Submit your Article

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has unveiled the much-anticipated Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) Cooperation Framework between Nepal and China, which has identified 10 projects but leaves the investment modality ambiguous. A closer study of the document indicates that implementation remains an uphill task.

The investment modality for the BRI projects continues to be one of the most disputed and ambiguous issues. The Nepali Congress (NC) has consistently held its position that it will accept only projects built through grants, while the CPN-UML is open to taking loans. Regarding the investment modality, the document mentions that “the two sides will work to ensure technical support and aid financing modalities that suit the needs of the two sides and the requirements for sovereign-initiated projects.”

The document further states that the two sides will conduct an objective analysis of the technical, financial, commercial, and economic feasibility of the projects and ensure value for money for the prioritized initiatives. It also allows for seeking international financial support to finance BRI projects, stating, “The two sides will continue to call upon international multilateral financial development institutions or mechanisms to provide more financial support for promoting connectivity and development.”

As per the agreement, Nepal will welcome and facilitate the establishment of branches of Chinese banks and financial institutions. The two sides will work to expand the use of national currencies in bilateral trade and investment according to practical situations. The framework also highlights elevating bilateral relations to a strategic partnership of cooperation, a vision articulated during Chinese President Xi Jinping’s visit to Nepal in 2019.

For implementation, China has designated the National Development and Reform Commission, together with the ministries of foreign affairs and commerce, to take the lead. Nepal, in turn, has designated its ministries of foreign affairs and finance. These entities will coordinate bilateral cooperation under the framework.

The document makes it clear that the framework does not constitute an international treaty and thus does not create rights or obligations under international law. It is subject to each country’s national laws, regulations, and policies governing specific projects. This provision means that, like the United States’ Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), the BRI framework does not require parliamentary approval.

The document also clarifies that project cooperation implemented under this framework does not prevent either side from engaging in similar cooperation with other countries or mechanisms. Disputes regarding the framework will be resolved through consultations and negotiations between the two sides.

The framework came into effect on the date of its signing and will remain valid for three years, with automatic extensions for subsequent three years, unless either party provides a written notice of termination three months in advance. Importantly, the termination of the framework will not affect any ongoing cooperation projects. Recently, China has sought to bring all bilateral cooperation under this framework, but even if it is terminated, ongoing projects will not be affected.

Under the BRI, the document lists 10 infrastructure and urban development projects. These include the Tokha-Chhahare Tunnel, which is of strategic importance for Nepal-China trade and aims to reduce travel time, improve road safety, and support economic growth. A letter of exchange for the project feasibility study has already been agreed upon by both sides. Another significant project is the Hilsa-Simikot Corridor, one of eight North-South corridors aimed at enhancing connectivity between Nepal and China. A letter of exchange for the feasibility study of upgrading the Hilsa-Simikot section has also been signed.

The much-discussed Nepal-China cross-border railway project is expected to traverse Nepal’s Rasuwa district, offering a direct link between the two countries and enhancing bilateral connectivity. The agreement states that after the completion of the feasibility study, the two sides will work to build the China-Nepal cross-border railway.

Other projects include Amargadhi City Hall in Dadeldhura, the home constituency of NC President Sher Bahadur Deuba. The 220 kV cross-border power transmission line is another prioritized project, although discussions on its implementation are ongoing. Additional initiatives include Madan Bhandari University of Science and Technology, Kathmandu Scientific Center and Science Museum, China-Nepal Friendship Industrial Park in Jhapa, and Jhapa Sports and Athletic Complex, located in Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli’s constituency.

The BRI framework has become a tool for political parties, particularly the communists, to advance their agendas, but implementation may face roadblocks due to internal and external factors. Although top politicians from the ruling coalition are attempting to downplay differences between the NC and UML, the two ruling parties are not aligned. UML leaders, including Prime Minister Oli, have stated that BRI involves both grants and loans, while NC leaders remain firmly committed to a grants-only approach.

A major challenge for the framework’s implementation lies in the NC’s stance, as the party is likely to remain a dominant force in Nepal’s politics, whether in power or opposition. While NC President Deuba and his ministers have supported the BRI framework to maintain coalition unity, the party’s position is expected to harden if it leads the government in the future. This makes forging a national consensus on BRI project execution extremely difficult.

