Submit your Article

Nepal has reaffirmed its solidarity in the fight against terrorism, as it condemned the recent terrorist attack in Pahalgam, India, which killed several innocent tourists, including a Nepali national. In a statement issued by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Wednesday, the Government of Nepal expressed deep concern over the escalating tensions between India and Pakistan in the aftermath of the April 22 attack. 

Nepal recalled standing in solidarity with India during the tragic period, united in grief and suffering. Reiterating its firm stance, Nepal described the assault as a “barbaric terrorist attack” and underlined its unwavering commitment to combating terrorism in all its forms. “Nepal stands together with all in the fight against terrorism,” the statement said.

The Ministry emphasized that Nepal, in line with its principled foreign policy, would not allow any inimical forces to exploit its territory to harm neighboring countries. Urging restraint from all sides, Nepal called for the de-escalation of tensions between India and Pakistan and stressed its dedication to promoting lasting peace and regional stability in South Asia.

Aahara sat on the edge of her bed, staring at her hands. They were trembling again. She felt like her chest was caving in, and her thoughts were racing so fast that she couldn’t grasp a single one. A knot twisted in her stomach, making her feel nauseated. The air in the room felt heavier than usual, as though it were conspiring against her to make breathing just that little bit harder.

Her phone buzzed on the nightstand, the name ‘Nikita’ lighting up the screen. It was her best friend, calling to confirm their lunch plans. Aahara had already texted Nikita twice that morning, first saying she’d be a little late, then coming up with a vague excuse about a “last-minute work deadline.” Now Nikita wanted to call and make sure everything was okay.

But Aahara couldn’t answer the phone. Even the thought of talking to Nikita felt overwhelming. She had no idea how to explain all the different thoughts and worries that were going through her head. Her mind spun through its daily cycle of worries. “Did I forget to send that email? What if my boss thinks I’m incompetent?” “I should check on my parents. What if something happens to them, and I didn’t call in time?” “I don’t feel right. What if I have some undiagnosed illness and the doctors just missed it?” No amount of reassurance ever silenced these thoughts. 

Aahara tried to reason with herself to no avail. She had been living like this ever since her mother took ill a few months ago. Aahara’s worries continued even after her mother came back to health. 

She wasn’t just nervous; she wasn’t just overthinking. She had Generalized Anxiety Disorder, a type of anxiety disorder which made even the most ordinary parts of life feel overwhelming.

Aahara and her story is fictional, but this could happen to anyone. Based on a study conducted by Risal et al. (2016) among 2100 people all across Nepal, the prevalence of anxiety is 22.7 percent. That’s 70,14,300 people affected with anxiety.

Anxiety is more than just feeling nervous before a presentation or jittery before an important event. It’s a complex mental health condition that can make ordinary tasks feel insurmountable.

At its core, anxiety is a natural response to stress. It’s your brain’s way of keeping you alert to potential danger. Imagine you’re walking through the woods and hear a rustle in the bushes. Your body floods with adrenaline, preparing you to fight, flee, or freeze. This is your body’s fight-or-flight response, and it’s a helpful survival mechanism when there’s an actual threat.

The key difference between fear and anxiety lies in their triggers. Fear is a response to an immediate, real danger—like encountering a wild animal in the woods. It’s a short-lived reaction that helps you take action in the face of a specific threat. Anxiety, on the other hand, is often future-focused, triggered by perceived threats that may never materialize. It lingers, creating a sense of unease and worry, even when no immediate danger is present. While fear fades once the threat is gone, anxiety can persist, making everyday situations feel just as alarming as life-threatening ones.

The problem arises when this response gets stuck in overdrive. For someone with an anxiety disorder, their brain sounds the alarm even when there’s no immediate danger. A casual conversation, a grocery trip, or even sitting in silence can trigger the same physiological reactions as facing a life-threatening situation.

