Submit your Article

 Q. Most mis-understood thing about you?

A. I am not calm. Therefore I have just lowered my expectation.

Q. A question you hate to answer?

A. Every question :)

Q. The thing people would be surprised to know about you?

A. I am coming up with some surprises, wait for it.

Q. Celebrity Crush?

A. Hmm... I adore every person who wants to do good for the country.

Q. The quote you live by?

A. Go with the flow but do what you gotta do.

Q. Best purchase you've ever made?

A. My Royal Enfield and my ST guitar.

Q. What do you look for in women?

    A. They should be easy going, bold, understanding, loving, a little bit crazy and much more.

Dai Yonghong, the head of the geopolitical studies unit of Sich­uan University, is an old Nepal watcher. He is currently a visiting professor at the Masters in International Relations and Diploma­cy (MIRD) program of Tribhuvan University. Laxman Shrestha and Purushottam Poudel of APEX caught up with him to discuss China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and its impact on Nepal.

 How do you assess Nepal’s participation in BRI?

Nepal and China have made dozens of agreements under the BRI. We should first be assured that this will be of benefit to both the countries. We should not deviate from the projects that have already been agreed upon. Political stability is vital for the completion of the agreed projects and I believe the merger between the two main communist forces in Nepal is a harbinger of this stability.

There is now a debate in Nepal about whether the country should look to the south or the north. I believe Nepal should rise above this debate and develop a global outlook. China always looks to partner with countries that it can help economically. There can be no development by partnering with countries that want instability more than they want development.

How do we evaluate the trade and investment components of the BRI?

I believe the issue of trade and investment should be placed under a broader economic framework. China does not want any political gain from its neighbors. We just want strong and long-lasting relations based on mutual trust. A strategy that has political objectives might work in the short run but it can­not help us achieve our long-term goals.

If that is the case, what does China want from its neighbors?

We want to see our neighbors develop. We want other countries in the region to benefit from China’s economic rise. At one time China used to be one of the largest importers of foreign direct investment in the world. Now, we are the biggest FDI investor in the world. Other countries can utilize this eco­nomic clout of China to their benefit.

China also has great technical expertise. China has made rapid progress in technology used in infrastructure development as well as in technol­ogy related to communication and agriculture. Other countries can use this expertise. More than that, you can also utilize our management expertise. If you have all the resources but you don’t have management expertise, then all those resources have no meaning.

How do you see Nepal-China cooperation shape up under the BRI?

China can utilize its capital, technological and management expertise to build railways in Nepal as the state of Nepal’s roads is unsatisfactory. Not the least because Nepal will need railways to connect with the ocean. Nepal is often called a yam between India and China but if it can emu­late the economic prosperity of India and China, it can be a diamond between these two Asian powers. Nepal is in a situation whereby it can develop by taking a ‘free ride’ on the pros­perity of its two neighbors. The important question is: Does Nepal now have the kind of economy agenda and the leadership to push this agenda for the kind of economic transfor­mation it envisions?

How will the Chinese investment in Nepal be different from its investments in Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Laos or Myanmar, the investments that have not always been seen in favorable light?

The kind of investment will depend on the dialogue between the two countries. It will be wrong to see investments under BRI as China somehow wanting to build a monopoly in a country. China will move ahead strictly based on consultations with host countries.

Dila Pun of Bheri municipality in Jajarkot dis­trict of western Nepal is not amused. She used to pay Rs 16 in land and property tax annually. But as a part of the municipality’s consolidated property tax she is now having to fork out Rs 1,900 for the same piece of real estate. “There has been no change in public services. The local hospital does not have medicines for even common fever and yet the government is burdening us with back-break­ing taxes,” she complained with APEX.

Pun’s grievance with local taxes reverberates right across the country. In Tilottama municipality of Rupandehi district, also in western Nepal, the local level units of Nepali Congress have formed ward-level ‘struggle committees’ against the ‘arbi­trary imposition’ of new taxes. With everything from mom-and-pop shops to cattle being taxed under the new regime, people’s frustration with elected officials, and with the new federal setup—which has rightly or wrongly come to be associated with higher taxes—is growing.

In the absence of proper guidelines, such taxes at lower levels of government can often be arbitrary and punitive. There is also a risk of duplication in taxes among the three tiers of government. The National Natural Resources and Fiscal Commission, a constitu­tional body, was supposed to sort out these issues. Yet nearly three years after the promulgation of the new constitution, this ‘facilitator’ between the three tiers of government is yet to get its full shape.