Even among communist parties, which tend to speak positively about BRI to please China and their voter base, substantive action on the initiative has been limited. For example, Pushpa Kamal Dahal, chairman of the CPN (Maoist Center), has often praised BRI, but made little effort to advance it during his tenure as prime minister. Bureaucratic resistance further complicates matters. The Finance Ministry, in particular, has historically opposed taking loans for BRI projects due to concerns over economic viability and repayment capacity. Recent corruption scandals have also made bureaucrats wary of projects perceived as serving political interests rather than national priorities.

Nepal’s geopolitical realities and economic constraints pose additional challenges. India, for instance, has expressed reservations about Nepal’s participation in BRI, citing sovereignty concerns, and has advised Nepal to prioritize transparency and safeguard its independence. These geopolitical factors, combined with Nepal’s already significant debt burden, have slowed BRI progress over the past decade and will likely continue to do so.

The selection of projects itself raises questions about their alignment with BRI’s objectives of fostering transformative infrastructure and economic integration. For example, the proposed cross-border railway is a highly ambitious project that Nepal is not financially equipped to undertake, even on a grant basis. Its economic viability is questionable, as is the feasibility of other projects, such as tunnels and industrial parks, that do not align with BRI’s stated goal of improving people’s livelihoods. Securing funding for such initiatives remains a significant challenge.

The NC had decided to accept grants while rejecting loans before the BRI framework was signed during Prime Minister Oli’s visit to China. The party presented this position during internal discussions, and the Oli-led government aligned its proposal accordingly. However, concerns have arisen about “aid financing” being prioritized over grant financing in the framework.

The NC’s position remains that only projects funded through grants should proceed. The party argues that conditional loans, whether from China or other countries, are not in Nepal’s interest, given the country’s poor track record of generating returns from such projects. The experience of the Pokhara International Airport, which has become a financial burden due to its inability to deliver returns, underscores this point.

The government has conveyed Nepal’s preference for grants to Chinese leaders, and officials are optimistic that China will honor this stance in upcoming agreements. The Nepali side hopes that grant commitments will be implemented and that negotiations for the listed projects will proceed smoothly. Technical cooperation and industrial investments are also encouraged, as they have the potential to boost employment and create mutual benefits.

Prime Minister Oli, upon returning from China, reiterated that Nepal will prioritize grants over loans under BRI. The Foreign Ministry has also conveyed a similar message. While discussions around the BRI framework continue, its successful implementation will depend on navigating political divisions, ensuring transparency, and securing economically viable projects.

Tim Tomlinson is a Professor of Writing at New York University’s Global Liberal Studies Program. He is a co-founder of New York Writers Workshop, and co-author of its popular text, The Portable MFA in Creative Writing. He is the author of the chapbook, Yolanda: An Oral History in Verse; the poetry collection, Requiem for the Tree Fort I Set on Fire; the collection of short fiction, This Is Not Happening to You; and, most recently, the hybrid collection of poetry and prose, Listening to Fish: Meditations from the Wet World. Tomlinson led New York Writers Workshop Kathmandu in May and June where 35 writers from five continents participated. Ken Subedi conversed with Tomlinson about the Kathmandu workshop, his experience in Nepal, his books and his works.

Was this your first time in Nepal? When did you learn about Nepal for the first time?

This is my first time in Nepal. Nepal has been in the background of my consciousness for decades. As a young kid, I knew that people were coming here. Hippies were coming here in the 60s and early 70s. You know well that Cat Stevens’ song “Katmandu” was also based in those times. These things made me wonder about Nepal. I also heard stories about the notorious serial killer, The Serpent.

You are the organizer of New York Writers Workshop Kathmandu and inaugurated Himalayan Literature Festival. Can you please share your experience of the workshop and festival?

The first day of the festival was densely packed. Many moving parts. And I was a bit frantic, putting out brush fires, but things settled a bit on the second day. We’ve been getting lots of positive feedback. I sat in on a couple of panels. The writers we brought here are brilliant and super talented. Hearing from them and knowing that audiences are absorbing all these experiences has been enormously gratifying.

How did you start New York Writers Workshop?

It has been around 24 years now. We started in 2000. We actually taught our first workshop in New York City. A bunch of my friends and colleagues got together and formed our organization. We’d been working for other organizations that did not really respect the life of the writer. We believed we could do better in different ways. We understand the nature of being a writer.

Do you agree that corporations don’t value poetic license?

