Submit your Article

Contemporary global discourse is saturated with calls for multipolarity. Leaders from Beijing to Brasília, from Moscow to New Delhi invoke a new world order—one where power is shared more equitably among diverse states and regions, and the dominance of any single power is curbed. Yet, despite these slogans and shifting alliances, the reality remains more concentrated than advertised. The United States continues to act—and be treated—as the primary actor on the global stage, wielding unmatched capabilities across military, economic, technological, and institutional domains. In effect, the world is staging a multipolar play, but the US remains its lead performer—a solo show on a multipolar stage.

Consider military power. As of 2024, the United States accounted for roughly 37 percent of global military expenditures, with a defense budget exceeding $1trn (SIPRI estimate)—more than the next nine countries combined, including China and Russia. Its global military footprint includes over 750 bases across more than 80 countries, reinforcing rapid deployment capabilities and sustained influence in every major region. In contrast, China, the oft-touted peer competitor, has only one overseas military base and far less capacity for power projection.

The United States continues to dominate global affairs through unilateral decisions that often override international consensus. In Ukraine, Washington has led the global response to Russia’s action with over $75bn in aid and a sweeping sanctions regime that even neutral powers like India and Turkey have had to navigate under pressure. In the Middle East, the US carried out the assassination of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani in 2020 and continues to conduct airstrikes on Iranian-linked targets in Syria, Iraq, and Yemen—frequently without international consultation. The pattern holds in Gaza, where the US has repeatedly vetoed UN ceasefire resolutions during the 2023–24 conflict, even as civilian casualties mounted and allies grew uneasy. In these arenas, global powers like China and Russia have issued condemnations, but lack the influence or institutional weight to meaningfully counterbalance American actions.

Latest examples include the US Air Force and Navy attacks on three nuclear facilities in Iran on June 22 as part of the Iran–Israel war, the US support to the Israeli war in Gaza, against Hamas who no longer poses a strategic threat to Israel, even by the standards of some 600 retired Israeli security officials, including former heads of intelligence agencies. Prior to it in December last year, amidst the Russian warnings, the US helped bring down Syria’s Assad regime—the closest Russian ally in the Middle East. Forget the eastward expansion of NATO disregarding its own assurance to Russia that it would not do so.

This solo performance extends to East Asia, where the US continues to maneuver around its “one-China” policy by deepening ties with Taiwan through arms deals, diplomatic visits, and strategic signaling—all while China, despite its rise, remains unable to prevent these moves. In Syria, the US maintains troops and control over resource-rich regions in defiance of Damascus, as Russia looks the other way and China stays diplomatically detached. India, often seen as a rising multipolar player, has largely opted for strategic silence or hedging in each of these conflicts. Across these cases, the US not only acts without deference to global opinion—it also forces others to adjust to its decisions. The result is a world that may appear multipolar in discourse, but in practice still revolves around a single actor exercising disproportionate power with little external constraint.

In economic terms, US financial primacy remains foundational. The US dollar still constitutes around 60 percent of global foreign exchange reserves and is involved in 88 percent of all currency transactions. US capital markets continue to serve as the world’s main liquidity pool, and American technology firms lead in innovation and digital infrastructure. Even US domestic legislation—such as the Inflation Reduction Act and CHIPS and Science Act—has reshaped global industrial policy by incentivizing foreign firms to align with American interests and supply chains, frequently overriding WTO norms or multilateral negotiation channels. See how the US has threatened India with additional tariffs should the latter continue buying Russian oil.

Moreover, the United States retains unmatched normative and institutional leverage. It plays a leading role in NATO, the G7, the Bretton Woods institutions, and dominates voting power in the IMF and World Bank. Even when institutions falter, the US increasingly relies on ad hoc or bilateral mechanisms to maintain influence, such as AUKUS, the Quad, and security pacts in the Indo-Pacific—sidestepping multilateral gridlock with flexible but US-centered architectures.

During his second term, President Trump has intensified the use of economic sanctions and tariffs as central pillars of his foreign policy, particularly targeting Iran and China. A “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran has been reactivated, with a primary goal of driving the country’s oil exports to zero. This has involved a significant increase in sanctions, with roughly three-quarters of new designations since January 2025 aimed at disrupting Iran's revenue streams. For instance, the Treasury Department has targeted over 115 individuals, vessels, and companies across 17 countries, including a “vast shipping empire” led by Iranian oil tycoon Mohammad Hossein Shamkhani. These sanctions have also been extended to third-party entities in China, India, and the UAE for their role in facilitating the trade of Iranian petroleum and petrochemical products, such as the sanctioning of six Indian companies for engaging in over $220m in trade with Iran.

