Submit your Article

The fountains of liberal democracy are thought to have emerged from the West, particularly during the American, European, and French Revolutions in the late 18th century. The US has been a leading advocate for democracy, pluralism, and human rights ever since. The very “champion of democracy”, under its current president, assumes that its crusader is not obliged to follow the essence of democracy, but the rest of the world should. Miserably, the ideals of modern liberal democracy—pluralism and rule of law—are likely to vanish exactly from where they had originated.

The world has been witnessing a one-man circus-drama in international politics since Donald Trump assumed the oath of office of the US presidency for the second term. The diplomatic world has been continuously reverberating due to Trump’s “draconian” policies. Trump’s first day of presidency became highly controversial both in the domestic and international spheres, while nearly 250 years of American “credibility and reputation” has been frequently questioned within 25 days of his presidency. The president floated a series of absurd policies that not only go against democratic values, multilateralism, and international alliances, but also challenge the US constitution and international law.

Trump has issued a number of executive orders that have drawn harsh criticism from both domestic and foreign quarters. The politico-diplomatic drum is being pounded by issues like “birthright citizenship,” “deportation of US immigrants,” and renaming the “Gulf of Mexico” to “Gulf of America.” Mexico asserts that the renaming of the “Gulf of Mexico” violates international law and goes against the “UN Convention on the Law of the Sea”. The federal judge temporarily blocked Trump's executive orders to “freeze all federal financial assistance,” claiming that such orders are illegal and unconstitutional. Democratic senators have fiercely opposed the proposal, citing “chaos and confusion” at all federal levels as a result of the federal funding freeze (CNN). On the other hand, Trump’s several other “diplomatic trolls,” including “Canada as the 51st state of the US,” “Acquiring Greenland,” “Controlling Panama Canal,” and lately “Gaza Clean Out” idea and then “taking ownership of Gaza”, would have a significant impact on US foreign policy.

President Trump has imprudently challenged states’ sovereign dignity, human rights, international law, the essence of diplomacy, and key liberal-democratic ideals; blame the critics. Trump has, most recently, proposed an outrageous plan not only to resettle Palestinians permanently in Egypt and Jordan but also to “take over the Gaza Strip”. Palestinians and their supporters have sharply criticized this policy as a shrewd idea of “ethnic cleansing”. Egypt and the Arab League have also strongly opposed the idea, while most of the nations in the Middle East are emphasizing a two-state solution in the Israel-Palestine issue. Similarly, a number of other nations, including Saudi Arabia, China, and Russia, advocated for a two-state solution. The Biden administration backed a two-state solution as well. On the one hand, Trump is aggressively pushing the idea of permanently relocating Palestinians to third countries and “owning the Gaza Strip,” while on the other hand, he is inhumanely deporting immigrants from his country and sending some of them to Guantanamo Bay as “criminals” without consulting the concerned countries diplomatically or providing a “court trial” for the accused criminals. Rather than implementing tangible measures to resolve the Middle East conflict, as previously pledged, the president is seeding newer seeds of conflict.

How likely are the Palestinians and the concerned parties to accept this radical plan? Can Israel truly support Trump’s colonial idea of “acquiring the Gaza Strip”?

Trump loves hovering unusual ideas, big dreams, and trivial policies, which hardly get accepted widely and materialized, argue analysts. His ideas are something like floating great delusions and achieving a little after strategic negotiations. North Korea negotiations resemble one of the similar strategies in his first term, while North Korean leader Kim Jong Un reciprocated a much shrewder “Madman Theory” dictum than Trump applied. Subsequently, Trump’s North Korea policy was ruined without any fruition. The reality of the Gaza plan could not only be far worse, but a two-and-a-half-century-long American legacy would also be in peril.

Presumably, Trump hallucinates that he is the President of the world and whatever he flaunts through his “Truth Social” discretion or executive orders instantly becomes law—both domestically and internationally, and that the rest of the world will recognize this. According to the US Constitution, any bill proposed by the president must receive a two-thirds majority in both the House and the Senate in order to become law domestically. The Republican Party currently does not have that majority. Similarly, the president’s “unlawful” executive orders may also be challenged in court; however, each nation-state or “war criminal”, if any, is equally bound by international law, the World Trade Organization (WTO), the UN Security Council, and the International Court of Justice (ICJ), among other bodies. Fascinatingly, Trump has issued an executive order to sanction the ICJ.

