Submit your Article

Prime Minister Balendra Shah, who assumed office on March 27, held a joint meeting with Kathmandu-based ambassadors on April 9. Though his decision was highlighted as a departure from the traditional practice of meeting ambassadors one-to-one, the event seems to have been ill-conceived, as any new prime minister would prefer to establish personal contact, at least with the envoys of countries with which Nepal has vital relations. In the parliamentary system, it is the prime minister who decides the course of diplomatic relations in the best interests of the country, the foreign minister who leads diplomacy, and the Foreign Ministry that executes it through ambassadors. 

On Aug 10, Prime Minister Shah walked back on his approach to diplomacy by meeting ambassadors individually. He met with the Indian and Chinese ambassadors on the same day, first the Indian envoy and then the Chinese. Why did the meetings take place on the same day, and why was the Indian envoy met first? Why did he not meet the Chinese envoy first, as alphabetically “C” comes before “I”? Perhaps the answer lies in geography: India is Nepal’s eastern, southern and western neighbor, while China is its only northern neighbor.

A few months ago, the new government unveiled its national commitment framework, portraying Nepal as a “buffer state” that aims to become a “vibrant bridge” between India and China. We have once again fallen into the old trap of diplomatic jargon, ignoring the reality that a bridge helps the two sides it connects to flourish, while the bridge itself merely serves as a means. Providing different routes for China to connect with India for its trade and strategic purposes can hardly benefit Nepal. We have to concentrate on developing our own economy so that our products can be exported to China and India to balance our trade deficits with them. We often forget that the balancing act appears easy but is difficult to practise. Putting two legs in two boats may look safe, but if the boats drift apart, the rider will fall.

The centuries-old saying of Prithvi Narayan Shah that “Nepal is a yam between two boulders” might have been relevant at the time, when the mighty Mughal Empire of India was losing its grip over its territories and the East India Company was expanding its political power by acquiring control over Bengal and Bihar, while mighty China was then a sleeping lion. However, Nepal fought wars with Tibet, while the Shah kings and Mukhtiyars sought help from China. The Rana prime ministers obtained support from British India to secure the continuation of their oligarchy. Sadly, even the present dispensation seems unable to depart from this usual course.

It should be realized that Nepal is no longer a yam between two boulders, but a growing plant between two giant banyan trees whose branches overshadow Nepal and prevent it from receiving the full rays of their development. We very often define our foreign policy by divorcing it from our internal policy and basic national needs. We forget that foreign and domestic affairs are inextricably linked in a symbiotic and often blurred relationship, in which domestic policy acts as the foundation for foreign policy. Foreign policy serves to protect national interests, which are defined by internal needs such as economic development, security, political stability and territorial integrity.

In short, foreign policy is an extension of domestic policy. These two, by their interdependent nature, shape national interest formulation and economic diplomacy, which are essential for the country's growth and existence. Since the days of Prithvi Narayan Shah, Nepal has been treated as a “political project” by its rulers. Even the Nepali intelligentsia has often supported the concept to suit its interests. The result is that around 6 to 7 million youths are working abroad as migrant workers, while nearly 2,000 youths queue up at Tribhuvan International Airport every day to leave the country for work. Sadly, villages in the far-western districts are being emptied as entire families migrate to India for employment. The fault lies with us, as we have never made the interests of the people our supreme goal by transforming Nepal into a “people’s project” while formulating our foreign policy.

It is a truism that China is superior to India in many respects. It is difficult for India to compete with China in economic, military and technological advancement, as well as in mass production. However, even today, China is not easily accessible by road for meeting our daily needs for heavily consumed items such as petrol, diesel, gas, food grains and sugar. It may take a decade or more to complete all-weather roads, while the distance to seaports remains a major barrier to international trade. Moreover, China is an export-oriented economy and may have little interest in importing our products on a significant scale to balance our trade deficit with it. Can we afford any further delay in transforming our policy?

