Submit your Article

On Nov 3, Nepal was struck by a devastating 6.4-magnitude earthquake, centered in Jajarkot within the remote Karnali province. This natural disaster left the nation in urgent need of assistance to rescue victims and provide essential relief materials and shelter. The government swiftly undertook rescue efforts at the epicenter and other severely affected areas by deploying the Nepal Army and other security forces. However, a significant gap emerged in providing essential aid to those most affected, leaving many stranded without proper shelter.

The earthquake claimed the lives of at least 157 people, with nearly 400 individuals sustaining injuries across Nepal and parts of India. The dire situation worsened due to the government’s involvement in petty politics when it came to distributing relief materials. Instead of focusing on impartial aid distribution, the ruling parties showed favoritism by prioritizing their own supporters and cadres. This division in aid allocation further exacerbated the suffering of those already grappling with the aftermath of the disaster.

In the aftermath of the earthquake, Nepal’s immediate neighbors, India and China, stepped up to provide crucial support to the affected areas. Additionally, ambassadors from various nations expressed deep condolences for the lives lost in the earthquake and offered readiness to extend support to Nepal during this challenging time. Collaborative efforts of the neighboring countries and the international community played a pivotal role in assisting Nepal’s relief and recovery endeavors after the disaster struck.

Swift response

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi was the first to extend assistance to Nepal in the wake of the earthquake. Expressing deep sorrow for the loss of lives and damage caused, Modi tweeted his condolences and pledged India’s unwavering support. “India stands in solidarity with the people of Nepal and is prepared to provide all possible assistance. Our thoughts are with the bereaved families, and we wish the injured a speedy recovery.”

India promptly fulfilled Prime Minister Modi’s commitment by delivering the initial phase of relief materials to Nepal on Nov 5. From the Nepalgunj Airport, two truck-loads of essential supplies, accompanied with a security team, were dispatched to Jajarkot and Rukum Paschim. India’s Ambassador to Nepal, Naveen Srivastava, handed over the relief to Deputy Prime Minister and Defence Minister Purna Bahadur Khadka. The aid package comprised 625 units of plastic tarpaulin and tents, 1,000 sleeping bags, 1,000 blankets, 70 large-size tents, 35 packets of tent accessories, medicines and 48 other assorted articles, among other essentials.

On Nov 6, India continued its support by delivering a second consignment of relief materials for the disaster-affected families. The Deputy Chief of Mission, Prasanna Shrivastava, presented the second consignment to Nepal as part of the ongoing aid efforts. 

In the aftermath of the 2015 earthquake, India had been the first country to swiftly provide vital support to Nepal. Maintaining this commitment, India remained steadfast in extending comprehensive assistance to Nepal in the wake of the Jajarkot earthquake. Prime Minister Modi reiterated Indian support to Nepal, emphasizing the significance of assisting neighboring countries during times of crisis and how India continues to stand by its neighbors in times of need. 

China, the northern neighbor, also supported Nepal. On Nov 9, two Chinese cargo planes arrived at the airport carrying 600 cotton tents and 4,600 blankets. 

China’s Ambassador to Nepal, Chen Song, handed over the relief package to Nepal’s Home Minister, Narayan Kaji Shrestha, who acknowledged China’s consistent support for Nepal’s economic development and emphasized their assistance during critical times, such as the 2015 earthquakes and the Covid-19 pandemic.

Ambassador Chen highlighted the significance of the relief materials, portraying a strong connection between China and Nepal, characterized by shared mountains and rivers, and a bond of mutual assistance. These supplies symbolize China’s commitment to fostering a community with a shared future for all mankind, he said. This crucial support entered Nepal via the Kerung-Rasuwagadhi border point, facilitated by the Chinese Embassy in Nepal. Additionally, the China International Development Cooperation Agency announced a supplementary batch of emergency humanitarian assistance for Nepal. Furthermore, the Red Cross Society of China offered emergency cash assistance to aid Nepal’s rescue and relief endeavors in the earthquake-affected areas.

