Submit your Article

Just like China has its ‘Socialism with Chinese characteristics’ to govern domestic politics, the country has its own way of doing foreign policy. The rest of the world seems to move by one set of rules, and China by another. Every other major power right now is devoted to battling the Covid-19 crisis. China too has given meticulous attention to the virus. Yet it has also espied the “right time” to expand its footprints abroad.

The country is ultra-active in Covid-battered Nepal as well. Chinese ambassador Hou Yanqi has been doing the rounds of the abodes of top Nepal Communist Party leaders, urging them not to ‘destabilize’ the Oli government. Even though the Chinese are unhappy with the Nepali prime minister’s backing of the MCC compact, they seem to have calculated that Oli is still the man to best secure their interests this side of the Tibetan plateau. Having come to this conclusion, ambassador Hou has thrown diplomatic decorum to the wind in her open lobbying for Oli’s continuity. 

The chief claimant to Oli’s PM throne, Pushpa Kamal Dahal, has understandably refused to meet her. Having spent so much of his political capital in the past few years proving his loyalty to Beijing, he does not want to lose the hard-earn trust. Therefore, only a month and a half ago, he had listened to Hou and let Oli be. But Dahal is in no mood to make such concessions again. But nor can he defy Hou.

Dahal realizes that saying ‘no’ to the Chinese could undo all his efforts to cultivate Beijing. Dahal also understands that as much as New Delhi mistrusts Oli, it does not trust Dahal any more. Dahal was the one who broke the unstated decorum of the Nepali prime minister making New Delhi his first port of call and flew to China instead. The ex-Maoist boss was also the one who tried to sack a sitting Nepal Army chief, despite clear warnings from the south not to engage in such adventurism. 

Above anything else, the recent activism of the Chinese ambassador, her easy access to top leaders, her lack of concern about her conduct, even Dahal’s refusal to see her—all show the enormous power China wields over the NCP. Yet China’s preference for one NCP leader above everyone else is harder to understand. The only way to make sense of it is to assume Oli has told Hou that should other NCP leaders try to take away premiership from him, he would not hesitate to divide the party, China’s most trusted institution in Nepal. In other words, Oli subtly asked her to do the lobbying for his continuity. 

But why blame the Chinese envoy when it is our own leaders who are throwing their doors open for her, any time, any day? And weren’t previous Indian envoys in Nepal—and the bunch of Indian spooks that has now descended in Kathmandu to checkmate Hou—doing the same? Moreover, the misogynistic reporting of sections of the Indian media that shamelessly accused Hou of practicing ‘honey trap’ diplomacy has not gone down well here, and will further dent India’s image.

In the end, we are going about this the wrong way. Were our leaders more mindful of national interests and abided by the diplomatic code of conduct, the question of conduct of foreign envoys and other representatives here could be largely irrelevant.

What started as a health crisis in the form of the Covid-19 pandemic has now unfolded into a global economic and livelihood crisis. While the ubiquitous quarantines and lockdowns may have saved many lives and provided an additional benefit of environmental improvement, their enormous consequences on people’s livelihoods are conspicuous.

For example, a recently conducted Rapid Assessment of Socio-Economic Impact of Covid-19 in Nepal by the Institute for Integrated Development Studies (IIDS) indicates that 28 percent of men and 41 percent of women lost their jobs following the lockdown. Further, the impact is concentrated among the income-based vulnerable population dependent on scarce economic resources. The livelihood crisis, if it persists, is likely to further impact the already vulnerable population and pull people into poverty.

In Nepal, one-fourth of the population lives below the national poverty line (i. e. less than $0.5 a day). Given their finite earnings and scarce resources, how they sustain their lives and grapple with various socio-economic constraints is a pertinent topic of discussion. Typically, income-based vulnerable people are more likely to face food insecurity and have limited access to healthcare facilities. These challenges are potent, especially as they also tend to engage in physically demanding work.

Food insecurity is a long-standing issue in Nepal. According to the Demographic and Health Survey (DHS), as many as 52 percent Nepali households are food insecure, and food insecurity is pronounced among households in the lower wealth quintiles. The 2019 Nobel Prize-winning economists Esther Duflo and Abhijit Banarjee, building on the work of another Nobel Laureate Angus Deaton, say food insecurity among the impoverished population is concerning as they spend a significant amount of their earnings—roughly one-half to three-fourth of their total income—on food.

Following the Covid-19 lockdown in Nepal, a large proportion of the economically vulnerable population has lost jobs and incomes, and therefore become more susceptible to food insecurity. This depreciates the country’s human capital, which in turn threatens to derail economic growth. While the physical toil and economic hardship of the economically vulnerable population garner much public attention, their psychological states under resource scarcity and poverty often go unnoticed.

