Submit your Article

The pledge of G7 countries to donate a billion Covid-19 vaccine doses to low-income countries has been praised by many as a unified front to intensify international efforts against the pandemic. But the question is whether this pledge will adequately address the deep gap between rich and poor countries’ access to vaccines.

Without an effective global vaccination plan, one billion doses of Covid-19 vaccines could be just a drop in the ocean compared to the World Bank’s estimate of 11 billion doses needed to end the Covid-19 crisis globally.

The delay in global vaccination rollout is as much about the stockpiling of vaccines by the US, the UK and other rich countries as it is about lack of seriousness on the part of the Western leaders, who could have agreed to waive the intellectual property protection and other export-related regulation on an exceptional basis to allow developing countries to produce these vaccines themselves. Moreover, keeping China, India and Russia out of the global vaccine discussions will not strengthen global efforts against this global problem. An effective global vaccine regime should monitor the production, supply and distribution of all vaccines.

Delays in vaccination rollout are not only reversing development gains for millions but also deepening global inequality. The UN ‘Sustainable Development Report 2021’ estimates a loss of four million jobs globally, and about 120 million people falling back into extreme poverty. According to Mckinsey, a management consulting firm, women's jobs are 1.8 times more vulnerable to the crisis than men’s. About 11.5 million migrant domestic workers, mostly women, have been left unpaid and stranded in the Middle East.

Nepal’s Covid-19 vaccines woes have been compounded not only by the global vaccine inequality, but also by its political crisis, failure in diplomacy, mismanagement, and corruption issues. The inefficiency in the procurement process, the rent-seeking behaviors of politicians and businesses, India’s own Covid-19 crisis, and China’s emphasis on non-disclosure agreements contributed to the delay of vaccine procurement. The non-transparent, uneven and unequal distribution of Covid-19 vaccines in the capital city and other parts of the country is also creating anger and frustration among people.

Nepal failed to effectively engage in vaccine diplomacy when it was hit by the second wave of ‘Covid-19 catastrophe’. With more than 8,000 new infections a day, Nepal’s health and humanitarian crisis was proportionally bigger than that of India, but Nepal failed to effectively mobilize its foreign missions to receive international support to address Nepal’s health and humanitarian crisis. Initially, the Prime Minister of Nepal, instead of asking for global support, was even claiming that the situation was under control.

Although belated, Nepal engaged its President to write letters to foreign leaders for vaccines, but except China, no other country has yet replied. In particular, Nepal has failed to convince India that the delay in supplying the second dose of vaccines has fueled anti-Indian sentiment in Nepal with the perception that India might be more interested in Nepal’s political crisis than its health crisis.

Nepal has so far received 4.2 million doses of Covishield vaccine from India and 1.8 million doses of Vero Cell vaccine from China. Some of those who have taken the first dose of Covishield are still waiting for the second dose after many weeks. The government is finally planning to purchase four million doses of Vero Cell vaccine, but it is too little, too late for a population of 30 million. According to many epidemiologists, 60-70 percent of the population needs to acquire resistance to safely achieve herd immunity against Covid-19. Thus Nepal should immediately increase the number of vaccine doses to be procured from China to at least 10 million (one-third of Nepal’s population).

Moreover, Nepal should also use its effective diplomacy to secure enough doses of AstraZeneca and Covishield vaccines for those who have taken the first dose of Covishield or for those above 64 who are yet to get the first shot. (Vero Cell has not been recommended for those above 64.) Nepal should also actively engage to secure as many doses of vaccines as possible from the US and UK-announced vaccine pledges.

What we learned from the first and second waves of Covid-19 is that if we cannot manage the pandemic, we cannot prevent the humanitarian and economic crises. Nepal currently seems to have fallen into a vicious cycle of Covid-19 pandemic and economic despair. Covid-19 has exacted humanitarian and economic costs on the society, while Nepal is also experiencing severe financing gaps due to the economic downturn.