During an official visit to Nepal, Communist Party of China’s Tibet secretary Wang Junzheng announced further support for Nepal while paying a courtesy call on Prime Minister Puspha Kamal Dahal. Also, CPC’s International Department (CPCID) extended support to Nepal through party channels. Leaders from Nepal’s major four parties facilitated the distribution of the materials received thus to the affected regions.

Genuine friendship

India and China, as emerging powers and our neighbors, have demonstrated their unwavering support for Nepal in times of crisis. The immediate assistance provided after the earthquake showcased their genuine friendship and solidarity with Nepal in times of need. The border disputes and conflicts between India and China are bilateral issues that Nepal regards as internal matters of the neighbors. How they navigate and develop their relations with the US is their prerogative, and Nepal can only urge both nations to peacefully resolve their disputes through diplomatic channels.

Nepal perceives India and China not as challenges but as opportunities. Their swift aid during this crisis underscores the importance of regional cooperation and mutual assistance in times of adversities. It's crucial for Nepali leaders to recognize that while Nepal benefits from neighborly support, it’s equally important to ensure respect for genuine interests of the neighbors. 

Shared borders and cultural ties mean disputes can crop up because of close proximity. Prime Minister Modi’s ‘neighborhood first’ policy has consistently supported Nepal, just as President Xi Jinping’s ‘peripheral diplomacy’ has guided China’s support to Nepal within this framework.

Nepal must uphold its national interests and sovereignty while engaging with its neighbors. It’s essential not to display bias in dealings with them. Nepal should adopt a pragmatic approach and openly discuss issues. If there are discrepancies or missteps from either neighbor, Nepal should seek rectification in a transparent manner. Nepal’s stance, whether in protest or support toward India and China, should be guided by specific issues and remain issue-centric.

Foreign policy is a set of goals, policies and strategies aimed at promoting national interest through effective conduct of external relations. Most importantly, it has permanent and changeable features. According to Frederick H Hartmann, it is a ‘Systematic statement of deliberately selected national policies’. George Modelski defines foreign policy as the system of activities evolved by communities for changing the behavior of other states and for adjusting their own activities to the international environment. Hence, it is generally designed to protect and promote a country’s national interest, security, economic prosperity and independent international image.

Nepal aims to protect its core national interest and secure these interests through its foreign policy (Foreign Policy 2077). The policy, an attempt at clarifying Nepal’s policy to the internal and external audiences, highlights the country’s constitutional provisions, including directive principles, and tries to incorporate its fundamental objectives. Apart from guiding internal affairs of Nepal, the policy also helps development partners, neighboring countries, academicians, foreign policy experts, researchers and others get a clear picture of its objectives and goals.

Nepal’s foreign policy is characterized by continuity and change because it is guided not only by constitutional provisions but also by ages-old principles of peaceful co-existence (Panchasheel), non-alignment, world peace and international law.

For the promotion and protection of national interest, a foreign policy has to adjust to the changing political and economic contexts as well as the unexpected exigencies relating to new emergencies issues of health, ecology and technology, among others, by keeping the above-mentioned characteristics at the core. Foreign policy 2077 emphasizes soft power, multidimensional connections with other countries, revision of bilateral treaties, Nepali diaspora, resolution of border disputes, labor diplomacy, public diplomacy, track II diplomacy and climate change issues, making it a bit different from previous foreign policies.

Given contemporary international politics and our geostrategic location, the policy demands widespread and multidimensional cooperation involving government-to-government, people-to-people and business-to-business engagements with the international community. 

Our foreign policy also emphasizes multidimensional connectivity networks in this globalized world, including transnational roadways, railways, waterways, airways, optical fibers and electricity transmission lines. Such international networks can play a crucial role in the transformation of least developed countries (LDCs) to developing ones.

Although foreign policy 2077 is much more detailed than previous foreign policies, challenges remain when it comes to getting desired results through this instrument. Nepal needs to identify new areas of collaboration driven by shared interests to get benefits from technology transfers and strengthen diplomatic missions further.

Our unique geostrategic location between two Asian giants India and China means we need to maintain cordial, balanced, friendly and cooperative relations with both the neighbors to achieve the desired and set goals of foreign policy. 

