National AI Policy 2025: Promise, pitfalls and the path ahead
Nepal has initiated a significant endeavor to incorporate Artificial Intelligence into its national strategy with the introduction of the National AI Policy 2025. This policy serves as a foundational document for fostering AI innovation and governance, with the goal of transforming Nepal into an AI-centric nation, in line with the swift technological progress observed worldwide. Despite the policy’s forward-looking aspirations, it reveals critical deficiencies in implementation, funding and ethical regulation, which may influence its actual effectiveness.
AI has transitioned from a futuristic idea to a transformative force that is redefining industries, governance and interpersonal relationships on an unparalleled scale. Its ability to improve public administration and revolutionize healthcare highlights AI’s documented potential for driving economic and social change. As a developing country aiming for digital inclusion, Nepal has much to gain from the responsible integration of AI technologies. The government's acknowledgment of AI as a vital element for national advancement is praiseworthy. However, the mere creation of a policy does not signify readiness. The effectiveness of a policy is determined by its execution, which presents Nepal with its most significant challenge.
A key feature of the policy is the creation of an AI Supervision Council and a National AI Center, both designed to manage AI governance, research and ethical issues. Furthermore, the government has established the AI Regulatory Authority, a new entity tasked with ensuring adherence to AI regulations, promoting transparency and establishing governance standards for AI. According to the policy, the AI Supervision Council will be under the Minister for Communications and Information Technology and include representatives from the academia, private sector and the civil society to guarantee that AI is developed and utilized responsibly. This institutional framework represents a positive advancement, aiming to prevent unchecked AI development. Nevertheless, the document lacks clarity regarding the specifics of regulatory enforcement. Who will be responsible if AI systems inflict unintended harm? What strategies will be implemented to address AI-generated biases in a nation with low digital literacy? The absence of definitive actions to tackle these critical issues may undermine the policy’s effectiveness.
One of the significant challenges facing AI adoption in Nepal is its vulnerable digital infrastructure. In contrast to leading global AI nations that benefit from advanced data centers and high-performance computing capabilities, Nepal continues to experience unreliable internet connectivity in numerous regions. The policy does stress the importance of developing AI infrastructure, which includes creating cloud computing platforms and national AI databases. It underscores the necessity for high-performance computing (HPC) facilities and AI-capable data centers to bolster research and development initiatives; however, it lacks specific details regarding the funding for these projects. This raises the critical question: where will the financial resources originate? While the policy mentions public-private partnerships (PPP), it fails to provide clear incentives to draw in investment. In the absence of a dedicated budget or a financial strategy, Nepal risks repeating the familiar pattern of policies that appear promising in theory but struggle to be implemented effectively.
A significant challenge facing the country is the limited availability of professionals skilled in AI. The policy advocates for the integration of AI curricula in universities and vocational training institutions, a step that is both essential and timely. The policy emphasizes that “AI education will be incorporated into the national curriculum at various academic levels to cultivate a sustainable AI workforce.” However, educational reform is a long-term strategy. Nepal must also consider immediate solutions such as international partnerships, AI boot camps and specialized training programs for current professionals. Without a competent workforce, the aspirations for AI innovation and governance will remain unfulfilled.
While the advantages of AI are considerable, its associated risks must not be overlooked. Worldwide discussions on AI governance focus on ethical deployment, bias reduction and data privacy. Nepal’s AI policy recognizes the significance of ethical AI but falls short of providing a comprehensive framework for responsible implementation. Challenges such as misinformation from deepfakes, AI-enabled surveillance and algorithmic bias necessitate rigorous oversight, especially in a nation where digital rights protections are still developing. The lack of clear data protection measures is a notable gap. Although “the government aims to establish a Data Protection Act to regulate AI-related data collection and processing,” there is scant mention of how these regulations will be enforced. For AI to gain public trust, it must be accountable, and such accountability requires a legal framework that is currently absent in Nepal’s policy.
One of the most encouraging elements of the policy is its acknowledgment of AI’s potential across various sectors, such as healthcare, agriculture, energy and tourism. AI-enhanced healthcare solutions could extend medical services to underserved regions, while predictive analytics in agriculture may improve crop production. The policy outlines that “AI applications in agriculture will encompass automated irrigation systems, pest management solutions and climate monitoring technologies to boost productivity.” However, the successful implementation of AI across sectors hinges on robust collaboration among government entities, the private sector and academic institutions. While the policy expresses optimism, it lacks clarity on how these partnerships will be cultivated and does not address the possible resistance from traditional industries concerned about AI-induced changes.