Trump’s initiative to enact peace in the Middle East and the Korean Peninsula during his first term deserves admiration without bias. Apparently, Trump does not want war anywhere in the world as president of the United States, which is perhaps unique in the history of the US presidential administration. Remarkably, the US did not enter into any kind of military conflicts directly or indirectly during his first presidency, while most of his predecessors or immediate successor dared it. Yet the US unfortunately witnessed several conflicts—political, social, ethnic, and democratic clashes—within the domestic sphere during the Trump era.

The US may witness a historic political upheaval to amend the constitution, potentially restricting the president’s executive authority. Trump supporters have already called for an amendment to the US Constitution that would change the presidential term limit, presumably to allow Trump to serve a third term. The possibility that the US could witness an extreme form of civil war in the future cannot be ruled out. But since the riot on Capitol Hill on 6 Jan 2020, when Trump was still president in the last days of his first term, America has already descended into civil war, blaming the Democrats. One cannot foresee that such a day will not come in the history of American foreign policy—the American army would defy the directives of its own president.

President Trump is leading the “most powerful nation on earth” with mere business tactics, instead of adopting a wider political vision and pragmatism. In every political or diplomatic deal, Trump applies business intelligence (rather than political and diplomatic intelligence) and often expects profit, just the financial yield in foreign policy. For instance, the TikTok ban and subsequent “50 percent share demand” sound more like gathering revenue than safeguarding US national security. Reducing tariffs to 10 percent from the previously announced 60 percent to China may be again a “Musk effect” of business tactics with China than advancing American national interest. Imposing 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico is something like they are sanctioned by 25 percent, while China is sanctioned just by 10 percent. In this retrospect, Trump has sanctioned 15 percent more to its historic allies and partners—Canada and Mexico—than its longstanding rival—China. There is again more business undertakings than political vision. While China, Canada and Mexico imposed respective ratios of tariffs on US imports in retaliation for Trump’s tariff policy, the close allies and key trading partners are prepared to counter-challenge the superpower.

Despite the fact that the majority of European nations are American allies and partners which have collaborated with the US to shape the global economic and democratic order, Trump has also threatened to impose tariffs on the EU. After reaching a mutual agreement to curb drug-related crimes and border migration, Trump reportedly suspended tariffs on Canada and Mexico for a month. Whether Trump’s “tariff halt” or tariff attack would create a new “trade deal” or push for a “global trade war,” it is indeed a crucial concern as it would leave global repercussions. 

Trump’s insensible foreign policy and weaponization of tariffs could be costlier to the US. If Trump inertly pushed apolitical and derogatory policy on the close friends of the US, they may be compelled to turn to adversaries by forging an alliance with China. This could lead the US not only to be isolated in world politics, but the rest of the world would also go under China’s clutch. Subsequently, China would be winning the global geopolitical game.

Can America sustain its longstanding legacy of greatness and political supremacy by such old-fashioned, self-centered, and apolitical policies? How long can the US endure its might by just eyeing other countries’ resources and using threats and coercive diplomacy?

The US, perhaps, can no longer sustain its prominence and omnipotence by damaging its relations with historic key partners and allies, including the closest neighbors. This notion is also applicable to two rising powers—China and India. Realizing this very fact, perhaps, India and China have stepped up to improve their ties in recent days.

Trump is accused of instigating a tech and trade war with China since he became the US president for the first time, which pushed China to accomplish such an extraordinary technological and economic transformation within a short span of time. China is aiming not only to be a superpower but also a megapower—both in political and techno-economic spectrums.

Just a few days after President Trump announced a $500bn investment in AI infrastructures under the “Stargate” project, China’s “DeepSeek”—an open-source AI model—is said to have sent shockwaves through the American tech sphere and rattled the stock market by “sparking a turmoil in the tech market”, something like making a “coup in the AI space”. DeepSeek may not just be a “wake-up call”, as remarked by President Trump, but also could be a substantial challenge to US dominance in AI.

But at their core, both the LLM (Large Language Models) work by gathering personal data and information floated in the internet world. They even compile information from online resources such as e-books, journal articles, opinion pieces, and other works that the authors have written over the course of years of study. Ironically, neither chatbot brings up references. Thus, they must be brought into AI regulation and plagiarism frameworks to maintain data privacy and respect natural academic works.