Behavioral economists Sendhil Mullainathan and Eldar Shafir have found that poor farmers have significantly higher cognitive ability post-crop harvest as compared to pre-harvest, suggesting that economically vulnerable people are psychologically distracted under resource scarcity. Further, scarcity-led psychological distractions could lead them to make adverse economic decisions, such as falling into huge debt traps, aggravating their economic hardship. So, while it is important to understand the economic struggles of the poor, which is likely to exacerbate in the immediate future, it is also vital to recognize the interplay of the socio-economical and psychological factors, especially at a time when the suicide rates are noticeably high.

The government role is crucial in recognizing the challenges and needs of its citizens. However, the current crisis has put a question mark over government responsiveness, as evidenced in its dire preparedness for health emergencies, resource allocation, and mobilization, giving rise to what has now developed into a nationwide public protest.

Thousands of migrant workers have returned to Nepal and more are due. Given that many of the returned migrants will find no immediate jobs, the government is faced with the challenge of overseeing their safe return and accommodation. However, incompetent management thus far has also raised serious concerns over government credibility. Amid these uncertainties, the question of how the government should address the needs of its citizens, especially the economically vulnerable population, becomes a monumental one.

Job security is vital to keep the economy afloat. The government can employ a large number of local workers in large infrastructure projects by adopting safety measures. We also have to scale-up and improve our quarantine and healthcare facilities to accommodate the increasing number of virus-contaminated individuals, possible suspects, and returned migrants. The government can also utilize local workforce in those facilities. While the recently announced budget does not guarantee outright economic protection for the vulnerable population, tax benefits for small and medium-sized enterprises may help in their economic recovery. The government should ensure the smooth running of those enterprises.

The role of provincial and local governments is as crucial in engaging and incentivizing local workforce, with incentivizing agricultural production, which is already underway in several municipalities, the immediate priority. A case in point is the rural municipality of Miklajung of Panchthar, which has announced an incentive of Rs 100,000 for farmers producing over 40 muris of paddy this year. More economic incentives are required at the municipal level to engage the local workforce, increase agricultural production, and ensure food security.

Lastly, it’s about time the government cuts down extravagant spending in all three tiers and focuses on more urgent issues at hand.

Khatiwada is a PhD candidate in economics at the University of New Mexico, USA; Pant is a fresh Juris Doctor Graduate from University of Sydney, Australia

‘Neutrality’, ‘nonalignment’, ‘amity with all, enmity with none’—what is there not to like about the Oli government’s key foreign policy tenets? But they mean little. Historically, while Nepal has professed strict nonalignment, it has repeatedly tilted between India and China. India, one of the leaders of the nonaligned movement, acted as all but a formal Soviet ally until the collapse of the USSR. China too openly flirted with the Soviets before shifting its allegiance to the US in early 1970s. Now, on the face of a hostile America, China-Russia rapprochement is again reaching new heights. 

At present Nepal’s foreign policy exhibits a clear China tilt, as evidenced by its backing of the latest Chinese crackdown in Hong Kong, and the CCP’s lockdown-time political training of its ruling party leaders. Indian Army chief M.M. Naravane was wrong to infer that Nepal took up Kalapani at China’s behest. But in the Indian eyes he only said what seemed most logical in light of the India-China border tensions. 

Talking to APEX, both Indian and Chinese strategic thinkers said their countries could ask Nepal to clarify its allegiance in the event of an India-China war. While India would seek Nepal’s backing based on the 1950 Treaty of Peace and Friendship, China is likely to invoke Nepal’s BRI membership to do so. Again, the easy way out for Nepal would be to profess its continued neutrality, come what may. But as tensions mount that fiction will get progressively harder to maintain.

There is zero trust in KP Oli in New Delhi. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s henchmen who deal with Nepal have ruled out meaningful talks so long as Oli is in power. The beleaguered Nepali prime minister may see his labeling as ‘pro-China’ cruel just when the Chinese are losing trust in him over his backing of theMCC compact, which Beijing wants Nepal to ditch. 

If Oli remains in power, India will continue to label him pro-China and refuse to talk. As the status quo in Kalapani suits it just fine, India will have no incentive to discuss border dispute. Luckily for New Delhi, Oli, in a last-ditch effort to save his chair, seems minded to throw his country into another political turmoil. If he splits the ruling party, India could once again get to shape the new government in Kathmandu to its liking, much to Beijing’s chagrin. This is why China is more amenable to the option of Oli quietly handing over power to someone else in the NCP. More likely, Oli will put up a dogged fight and use every trick in the book to hang on.

