Submit your Article

There was a time when the UK was an undisputed world super power, backed by an empire and navy that spanned the entire globe in the nineteenth century. In the twentieth century, particularly from 1945 to 1990, the world order boiled down to a bipolar structure, dominated by the USA and the USSR (present-day Russia) as the competing super powers. Since 1990, the USA has remained the only super power of the world. Nevertheless, the emergence of BRICS in the international arena as a major alliance for economic and social cooperation—grounded in the principles of the UN Charter and international law—signals the beginning of multipolarism. Russia regained its military strength, while China has taken the world by storm with its rapid economic rise within the period of 20 years, establishing itself as a formidable global power.

India with vast human and natural resources, along with a fast-growing economy and a strong push toward high-technology innovation, is playing a pivotal role not only in this region, but also on the global arena as an emerging power. The way the international economic and strategic powers are taking shapes in the global political economy signals the dawn of a new global order. The Russia-Ukraine war and the US, Israel-Iran war have shown how powerful nations play to achieve their own interests at the cost of human lives. The global scenario paints a gloomy and miserable picture that poorly affects small states with weak economies.

Balancing

Nepal’s geopolitical position, located between two major powers, remains inherently vulnerable despite efforts to maintain diplomacy in a balanced way. Prithvi Narayan Shah’s strategic assertion that ‘Nepal is a yam between two boulders’ continues to be equally important and relevant even after more than two centuries. Against this backdrop, neither the geography of Nepal can be altered nor its   neighbors chosen. Nepal must build its socio-economic strength in line with the ground realities of its geostrategic position. This means, drawing lessons from the past experiences, the government must read the writing on the wall and keep abreast of the shifting regional and global order to foster its development efforts and balance its delicate foreign policy. Nepal can neither bear the biting cold of the north nor the scorching heat of the south. Similarly, it cannot withstand the damaging storm from the west. It must, therefore, steer a middle path by developing strong institutional relations followed by the art of diplomatic balance.

In practice, previous governments have often been criticized for pursuing an unbalanced foreign policy. Ineffective handlings of policy across different governments has made neighboring and friendly countries skeptical of Nepal’s diplomatic governance. Weak institutional coordination and a lack of continuity in diplomatic initiatives have projected an image of naivety in the conduct of foreign policy.

Nepal’s geopolitical location is both a blessing and a burden. However, Nepal is a landlocked country, but it is not ‘mind locked’. The mind is a powerful source of action and innovation. Focusing on knowledge-based human resources, innovation, technology, digital connectivity and energy corridors is immensely important, as these elements significantly reduce the constraints imposed by physical boundaries. There is ample scope to develop Nepal through its enhanced economic connectivity between India and China, provided that the trust of its neighbors is secured. Over the past couple of decades, successive political governments have mainly centralized their actions to build ‘vote banks’, rather than steering national interests and development efforts in a way that ensures citizens’ satisfaction.

While dealing with its immediate neighbors, Nepal must not forget that the US as a super power is taking more interests here in recent years, primarily to counter China as its strategic competitor, and at times to balance its hidden agenda toward India. In view of this landscape, Nepal must remain vigilant in safeguarding its sovereignty and national interests by implementing its foreign policy principles into effective and consistent action. So long as the political leadership continues to adopt this reality in a sensitive manner and stays free from the pressure and influence of powerful countries, Nepal’s national interests will be definitely safeguarded.

Learning lessons

In international relations, there are no permanent friends or foes. It is national interest that ultimately determines who can be regarded as a real friend. The government of Nepal has no option left but to resolutely and rapidly strengthen its economy beyond its present condition. Otherwise, its voice in regional and global platforms will be marginalized and rendered inconsequential. Development is determined not only by its resources, it takes inspiring shape through committed will of the government and altruistic implementation of realistic policies.

One of the basic flaws of Nepal’s governance system is its persistent failure to learn from past experiences. It tends to forget even the gravest crises with alarming haste.

Coming days will be more critical and perilous due to the covert and overt power struggles among global powers that will directly affect vulnerable nations like ours. How the present government calibrates its tactical moves in foreign policy is a matter of serious and sensitive consideration. Nepal’s strategic situation demands greater cooperation with its immediate neighbors rather than distant power, maintaining a balanced approach. Unless Nepal’s diplomacy ensures that its foreign policy is strategic, coherent, focused on national interests, balanced in engagement and proactive, frequent critiques of its implementation will continue.

The first session of the House of Representatives following the March 5 elections commenced on Thursday at the Federal Parliament Building in Singhadurbar. The session was summoned by President Ramchandra Paudel on the recommendation of the Council of Ministers, in accordance with the Constitution of Nepal. The meeting was presided over by the senior-most member of the House, Arjun Narsingha KC.

