Submit your Article

Donald J Trump was sworn in on Monday as the 47th President of the United States, marking a remarkable political comeback. On Sunday, Trump pledged to issue nearly 100 executive orders aimed at reversing or eliminating policies enacted by the Biden administration. These orders primarily target immigration, energy policy, and a range of other issues.

Foreign policy experts suggest that Trump’s return to office warrants close attention to his trade war with China, his approach toward Asian allies like Japan, South Korea and the Philippines, and his “America First” foreign policy. These stances could bring significant shifts to multilateralism and global diplomacy, with considerable effects on the Indo-Pacific region. Trump's transactional approach to diplomacy is expected to heighten tensions in critical areas such as the South China Sea, the Korean Peninsula and Taiwan.

Regarding Nepal, shifting US global priorities could impact American assistance in climate change and health sectors. Political analyst Chandra Dev Bhatta notes that while American foreign policy has shown consistency over time, recent years have highlighted ideological differences between Republicans and Democrats. If Trump 2.0 adopts a more aggressive foreign policy, Bhatta predicts it will manifest through economic measures, particularly tariffs. “If Trump becomes a ‘tariff man,’ it will have a ripple effect globally due to the interconnected nature of the world economy,” Bhatta said.

For smaller countries like Nepal, where economic stakes are lower, the focus will remain on geopolitics over geo-economics. However, navigating this geopolitical landscape will become more challenging, Bhatta adds, as geopolitics and geo-economics are increasingly intertwined. He also highlights potential domestic implications for Nepal stemming from Trump’s policies, especially his declared funding cuts through the Department of Government Efficiency and Governance (DOGE) and the “Make America Great Again” (MAGA) agenda. If these cuts are implemented, they could significantly affect funding both domestically and internationally.

Trump’s immigration stance could also impact Nepalis in the US, particularly if he enforces stricter policies on undocumented immigrants. Bhatta speculates that such policies might be part of a bargaining strategy, commonly referred to as the ‘madman theory,’ or a genuine intent, the outcome of which remains uncertain. Additionally, Trump’s efforts to consolidate power in Asia under the MAGA banner will likely exert geopolitical pressure on countries like Nepal.

Strategic thinker Binoj Basnyat believes that Trump’s second term is likely to continue Biden’s legacy in Asia due to the region’s growing importance in global trade, security and geopolitics. He emphasizes that managing rising challenges, fostering alliances and ensuring stability will shape US strategies. India’s role as a vital partner in the Indo-Pacific region will be central to these efforts. The US will likely continue leveraging frameworks such as the 2017 “South Asia Policy”, the “Free and Open Indo-Pacific” strategy and the 2022 Indo-Pacific Strategy.

Basnyat highlights that these strategies align with containing China’s rise while strengthening ties with India, designated as a major defense partner in 2016. Initiatives like the India-US 2+2 ministerial dialogue, established in 2018, will continue to influence smaller South Asian nations, including Nepal. He notes that global competition and great power influence are shaping national politics in South Asia, with Nepal’s political parties also reflecting these dynamics.

Basnyat asserts that Nepal’s strategic stability is shaped by global geostrategic factors, including the Post-Cold War syndrome in Europe, the New Cold War in the Indo-Pacific and proxy wars in the Middle East. He suggests that under any potential geopolitical scenario, Nepal’s strategic trajectory will largely depend on its relationships with New Delhi and Beijing. However, Nepal should also prioritize its ties with Washington as a third neighbor, balancing national interests without falling into strategic traps.

During the Joe Biden administration, US engagement with Nepal increased significantly, with over $700m in foreign aid provided since 2019 through the US Department of State and USAID. These initiatives focused on health, economic growth, democracy, governance and food security. One of the primary US priorities in Nepal is the smooth implementation of the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) project. Recently, American private companies have also expressed interest in investing in Nepal’s tourism, medical and other sectors. Meanwhile, the US push for the State Partnership Program (SPP), pending since 2022, remains a contentious issue.

During Trump’s previous tenure, the 2019 Indo-Pacific Strategy report sparked controversy over its implications for MCC and other bilateral initiatives. The Biden administration carefully avoided conflating these issues in bilateral discussions. Observers suggest Nepal should closely monitor Trump’s policies toward India and China, as they could indirectly affect Nepal.

