Submit your Article

Former Minister of International Development and Minister of Environment of Norway, Erik Solheim, attended the inaugural edition of Sagarmatha Sambaad at the invitation of the Nepal government. A seasoned diplomat, Solheim has also served as the under-secretary-general of the United Nations and the executive director of the United Nations Environment Program. Kamal Dev Bhattarai and Pratik Ghimire of ApEx interviewed him about climate change impacts in the Himalayas. Excerpts:

What drew you to Sagarmatha Sambaad?

I was invited by Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli. I met him a few months back and he said we are finally making the summit happen. The event had been postponed due to the Covid-19 pandemic. So, the prime minister was very eager, and I said, yes, for sure I want to come. And the main reason is of course that the melting of the glaciers in the Himalayas, which is of enormous importance to the world. These glaciers are feeding all the major rivers. Ganga, Brahmaputra, the Mekong, the Indus, they are all fed by the melting of the Himalayas. And the impact, if this is disturbed, will be enormous. If you take India, China and Pakistan, there are maybe 2bn people living in this region. So, this is one of the most important environmental issues in the world, and it’s very good that Nepal is taking the lead to put this issue on the agenda.

Do you think that this kind of summit could help shape the global perspective, or global discourse on climate change and sustainability?

One summit of course will not change everything in the world. But if you sustain the topic, have more summits, and really bring it into the different global processes, I think it will have a massive impact. Because this is also the third pole. You have the north pole where we live in Norway, you have the south pole in Antarctica, and this is the third pole, with all the ice and snow in the Himalayas. So, to get that perspective out to the world, I think this summit was very important.

Can this kind of event be a common voice for mountainous regions and mountainous countries? 

Absolutely, because the issues are the same. Of course, the Himalayas is the number one mountain region in the world, but I’ve been many times to, say, Bolivia in the Andes. In Bolivia, you see skiing tracks, which were built at a time when there was snow to bring tourists. Now, the skiing tracks have no snow. They are just standing there with no use. So, the issues are the same in the Andes, in the Alps, and in many other mountain ranges. But the Himalayas is the most important, the biggest amount of snow, the highest number of people being impacted. 

As a former UN Environment chief, you have been in many kinds of climate dialogues. Do you think these kinds of dialogues really help in real world climate actions?

It works only if you can trigger action, and the government can set the direction for action. But you also need business and civil society groups and others to act. What I think is very important is not just to see climate change as a problem, but also as an opportunity for innovation and economic growth. One example is, of course, now over 70 percent of cars in Kathmandu or Nepal are electric. Well, that’s very good for fighting climate change. But it’s also very good for the people here. These cars are more modern, better, higher quality, more tech. They will reduce pollution. Kathmandu is in a valley, as you know very well that you don’t have a lot of wind to remove pollution. It will stay on. So it makes sense to embrace electric vehicles. Nepal is now next to Norway, with the world's most electric cars. Sure, there is China, but China is so big. So in terms of percentages, Nepal is really leading the world. Again, looking for what’s beneficial, both economically and for the environment, electric cars are much cheaper because you spend less money.

Are you really hopeful about the direction the world is heading in terms of climate action?

I think the world is heading in the right direction, but not mainly because of the diplomatic talks, but mainly because of the action of business. Look, China last year added 300 gigawatts of solar energy to the grid. That is 100 times Nepal's entire hydro power grid. So this is enormous. In India, Prime Minister Narendra Modi just launched a scheme for 10m rooftops with solar. Again, that’s huge. And China and India both have understood that climate and environment is not just a problem, but also an opportunity. Now most electric cars in the world are Chinese. This benefits the Chinese economy and environment. It’s the same thing in India. With Modi launching the solar industry in India, it benefits the economy and environment.

What adaptation strategies would you recommend for vulnerable and mountainous countries like Nepal?

Number one, going big on renewables. Hydropower is already big, but there’s a huge potential for more hydropower in Nepal, and that’s also a potential for huge export earnings if you sell it to India. Going big on solar, and then doing even better to protect nature, can also bring economic opportunities. I know that there are disputes in Nepal about the number of tigers, but Nepal has doubled the number of tigers. That can be turned into a draw for tourists, because tourists really want to come and see tigers. You get good jobs while protecting nature at the same time.

We have often heard you talking about green growth. How can developing nations like Nepal grow their economies without repeating the environmental mistakes of the already developed or industrial countries?

The main issue is to understand that renewables are now the cheapest anywhere in the world. In the past, every nation that wanted to grow its economy depended on coal energy. It started in the United Kingdom and spread to Germany, to the United States, to Japan, to China. But now if you switch from coal to solar, you save money. Solar is cheaper. That means a new development path is possible. So for Nepal to really root its economic development in electric vehicles, solar panels, hydropower, that will make a very different pathway forward. Less polluting, but also cheaper and better.

Nepali leaders frequently say that the international community is not paying attention to the impact of climate change on Nepal’s Himalayas. This is one reason the Nepal government organized Sagarmatha Sambaad. Do you agree with this claim?

I think the prime minister and other leaders are right that the support from the international community hasn’t been sufficient. And I think Nepal is very right to put this much more front and center by organizing the Sagarmatha Sambaad.

