Submit your Article

Dai Yonghong, the head of the geopolitical studies unit of Sich­uan University, is an old Nepal watcher. He is currently a visiting professor at the Masters in International Relations and Diploma­cy (MIRD) program of Tribhuvan University. Laxman Shrestha and Purushottam Poudel of APEX caught up with him to discuss China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and its impact on Nepal.

 How do you assess Nepal’s participation in BRI?

Nepal and China have made dozens of agreements under the BRI. We should first be assured that this will be of benefit to both the countries. We should not deviate from the projects that have already been agreed upon. Political stability is vital for the completion of the agreed projects and I believe the merger between the two main communist forces in Nepal is a harbinger of this stability.

There is now a debate in Nepal about whether the country should look to the south or the north. I believe Nepal should rise above this debate and develop a global outlook. China always looks to partner with countries that it can help economically. There can be no development by partnering with countries that want instability more than they want development.

How do we evaluate the trade and investment components of the BRI?

I believe the issue of trade and investment should be placed under a broader economic framework. China does not want any political gain from its neighbors. We just want strong and long-lasting relations based on mutual trust. A strategy that has political objectives might work in the short run but it can­not help us achieve our long-term goals.

If that is the case, what does China want from its neighbors?

We want to see our neighbors develop. We want other countries in the region to benefit from China’s economic rise. At one time China used to be one of the largest importers of foreign direct investment in the world. Now, we are the biggest FDI investor in the world. Other countries can utilize this eco­nomic clout of China to their benefit.

China also has great technical expertise. China has made rapid progress in technology used in infrastructure development as well as in technol­ogy related to communication and agriculture. Other countries can use this expertise. More than that, you can also utilize our management expertise. If you have all the resources but you don’t have management expertise, then all those resources have no meaning.

How do you see Nepal-China cooperation shape up under the BRI?

China can utilize its capital, technological and management expertise to build railways in Nepal as the state of Nepal’s roads is unsatisfactory. Not the least because Nepal will need railways to connect with the ocean. Nepal is often called a yam between India and China but if it can emu­late the economic prosperity of India and China, it can be a diamond between these two Asian powers. Nepal is in a situation whereby it can develop by taking a ‘free ride’ on the pros­perity of its two neighbors. The important question is: Does Nepal now have the kind of economy agenda and the leadership to push this agenda for the kind of economic transfor­mation it envisions?

How will the Chinese investment in Nepal be different from its investments in Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Laos or Myanmar, the investments that have not always been seen in favorable light?

The kind of investment will depend on the dialogue between the two countries. It will be wrong to see investments under BRI as China somehow wanting to build a monopoly in a country. China will move ahead strictly based on consultations with host countries.

Kan Kimura is a doyen in the fields of political science and area studies in Japan. A professor with the Graduate School of International Cooperation Studies in Kobe University, Kimura is author of over a dozen scholarly books on Japanese and Korean history and Japan-Korea relations. The foremost authority on North Korea-South Korea relations, Kimura has written extensively on Asian geopolitics as well. Biswas Baral and Shambhu Kattel of APEX caught up with Kimura during his brief personal trip to Nepal to discuss the wider ramifications of the ongoing US-North Korea dialogue, BRI and Nepal, and Japan’s place in Asia.

What are the broader security implications to Asia of the recent rapprochement between the US and North Korea and prospect of peace in the Korean peninsula?

First of all, it will not be at all easy to make North Korea renounce all its nuclear weapons. Even if the North announces that it has given up all its nukes that will be technically dif­ficult to verify, much more difficult than it was in the case of say Iraq or Libya. Moreover, you have to under­stand that the reason North Korea has nuclear weapons is because of the United States.

Now the Korean peninsula is firm­ly under Chinese influence. I think recent US diplomacy in Korea is a part of its plan to withdraw from the peninsula, as President Donald Trump keeps hinting. Even while he was campaigning for presidency, Trump made it clear that he would withdraw US troops from East Asia and he seems intent on keeping his promise. But whatever Trump says I don’t think there will be a big change in North Korean nuclear arsenal in the near future.

The prospect of the US with­drawal from East Asia is the biggest nightmare for the Japanese people. Of course the Chinese don’t think that way.

But isn’t the presence of Amer­ican troops in the Korean pen­insula also in Chinese inter­est? Because if they withdraw without the North giving up its nuclear weapons then Japan would also be forced to acquire nukes and to enhance its military capabilities. Japanese invasion of China in early 20th century has not been forgotten.

What you are saying would have made perfect sense back in the 2000s. But right now the Chinese GDP has grown twice as big as Japan’s. In the next 10-15 years, the Chinese economy could be four to five times bigger than Japan’s. Now the Chinese policymakers believe that they have absolutely nothing to fear from Japan if Japan is estranged from the United States. For histor­ical reasons, Japan does not have very good relations with countries like South Korea, the Philippines and China. So without the support of the US, it will be isolated. China seems to be succeeding in its strate­gy of ‘divide and rule’ as they have successfully driven a wedge between the US and Japan, and Japan and South Korea. South Korea is now completely dependent on China, as is the rest of South East Asia.

To change track a bit, what does Japan make of China’s Belt and Road Initiative?

What I have been telling the Jap­anese government is that Japan is still the biggest military and economy power in Asia bar Chi­na. So it can still forge meaningful partnerships with other coun­tries in the region. Take the case of the Trans Pacific Partnership, from which the US recently with­drew. Everybody thought that US withdrawal would be the death of the TPP but that is not the case. Other countries in the partnership wanted to keep it alive and you see that the US is again showing some interest in rejoining. Japan should fully support this process. If Japan does not take leadership on this no other Asian power can do so. India cannot do so because it does not have much influence beyond South Asia, not even in Myanmar, its next-door neighbor. India is getting militarily and economically strong and yet it is still by and large an iso­lated power.