In an interview with ApEx, Katie Donohoe, USAID’s mission director in Nepal, highlighted the agency’s enduring mission despite changes in US administrations. She remarked, “Since USAID was established in 1961, there have been 12 presidential administrations, and this will be my fifth transition working with USAID. While new administrations bring different policy priorities, USAID’s core mission has remained consistent.” Donohoe expressed confidence that USAID will adapt to align with the new administration’s priorities while continuing to collaborate with the government of Nepal and its people.

As Jan 20 approaches closer and President-elect Donald Trump prepares to return to the Oval Office in the White House, states are sensing terrible tremors in foreign policy around the world. Trump’s ‘Truth Social’ diplomacy is already creating huge shocks in foreign policy and multilateralism even before he assumes the oath of office of the presidency. Trump is arguably the only president in American history to be equally admired and despised both within and outside the country. Most of Trump’s detractors blame that his MAGA (Make America Great Again) movement is a trivial insignia of nationalistic vanity rather than being a patriotic big headedness. Trump, however, has been irrefutably successful in synonymizing ‘Trumpism’ and ‘Republicanism’ and shrewdly synthesizing it into ‘Populism’ in US politics.

The President-elect has declared that he will impose heavy tariffs on all exports from China, Canada, Mexico, and the BRICS countries, including tech and EVs. China, on the other hand, has announced a ‘zero-tariff’ policy for small states, particularly LDCs. Trump’s “great wall of tariff” may lead to crucial tensions in the tech, trade, and diplomatic affairs between the US and China under Trump 2.0, which would have global repercussions. Many Americans may still be unaware whether the ‘blanket tariff’ that could raise inflation is actually an American ‘policy’ or just a ‘threat’, put forth as a negotiating tactic that the president-elect is likely to impose on its major trading partner, close neighbors, and longstanding allies. Besides, the linkage between the taxes that Americans pay and the tariffs that the Trump administration is likely to impose on foreign exports should be understood by the general public.

Trump has avowed of taking back Panama Canal, controlling Greenland, and has urged Canada to join the US as its 51st state in a Christmas message under his ‘Truth Social’ discretion. Panama Canal is a waterway in Panama that connects the Atlantic Ocean with the Pacific Ocean, which was built by the US and handed over to the Panamanian government nearly 25 years ago. Greenland is a sovereign territory of Denmark, while Canada is a G7 member and NATO ally. The chances that Trump would again raise the issue of the origin of Covid-19 towards China cannot be denied, which could widen the trust gap between the US and China.

Trump made immutable mistakes by emboldening some of its adversaries including Iran, North Korea, Venezuela and Turkey, among others, during his first term as the US president. His adversaries have become skeptical of his emotional intelligence and diplomatic avenues due to his frequent use of coercive and irrational language through his erratic tweets during his first term. He is now annoying US allies and key partners, which could bring irrevocable debacle in US foreign policy. Trump is, perhaps, assuming that the Nixon-Kissinger model of the “Madman Theory—act mad and other countries won’t dare trifle with you”—could work for him too.

In his dealing with North Korea, Trump applied the “Kernel of idea” from Madman Theory, possibly to give the impression that he was “irrational and volatile” so that North Korea would less likely provoke the US in fear of potential consequences. Madman theory sometimes may go truly furious in case of action and consequences if the strengths and strategies of the adversaries are undermined.

Trump has abandoned a number of multilateral alliances, such as the Paris Climate Agreement, the Iran Nuclear Deal, and the nuclear missile accord with Russia during his first term. As a result, the US dramatically lost credibility, reputation, reliability and trust of its allies. The US is likely to witness more severe forfeiture under Trump 2.0 as he has threatened to walk-out from NATO and other significant multilateral alliances.

The main concern, however, may be whether these unusual strategies truly fall under modern US foreign policy? Do rational Americans want a military confrontation (or colonial war) in any part of the world under the monologue of neo-colonialism or political hooliganism?

