Submit your Article

Do we perceive the real or what we desire to see? Two observers of the same event often recall differing details. Patanjali prescribed yoga to discipline the mind and dampen its wanderings, chittavritti nirodha; otherwise perception gets clouded by rationale, opposites, alternatives, sleep and memory. A well aware person’s brain emits clean theta waves that maintain long range temporal correlation, but the beta waves of people with confused identity lose such correlation due to interference with neural noise (Sci Rep 11, article number 422 (2021)). Sensors, used by scientists to extend their own, are cooled to reduce inherent noise. Touch, taste, smell, sound and sight are identified as the five physical senses, but the Gita teaches that the mind is the sixth sensor, indriyanam manashchasmi. So the conscious living mind cannot be completely stilled. This issue was thrust upon physicists as they explored the nanoworld of atomic interactions. Planck discerned light as a stream of discrete energy photons in 1900 to usher in the quantum era. Integers in the Balmer formula, for the wavelengths of light emitted by hydrogen atoms, arrived 15 years too early to be realized as quantic. Another 13 years passed before Bohr related it to quantized electronic momentum, which in turn was seen as a standing electron wave by de Broglie a decade later. The 2022 Nobel Prize in physics was awarded to Alain Aspect (France), Anton Zeilinger (Austria) and John Clauser (USA) for experiments supporting quantum randomness over local reality. 

Wave-particle (or spirit-matter) duality of nature is not dialectical but complementary. Delayed choice experiments prove that the two apparitions cannot be seen simultaneously; a quantum immediately erases its wavy history for a particle detector, and vice-versa. Similar waves superpose to make bigger or smaller ones. This led Schrodinger to think of his cat in a live+dead superposed state until let out of the bag. Infinitely superposed general waves collapse randomly into one of the constituent eigenstates at detection. Einstein bemoaned how anyone can believe “that the Moon is not there when you are not looking at it.” Heisenberg’s limit on determinism required the product of uncertainties in conjugate variables like position and momentum to be greater than the Planck constant. A particle is located at best within the wavelength of light that bounces off it; more precision with shorter wavelength transfers higher momentum which becomes more uncertain. Wigner paradox, on seeing a quantum system differently than his friend, is under test. 

Einstein used quantum to explain many effects and got the Nobel Prize for photoelectricity. Skeptical of the randomness, he later declared “God does not play dice with the Universe,” and Bohr retorted, “Stop telling God what to do.” Einstein, with Podolsky and Rosen, proposed the EPR paradox in 1935 to precipitate the issue. A subatomic particle like neutral pion at rest can decay into a photon pair, or any other allowed particle-antiparticle, that fly off in opposite directions with opposite spins and other quantum numbers. Measuring the properties of one immediately tells of the distant partner. Such faster than light “spooky action at a distance” as Einstein called, violates causality that requires cause to precede effect. They thought it suggestive of hidden variables that would preserve local reality. Schrodinger conjoined the decay pair into an entangled state of highly correlated components. Bell proved a theorem requiring the correlation coefficient of measurements in a locally real hidden variable theory to be less than a certain value, while quantum randomness would make it greater.

Clauser modified Bell inequality in 1972 to make it measurable, entangled photons about six meters apart, measured a greater value to reject local realism, and lost his two dollar bet against quantum randomness. In the next decade, Aspect closed the unidirectional loophole of Clauser’s observation, with random directional views of entangled photons traversing through 12 meters. Can a hidden variable impose sequence on what appears random? Then Zeilinger, who had entangled photons about half a kilometer apart, devised a method in 2017 to use light emitted by stars hundreds of light years away to generate randomness. One could still argue that the randomness was wiped out by an encoding in the starlight, about an experiment to be performed by an unborn scientist. Every loophole cannot be closed but becomes ever more fantastic, setting quantum theory on a stronger base. A scientific theory has to remain continually verified by experiments to ever increasing precision till the present; a single contradiction turns it into fiction. 