What are your suggestions for Nepal so that the international community could hear this issue? 

It should organize more events in other parts of the world. We have the climate talks in Belém, Brazil. We have the UN General Assembly. We have Davos, the World Economic Forum. We have dialogues in neighboring countries. We have the Raisina Dialogue in Delhi. We have the Boa Forum in China. These are major events where lots of people are coming together. And the Nepal government, with its Indian, Chinese and European partners, could organize many more events putting Nepal and the Himalayas at the center.

The Nepal government had expected for heads of state and government to join the dialogue, but that didn’t happen. What could be the reasons?

Well, I think right now, many leaders are focused on other issues. Chinese President Xi Jinping, for example, is focused on trade and conflict issues with the United States. Prime Minister Modi has, of course, been very focused on the conflict with Pakistan. But the very high level, I mean, the Minister of Environment came from Delhi. A Central Committee member of the Chinese Communist Party did attend the dialogue. Certainly, it will be good to attract even more high level representatives in the future, and I’m sure that can happen. 

Since Nepal and Norway are long-time partners, how do you see the current status of these countries’ collaboration on environmental and climate issues?

Norway has supported a number of climate activities in Nepal. A very obvious area is hydropower, because Norway is a big hydropower nation, and so is Nepal. So to look into all opportunities to engage Norwegian companies in sharing the best practice or investing in hydropower in Nepal I think would be a huge, huge opportunity. But there are also others. Hydropower is the biggest opportunity, because Norway has much less. Besides that, anything related to tourism. Nepal has huge tourism potential. I mean, all it has is tourists, but it can get more. So finding ways of getting more value from the tourists, charging them more so you get more and more value, but also, of course, organizing tourism in such a way that it has the least impact on nature.

Neeraj Singh Manhas currently serves as the special advisor for South Asia at the Parley Policy Initiative, Republic of Korea, and is a subject matter expert at the Centre for Joint Warfare Studies, Ministry of Defence, Government of India. He is also a non-resident visiting senior scholar at the Centre for National Security Studies, and an Editorial Board Member for World Water Policy, journal published by (WILEY-Scopus, Elsevier). He closely follows South Asia’s water and river geopolitics. ApEx talked to him about India’s decision to suspend the Indus Water Treaty and its implications for Pakistan and South Asia.

How does the suspension of the IWT affect Pakistan?

The Indus Waters Treaty has been crucial for Pakistan, as it regulates the flow of water from the Indus River and its tributaries, which are vital to Pakistan’s agricultural and energy sectors. Under the treaty, Pakistan was granted exclusive rights over the waters of three western rivers—Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab—while India was allowed to use the waters of the eastern rivers. With India’s suspension of the treaty, Pakistan faces the possibility of having its water supply disrupted, which could lead to severe consequences for its agricultural output, as over 90 percent of Pakistan’s water needs are met by the Indus River. Eighty percent of Pakistan’s agricultural land—around 16m hectares—depends on water from the Indus system. 

Also, this system supplies water to over 237m Pakistanis. The major cities like Karachi, Lahore, and Multan get their water directly from this system. However, 25 percent of Pakistan’s GDP depends on this water, as that share of national income comes from agriculture. The agricultural sector supports 68 percent of Pakistan’s rural households—whose livelihoods are now under threat. Additionally, water shortages could affect hydroelectric power production, which contributes significantly to Pakistan's energy generation. The economic and environmental implications could be disastrous, especially for Pakistan’s rural population, which depends on these rivers for irrigation. This suspension risks destabilizing Pakistan’s food security and overall economy, especially as the country grapples with existing resource shortages.

What are the potential environmental and economic consequences for Pakistan?

The potential environmental and economic consequences for Pakistan are grave, as the Indus River system is not just a source of water but a lifeline for the country’s economy. With Pakistan relying on these rivers for nearly 70 percent of its total water supply, any disruption could lead to significant water shortages, especially in the agricultural sector, which employs a substantial portion of the population. The immediate effect would be felt in irrigation, with crops failing due to insufficient water. 

Additionally, Pakistan’s hydroelectric plants, which rely on the flow of water from the Indus and its tributaries, would face a decrease in power generation, exacerbating the already critical energy crisis. On the environmental side, lower water availability could lead to the degradation of ecosystems, affecting wetlands and biodiversity that depend on consistent water flow. Economically, this could lead to food shortages, price hikes, and social unrest, especially as millions of people depend on these resources for their livelihood.

How has Pakistan responded to the suspension?

Pakistan’s response to India’s suspension of the IWT has been one of strong condemnation. Pakistani officials have rejected India’s accusations and denied any involvement in the Pahalgam attack. They have labelled India’s move as ‘cowardly’ and ‘immature’, claiming that it is an inappropriate and politically charged reaction that violates the spirit of the treaty. 

Pakistan’s foreign minister has called for an international response, urging global stakeholders to condemn India’s actions and mediate the dispute. The Pakistani government has warned of potential retaliation, emphasizing that such moves could escalate tensions further, potentially leading to military or diplomatic consequences. Given the sensitivity surrounding water issues in the region and the shared nature of the Indus River system, Pakistan fears that this could lead to long-term instability in the region. While Pakistan stresses that the treaty should remain intact, it has also warned that India’s actions could undermine future cooperation on regional water-sharing arrangements.

