Submit your Article

“Endurance is one of the most difficult disciplines, but it is to the one who endures that the final victory comes.” – Gautam Buddha

My cell phone rang. A biker friend was calling to tell me they were staging a race, and he asked me to participate. When I learned it was an uphill climb, I gave it my thumbs down. Riding uphill is not my forte, let alone race. I did the last contest in Tansen five years ago—a cross-country race. I was 64 then.

The biker friend, Rakesh Manandhar, aka Mtb Rocky, would not take no for an answer. He said the race included a category that fit me like a glove—the ‘Senior’ (60-plus).

I knew Rakesh when I was a rookie, 13 years ago. Well, I could not turn a good friend down, could I? I fell for it and signed up against my better judgment. Maybe one last time, I reminded myself. Slated for 8 Jan 2022, the Tarebhir Trek Uphill Challenge was a 3.56 km brutal climb.

The big day arrived with the flag-off at Deuwa Chok, Budhanilkantha. By the time I arrived at the venue, four kilometers from my house, I was short of breath—and a nervous wreck when I gawked at Tarebhir towering above me. Raju, my cycling mate, only 34, on the other hand, was bursting with excitement: this was his first-ever race.

The turnout was unbelievable—the place crawled with riders dressed to the occasion in their snazzy helmets and colorful outfits. The lineup of mountain bikes was staggering, too—from entry-level to futuristic bikes.

I learned 130-plus racers were competing—mind-boggling! As I took stock of the milieu, my eyes fell on small kids who looked no older than eight—and vying, too. There were women, young and old alike. Surprise, surprise—a couple of them looked in their fifties.

Raju fell in the ‘Master’ category. The organizers had taken in multiple age groups, from juniors, elite, masters to grandmasters to seniors. The whistle sounded for the women’s lineup (six to eight racers at a time); I picked out Laxmi Magar, the seven-time national cross-country champion. We have known each other for 10 years now, following several races I did with her.

The race kicked off, with Prayash Tamang, CEO of Kathmandu Bike Station, logging every contestant’s time. And the first batch of the riders tore up the steep track amid boisterous cheering and clapping.

Then came my turn. Seven other riders flanked me, Raju included. I felt jumpy as the countdown began. I realized I was attempting to move a mountain—fat chance.

By the time I cleared the first 500m, I had done great, even rode past a few riders. Good job, I said to myself and patted myself on the back. The joy was short-lived, though, as the climb got steeper and every rider appeared to pull ahead of me.

The unrelenting climb appeared vertical. I dismounted several times, gasped for air, sipped from my bottle, and pushed my bike. No respite, though; every second counted. I was still unconvinced if I could make it to the finish line.

I ran into some riders who hurtled down the slope, after having completed the race. How far to the finish? I asked one of them as I fought for breath. Halfway came the reply; my heart sank. Did I imagine the incline got steeper as the dirt track wound uphill? It appeared so. Suddenly, a rider swished past me. Man-oh-man, he was just a kid!

As I pushed on, riding and walking, I almost felt I was in a stupor, my legs hurt, and I feared my knees might buckle. In all honesty, I was at the end of my rope. As more riders came shredding down, the thought I’d barely made it half the distance seemed to further fuel my misery. I saw some riders idling by the track; they had quit. I kept on stoically, though. I would complete the race if it were the last thing I would do, I muttered to myself.

And, before I knew it, after tackling a gnarly climb, I spotted a large crowd at the crest. The Finish Line at long last! I’d made it. Unawares, I had an epiphany—I’d rediscovered myself—my strength, grit, confidence, and self-esteem.

I remember the pride I felt when I became the first British woman ambassador to Nepal in 2019. The leadership at the British Embassy, which had always been men, was changing. When I went to present my credentials to the President, as every new ambassador must do, I felt proud as I stood in front of the first female President this country has ever appointed. I sensed a connection between us—a mutual recognition perhaps of each other’s achievements.

The Head of State may be largely a ceremonial post in Nepal, but I know the election of Bidya Devi Bhandari as the country's first woman President has inspired many Nepali women to dream bigger and aim higher. It has cemented the idea that Nepali women are equal to Nepali men, in principle and in practice.