Despite the formal opening, the session was immediately disrupted by protests from the CPN-UML. As soon as proceedings began, UML lawmaker Guru Baral rose to obstruct the House, prompting the Speaker to grant him time to speak. The opposition expressed strong objections to the recent arrests of CPN-UML Chairperson and former prime minister KP Sharma Oli, as well as Nepali Congress leader and former home minister Ramesh Lekhak.

Baral alleged that both leaders had been detained by misusing Sections 181 and 182 of the Civil Code, calling it a matter of “grave concern.” He claimed that protests were taking place nationwide and accused the government of suppressing them, demanding their immediate release.

In a powerful address to the first session, Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) Chairperson Rabi Lamichhane asserted that his party carries a historic mandate to transform the country’s administrative core, Singhadurbar, rather than simply occupying it. Lamichhane emphasized that the RSP has already begun the process of reform and pledged that his party would repay the voters’ trust through responsible governance.

He issued a rare challenge to the opposition, inviting them to maintain a strict, 24-hour watch over his party’s actions to ensure total accountability. He reminded his fellow lawmakers that while their physical seats in Parliament have changed, their moral obligation to answer the public’s questions remains the same. He warned that failing this “massive mandate” would leave them permanently stigmatized by history. 

Regarding the arrests of Oli and Lekhak, Lamichhane firmly rejected claims of political vendetta. Citing the GenZ protests of September last year, he asserted that the first right to justice belongs to the mothers of martyrs and urged the opposition to respect the rule of law rather than blaming “foreign interference” for their political setbacks.

In a notable moment, Lamichhane issued a public apology from the parliamentary rostrum to the Dalit community for centuries of systemic injustice, describing it as “organized crime.” He pledged that no citizen would face discrimination based on caste under the current leadership and committed to ending political retaliation through the misuse of laws and ordinances.

He also assured a fair parliamentary environment, stating that dissenting voices would not be silenced and that a majority would not be used to harass the opposition. He reiterated his commitment to transparent governance and a foreign policy guided by national interest, while assuring investors of a secure and predictable environment.

Main opposition Nepali Congress lawmaker Bhishma Raj Angdembe extended his best wishes to Prime Minister Balendra Shah for completing a full five-year term, noting that no prime minister in the past 75 years has done so. At the same time, he cautioned against unconstitutional practices.

While expressing support for national progress, Angdembe rejected claims that the past 35 years had yielded no achievements, urging the government to acknowledge past progress while addressing remaining challenges. He also questioned the government’s transparency regarding the GenZ protests, asking whether the investigative commission’s report would be made public.

Raising concerns about the Gauri Bahadur Karki Commission, Angdembe accused it of bias, saying it focused on state suppression on Sept 8 but did not adequately investigate the arson and destruction of key government buildings, including Singhadurbar, on Sept 9. He stressed the need for a comprehensive and impartial investigation into both incidents.

Meanwhile, CPN-UML Parliamentary Party leader Ram Bahadur Thapa delivered a scathing critique of the current political transition, alleging that the GenZ movement on Sept 8 and 9 was an unannounced ‘Color Revolution’ orchestrated by the RSP. While formally congratulating Prime Minister Shah on his historic appointment and the RSP on the success in the March 5 election, Thapa claimed that this ‘magical victory’ was bolstered by decisive internal support from the Nepali Army, the bureaucracy, the Sushila Karki cabinet, the Barbara Foundation, and various NGOs. He further alleged that external ‘invisible powers’ used AI, algorithms, and Goebbels-style propaganda to frame champions of democracy as villains and murderers while elevating those seeking to ‘burn the country’ to the status of heroes.

In a series of pointed questions directed at the state, the UML leader demanded to know the true objectives behind the arson attacks on key state institutions like Singhadurbar, Shital Niwas, Baluwatar, and the Supreme Court, as well as the mysterious appearance of armed groups during the protests. He fiercely condemned the ‘illegal arrest’ of Oli and Lekhak, labeling it a conspiracy to dismantle established political leadership through a ‘cycle of state terror’ and ‘media trial’.

While acknowledging the temporary defeat of the traditional parties, Thapa warned that the CPN-UML would use its full strength in Parliament to demand answers, concluding that this loss is only a temporary setback and that a defeated army always possesses the potential to turn the tide toward victory.

Nepali Communist Party (NCP) Vice-chair and lawmaker Barshaman Pun delivered a reflective speech, admitting that his party failed to capitalize on the historic mandates it received in the past. Drawing a parallel between the current rise of the RSP and the success of the then-CPN (Maoist) in the 2008 elections, Pun acknowledged that the Maoists held a similar level of overwhelming public trust but were unable to utilize it effectively for the country’s benefit. 