Interestingly, once ChatGPT came into existence, the entire world was creeping behind one model, and the same was true when DeepSeek was revealed. With no “proven design,” “ethical practices,” or “reliability,” is the world prepared to embrace anything that emerges in the AI field? For instance, you will be astounded to see the different responses obtained from DeepSeek and ChatGPT when you compare their outputs using the same input (a single question). You can easily identify algorithmic bias, influence, and geopolitical flavor based on their country of origin and political beliefs. Mostly trained by “misguided strategy,” “unethical data access practices,” and political-diplomatic influence, these models have the potential to undermine not only human academic work and individual sovereign dignity, but also democratic and rational technological futures, as well as national security concerns.

The rise of DeepSeek, however, marks the beginning of the end of the US's long-standing tech hegemony. On the other hand, China’s “technological explosion,” followed by mounting tech supremacy, has led to tech bipolarity between the two superpowers, possibly igniting a “tech cold war”. This could fuel a new form of tech-world order, which could further influence social, economic, and democratic order worldwide. In essence, AI innovation should never be tech-hegemonic, syndicalist, or Western-phobic; rather, it should be a revolutionary breakthrough that could contribute for the greater good of people, society, nation, world, and humankind.

The world today, however, is far more familiar with Trump than it was during his first term. Countries are therefore expected to deal with him in the second term using thoughtful strategies.

At a time when the US, under Trump, has suspended all its aid programs around the world, countries like Nepal—that generally depend on foreign aid—need to consider “multi-strategic policies” so that they can initiate development and partnership programs with other powers.

Considering the “Trump effect in Nepal”, the two neighboring giants—China and India—may give a higher priority to Nepal and try to get involved to push their interests under newer and shrewder aid strategies. Against this backdrop, Nepal should leverage multiple choices to forge strategic partnerships with resourceful, rising economies, which could help drive development, commence innovation, invite investment, explore tourism potential, and supply domestic products and resources to different parts of the world. More importantly, Nepal needs to rely on “self-help” and explore the prominence of soft potentials by integrating people, society and nation, while putting national interest at the top.

The author is a geostrategic thinker and techno-geopolitical analyst

Nepal is witnessing an alarming trend—its youth, the backbone of the country, are leaving in droves in search of better opportunities abroad. This mass exodus is not just a migration story; it is a consequence of economic disparity, limited opportunities, and systemic failure to retain its brightest minds.

Over the past three decades, nearly 6.8m Nepalis have received labor approval for overseas jobs (excluding India), with an estimated 1,700 leaving daily. The Department of Foreign Employment (DoFE) estimates that an additional 1.5m–1.7m Nepalis are working in India, while many others bypass formal channels to seek opportunities elsewhere. On top of this, over 100,000 students leave Nepal annually for studies abroad.

Despite Nepal’s economic growth in recent years, wealth remains concentrated in the hands of a few. Rural communities continue to suffer from limited access to quality education, healthcare, and employment. The lack of industrialization and sustainable job opportunities forces thousands of youths to seek employment in foreign lands, particularly in the Gulf nations, Malaysia, and beyond.

Even educated youths are struggling. Many university graduates find themselves unemployed or working in low-paying jobs unrelated to their fields of study. The mismatch between education and market demand has left an entire generation disillusioned, forcing them to look elsewhere for stability and prosperity.

The fourth Nepal Living Standard Survey report, published by the National Statistics Office in June 2024, shows that the unemployment rate climbed up to 12.6 percent in 2022-23 from 11.4 percent in 2017-18, representing a 1.2 percent rise in the five-year period. The unemployment rate has risen from 4.9 percent in 1995-96 to 12.6 percent in 2022-23.

The situation is even more dire for younger workers. Among those aged 15-24, the unemployment rate jumped from 7.3 percent in 1995-96 to 22.7 percent in 2022-23. The report said this highlights the challenge of finding jobs for youths in Nepal. 

The survey also shows that only 32.4 percent of the population is employed, while 62.9 percent are not in the labor force, and 4.7 percent are unemployed. These figures underscore the scale of the problem.