The Covid-19 crisis and escalating India-China tensions will have all kinds of unforeseeable consequences for Nepal. If India and China start firing on one another, the 40,000 Nepali or Nepali-origin Gurkha soldiers will be on the frontline. When they return to the country in body bags, the pressure to end Gurkha recruitment will grow, to further detriment of India-Nepal ties. Perhaps the government considers an unstated alignment with a stronger power a safer bet. But if India ‘loses’ the war, dealing with the wounded elephant would be a herculean challenge as well. 

Right now, Nepal is relatively autonomous to profess its neutrality and nonalignment. Tomorrow, the question of its autonomous status may be rendered moot if neither India nor China trusts the Nepali leadership to secure its interests.

As locusts descended on Gurgaon, India, I watched videos online and realized the area noted for its technological sophistication and prowess looked like an ecological desert. The blue-glassed skyscrapers, asphalted treeless roads, barren streetscapes so different from green rural landscapes of India struck me with their ecological unsoundness. While touted as a “Smart City,” filled with smart people using and selling smart tech, what was most obvious was how helpless the people were in warding off this natural disaster. They had no ducks, no sparrows, no wasps, no schoolchildren picking locusts off the ground to sell to the local government for Rs 25, even. They did not even have soil they could apply with nitrogen fertilizer, another deterrent to locusts.

Yet we’ve been forced to think this way of living is the acme of perfection, one we should all emulate and aspire to. Bill Gates raised $9 billion to create a vaccine for Covid 19. Why did all the nations of the world eagerly handover their health budgets to this tech marketer, instead of banding together to create an international consortium of researchers from universities around the world which they could depend on to deliver for the public good? Why did they believe that the richest man in the world, with many pharmaceutical investments, was the right man for the job? 

The trendy term STEM seamlessly fuses science with technology. Science, which has always meant gathering of knowledge through observation, and conclusions based on rational correlations, doesn’t require a techie twin to become science. With the STEM worldview, however, we have started to assume that all of our knowledge depends not on long and thoughtful observation, but on technological machines which define the contemporary scientific encounter. If there’s no machine to contextualize the phenomena, surely it cannot be science!

A few days ago, I had to call a fridge repairman to refill my fridge with hydrocarbon gas. As he stood there among the copper tubes and wires, cutting and fusing things with his blowtorch, filling my kitchen with toxic gases, it occurred to me that this was a futile, convoluted exercise. Who came up with this idea of creating this giant machinery held together with wires, tubes and gases, simply so that people could keep their food cold for a day or two? We were willing to blow a hole through the ozone for this enterprise and kill all of life in the process. What leap of logic made us think that this invention (designed by men who’d never tried to clean a plastic ice-cube tray, for one) had to be in everyone’s kitchen?

The ventilator, which fills people up with oxygen, operates on a similar premise: the body is a big complicated machine, one we must refill with gas when it runs out of it. It is no surprise that the dials with which a fridge repairman fills up a gas chamber is similar to the dials which regulate oxygen in a ventilator. This mechanistic view is a Western way of looking at the body. X-ray, ultrasound and other imaging devices peer into the body to understand its workings. The body is to be repaired by being cut, drilled, blowtorched by chemicals and radiation. We glorify the technology behind these procedures. We are told these apparatuses are the height of scientific thinking, not a rather crude way to approach the complex workings of a body with an unknowable mind.

A recent discussion I got into Twitter with a young woman illustrates this point. A young baby was left tragically deformed by doctors at Grande Hospital after they used suctions to mechanically pull water from his brain. Babies in Nepal are traditionally massaged with mustard oil to avoid this very problem of inflammation and water collecting in the brain. Fenugreek is a known anti-inflammatory agent. The Tamang woman who shaped my nephew’s head did it beautifully. I had sat and watched the way she patted the baby’s head into shape.

Knowing I was straying into sensitive territory, but pushed by the thought of the young child, I made the point that the tragic latrogenic distortion of Rihan’s head could be corrected by age-old traditional mustard oil massage, because the two halves of the skull would not fuse till he was three. There was still time to reshape it through the gentle, expressive molding skills of the masseuses who know so well how to improve upon nature’s work. A young woman responded to me in this manner:

“i dont even want to argue w you. pls refrain from peddling pseudoscience on everything under the sun.”

Why do we believe that “science” is somehow wedded to this mechanistic view of the high-tech world, and anything else which does not involve technological apparatuses, Big Pharma, transnational corporations, or Western Latin phrases, is not science? Why has technology become our touchstone of scientific knowledge, not rational and patient observation? Why did we just hand over $9 billion to a tech guy to cure ourselves, when that work should be done by an international consortium of researchers coming from Third World countries where the coronavirus hasn’t spread, and whose traditional science and knowledge have already provided the cure?