A significant concern is whether Nepal’s AI policy is in line with global best practices. Given that AI is a global technology, Nepal must avoid developing its AI ecosystem in a vacuum. The policy would be strengthened by clear commitments to align with international AI governance standards, such as those established by the OECD and UNESCO. Although the policy states that "Nepal will engage with international AI governance bodies to align its regulatory framework with global standards," the absence of specific actions could lead to regulatory inconsistencies and hinder Nepal's integration into global AI markets.
The government has invited public input on the AI policy, which is a positive indication of its openness to refining its strategy. However, effective engagement necessitates widespread participation, extending beyond policymakers and experts to include civil society, businesses and the general populace. Nepal’s AI initiative should evolve into a national movement that harmonizes innovation with inclusivity, security with accessibility and ambition with practicality.
The National AI Policy 2025 represents a positive advancement, yet its effectiveness will depend on its ability to move beyond mere statements. Nepal has the chance to establish a distinctive approach to AI integration, but this requires a focused effort to tackle issues such as infrastructure shortcomings, funding limitations, workforce deficiencies and ethical dilemmas. AI should be viewed not only as a means of technological progress but also as a societal catalyst that, when handled appropriately, can drive Nepal forward. The primary challenge ahead is to ensure that this policy leads to real, measurable outcomes rather than becoming just another unfulfilled initiative.
The author is the founder of ‘Teach Me AI’
Joining the Wagner Group has its perils
Recent events in Russia have brought the Wagner Group, a controversial private military company, into the spotlight. With concerns about the fate of its fighters and leader, the group’s future hangs in the balance. Reports indicate that the leader of the group has sought refuge in Belarus, while Russian President Vladimir Putin has presented the soldiers with three options: Join the Russian military, return to their families, or seek refuge in Belarus. As uncertainty looms, the group continues to expand its operations and attract new members, including young individuals from Nepal.
Nepalis possess renowned combatant qualities as the enlistment of the Gorkhas, acknowledged globally as an exceptionally fierce warrior, in the Indian Army and the British Army since 1815 shows. Gorkha regiments raised by the British exhibited remarkable valor in various military campaigns. “This is a troubling circumstance. The Nepal government lacks the capacity to intervene as these individuals have taken action independently,” EurAsian Times quoted Nepali Army’s Major General Binoj Basnyat (retd) in reference to the Nepali youths’ involvement in the Ukraine war.
“If Nepali citizens are serving in the armed forces of a sovereign nation, it should align with the government's foreign policy, or there ought to be (an) MoU or a treaty with the respective country. However, such mechanisms are absent in this instance,” he remarked, stressing the need for the government of Nepal to address the matter promptly. Numerous videos have emerged on social media platforms over recent weeks (some of them self-captured), showcasing Nepali youths enlisting in the Russian Army, exhibiting their training sessions or their arrival at training facilities.
In one particular case, the video shows a young individual from the Koshi region, a Russian university student, pointing out that he had two choices with the expiration of his visa: Either return to Nepal and face unemployment or secure a position in the Russian Army.
An attractive incentive
President Vladimir Putin has offered Russian citizenship to individuals willing to commit to one year of military service. This game-changing move seems to have further attracted the Nepali youths to the group along with the relaxing of some of the requirements, including language proficiency.
Historically, Nepal has sent its youths to serve only a number of armies and police forces, including the British and Indian armies. However, India’s new recruitment scheme—Agnipath—has strained Nepal-India relations, prompting Nepali youths to explore alternative opportunities.
Uncertainties surrounding Wagner
While Wagner prospects may appear enticing due to its financial rewards and promise of modern warfare experience, it is crucial to keep in mind that the group is not an official army and that its operations have frequently sparked controversies. The group faces an uncertain future, raising legitimate concerns about the long-term viability of the Nepali youths’ decision to join their ranks.
The recent mutiny and the Wagner leader seeking refuge in Belarus have added another layer of uncertainty surrounding the group, raising questions over the fate of the fighters concerned. It is essential for individuals considering joining the group to carefully evaluate the potential risks and associated challenges.
In conclusion, young Nepali individuals joining the group has raised eyebrows and prompted deeper analysis. Putin’s decree offering Russian citizenship to those, who commit to military service, has fueled the recruitment drive further. While the future of the group remains uncertain, it is crucial for potential recruits to carefully consider the risks associated with joining a private military company by looking beyond the benefits like offer of citizenship, attractive salaries, health and life insurance benefits, performance-based bonuses, and the opportunity to gain hands-on experience with modern weapons.