From an American perspective, Trump is accomplishing American goals, such as economic growth, immigration control, border security, and nationalism. Enhancing American security and economic interests are truly a nationalistic idea. The interests of the US, however, are global. America firmly believes in globalism, liberalism, open world economy, and multilateralism. America is not just a country in the North American continent; it is a responsible global power. America is the world's most powerful nation not just because of its economy, strong domestic institutions, technology, or military might, but also because of its pragmatic foreign policy, soft power, visionary engagement in multilateral organizations, and trustful allies and partners. America’s masculine foreign policy, unwavering hold on global leadership, and distinct legacy have made it a great power. American security is said to be characterized by its emphasis on democracy, multiculturalism, multilateralism, and international law.

By the end of World War II, the US was still the most powerful country in the world, controlling over 35 percent of the world’s production, and it had the ability to (re)shape the world according to its wishes.  American values abroad are gradually waning. Is America on the verge of decline? What will be the American position in the years to come, question many critics?

When we examine the precise causes and consequences of the rise and fall of great powers or various empires, constricted ideas or disparities in development have resulted in power struggles. Their power primarily centered on the conflict between their militaries’ ascent and social forces, ethnic nationalism, economic development, colonial and hegemonic behavior. Additionally, power struggles have led to the extinction of empires following the annexation of such power.

Presumably, with a limited global presence and an isolationist foreign policy, America cannot sustain its position as a major power in the long run. The absence of US leadership in the world would leave ample ground for its adversaries to create more challenges or trouble for it. America is the only multicultural nation in the world where people from all over the world dwell or aspire to dwell. While America is winning the hearts, minds, and spirits of tens of millions of people worldwide, Trump's massive deportation plan would certainly weaken its soft power and essence of multiculturalism.

However, Trump’s initiative for peace in the Korean Peninsula and last-minute decision to withdraw the order to strike Iran in his first term must be admired. Trump’s decision to fire his “hawkish” National Security Advisor John Bolton during that situation suggests that he opposed war in the Korean Peninsula and the Middle East. Reportedly, Bolton was aggressive in pushing war and later advised then President Trump to employ the ‘Libya Model’ of unilateral denuclearization for North Korea and the ‘Iraq Method’ for Iran. Trump is said to have rejected both the outrageous prospects and avoided the war. Trump instead emphasized the ‘New Method’ for peace negotiations. He is expected to use that ‘New Method’ in his second term to bring peace around the world, although what that ‘New Method’ is still not known. Optimistically, it can be asserted that Trump does not want war. Yet the crucial concern is- does Trump want absolute peace and wish to preserve an essence of stable global order?

The president-elect has pledged to put an end to the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine. He is expected to advocate for a similar course of action to resolve the Israel-Palestine conflict and establish enduring peace in the Middle East.

Whether Trump truly wants absolute peace and steady international order, he needs to start peace negotiations from Beijing. To date, the legitimacy of Pyongyang and Kremlin peace negotiations has been contingent on how smoothly Beijing’s trade operates. Thus, Trump must first make real headway in settling the trade and tariff issues pertaining to China. Similarly, the US-North Korea and US-Iran negotiations must be conducted sensibly through diplomatic and political channels, else North Korea and Iran could rise as strong contenders not only to the US allies in the Korean Peninsula and the Middle-East, but also to the US itself.  

Iran asserts that it is a powerful country (more so than Iraq was) and has the ability to retaliate for any strikes against the US allies. Tehran has maintained good relations with the Kremlin, Beijing, and Ankara, which could make Washington feel weaker than all the former four combined. North Korea is equally marshaling the clout of missile and nuclear technology and showcasing to Washington that Pyongyang is not alone in world politics, as it has been strongly backed up by Beijing and the Kremlin. North Korea and China are “as close as lips and teeth, communist brothers in arms…,” as Mao Zedong put it. Strategically, Pyongyang and Tehran assume that they both are as strong as Washington. While the US, under Trump 2.0, is likely to create a huge gap of trust with its allies and multilateral communities, its adversaries could take advantage of gradually waning American strength.

Chinese people are reportedly very appreciative of Donald Trump's China policy, despite the fact that it was largely humiliating; this could have led to China taking a more focused approach to accomplishing its economic, technological, and diplomatic and foreign policy goals. Since China’s opening up, the US and China have maintained good trade relations despite their long standing political rivalry. President-elect Donald Trump is anticipated to play a statesmanship role in fostering friendly, vibrant, and harmonious US-China ties, much like President Richard Nixon did in establishing US-China diplomatic relations in the past.

