Submit your Article

With the novelty in tech and AI, the threat perceptions have also changed. Every tech power considers “tech sovereignty” as one of the key elements of national power capability, while China’s mantra of tech sovereignty lies within its goal of ‘Algorithmic Governance’, ‘Tech Supremacy’ and ‘Global Leadership in AI’ that it has targeted to attain by 2025 and 2030 respectively. China is said to be in the process to initiate the concept of “sovereign” internet, where “China possibly controls key technology supporting critical infrastructure in countries around the world” (VoA News). China’s prospect of ‘Digital Silk Road’—that includes expansion of digital capabilities through big data, IoT, and underwater technology—can also be a part in attaining tech sovereignty.  To achieve those goals, China has massively invested in AI, information and data security, economic and military edge, and producing engineers and AI experts. China produces more than 600,000 engineers annually (70 percent more than India) and has four times more AI experts and engineers than the US (RAND). Tech sector in China reportedly contributes to nearly 39 percent of GDP, while 80 percent of its GDP growth is determined by the application of technology.  Reportedly, China consumes about 40 percent of the total chips produced globally and controls more than 50 percent of global lithium ion production capacity, while it dominates nearly 93 percent of EU’s magnesium consumption. China controls more than 55 percent of global rare-earth mining. The rare-earth elements are used in various crucial technologies including manufacturing components in touch screens of smartphones, missile-defense systems, electric cars (and batteries), and renewable energy equipment (The Wall Street Journal). For China, ‘outer space and cyberspace have become new commanding heights of strategic competition’ between states, reads China’s Military Strategy 2015. The US, on the other hand, is an extant tech super power that is dominating the global order. Great power vs superpower China has become stronger economically, militarily and diplomatically on the world stage in recent years. China, politically a Marxist country, has been significantly benefiting from economic liberalism for the last 45 years. Chinese GDP is approximately $18.32trn, which is nearly 18.5 percent of the Global GDP (SIPRI Fact Sheet-2021). The second largest economy in the world, China also has a larger GDP than that of the third, fourth, fifth and sixth largest economy combined. It has been a great power for about 60 years, which boasts nearly 2.5m soldiers, which is one of the strongest military forces in the world (Military Direct). China has military expenditures of around $293.35bn, which is nearly 14 percent of the world’s total military spending ($2113bn) per year (Statista-2021). The Chinese defense budget, second only to the US, is again larger than that of the third, fourth, fifth and sixth largest economy combined. Besides its military might, China has also been engaged in soft power diplomacy, international cooperation, economic integration, development and economy under various initiatives including the BRI. China, however, is running into structural constraints such as “demographic crisis” in the long run, which is why it will be the decelerated-economy over the next two years, according to the projection of the IMF. China’s past “one child policy” has become a huge challenge to its foreign policy of the present. India, on the other hand, is leveraging the demographic constraints and expected to be the world’s fastest-growing economy over the next two years. The US, a long time “realist” country, has been a great power for more than 100 years and extant superpower for about 75 years. It has nearly 2m soldiers and a military expenditure of $801bn in a year. The US defense budget, which is nearly 38 percent of the world’s total military spending ($2113bn) (Statista-2021), is larger than that of the second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh largest economy combined. Its GDP of more than $25.46trn is nearly 21 percent of the Global GDP (the US had dominated more than 35 percent of the global economy in terms of production at the end of WW-II). (IDDS-Institute for Defense and Disarmament Studies; World Arms Database; SIPRI Fact Sheet-2021). The American military possesses the world’s most advanced technology whereas its satellites used in military surveillance and mapping, and communications are said to be high enough to trace out even the tiny objects on the road. And, the tech sector in the US is contributing to nearly 12 percent of the US GDP. Despondently, the US, under the political cover of liberal idealism, is struggling to garner alliance support to counter China that is largely grounded on its long standing realist beliefs of power balance and dominance, argue analysts. History will, however, justify whether