While average per capita income has risen significantly—from Rs 7,690 to Rs 136,707 over the past few decades—this growth has been highly uneven. The richest 20 percent saw their per capita income surge from Rs 19,325 to Rs 259,867, while the poorest 20 percent experienced only a modest increase, from Rs 2,020 to Rs 61,335. This stark disparity is a key driver of rising unemployment and mass youth migration.

Nepal’s income inequality, as measured by the Gini coefficient, has worsened over the years. In 2010/11, Nepal already had one of the highest levels of income inequality globally, and this gap has only widened since. By 2019, the income Gini coefficient had risen further, reflecting growing disparity.

Wealth inequality is even more extreme. The Palma Ratio, which compares the income share of the richest 10 percent to that of the poorest 40 percent, shows that Nepal’s richest 10 percent earn more than three times the income of the poorest 40 percent. Their wealth is over 26 times greater.

During the first Nepal Living Standards Survey in 1995, the poorest 20 percent of the population held only 5.6 percent of the total wealth, while the richest 20 percent controlled around 50 percent. The survey continued in 2010 and 2024, showing a rising trend for both groups, with the wealth share of the richest 20 percent now reaching 56 percent, says economist Chandra Mani Adhikari.

This uneven distribution of wealth has created a system where resources—education, employment opportunities, and access to capital—are concentrated among a small elite. Wealthier families can afford private schooling, overseas education, and business investments, ensuring their children access to high-paying jobs or entrepreneurial success. Meanwhile, lower-income youth, particularly in rural areas, struggle with poor educational infrastructure, lack of vocational training, and limited job prospects.

The government’s failure to address this gap has resulted in a labor market that systematically favors the privileged. Public education and vocational training programs remain underfunded, leaving many young people with few pathways to employment. Without robust skill-development initiatives, many are forced to choose between low-wage informal jobs or seeking opportunities abroad.

Economist Adhikari explains, “Once money began influencing Parliament and the government, policies started prioritizing large corporations over ordinary citizens.” In Nepal, economic policies heavily favor the affluent. “Big corporations and landowners benefit from tax cuts, subsidies, and easy access to loans, while small businesses and startups are bogged down by bureaucratic hurdles and limited financial support,” he notes. “This creates an environment where young entrepreneurs from lower-income backgrounds struggle to compete, reinforcing a system where only the wealthy can succeed.”

He further adds, “Nepal’s governance is controlled by a small, wealthy elite that designs policies to maintain their economic power.” Rather than focusing on industrialization or job creation, economic policies prioritize imports and service sectors dominated by the rich. The lack of industrial development severely restricts employment opportunities, forcing skilled and semi-skilled workers to seek work abroad. “A growing share of the service sector in GDP only exacerbates economic inequality,” Adhikari concludes.

Furthermore, while remittances contribute to nearly 29 percent of GDP, the funds primarily sustain daily consumption rather than being reinvested into productive sectors. The elite class, meanwhile, dominates high-profit industries like banking, real estate, and large-scale import businesses, limiting the economic space available for young professionals and workers to establish themselves.

The dependence on remittances has also created a paradox—while foreign employment helps individual families, it weakens the country’s long-term prospects by depriving Nepal of its skilled workforce. Many skilled workers—engineers, IT professionals, nurses, and hospitality workers—are leaving, creating a brain drain that could take decades to reverse.

Nepal’s literacy rate for youths (15–24 years) is over 90 percent, but many lack access to quality higher education or vocational training. During an interview with ApEx, former member secretary of the Council for Technical Education and Vocational Training (CTEVT) Ramhari Lamichhane said that the government has prioritized technical and vocational education, but it’s limited to policy documents. “It has stated that 70 percent of students will receive technical education, but there is no clarity on what kind of technical education this entails,” he says.

About a decade ago, there were around 800 institutions affiliated with CTEVT, but today, that number has grown to approximately 1,700. However, Lamichhane points out a concerning trend: When there were 800 institutions, 56,000 students were enrolled in technical education, but now, despite the increase in institutions, there are only 38,000 students.

A 2021 report by the International Labor Organization (ILO) found that over 60 percent of Nepali youths are either underemployed or working in jobs that do not match their qualifications. An estimated 1,500 highly skilled professionals—doctors, engineers, IT experts—leave Nepal annually for better opportunities abroad.