He noted that the 2017 electoral alliance and subsequent party unity were also opportunities that the leadership “did not know how to handle” or sustain. Offering a word of caution to the newly dominant RSP, Pun urged them to learn from these past mistakes to ensure that this mandate translates into meaningful progress for the nation, promising that the NCP would provide the necessary cooperation to move the country forward.

Harka Sampang, chair of the Shram Sanskriti Party, launched a poignant critique of the perceived ‘internal discrimination’ within the parliament itself. Responding to earlier remarks by RSP Chair Lamichhane regarding systemic inequality, Sampang argued that a double standard exists where major ruling parties are allotted 30 to 40 minutes to speak while smaller parties are restricted to just a few minutes, asserting that all lawmakers are equally elected by the people and deserve an equal platform.

Beyond parliamentary conduct, Sampang took a hardline nationalist stance by demanding the immediate cancellation of the “unequal and treasonous” MCC compact, which he claimed undermines Nepal’s non-aligned foreign policy and serves a hidden military strategic purpose.

Outlining his party’s expectations for the new government, he urged Prime Minister Shah to adopt a policy of ‘management over displacement’ regarding landless squatters, calling for an end to the use of dozers against citizens’ homes and demanding the distribution of land ownership certificates instead. He also cautioned the government against making hasty, unstudied decisions on sensitive social issues, specifically urging a reconsideration of recent moves involving elderly allowances, student organizations, and bridge course regulations. 

Sampang advised the administration to consult thoroughly with the opposition and all stakeholders before implementing major changes, warning that failing to do so would lead to a cycle of making decisions only to be forced into embarrassing retreats later.

Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP) leader Gyanendra Shahi offered support for constitutional amendments to abolish the provincial system, arguing that it imposes a heavy financial burden. He also reiterated his party’s position in favor of restoring a constitutional monarchy, while cautioning the government against ignoring public sentiment.

Independent lawmaker Mahabir Pun described himself as a non-partisan figure committed to reform. He said he entered politics following the GenZ movement and briefly served as education minister, during which he initiated reform measures in the education sector. Pun said he had handed over draft reforms to the prime minister’s team and pledged to continue working for systemic change from within Parliament.

In the 275-member House of Representatives, the RSP holds 182 seats, followed by 38 seats for the Nepali Congress, 25 for the UML, 17 for the NCP, seven for the Shram Sanskriti Party, five for the RPP, and one independent member.

The meeting was adjourned and will reconvene on Sunday.

Each monsoon season, Nepal faces recurring severe impacts from natural hazards. Landslides in hilly regions and river overflows destroy roads, settlements, and livelihoods, displacing thousands of families every year. These occurrences are typically referred to as ‘natural disasters’, implying that the resulting damage is an unavoidable consequence of rugged terrain and extreme weather conditions. However, this way of looking at the problem hides and oversimplifies it. While the hazards Nepal faces are natural, the scale and severity of the resulting disasters are shaped primarily by human exposure and decisions about where and how we build, live, and govern.

It is important for both scientific analysis and policymaking to know the difference between a hazard and a disaster. Flooding, a landslide, a glacial lake outburst, a seismic tremor, or extreme rainfall are all examples of natural hazards. When these hazards hit populations that are already vulnerable, systems that aren't prepared, and institutions that can’t handle or absorb the effects, a disaster occurs. Due to the geographic location, Nepal is tectonically active, has steep slopes, and has delicate ecological conditions. This makes the country naturally prone to hazards. But the extent of the disaster depends on the pattern of settlement, land-use regulations, investment in preparedness and response, and the resilience of governance. 

In this context, the narrative of a natural disaster is not complete, and using this kind of rhetoric can sometimes make people think that disasters are unavoidable or completely out of human control. This kind of framing again obscures the role of governance, policy decisions, development patterns, and resource capacity in shaping the results. It is therefore critical to know the distinction between a hazard and a disaster.

Why ‘not natural’?

Available data demonstrate that disasters in Nepal are driven by natural hazards, but their impacts are shaped by Nepal’s physical and social systems, which are very exposed and vulnerable.

According to the UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, floods alone affected more than 8m people between 2000 and 2023. From 1992 to 2021, landslides and floods killed almost 7,000 people. Landslides killed 3,692 people, and floods killed 3,201 people. During the monsoon of 2024, heavy rain caused more than 132 major landslides, killing 236 people and forcing more than 8,400 people to leave their homes in several provinces, from Koshi to Sudurpaschim. 

