Submit your Article

Jordan Chhetri, a cancer survivor, has embarked on an expedition to climb Mt Everest to raise money for the hospital that cared for him. He was 14 when the doctor told him that he had State 4 Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma. He beat the disease after nine months of intensive treatment and set up a charity, Perform with Purpose, to raise money for children with cancer by climbing Mt Everest. He also aims to be the first Nepali/English cancer survivor to stand on the Everest summit. In an interview with ApEx, Chhetri talked about his preparation for the Everest expedition. Excerpts: 

How is your health now?

I am in very good health. I have been training for this purpose for 14 months now.

How did it feel to get permission to climb Mount Everest given your health condition?

When I spoke with my doctor about this project, he said it's absolutely fine. I was ecstatic when those words came out.

You were diagnosed with cancer at the age of 13. What was that time like?

It was a strange feeling. I cannot describe this; you have this thing inside of you, threatening to take your life. So it felt scary, to say the least. No one knows how it happens; sometimes it just does, and I am okay with that. I underwent intense chemotherapy which lasted for around nine months. One does not really return to normalcy because there is always a fear of it coming back. But I learned early on that if you dwell on that fear, you will only get depressed and worried. I do not have enough hours in the day to worry about things I can not control.

I am 29 years old now. I will be the first Nepali/English cancer survivor in history to summit the massive mountain! I am doing this for the support of the Southampton Hospitals Charity, for children coming to be treated at the same hospital where I received treatment, inside the Southampton Charity Hospital, specifically on the 5th floor, in the Piam Brown Ward.

How long have you been in Nepal? What kind of preparations are being made for your expedition?

I have been in Nepal for 22 days now. I have been learning and training with the British Gurkha Training Centre in Pokhara. These guys, who are striving to be elite, are something else -hardworking and dedicated to their craft. I am currently in Namche Bazaar, taking an active rest day. This place is beautiful. I have no other words to describe Namche. All the preparatory works, including training, gear check, and briefing, have been completed. I have already received a permit to summit Everest.

You have come to Nepal to climb Mount Everest. Does it have any purpose, or is it just your hobby?

I came to Nepal to learn about the country and climb the world's tallest mountain to test my limits and see how far I can push my body. This mountain is the perfect place for that.

Do you also have plans to support cancer patients in Nepal?

I reached out to some Nepali cancer charities, but none of them ever got back to me. So, I have been raising money solely for the Piam Brown Ward of the Southampton Hospitals.

Who else is in your Everest expedition team?

I am climbing with Gelje Sherpa of AGA Adventures. These guys have been nothing short of amazing, helping me with all my administration work. Adrianna Brownlee of AGA Adventures has been on call 24/7 to answer any questions I had leading up to my project.

A research recently published by Christopher K Colley for the Stimson Center, an American think tank, nudged me to contemplate doing something I have never done before: Write a piece on foreign policy centered on Nepal from the perspective of Beijing. 

The paper, The Emerging Great Game Chinese, Indian and American Engagement in South Asia, is interesting, though not much in terms of its quite narrow and limited recommendations on how the USA can better counter the existing regional dynamics over the region. 

Instead, it is of great value for its fairly balanced analysis of what China, India and the USA have been doing (or not doing) in order to assert their positions in Kathmandu and Dhaka. 

Colley, an assistant professor of International Security Studies at the United States Air War College, highlights how ably China has been capable of outpowering its two big rivals in Nepal.

At the same time, the author, quite correctly, underscores that it has not been entirely all smooth sailing for Beijing. 

China has been overtly perceived to favor the leftist parties, which recently formed a new coalition, a tactic that can often backfire.

Indeed, the political instability in Kathmandu and the overall volatility of national politics is at least partially induced by the same game that Beijing learned so ably from other foreign powers jockeying for influence in Nepal. 

And it is a sort of chain reaction: As China steps up its game, more push backs and initiatives are put in place by its rivals to offset its increasingly more vocal foreign policy in Nepal. 

But connectivity and infrastructure are the elements that have been so central to Beijing’s approach to both Nepal and Bangladesh (and by extension to the entire world) and that have been distinguishing it from other big players. 

We need to give credit to Beijing that the Belt and Road Initiative is certainly very ambitious, perhaps even too much. 

Symbolically speaking, the BRI has been extremely important because it offered a clear vision of a future based on connectivity and with it comes a very clear and eye-catching narrative. 

No matter the confusion attached to the BRI, what really counts is that the Chinese were able to portray it as a game-changer initiative that is still unmatched by other geopolitical rivals. 

At the same time, though, concrete results and benefits on this front, as Colley explains, are mostly still to be seen on the ground in both nations. 

In this regard, it is still remarkable that Kathmandu and Beijing have not signed the implementation framework of the BRI as yet.  

India has been trying with its Look East Policy but, beyond the fact that it has never been focused on Nepal, the initiative is more like a strategy rather than a concrete, tangible initiative like the BRI.

The EU Global Gateway Initiative not only was designed very lately and it is still in its infancy, it’s still very far from being relevant and certainly did not make a mark in Nepal 

The USA does not have any infrastructure programs in the region. Unless we consider the highly complex and possibly impractical India-Middle East-Europe-Economic Corridor (IMEC) signed last year during the India G20, it is a joint venture with the European Union and seven other countries. 

