Submit your Article

Bimala Tumkhewa has been a prominent figure in Nepali literature and media for nearly two decades, carving out a distinguished presence in both realms.

Her writing style not only challenges patriarchal norms but also voices against injustice and inequality. Raised on tales of distant lands by her father, Khadga Bahadur Limbu, who served in the Gurkha battalion, Tumkhewa’s formative years were shaped by his struggles, influencing her deeply.

After Khadga Bahadur’s passing, Tumkhewa defied societal norms by performing his last rites, traditionally reserved for sons. Far from weakening her resolve, this act seemed to strengthen her, reflected in her increasingly powerful writing, particularly her acclaimed love poems.

Currently serving as the central president of Sancharika Samuha, a forum advocating for women journalists, Tumkhewa leads initiatives to address gender issues in media and promote a fairer society. Under her leadership, the organization has worked tirelessly to empower female journalists, advocating for gender-friendly policies and facilitating opportunities for their professional growth.

Tumkhewa’s bold personality was shaped by her upbringing in Pathari, Morang, where she defied societal expectations to pursue her passions in literature and journalism. Despite being the sole daughter after her brothers’ passing, her parents’ unwavering support fueled her literary endeavors and her stance against inequality.

While many of her peers pursued opportunities abroad, Tumkhewa remained dedicated to her craft, primarily focusing on poetry before branching out into storytelling and memoirs. Motherhood marked a significant shift in her perspective, influencing her creative output and inspiring her upcoming collection of stories.

Believing writers must hold themselves accountable to society, Tumkhewa has consistently used her platform to denounce injustice and immorality, challenging established norms through her writing.

Her journey to Kathmandu in 2001 was marked by the discovery of a city different from her village, yet her love for poetry forged a deep connection with its streets. Despite facing hardships, she immersed herself in the literary scene, contributing to the rich tapestry of Nepali literature.

During the 2006 protests, Tumkhewa actively participated, alongside a diverse array of citizens, in advocating for democracy. Reflecting on the camaraderie of that time, she notes a sense of disconnection among contemporary writers, contrasting with the solidarity witnessed during the protests.

Recognizing the ongoing injustices faced by Nepali women, Tumkhewa emphasizes the need for greater acknowledgment of their contributions, advocating for female representation in key positions, such as the chancellorship of the Nepal Academy, to elevate their status further.

The streets of Kathmandu would be filled with protesters every day during the 2006 protest. Within moments, the streets would be littered with tear gas, water cannons, stones, and brick pieces. Commoners, lawyers, journalists, poets and writers had all taken to the streets. Tumkhewa joined the protests daily. During those days, places like Gurukul, Naya Baneshwor, Putalisadak, Bagbazar, Ratnapark and Khullamanch would be teeming with protesters. Writers from across the country had converged on the streets. 

This was the first time such a massive number of citizens had taken to the streets for democracy after the protests of 1950, 1960 and 1990. “The current environment is not like that time. Back then, there was a deep camaraderie among poets and writers. Now, we may seem close on social media, but our hearts are far apart,” she added.

The list of injustices and violence that Nepali women have had to endure solely for being women is quite long. Although women have risen above the situation of having to commit sati (self-immolation) upon their husband’s death, Nepali society is still not free from such crimes. Women’s contributions at all levels and stages are significant, but their true value and recognition have not been adequately acknowledged. Since Nepali women have assumed all important positions in the country, Tumkhewa feels if the Nepal Academy has a female chancellor, its dignity would be enhanced further.

Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs, Narayankaji Shrestha, returned home after concluding a nine-day visit (March 24-31, 2024) to the People’s Republic of China, upon the invitation of Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi. During his stay in China, he engaged in bilateral discussions with his Chinese counterpart and paid a courtesy call on Chairman of the National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), Wang Huning. 

His itinerary comprised high-level meetings primarily in Beijing, the capital city of China. However, beyond the diplomatic engagements, DPM Shrestha ventured to three strategically significant locations in China, vital for Nepal's interests. Concluding his engagements in Beijing, he visited Chongqing, Tibet, and Sichuan, situated in the southwestern part of China. These regions, emerging as pivotal trading hubs in southern China, hold considerable potential for bolstering bilateral trade ties with Nepal.

Upon arrival at the international airport, DPM Shrestha convened a press conference alongside senior officials from the ministry. He asserted that the visit had been ‘highly successful’ and had elevated bilateral relations to new heights. It's a common diplomatic practice for ministers returning from foreign trips to portray their visits in such positive terms, often using phrases like ‘newer heights’ to describe the outcomes. In Nepal, it has become a fashion statement.  