In addition to targeted sanctions, the administration has employed broad tariffs to isolate and pressure nations. The average applied US tariff rate rose from 2.5 percent to an estimated 27 percent in the first few months of the second term, the highest level in over a century. A universal 10 percent tariff was imposed on all imports, while country-specific tariffs were also used to escalate trade disputes. For example, tariffs on Chinese goods peaked at 145 percent, leading to retaliatory tariffs of 125 percent from China. The administration has also leveraged weapons supply as a foreign policy tool. While not directly providing vast amounts of military aid to Ukraine, the US has authorized weapons sales through its Foreign Military Sales (FMS) program, committing approximately $960m and pressuring NATO allies to increase their defense spending to five percent of GDP by 2035. This strategy of combining economic pressure, isolation, and arms sales to allies underscores a transactional and unilateral approach to international relations.

What seems strange is the extreme selfish behaviour of the competitors, a phenomenon reflected in the Nepali expression hul ma jyan jogaaoo (stay safe in the crowd), an attitude that lets a rooster fight the jackal alone! It is not hard to see how the US woos one opponent when it is attacking the other, successfully bringing down the regime in question. Only the US knows the wheel rotates.

Thus, the international system is characterized less by balanced multipolar governance than by fragmented resistance surrounding a persistent unipolar core. The United States continues to act, and be perceived, as the system's indispensable actor, even as rhetorical coalitions challenge its dominance. The world may speak the language of multipolarity, but until that rhetoric is translated into shared institutions, joint rule-making, and collaborative enforcement, the global order remains a solo performance by the United States—backed by unmatched capability and strategic depth—on a stage filled with understudies.

As per the vision of King Prithivi Narayan Shah, Kshetriyas are born warriors, who are innately brave and decisive. While reading Into The Fire by Capt. Rameshwar Thapa, one senses that same warrior spirit. During the peak of Nepal’s Maoist insurgency, Thapa conducted numerous helicopter rescue missions in the name of humanity. These were not official duties, but acts he undertook as a responsible citizen. He rescues even Maoist combatants, showing that compassion can transcend political divides.

The book invites readers to ponder whether his flying was simply a job, or a deeper calling. His symbolic trials, like leaving Nepal to study in Russia, resemble the path of a hermit in search of knowledge and purpose.

The title, Into the Fire, itself is self-explanatory. It captures the experience of flying over warzones, amidst explosions and bombardments. The task was daring and dangerous. Thapa traversed Nepal from east to west, offering ‘Malham’ (relief and healing) to the wounded. Some of his missions seem unbelievable. For instance, landing in Sandhikharka (Arghakhanchi) under live fire—despite two helicopters being shot—shows the extreme risks he and his team took, continuing their mission even after being hit.

Plot and structure

The book is structured in three main parts, narrating real-time events tied to Nepal’s middle class. For engaged readers, the story is both exciting and thought-provoking. Thapa draws attention in an almost Panglossian tone—an optimist through hardship.

Early life and solo dream: The story begins with a child’s journey to manhood, shaped by dreams and struggle. Thapa’s first earning, Rs. 3.5, was used to buy a pen, a symbolic gesture of his quest for education. This parallels with Dr. APJ Abdul Kalam, India’s former President, who used his first income to buy a pen to support his learning. It reflects how small acts can carry deeper meanings.

Enthusiastic U-turn: Thapa’s determination led him to take bold decisions. Dissatisfied with his clerical job in court, he reconsidered his path after a conversation with Sheshraj Parajuli and a transfer letter to Rasuwa district. When he appealed to Chief Justice Keshav Prasad Upadhyaya to halt the transfer, he received a counter-advice: “Why stick to a white-collar job when you have so much potential?” That moment reignited his childhood dream to become a rotary-wing pilot.

Insurgency and personal risk: Separated from his family, Thapa lived by the slogan of “do or die.” Maoist attacks in Rolpa, Rukum, Sindhuli, and Gorkha signaled an internal war. Though he could have refused to fly, Thapa’s inner voice urged him to serve a nation in turmoil. He was ready to fly into danger.

From captain to entrepreneur: The Bhagavad Gita’s principle of “perform without expectation” seems to guide Thapa’s transition into entrepreneurship. After years of risk-filled service, he expanded into media, real estate, hydropower, and tourism. His entrepreneurial journey shows he is a visionary, someone looking far beyond boundaries.