the US could have become a responsible global leader. From the above assessment, it can be estimated that the parallel growth competition between the US and China in all domains—economic, defense, technology and soft potentials—may have similar patterns for the years to come that would help emerge them as a bipolar force of Global politics, economy and technology. Yet, the one with sensible vision, cohesive mission, generous action, and trustful coalition would dominate the global order. However, we cannot predict the future of global politics and make assertions about China’s grand presence on the world stage or America’s gloomy decline, as world politics is quite complicated. But we can map the possibilities or trace the consequences based on inferences, data and facts. For now, we can say that China is indeed influencing global politics by being deterministically sensitive, conscious and responsible. Yet, “honesty” and “pragmatism” matter. The US, under the Trump administration, has dispensed with several multilateral associations and threatened to get out of several others, including pulling out of the Iran Nuclear Deal, Paris Climate Agreement and the nuclear missile accord with Russia, which resulted in heavy loss of the US credibility, reputation, reliability and trust from its allies. A few weeks ago, classified intelligence documents revealed that the US is reportedly engaged in spying not just its foes like Russia, North Korea and China, but also its important allies and friendly countries including South Korea, Israel, Ukraine, and the UAE. Numerous western media, including The New York Times, The Guardian and The Washington Post, stated that the disclosure of highly classified documents represents “a massive intelligence breach”, which complicated US relations with the concerned allied countries and raised mistrust on US reliability to maintain secretes, which could even jeopardize diplomatic ties with its allies. This could also make a significant impact on the Ukraine war, while it could be a “hole-in-the-wall” for its adversaries to change their strategies. Yet, the allegations are not verified officially by the concerned partners. The US has a very disappointing precedent of snooping on its allies, including Germany, in the past. It was revealed that the US has been involved in prying on the then German Chancellors Angela Merkel and Francois Hollande in 2013 and 2015, respectively (TIME). The US is gradually losing trust from its associates and could be isolated in the global political sphere in the long run, while China is sensibly expanding its presence, trust and integrity on the world stage. Had the US and its allies desperately wanted peace in Ukraine, perhaps, they would have accepted the peace deal proposed by China, and Washington would have begun peace talks along with Beijing. Arguably, the US neither wants “full scale war” nor “absolute peace” in Ukraine because it wants to leverage between the prospects of  “not war” (“no end of war”) and “not peace”. This is why the US has not been directly involved in the Russia-Ukraine war. Essentially, China is the first target for the US and Ukraine the second, while its another vital purpose is to weaken Russia by using Ukraine, argue analysts. As like the conflict and instability in Ukraine is more a security threat to the EU than Ukraine itself (from the European perspective), so is the security concern in Nepal (from Chinese and Indian perspectives). How India maintains its relations with its immediate neighbors, including China and Nepal, will determine whether India is also willing for parallel global leadership along with the Asian giant, China. At this instance, “Nepal is in a geostrategic chessboard” (author’s previous column), while if any of the three powers—the US, China and India—make a coercive move against Nepal, one or two of them—individually or together—would make a counter-move against the third one. In the foreseeable future, Nepal could be a most preferred player for the superpowers in the global geopolitical chess match. Yet, the crucial concern for Nepalis is whether Nepal is cautiously prepared to make a sensible move in the global geopolitical chessboard? Nepal should make a rational move such that it could “hedge” them strategically and heighten its credence in the international sphere by advancing its national interest. The US-China relations have been at a “historic low” since Nancy Pelosi, the then House Speaker, visited Taiwan on 2 Aug 2022, and Taiwan President Tsai Ing-Wen met House Speaker Kevin McCarthy on 5 April 2023 in the US. On the other hand, China-Russia relations have been at their “highest point” following President Xi Jinping’s visit to the Kremlin. Since the US is currently dragged down into a tumult of domestic issues, and the chances of getting cooperation from its allies and friends are getting low, it may not directly involve Taiwan next. The US has still not