Despite the vague language used to describe the achievements of the visit, DPM Shrestha emphasized that the primary focus was on extending trade, fostering economic cooperation, and building trust between the two nations. In light of Shrestha's remarks and the outcomes of his visit, one significant progress emerges: the visit has played a role in restoring understanding and trust between Nepali and Chinese governments. This suggests that the meetings and events during the visit have contributed to strengthening the foundation of bilateral relations.

When KP Sharma Oli and Pushpa Kamal Dahal formed a new coalition led by leftist parties, breaking away from previous alliances under the Nepali Congress, rumors began making rounds that China may have played a significant role in this surprising political maneuver. Nepal’s volatile political landscape often gives rise to such rumors and gossip, and it was widely speculated that the formation of a leftist-led government in Nepal could only have been possible with the initiation and support of China, given its communist ideology. DPM Shrestha might have shared such comments and feedback with Chinese officials. And, he certainly clarified that the new coalition will try to address genuine concerns of neighbors without tilting to any side.   

Whether India sought to maintain the previous government or whether China supported the formation of the new alliance remains a question best left to be answered in due time. But in domestic political developments, Nepali political parties should stop dragging India and China as parties involved in the process. We should keep in mind that India and China have greater roles to play in a fast-changing global context beyond the neighborhood. It is completely an ignorance that New Delhi and Beijing always contemplate about intervening in Nepal’s internal affairs. This thought is just the byproduct of deficiency syndrome of Nepali general psyche.   

When the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) entered into force last August, it was perceived as a significant setback for China, especially since the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), signed four months prior to MCC, had not seen any tangible implementation. This development was seen as a blow to Beijing, indicating that the US had successfully advanced its project in Nepal while China had yet to materialize its plans under the BRI. Chinese leaders viewed MCC as part of the Indo-Pacific strategy, interpreting its entry into Nepal as a strategic move of the US aimed at countering China’s influence. While the signed document denies China’s claim that MCC is part of the IPS, Nepal’s stance should remain impartial vis-a-vis the strategic rivalry between the US and China. As a sovereign nation, Nepal should maintain cordial relations with both of its neighbors. 

This visit should be seen in the backdrop of growing mistrust between Nepal and China during the previous coalition. In that sense, the primary concern from the Nepali side was to openly exchange thoughts on bilateral cooperation and bridge that gap. DPM Shrestha has worked on it. “The visit has been instrumental in strengthening mutual harmony, respect and trust between Nepal and China,” he narrated.  DPM Shrestha is recognized as one of the few Nepali politicians with a deep understanding of foreign policy and international relations. He has demonstrated an ability to conduct diplomacy in a balanced manner that respects the sentiments of Nepal's neighbors. While maintaining relations with China, he must have kept in mind that his policy and action shouldn’t be perceived as unnecessarily loyal to any neighbor.  

During the discussion, he reiterated the importance of connectivity between Nepal and China requesting the opening of the 14 traditional trade routes that have remained closed since the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic, eliciting a positive response from China. This issue has surfaced in previous meetings as well. As soon as China opens all major routes for trade and transaction, it would be beneficial for China too. Nepal and China also agreed to establish a joint commission at the level of foreign ministers. This is a positive development. According to the report, this commission will play a crucial role in regularly reviewing various aspects of the existing friendly relations between Nepal and China, signifying a commitment to deepening bilateral ties through continuous dialogue and collaboration.

The much-awaited agreement on the implementation plan of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) was not finalized during the visit, though discussions were held to give a final shape to the plan and advance it toward the execution phase. This demonstrates the ongoing commitment of both the parties to work together on BRI and reflects their shared interests in enhancing connectivity and cooperation. Debate has been there about the modality of financing the projects under BRI. The Nepali side has been asking China to provide grants for some major mega projects while in the rest of the projects Nepal would be ready to accept the loans. China should consider the proposal of Nepal. Given that Nepal shares borders with two emerging economies and rising global powers, it is imperative to seize opportunities while avoiding unnecessary challenges.

The current political landscape presents myriad challenges and complexities. Each day, scores of young individuals depart the country in pursuit of employment and education opportunities elsewhere. There is widespread discontent with the prevailing socio-economic conditions and governance. Citizens grapple with soaring market prices, unemployment, shortages of essential goods, and enduring issues of governance inefficiency. They encounter bribery and favoritism as pervasive barriers to accessing basic services across government offices, corporations, and banks. This pervasive corruption fosters dissatisfaction, discontent, and resentment towards the government and political parties.