According to weather data, several Hill districts have had the most rain during the monsoon season since 1970, which is a sign of statistically extreme events. The National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Authority (NDRRMA) says that the rain in late September 2024 alone cost the economy Rs 46.68bn. More than 83 percent of these losses were to physical infrastructure, such as roads and highways suffered damage to the tune of Rs 28bn (approx), and hydropower facilities like the Upper Tamakoshi suffered losses worth more than Rs 30bn. The Tribhuvan International Airport station in Kathmandu saw the most rain in over 20 years, with 239.7 millimeters falling in just 24 hours. The disaster left nearly 250 people dead and displaced more than 10,000 families, underscoring how vulnerable Nepal’s systems remain during extreme weather events.

Earthquakes remain the highest-priority hazard in Nepal due to their catastrophic potential. The 2015 Gorkha Earthquake, which is one of the worst disasters in over a century, resulted in approximately 9,000 deaths, 22,000 injuries, and damage to or destruction of around 1m houses. The World Bank report says that the economic loss was about $7bn, which was about one-third of Nepal’s GDP at the time. In 2023, yet another earthquake of magnitude 5.6 struck Jajarkot and Rukum West, which caused more than 157 fatalities. Both these towns were still recovering from the 2015 earthquake, even though monitoring systems had advanced. This shows that they were still vulnerable in terms of their structure and institutions.

Climate change further magnifies this risk by increasing both the frequency and the intensity of extreme events. According to the World Meteorological Organization, Nepal's average temperatures are rising faster than the global average, at 0.66°C per year. This is happening faster in high-mountain areas. There are more than 400 glacial lakes that could be dangerous, and the risk of outburst floods is growing with glacier retreat. Research from the Integrated Center for Mountain Development (ICIMOD) in 2023 estimated that Glacial Lake Outburst Floods (GLOFs) could affect more than 2 million people downstream in the coming decades.

These disasters persist due to deeper systemic issues concerning structural and governance conditions. Around 78 percent of Nepal’s population lives in rural areas where critical infrastructure is insufficient to withstand hazards. According to the Department of Urban Development and Building Construction (DUDBC), over 70 percent of buildings in Nepal are constructed without seismic code compliance. Rapid urbanization has pushed informal settlements onto riverbanks, floodplains, and landslide-prone slopes, particularly in Kathmandu Valley, where more than one-third of settlements face moderate to high exposure. Despite this, many local governments still lack sufficient technical staff, resources, geospatial infrastructure, and expertise to incorporate hazard information into land-use decisions. This reinforces the governance gaps. Although the Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act (2017) marked progress, implementation remains weak. NDRRMA reported that only about 20 percent of local governments have up-to-date disaster preparedness plans, and fewer than seven percent use hazard maps for local planning. 

In 2021 alone, Nepal recorded more than Rs 33bn in economic losses from disasters. Yet less than five percent of total disaster-related spending was allocated toward mitigation efforts. Investment remains heavily concentrated in post-disaster response rather than prevention, highlighting a reactive rather than a proactive approach and creating a reinforcing feedback loop.

Developing risk-informed systems

Clearly, these patterns demonstrate that disasters in Nepal are not purely natural in their consequences, as hazards are inevitable given the country’s geographic characteristics and monsoon climate. The scale of destruction, however, is shaped by development choices, governance gaps, and systems that do not prioritize resilience. If Nepal is to change this trajectory, it requires several critical shifts, most importantly toward risk-informed development at all levels.

A starting point is the systematic use of risk mapping to guide all forms of development. Hazard, exposure, and vulnerability assessments should inform where houses, schools, bridges, and roads are sited, rather than being an afterthought. There should be enforcement of resilient design, especially in seismic and landslide-prone regions where building codes are often poorly enforced. Nature-based solutions also represent an essential pathway toward long-term resilience, especially in a country like Nepal, where ecosystems play a direct role in many indigenous practices. 

Forest cover, wetlands, and river corridors serve as natural buffers that reduce the impact of floods and landslides. Their restoration is not just ecological but necessary for long-term resilience. Local knowledge and modern technology must be brought together. Communities possess valuable insights into seasonal flows, slope instability, and the history of past disasters. When this knowledge is combined with advanced geospatial analysis and remote sensing techniques, such as satellite-based monitoring, LiDAR terrain mapping, interferometric SAR, and other earth observation tools, Nepal can anticipate risks more accurately and plan more effectively.

Social inclusion must be central to these efforts. Women, Dalits, Indigenous peoples, and other marginalized groups are often the most affected by disasters, yet their voices are frequently left out of planning and preparedness. Building resilience requires full participation and equity.