On the contrary, the geographical situation with India is different. Our rivers flow southward due to geographical reasons. We can easily share water and hydropower resources for mutual benefit. We have both road and rail links to the sea for international trade, which also provide relatively easy procurement and transportation of food grains, petroleum products and other goods. Hence, the need of the hour is to be realistic and rebuild trust in our relations.

Trust can be built if genuine and practical expectations are brought from both sides to settle chronic issues. Only then can we be optimistic about the future. We must, first of all, understand the genuine grievances and needs of our people and try to address them. Our leaders must erase from their psyche the psychological fault line of mistrust created by history in order to usher in a new era of cooperation and mutual trust for the betterment of both peoples.

The Election Commission (EC) has notified that it will register voters till Nov 21. The date has been extended in response to a request from Prime Minister Sushila Karki in view of the heavy turnout of voters for registration. Despite the two-shift registration of voters, long queues for registration may be due to the apathy of the EC at the time of annual updating of voter list by including eligible voters seriously on the one hand and the apathy among the voters toward registration, on the other. 

It is worth mentioning here that previously for a citizen to get his name registered in the voter list he had to submit only his citizenship certificate, which was provided by the District Administration Office and that was done at the village level itself. The introduction of the new system of giving biometric data at the District Election Office (DEO) for registration has discouraged many eligible voters. A majority of the voters, who are out of their native places for jobs, education and other purposes, do not prefer to visit the DEO to register themselves by visiting the DEO, which means a certain disruption in their daily schedule.  

Sadly, a citizen has to visit the district headquarters three times, first, for obtaining citizenship certificate, then for voter registration and lastly for getting the National Identity Card. Interestingly, if biometric data are obtained at the time of issuing the citizenship certificate, a citizen has no need to visit the district headquarters time and again.  

If the government introduces a law to address this issue, it will reduce the government expenses by at least 66 percent by curtailing unnecessary staff engaged in this task. At the time, the citizens will get some relief as they won’t have to undertake a strenuous journey to the district headquarters, especially in the hilly and high mountain religions. 

Like many other countries, there are two types of migrant voters in Nepal. First, those who are migrant workers working outside the country. Their number is anticipated to be 5-6m leaving apart about 2m voters living in India. The second type of voters are internal migrants whose number is also believed to be about 1-1.5m. 

A significant number of such voters include those who are registered but are unable to vote at the fixed place, date and time. The data show that out of a 30m population only 18.2m voters are registered and with the latest addition it will reach 18.5m. Interestingly, out of 18.2m voters, hardly 12.5m voters cast their votes and about 0.6m of these votes become invalid. Most of the internal migrant voters do not  cast their votes, explaining, in part, the poor turnout of voters. Since the EC has agreed to use biometric data from the National Certificate issuing office for registering the names, there is heavy rush of voters for registration.

Given this context, I humbly suggest some changes for increasing voting participation of GenZ and migrant workers abroad.

The EC has been authorized to hold polling in several phases (as per Clause 6.3 of the HoR  Election Act, 2017). It entails that it can advance partial voting as well, as per practice of several countries. It is called ‘advance voting’, ‘absent voting’and  ‘external voting, etc. If the EC decides, it can keep voting days open from the date symbols are distributed to the candidates, at least two days ahead of voting day (March 5) for those migrant workers who happen to be in the country during these 15 days, i.e, during the campaign period. The migrant workers won’t have to wait for March 5 to cast their votes. Even if it facilitates a few, that will create history for a democratic Nepal.

More significantly, it will facilitate those GenZ, who are in Kathmandu and other places inside the country in thousands, for their studies and all other purposes, together with the general voters who cannot vote in their home constituency being far away for different purposes. They can also cast their votes for their home constituencies. 

Those allowed to vote for the proportional representation (PR) segment have really been reduced to a status of 40 percent voters. If they can vote for their home constituency also, they will be 100 percent voters, as PR is meant for choosing a party and not the individual candidate. 

