Submit your Article

Let me start with a short disclaimer. I love short stories. I’m a sucker for stories that are a few pages long, especially when there’s a lot of work and I can’t seem to concentrate on longer works of fiction. Short stories also help me get out of the inevitable reading slump. Here, I must admit that I’m not very happy with how much I’ve read this year. Apart from a few rereads and some odd slim novels here and there, I haven’t enjoyed many of the books I’ve picked up.

A short story collection is always a safe bet. I don’t have to invest much time and mental energy into getting to know a character. And since a story takes an hour or two at the most to finish, I feel like I’ve at least accomplished my reading goal for the day. I’ve mostly gravitated toward horror stories like Bora Chung’s ‘Cursed Bunny’ and Carmen Marie Machado’s ‘Her Body and Other Parties’ which is why Cho Nam Joo’s ‘Miss Kim Knows and Other Stories’ was such a refreshing read.

Cho is the author of the best-selling novel ‘Kim Jiyoung, Born 1982’ which sparked a debate on feminism in South Korea while catapulting the writer to global fame when the book was longlisted for the United States National Book Award. Cho is known for highlighting gender inequality and misogyny in South Korea. Miss Kim Knows and Other Stories is a collection of eight stories about women from all walks of life. They are stories of life in South Korea from a female perspective. But the themes—loneliness, domestic violence, dysfunctional families, aging etc.—are universal.

What I liked about the book is that the stories aren’t dramatic but they leave you with some important messages—they might be things you already know and experience but you might have seldom paid attention to them. Women often make room for misogyny by not speaking up and letting things slide, and Cho draws our attention to that. She writes about the invisible labor women put in at home, work, and society at large, celebrating all the ‘little things’ they do to keep the ball rolling. In one of the stories, a neglected worker quits and the entire office starts to malfunction. In most of the stories, women are often repressed and maybe even unaware of what they want.

Some stories were a let-down. They felt a bit too cliché, like ‘Dear Hyunnam Oppa’ where a woman writes a letter to her boyfriend of 10 years, who has just proposed to her, listing out all the reasons why she doesn’t want to marry him. It felt too generic and forced. In ‘Puppy Love’, which explores love during Covid-19, the narrative ends abruptly, leaving you feeling unsettled. But that could have easily just been me and not a problem with the stories. Perhaps, I couldn’t relate to them. Maybe you will. With Cho, you never know, as her writing has the potential to tap into long-dormant emotions.

Short stories

Miss Kim Knows and Other Stories

Cho Nam-Joo

Translated by Jamie Chang

Published: 2023

Publisher: Scribner

Pages: 218, Paperback

There is no shortage of discussion in Kathmandu on the changing geopolitical landscape and the challenges Nepal currently faces in its external relations. Although serious research and publications are lacking, Kathmandu-based think tanks somehow manage to secure financial resources to organize programs at upscale hotels. Lately, there has been a boom in the number of foreign strategic and geopolitical experts visiting Kathmandu on the invitation of universities, think tanks and media houses, among others. These international and regional experts often visit Kathmandu to attend seminars and talk programs on geopolitics and foreign policy.

Although political leaders also participate in such programs as keynote speakers, only a few have the appetite and enthusiasm to listen to expert opinions. The main arguments of foreign policy watchers in Kathmandu can be summarized in the following points: there should be a national consensus among parties, at least on foreign policy issues; Nepal should strike a balance between India and China while maintaining cordial ties with the US; and Nepal should prioritize economic issues over strategic ones when dealing with major powers. While examining the election manifestos of major political parties, it seems all parties have the same position on foreign relations, as they all emphasize an independent foreign policy; balanced and cordial relationships with both neighbors; adherence to non-alignment and Panchsheel; and engagement with major powers on economic terms, among others. 