Final thought

When a flood sweeps away a village or a landslide cuts off a highway, it is easy to blame nature. But disasters in Nepal are more than natural hazards; they are the result of where we build, how we plan, and whom we prioritize. Natural hazards are inevitable, but disasters do not have to be.

To address this, disaster risk reduction must move from the margins to the very core of development decisions. Only then can Nepal look forward to a future where monsoons, rivers, and mountains are lived with rather than feared. The hazards will always be part of our landscape, but devastation does not have to be.

“Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world,” said Nelson Mandela. But in Nepal, education has become more about business than learning.

It is often said that education and health are the most profitable sectors. This is because everyone wants a better life. However, this has also led to problems. Government schools have trained teachers, but many schools are not performing well.

In colleges, qualified teachers are present, but some are not fully committed. Due to low salaries, they spend more time teaching in private institutions. This affects students in public institutions.

Because of this, families who can afford it send their children abroad or to expensive private schools. Students, on the other hand, are also changing. Many are no longer interested in deep learning. Instead of reading full books, they look for shortcuts.

Bulky textbooks with detailed commentaries and analytical content are often left untouched in bookstores and libraries. These days, many students prefer shortcuts—relying on guides and brief handouts just to pass exams. At the same time, some institutes in the market are engaged in writing theses for students in exchange for money. Such practices seriously undermine the quality and integrity of education. These thesis-writing centers and guidebook-based learning practices should also be strictly regulated, if not banned altogether. Still, guides at the school level should be banned to encourage students to rely on proper textbooks and develop conceptual learning.

In this context, recent steps taken by Education Minister Sasmit Pokharel offer some hope. His efforts to maintain the academic calendar, conduct exams on time, and publish results promptly are positive moves. The plan to publish the 10th board exam results within a month, as well as the decision to ban political activities and student political groups in colleges and universities, are important steps. These actions will not only improve academic credibility but also help create a better and more productive environment in educational institutions.

Today, students talk more about politics than studies. Those connected to political groups are seen as powerful, even if they are not good in academics. This creates division and distracts students from education.

The decision to allow students to study up to bachelor’s level without citizenship is also very positive. Education should be for everyone. However, more work is needed. The Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2018 says that private schools must provide some seats for poor students.

Time to energize local levels

Nepal’s Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2018 provides that 10 percent of seats must be reserved for scholarship in schools with up to 500 students, 12 percent in schools with up to 800 students, and 15 percent in schools with more than 800 students. This legal provision should be strictly enforced. However, many boarding schools have yet to implement this requirement.

Local governments also need to do more. They should keep proper records of how many children are in school and how many are not. They should work to reduce dropouts. Teaching in local languages at early levels can help children learn better.

Politics in government schools

School Management Committees (SMCs) were created to improve schools, but some are accused of favoritism and misuse of power. It is alleged that many SMCs prioritize appointing their near and dear ones instead of selecting the most competent and deserving candidates. They are also accused of interference in school affairs, often treating the institution as their personal domain. This needs to be corrected.  Many people believe that SMCs have done more harm than good, causing disruption rather than bringing meaningful change.

There are other areas for improvement.

Principals should be selected through open competition, not just seniority. Teachers should get regular training. Government teachers should focus only on their schools and avoid private tutoring. The School Improvement Plan (SIP), which every school is required to prepare, has largely remained limited to paper and has not been effectively implemented in practice. There should be no political interference in the appointment of principals, and selection should be based solely on merit.

Education is a shared responsibility of teachers, students, and society. If all work together, Nepal’s education system can improve.

Way forward

The time has come to focus on quality, not profit. Nepal’s Education Minister, Sashmit Pokhrel, has shown courage by working to maintain the academic calendar.

In addition, it is high time to break the hold of private education mafias. The ministry should go further by ensuring that private schools strictly follow government rules, provide teachers with salaries and benefits, at least, comparable to government standards, and charge fees that are affordable for students. There must be stronger monitoring of private education operators so that they do not function like unruly forces without accountability.

Moreover, Nepal’s education system lacks a proper balance between theory and practice. Students graduating with degrees often have strong theoretical knowledge but lack the skills to apply it in real-life situations. Therefore, Nepal’s education system should prioritize practical exposure and employment-oriented learning to make education more useful and job-ready.

Nepal’s education system should go beyond teaching that food is essential for survival; it should also include practical life skills such as cooking.

It is high time we changed the narrative that education and health are the most profitable businesses in Nepal. They should be seen first and foremost as essential public services.

[email protected]

The author is a faculty member of Law at Manmohan Technical University, Biratnagar