Entanglement is used in teleportation to produce an exactly similar state elsewhere; but two identical states cannot co-exist, so the original has to be disentangled immediately; hence they can be used for unbreakable encryption in quantum networks. They are also the qubit of  quantum computers. Binary digits (bits) are stored in our classical computer as either of two states represented by 0 and 1. A qubit can store any of the infinitely different superpositions of its two states, all fractions from 0 to 1, making quantum computers many fold quicker. In a recent interview with the Spanish newspaper El Pais (14 June 2023), Zeilinger says that a full quantum computer would require thousand qubits, and the present ones have just about 50. He thinks that quantum computers will enter cell phones in a hundred years. The Austrian Academy of Sciences entangled photons almost 250 km apart in an optical fiber, Max Planck Institute entangled a cluster of 14 photons, and the MIT atomic clock has been stabilized with entangled photons to lose less than one second in 150bn years. The whole Universe could be a single quantum state, entangled in a neural network (doi.org/10.3389/fphy.2020.525731) of the cosmic web that ensnares every mass to comprise the mind of nature. 

As any observation physically affects the observed, absolute reality is unknowable. A surrounding that adjusts to our sense of awareness tells that nature is intrinsically conscious. This possibility will be discussed in subsequent articles. 

The author is a professor of Physics

In a multiparty democracy, even if there are differences among the parties on other issues, let us establish the tradition of maintaining national consensus on foreign relations and foreign policy and always follow it. No one should make an open or opaque agreement with any foreign power against national interest for political parties, factions and private interests. In the context of a new Cold War (or Hot War?) unfolding with Asia at the center, Nepal should pay attention to its unique geo-strategic location. 

On one hand, we have to end the traditional dominance of some entity and maintain our complete independence/sovereignty/geographical integrity. On the other, we have to prevent our fall into the abyss. With regard to PM Pushpa Kamal Dahal’s visit to China, emphasis should be on implementation of previous agreements and quick construction of physical and other infrastructure that will connect Nepal with China’s vast market.

The author is a former prime minister

The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) has been awaiting reinvigoration in the absence of any summits since Nepal last hosted it in 2014. What is supposed to be the 19th iteration of the SAARC summit, scheduled to be held on 9-10 Nov 2016 in Pakistan, is not yet visible on the horizon after India pulled out, citing the terrorist attack on its army camp at Uri on 18 September 2016. Currently, only a few low-level meetings of SAARC and routine work of its institutions are taking place, which can neither inject required vitality to this regional body nor justify its relevance.

For the supporters of regionalism, SAARC’s current stagnation is, without any doubt, a vexatious one. I find this situation particularly disconcerting as a person who was deeply involved in the groundwork for the last Kathmandu summit as the head of SAARC Division of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Nepal and also the chair of the Programming Committee. This situation should be ended as early as possible.

The informal meeting of SAARC foreign ministers, held in New York on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly, can take initiatives to break the logjam in favor of reviving the association by creating an enabling environment for the leaders to resume their summit-level engagements. One more such opportunity is in the offing. Overall, it is by addressing such complex situations that an informal forum like this can substantiate its utility.

Problems

A number of factors can be attributed to the current stalemate. Differences between member states over their bilateral issues, especially between India and Pakistan, be it security, political developments, free trade, transport connectivity, etc. have at times put the brakes on SAARC’s tempo. As a result, summits (eg 7th, 13th and 19th) have been postponed and vital agreements of regional importance (eg the SAARC Motor Vehicles Agreement) blocked.

Unlike other regional organizations, member states of SAARC are characterized by their asymmetrical size in terms of territory, economy, demography, technological capability, and so on.  This situation has created an unequal space for their say in regional matters, some enjoying more dominant position and others satisfying a lesser one, based on their respective individual strength, though all countries are equal in terms of sovereignty.

SAARC has aimed at establishing the South Asian Economic Union (SAEU), as declared by the 18th summit, but it has become a remote possibility—at least for the time being, given the absence of requisite steps up till now. Owing to the lack of elements of deeper integration, it will remain as an intergovernmental organization like the ASEAN, but not a supra-national entity like the EU.