Two years before I arrived in Kathmandu, Nepal had achieved an even more remarkable milestone of gender equality in political participation. The country had successfully held the first elections to the three spheres of government under its new constitution and women had been elected to at least 33 percent leadership positions in federal, provincial and local governments.

Today, 112 (33.53 percent) of the total 334 members of Nepal’s federal parliament are women. Critics may dismiss this achievement, arguing that the percentage of female members of parliament is low compared to the population. That’s true, and there’s a long way to go. But it’s also true that female representation in Nepal is comparable to the UK’s parliament, well above the global average of under 24 percent, and even more remarkable when set against the South Asian average of less than 18 percent.

Nepali women have taken one third of the legislative seats at the provincial level as well. Of the 555 members of the state assemblies across seven provinces, almost one-third (181) are women. They are making valuable and dynamic contributions to strengthening the foundations of federalism.

At the local level, women’s political participation is even more encouraging. Of the 35,000 local elected representatives, over 14,000 (nearly 41 percent) are women. As mayors, deputy mayors, ward chairs and ward committee members, they are making local laws and policies, and delivering public service at the grassroots level.

However, these impressive numbers of Nepali women leaders belie a complex issue of gender inequality. Most women remain subordinate to male leadership. Ninety-one percent of Nepal’s deputy mayors and rural municipality deputy chiefs are women. But how many women are mayors and rural municipality chiefs? Only two percent. How many women are ward chairs? Just one percent.

Another example: only six of the 165 directly elected members of the House of Representatives are women. The other 84 women were nominated through the reserved quotas. What do these numbers tell us? That very few women leaders were given party tickets to fight direct elections. Did the party leadership not believe in women’s leadership abilities to build their own constituencies and win elections?

I believe women should be present at all levels of leadership. Evidence suggests that where women are more active in leadership positions, civil participation is higher, corruption is lower, services are better, politics is less combative and more inclusive, and stability is higher. Inclusive and balanced representation helps everyone to grow and exercise their human rights.

I have met and exchanged views with many women leaders in and outside Kathmandu over the last two years. They may represent opposing political views, but they share a common challenge: women have been sidelined to deputy positions and reserved quotas despite their enormous contributions to public service.

Despite the barriers that still face women in Nepal, I am optimistic that more women will reach leadership positions when Nepal holds local elections on May 13 this year, and for good reason.

Firstly, women deputy mayors and ward committee members now have years of experience running local governments. They are eager to stand for higher positions and are committed to doing better for their communities.

Secondly, local women representatives have earned the trust of their constituencies and are now in stronger positions to win elections.

And thirdly, I have found Nepal's political leadership increasingly progressive and willing to increase women’s political participation. In recent years, they have backed women as head of state, speaker, deputy speaker, chief minister and cabinet ministers, which shows that the door is open to more women in leadership positions.

In the lead up to the local elections, I want to call on Nepal's political leaders to put in more effort toward creating an environment that improves women’s chances of reaching leadership positions. The first step is to field more female candidates for mayor, rural municipality chief and ward chair. 

The UK is a strong supporter of women’s rights and leadership. Increasing women's political participation is one of the key pillars of our strategic vision for gender equality. That is because it is not only right that women should be given the chance to lead, but it’s essential. Nepal’s own ambitions to reach middle income by 2030 and to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals depend on having more women in political leadership positions. We have been supporting Nepal to increase political participation of women for many years, and we will be providing more support in the years to come. The UK’s support to girls’ education, women’s economic empowerment, and security and justice for women in Nepal, underpin and support our efforts to increase women’s political participation.

It is in this same spirit that I have been joined by seven other women ambassadors and heads of agencies based in Kathmandu for our leadership mentoring initiative. Over the course of this year, each of us will help to support the career and leadership aspirations of a young woman. I hope that these smart young women take what they learn and go on to inspire countless others.

We are now two months away from this year’s local elections. This is the best time for all of us to accelerate our efforts towards creating equal opportunities in politics for Nepali women. In my own capacity, I will be speaking out for leadership and helping women to #BreakTheBias.

The author is the British Ambassador to Nepal

Being landlocked between two large countries, Nepal’s international trade has been basically limited to China and India. With the end of the Rana regime and opening up to the world, Nepal’s trade diversification began in 1951. In his seminal article “Nepal’s Recent Trade Policy” published in Asian Survey in 1964, YP Pant describes how Nepal’s favorable trade with India before 1951 had turned to a deficit. Nepal’s trade volume with Pakistan (including the present-day Bangladesh) accounted for less than three percent of the total. Pant also mentioned that Nepal’s trade with Tibet was negligible.