Sustainable and resilient recovery from Covid-19 will require a deliberate effort to accomplish three main goals within the next 6-12 months. First, vaccines, vaccines and vaccines. Nepal needs enough vaccines to cover at least 60 percent of its population within the next six months to prevent the next wave of Covid-19 pandemic.

Second, Nepal’s health infrastructure needs to be urgently revamped so that the country has the capacity, infrastructure, and human resources to effectively handle and manage any future pandemic. It is time to upgrade state-run hospitals and make them well equipped with enough manpower, oxygen, ventilators, ICUs, ISO certified testing labs, adequate number of beds, and specialized viral and communicable diseases units.  All measures announced in the new federal and provincial budgets regarding the prevention, control, testing, and treatment of Covid-19 need to be properly and timely implemented. The main issue is whether the allocated budget can be spent to upgrade Nepal’s health infrastructure given a significant gap between policies and their implementation.

Third, Nepal’s economic recovery both in formal and informal sectors remains fragile and uncertain. Almost all small, medium and large-scale businesses, such as hotels, trekking, travel and tours, airlines, cinema halls, handicraft, media houses, advertising agencies, tailoring, beauty parlors, health and fitness clubs have been hit hard. The future of millions of workers employed by these businesses is now in limbo. The unemployment rate hit the record high of over 14 percent in 2020. Although several provisions of Nepal’s new budget aim at providing relief for people and businesses, Nepal’s growing political problem and poor budget implementation may prolong Nepal’s economic recovery.

The author holds a Master of Science in International Affairs from the New School University and Specialized Postgraduate courses from Harvard University

Inspired by an article in The Economist about the secrets of the longevity of the Chinese Communist Party, in this column, I want to comment on the condition of the established political parties in Nepal. On July 1 this year, the Communist Party of China will complete 100 years of existence and more than 70 years in power. The Economist points out three reasons for the success of the party (which it calls a ‘dictatorship’): ruthlessness, ideological agility and the ability to save itself from becoming a kleptocracy. 

The suggestive undertones in the article are revealing: the West starts all observations about China, or the other world for that matter, with an air of authority granted (supposedly) by the feeling that they are the harbingers of the universal values of liberty and democracy. So, the observation about the CCP’s success has already been labeled the most successful form of authoritarianism ever.                        

At the moment, the West is having a hard time dealing with the harsh realities of the new world. Covid-19 has exposed the inadequacies many developed nations were sleeping over for decades. Misappropriated priorities, like more investment in weaponry than in health, have laid bare the truth that the self-claimed laissez faire enlightenment is self-delusional. The Trump episode and the BREXIT have also curiously highlighted the shortcomings. 

In this context, when one looks at China from the West, the scenario is nothing but perplexing. Contrary to the predictions of pundits for decades about the Chinese system’s impending collapse, the descendants of Mao and Deng have proved themselves adaptive and quick learners. They call themselves a democracy despite what the West wants to label them with, but they take that narrative to a higher level by calling it a system unique to Chinese history and culture. 

The CCP has proven to be a self-learning system that runs on a clear long term strategy, rewards performance and prefers a disciplined order over laissez faire anarchy. Although the skeptical outlook of the West about the Chinese Party continues, the party has been able to keep its stronghold over the nation because of its aversion to external influence and the ability to keep external players’ attempts to interfere at bay. With the size of the nation, and the focus on long term strategy that is now seen as ingrained in Chinese thinking, Chinese rulers were able to save themself from the devastating helping hands of outsiders. 

A recent example of the helping hands gone wrong is Iraq. The US wanted to force a power equation favorable to its interests, but the lack of in-depth understanding of local dynamics made its strategy ineffective. And now, Iraq has turned into a battlefield of interests between Iran and the US. 

Nepal, too, because of its geo-political juxtaposition and the selfishness of its elites, has become another case study where external interference has led to many quick fixes but damaging outcomes in the long run. Recently, five ex- Prime Ministers issued a statement giving a shout out to the damage such heavy-handedness of external players are causing in internal politics. This is nothing but pure opportunism, as some of the same ex-PMs have been vocal in the Indian media, asking for an intervention in Nepali politics when the power equation here is unfavorable to them. 