Such physiological reactions can be:

• Fastened heart rate
• Shortness of breath
• Tightness in the chest
• Nausea or stomach pain
• Muscle tension  
• Sweating or trembling  

These sensations can be terrifying, leading to thoughts like, “Am I having a heart attack? Am I dying?” Many people with anxiety also experience insomnia, fatigue, and difficulty concentrating, making even the simplest tasks feel overwhelming. It is also important to emphasize that anxiety is an umbrella term for many different types. Some types of anxiety are: 

• Generalized Anxiety Disorder
• Panic Disorder 
• Social Anxiety Disorder 
• Specific Phobia 
• Agoraphobia 
• Separation Anxiety Disorder 
• Selective Mutism 

Aahara’s story sheds light on the often hidden yet pervasive struggles that anxiety brings. It serves as a reminder that anxiety isn’t just a fleeting feeling of nervousness, it’s a mental and physical burden that can take over someone’s entire existence. But it’s important to remember that while anxiety may feel like an inescapable maze, there are ways to navigate through it. 

Seeking support is the first step. Whether through therapy, conversations with loved ones, mindfulness practices, or medical treatment, there are tools to help individuals regain control over their lives. Aahara’s journey is far from over, but by acknowledging her anxiety and taking small steps toward healing, she’s moving toward a life defined by courage rather than fear.

Frustration is a common problem among youth, often triggered by unmet expectations, social pressures, or internal conflicts. According to the American Psychological Association (APA), frustration is the thwarting of actions that prevent individuals from obtaining something they have expected.

Understanding the reason for frustration among youth is necessary to know how much they are affected by the country’s current system. To understand this complex emotion, it is important to analyze through psychological and sociological perspectives.

One of the major reasons for frustration among youth is education. “The education system in Nepal places more emphasis on theoretical knowledge rather than practical skills needed in daily life. With this, students feel disconnected, since their learning rarely aligns with real-life problem-solving situations,” says 17-year-old Pasang Tenzing Lama. Education system plays a significant role in shaping youth’s future, and when they feel alienated from the curriculum, many seek opportunities abroad, hoping to acquire practical skills rather than staying back in their own country.

Lama’s perspective shows the thinking pattern of many youth, where being disengaged from education evokes a problem. Gopal Dhakal, a psychologist, says that along with outdated curriculum and lack of practical skills, young people struggle to define their place in society. The mental conflict between what they were taught and the harsh reality, like limited opportunities, leads to disillusionment among youth.

Twenty-three-year old Prapti Khadka says: “Young people are forced to seek opportunities abroad, as they find greater exposure and potential for their growth. As a result, many people tend to stay abroad without any plan to return to Nepal.” 

Sociologist Meena Poudel says, “Youths today are globally connected through social media and digital access, but they live in a local context of stagnation. This creates the belief that everything is possible elsewhere, but they feel trapped at home, unable to access those same opportunities.”

The search for a better future goes beyond education and touches the broader workforce. A study by Pew Research Center in Dec 2024 found that only 12 percent of the survey participants expressed dissatisfaction with their jobs. In Nepal’s context, job dissatisfaction among youths could be much higher. Kopila Thapa says her poor salary, long working hours, and the job pressure pose a lot of challenges in her life.

This displeasure not only touches on job conditions, but also ties up the broader issues among youth. Psychologist Dhakal says in the current scenario, youth face constant rejection from a lot of things, despite putting in a lot of effort. “Over time, this leads to low self-esteem, depression, and even suicidal thoughts. As proper paths are unavailable for youth, frustration can give way to aggression and crime.”

This phenomenon is not unique to Nepal. In China, the term “Bai Lan” has gained popularity among youths. It reflects a mindset, which means let it rot, where individuals choose to give up striving in a system they feel is rigged or hopeless. A significant factor intensifying annoyance is the political sphere, where youth feel disconnected from the political process.

“With the frequent changes and lack of a stable government, the demands of citizens are unmet, where youth voices are often neglected”, says 23-year-old Sushant Maharjan, who sees political instability as the major problem in the country.