With the construction of the Kathmandu-Lhasa Highway and other land routes, China became our second largest trade partner, today covering 14 percent of total foreign trade. India remains our major trade partner, making for 64 percent of total trade. Nepal has active transit treaties with India, Bangladesh and China. Again, our trade is basically limited to India and China.

What is bothersome is Nepal’s trade deficit, which hit $11.69bn in 2020-21. Nepal exports to India a tenth of what it imports from there. With China, while Nepal’s import was $1.95 billion in 2020-21, our export was a negligible $8.35 million. In the first six months of the current fiscal, the balance of payment (BoP) was at a loss of $2bn. Such huge trade deficits and negative BoP can herald an economic failure. Immediate attention is called for.

Compensating such huge deficits with tourism, which brought Nepal total revenue of $668 million in 2019, is unrealistic. Remittance too is declining. The demography of Nepali workers overseas is changing, with an increase in the number of skilled workers who are going to more advanced countries and regions, and choosing to settle there. They are less likely to send remittances to Nepal where they do not intend to live. Nepal is thus yet to find an effective way to balance its trade.

Failing regionalism

Multilateral trade forums, including the WTO, have emerged as a solution to trade barriers, promising coordinated trade negotiations that enable smaller economies to get fair terms. Regional negotiations also help member countries avoid double standards in dealing with different neighbors of similar cooperation potentials.

Simplification of multilateral cooperation definitely facilitates trades. Unfortunately, not all member countries and regions can make equal gains. Multilateral cooperation helps those who prove competitive in global trade, and hinders the relatively weak and disadvantaged.

What Nepal needs is to identify geographical and economic regions, membership in which gives it an opportunity to carry business more fairly. At present there is little scope of regional trade cooperation with the north as it is difficult for cargos to get past the vast, neighboring China. South Asia is where Nepal belongs, which is also why it helped establish the South Asian Free Trade Area (SAFTA)—with Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka as its signatories.

Nepal also joined the Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC) in 2004 whose priority areas include trade and investment, and tourism. Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Thailand are members of the BIMSTEC Free Trade Area. However, our economic and trade cooperation has been basically limited to India.

Not that there is no possibility of meaningful cooperation within SAFTA or BIMSTEC. With Indian help, there are already signs of trade in products and services like electricity, agricultural products, information technology, medicine, tourism and education. However, compared to India and China, trade volumes with other countries are small, and any trade surplus with them is unlikely to offset the deficits with India and China.

Go bilateral

Nepal’s efforts at Nepal-China-India trilateral cooperation have not been successful. China and India share a long land border, and are also connected with seas. The Chinese land connected to Nepal is sparsely populated, and has limited scope for trade other than in minerals, and Indian pilgrimage to Mount Kailash and Mansarovar. Connectivity alone will not bring Nepal substantial economic gains. Further, long-term rivalry between China and India is not conducive to trilateral cooperation.

India, which maintains a porous, open border with Nepal, frequently sets conditions to imports from Nepal. India says its favorable terms of term only extend to goods and services originating in Nepal, and exclude the goods and services where foreign raw material or investment is involved.

Nepal is a minor trade partner for both China and India. But, for us, they are major ones. Here, economic and trade diplomacy could be useful. First, we should classify our trade items into essential and non-essential. We should then allow import of non-essential commodities, provided such imports do not lead to bilateral trade imbalance. Second, we should request China and India to invest in Nepal in sectors that contribute to import substitution, and promote our export to the investing country or to other markets outside our reserved quota.

Third, we should listen to their suggestions on bilateral trade balance, and try to accommodate them so long as such measures do not negatively affect Nepali economy, jobs, social harmony, culture, values, politics and international relations.

Sure, some items we import from our neighbors are refined third-country raw materials, or are in short supply here. Such items can be considered essential, and thus should be excluded in the evaluation of bilateral trade balance. These items as well as security-related and life-saving goods and services and new essential technologies can be covered through donations, remittance and international cooperation.

With right decisions and modest austerity, we can become self-sufficient in food and basic services. Outside these, Nepal should adopt a policy of balanced bilateral trade.