Moreover, its main objective to ‘promote the welfare of the peoples of South Asia and to improve their quality of life,’ as mentioned in the SAARC Charter, is very wide and vague. Without developing congruent policies, strategies and action plans, complete achievement of it would be easier said than done.

Also, there is virtually no area of cooperation left uncovered by this association, ranging from agriculture to trade to science and technology. But due to a lack of sufficient funds to launch concrete activities in these areas, tangible outcomes benefitting the people directly are absent. Only meetings, workshops and a few minor activities will not bring out coveted results.

Future course

In the current imbroglio, how to hold the next SAARC summit and boost regional cooperation, even in a better manner than before, has become the million-dollar question. As a regional organization, SAARC can definitely add value to individual national efforts towards development and prosperity and also strengthen regional solidarity. But its absence will incur loss of whatever achievements it can make, even though they are of little significance. Therefore, SAARC should not be left to die; it must be revitalized. Following actions can be taken in this regard:

First, all member states must be genuinely interested in building mutual trust, understanding and partnership, without which neither regional esprit de corps nor the healthy growth of SAARC is possible. Further, in no way should any member state create unpleasant situations like threats to the security and interference in the internal matters of other countries or disturbance to regional peace.

Second, it is optimally desirable that each member state fully recognize the sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence of other fellow member states, adopting the principle of the Panchsheel. Likewise, the principle of “non-interference in the internal affairs of other States,” as mentioned in the SAARC Charter, should be put into practice, not just kept in words.

Third, bilateral and contentious issues between member states, which have often obstructed the path of regional travel, should be resolved by the parties themselves in order to advance regional cooperation. The SAARC process can regain vitality once India and Pakistan agree to resolve their issues at bilateral forums, while enabling the regional forum to take its normal course. Afghanistan also must come out of its present peculiar situation without further delay so that it could meaningfully join the regional process.

Fourth, the leaders of the region have the onus to take a bold and righteous decision regarding holding the next summit. If, for the time being, the summit is not possible to be hosted in Pakistan, an alternative venue needs to be explored to resume the process which Pakistan agrees upon until the conducive environment is created for reverting the chair to it.

Fifth, focus and priority to the countries within the region than without in various areas, such as trade, investment, tourism, etc. can give a boost to regionalism. Only after full utilization of the region’s potentials should member states look beyond it. Such policy and practice will help develop a more integrated and interdependent region. In order to materialize it, ways and means for gaining more from intra-region engagements need to be explored and utilized.

Sixth, the expectation of the peoples of this region is that SAARC produce tangible outcomes for them as a business-like organization, not only be satiated with meetings, ceremonials, statements and declarations. They want to see its institutions as effective vehicles for delivering results.

Seventh, the resources of the SAARC Development Fund (SDF) should be enhanced so as to implement big regional projects in the areas of connectivity, power generation, scientific development, development of health and educational institutions, and the like. As of now, the total commitments to its social, economic and infrastructure windows together have remained a meager amount of $163m. It is less-likely that the implementation of small projects of national character will create any meaningful impact.

Eighth, SAARC has to chart out its course to reach the ultimate destination of SAEU. Progress is expected beyond FTA. Measures, such as placement of a huge number of tradable goods in the sensitive lists and application of safeguard and non-tariff measures, cannot be applied if trade within the region is to be genuinely expanded from an infinitesimal volume of less than five percent.

Nineth, SAARC’s decision-making on unanimity principle also merits revision for its smooth functioning in view of occasional obstructions faced by it at the time of making decisions on vital matters. Practice of regional organizations varies in this regard; the EU decides on matters of common security and foreign policy by unanimity and on other matters by weighted voting and the ASEAN makes decisions by consultation and consensus with the exception of majority voting for concluding economic agreements. SAARC can innovate its own system.

Tenth, triennial SAARC summit, instead of biennial one as agreed upon at the 18th summit, could be more economical and practical, as the extended time frame would be available for the implementation of past summit decisions. New decisions should be made only after the implementation of the previous ones.