Sociologist Poudel admits that young people in Nepal are deeply frustrated with the political system  marked by the absence of visionary leadership.

“Youth voices are often ignored in our country’s decision-making process, which triggers more stress and leaves them without a clear vision for their future,” says 16-year-old Sniti Bega. 

Sociologist Poudel says that the traditional system of education, power, and knowledge remains unchanged, creating a disconnect between the younger generation’s needs and the authority that governs the society. “Our youths feel trapped in a system that does not evolve to their aspirations.

The heavy vexation among youth is an issue that underscores the urgent need for reform.” 

The societal structure, regressive education curriculum, and government must evolve to change to address the desires of younger generations. Through progressive leadership and a meaningful political dialogue, Nepal can retain its youth for the country’s growth and transformation. 

In April, after more than eight years in the United States, Aashish Subedi was put on a plane and deported to Bhutan, his country of birth. But when he arrived, Bhutanese authorities didn’t welcome him home. Instead, officials transported him to the border with India and he made his way to Nepal. But he was stateless.

Subedi is among dozens of former Bhutanese refugees who have been deported from the US in recent weeks, human rights advocates say. A US Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) spokesperson provided Global Press Journal with a list of six former Bhutanese refugees who’d been deported in April, but acknowledged that the list was far from comprehensive. Subedi’s name was not on that list, but he provided Global Press Journal with his green card number and other identifying information. All of the people on the list were convicted of serious crimes while in the US. Subedi says he, too, had previously been found guilty of a felony. The deported people were originally among tens of thousands of Nepali-speaking Lhotshampa people that the Bhutanese government persecuted and forced from the country in the 1980s and 1990s. Most of these families found haven in refugee camps in Nepal, where they weren’t allowed to get citizenship. Some, like Subedi, ultimately moved to the US as refugees.

But now, Subedi, who used the first name of Aasis while in the US, is back in the refugee camp where he lived as a child. “I never imagined that I would be returning to the place where I grew up, this time as an undocumented person,” he says. “Now, my future is shrouded in uncertainty.:  The case of Subedi and other deported former refugees calls into question the legality of deportation when the end result is statelessness. Under ordinary circumstances, agreements between countries govern deportation. In this case, it’s not clear whether the US had an agreement with Bhutan to deport people there. Representatives of the Bhutanese government did not respond to requests for information.

Even if Bhutan has agreed to receive the people, the deportations are “deeply alarming,” says Samantha Sitterley, an attorney at United Stateless, in an email to Global Press Journal. In general, she points out, it’s not legal for the US to deport people to a place where their lives or freedoms are threatened. “Bhutan has not changed its position towards this group, which includes the decision to explicitly deny them citizenship and other basic rights,” she says. An investigation is underway in the Nepali judicial system to determine what the former refugees’ future will hold. They no longer have authorization to live in Nepal since they were resettled in the US. And if they’re expelled from Nepal, no country in the world would be obligated to take them in.

Gopal Krishna Siwakoti, a refugee specialist at the Asia Pacific Refugee Rights Network, says at least 30 Bhutanese people have been deported from the US, and at least 60 more are expected to be deported soon. Now, he says, they’re stateless. “These people have no country, no citizenship and no land to call their own,” Siwakoti says, summarizing the situation as a grave human rights violation.

Ramchandra Tiwari, a spokesperson for Nepal’s Ministry of Home Affairs, says the Nepali government is engaging with both the US and Bhutan to resolve the issue through legal means. “Returning people who have been officially recognized as refugees and resettled abroad,” he says, “is unforgivable under international law.”

Stateless

Subedi’s deportation was part of what ICE called a “targeted enforcement operation,” according to details provided by that agency to Global Press Journal. All the men on the list provided by ICE were admitted to the US as refugees and eventually became permanent residents. Their criminal histories include convictions for battery of and cruelty toward children, solicitation of a minor under the age of 15, possession of child pornography, robbery and a host of other crimes. Subedi says he was convicted of “gross sexual imposition,” a felony in the state of Ohio.