This in turn is indicative of lack of political com­mitment to implement the seven-province, 753-local body federal formula. Even though the constitution has clearly delineated Nepal as a federal republic, there is still reluctance to devolve power and resourc­es away from Kathmandu. This is reflected in the fact that over 70 percent of all taxes collected in the coun­try is going into the coffers of the federal government. On the other hand, neither the local units nor the federal government have been able to offer a credi­ble rationale—for instance guaranteed social security (See here)—for increased local taxes. This is not so much a sign of the failure of federalism as it is of the mindset of our top politicians who are yet to internalize that the old unitary setup has been aban­doned—for a reason. The latest tussle over taxation is likely to a harbinger of much bigger disputes between different government tiers.

Of late there has been no shortage of voices linking higher taxes with the supposed failure of the federal formula. It is true that taxes have been increased (and their scopes widened) across the board, from properties to small businesses. Even cattle and bicycles are now being taxed. Land and property taxes were minimal under the old unitary dispensation, with most people paying no more than Rs 100. But under the new consolidated taxes, the same taxes have jumped to an average of well above Rs 1,000.Kathmandu municipality has introduced a spate of new levies and jacked up old ones. It will charge Rs 500 for a person to prove, on paper, that he is alive. To be liable for a naturalized citizenship, the recommendation forum will set you back by Rs 10,000. In Dhangari sub-municipality of Kailali district, you will have to pay an annual tax of Rs 15 if you own a bicycle; crossing a local river on a boat there will incur you Rs 25 a trip. In Godavari municipality of the same district a chatpate seller will have to fork out Rs 20 and an ice-cream seller Rs 30 a day.

Perhaps one reason for such widespread skepticism of the new tax regimen is that people are just not used to hearing of ironsmiths and fruit sellers paying taxes. In time, they might sound pretty normal. But in the view of political analyst Shyam Shrestha there is another, more important reason for this skepticism. “Neither the central government nor the local level governments have bothered to explain the ratio­nale for these levies,” he says.

He has a point. These taxes will help pay for social security and basic health and education needs of the locals, a duty of the local bodies under the new constitution. “How can the local bodies guarantee these services without raising taxes?” Shrestha asks. But Shrestha says elected representatives have thus far been unable to credibly assure the people that their money will be well spent.

“If you can assure them that all their basic needs will be taken care of, who will oppose higher taxes?” he asks.

Notably, three years after the promulgation of the new constitution, the all-important National Natural Resources and Fiscal Commission it envisioned to work out taxes and division of spoils among different tiers of the government is yet to get a complete shape (See: HERE). Perhaps the political masters of the country were never sold on federalism.

Property worth about Rs 20 million was destroyed when an electric shop caught fire at Shivasatashidham-11 in Jhapa district Thursday evening. 

An electric short circuit started a fire in Sangraula brothers' electric shop. Electric devices including televisions, refrigerators, and washing machines among others were destroyed in the fire, said shop owner. 

According to Jhiljhile Area Police Office Inspector Kailash Rai, the fire was doused by locals and security personnel after an hour. RSS

Fiction

THE WOMAN IN THE WINDOW

A.J. Finn

Published: 2018Publisher: Harper Collins

Pages: 427, paperback

We believe first novels hold a lot of promise but unfor­tunately a lot of first novels published each year disappear into a pool of works that never make it further than the first edition. Then there are some firsts that receive a warm welcome. A.J. Finn’s The Woman in the Window is one such work. Finn (nom de plume for Dan­iel Mallory) is a former book editor and, having worked mostly with the mystery genre, he knows the tips and tricks of the trade. That is prob­ably the reason why The Woman in the Window feels like a rehash of a few bestselling books you have read in the last few years.In the recent times, books like S J Watson’s Before I Go to Sleep and Paula Hawkins’ The Girl on the Train have given birth to a whole new sub genre of psycho­logical thrillers where a woman whose credibility is undermined for some reason witnesses a crime. The Woman in the Window takes a similar route. Here you meet Dr. Anna Fox, a child psychologist who has become severely agora­phobic post a traumatic experience. She is terrified by “the vast skies, the endless horizon, the sheer exposure, the crushing pressure of the outdoors” and so she chooses to stay at home talking to her estranged husband and daughter on the phone, and making her tenant bring her groceries.

Taking photos of her neighbors and hence spying on their lives is her only ‘outdoor’ exposure. Then, from her window, Anna witnesses a murder at her neighbors’ home and she manages to call the police. But the thing is Anna is a drunk who is on many prescription drugs, none of which should be mixed with alcohol, and so the police don’t believe her account of what happened espe­cially since her neighbors deny the whole thing and call her a crazy per­son who has been harassing them since day one.