We also need to know that conduct of foreign policy is not the exclusive domain of Foreign Ministry as the private sector, civil society, non-government organizations, professionals and state as well as non-state actors all have important roles to play. 

Most of the time, our foreign policy is punctuated by hyper-populism and often not dictated by principles due to political influence. This calls for an effective mechanism for the execution of foreign policy. Our political parties often pick individuals lacking even minimum standards and knowledge of diplomacy as ‘diplomats’, so the focus should be on improving professional skills and efficiencies of diplomats and officials working in Nepali missions abroad.

Nepal has struggled with many ups and downs and undergone various political translations. Time has come for the country to use economic diplomacy as a major aspect of foreign policy to achieve national prosperity and make every Nepali happy.

Formulation of a national consensus-based foreign policy and its full implementation is a must to realize this goal. 

Rule of law is a basic tenet of democracy. If a nation has a robust rule of law, it will essentially have a strong and durable democracy. But what is the rule of law and how can it be meaningful? The first element of rule of law deals with the process of lawmaking—which ought to be transparent and participatory. According to the Constitution of Nepal 2015, all three tiers of the state—the federal, province and the local level—are entitled to make their own laws within their constitutionally and legally-defined limits. 

Presently, there are 334 members in the two Houses of the Federal Parliament; 550 members in assemblies of seven provinces; and over 20,000 elected representatives in legislative bodies of 753 local levels in the country. All of them are called lawmakers. 

With the promulgation of a new constitution in 2015 that transformed the country from unitary Hindu monarchy into a federal secular republic, there is a huge need to frame hundreds of laws to replace the old system. Despite the completion of two rounds of general, provincial and local elections, the task of lawmaking is yet to complete. Numerous essential laws on federal governance, police system in provinces, civil service system in provinces, education, health have not been formulated yet. 

From federal to province to local level, each tier has faced unique challenges in lawmaking. Take for instance the recently concluded session of the federal parliament—the MPs themselves have lamented that only one single law was passed during the entire session spanning months. 

In practice, Nepal also faces a unique problem of lawmaking being dominated by a handful of senior leaders of major parties. The MPs or even committees always look up to them to pass any law. They also block any legislation that is against their vested interests. Prime Minister, the leader of the opposition and president of the Nepali Congress rarely take part in committee discussions or House meetings. They do not even attend the House for more than 10 days in the entire session. 

Provincial assemblies have always complained that they lack facilitating federal laws that can allow them to frame their provincial laws in areas like provincial civil service, which are of urgent necessity. Local levels have been found to engage in lawmaking that is either outright copying of model laws distributed by the federal government—without incorporation of local context and circumstances—or haphazard drafting without concerns for due process and content. Many laws originating in provincial assemblies and local level have also been challenged for violating the limits and jurisdictions as laid down by the Schedules of the Constitution. 

That apart, the prevalent practice is to enact laws without peoples’ participation. Government bodies draft a law to their liking and push it through the parliament with minimal involvement of stakeholders. As such, they are not structured in a way that people can comprehend them. They usually fail to reflect the peoples’ aspirations and expectations. 

The second element of the robust rule of law is concerned with the state of implementation of laws. People must know about the laws of the land and abide by them, but there is no systematic procedure to sensitize the people about the laws and provisions introduced. This is the first barrier to the implementation of the laws. 

In fact, even the lawmakers do not know what they have enacted into laws, though they expect everyone to abide by the laws. Clearly, the laws do not get implemented automatically. Processes, programs, resources, management and a favorable environment are required for their implementation. 

Capacities, willingness, monitoring and enforcement are all necessary to make that happen. Most importantly, there has to be a realization of how much ownership is felt by the stakeholders, including those who are supposed to abide by them. 

Some of the critical issues in any rule of law system are to find out whether the people feel benefits of abiding by laws, or whether they feel the burden of abiding by the laws and consider it as imposition of exploitative measures. 

The third and final element of the robust rule of law deals with the institutions that are responsible for upholding laws, and ensuring a system of checks and balances. This involves the geographic distributions of the legal institutions that will have to, first and foremost, ensure the access to law and justice for the ordinary people. 