At the moment, the two main established political parties of Nepal are both in crisis. The Congress is unable to come out of the grip of the septenerians who have been proven to be failures again and again, and the main communist party has completely wasted an almost two-thirds majority in its ongoing internal power struggle. The Chinese example may not be of much help for us because of reasons like the difference in size and culture. But some things are still worth pondering over. 

In the 30 years since the establishment of multiparty democracy in Nepal, our political parties have failed to build a character of their own aligned to their ideals. The Nepali Congress became consumed by the forces that it fought in the past, and became the vehicle to safeguard the interests of the feudal elites in the name of democracy, as the same Panchayat-time elites of the society became influential in the party at the grassroots. The fear of communists, propaganda about the ruthlessness of their methods, and the hard power of the status quoists of the society were the feeding forces for it. Today, the Nepali Congress has turned into a rigid, feudal structure, albeit wearing a liberal mask.

But the communists of Nepal have undergone a decay worse than this. After raising expectations of the marginalized people through an armed struggle, the communist parties have turned exactly into 'straightforward kleptocracy in which wealth is sucked up exclusively by the well-connected'. So, unless a new political party establishes itself based on ruthless meritocracy, and builds a mechanism to bring to power capable young leaders from diverse backgrounds, this decay shows no sign of halting.

The social media algorithm is scary and fascinating at the same time. Effortlessly it keeps on providing us feeds evaluating our past posts, actions and search. If you observe your Youtube list, Twitter timeline or Pinterest search, to name a few, the feed keeps giving you exactly what you prefer to watch or interact with.

Once I tried to search for a Ted Talk on happiness and ever since I have been flooded with motivational speeches from all kinds of outlets. Then, one day, a friend of mine used my phone to search for some relationship coach and his recommendation on how to build a great relationship with your guy. Ever since I have been getting doses of  “What a guy likes in a woman” to “3 things not to do to chase a man”.

Not even two decades ago we never had this sort of option. I remember back in the 90s when we were in school, fashion and lifestyle magazines like Cosmopolitan, Elle and Femina used to have a quiz column where you were asked 7-10 questions and on that basis they would draw conclusions about the topic.

The topic varied from “What kind of person are you?”, “ What kind of man should you date?”, “How healthy is your relationship?”, “Are you an introvert or an extrovert?”, and so on and so forth. There were results on the basis of points you scored, or there were A-B-C-D defined replies. I remember seniors and also girls from my batch getting together with their pencils and notebooks during lunch to try out these quizzes. The magazines were sneaked inside the school “illegally.”

But at present, finding thousands of such expert quizzes and suggestions is only a google away. I won’t lie, there were times when I was dating and when there came some hiccups, I tried listening to expert advice online, especially on YouTube. (According to a recent survey, 57 percent of Nepal’s internet users regularly visit the video channel.) One out of 10 suggestions may have worked. I still say it may have, or it could be purely coincidental.

For the past two weeks I have intentionally searched for a few such videos again for research. I shouldn’t be surprised but I am at the number of views these videos have on Youtube (from hundreds of thousands to millions). There were dozens of comments in the videos as well. There are actually people who take these things seriously and follow them. Makes me question if it really works.

Nothing in life comes with a guarantee card except that we are born, we will grow old and we will eventually die. Except that, we all need to explore, test and taste. What might work for those 100,000 people might or might not work for us. Maybe the man/woman you are currently dating does not have any of the characteristics these opinions are based on.

A lot of times we search these videos when we are in dire need of solace. If you notice, these videos are made with a lot of psychological tricks. I can assure you, you will agree with 90 percent of what they are saying because they say things you want to listen to, at that exact distressing moment.

I do partially agree with a few things they say because they are based on human behavior as well. We all react to certain things in similar ways. We all have the same emotions but we act differently in different situations. The boiling and cooling points vary from person to person. Just because a relationship coach in some social media site tells you that you need to be more outgoing and be more reachable when in real life you are an extreme introvert, you might pretend to be someone who you are not, just to save that relationship. The question is, for how long?