Absolutely. They value the bottom line. We’re expendable items. I mean any organization you work for, as soon as they’re short of money, fire the writers. No more copies, no more paper clips, you know whatever. Universities exploit the instructors as much as they can. New York City is a smorgasbord of different ethnicities and nationalities. We make no distinction about who comes to our workshops. We offer things to everybody in the population of New York City, which is almost like saying everybody in the whole world. Eventually, we expanded. We went global.

Maybe you started with different places in the USA.  Then you started to move towards other countries.

I married a Filipina and I started travelling quite a bit in Asia. So, I first worked in The Philippines. And the name New York Writers Workshop, it’s kind of a passport to the world. “New York City” resonates all over the world. Within about three years I had been going back and forth between The Philippines, in the universities, in the writing organizations. And then we started the larger conferences, of which this is the largest, the most ambitious one.

You edited a book called The Portable MFA in Creative Writing in collaboration with New York Writers Workshop. You also contributed the “Introduction” and the chapter on fiction. Can you please share some insights about, like how you came up with that book? And why do you think the need to write such a book when there are so many MFAs going on like this? 

That was in 2006. We’d been a teaching organization for six years. And we’d all encountered what we call “recovering MFA’s,” very promising writers who, for one reason or another, couldn’t move from  one sentence to the next. Their MFA programs jammed them up. In my introduction, I say – I want to teach that kind of workshop that I never had. So my approach, our approach, is “how-to,” not “don’t do.” 

It can be an MFA supporting book. So, basically you wrote for MFA graduates when they can’t work on the practical side, and they have only theoretical knowledge.  So, who were your target audience when you started to write? 

Yeah, the target audience was anyone who wanted to write. I had been teaching workshops for probably ten years. So many of my students were saying—when will you get particular exercises in the book? So I brought together some of our instructors where six of us contributed. In my section I included many of the exercises I did in my class.

Do you think that Nepal is worth writing about? 

Absolutely. We’re experiencing dense concentration of a new culture. We’re planting the experience like a seed that, we expect, will grow when we get back to home.

Can you share about your latest book Listening to Fish?

It grew out of my decade’s long experience as a scuba diver. I began scuba diving in the 1970s when the reefs appeared inexhaustible. The places where I dove first, with their dazzling arrays of biodiversity, are now at a tipping point, or past the tipping point. It’s a tragedy, a highly dangerous tragedy.

Maybe it is due to the refineries?

Oh, yes.  There is always some level of natural stress, environmental stress. But the human hand has made natural stress unnaturally stressful to the point that it’s catastrophic. Can the health of the reefs ever be restored? This is an existential question.     

So, your title: Listening to Fish. Is it listening to the grievances or the hardships, sufferings of the fish?

Precisely. If we start to listen to what they can tell us, they will tell us their stresses. They speak in a universal language. Their eyes implore. They seem to say, we’ve welcomed you here, now help us.

And dolphins are also beaching, right?

Coral is bleaching, dolphins are beaching, the sea is going mad.

So you have organized such workshops in many parts of the world. How does it help the literary community? How does it contribute to the craft of a writer? 

There’s an enormous amount of cross-pollination and collaboration. The conferences we did in Greece and Italy led to translations, publications, and community. What we appreciate here is the ubiquity of spirituality. It’s woven into the fabric of everyday life. It’s tangible. I expect some of that sense will filter into the work we all do back home.

And even we will also be indoctrinated with some of the familiar Western tradition and American values also. 

I hesitate to use the word “indoctrinated.” I prefer being exposed to, because we’re here as much to listen and learn and share, as well as teach. Last night, Ravi Shankar read his poem Kathmandu.  He concludes by saying—there must be not power, but compassion. I think travel can induce that. It reveals how much you don’t know.

I know you like different genres at a time. You don’t fix yourself to one category. But what fascinates you the most? Which is more near to your heart?

I would like to write short stories that a reader remembers. Now and then, it gives me the biggest glow. Fiction is the most important, nearest to my heart.

In the middle of the 18th century, European colonial powers took control of India. The British administration of the then-Government of India carried out a study of Indian society, culture, language, history, etc. They established the Asiatic Society in Calcutta in 1784, Fort William College in 1800, the Archaeological Survey of India in 1861, the Calcutta Museum in 1814, Serampore College, etc. while conducting this survey work.