Judges had ordered at various times in recent years that all the men on the ICE list be removed from the US. The most common way someone loses their status as a permanent resident is due to criminal conviction, Sitterley says. If the former refugees lost their status, she says, “they were stateless when they were in the US.” The yearslong delay between the removal orders and the deportations indicates that “ICE had the authority to deport these people for quite some time but no place to send them, until now,” Sitterley says.

Himesh Krishna Kharel, a lawyer for Subedi and the other former refugees, says the men have been victims of criminalization since birth. Most didn’t know about the process for applying for US citizenship, he says. They also couldn’t afford lawyers to represent them in the criminal cases that ultimately figured into the US decision to deport them. “The US resettlement of refugees is a permanent solution,” says Ram Karki, founder of the Global Campaign for the Release of Political Prisoners in Bhutan. “If resettled people commit crimes, they should be prosecuted within the US legal system.”

Expelled and stranded

Subedi says he was taken by ICE directly from prison in March, and detained in Ohio. He was then moved to a series of detention facilities before being deported in April. He says he was one of 18 people that ICE officers accompanied to Bhutan. When they arrived, he says, after a day at a hotel, Bhutanese authorities took them to the Indian border crossing and handed them InRs 30,000 ($355) each.

Subedi remembers their words: “You have no right to be here—no language, no citizenship.” He moved through India, he says, and paid a broker to cross illegally into Nepal. In the 1980s and 1990s, Bhutan’s nationalist “One Nation, One People” policy targeted Lhotshampa Nepali speakers, stripping them of their citizenship and forcing nearly 100,000 people to Nepal. Many spent years, even decades, in refugee camps. From 2007 to 2018, more than 113,000 Bhutanese refugees were resettled from Nepal to third countries, making it one of the largest and most successful UNHCR resettlement programs in history. Some, though, still remain in camps in Nepal.

Subedi reunited with his father, Narayan Kumar Subedi, when he returned to the refugee camp in April. Narayan Kumar Subedi says he, his two wives and his son were expelled from Bhutan 33 years ago. They received refugee cards and lived in a refugee camp in Nepal, but weren’t allowed to pursue permanent residency or citizenship. Years later, when the international resettlement program began, one of his wives, son and a daughter who was born in the camp were deemed eligible for refugee status in the US.

Meanwhile, Narayan Kumar Subedi remained in the camp. Now, fate has brought his son back after nearly a decade—not as a citizen of any country but as a stateless person with no land or nationality to his name. The reunion was bittersweet. “I was emotional to see my son again,” he says. “For years, I sat alone in their empty bed, waiting for this moment.”

He called on the police to investigate the deportation. But when they arrived, they took his son away in handcuffs. Immigration officials ordered that he be sent back to the US. “These individuals came without documentation, and under current law we are forced to classify them as illegal immigrants,” says Tiwari, spokesperson for the Nepali Ministry of Home Affairs. Aashish Subedi says he was held in police custody for weeks while his legal status was investigated. During that time, his father filed a writ of habeas corpus in the Supreme Court. On April 24, Subedi, along with three other former Bhutanese refugees who’d been deported from the US, listened to lawyers argue their cases.

The order finally came: temporary relief, a stay of deportation. But an investigation with a 60-day deadline is now underway for some of the former refugees, says Tulshi Bhattarai, the immigration officer leading the investigation. “Since they do not have any supporting documents, our interrogation is based on their statements,” Bhattarai says. Karki, of the Global Campaign for the Release of Political Prisoners in Bhutan, says the case illustrates Bhutan’s impunity when it comes to expelling its own people and underscores the need for Nepal to establish refugee resettlement terms. “Without such measures,” he says, “Bhutan will now face less accountability and may find it easier to reject or expel refugees again.” 

This story was originally published by Global Press Journal