Finally, SAARC ought to be activated with great efficacy to build regional synergy for utilizing the vast potentials of South Asia. Countries of this region are fortunate in the sense that they are blessed with immense human and natural resources. This regional body can help them develop various areas of common interest for which individual national efforts are insufficient. It is here that SAARC can prove its worth.

Nepal’s role as chair

At present, Nepal has put on two caps of SAARC, one for a member and another for the chair, which confers on it an additional responsibility for moving the regional cooperation process forward. Thus, Nepal, as the chair, should continue urging India and Pakistan to resolve their differences bilaterally and create a conducive environment for the resumption of the regional process. It can take up this matter individually with all seriousness and priority and, whenever appropriate, also take other member states on board. Reconciling the recalcitrant positions demands Herculean efforts. For this purpose, not customary talks and official statements, but higher-level engagements with deep interest, exploration of alternatives, and diplomatic skill could be of real significance.

The author is former Nepali ambassador to Kuwait

Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal is set to visit China later this month. It is reported that PM Dahal would emphasize an agreement on cross-border energy trade, construction of two cross-border transmission lines in Rasuwagadhi and Kimathanka border points, construction of trans-Himalayan roads and integrated check posts among others. If the visit brings back home a few major breakthroughs in arenas of energy trade and connectivity, PM Dahal’s visit could be considered successful.

There are, however, quite a few challenges in further deepening Nepal-China ties as new proclivities and patterns of China’s engagement with Nepal—mostly problematic—have emerged over the last decade. One small event in Bhaktapur district in July this year sheds light on China’s newfound engagement patterns.

In the event, two representatives of Chinese Communist Party (CCP)’s International Liaison Department launched a project named “Silk Roadster” to mark the 10th anniversary of President Xi Jinping’s signature Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). The event was meaningful in three aspects—i) Silk Roadster is the latest one among quite a few initiatives announced over the decades and is reflective of China’s penchant for engaging with Nepal through new initiatives which are more often than not vaguely envisioned and fail to gain the necessary traction, ii) China’s proclivity to portray the success story of Nepal-China BRI agreement which in essence has remained in limbo for long and iii) China’s tendency to undertake bilateral relationship undermining standard diplomatic norms—mostly by prioritizing CCP’s party-to-party ties with the communist parties of Nepal.

Too many initiatives

Nepal had signed up for President Xi’s signature initiative BRI in May 2017. Both parties kept the MoU undisclosed for five years—and only when a Nepali media house released the full-text document in 2022, its contentious and vaguely defined provisions, such as the Free Trade Agreement and Policy Exchanges, drew scrutiny. In 2018, Nepal submitted a list of 35 projects to be executed under the initiative but upon China’s insistence the number was reduced to 16 and then to nine, finally. In Dec 2022, a Chinese expert team visited Nepal to initiate the Detailed Project Report of the Kathmandu-Kerung Railway—one among the nine proposed projects. Apart from this, there has been no concrete development—neither any provision is implemented nor any project under construction. Rather, Indian companies have bagged two of the proposed projects—Phukot Karnali Hydropower Project and Tamor Hydropower Project.

The main problem with Nepal-China BRI agreement remains the funding modality. While Nepal was already cognizant of the fact that BRI entailed loan components with a comparatively higher interest rate even while signing up for the initiative, no agreement was reached then. The Nepali Congress government formed in 2021 made it clear to China that Nepal simply cannot undertake BRI projects on commercial loans. That aside, starting from 2018, China’s lending spree also has taken a downturn due to its own economic slowdown. And the failure of some BRI projects across the globe have served as cautionary tales for countries like Nepal that are yet to enter the implementation phase of the BRI.

China has, however, gone to lengths in portraying the success story of the BRI in Nepal. In Dec 2022, just a day before the inauguration of the Pokhara International Airport (PIA), the Chinese Embassy in Nepal claimed PIA to be the flagship project under the initiative. The PIA was constructed with a loan from the Export-Import Bank of China, but it isn’t one among those nine proposed projects. And in July, the Silk Roadster platform was announced under the BRI framework focusing mainly on people-to-people exchanges in arenas like imparting training, building skills and providing scholarships.