However, there are differences in the tone, tenor, and conduct of foreign policy between the Nepali Congress (NC) and major communist parties, particularly CPN-UML and CPN (Maoist Center), which have been in power for the past three decades. To illustrate these differences, let's consider some recent examples. Nepal voted in favor of a UN resolution condemning Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022, but communist parties opposed it, stating that it goes against Nepal's policy of non-alignment. While some former foreign ministers from left parties said it was okay, dominant communist leaders saw it as a tilt toward the West. Many communist leaders support Putin's justification of the attack, which is why Russia is engaging with communist leaders, not NC leaders. When it comes to China, communist parties, mainly CPN (Maoist Center), are a step ahead and more vocal than NC in upholding the one-China policy. Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal, during his China visit last year, made a commitment on the one-China principle (previously policy) and said Nepal stands against Taiwan independence. He often repeats the same statements in Kathmandu. We do not hear such statements from NC leaders. 

Earlier, in 2018, the then Nepal Communist Party-led government supported Hong Kong's new security laws. Another issue is the reported border encroachment by China in Humla district. NC formed both government-level and party-level panels to investigate this matter, but communist government and party leaders often reiterate that there is no border encroachment by China at all. 

The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is another case in point. Though the basic framework of BRI was signed by NC's foreign minister Prakash Sharan Mahat in 2017, the party is less interested in its implementation. Some leaders are openly opposing it. NC leaders may disagree, but it is clear the party is not as enthusiastic about BRI as communist parties. With India, communist parties are more vocal about some disputed issues such as the 1950 Peace and Friendship Treaty, the Eminent Persons' Group (EPG) report and border disputes. These issues have also been mentioned in the Common Minimum Program (CMP) of the present coalition government. However, the NC is not as vocal about those agendas. Instead, some NC leaders have started saying that there is no need to amend the 1950 treaty, and the party has not taken ownership of the EPG report. 

Regarding the US, fringe communist parties often criticize the US as an imperialist power. While mainstream communist parties do not directly subscribe to these views, there are differences between NC and communist parties on democracy and US policies. Communist parties are skeptical about America’s Indo-Pacific Strategy. They all were against the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) program in Nepal initially. While NC openly supported, lobbied, and was even ready to break the alliance with Maoists to get the MCC endorsed by Parliament, left parties either opposed it or sat on the fence. Whether one agrees or disagrees, there is now more cordiality between China and Nepal's communist parties. China is engaging with NC at least at the government level. Over the past few years, it is a bitter reality that there is a lack of trust between NC and China, and between India and communist parties. The relationship between NC and China is not so cordial, mainly after 2015-2016, though Chinese leaders and scholars often remind NC about the role played by BP Koirala in laying the basic foundation between the two countries.

Additionally, political parties have highly politicized issues relating to major countries. This has been further exacerbated by coalition governments and political instability. It is futile to expect any substantial progress when parties with different views and political ideologies form a coalition government. There is a tendency among parties not to take ownership of agreements or understandings signed by governments led by other parties. $Due to the sudden changes of foreign ministers, if not the government itself, foreign powers are finding it very difficult to deal with Nepal. All this has eroded trust in the political parties and successive governments. There is no common vision or guiding document on how Nepal wants to engage with major powers in the changing geopolitical situation. 

No wonder, Nepal has not been successful in reaping the benefits from the economic rise of India and China. What is worrying is, there is no sign of improvement in the near future. There will not be political stability for at least next four years because parties have already agreed to lead the government by turns. Even after the 2027 elections, political stability remains elusive, as the possibility of a single party getting a majority is slim. If parties are responsible, they should deal with this issue seriously. Parties should refrain from taking sides or positions on big-power rivalry and should not politicize development issues; instead, they should focus only on economic engagement. However, there is slim hope with the current set of leaders whose only aim and ambition seems to be grabbing power by appeasing external power centers. The current polarization in the political landscape must be stopped without delay.

During the constitution drafting process from 2008 to 2015, the electoral system emerged as a key contentious issue among major political parties and stakeholders. Various electoral systems practiced in different countries were proposed. Ultimately they compromised on a mixed electoral system combining first past the post (FPTP) and proportional representation voting system. The aim was to address demands for inclusion and proportional representation across society. Since the promulgation of the new constitution in 2015, which solidified this mixed model, two elections for the three-tier government have been held, with parties preparing for the next elections in 2027, pending any unforeseen circumstances.