maintained formal diplomatic relations with Taiwan since it broke the relations in 1979, while the US itself does not consider Taiwan as a sovereign country. The EU, after French President Emmanuel Macron’s recent remarks, perceives that “Sovereignty Variance” of Taiwan is dissimilar as that of Ukraine, while China considers Taiwan its inalienable territory. The Chinese Foreign Minister Qin Gang urged his German counterpart Annalena Baerbock, who recently visited Beijing, to support the reunification process of Taiwan with China. “China once supported Germany's unification cause and hopes Germany will also support China's great cause of peaceful reunification,” said top Chinese diplomat Wang Yi. In response to Wang’s remark, Baerbock said, “Germany understands the importance and sensitivity of the Taiwan question to China and reaffirmed that Germany would continue adhering to the one-China principle,” stated CGTN. Arguably, China is in a grand mission to garner international support for peaceful reunification of Taiwan with its mainland, besides its other undertakings. China could be successful in integrating Taiwan with the mainland, while Hong Kong would be far easier than Taiwan, argue some analysts. Following the integration of Taiwan and Hong Kong, China could be a new superpower on the world stage. Yet, being just a superpower is a hegemonic perception, while China is expected to be an accountable global leader with “amity and cooperation”. Amity and cooperation Despite intensified geopolitical friction between the two superpowers—the US and China—they also have deep economic ties; the US-China trade volume was said to be more than $690bn in 2022. They should be conscious regarding their rising and/or declining global credence and should not give any undue space to the others in waiting. They can preserve their greatness only through decent leadership. For this, they have to overcome their belligerent attitude toward each other, and need to be equipped with conviction, knowledge, intelligence, agility and ability to pursue each other instead of exuding coercive measures. The geopolitical reality of the present world politics is that both the US and China cannot downright contain, confront, or ignore each other, like it happened during the Cold War between the US and Soviet Union. The US-China negotiation should not (and must not) turn into a binary (0 or 1) “either war or capitulation axis”. Washington and Beijing must realize that both of their policies should not be practiced as if it’s an ON/OFF switch. Instead, they must bring the possibility of identifying several fractional possibilities lying between 0 and 1. The world’s two most responsible nations in modern history have to plan for those options with decent, equable, and nimble rationality.   Most importantly, they should start communication, cooperation and coordination with trust and reverence with a shared vision and pragmatism for a constructive and peaceful world. The great nations like the US and China should explore their greater spirit and bigger generosity for the greater good of society, humankind, and the Universe.

The front cover has a picture of a raccoon, a taxidermized raccoon to be exact, with outstretched arms and a huge grin. The blurb has raving reviews from Neil Gaiman and Brene Brown. It’s a book that instantly grabs your attention. And I’m glad it did as I was having quite the reader’s slump when I came across it. This book got me out of it and how. It was funny, insightful, and educational. In ‘Furiously Happy’ Jenny Lawson explores her lifelong battle with mental illness. The title is based on her #furiouslyhappy movement which trended on Twitter. The theme of the movement was that people take their lives back from the ‘monster of depression’. She wanted to be furiously happy to make good moments amazing. It’s not a sequel to her first book, ‘Let’s Pretend This Didn’t Happen’ but rather a collection of bizarre essays and random thoughts. Lawson talks about her depression and anxiety and makes you laugh. You feel guilty for laughing but Lawson is witty and you just can’t help it. But that doesn’t mean she isn’t empathetic. She gives mental health its due. She makes you mull over just how important talking about depression and anxiety is so that people don’t shy away from getting the help they need. At times you forget you are reading a book on an important issue. It feels like you are witnessing an argument between the author and her husband, Victor, or watching her make a fool of herself in the cutest way possible. But Lawson’s stories are inspiring. She is also very real and honest about some personal things. And, whenever she can, she lives her life, furiously happy. Reading the book makes you realize that you too should go out there and be furiously happy. The least you can do is try to fill your memory bank with good stuff so that you can deal with the hard times. I’ve watched my