lean on empathy and rationality.

India and Pakistan, for instance, have sometimes managed to de-escalate tensions with measured restraint. Meanwhile, powers like Israel and the US seem to navigate deterrence through over-rationalized emotions, which is perhaps the product of cognitive bias. Today’s belligerent global climate, from Iran to Taiwan, may be more a product of mistaken minds than deliberate balance between soft and hard power.

The world is unwell, with eight billion people suffering from some form of threat—be it security, economic, geopolitical, technological, climatic or resurgence of pestilence. The world that embraced Donald Trump in the midst of the Russia-Ukraine war and Israel-Palestine conflict has no appetite for an Israel-Iran war that has modern civilization on the brink.

Israel’s assertion—that “the US is behind the coordinated attacks on Iran”—could escalate tensions in the Mideast. China, Russia and several Arab nations condemning the attacks on Iran may be an indication of a widening distrust between the US and the Mideast. This may drag the US and China into a regional conflict, turning it into a global war. 

“Nothing is solid, permanent and immutable”, the Buddha said. Picking a leaf from his teachings, world leaders should walk toward knowledge, intelligence, sensibility and rationality from ignorance. They must be more compassionate for global peace and stability.

The world is witnessing an unprecedented shift in the global balance of power, shaped by fluctuating levels of trust—ranging from distrust to over-trust—among allies, partners, and rivals. While long-standing adversaries inch closer to trust, former allies are drifting apart.

For nearly eight decades, the United States has dominated the global order, emerging as the unipolar leader after World War II. Historically, international politics has been reshaped after great wars, but US President Donald Trump disrupted this pattern, attempting to redefine global dynamics without such a transition. His disregard for alliances, multilateralism, and diplomatic norms—along with his defiance of the traditional "balance of power" principle—has stunned scholars, analysts, and foreign policy experts worldwide.

A stark display of this shifting order unfolded in the Oval Office last week when the presidents of the US and Ukraine engaged in a tense, televised exchange. The meeting resembled a coercive business negotiation rather than a diplomatic discussion. The Ukrainian president appeared pressured into signing a critical mineral deal, reducing the encounter to a stage-managed spectacle. The scene was less about strategic partnership and more about power dynamics, with Ukraine seemingly treated as a pawn in a larger geopolitical game.

Has Trump's approach advanced American interests, or has it weakened the country’s global standing? Following the heated Oval Office confrontation, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was hailed as a “dignified hero” by EU leaders and US Democrats. Unlike past leaders who complied with Washington’s directives, Zelensky defied the American president, refusing to yield to pressure. However, this did not translate into a victory for Ukraine. Instead, the United States suffered a diplomatic setback, fracturing its alliances and reinforcing global skepticism about its leadership.

The diplomatic rift between the US and the EU on the Ukraine issue signals potential realignments. Analysts warn that institutions like NATO and the Transatlantic Alliance could face an existential crisis as America's credibility erodes. Critics argue that no US president has misunderstood trade, tariffs, multilateralism, or diplomacy as profoundly as Trump. Even his former National Security Advisor, John Bolton, has condemned his foreign policy as reckless, warning that it may jeopardize American security rather than strengthen it.

Meanwhile, key global players—including India, Saudi Arabia, Australia, Japan, and South Korea—are quietly observing America’s struggles, ready to exploit its diplomatic missteps. Trump’s policies, which have alienated allies while appeasing adversaries, raise serious concerns about the future of US leadership. Can a nation maintain global dominance when it mistreats its allies and emboldens its rivals?

Trump’s erratic foreign policy has further complicated global tensions. Instead of working toward a resolution in Gaza, he mocked an AI-generated video, “Trump Gaza,” on his Truth Social platform—an act widely criticized as insensitive. While the US frames its national interest as “merciful” in Jerusalem, its stance in Gaza and Kyiv appears markedly inhumane, raising ethical concerns.

The shifting power dynamics extend beyond Ukraine. If Trump applies similar coercion to Taiwan, the US could effectively hand over the island to China, fulfilling Beijing’s long-standing ambition. A comparable approach toward Japan, South Korea, or the Philippines could dismantle critical alliances like QUAD and AUKUS, leaving America increasingly isolated. The notion that Trump might either dismantle NATO or invite Russia to join it—an idea reportedly echoed by his close advisor Elon Musk—reflects the volatility of his global strategy.

Under Trump's leadership, US foreign policy has become a source of global instability. The question remains: Is this a calculated shift or a dangerous slip in America’s 250-year legacy? Many analysts believe that the post-Cold War world order, which once revolved around the US, is now giving way to a multipolar system where Washington is no longer the sole authority.

While Trump claims to be fostering global peace, his actions suggest otherwise. The possibility of a major global conflict looms large. China has already warned that it is prepared to confront the US—whether in trade, tariffs, or war—until the end. If tensions escalate, and relations with the EU, Canada, and the Middle East remain strained, Washington may find itself without key allies in a potential US-China conflict.

A nuclear confrontation, though unthinkable, could prove catastrophic for humanity. Sensible voices across the world, including this author, oppose all forms of war. However, if Trump continues to push the boundaries of international diplomacy, the US may face unprecedented domestic turmoil. A political crisis could even lead to constitutional amendments limiting presidential authority. Some foresee a scenario where Trump faces mass protests, possible impeachment, or even resistance from the US defense and intelligence community.

As global alliances shift, other nations are stepping up. The EU may seek stronger ties with China, while Saudi Arabia leverages its position in Middle Eastern politics. Russia continues to assert itself, while India navigates its role with strategic shrewdness. The US, once the dominant force in global geopolitics, is now at risk of losing influence across multiple regions.

For Ukraine, the only viable path forward may be direct negotiations with Russia. While Zelensky has called for NATO intervention, the West must prioritize peace over prolonged military engagement. Without diplomatic talks, Ukraine's chances of securing a lasting resolution remain slim. If Israel can negotiate with Hamas, Ukraine too can engage in dialogue with Russia.

In this era of global upheaval, Nepal must tread carefully. Given its strategic location between two rising powers—China and India—Nepal must resist external pressure that could drag it into conflicts resembling Ukraine’s plight. Instead, it should focus on internal stability and self-reliance, strengthening its institutions, economy, and diplomatic standing.

To thrive in an increasingly complex world, Nepal must enhance its global competitiveness in areas such as political stability, technological innovation, data sovereignty, and social integrity. Rather than seeking leniency from global powers, Nepal should cultivate its own strengths and maintain a balanced foreign policy rooted in nonalignment and the principle of “amity with all, enmity with none.”

As the global order shifts, peace remains the ultimate objective. True leadership lies in diplomacy, dialogue, and cooperation—not in coercion and conflict. The world must work collectively to prevent further geopolitical fragmentation and prioritize stability over discord.

The author is a geostrategic thinker and techno-geopolitical analyst