Ever since the country adopted a new constitution in 2015, no single party has secured a majority to govern the country independently. Although there was a single-party majority following the merger of CPN (Maoist Center) and CPN-UML, it was not a result of the election. With no possibility of single-party majority, parties have turned to coalition governments, resulting in frequent and unpredictable changes. Many, both within and outside active politics, attribute this political instability to the current electoral system, suggesting that Nepal cannot achieve stability unless changes are made.

Senior Nepali Congress leader Shekhar Koirala has been a vocal advocate for changing the electoral system, proposing that the House of Representatives (lower house), consisting of 275 members, be elected solely through the FPTP model to ensure a single-party majority and political stability. However, his own party, NC, has not officially discussed changing the electoral system. Koirala argues that the root cause of the current political crisis lies in the electoral system itself.

Despite Koirala’s proposal, cross-party political leaders and experts argue that changing the electoral system, which is closely linked to inclusion, a fundamental aspect of the constitution, is nearly impossible. The proportional representation system has ensured the representation of marginalized communities in the legislative process, although political parties have been criticized for appointing their family members. Santosh Pariyar, chief whip of Rastriya Swatantra Party, vehemently opposes changing the current electoral system, considering it a violation of the constitution and a threat to the rights of marginalized communities.

Deepak Bhatta, a CPN-UML leader, contends that once a system is adopted, it should be allowed to function for at least 15-20 years before considering changes. He criticizes the shifting political agendas of leaders and emphasizes the need for stability in governance. However, past experiences have shown that even single-party majority governments have failed to complete their terms due to intra-party disputes, casting doubt on the correlation between electoral systems and political stability.

While major political parties such as Nepali Congress, CPN-UML, and CPN (Maoist Center) have yet to officially discuss constitutional amendments, there are various viewpoints within each party. The issue of electoral system change must be carefully considered, as it requires consensus among major political parties, including those representing Madhes. Until political parties address systemic issues and work towards genuine consensus, achieving political stability will remain a distant goal, with electoral system changes alone unlikely to suffice.

The main opposition party, the Nepali Congress, has been obstructing parliamentary meetings for the past few days demanding the formation of a parliamentary committee to probe the alleged involvement of the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs in a cooperative fraud. However, ruling parties do not agree with the NC’s demand, stating that there is no solid evidence of the minister’s involvement in the misappropriation of cooperative funds. 

While political parties have every right to stage protests in the Parliament, they should never forget that rights come with responsibilities attached. In Nepal’s context, major parties have misused this right to protest all too often by holding the parliament hostage for fulfilling their petty interests. In essence, all major parties are responsible for not allowing a smooth, independent and effective functioning of the parliament. This practice seriously hampers the law-making process and deliberations on the people’s agendas.

A case in point: It has been a decade since Nepal formally adopted federalism, but dozens of laws are yet to be formulated, giving successive governments opportunities to rule through ordinances without parliamentary scrutiny. 

Therefore, it’s time for all major parties—the Nepali Congress, CPN-UML and the CPN (Maoist Center)—to realize their mistakes and vow to never obstruct the parliament again by keeping in mind that such obstructions have never benefited them as they have to reach a compromise solution sooner than later.  Allowing the parliament to work independently is crucial, especially at a time when voices against the current political system are getting stronger and regressive parties are questioning the relevance of the current political system by pointing toward a dysfunctional parliament. 

The time has come for the parties to put an end to such obstructions once and for all—like they did with Nepal Bandh protests in view of tremendous hardships caused to the people—and allow the House to fulfill its duties, given that several urgent bills, including those related to the 2024 Nepal Investment Summit, remain pending in the House. 

A declining public trust toward the parliament resulting from the tendency of using the sovereign body to make or break a government and pursue various other petty interests should also act as a wake-up call for the main opposition and other parties to end such obstructions and get back to business. The sooner they do it, the better.