The PR segment is for ensuring 33 percent representation of women in the House of Representatives. Thus, it has become a women’s representation segment. This will also help those officials and staff engaged in voting management far away from their home constituencies.

This may revolutionize the voting pattern of the country. Of course, the EC has to get the ballot papers printed within a week by not depending solely on the Janak Educational Material Centre but also on other governmental and private printing presses by adhering to usual security measures.

The author is former election commissioner

The Sushila Karki Cabinet is still incomplete, though she has included ministers in two lots. Perhaps, she is finding it difficult to choose ministers as she has to balance between the nominees of different GenZ groups on the one hand and their efficiency and honesty, on the other. The GenZ movement overthrew the Oli government through mass protests held on Sept 8 and 9 after the government crackdown on social media, which had been giving a people fed up with rampant corruption, bad governance, nepotism, lavish lifestyles of political leaders and their near and dear ones, political instability and an uncertain future, a platform to vent out their anger and frustration. 

The rally, which saw a significant number of students in school uniform, was almost without any leadership. The unleashing of the police force in the massive protest resulted in the death of 19 protesters, which sparked counterviolence that turned government buildings, media, business houses, banks and hotels etc into a cinder throughout the country.

Sadly, the mass, which lacked leadership, was hijacked by those groups who wanted to take revenge against not only the political leaders but also against government institutions and commercial institutions against whom they had some grudges like those who were dissatisfied with the present democratic setup, living standards of the leaders and their relatives and deprived of misusing of the state fund and natural resources. The security agencies were unable to stop the arson and vandalism.

The present condition is not the outcome of the failures of one government or two. It is an accumulative effect of the past, as rulers did not care for the welfare of the commoners. The Nepali state always remained a political project and never became a peoples’ project. Of course, the present predicament hastened the scenario to unfurl. The  country has enough foreign exchange due to increasing remittances, on the one hand and about 5-6m workers working aboard and about two thousand departing daily by air despite a large number of people from the western districts going to India, on the other.

The Nepal valley (the Kathmandu valley) became a Nepal state with the political project of Gorkha King Prithvi Narayan Shah of expanding the boundaries of his tiny principality. It materialized with the capturing of the Kathmandu valley, in 1769. Its boundaries  went on expanding until it was stopped by Kangra (India) and the British East India Company, which was equally expanding its territories. The company squished the border through a (controversial) Treaty of Sugauli in 1816. The Rana regime extended support to the British in both World Wars to keep them in good humour and keep their political project intact.

However, the resentment among the people, dissatisfaction of King Tribhuvan and Nepali Congress’ armed revolution in 1950 needed negotiations in Delhi, which resulted in a ‘Compromise Formula’ that pledged to establish democracy through a constitution promulgated through an elected Constituent Assembly (CA), provide recognition to the King, give continuity to the Rana Prime Minister and form a coalition government with the Nepali Congress. The deal was not fully implemented.

The resurrected Shah dynasty continued its earlier stand on its political project. King  Mahendra ignored the CA issue and proclaimed a constitution to hold parliamentary elections. Within 18 months, he dissolved the elected government and parliament, and introduced a partyless Panchayat system. King Birendra followed suit.

The 1990 people’s movement reintroduced the parliamentary system. But it could not last long due to the internal bickering of the Nepali Congress and the decade-long Maoists insurgency. After the assassination of King Birendra, King Gyanendra, who sought to rule directly, forced the seven political parties to join hands with the Maoists against the monarchy. Consequently, another people’s movement in 2006 overthrew it. The elected CA adopted an all-inclusive constitution with federalism in 2015.

During the last 74 years (1951-2025) there were 59 changes of government. Significantly, the instability continued as the latest government is the 15th since 2006.The frequent changes were necessitated only to satisfy the insatiable greed of leaders to acquire power and continue to hold as long as possible and also to accumulate unlimited wealth by any means that led to corruption and misrule. 