If current economic conditions persist, youth migration is expected to increase, with an estimated 600,000–700,000 Nepalis leaving annually by 2030. Nepal’s economy is projected to grow at a modest rate of four to five percent annually, which may not be sufficient to create enough jobs for its growing youth population.

“Only a handful of youths connected to the elites are benefiting,” says sociologist Pranab Kharel. “The elites are not only making money within Nepal but also taking it abroad, which means future opportunities are almost nonexistent, and it negatively impacts the youth.” According to him, this will not only widen economic inequality but also exacerbate racial, communal, and gender disparities, intensifying various forms of social injustice.

In 2019, the Prime Minister’s Employment Program was launched, but its impact remained limited due to poor implementation. In 2020, the government introduced a Rs 2bn Covid-19 relief package to provide temporary support for returning migrant workers. In 2021, amendments to the Foreign Employment Act were introduced to strengthen protections for migrant workers. The government then shifted its focus to digital employment in 2022, allocating Rs 3bn to promote remote work and IT jobs. But despite numerous political promises, the government has failed to create a sustainable environment for job creation and economic development. 

The Palma Ratio, which compares the income share of the richest 10 percent to that of the poorest 40 percent, shows that Nepal’s richest 10 percent earn more than three times the income of the poorest 40 percent. Their wealth is over 26 times greater

These programs, meant to support employment—such as youth entrepreneurship funds and skill-training initiatives—rarely reach the most vulnerable. Bureaucratic inefficiencies, corruption, and an unstable political climate further discourage young entrepreneurs and investors from staying in Nepal. Programs aimed at youth employment often lack proper implementation and fail to address the core issue: the absence of a thriving industrial and business ecosystem. As a result, despite various initiatives, youth unemployment remains high, and migration continues to be seen as the only viable path to financial stability for many.

Reversing the youth exodus requires a multi-pronged approach. Economic reform is crucial, with a focus on encouraging industrial growth, promoting entrepreneurship, and investing in key sectors such as technology, agriculture, and tourism to generate employment opportunities. Education reform is equally important, as aligning education with market demand and fostering skill-based training can help bridge the unemployment gap.

Government accountability is also vital. Creating a corruption-free and investment-friendly environment can encourage businesses to thrive and generate more jobs at home. Empowering youth by supporting startups, providing financial incentives, and ensuring a fair job market can help retain talent and reduce the outflow of young workers.

Nepali youths are not leaving just for money; they are leaving for dignity, security, and opportunity. If Nepal fails to address the root causes of economic disparity, the country risks losing its most valuable asset—its youth. It is high time that policymakers, businesses, and society work together to create an environment where young Nepalis see a future within their own country, rather than beyond its borders.

Born in the Syangja district in 1977, Dipak Thapa belonged to a modest household. As the youngest of 13 siblings, Thapa wore oversized clothes, embraced the outdoors, and spent hours playing marbles and other imaginative games with his friends.

Thapa wasn’t particularly academically inclined. He got enrolled in the SOS Children’s Village, an institution designed for orphan children but also open to those from families with stable incomes. In grade seven, a question paper leak led him and his friends to tear up their certificates and leave the school in defiance. He was forbidden from coming back.

Thapa found himself drawn to dance. His elder sister and sister-in-law performed cultural dances at Lakeside, Pokhara, and they often took him along. By grade seven, he was dancing at two local hotels, earning a modest salary of Rs 700. Over time, he blended dance with comedy, creating a fusion of entertainment that made him stand out.

Comedy became his second language. He connected with various individuals in the entertainment world, and he was particularly influenced by Sandeep Chhetri. He began to craft his own unique blend of comedy, mixing it with cultural dance in a way that resonated with the audience. His performances brought a fresh, engaging twist to traditional humor.

However, Thapa’s journey was not without its dark moments. For 15 years, he struggled with addiction. His descent into substance abuse began with a friendship that introduced him to brown sugar, a drug he knew was dangerous but failed to resist. He remembers hiding his addiction from his family and friends, sneaking away to friends’ houses or hotel rooms to feed his habit. 

Thapa traveled to Hong Kong for six months, where his addiction continued to weigh on him. His battle with addiction lasted 15 years before he finally broke free. He went to a hotel and requested the staff to lock him in his room for four days.