family and friends struggle with mental illness. While I’d like to believe that I’ve always extended the support they needed, reading Furiously Happy has given me a much deeper understanding of just what they might be dealing with. Her book is an important read to normalize and destigmatize mental illness. It gives readers an insider’s perspective. There were a few chapters that I didn’t enjoy because Lawson has no filter and her language can come off as offensive. But that doesn’t mean someone else won’t be able to see themselves or their loved ones in those moments. I wish I had read this book sooner. Now, I wish for everyone to read it. Four stars Non-fiction Furiously Happy Jenny Lawson Published: 2015 Publisher: Picador Pages: 329, Paperback

Prashant Aryal is a prominent journalist and editor who has worked with various media houses in Nepal. Currently, the 54-year-old is not affiliated with any news organization. Instead, he’s exercising his journalistic instincts as a freelancer. Try as he might, Aryal confesses he cannot stay away from journalism, a career he fell in love with in 1988 as an intern reporter for Suruchi Saptahik, a weekly tabloid where he served for two years as employee. As a young man with no idea where his career was headed, Aryal says, this opportunity became a driving force for him to become a journalist. In his active news reporting days, he worked on political and anti-corruption stories. “I have always been a person who likes to take up new challenges,” he says. After his internship with Saptahik, Aryal joined Mahanagar, an evening daily that came out at 3:00 pm at the time. Reporting during those days, Aryal says, was a struggle. He remembers reporting anecdotes of the 1994 World Cup that took place in the US while working at the daily paper. “I used to stay up all night watching the matches, and then I’d have to write and send the articles to the newspaper in the morning,” he says. Even though it was a tedious job, he says, he enjoyed every bit of it. In 1996, he became a reporter for Kantipur Daily. “My interests have always leaned toward politics,” he says. He worked on political stories before becoming the sub-editor for the daily. He worked at Kantipur for four years before joining Space Time Dainik, a Nepali daily broadsheet at the time. After a brief stint there, he went on to join Himal Khabar, where he worked for a year. After years of working as a journalist, Aryal took a break and became a media communication analyst for an NGO. But he couldn’t stay away from the newsroom for long. He returned to his calling by joining the Nepal magazine published by Kantipur Media Group. “I like to keep changing my workplace,” says Aryal. He says that working the same job for years can be mundane, which in turn might affect one’s drive and future. He further adds that he is committed to seeking different opportunities that give him diverse experiences as well as help him in advancing his career. Despite that, he was one of the longest-serving editors of the Nepal Magazine (he was there for 10 years), which unfortunately shut down due to financial turmoil during the Covid-19 pandemic. Aryal joined Kantipur TV as the chief editor, where he worked for three and a hlaf years and joined Galaxy 4K, where he worked for a years before becoming a freelance journalist. In his career as a journalist, he has spent more time editing than reporting. But, he says, a person cannot truly become a journalist without reporting. Although he mostly edited, Aryal mentions that he spent a fair share of his time reporting, which helped him understand where the media’s involvement stands in Nepal. He says his coverage of the impeachment motion filed against Nepal’s first woman Chief Justice Sushila Karki was one of his best works so far. Having reported on politics for a long time, Aryal says that political reporting is risky because politics itself is highly ambiguous and uncertain. According to him, one of the biggest obstacles in media is the possibility of misinformation, disinformation, and lack of clarity. Accuracy is a major concern that must be addressed during fact-checking and verification. “However, in rare circumstances, it cannot be ensured. Asking for forgiveness is the only option during times like these,” he says. He says Nepali journalism still lags in many aspects. “It lacks consistency and not every news article is trustworthy,” he says. Also, he adds that journalism and media outlets in Nepal are more focused on covering news related to celebrity, politicians, and advertisements, while the concerns of vulnerable groups are largely ignored, despite digital media making diverse storytelling possible. But he says he isn’t much concerned about the shrinking influence of traditional media with the proliferation and popularity of digital and social media. “I’m sure that journalism will thrive in different forms. It will evolve, progress, and exist forever.”