Strengths of the Book

Personal ideals: The book offers an intimate account of Nepal’s middle-class life, marked by poverty and resilience. It reflects conditions still prevalent in many least developed countries. Thapa emerges as a man of strong personal ideals and conviction.

Contribution during insurgency: Nepal was ill-prepared for warfare, and pessimism spread quickly. Maoist guerrillas executed people without hesitation. While travel on rugged terrain was difficult, air travel was the only viable option. Despite the risks, Thapa stepped in, driven more by idealism than duty. His actions embody a sense of purpose beyond survival.

Inspiration: The transition from childhood to adulthood in the book is rich with insight, courage, and hope. The story is motivational, especially for young readers. Thapa’s humility in learning, combined with his deep sense of responsibility, stands out.

Limitations

Hero-centric narrative:  Some readers may find the book overly centered on the author’s heroism. Flying into combat zones and rescuing the wounded is indeed courageous, but the tone occasionally leans toward glorification. While many autobiographies carry personal bias, this one does little to address or balance those tendencies.

Selective memory: The book focuses heavily on challenges and heroic moments, leaving out the routine or less dramatic aspects. Readers may seek a fuller psychological portrait, but instead get a highly curated narrative. Still, this selective remembrance satisfies many readers’ thirst for dramatic stories.

Matters of privacy: When covering his entrepreneurial ventures, the author avoids discussing matters like employment generation or contribution to the national economy. While it’s understandable for a memoir to stay task-focused, more detail would have enriched the narrative.

More a war diary than a memoir: Some may view Into The Fire as a war diary rather than a complete autobiography. Though it contains emotional and soft elements, the narrative remains largely event-driven and action-focused.

Conclusion

Into The Fire explores realities that go far beyond the imagination of most people. The risks, bravery, and moral clarity depicted are truly extraordinary. To enhance its credibility, future editions might include footnotes or endnotes for context. Still, the core themes of hope, justice, and patience resonate powerfully.

The bilingual format bridges local and international audiences. Technical and non-technical errors, whether in translation or print, are minimal and easily rectifiable.

This book can serve as a beacon of hope for students, educators, public servants, freelancers, researchers, aviators, and anyone who aspires to rise above limitations and serve with courage.

Imagine sitting near a window at the foothills of the majestic Himalayas, gazing at snow-capped peaks glistening under a crystal-clear blue sky. Your workspace is nestled deep within lush jungles, surrounded by towering trees and the melodic chirping of birds. With a steaming cup of coffee in hand and a laptop before you, you find yourself immersed in work and nature’s tranquility, a perfect blend of productivity and serenity. This extraordinary experience isn’t just a dream; it’s a reality in Nepal. Renowned for its diverse communities, rich cultural heritage, and breathtaking landscapes, Nepal offers an unparalleled blend of natural beauty and opportunity. From the towering Himalayas to the rolling hills and the fertile plains of the Tarai, the country is a treasure trove of scenic wonders. Strategically located between China and India, Nepal holds immense potential as a rising hub in the global IT industry.

There are over 250 listed software companies in Nepal, collectively generating billions of dollars in revenue through international outsourcing. This number continues to rise steadily, thanks to the high-quality services provided by tech companies in Nepal. They have demonstrated that Nepal has the potential to become the next Silicon Valley on the global stage. One key factor contributing to this growth is the cost advantage. In the Nepali labor market, labor is comparatively more affordable than in other South Asian countries. This makes Nepal an attractive destination for outsourcing IT services, leading to increased revenue and opportunities for the country.

Nepali workers have earned a reputation for their commitment to producing high-quality output, which further enhances Nepal’s appeal as an outsourcing destination. This combination of cost-efficiency and quality work positions Nepal as a strong contender in the global IT industry. According to a paper published by the IIDS, Nepal generated more than $525m in 2022, and the upward trend continues. The number of registered software companies in Nepal is increasing, along with a noticeable rise in the number of freelancers in the country. This growth has played a significant role in Nepal's economic development and is making a greater contribution to the country’s GDP.

Currently, the IT sector contributes about 1.4 percent to Nepal’s GDP, but this ratio is expected to increase in the near future, especially if the government continues to support the development of software companies in the country. It is also worth noting that the IT sector accounts for 5.5 percent of foreign exchange services, which is a positive indicator of its contribution to Nepal’s economy.