In the face of experiencing two near-death experiences during his election campaign, Trump's tremendous resilience must be cherished. Trump has become more composed, brave, and strong following these failed assassination attempts. He resembles a deceased man who has miraculously come back to life. The way he has got a new life, the similar way he is expected to bring peace, hope, natural life, and aspirations to people around the world with a greater generosity and wider spirit. The rest of the world would be incredibly grateful to Trump if he could, as he previously declared, put an end to the ongoing international conflicts and promote amicable US-China relations. Essentially, if President Trump played a sensible role in bringing international peace, stability, and balanced order, the entire world would applaud him, perhaps not only in this generation but also in the generations to come.

Taking into account sensible geo-location, highly unstable global geopolitical situation, vulnerable digital space, and the magnitude of AI threats, Nepal's security architecture has specific limitations. For Nepal, the conventional idea of security might not be operational. Therefore, it is imperative that Nepal adopt a practical security strategy that involves increased trust, strategic partnerships, and techno-economic cooperation with both its immediate neighbors and other global powers. The most crucial matter is that Nepal should be aware of the geopolitical rivalry between China and India or the US and China and logically implement a policy to balance relations with them.

Nepal should be ready to handle any fallout from occupation of Taiwan, which might result in a massive ‘crossfire’ between China and the US that could directly affect Nepalese security and sovereignty. Nepal would have suffered greatly on all fronts—politically, economically, digitally, physically, and psychologically—if it had not been able to diligently manage the geopolitical balance between the competing superpowers. For Nepal, the most important foreign policy choice would be whether to align with one or remain neutral, while the main concern would be how Nepal could balance between them and defend itself in that circumstance. Both the options, however, would be costlier to Nepal. Perhaps neither China nor the US would ensure Nepalese security in that critical situation. China would accuse Nepal of failing to participate in its Global Security Initiative (GSI) on time, while the United States would accuse Nepal of dwindling to participate in the Indo-Pacific Strategy (IPS) or State Partnership Program (SPP) in advance. Yet, both the superpowers have made an effort to persuade Nepal to support their cause through the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) to some extent.

Nonetheless, Nepal must assess realistic foreign policy and promote techno-economic cooperation by initiating a ‘better relationship initiative’ with all the major powers, including its immediate neighbors. This could help to alleviate all of those persistent domestic and international challenges and to achieve foreign policy goals. Essentially, Nepal should practice time-sensitive policy to reduce the ‘trust deficit’ with its immediate neighbors and other powers, which could strengthen bilateral relations and raise the possibility of applied security and stability.

The author is a techno-geopolitical analyst and geostrategic thinker

The year 2024 marked a significant electoral season across major nations, including the UK, the USA, Russia and India. However, global attention was particularly focused on the US presidential election.

Republican Party candidate Donald Trump made a stunning comeback to the White House, defeating Democratic candidate and incumbent Vice-president Kamala Harris. Trump, who lost the 2020 election to Joe Biden after serving his first term (2017-2021), began his 2024 campaign the day his defeat was confirmed. With years of preparation and relentless effort, his strategy paid off.  

Trump secured 312 electoral votes and 50 percent of the popular vote, surpassing the required 270 electoral votes to win leaving Harris with 226 electoral votes and 48.3 percent of the popular vote.

This election was of global importance also because it occurred amid significant global conflicts, notably the ongoing Israel-Hamas war, with Iran and Lebanon's involvement, and the Russia-Ukraine war surpassing 1,000 days. The United States played a pivotal role in these conflicts, both directly and indirectly.

These wars have had profound global repercussions, including soaring inflation rates, environmental degradation and widespread human suffering. The Democratic Party and President Joe Biden's strategies in addressing these crises have come under scrutiny, raising concerns among the American populace.

The American intelligence community, including the Central Intelligence Agency

(CIA), may have made miscalculations in assessing certain global situations. Amid these crises, the United States found itself in a precarious position, facing internal and external challenges. The repercussions of these failures were not only felt domestically but also reverberated across the globe, highlighting America’s struggles on the international stage. And these things did not go unnoticed among the Americans regardless of their political affiliations.