The people must have easy, economical and intimidation-free access to the institutions of law, including the administration and courts. They must be able to get justice on a predictable timeline. They must also be able to feel that justice is being delivered equally—irrespective of caste, gender, region, economic status or political clout. 

Rule of law institutions must be strong enough to serve their purpose. Matters like trustworthiness in terms of their competence, impartiality, independence, accountability and legitimacy are of utmost importance. This will also determine whether their 

decisions are easily accepted and implemented.  

This will demand a change in all three elements mentioned above. In lawmaking, there is a need to expeditiously formulate essential laws, particularly in areas listed under the concurrent list of the constitutional schedule such as policing, civil service, education and health. 

The Rule of Procedure of the parliament should explicitly state that all MPs must attend at least 50 percent of the House meetings or face disciplinary action. The bills tabled in the parliament must be settled—passed or rejected—within a certain timeline within the session. 

There is a need to ensure participation in lawmaking for public ownership before implementing laws. Town hall meetings or mobile meetings of parliamentary committees at province and local levels can be held with help from civil society organizations to pre-inform the people about the laws. The authorities also need to be accountable to ensure proper implementation of laws. 

In the institutional development aspect, there is a need to first ensure timely and full appointment of judges and court officials. They need to be held accountable to ensure economical, easy, timely and equal access to law and justice for the people. 

The judiciary also must settle cases on stipulated time and if any case is made to linger, there has to be accountability on the part of the courts. For example, a case against appointments in constitutional bodies has been lingering for three years without any justification. 

On the part of the people, they need to be empowered so that they can also rise and demand a robust rule of law in all spheres of their lives. Combined efforts of the executive, the legislature, the judiciary and the people will ensure a robust rule of law that is transparent and participatory.

The author is Executive Director of Nepal Law Society

The political philosophies and economic ramifications of communism have long been the focus of intense discussion and analysis. But another equally important, though occasionally disregarded, aspect is the influence of communism on education. It raises the question: Does implementing communist ideas in education actually promote liberation, or is it just propaganda?

Historical perspective

The socioeconomic disparities brought about by the industrial revolution gave rise to communism as an ideology. Proposing the elimination of private property, class divisions, and the creation of a classless society, communism aimed to construct a system in which resources and wealth were shared among all. The relationship between communism and education has a long history, as seen by the emphasis placed by prominent communist leaders like Karl Marx on the importance of education in forming social consciousness.

Marx claimed that in a communist society, education ought to be a means of emancipation, enabling people to engage in critical thought and actively contribute to the collective's future developments. Early 20th-century communist groups, particularly those in the Soviet Union and China, instituted educational reforms with the goal of ending illiteracy and giving everyone access to equal educational possibilities.

The potential liberation in education

The notion that all people should have access to high-quality education, regardless of their socioeconomic status, is one of the core principles of communism. Theoretically, a communist educational system would eradicate differences in access to education and promote a society in which a person’s potential is unrestricted by their financial or social status.

Furthermore, communism emphasizes the growth of a communal consciousness and critical thinking. The goal of a communist educational system would be to develop people who actively participate in society politics, question established norms, and confront injustices. In this way, education turns into a liberating tool that breaks down the barriers of conventional hierarchies and motivates people to work for the welfare of society.

Communist educational systems frequently place a high priority on vocational training with the goal of supplying people with useful skills that advance the welfare of the group as a whole. By bridging the knowledge gap between theory and practice, this method aims to equip people to actively engage in a society where everyone is involved in both production and government.

Country’s like the Soviet Union (Former Russia), Cuba and China have practiced communism and education with their own way and needs as Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels mentioned in ‘The Communist Manifesto.’

The Soviet Union, which offers a striking historical example of the blending of communism and education, engaged in the practice of propaganda and indoctrination from the 1920s to the 1980s. During this time, the education system was transformed into a potent weapon for advancing the communist ideology. Under Vladimir Lenin’s direction, the Soviet Union’s early years saw drastic changes to education aimed at producing a ‘New Soviet Man’ who personified communist principles.