Even if you think the plotline feels familiar, be willing to give the book a chance because it will surprise you. Finn excels at planting misconceptions and confusing you. You can’t trust anything you read as, time and again, Anna is made to doubt her own memories. We don’t want to spoil it for you by revealing too much but we can tell you that the characters in the book are rarely who or what they appear to be. And it is this seed of doubt that takes root in your psyche early on that makes reading The Woman in the Window an entirely new experience even though the author has stuck to a tried and tested narrative.

There are no flashy twists and turns in the storyline but the carefully crafted psychological suspense driven by Anna’s secrets and fears will make you want to stay up late into the night to finish the book. Yes, you will forget all about it the minute you are done but it will feel good while it lasts. Let this be your escapist entertainment this weekend. We guarantee you won’t be disappointed.

 China has blasted US tariffs on solar panel imports, filing a complaint at the World Trade Organization in the latest salvo of the trade battle between the world's two economic giants. 

US President Donald Trump approved steep tariffs on solar panel imports in January to protect US producers, triggering an outcry from China, South Korea and even protests from the US solar industry. 
China's commerce ministry accused Washington of erecting trade barriers while subsidising its domestic industry. 

"While taking protectionist measures against imported photovoltaic products, the US provided subsidies to domestically produced photovoltaics and other renewable energy products," the ministry said in a statement. 
China lodged its challenge at the WTO on Tuesday, the statement said.

The US subsidies have given an unfair advantage to domestic companies and "damaged the legitimate rights and interests of China's renewable energy companies," it said. 

Beijing said the US measures are suspected of violating trade rules and that it would turn to the WTO's dispute resolution mechanism to protect its interests. 

Trump's tariffs were not popular with the US solar industry, which claimed the rising cost of imports would cause the loss of thousands of jobs.Imports of cheap Chinese panels helped triple US annual solar electricity generation between 2012 and 2016.

But they also drove prices down by 60 percent, causing most US producers to stop production or declare bankruptcy, the US Trade Representative said in January. 

The USTR accused China of using state incentives, subsidies and tariffs to increase production and said manufacturers had evaded US tariffs by repeatedly shifting production to new countries.The United States and China have slapped tit-for-tat tariffs on tens of billions of dollars worth of goods from each country, with another round of levies scheduled to being next week. AFP

Austria's capital Vienna has beaten Melbourne to be ranked the "world's most liveable city" in a new annual survey released Monday, ending the southern Australian city's seven-year reign. 

It is the first time a European metropolis has topped the annual chart compiled by the Economist Intelligence Unit which identifies the best urban playgrounds to live and work in. 

Each year 140 cities are given scores out of 100 on a range of factors such as living standards, crime, transport infrastructure, access to education and healthcare, as well as political and economic stability. 
Vienna scored a "near-ideal" 99.1, beating Melbourne into second place on 98.4. Japan's Osaka took third place. 

Australia and Canada dominated the top ten, each boasting three cities. Australia had Melbourne, Sydney (fifth) and Adelaide (10th) while Canada had Calgary (fourth), Vancouver (sixth) and Toronto (joint seventh). 

"Those that score best tend to be mid-sized cities in wealthier countries," researchers said in their report. They noted that several cities in the top 10 had relatively low population densities which fostered "a range of recreational activities without leading to high crime levels or overburdened infrastructure". 

Australia and Canada, researchers said, have an overall average population density of 3.2 and four people per square kilometre respectively, compared to a global average of 58. 
Japan, which alongside Osaka boasted Tokyo in the top ten (joint seventh), is the glaring exception to that rule with a nationwide average of 347 people per square kilometre but its cities are still famed for their transport networks and living standards. Copenhagen was the only other European city in the top ten at ninth place. 

Researchers said wealthy financial capitals such as Paris (19th), London (48th) and New York (57th) tended to be "victims of their own success" with higher crime rates and overstretched infrastructure dampening their appeal.At the other end of the spectrum the five worst cities to live in were Damascus at the bottom of the table followed by Dhaka, Lagos, Karachi and Port Moresby in Papua New Guinea. 

The survey also looked at cities where long-term improvements had been made. Abidjan, Hanoi, Belgrade and Tehran saw the largest improvements in liveability over the last five years -- more than five percentage points. 

Ukraine's Kiev, the capital of a European country wracked by political violence, civil war and the loss of Crimea to Russia, saw the largest drop in its liveability over the last five years (-12.6 percent). Puerto Rico's San Juan -- which was devastated by a hurricane last year -- as well as Damascus and Caracas also saw steep drops over the same period. AFP