Ideological politics often arise in response to certain social or cultural issues or values. However, as these values change over time, the relevance and appeal of certain ideological positions may diminish. Then, it cultivates political polarization, cultural conflict, social discrimination, economic stagnation and complete division of the people among rival factions, and the politicians retain power among themselves. But it fails to adapt to changing circumstances to effectively address new challenges losing relevance and support initiating decay of its own. Additionally, changing demographics also impact patterns of political supporters—ultimately, forcing it to die out simply because of the failure of gaining enough popular support. Economic, social, or political crises are critical ingredients of any society. They can undermine the credibility of ideological movements and lead to their decline and implant a new dominant ideology that causes crumbling of the existing sociopolitical structures. Then people begin to question the incumbent system. Again, people also get fed up with the ideological conflicts among the leaders of conflicting ideologies. The ideological politics are mostly divisive and contentious, leading to social and political unrest wreaking havoc in people’s lives. Over time, generational changes immensely affect this process. Nepal has a complex and dynamic political landscape, with multiple parties and ideologies competing for power and influence. As the new constitution was promulgated in 2015, it ushered some changes and brought both new opportunities and new challenges. Nepal needs a gradual shift toward a more pragmatic, issue-based approach to governance involving a greater focus on addressing the country's economic, social, and environmental challenges, rather than ideological posturing and identity politics. The emergence of the Nepal Communist Party (NCP) in 2018 was seen as a sign of continued relevance of ideological politics in the country. However, the party was short-lived, and it split into two factions in 2020, with each faction accusing the other of deviating from communist ideology. The current political landscape in Nepal is characterized by a mix of ideological and pragmatic politics. While there are still parties that adhere to specific ideologies, such as NC, CPN UML, CPN (Maoist Centre) and Janata Samajwadi Party among others who have, to the larger extent, failed to charm the electorate. In South Asia, BNP, CPB and JIB in Bangladesh, DMK ADMK, CPI, CPI(M), INC, SAD among others in India, CPN-UML, NC, RPP and others in Nepal, ML-N, PPP-P and others in Pakistan, SLFP, UNP, SLMC among others in Sri Lanka all suffer socio-political and ideological stagnation. Many countries that have embraced communism, socialism, or other ideological systems have experienced economic stagnation, social unrest, and political instability. The rise of technology and social media has led to a fragmentation of political discourse and a growing distrust of established political parties and institutions. Some of the ideology-based political parties in some corners of the world are trying to preserve their destiny, while most of them are gradually dying out. Since the middle of the 20th century, Nepali people have been witnessing a sea change in socio-political, cultural and economic patterns of their life. They saw the expiry of the Rana regime that ruled Nepal from 1846 to 1951. It was characterized by authoritarianism, repression, and the concentration of power in the hands of a small ruling elite. Growing public discontent, external pressure, internal power struggles and rise of democratic and progressive forces dismissed it mercilessly, and the multiple party democratic system was introduced. Then the Panchayat system which was established in Nepal in 1962, following a coup led by King Mahendra, again concentrated power in the hands of a small group of elites. However, the popular discontent, economic stagnation, international pressure and the rise of democratic and progressive forces toppled the 30-year-long direct rule of monarchs in Nepal—a turning point in Nepal's history that paved the way for the country's transition to a more democratic and inclusive society. Though it emphasized industrial development, promotion of agriculture and rural infrastructure, including roads, schools, and health facilities leading to an increase in agricultural productivity and a reduction in poverty rates in rural areas, it could not survive longer. In the late 1990s and early 2000s, Nepal saw growing popular discontent with the monarchy, which was seen as corrupt, autocratic, and out of touch with the needs and aspirations of the Nepali people. Nepal's monarchy was increasingly isolated on the international stage, with many countries and organizations criticizing the government's poor human rights record and lack of democracy. The decentralization of power, fiscal decentralization, promotion of local entrepreneurship, agriculture development, social development, and employment opportunities could not sustain the system and it perished. The Maoist insurgency that began in 1996 posed a significant challenge to the monarchy's authority and legitimacy, and the government's harsh response to the insurgency further fueled public anger and resentment toward the monarchy. In 2006, a mass popular movement led by political parties, civil society groups, and student organizations succeeded in toppling King Gyanendra's authoritarian regime and restoring democracy in Nepal. Following the success of the popular movement, political parties negotiated with the monarchy to transition Nepal to a federal democratic republic. Later, Nepal abolished its monarchy in 2008 and established a federal democratic republic. However, the rise of populist politics also promotes polarization, disruption of political institutions and practices but also enables simplification of complex problems. It can erode trust in institutions and defend the corrupt and self-serving elite, but encourages greater political participation and civic engagement of the previously marginalized segments of the demography. Thus, an increasing number of voters have now broken the chains of all ideologies—the heroism of the sovereign citizen and the beauty of democracy. No political power is comfortable anymore without a direct link to citizen-life through good governance and public service delivery. Legacy politics, nepotism or any form of favoritism have no longer been enough to win people's votes. Now the voters believe those who have greater knowledge of contemporary global communities and true apprehension of the country, the people at home and abroad, and those who have yet to be tested. Common citizens are attracted to new parties and faces. Misfortune looms large over the fate and longevity of existing ideology-based political parties in Nepal.