The challenges before the GenZ movement are enormous. It was easy to overthrow a beleaguered government but eradicating deeply-entrenched corruption will be a Herculean task. The strong collusion between politicians, bureaucracy, security agencies and judiciary will not allow any effort to eliminate it, as each of them will defend the rest for its own safety. To ensure that the government does not deviate from their chosen direction, GenZs have to keep a close watch; otherwise their sacrifice will be fruitless.

Views are personal

Our political leaders, foreign policy and diplomacy baffled our regional super power and the second largest economy of the world China at Its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) which was initiated by president Xi Jinping and has been adopted by dozens of countries of the world. Hardly a few countries have dared to come out of this Chinese venture. China was so much perplexed that the third Road and Belt Forum for International Corporation in its meeting held on 17-18 Oct 2023 included two small operational projects, Panda Pack Project and Amity Living Water Project, in the list of projects under BRI against nine projects selected during PM Oli’s last visit on account of the BRI implementation plan remained held up in Kathmandu. The then Chinese envoy’s claim that the construction of Pokhara International Airport was made under BRI as he knew well that the project was started before Nepal signed it, showed the Chinese desperation. This agony of China has now been removed by PM Oli’s four-day visit (Dec 2-5) to China. Its constant efforts since 2020 to get its BRI implementation plan accepted by Nepal has now succeeded.

The government has published the contents of the BRI Cooperation framework. Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) may now be called Belt and Road Initiative Cooperation (BRIC) in Nepal, as mode of payment will now be ‘technical and aid assistance against the usual mode of payment being loan to aid assistance, which was unfamiliar to the BRI world. Nepal has now expanded the payment modalities including technician and aid assistance disregarding its previous stand on ‘grant’ only. It seems that the PM has used his autotype as a PM ignoring the stand of the Nepali Congress. The contents of the plan have been very carefully drafted, as what China has given with one hand seems to have been taken away with another.

It is feared that Chinese currency might become a legal tender by allowing China to use it for the projects financed by it. We must be thankful to God that the Chinese language has not been accepted as a medium of teaching as yet at the university-level.  Positively, PM Oli’s visit to China shows that he is not only a shrewd politician but also a smart diplomat as he got the BTIC signed, as the Chinese BRI implantation idea has been replaced by another nomenclature by Nepal. Had it not been signed, his visit could have been taken as a failed one. He has apparently given all that he could have. It is more than what was given during president Xi’s last visit in 2029. 

Negatively, PM Oli could not give all that (loan modality), which  he wanted to offer to please the Chinese leadership. That is probably the reason why he got irritated when the question regarding ‘loan’ was raised during his press conference at the airport. The consensual draft prepared by the joint expert committee that included the terminology of ‘BRI Cooperation Framework’ replacing the Chinese BRI Implementation Plan’ was only half-heartedly supported by the PM. This was probably the reason why he excessively talked here about not taking loans from China for any projects, which was definitely not acceptable to China.

Since PM Oli had already made up his mind to visit China, he accepted the consensus draft to preserve the alliance and the Chinese negotiators might have accepted it to negotiate further while finalizing the draft in China during the visit. China had not taken the Nepali defiance of sending the revised/modified version of the implementation plan kindly. Probably sensing the dissatisfaction, he did not take up the demand of converting the loan taken for Pokhara airport into grant, the issue, which was already communicated by Finance Minister Bishnu Paudel to Yang Weiqun, vice-chair of the China International Development Cooperation Agency, on Aug 23 in Kathmandu. It seems he did not raise the issue to irritate further the Chinese establishment, which might have delayed the BRI cooperation work plan accepted by it, as was done by the then PM Pushpa Kamal Dahal who did not raise the issue of border disputes with Indian PM Modi during his visit to India. 

However, in domestic politics he has proved himself as an unchallenged leader who can do anything indirectly which he cannot do directly. He has again outwitted Sher Bahadur Deuba by doing what he wanted to do despite his assurance of not doing that. He has obliged Deuba by accepting the prime ministership overnight betraying the strategic political partner Dahal. Alternatively, Deuba knows his inability to oppose PM Oli at this juncture, probably on account of personal problems. 