The author is a professor of pharmacy at Tribhuvan University

Climate change-related migration is not a future hypothetical situation; it’s a global reality today. The climate crisis is redefining our world, as the Earth’s climate is changing at a quicker rate than at any other time in human history.

Climate change can jeopardize food, water, and economic security when paired with physical, social, economic, and/or environmental vulnerabilities. Displacement, loss of livelihood, weaker governments and, in some cases, political instability and conflict are secondary repercussions of climate change. Climate change is widely recognized as a contributing and exacerbating factor in migration and conflict.

Migration in response to climate impacts may range from mobility as a proactive adaptation strategy to forced displacement in the face of life-threatening risks. This mobility may occur within or across international borders. Specifically, one model forecasts climate change may lead to nearly three percent of the population (more than 143 million people) in three regions—Sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia and Latin America—to moving within their country of origin by 2050.

Climate change, rising sea levels, more frequent cyclones, flooding of rivers fed by melting glaciers, and other extreme weather events are intensifying internal and international migration in South Asia. Further, rapid economic expansion and urbanization are hastening and amplifying the impact and drivers of climate change. To make matters worse, many of the new urban developments are in low-lying coastal areas vulnerable to sea-level rise. 

The World Bank estimates that by 2050, South Asia (Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, the Maldives, Nepal, and Sri Lanka) will have lost 1.8 percent of its annual GDP owing to climate change.  According to the New York Times, living conditions of 800 million people could dramatically deteriorate, resulting in mass migration—possibly at an unprecedented level.

Although the majority of those displaced or migrating as a result of climate change stay in their home countries, cross-border flows are increasing, particularly in regions where climate change collides with conflict and violence. As the effects of climate change become more severe, it is critical to understand the factors that may mitigate or exacerbate migration, and to develop strategies to proactively and humanely manage these impacts.

Nepal’s situation

Poverty, marginalization, state neglect, inequality, discrimination, and out-migration have always plagued the Himalayan country, and these issues precede climate change. All these current structural problems are exacerbated by global warming. As 1.3 billion people live downstream and rely on its rivers, the loss of Himalayan ice will have disastrous implications. Glaciers in the Himalaya’s central and eastern regions are already receding at a rate of up to 30 meters a year.

In Himalayan villages, half of the youngsters are malnourished. The national poverty rate in Nepal is 23 percent, but mountain residents account for 42 percent of the country’s impoverished. Faced with irregular weather and other climate change effects, the poor are already being pushed to migrate.

Droughts, flash floods, and rising temperatures are becoming more common as a result of climate change, lowering crop yields across Nepal. Water tables have dropped, glaciers are melting, natural springs have dried up, and snowlines have fallen across the Himalayas. This monsoon, over 80,000 people were sick with dengue in an unprecedented outbreak, which scientists blamed on a changing environment. An unusual tornado struck the Bara area, killing 80 people and destroying towns. Every year, floods in the Tarai are getting worse. The change in climate is giving people no choice but to migrate.

How should we prepare?

First, early effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is necessary to alleviate climate pressures that cause internal climate migration. This must be a global effort starting now.

While climate migrants fleeing intolerable conditions are similar to refugees, they do not have the same legal rights. As there is no coordinated effort to monitor the migratory population, desperate individuals migrate where they can, not necessarily where they should. Dedicating greater resources to mitigate climate migration also helps.

Shifts in population distribution can also be part of a successful adaptation strategy if they are recognized and skillfully handled, allowing individuals to move out of poverty and develop more sustainable livelihoods.

The most effective method of improving the migratory process is to do research, which might include increasing migration monitors, offering safer forms of transport, and consolidating and extending integration resources to destination countries. More research, particularly new granular data on climate change consequences at the regional and country levels, is needed to support these plans.

To conclude, climate-induced migration reveals the deep link between climate change and development, which in turn has a direct influence on people’s lives and livelihoods.

This global challenge has and will continue to create a multitude of critical issues. Climate change is a risk amplifier as it can worsen economic insecurity or political instability, leading to migration. Climate change impacts are anticipated to get worse when coupled with growing backlash against migrants and refugees around the world, stretching institutional capacity and governance and increasing the cost of adaptation. In the long run, stopping climate change is the only solution.

The author is the founder of One Health Research and Training Center