Considering the unrivaled level of connectivity projects China aims to build in Nepal, Beijing should do a much better job in terms of outreach. 

Students, civil society and think tanks in Nepal should be engaged to better explain not only the BRI but also the more recently launched Global Civilization Initiative that still remains a mystery for many observers. 

This public outreach will probably be met with similar attempts by the USA and India while I am not entirely confident that the EU can be up to playing this game. 

China could also get out of its comfort zone and explain its human rights approach.

It knows, in advance, that the primacy of economic rights, a cornerstone of China’s official policies, can be relatively well received here but with some caveats. 

On the one hand, the Chinese model of top-down governance centered on effectiveness of policies and quick delivery of results can easily find admirers in Nepal, a country plagued by ineffective governance. 

On the other hand, in a nation that fought tooth and tooth for its freedoms in its decades-long quest for democracy, not once but multiple times, the same argument of the primacy of economic rights over political and civil liberties won’t go very far nor persuade the majority. 

Even a much more proactive PR and public engagement with the citizenry of the country won’t be enough. 

Such activities should also be matched by what really matters: A change in substance in China’s overall approach to Nepal and by extension, in the way it traditionally deals with developing nations around the world. 

It is now crystal clear that the Nepali side has been quite skillful at pushing back in terms of terms and conditions that Beijing has been offering for the BRI projects.

A country like Nepal, often portrayed as a weak nation, has been doing a masterful job at asserting its own strategic interest in its relationships with China.

So, if China really wants a breakthrough with Kathmandu, it has to show a much higher level of flexibility on how the BRI can be rolled out. 

It needs to accept the key terms, quite reasonable if you think about it, that Nepal is demanding: Grants and very nominal interest rates on the loans that it needs to take. 

Beijing should be much more effective and persuasive at explaining how it can really be transformative for Nepal to have a direct railways connection with its southern borders.  

Considering the staggering sums involved and the sheer complexity of the undertaking, it is obvious that Kathmandu does not want to incur huge debts.

Could Nepal offer China a new template on how to deal with the world, a much less rigid one and more attuned to the needs of the recipient nations? 

The Dragon Boat race on the occasion of the Chinese New Year was a big boost for the image of China in the country.

Yet it is not nearly enough to dispel some of the concerns that many harbor toward Beijing. 

It would not be surprising if an increasing number of people in Nepal start showing some annoyance toward China using the same heavy-handed approach that New Delhi has been, for so long, accused of. 

For sure, Nepal does not need neither big brothers nor big sisters. 

It needs reliable partners that, while overtly and covertly pursuing their strategic interests, also allow Nepal to play the same game by maximizing its own national priorities.

This means to be okay with the fact that Kathmandu might also and, very respectfully, say “no” to them as they do not align with its core interests . 

Accepting this new reality means that Nepal is growing and moving steadfastly toward becoming a developed nation, a country that is not afraid of exerting its own sovereign interests. 

It will also imply that its core partners have been effective at fulfilling what should be their primary mission in Nepal: Helping the nation to stand more confidently and more ambitiously on its own feet. 

The author writes about politics, human rights and development in Nepal and the Asia-Pacific

There’s a popular ‘21/90 rule’, which states that it takes 21 days to create a habit and 90 days to create a lifestyle. Once a habit forms, it normally stays throughout life.

One such habit that should be introduced during a child’s formative years, preferably in kindergarten days, is the habit of reading. Reading books, newspapers, etc should be made fun and invigorating thereby triggering curiosity. To make it a habit, it must be routine and engaging. Children should be encouraged to explore genres that pique their interest. In the process, they should also try to grasp knowledge on other subjects that could aid in forming a well-rounded personality. Gifting books to celebrate achievement has been known to spur children to do even better in their vocations and also inculcate a zeal to read. Savvy use of technology e.g. audiobooks has been found helpful to goad reluctant readers.

The budget session of the House of Representative (HoR) is beginning from May 10.  As per constitutional provisions, the government has to present the budget by the end of May.

But the main opposition Nepali Congress and Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) have toughened their respective stances, signaling that the parliamentary stalemate, seen during the winter session, will continue. NC has said it will not allow the government to table the budget in the Parliament if it does not form a parliamentary panel to investigate Rabi Lamichhane’s alleged involvement in a cooperative fraud. At a meeting called by Speaker Devraj Ghimire, NC reiterated its call for a parliamentary probe panel. “We are firm in our position and hope that the government will address our demands,” said NC leader Ramesh Lekhak.

Earlier in the day, RSP’s official meeting reiterated its stance against the formation of a panel to probe Lamichhane’s alleged involvement in the case. At the meeting, RSP leaders accused NC of trying to create friction in the five-party ruling alliance at the whims of some external forces. Lamichhane has been demanding that he be allowed to speak in the parliament to come clean on the charges leveled against him. “We won’t accept a probe panel targeted against an individual (Lamichhane),” Manish Jha, a lawmaker from RSP, said and suggested forming a panel for investigating all cooperative frauds across the country.

Lamichhane has written to the Speaker urging the latter to allow him to furnish clarifications on the allegations leveled against him. Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal and CPN-UML KP Sharma Oli have maintained that a panel targeting an individual will not resolve the cooperative crisis.