In light of these challenges, the fundamental question arises: What is the path forward? What do citizens seek, and how can their needs be addressed? Primarily, people yearn for effective governance, characterized by the eradication of corruption, accountability for wrongdoers, streamlined service provision devoid of bribery, domestic employment opportunities, and accessible quality education. These aspirations form the bedrock of public expectations, yet realizing them poses a significant challenge.

On corruption and good governance

To control, minimize, and abolish the corruption in the country, the government needs the political willpower. And the parties' leadership. The govt., parties, and bureaucratic leadership must be seen as clean and bold to fight against the menace of corruption. No tickets to corrupt leaders or cadres in the election and no party promotion: This principle must be applied. The corrupt people must be filtered from below.

In Nepal, civil servants are divided along the party lines and are doing pure politics with the State’s salary. It is objectionable and inappropriate. It must be stopped. We do not find such a situation anywhere in the world. The political parties must review it and find a national consensus on it.

On CIAA 

Though there are a lot of limitations and constraints, the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA) is doing well in controlling corruption in the country. However, there is a need to bring some concrete reform and change. This institution must be free from political intervention, and there is a need to restructure the composition and bring change in the selection process of commissioners. Only then will the work of this Institution be effective and result-oriented.

On CIB and other investigating agencies 

Our police investigating agencies are very skilled, effective, and performance-oriented in South Asia. The work of these agencies is highly appreciated and recognized by the regional and international police investigating agencies. The Nepali people also have a positive impression of it. However, there are always setbacks when political interventions are made. Political intervention is always made ineffective and resultless to the work performed by the agencies. So, there must be no political intervention in the crime investigation process to control corruption and punish the culprits.

On service delivery

The general people are indifferent to party politics and pay attention to their daily needs and concerns. They are susceptible to and care about service delivery issues. They always compare the Panchayat system with the multiparty and present Federal Democratic Republican system. They say that they do not find new and optimistic scenarios at present. Their impression of service delivery is even worse in the present situation. They say that without bribery or approach or caste, linguistic, and regional relations, receiving service is almost impossible anywhere in government or semi-government offices. Scenarios are the same in banks (basically for getting loans) and other corporation offices. So, what should the government do here?

The government must send concrete, clear, and circular solid notices to all service delivery offices to perform their duties promptly and adequately without delay, bribes, and approach. Otherwise, it should be punished. The home ministry, related ministries, and the prime minister’s office should be vigilant and alert so that the people can realize and see the positive change in service delivery.

On unemployment

The government should have a clear-cut vision of employment generation. Employment can be generated through State, semi-state, private, and FDI sectors. There should be an investment-friendly environment in the country. All legal, political, administrative, technical, and practical barriers should be removed in a basket decision as soon as possible. Those who are obstacles in this process should be punished. All economic activities, whether big or small, should be encouraged.

On education

Education and health have a massive potential in our country. We can make it a hub in South Asia. Our national and foreign investors are eager to invest in this area. Nepali parents are very supportive and cooperative in providing their children a quality education in Nepal. They are heartily spending money on it. The Indians have money and they are eager to send their children to Nepal for quality and cheap education. They also like Nepali weather very much. So, we have the service seeker as well as the investors too.

The only thing is the government should be supportive. We should have an apparent education policy and program and a very supportive policy and attitude for the investors.

In conclusion, meeting the aspirations of the populace necessitates a concerted effort to combat corruption, enhance service delivery, generate employment, and improve education accessibility. Collaboration between government, political parties, and citizens is essential in realizing these goals and building a more prosperous and equitable society. Through sustained dedication and collaborative action, tangible progress can be achieved towards creating a brighter future for all.

Over the past few years, Nepal has found itself in the midst of a tug-of-war among three major global powers: India, China, and the US. Each of these countries are vying for influence in Nepal’s economic, military, ideological and technological spheres.

Let’s begin with the US. The Biden administration in the US has made advancing democracy one of its key global priorities. In South Asia, Nepal appears to be in the high priority of the US democracy projects. The US has been inviting Nepal’s prime minister to its annual democracy summit. Both communist and non-communist prime ministers have attended the summit. The US is making efforts to counterbalance the influence of the Chinese Communist Party in Nepal and uphold democratic values in the region. In the meantime, the US is equally concerned about the influence of India’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) which is pushing for the restoration of Hindu state in Nepal. A US document says: “The Nepali political class’s penchant for balancing relations with its large neighbors India and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) renders security cooperation, including with the United States, prone to political interference.” 