In a bold move of self-expression, Thapa recently went on the popular show Roadies to publicly share his story of addiction. By doing so, he not only broke the silence around his personal struggles but also marked a significant turning point in his life. 

Thapa’s journey took an unexpected turn when he filled out an audition form for Roadies. “I learned that confidence is the key to achieving anything,” he says. “It doesn’t matter how strong or intelligent you are — without confidence, success will always be out of reach.” This realization, he says, came during his time on Roadies, a platform that tested not only his physical strength but also his belief in himself. 

Thapa has strong views on the evolution of comedy dance in the country. He feels that today’s performances often focus too heavily on the comedy aspect, at the expense of the dance itself. “In today’s comedy dance, I don’t really see much dance,” he says. “They tend to focus more on comedy. But what’s needed is both — comedy and dance. It’s only when the two come together seamlessly that you truly have a comedy dance.” 

His breakthrough moment came with the popular song ‘Ye Baa Kinideu Na Bhatbhate’. Fans would often say his dance had a magical quality that made everyone laugh, and indeed, magic had always fascinated him.

His love for magic was born in his childhood, but it wasn’t until he began to feel that his dancing days might be numbered as he grew older that he decided to explore it more seriously. He reached out to one of the well-known magicians of the time, Balram Sarkar, asking him to teach him the craft. To his surprise, Sarkar agreed and invited him to his home to learn. 

The first lesson, Thapa recalls, took place while they were sharing a meal of meat and rice. “Magic is all about hiding things. The more you master the art of misdirection, the better magician you become,” he says. 

In Nepal, magic is often dismissed as ‘fake,’ a misconception that Thapa works hard to correct. Thapa also highlights a troubling trend in the digital age: “YouTube channels are constantly leaking magic tricks, exposing how they’re done, which undermines the true artistry of magic.” He believes this not only disrespects magicians but also diminishes the craft on a global scale.

He also shares the challenges magicians face in Nepal. “The audience here drives us crazy,” says Thapa. “When performing a trick, people often try to figure out the formula behind it, claiming we’re just hiding things here and there. Every magician does this, but if the same happens with foreign magicians, no one dares to question them.” He says that, in many ways, magicians in Nepal are often underestimated.

Thapa urges the Nepali audience to view magic as an art form and respect its integrity. “If you ever learn the tricks, keep them to yourself,” he says. “Don’t spoil the magic for others. The art deserves to be preserved, not exposed.” His call is simple yet profound: To appreciate magic for what it truly is—a performance that takes skill, creativity, and years of practice.

Thapa often reflects on the limitations faced by Nepali magicians when it comes to the resources required for high-level magic. He cites the example of international magician Dynamo, who is known for walking on water — a stunning feat that requires expensive equipment. “To pull off such tricks, you need significant investment,” he says. “The equipment is costly, and as Nepali magicians, we simply don’t have the means to invest in such high-tech setups.” He humorously adds, “I could make the Dharahara disappear, but the investment it would need is just not within our reach.”

As an artist, Thapa wasn’t limited to just mastering dance or magic. He had a teacher who greatly influenced his approach to expression. When learning dance, he often watched his teacher’s performances closely, particularly the facial expressions that brought the dance to life. This influence led him to incorporate exaggerated facial expressions into his own comedy dance routines. “I used to copy the expressions of my guru,” Thapa recalls. “At one point, my parents thought I had gone crazy because I’d spend hours in front of the mirror practicing them.”

Thapa’s journey has been marked by his encounters with some of the biggest names in the Nepali entertainment industry. When he was just beginning to make a name for himself, he crossed paths with the rising stars of the time, including Dhurmus Suntali. Despite this early connection, he never made it to Kathmandu when the opportunity arose. Santosh Panta had asked him to come to Kathmandu to shoot a music video, but circumstances led to the song being released without him, a decision that Thapa doesn’t regret.

One of the most significant moments in Thapa’s career came when he spent five years performing alongside two of the most respected figures in Nepali comedy, Hari Bansha Acharya and Madan Krishna Shrestha. “We shared the stage for five years, and they said  something that really stuck with me,” he says. “They said they couldn’t copy what I did, but I could copy everything they did.” That compliment, coming from such legendary figures, was deeply inspiring.