Apart from the BRI, China has launched a few other initiatives. In 2022, China announced the Global Development Initiative (GDI) under which two projects are to be implemented in Nepal. The next is the Global Security Initiative (GSI). While China has been lobbying and pressuring political leaders, particularly the communists, to push Nepal into signing up for it, Nepal hasn’t done so as our foreign policy proscribes joining security or strategic alliances. However, former President Bidya Devi Bhandari had participated in the GSI event in 2022, despite repeated requests from the government to not do so. In 2023, China announced yet another initiative called the Global Civilization Initiative (GCI), which is quite ambiguous in its conception and language. Nepal hasn’t joined GCI either but, in June 2023, a dragon boat race was carried out in Pokhara under this initiative.

China has sought to engage with Nepal via its many initiatives announced in the last few years but none have materialized yet. If anything, these initiatives—particularly the GSI and GCI—have created confusion and shifted focus from main priorities and issues of Nepal-China collaboration.

Party-to-party ties

The next pattern that has emerged over the years is China prioritizing party-to-party ties, particularly ties with the communist ones, which amounts to undermining standard diplomatic norms and procedures. Albeit nominal, the common ideological identity makes it easier for the Chinese Communist Party (CPC) to engage with the communist parties.

China had facilitated the communist collaboration and subsequent party merger in 2017, and so long as the Nepal Communist Party (now divided into CPN-UML and CPN Maoist Center) was in power, China’s influence over Nepal was quite high. In 2019, about 50 Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leaders provided training to more than 200 Nepal Communist Party leaders on “Xi Jinping Thought”—a blueprint for consolidating authoritarian power.  It was during NCP’s rule, in 2020, that Nepal voted for Beijing’s new security law for Hong Kong, introduced amidst the Hong Kong pro-democracy protests at the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC). The law had provisions of harsh penalties for vaguely defined political crimes. 

In 2020 itself, Nepal had defended Chinese policies in the western region of Xinjiang, at the UN General Assembly, despite reports that the state was subjecting the Uyghur Muslims community to systemic atrocities. During President Xi’s visit to Nepal in 2019, both sides had reportedly agreed to elevate the relationship to the “strategic level”—with neither side coming up with further clarification or justification regarding the use of the term “strategic”. 

China had perceived the split of NCP in 2021, and the subsequent parliamentary ratification of the US’ MCC as its influence over Nepal slipping away. China was then upbeat during the short-lived collaboration between the two main communist parties in forming a new government in 2022. These are just some cases in point—the pattern is all too clear.

China is a one-party state and the CPC itself is involved in China’s bilateral engagements. However, employing CPC’s party ties with the ideological counterparts in Nepal to push China’s interest is a challenge for a fledgling democracy like Nepal, which is yet to institutionalize democratic institutions, norms and procedures. China emphasizing ties with communist parties at the expense of other parties doesn’t even portend well for Sino-Nepal relationship as the communist and democratic forces command almost equal support of Nepal’s voting populace.

Conclusion

While Nepal can benefit a lot from collaboration with China, China’s push for multiple initiatives, and China’s emphasis for party-to-party ties along with a newfound penchant to interfere in Nepal’s internal affairs have come across as major challenges. China should now prioritize infrastructure projects, development assistance, and energy trade rather than seeking to push Nepal toward signing up for its many initiatives. 

It is also high time China acknowledged that it enjoys relatively favorable opinion amongst Nepal’s general public for a simple reason that, in the past, it had mostly refrained from directly interfering in our domestic affairs. On Nepal’s part, political parties should give up the tendency of employing bilateral relationships to their own advantage, and the government should negotiate toughly to safeguard our interests. PM Dahal’s upcoming visit is an opportune moment to do just that. The ball, however, is in China’s court—the trajectory of Nepal-China relationship is largely contingent on China’s approach, and its flexibility to address and accommodate our concerns.

The author is a research fellow at the Center for Social Inclusion and Federalism