After completing my six-year tenure as an election commissioner in July 2000, I decided not to return to teaching, my original profession. Instead of confining myself to the classroom, I decided to write articles on electoral matters to share my ideas with the people at large.

In the beginning of 2001, Padmaratna Tuladhar invited me to meet a foreigner (whose name I don’t remember) at a five star-hotel in Kalimati. There, I met Charan Parsai for the first time and a lady whose name I cannot recall. I don’t remember the subject we four deliberated upon. But this was my first interaction with civil society leaders. Devendra Raj Pandey got me associated with Nepal South Asia Center in March 2002 and I worked with him until I was made national coordinator for the Ceasefire Code of Conduct in June 2006.

However, I was in constant touch with Daman Nath Dhungana through the 22-member Civil Monitoring Committee, formed to monitor the ceasefire that the Maoists had declared for Dashain in 2005, as both of us were its members. We remained associated through several organizations like Parliamentary Foundation, Friends for Peace and Nepal Transition to Peace Institute Nepal/Nepal Shanti Pratishthan, which was established in 2014.

During this period, we used to meet at least thrice a week and share our views over phone every evening till recently. After developing a theme to write on, I used to talk about it and after publication of the article, get his comments, which were always objective. He was actually my friend, philosopher and guide. Even when he was almost bedridden after his return from Delhi, where he had been for medical treatment, I used to meet him on alternate days. Though unable to speak fluently as before, he used to infer that I must be busy with my writing. Referring to our cordial relationship, I used to tell him that it must have been fixed in our previous lives, though neither of us believed in past lives. Even today I do not know why he was so cordial and helpful to me as we were far apart geographically: I am from Madhes and he was from Kathmandu.

There were some salient traits of his personality, which I want to share with the reader. First, he was a full-time politician, though not active but always participatory. He never declined an invite for a meeting, whether called by a party or a group, and he was a true politicoholic. Second, he was a democrat by conviction and practice, and never compromised with his ideals for any gains. It was he who raised, for the first time, the issue of electing a Constituent Assembly (CA) for framing a people’s constitution, in Nepal. So, the CA was his brain-child, though India’s first PM, Jawaharlal Nehru, had included the agenda in the ‘Delhi Compromise’ signed in Delhi in Feb 1951. The agenda remained on paper until the Maoists included it in the 12-point understanding reached with the Seven-Party alliance in Nov 2005.

Third, he was a politician with a difference as he neither sought any favour for himself nor obliged anyone for profit. Perhaps, this was the reason why he got respect from others but not their support, which is required the most in today’s electoral politics and that was also the reason why his institutions always lacked funds to operate smoothly. Fourth, he was always ready to address any meetings and deliver speeches but was quite lazy when it came to writing, which deprived us of his knowledge and wide experience for our guidance.

Fifth, he was a witty orator and knew how to twist and turn the subject matter he took up for deliberations. Sixth, he was a treasure of knowledge acquired by reading books, which he used to share with us in our meetings. Seventh, he was very hospitable and used to receive visitors well before the scheduled time. Eighth, I always found him very accommodating. During the launch of my books, he used to busy himself with the management aspect of the events. Lastly, he was always worried about the low level of politics and the future of Nepal. He wanted to take the lead in improving the situation but found himself handicapped by not having any organization to support him.

He wanted the Parliamentary Foundation, the organization he had founded, to function smoothly to provide organizational support for streamlining the parliamentary system and also wished to get the initiatives of NTTPI for documenting the peace process. Sadly, his wishes remained unfulfilled.

Fulfilling his wishes through joint efforts would be our tribute to the departed soul. In his death, I have lost one of my great well-wishers, whom I will be missing all my life as the void resulting from his absence will never be filled up.