“Many people told me that if I wanted to do something big, I had to come to Kathmandu,” says Thapa. “But I’ve always believed that success isn’t tied to a specific place. If you have the right mindset and determination, you can achieve your goals no matter where you are.” This philosophy has guided him throughout his career, proving that talent, hard work, and confidence can create boundless opportunities.

Thapa has a bold vision for the future of magic in Nepal. He dreams of a Magic Association House being established in the country. It would be a place where magicians can come together to create shows, hold competitions, and advance the craft. “I believe Nepal needs a dedicated space for magicians to grow, collaborate, and inspire one another,” he says. If no one else takes the initiative, he’s determined to make it happen. “I will take a loan if I have to, but I will surely do it,” he says, adding that his goal is to continue performing magic shows and exploring new tricks, ensuring that the art form flourishes in Nepal.

Nepal, a country famed for its stunning natural beauty and varied biodiversity, is home to myriad marginalized communities whose lives are deeply intertwined with the forests that cover around 40 percent of its landmass. These localities include indigenous people, Dalits and diverse ethnic populations struggling with extensive hurdles due to factors like socio-economic disparities and ecological shifts. At the same time, these communities exhibit significant resilience and adaptability in facing the challenges in their daily lives.

A lifeline 

Forests in Nepal are not just natural wonders; they also serve a fundamental to survival and cultural essence of various marginalized communities. Indigenous groups in particular depend on forests for vital resources such as food, medicine, firewood and income through non-timber forest products (NTFPs). According to a study by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), over 60 percent of rural households depend on forest resources for their livelihoods, though restricted forest policies often limit the access to those resources.

Policies and impact

Despite their heavy resilience on forests, marginalized groups frequently experience difficulties due to national forestry strategies that value conservation more than community rights. Local voices have been historically ignored in the process of policy-making due to the government’s centralized framework for forest management strategies. Many indigenous community people are unaware of the legal validation of their land holdings, exposing them to risk to displacement and deforestation. 

To illustrate, the Forest Act of 1993 was implemented with the goal of shifting forest control and advocating community forest-based management but many marginalized groups are still facing challenges vis-a-vis integration and recognition.

Cultural identities

The cultural value of forests cannot be exaggerated. For many marginalized groups, forests serve as a divine sanctuary. Traditional environmental knowledge passed on to descendants plays an important role in sustainable forest management. Indigenous practices often reinforce the conservation of biodiversity and sustainable resource use.

As the entry to forest declines due to external challenges such as logging, harvesting and agricultural expansions, these cultural links become fragile. Waning ancestral forest conservation practices not only disrupt biodiversity but also undermine the cultural history of communities.

A harsh climate 

Climate change creates more challenges, especially for marginalized communities that rely on forests for their livelihoods. Unpredictable rainfall patterns increase the risk of natural disasters and bring about changes in ecosystem patterns, exacerbating economic instability as well as food insecurity. As an example, shifts in the weather cycle are mainly to blame for crop loss/damage and decrease in farm productivity in several parts of Nepal. 

More often than not, marginalized communities lack commodities and assistance needed to tackle these challenges effectively, to the detriment of their health, education and the economy.

Rights, wrongs and roles 

In response to these challenges, grassroots movements have surfaced for defending the marginalized communities’ rights over land and forest resources. Organizations such as the Nepal Federation of Indigenous Nationalities (NEFIN) have been raising the voices of these communities in policy-making processes and political discussions for years. 

Resilient community forestry programs have shown how local populations influence sustainable management practices. A case in point is Ramechhap where community-led initiatives have shown that putting local communities at the forefront of forest conservation yields encouraging results.

Conclusion 

Problems facing marginalized communities living around forest areas in Nepal show the need for inclusive forest protocols that honor their rights and roles in conservation initiatives. 

By promoting an alliance between government agencies, NGOS and local communities in forest conservation, Nepal can create a more balanced approach to conservation. Educational advancement and capacity-building training can help these communities manage forests more sustainably. 

In conclusion, realizing the hardships and adaptability of marginalized communities is crucial for ensuring sustainable development of Nepal’s forestry sector. By admiring their traditional knowledge

and practices vis-a-vis conservation, Nepal can move forward to a more inclusive future where both communities and forest coexist and thrive.