The American people not only elected Trump as president but also gave the Republican Party a majority in both the Senate and the House. This shift in power may reflect a desire among Americans for the US to step back from its involvement in ongoing wars. With Trump now in office, the world watches closely, hoping his first move will be to bring an end to these conflicts and restore peace.

During his election campaign, Trump clarified that he was not against immigrants but opposed illegal immigration, a stance that resonated with many. He also criticized the Democratic Party’s inability to control inflation, which had negatively impacted everyday Americans. Trump promised to tackle inflation by keeping production costs low, including pledging not to raise taxes on industrialists. Additionally, he vowed to restore America to a ‘golden age’ of prosperity. These appealing proposals during his campaign struck a chord with the American public, contributing to his victory.

It was clear that removing America from the ongoing wars would be a difficult task without Republican leadership, and even many Democratic supporters likely recognized this reality.  

Another challenge for the US comes from BRICS, the alliance of global leaders from Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Iran, Egypt, Ethiopia, and the United Arab Emirates. With new members continuing to join, there are growing discussions about creating a potentially gold-backed currency to compete with the US dollar. This proposed BRICS currency could help these nations assert their economic independence and challenge the dominance of the dollar, which currently accounts for about 90 percent of global currency trade. This emerging shift poses a significant headache for the US, and many speculate that Trump may take steps to counter BRICS’ growing influence.

Harris faced significant challenges in her campaign, particularly due to the limited time between her announcement for presidency and the election day. This short window left her with little opportunity to build momentum for her campaign by reaching out to the voters. Additionally, her light personality did not seem to convey the strong leadership needed to tackle the pressing global challenges. However, after her defeat, Harris delivered an extraordinary speech that showcased her grace and respect as a leader. Her acceptance of defeat, alongside her heartfelt congratulations to Trump, demonstrated her integrity. She also reaffirmed her commitment to the US citizens, the Constitution and the promises she made during her campaign, further solidifying her stature as a respected figure in American politics.

The elite class in the US played a significant role in helping Trump win the election, but there is hope that his administration will not solely represent the interests of the wealthy. People around the world, who view the US as a global guardian, hope that this perception will not be lost. Rhetorics aside, Trump may continue America’s support for the United Nations’ agencies and North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) as this is something the world desires as well.  

As a Nepali citizen, I extend my congratulations to Trump and hope that he will continue to uphold the hopes of people around the world.

The author is a member of the Supreme Court Bar and has been practicing corporate law for around three decades

Kamala Harris courted voters angered by the Gaza war while Donald Trump doubled down on violent rhetoric with a comment about journalists being shot as the tense US election campaign entered its final hours.

The Democratic vice president and the Republican former president frantically blitzed several swing states as they tried to win over the last holdouts with less than 36 hours left until polls open on Election Day on Tuesday.

Trump predicted a "landslide", while Harris told a raucous rally in must-win Michigan that "we have momentum -- it's on our side."

The 2024 race is going down to the wire, with more key states effectively tied at this point than in any comparable election. Over 77.6 million people have cast early votes, around half of the total ballots cast in 2020.

With the clock ticking, Harris, 60, spent the day in Michigan where she risks losing the critical support of a 200,000-strong Arab-American community that has denounced US handling of the Israel-Hamas war.

"As president, I will do everything in my power to end the war in Gaza," Harris said at the start of her speech at Michigan State University, noting that there were leaders of the community present.

But the rest of the speech was upbeat, with Harris spending more time on urging people to get out and vote than on attacks on Trump.

"We got two days to get this done," she said.

Earlier, Harris quoted scripture in a majority-Black church in Detroit, Michigan and urging Americans to look beyond Trump.

"Let us turn the page and write the next chapter of our history," she said.

Trump on Sunday zigzagged through Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Georgia -- the three biggest swing-state prizes in the Electoral College system that awards US states influence according to their population.

The 78-year-old Trump, the oldest major party candidate in US history, added to his increasingly dark rhetoric by musing to supporters in Lititz, Pennsylvania, that he wouldn't mind if journalists were shot.

Discussing his near-miss assassination attempt against him in July, he said to laughter that to be hit again "somebody would have to shoot through the fake news -- and I don't mind that so much."