Marxist-Leninist ideas, which emphasized the benefits of collectivism, class conflict, and communism’s ultimate victory, had a strong influence on the curriculum. Even as the percentage of literacy increased dramatically, political indoctrination found its way into the school system. Pupils were taught a rewritten history that frequently ignored opposing viewpoints and exalted the accomplishments of the Communist Party.

Likewise, opposing opinions were silenced, and teachers were under pressure to follow party lines. Instead of encouraging critical thought, the educational system started to inculcate state loyalty. This is a prime example of how communism in education changed from being a liberating force to a propagandist and ideological conformity weapon.

Has a balance seems to be achieved in Cuba from the 1960s until now? Cuba offers a more complex illustration of the relationship between communism and education than the Soviet Union did. In an effort to end illiteracy and establish a more egalitarian society, Fidel Castro's government carried out extensive educational reforms after the Cuban Revolution of 1959.

High rates of literacy and universal access to school are two major accomplishments of Cuba's educational system. Marxist ideas are incorporated into the curriculum, but civic education and critical thinking are also prioritized. In order to promote a balance between society norms and individual freedoms, students are encouraged to challenge authority and participate in conversations concerning societal issues.

China’s experience with communism has evolved significantly from the 1950s to the present, especially in the post-Mao era. Under Mao Zedong’s leadership, political dogma dominated the curriculum and education was strictly regulated. Intellectual freedom was suppressed and school closures resulted from the Cultural Revolution’s increased use of ideological indoctrination.

China’s educational scene has seen significant changes since Mao. A change in priority was brought about by Deng Xiaoping’s economic reforms in the late 20th century, which placed more emphasis on technology developments and skill development. Although the Communist Party still maintains a large amount of influence, there has been a steady openness to other ideas and a diversification of the curriculum.

Strong rivalry and social pressure are two issues that the Chinese education system is currently facing. Critics claim that the focus on memorization and exam-focused education hinders critical thinking and creativity. The constant battle to find a balance between emancipation and conformity within the educational framework is highlighted by the conflict between conventional communist beliefs and the demands of a quickly changing global economy.

Concerns and criticisms

Communist ideas have been heavily criticized in education, notwithstanding any possible advantages. The possibility of indoctrination and the repression of personal freedom are two main causes for concern. Critics contend that a communist educational system may suppress dissent and restrict students’ intellectual growth by placing a higher priority on ideological conformity than intellectual diversity.

Communist educational programs have historically been implemented, especially in nations like China and the Soviet Union, which is the subject of another critique. Critics cite examples where education was used as a vehicle for political indoctrination, producing a narrative that suited the ruling party’s objectives instead of encouraging serious intellectual inquiry.

Also, it is imperative to acknowledge the pragmatic obstacles associated with the extensive establishment of a communist school system. The distribution of resources, the function of educators, and striking a balance between the rights of the individual and the interests of the group are all difficult issues that require serious thought.

Emphasizing the significance of striking a balance between communal values and individual liberties is essential to addressing the issues surrounding communism in education. In addition to upholding a dedication to social fairness and equality, a successful communist educational system should work to foster critical thinking, intellectual variety, and a sincere desire for knowledge.

Transparency and inclusion are also crucial for developing a communist educational system that stays clear of propaganda’s traps. Instead of just encouraging pupils to follow a predetermined ideology, an educational atmosphere that fosters autonomous and critical thinking can be established via open conversation, respect for differing viewpoints, and a dedication to intellectual freedom.

In conclusion, there are legitimate issues as well as the possible advantages of communism in education. It’s a complicated and varied relationship. Even while communism aims to eliminate socioeconomic inequality, its application in education must be carefully considered to avoid the traps of ideological indoctrination and propaganda.

In a time when education is significant in determining how societies will develop in the future, it is important to investigate how communist ideas may support people’s liberation while upholding the ideals of diversity and intellectual freedom. Realizing the potential advantages of a communist educational system requires striking a balance between individual liberties and social values without compromising the values of critical thinking and intellectual inquiry.

The author is a law student at the Kathmandu School of Law