These organisations were founded by pioneers including William Jones, Lord Wellesley, Alexander Cunningham, William Carey, John Marshman etc. Indians like Babu Rajedralal Mitra, Purna Chandra Mukhopathaya (PC Mukherjee) etc. also helped to establish these institutes.

Mukherjee was born on 19 June 1849, at Panihati, which is located 10 km from Kolkata. In 1868, he completed his elementary education at the Agarpara Christian School and his middle schooling at the Sodepur English High School. He had a keen interest in studying geography and history. He attempted the BA graduation examination at the University of Calcutta in 1873, but he was unsuccessful.

Mukherjee started his professional career in 1874 in the Audh-Rohilakhand railway department. But after six months, he joined the Lucknow Museum and from there he was sent to the Bombay School of Art where he spent two years. After finishing the course he came back to Lucknow and became interested in archaeology. He prepared a report titled “Pictorial Lucknow: History, People, and Architecture” while working at the Lucknow Museum which was published as a book in 1883. One of the interesting things of the book is his drawings of the Nawabs, castles, and locations of Lucknow.

Mukherjee was involved in archaeological excavation work in Bihar and Orissa from 1891 to 1894. The Bihar Museum’s contents were moved to the Indian Museum in Calcutta by the Government of Bengal in 1891. Some of these sculptures were on exhibit there, while others were kept in the museum’s reserve collection. Mukherjee was deputed as the Indian Museum’s interim archaeologist and given the task of transporting the Broadley collection of antiquated sculptures from Bihar to Calcutta and helping with museum organisation. He was also assigned to another project to do research into the Rajgir and Bargaonarchaeological ruins.

He was given the task of survey work at the Konarak Sun Temple in Orissa in 1897–1898 and also travelled to Patna at the site of the former Pataliputra-Bankipur. He gave items discovered during excavation work in the Pataliputra region between 1896 and 1898 to the Patna Museum. In actuality, materials discovered during excavation work between 1896 and 1898 served as the foundation for the later establishment of the Patna museum. His reports were later published as books in 1892 and 1898 respectively. Mukherjee also engaged in excavation work in the Jain holy site of Kankali Tila near Mathura, Punjab and Taxila region during 1899 to 1902.

But his biggest contribution was discovering the birthplace of Gautam Buddha. Gautam Buddha spent his early life (nearly 30 years) at Kapilavastu. Kapilavastu was located north of the larger Kosala, in the foothills of modern-day Nepal. It’s the town where Sidhartha Gautama was raised and lived as a prince until he renounced worldly life, as written in the Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism.

In 1899, the British Government sent him to the Tarai area of Nepal to determine the exact location of Kapilavastu. From March to August of 1899, he continued excavation work in Lumbini. Using epigraphical, literary and physical evidence, Mukherjee determined that Tilaurakot, 16 miles from Lumbini and 21 miles from Pirprahwa, is the real Kapilavastu. The report was also later on published as a book. Mukherjee also excavated the southern side of the Maya Devi Temple of Lumbini and exposed carved brick masonry, of the type found along the western and northern edges.

Besides these, during 1882 to 1901, Mukherjee wrote several articles in The Theosophist Journal regarding Mahavira Jain, Mauryan Empire and different issues regarding Indian archaeology. He also wrote several Bengali articles in the Prabasi Patrika and some other journals some of which aren’t available now.

In the Bengal Circle between 1902 and 1904, the Archaeological Survey of India carried out a survey effort that included Champaran, Muzaffarpur, Patna, Shahabad, Gaya, Birbhum, Hoogly, Puri, Khulna, Dacca, and Mymensingh among other places. Despite the fact that Mukherjee was working as a draughtsman at the office, he was chosen to be the pandit of the survey. The principal object of the survey work was to inspect as many ancient remains as possible, in order to ascertain what is really worth preserving, and also which places or areas should be surveyed in a more detailed and systematic way.

He died at the age of 53 on 4 Aug 1903 in Panihati at his ancestral home. Though without the advantage of scientific training, Mukherjee showed himself devoted to his work and possessed of a variety of useful knowledge which was not infrequently turned to good account, said Sir John Marshall in an obituary he wrote for Mukherjee. In brief, Mukherjee was an author, painter, archaeologist, and above all, a passionate nationalist who adored old Indian art and architecture throughout his career. 2024 marks Mukherjee’s 175th Birth Anniversary.