Nobel laureate Mohammad Yunus, as the nominee of the agitating student leaders, is leading the advisory government of Bangladesh after the students uprising of July succeeded in dislodging Sheikh Hasina’s 15-year-old dictatorial government. As per the Army Chief’s advice, as reported, Hasina resigned and fled to India for her safety in the wake of violent protests. The takeover of the country has brought back a semblance of law and order in the country after a spate of revengeful activities targeted against Hasina’s supporters and the minority Hindu community. At this point in time, the Yunus government would do well to draw a roadmap for holding elections at the earliest to restore democracy, as Bangladesh has a history of frequent military interventions.

Per media reports, more than 400 agitators lost their lives since the agitation began. But a question arises: Did the Hasina government direct the army to shoot so many people? The army could have exercised restraint, as the protesters were not its enemy. Had it made its limitations known to the government, the result could have been different. If that had happened, Hasina, in all likelihood, would have been spared the trouble of fleeing the country to save her life.

With Hasina effectively out of national politics, the army has become more relevant, as without its support the interim government cannot function.     

Looking back, Bangladesh is the youngest country of South Asia created in 1972. Hitherto, it was West Pakistan, which was the creation of the partition of India in August 1947 on the ground of Muslim-majority areas. Mujibur Rahman, who achieved independence for Bangladesh with support from India, was not allowed to lead the country, as he was assassinated along with all family members except his two daughters (who were abroad) on 15 Aug 1975, the independence day of India. Ziaur Rahman, who led the military coup against Mujib, ruled the country from 1975 to 1981 after which another military General Hussain Mohammed Ershad held the reins from 1982 to 1990. 

The politics changed gradually, as Khaleda Zia, the widow of Ziaur Rahman, assumed assassinated at the hands of the Ershad group and Sheikh Hasina (in revenge of the assassination of her father and other family members), joine hands against Ershad, who paved the way for the restoration of parliamentary system. In 1991, a caretaker government held general elections through which Khaleda Zia came to power and completed her five-year term. The tradition of caretaker governments holding elections continued in 1996, 2001 and 2008. Hasina formed the government in 1996 after a poll win, only to lose power to her nemesis Khaleda in 2001. Two years after getting elected for the second time in 2009, Hasina abolished the system, sparking a strident opposition from Khaleda and her party. The relations between the two parties (Hasina’s Awami League and Zia’s Bangladesh Nationalist Party) and the two leaders got so worse that Zia and her party did not contest the 2024 general elections, after which Zia landed behind bars on charges of corruption. 

Hasina’s decision to rule the country single-handedly by ignoring, suppressing and persecuting the opposition on the charges of corruption ultimately brought about her downfall.

As Hasina appeared increasingly partisan, this shade of hers perhaps led people to believe that she was no longer a leader suitable for steering an unstable democracy, which has suffered repeated military coups. Her sudden departure from the political scene was the result of constant and concerted efforts on the part of her opponents to remove her from power. It is quite possible that the powerful elements opposing Sheikh Mujibur Rahman did not like to see his heir Hasina leading an independent and secular Bangladesh with good relations with India as the demolition of the statue of Rahman and burning of the houses of the Hindus show. 

Hasina’s autocratic rule and a strain of extremism coming from the political force under Khaleda Zia helped the situation to explode. A major reason for the agitation was the legal provision of reserving 30 percent quota for the family members of the veterans of 1971’s war of independence against Pakistan. Though morally justified during the early days of independence, the quota system had lost its relevance. Perhaps oblivious to the atrocities that their parents suffered during the struggle for independence, the new generation is fighting for a better life amid limited opportunities for employment.

What has happened in Bangladesh can happen in any other country with similar conditions. Politicians blinded by absolute power never want to give it up. They want to cling to power by hook or crook. They do not realize that a prolonged stay in positions of power makes them repulsive.  If the frustration among the youth and public despair continue for long and politicians do not take suitable measures to address this volatile situation, public outrage may erupt like a volcano in Nepal also. 