Despite claims that it does not export its communist ideology, China has been promoting its political model in other countries. Under the guise of showcasing its achievements, China has been exporting its ideology to South Asian countries. Chinese leaders are urging their Nepali counterparts, particularly those aligned with the communist ideology, to embrace the Chinese model. Every year, China invites a large number of Nepali communist leaders to its cities to showcase its development model. Of late, Nepali leaders have started saying that Nepal can replicate the same model which reflects a growing acceptance of the Chinese  model within the country.

Though India and the US are on similar pages on a range of issues, the two powers have divergent views about the democratic values in South Asia. India, on its part, is sending conflicting signals on the ideological front. While the Indian government seems committed to uphold democracy, secularism and inclusive constitution in Nepal, the ruling BJP harbors reservations about Nepal’s 2015 constitution, which, it perceives, is imbued with Western values. The BJP’s parent organization, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, is reaching out across the political parties and the general people with Hindu-centric agendas. The BJP believes it can reduce Western influence on Nepal, dismantle secularism and restore Hindus state through such activities. Such activities are already polarizing Nepal’s political fabric.

In addition to ideological battles, Nepal is grappling with strategic challenges posed by major powers. China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and its insistence on the One China policy dominate all its engagements with Nepal. Likewise, China’s Global Security Initiatives (GSI) and Global Civilizational Initiatives (GCI) and Global Development initiative (GDI) are getting more prominence over economic issues. Nepal has consistently expressed its commitment to One China policy for over 50 years now. Still, China does not seem convinced and seeks reaffirmation on One China policy every time.

A press statement issued after Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal's visit to China last September also reiterated Nepal's firm stance against Taiwan Independence. His new Foreign Minister Narayan Kaji Shrestha echoed the same sentiment during his visit to China last month. Although China keeps emphasizing on the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) in various meetings, tangible progress on infrastructure development under the BRI umbrella has not materialized yet. Government officials, politicians, and foreign policy analysts say that Nepal needs to capitalize on China's economic growth. However, this aspiration has yet to materialize due to the significant focus that both countries are placing on strategic concerns.

While Chinese investment in Nepal is on the rise and cooperation between the two nations has expanded in recent years, substantial investment projects that could catalyze economic growth remain elusive. Instead, Nepal’s attention is primarily directed towards ensuring that its territory is not used for anti-China activities. Regarding Chinese investment in Nepal, there have been occasional complaints from the Chinese side regarding obstacles faced by its investors.

Nepal engaged in a four-year debate on whether to accept the $500m support from the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) of the US government. The MCC projects are finally into implementation. However, the project is not gaining the desired pace. Many attribute the slow progress to the government’s lackluster commitment to these projects. This tepid response was partly influenced by China’s strong opposition to the projects which labeled it as part of the Indo-Pacific Strategy (IPS). Nepali politicians, bureaucrats and experts continue to struggle in comprehending the US policy towards Nepal in the context of the IPS. Following discussions on the IPS, attention in Nepal shifted on the State Partnership Program (SPP) of the US government.

Under domestic pressure, the government led by Sher Bahadur Deuba of the Nepali Congress wrote a letter to the US government stating that Nepal won’t be a part of the SPP. Of late, there has been a notable increase in interest from US investors looking to invest in Nepal. However, Nepal has yet to effectively address this interest despite a substantial increase in US assistance through USAID.

All this shows that Nepal has already fallen into the geopolitical trap. Nepal is not seeing much investments in priority sectors as major powers are prioritizing their security and strategic interests. Though Nepal is pushing for more economic collaborations, strategic issues are dominating the bilateral negotiations and public discourse. Nepal’s current key priorities are economic recovery, minimizing the impacts of climate change and creating jobs but due to the geopolitical tensions these issues are getting a backseat in the engagement with major powers.

Nepal has struggled to take a clear stance on initiatives like the IPS, BRI, and other strategic endeavors. While managing these challenges should be the top priority of the government, the country is marred by internal political instability. Geopolitics is gradually creating rifts within Nepali society. Nepal needs to make concerted efforts to mitigate internal divisions and chart a path forward that safeguards Nepal’s interests amidst global power struggles.