The increasing GDP contribution and foreign exchange earnings are clear indicators of a promising future for Nepal’s IT industry and its potential to become a significant player on the global stage. I had the privilege of working with one of Nepal’s leading software companies, Cedargate Technologies based in Sanepa, Lalitpur. Cedargate Technologies specializes in the US healthcare sector and is a US-based company. Its expertise in the US healthcare domain has earned it the trust and recognition for consistently delivering top-notch work. There are also numerous companies in Nepal working in the fintech and healthcare industries, as well as in artificial intelligence and machine learning, consistently delivering high-quality work. 

I noticed a significant number of young professionals at Cedargate Technologies. While I do not have exact data on the age distribution of employees, it was apparent that the majority fell within the 27–30 age group. This demographic indicates that Cedargate Technologies is successfully attracting and retaining young talent, contributing to the company’s dynamic and innovative environment.

It is crucial for Nepal to formulate and implement policies that encourage the growth of its IT industry while also incentivizing skilled youth to stay and contribute to the country’s development. Balancing competitive wages, career growth opportunities, and quality of life will be key to achieving this goal. According to a 2022 report, the per capita income of Nepalis was $1,336.5, with the country’s economy growing by approximately 5.6 percent. Nepal’s economy remains heavily reliant on remittances, which accounted for about 23.5 percent of the country’s total income in 2020.

While Nepal is often referred to as a nation of agriculture, tourism, and hydropower, it is now time to invest in the IT sector. To transform this situation and position Nepal as a hub for the Information Technology (IT) industry, the government should consider implementing new policies. These policies could include providing special support or incentives to foreign companies interested in investing in Nepal’s IT sector. Such measures have the potential to attract investment, generate more job opportunities within Nepal, and decrease the nation’s reliance on income from overseas workers. This strategy aims to strengthen Nepal’s economy and improve the safety and well-being of its citizens working abroad.

Digital globalization has triggered a revolution in information technology, reshaping the job market landscape. It has redefined how we perceive work, breaking down borders and democratizing technology. In the case of landlocked Nepal, it has the potential to transcend geographical limitations and become a borderless nation, provided the government fosters an environment conducive to technology market development. The Nepal government has taken commendable steps by initiating frameworks like the ‘Digital Nepal Framework’ and the ‘Master Plan for ICT in Education’. However, these plans have struggled due to inadequate planning and poor implementation, which is a common issue in many South Asian countries. For perspective,

India successfully exported $194bn in the 2021-2022 fiscal year. Nepal’s government should draw lessons from successful policies that have transformed regions into IT hubs, such as Silicon Valley in the United States. Additionally, Nepal can learn from neighboring countries that have offered subsidies to multinational tech giants like Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Infosys, and others. Reforms in foreign direct investment (FDI) policies can further stimulate growth.

Nepal’s strategic location between two potential superpower nations, India and China, offers unique advantages. The country’s environment is also conducive to tech innovation, making it a promising destination for the technology sector. There are various policies in Nepal that require reform across different domains, including Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), labor laws, intellectual property rights, monetary policies, Education and aspects related to infrastructure and data security. To foster the growth of the IT sector, the Nepal government should consider implementing specific measures. For instance, providing special subsidies for acquiring land for IT infrastructure could incentivize investments in this sector. Additionally, there is a need for enhanced security measures, particularly under the purview of the Home Ministry, to safeguard IT assets and sensitive data.

Furthermore, it is advisable to engage in negotiations and collaborations through Government-to-Business (G2B) partnerships. Encouraging large IT companies to expand to remote regions of Nepal, rather than being solely concentrated in the Kathmandu Valley, can help distribute economic opportunities more evenly across the country. This decentralization can not only reduce pressure on urban centers but also stimulate regional development, leading to a more balanced and robust IT ecosystem nationwide. In conclusion, Nepal stands on the cusp of becoming a Himalayan hub of innovation in the global IT landscape. Its stunning landscapes, rich culture, and diverse communities provide a unique backdrop for technological growth. The strategic location between China and India presents promising opportunities for economic development, and the innate talent and dedication of Nepali professionals are valuable assets.

However, realizing this potential requires a concerted effort, particularly in policy reform and implementation. While the government has taken commendable steps with frameworks like the ‘Digital Nepal Framework’ and ‘Master Plan for ICT in Education’, effective execution remains a challenge. Learning from successful models worldwide, attracting foreign investment, and offering incentives to multinational tech companies can fuel growth. Nepal’s transition from being known for labor exports to becoming a technology leader is a transformative journey. With the right policies, infrastructure, and commitment, Nepal has the potential to unlock its IT prowess, diversify its economy, and create a brighter future for its citizens, both at home and abroad.