The friendly Nepal-China relations are well tested. However, the reported inclusion of two small operational projects, Panda Pack Project and Amity Living Water Project in the list of projects under BRI by the third Road and Belt Forum for International Corporation in its meeting held on 17-18 Oct 2023.is disappointing and alarming for Nepal, for it sends two messages. First, China is reluctant to take any new project in Nepal and second, the naming of these two projects warns Nepal not to accept the terms and conditions laid down by China for BRI, which have been accepted by Pakistan and Sri Lanka. It is evident from the indirect messages of the Chinese envoy, who claimed the construction of Pokhara International Airport under BRI, as he knew well that the project was started before Nepal signed it. The envoy’s remarks on the Nepal-India electricity trade were also a pointer that China was not happy with the present dispensation. It has been skeptical toward Nepal since the approval of MCC, the US project by Nepal’s parliament.

PM Pushpa Kamal Dahal did his best to rush to China directly from the US to attend the 19th Asian games opening ceremony at Hangzhou and to meet president Xi jinping. But his plan failed, perhaps, as he could not satisfy President Xi for Nepal not accepting the terms and conditions of BRI. Nepal and China had signed 12 agreements, which included development of electricity connectivity between the two countries.

Dahal, though optimistic to have at least one or two projects out of nine agreed upon previously for approval under BRI, could read the mind of President Xi, who, with his ambitious plan of One Belt and One Road Initiative in 2013 (rechristened Belt and Road Initiative), has succeeded in connecting  China with Europe through Central Asia and South Asia to become the largest economy of the world through its mass production at the lowest cost and technical advancements. 

However, due to Covid 19, the slackened economy of China warranted immediate action to boost the economy. During the premiership of KP Sharma, Nepal-China relations were enhanced to strategic partnership. Naturally, China was very hopeful to bring some projects in Nepal under BRI. Moreover, in recent years, China has been assertive in Nepal’s internal politics and had managed to bring the CPN (Maoist Center) and the CPN-UML together before the 2072 election, which resulted in the coalition securing a majority in the federal parliament and also at provincial and local levels of government. However, it became frustrated with Dahal when he discarded the UMLand joined hands with the Nepali Congress and the CPN (Unified Socialist), defeating the UML in the elections. And since there was no progress on selecting projects under BRI, he annoyed China further.

Even after becoming Prime Minister with UML support, he again betrayed Oli and kicked out UML ministers from his cabinet. All these made China more suspicious of Dahal. It is a truism that Prachanda favored China by canceling the decision of the Dr Baburam  government to construct the Budhi Gandaki 1200 MW project by Budhi Gandaki Hydroelectric Project Development Committee, and  signed the MoU with China Gezouba Group Corporation (CGGC) to be constructed under the engineering, procurement, construction and financing (EPCF) model. His party leader and the then Finance Minister Varshman Puna had accepted a loan from the Chinese EXIM bank for developing the international airport in Pokhara.  Though the Deuba government canceled the project, KP Sharma Oli government again roped in the CGGC in 2018, as was done by the Dahal government.

Nepal went ahead to upgrade its relations with China to strategic partnership during President Xi’s visit to Nepal in 2019. Nepal allowed Chinese language in school curriculum. The PM’s Office authorized a subsidiary company of the Chinese Huawei Technologies Co Ltd after suspending the bidding process to set up the ‘action room’ equipped with a video conferencing hall. Nepal allowed China International Development Cooperation Agency to provide development assistance to 15 northern districts of Nepal and signed a treaty of  Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters with China, which it does not have with any other country. Nepal,  after breaking its traditional stand,  allowed the bracketing of the word ‘Zhumulangma’ with the Nepali word ‘Sagarmatha’.