There is a fear in Nepal that the Chinese are flexing their eco­nomic muscles to get their way and the BRI is part of the same coercive strategy.

Nepal’s situation is a bit like Mongolia’s, trapped between two big powers. But one of the good things for Nepal is that most of the geopolitical competition between big powers in Asia seems to be happening at the sea, the South China Sea for instance, and away from landlocked coun­tries like Nepal and Mongolia. The other good news for Nepal is that India and China seem to have for now settled their border problems and a big flare-up between them looks unlikely.

So I say you make the best of the good relations between India and China. More than that, Nepal is now maturing as a democracy, which is a big plus, because we cannot say the same about other countries in the region like Bhutan or Bangla­desh or Pakistan. This is a bulwark against the tendency of other big powers to intervene. It also allows other democratic entities like the EU and Japan to contribute to Nepal’s development. They can also then intervene when they believe Nepal’s sovereignty is at risk.

But how does Japan view the BRI? In your understanding, is it a benign concept that will benefit everyone or does it have a sinis­ter ring to it?

Frankly, the Japanese government is not too happy to see such a coa­lition but we know that we can’t also stop it. The best option then is to give each country in the BRI or TPP the freedom to join the other organization as well. So long as the BRI is not a closed entity, we should be open to the idea. This is why although those in government in Japan were initially hostile to the BRI idea, they have come to increasingly accept it as a fact of life.

What do you make of the idea of ‘debt trap’? Some in Nepal say that soon the country will owe so much to China it will have no option but to accept greater Chi­nese intervention.

Relying too much on bilater­al negotiations with China is bad for any country. The way to go about it would be to enhance your links with other countries as well, for which you need not neces­sarily be anti-China, so that you don’t give the Chinese too much bargaining power. This is why it is vital for Nepal to maintain good relations with other members of South Asia as well as entities like the ASEAN. Otherwise, Nepal can­not say no to China or to India. So have good relations with everyone. South Korea successfully punches above its weight diplomatically because it can leverage its unique relations with the US, Japan and China to its advance. Nepal should do the same.

In the semifinals, we have got England as a rival. The winner of 1966, England, is now seen in a lot of rhythm. Many soccer fans around the world are rooting for England to win the game. Surely England is the name established in World Football.

However, we are not weak in the ongoing World Cup. In the group stage, we had confirmed the place by winning three games. 

For more news click here

Sunkesari, a horror movie starring Reecha Sharma, which she is also producing, is being released on May 25. Sharma, who debuted as a supporting actress in the movie ‘First Love’ in 2012, is now one of the coun­try’s most popular and versatile actresses. She started her career as a model for various music videos, which earned her roles in TV serials. But it was the movie Loot—a highly successful crime thriller released in 2012—that marked a turning point in her career. Sharma was also a top-ten finalist in Miss Nepal 2007.

In your experience, how has the Nepali film industry evolved over time?

In some ways, it has developed a lot, but in other ways it has regressed too. Techni­cally we have evolved a lot. We may not be on a par with international standards, but we have started making wonderful movies. We’ve been successful in bringing back some of the audiences we lost. Also, our cinemas are no longer limited to Nepal because of the growing Nepali diaspora.

But, at the same time, unlike European countries where people visit movie theaters whenever they have free time, we haven’t developed a cinema-going culture. Many Nepalis still prefer Bollywood and Holly­wood movies, and they are unreasonably critical of Nepali movies, which has had a negative impact on our film industry.

Talking about the evolution of Nepali films, horror, traditionally, isn’t a suc­cessful genre in Nepal. What motivated you to make Sunkesari?

In the past five years or so, genres like comedy, romance and drama have flour­ished, which is a significant achievement. But, how long can we expect the audience to be drawn to these limited genres? The idea of establishing a new genre encouraged me. It was while watching ‘The Conjuring’ in a packed theater that I felt I wanted to try a horror movie.

Yes, there are various risks associated with this genre. I think the reason why the horror genre has not been successful so far is because we have not been imaginative. We cannot expect a movie to be successful just by having a ghost dressed up in a white sari wandering from one place to another while carrying a candle in her hand. (Laughs)

In Sunkesari, we have put in a lot of effort and have not compromised with quality. With the money we have invested in this movie, we could have made an extravagant film of another genre. I think this movie has various reasons to succeed but an equal number of reasons to fail. I sincerely hope it works, because if it does not, then it will be a long time before someone else attempts another horror flick.

Despite the relatively small size of the Nepali film industry, there are complaints that it lacks harmony. You were yourself recently involved in a bad spat. Why do you suppose that is the case?

It’s not that there is no harmony at all. Harmony does exist, but only among professionals who have dedi­cated their life to filmmaking. There are people—with lots of free time—who spread rumor just to create misunderstand­ing at a very personal level. It is a competitive industry and it is okay to dislike people but it is not okay to disrespect them.

Recently when I expressed my opin­ion about something I disliked, many people ganged up against me. They seemed to have forgotten that I am also a viewer and have opin­ions. In a public plat­form, compliments and criticisms are normal and one should not always expect compliments.

Finally, what purpose do you think movies serve? Is it just entertainment or should they also convey some social message?

Movies should always be made with a view to provide entertain­ment, because people take out time from their busy schedule to go to the theaters. But having said that, did mov­ies like 3 Idiots, Taare Zameen Par, etc only provide entertainment? They car­ried a powerful message too. When peo­ple left the theater, they had something to think about. That is what a cinema should ideally be: a mixture of entertainment and information. I would like to make a movie like that someday. But that is not what I have tried with Sunkesari. This one is all entertainment.