The laws confined to paper hold little more than cosmetic value. However, when they are faithfully implemented in letter and spirit, they become the bedrock upon which democracy stands.

Enactment and enforcement are the two vital components of law. Enactment is the birth of law, the moment when it is conceived. It is the intention, the vision of order and justice. And enforcement is its living pulse. It follows enactment and translates the words into action. So, are we serious about the enforcement of laws?  

As we celebrate Human Rights Day, a day designated by the United Nations (UN) to draw the attention of international community towards the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) which was adopted by the UN General Assembly on 10 Dec 1948 by a vote of 48 to nil with eight abstentions, it’s high time for us to reevaluate our efforts in effectuating those rights and obligations.  

The deliberation of UDHR is considered as one of the five core human rights treaties of the UN that functions to advance the fundamental freedoms and to protect the basic human rights for all individuals.  The declaration is neither addressed to nations nor to the member states but to every individual. This UN deliberation is in keeping with the words, “We the people of the United Nations” with which the preamble of the UN Charter begins.

In the words of Palmer and Perkins, the acclaimed commentators of Human Rights, ‘UDHR is a beacon of light for all mankind.’ There we can come across 30 fundamental rights, including that of right to life and liberty, and freedom of speech, guaranteed to every human being by virtue of being human.

Observe the laws 

Ever since its inception, UDHR has acted as a morally binding guideline to protect humanity and uphold human dignity. Still, this occasion of Human Rights Day always affords a mixed reaction. Yet, its gross and systematic violation continues in our part of the world. To tell you a fact, our rights are merely limited on papers.   

A day does not pass without news stories of severe human rights violations in countries across all regions of the globe.  Are our children being treated humanely? Are our labor rights protected humanely enough? Are our women safe on the streets? Are our women, children, differently-abled persons or senior citizens living a dignified life? Are we getting a breath of fresh air?

The rights incorporated under the UDHR are also embodied under the Constitution of Nepal. Take an example of Article 16, which envisages that every person shall have the right to live with dignity. 

So, what does dignity mean? Is it an integral part of human rights? Dignity means a state or quality of being worthy of honor and respect. A dignified life has a freedom to exercise his rights and even fight for it. It symbolizes equality as an intrinsic right and confirms that every human is equal in this world and that everyone has equal rights and duties.

Enhance economy 

The concept of equality is also one of the notions of UDHR as well as ours’ Constitution. The digital divide, stereotype and division of society in line with economical and political status demonstrate a vivid reality that things are not equal in our country and equality remains a legal matter limited to black letters of law.  The same is the case with the right to the environment. Our cities are so polluted that the constitutional guarantee of the right to live in a pollution-free environment gets violated in broad daylight.

The right to employment also seems to be limited on paper as our majority of youths are toiling in gulf and developed countries for a better future.

The continuous violation of our rights or state’s incompetence in enforcing those rights gives a message that we cannot upkeep the constitutional guarantees unless we are economically sound. Dr BR Ambedkar, the chief architect of Indian constitution, was of the view that civil and political democracy cannot be implemented in true sense unless we have a robust economic democracy. Simply put, our rights cannot be implemented in letter and spirit, unless the state is economically sound enough for that.  

It’s high time to declare a universal declaration for maintaining the economy of the states so as to make the states qualified to implement those laws and obligations.

So, will it be just to conclude that the only thing universal about human rights is its universal violation?

Way out

Our education system should encompass values such as peace, non-discrimination, equality, pollution-free environment, fair and impartial justice, dignity, tolerance, and respect for human dignity. Our legal education system is good at imparting knowledge about human rights but bad at educating students about equity, violence redressal and preventive mechanisms.  

The concerns of human rights can no longer remain an affair of a particular state in the present world. The only thing universal about universal human rights ought to be its universal acceptance. 

Ironically, the mandates of UDHR don’t seem to have the muscle of measures, such as allocation of grants to the states with limited economies to enforce the rights in actual sense. It’s seen that the developing countries, like Nepal, are in a sorry state to enforce fundamental rights just because of poor economic conditions. The observance of UDHR is not a charity but a duty.  It’s high time to stand together against all forms of bigotries and human rights’ violation. Over and above all this, it’s high time for the UN member states to resort precisely towards actual enforcement than the mere enactment of the laws.