For more than a decade, Nepali politics has been defined by three dominant figures: KP Sharma Oli, Sher Bahadur Deuba, and Pushpa Kamal Dahal. As party chiefs and multiple-time prime ministers, they have established themselves as indomitable forces. Among the three, it now seems almost certain that Oli and Dahal will retain control of their respective parties for at least the next five years—if not longer.

In the past two weeks, the CPN-UML and CPN (Maoist Center) held their Central Committee and Standing Committee meetings, respectively. The outcomes of these meetings will have far-reaching implications, particularly regarding leadership transitions. Both Oli and Dahal have further solidified their grip by weakening and isolating potential rivals. These developments starkly contrast with the widespread public desire, especially among the youth, for a generational change in leadership.

A significant section of Nepal’s youth continues to call for immediate leadership renewal. Many believe that since the same leaders have held sway over both party and government for more than three decades and failed to deliver, new leaders should be given a chance. Having become prime minister multiple times, these leaders have used the power and resources of the state to entrench their positions. Ministerial portfolios and key appointments were handed to loyalists, while dissenting voices were sidelined.

There have also been instances where state law enforcement agencies were allegedly used to harass internal party opponents. As a result, many young leaders have either aligned themselves with top leaders or remained silent, compromising the core values of intra-party democracy and leadership handover.

The internal dynamics of major parties tell a different story altogether. Youth leaders of NC, UML and Maoist Center—who once demanded a leadership transition—are now retreating from those positions. In recent Central and Standing Committee meetings, not only did they refrain from calling for change, but many also openly endorsed the current leadership.

The UML’s Central Committee meeting cleared the way for Oli to lead the party for a third consecutive term. The party decided to amend its statute, removing the 70-year age limit and the two-term cap tailored specifically to facilitate Oli’s continuation. But more than just a policy shift, both senior and youth leaders publicly declared that there is “no alternative” to Oli. Even former President Bidya Devi Bhandari’s attempt to challenge Oli by reentering active politics was thwarted; the party revoked her general membership for doing so.

Oli is now virtually assured to be re-elected party chairman at the UML’s 11th General Convention, expected later this year. Party leaders argue that Oli's leadership is essential to securing victory in the 2027 elections. In reality, he may continue leading the party as long as his health allows. Since taking the helm in 2015, Oli has consolidated power, sidelined rivals, and built a loyal inner circle. Two pivotal moments helped him secure dominance: the departure of senior leaders like Madhav Kumar Nepal and Jhala Nath Khanal, and the failed leadership challenge by Bhim Rawal, who was eventually expelled. That episode sent a clear message: challenging the leadership comes with consequences. More recently, Brinda Pandey and Usha Kiran Timalsina were suspended for six months for voicing dissent, reinforcing the party’s intolerance for internal opposition.

A similar scenario unfolded in the Maoist Center’s Standing Committee meeting. Senior leader Janardhan Sharma raised the issue of leadership change, only to be rebuked by nearly the entire committee. Out of 50 members, just three supported his proposal that Dahal, who has been at the helm since the 1980s, should begin transitioning party leadership to the next generation. Rather than supporting Sharma, other members criticized him. The party issued a warning that no leader should make public statements against its leadership. “There is a growing tendency to speak against party leadership and violate party discipline,” said Maoist leader Haribol Gajurel. 

The situation in the NC remains uncertain. Party President Deuba is unlikely to amend the party statute to pursue a third term. Leaders Shekhar Koirala and Gagan Thapa appear poised to contest the presidency. A third candidate from the Deuba camp may also run, while other senior leaders, who lack serious electoral prospects, may enter the race merely to secure bargaining positions in the party or government. Despite this, Deuba remains a strong presence, and the party's top leadership appears to be consolidating its hold.

Meanwhile, in the CPN (Unified Socialist), a breakaway faction of UML, Madhav Kumar Nepal maintains tight control despite facing corruption allegations. He has publicly warned senior leader Jhala Nath Khanal to leave the party for speaking against him. Despite mounting pressure, Nepal has refused to hand over the reins to a younger generation.

With these developments, the debate around leadership handover in major Nepali parties has significantly lost momentum. Over the years, these senior leaders, each of whom has held the prime ministership multiple times, have consistently used state resources to strengthen their internal party positions and marginalize opposition. With youth leaders increasingly dependent on the senior leadership for political opportunities and resources, they remain unable, or unwilling, to mount a meaningful challenge.