In spite of the good intention of Dahal to satisfy China, he could not do so, as he is heading a coalition government. The coalition partners are  not willing to accept any projects under BRI loan with high percentage of interest and shorter period of repayment. These parties can accept projects under aid or grant. And there is no ground to reject the Chinese offer at lower rates of interest and longer timeframe for repayment, as being offered by other international funding organizations. Moreover, China should not equate Nepal with Pakistan and Sri Lanka, as its relations with Nepal are centuries old.

It is believed that a nation is reborn by adopting a new constitution. And it really became true with the adoption of a new constitution in Nepal when its Constituent Assembly-2 declared it a secular, inclusive, federal, democratic republic on 20 Sept 2015. These are the cardinal features of the constitution. 

Looking back, we find that the three words, ‘democratic federal system’ were incorporated in the Interim Constitution (Article 38) in addition to the terms ‘inclusive and restructured’ through its first amendment on 13 April 2007. It has its basis in the Comprehensive Peace Accord (Clause 8.2) signed on 21 Nov 2006 by the then PM GP Koirala and the Maoist Chief PK  Dahal, which provides for making a ‘a high-level  Recommendation Commission for the Restructuring of the State.’ 

The Maoists were calling for restructuring of the state, however, it was not mentioned in the 12-point agreement signed on 21 Nov 2005, in India by the Seven-Party Alliance and the Maoists. Perhaps, the most pressing need at that time was to throw out of power the absolute monarchy and other demands were considered secondary.

The entire country celebrated as usual the eighth ‘Constitution Day’ on Sept 20, save the Madhes-based parties, which celebrated the day as a ‘Black Day’ for them, as  more than 100 Madhesi youths had sacrificed their lives for incorporating federalism with one Madhes Pradesh for 20 districts in the Tarai region in the forthcoming constitution. However, the constitution adopted provides for seven provinces out of which a province consisting of only eight districts was carved out of 12 districts. 

The other 12 districts of the Tarai were made part of the five provinces.

It was the thorny issue of federalism that failed Constituent Assembly-1 as consensus was impossible among the parties on the one hand and the strength of the Maoists and the Madhes-based parties in the CA was 

significant which could be ignored, on the other. 

In the CA-2, the number of representatives of both the parties, the Maoists and the Madhesi outfits, was reduced; it was possible for the Nepali Congress and the CPN-UML to adopt the constitution with support from some other parties. And realizing the position, the Maoist party also supported the NC and the UML’s proposals and gave up its demand for making identity and resources as the bases 

of federalism.

It was obvious that while adopting the constitution most of the top leaders of all major parties apprehended that federalism would weaken the nation, as it would affect the existing central control over those areas which would be brought under different provinces. 

They also apprehended that since local populations will have control over their areas, they may go for division/bifurcation of the territories. 

Their main concern was regarding their control of the bureaucracy, the permanent government.  If power was divided, their complete say over it would decrease, if not end.

These are the reasons that even after the passing of eight years and three tiers of government duly elected, they are not allowed to function as per powers delivered by the constitution. Important federal laws are not framed as yet to enable them to use their rights to govern the administration and discharge day-to-day duties. 

It seems that many laws, including those related to the civil and police administrations, have not been enacted by the center deliberately to prove that the provincial tier of governance is superfluous and redundant. It is evident from the facts that the frequent transfers and postings of high officials hinder the government’s functioning seriously, as there have been frequent complaints to the center. There are cases filed by the provincial governments in the Supreme Court for the protection of their constitutional rights.

It can be assumed that before taking the decision for carving out seven provinces, they made the local tiers of government more powerful and kept it outside of the overall supervision and control of the provinces to make the second tier weak and worthless. 

The constitution has provided for three tiers of government—central, provincial and local. 

However, the central government has made it a four-tier government by adding one more tier by way of district government, which is controlled by the central government. 

Chief district officers are in charge of peace and security of the districts. It has been made so that the central government will prevail ultimately over provincial and local governments. There are many more obstacles created by the center to prove that federalism is only an unwanted child of the constitution, which is not allowed to grow properly so that its life gets shortened for want of nutritious food to survive by not providing sufficient support.