Trump called Democrats "demonic" and, despite no evidence of any meaningful election cheating so far, claimed that Democrats in Pennsylvania "are fighting so hard to steal this damn thing."

Adding to fears that he would not accept a defeat in 2024, Trump added that he "shouldn't have left" the White House after he lost his 2020 reelection effort to Joe Biden.

Trump meanwhile said in Macon, Georgia, that he had asked vaccine-skeptic Robert F. Kennedy Jr, who dropped his own presidential bid to support Trump, to work on "women's health" and "pesticides."

His comments came a day after Kennedy caused consternation by saying that a Trump White House would order US water systems to remove fluoride from public water supplies.

Later in another rambling speech in Kinston, North Carolina Trump said "we're going to have on Tuesday a landslide that's too big to rig."

The polls however show that the result is likely to be historically tight.

A final New York Times/Siena poll Sunday flagged incremental changes in swing states, but the results from all seven remained within the margin of error.

Harris got a boost Saturday as the final Des Moines Register poll for Iowa -- seen as a highly credible test of wider public sentiment -- showed a stunning turnaround, with Harris ahead in a state won easily by Trump in 2016 and 2020.

In the last hours, both candidates are desperately trying to shore up their bases, and win over any undecided voters.

Pollsters have noted an erosion in Black support for Harris.

But with abortion rights a top voter concern, her campaign has hailed the large proportion of women turning out among early voters. AFP

If there were beliefs that Donald Trump could feel weak and powerless because of the many charges he has faced, then he has certainly proved everyone wrong. Overturning the mugshot released recently into a political campaign shows he’s still a topic of interest for people around the world.

The historic mugshot where he has reflected his personality as an angry man thinking of a revenge soon turned into a different merchandise to promote his election campaign. What is ironic yet creative for his campaign is to use the same picture of him as a protagonist who can make America great again.

He is back on Twitter/X, the platform he overused to spread hatred and misinformation to the extent that he had to be banned, posting the same mugshot with the message ‘election interference’ and ‘never surrender’. It has been viewed over 240 million times and has 1.6 million likes. It is interesting to note that his ultra-loyal fans and voters overlook all the allegations Trump has faced and instead promote him as the fearless leader who can transform America. 

The difference between most American leaders and Trump is that he lacks diplomacy, which his followers admire as being a straightforward person. And despite 91 felony charges against him, Trump has been able to use his victim card so well to convince his party and followers that they dismiss what he did on January 6, 2021.

When he was in power, he banned Muslims from certain countries from visiting the US. His relationship with the ‘rocket man’ or the North Korean leader Kim Jong-un became controversial, the decision to separate families at the US-Mexico border was widely condemned, and the revelation of paying hush money to a porn star put a question mark on his character. During the pandemic, he made it clear that he did not believe in scientists. Same is his opinion on climate change. He paved the way for white supremacy to surface and divide people. Thanks to him, the world supported the Black Lives Matter campaign that began later.

As a Nepali, I sometimes try to see if there are similarities between him and our Nepali leaders. Our current Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal once publicly took responsibility for the 5000 lives lost in the Maoist rebellion. As with powerful leaders, no action was taken against him. The transitional justice system has been mocked as the truth and reconciliation commission never gets a shape.  However, the difference between us and them is that they were able to bring the former President to a local jail where he surrendered too whereas our high-level leaders have mostly been protected.  

I also find Trump’s vocabularies to be similar with Dharan Mayor Harka Sampang’s. Both use/d indecent language to vent out on social media, and glorify their arrogance. He too is on a mission to make Dharan great again but has already faced backlash. Prohibitory orders to keep Dharan safe and calm are not a good sign of what could lie ahead in maintaining religious solidarity. He should be mindful before it’s too late.

Meanwhile, as a distant observer, I feel that Trump has sharply divided the American people. There are Americans who think the image of their country has tarnished while others think he is better than his contemporaries. As a leading Republican Party candidate, Trump definitely has challenges to face, not just with the indictments but also to be selected as the final candidate. However, the way he is trying to create his image of a fearless leader ready to take revenge has ignited curiosity to what happens next. As the largest economy of the world and a superpower, it is all but natural for the world to be interested in learning political developments in the United States. And the world is amazed to see how his popularity does not decline.