A very interesting example right now is a lot of videos that tell us that “Distance makes the heart grow fonder”. It might have worked in the 1980s and 1990s with the magazine quizzes. But right now after the pandemic, what everyone needs is constant physical presence and human touch. We crave for a big rib-cracking bear hug and to meet people who are dear to us. People have stopped waiting for the right time to communicate feelings or grievances because we all have felt the uncertainty of life due to the pandemic.

Like the social media apps we need to upgrade ourselves to the choices we make. If you want to call someone just call and talk—it won’t make you less important or desperate. If you want to say sorry and mend your relationship, go ahead with that too. There is only one rule and that is you want to handle it without any regrets. Rest will fall in place eventually.

Nepal’s constitution offers a flawed concept of democracy. The current constitutional crisis is, in part, an exhibition of those flaws.

In this five-part series, I explore the elements that make our constitution inherently frail and call on civilians to build a truly apolitical (or non-political) movement to save the constitution. This constitution may be flawed but it is our only and last hope.

Part II: A constitution or a truce              

From the oldest codified constitution in the world, of the United States of America, to the youngest, of Nepal, have all resulted from dramatic political changes that marked the end of an era and the start of another.

Nepal’s constitution was the end result of a brutal civil war, marking the end of the monarchy and opened a new era of a democratic republic. It ended the country’s identity as a monolithic Hindu state and acknowledged its religious, cultural, and ethnic diversity.

At the same time, however, the constitution failed to depoliticize the end of the brutal civil war. The drafters made the tragic mistake of mingling the political and peace process and gave the parliament authority over the peace process.    

In the 15 years since the signing of the comprehensive peace accord (CPA) that ended the civil war, there has been little meaningful progress on transitional justice, a vital component of the peace process. Although not specifically mentioned in the CPA, transitional justice was intended to be a holistic approach based on four key principles of truth, reparation, justice, and institutional reforms.

How exactly the transitional justice process would proceed was never made clear. Victims wanted room for prosecution. Maoists and political parties were pushing for blanket amnesty. How was the process to balance these two competing demands? As attention shifted to the integration of the Maoist militia and constitution-writing following the CPA’s signing, it became increasingly clear that the ultimate political authority would lie with those who could direct the process.  

Rather than divorcing itself entirely from transitional justice, the constitution allowed political parties power to determine how the peace process would unfold. It granted parliament the authority to make laws governing the process, which the constituent assembly—also the parliament at the time—did to disastrous consequences.  

Political influence over transitional peace stalled progress. In 2015, the Supreme Court ruled against parts of the Transitional Justice Act passed by parliament, finding that it allowed for amnesty even in cases of serious human rights abuses. The government’s appeal for a review of the Supreme Court’s decision was rejected five years later in April 2020, and only after hearings were postponed some two dozen times.

Key appointments in the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) and the Commission for Investigation on Enforced Disappearance Persons (CIEDP) have been subject to intense political negotiations between and within parties. Today, transitional justice remains mired in controversy and challenges. Approximately 2,500 complaints of disappearance and 63,000 cases of rights violations from the civil war era are pending at the TRC and the CIEDP.

A resolution of transitional justice remains unlikely, and the process itself has emerged as a political bargaining tool. Whoever holds political power and influence over parliament holds the key to the evolution of the process.   

Nepal’s current constitutional crisis isn’t merely about who will hold this or that office, or whether the President or Prime Minister can dissolve parliament. At its core is a deeper struggle about who will direct transitional justice. That process holds the key to the fate of many political and military leaders, not just the Maoists. And in that source of power lies the inherent instability of Nepal’s constitution.    

When the drafters had the opportunity to delink the constitution from transitional justice, they failed to do so. But why didn’t they? Probably because the biggest human rights abusers from the civil war were also the ones drafting the constitution.     

This is where Nepal needs a new peaceful apolitical civilian uprising, one that delinks political power and transitional justice. Civilians cannot convict, but they hold immense power to deliver truth, reconciliation, and to transform our current constitution into a genuine platform for governance and development.      

[email protected]