What are the broader implications for regional stability?

The suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty signals a worrying escalation in Indo-Pakistani relations, with far-reaching implications for regional stability. Both India and Pakistan are nuclear-armed countries, and any escalation in tensions over the treaty could lead to further militarization of the conflict. The suspension not only undermines the environmental and economic cooperation that the treaty represents but also exacerbates an already fragile relationship between the two nations. The history of territorial disputes, especially over Kashmir, complicates any diplomatic efforts to resolve the water dispute. The disruption of such a critical agreement could lead to an arms race or proxy conflicts, further destabilizing South Asia. It also risks undermining international efforts to mediate and foster cooperation in the region, with the potential to draw in external actors, including major powers and international organizations like the United Nations, which could get involved to prevent further escalation.

Is there a pathway to de-escalate this crisis?

While the situation remains tense, there is a potential pathway to de-escalation, although it would require significant diplomatic effort from both sides. The role of international organizations, such as the World Bank, which was instrumental in brokering the original treaty in 1960, could be pivotal in facilitating dialogue between India and Pakistan. Both nations need to demonstrate a commitment to peace, moving away from retaliatory measures and focusing on finding a solution that ensures equitable water distribution. One possible avenue could involve third-party mediation, with the World Bank or the United Nations acting as facilitators for negotiations. Additionally, confidence-building measures, such as the exchange of information about water usage and infrastructure development, could help to rebuild trust. However, this would require both countries to prioritize long-term cooperation over short-term political gains. The resolution of the crisis will depend not only on diplomatic negotiations but also on both countries recognizing the importance of the treaty for regional peace and stability.

Tom Lutz is a Distinguished Professor Emeritus and Professor of the Graduate Division at UC Riverside, the founding editor-in-chief and publisher of the Los Angeles Review of Books, founder of The LARB Radio Hour, The LARB Quarterly Journal, The LARB Publishing Workshop, LitLit Book Fair, and LARB Books. Ken Subedi sat down and conversed with Lutz about his experiences of Nepal and his works while he was in Nepal for New York Writers Workshop Kathmandu 2024.

When did you come to Nepal for the first time?

During the big earthquake. In 2015.

Did you come for work or pleasure? What was the purpose?

No, I travel. I write travel books. I travel whenever I get the chance. Gertrude Stein said—you can either buy clothes, or you can buy art. So you just have to choose—what do you want? She bought art and I bought clothes for one dollar, and then I travelled.

Where did you travel? To France?

I have travelled to 150 countries.

Where did you travel in Nepal in 2015?

I just travelled in Kathmandu and some rural towns around Kathmandu. What is that big temple town?

Changunarayan? Bhaktapur Durbar Square?

Yes, right.

So you came to Nepal in 2015. But when you were living in the US, when did you know about Nepal for the first time?

Well! It was the first time I had been to Nepal where there was a religion which was so syncretic. I see in the Buddhist temple, a Buddhist monk praying to Ganesh.

But usually Buddhists pray in their own rites. But here in Nepal, even the Buddhists pray to the Hindu gods.   

Exactly! This is the only place I have seen that. 

The roots of Buddhism lie in Hinduism.

Yeah, right! Of course! And the basic kind of Namaste, kindness, was impressive to me. That’s on the positive side. On the negative side—I had a romantic image of Kathmandu.  So I was surprised by the traffic and the pollution, and the poverty. That was surprising. I didn’t expect it.

So you also got to see how the earthquake ruined the country and the people who were devastated by it, right? 

Yes. I only came because I had some time, and I went to India as well.

Right now, how was your experience attending the workshop and Himalayan Literature Festival? 

Literature is international. It’s a cosmopolitan kind of activity. When people write – sometimes Nepalese writers write about Nepal, sometimes American writers write for America. But most of the American writers write hoping to write for the world. 

That is also because of the English language!

Yeah! And Yuyutsu is a perfect example. He goes everywhere. He writes to everyone. And he brings writers from everywhere. He is a perfect example of the cosmopolitanism of literary work.

But at the same time that may also create some sort of homogeneity, also the cultural homogeneity.

Yes. I think literature fights against homogeneity. Literature is interested in all the nooks and crannies of difference. There is no reason to write about Taylor Swift for example. Writers don’t tend to be interested in the normal.

Salman Rushdie says that a writer should always challenge the current stage, like current tradition, current norms, or established values. What’s your opinion on this view?

Yes. Literature always crosses the boundary. For example: Take this cup of tea; there is no story here. But if I take this tea and throw it in your face, then it is a story. I crossed a cultural boundary. It is something abnormal. And then it becomes a story.

You have written lots of books on various genres. You also write travelogues. You travel. There are so many areas where you have worked simultaneously. What excites you, what fascinates you the most? Is it literary criticism, fiction, memoir, or novel, or travelogue? Do you have any favorite areas? It’s like asking a father which son you love the most. In Nepal, the youngest son is always loved.

Yes. And that is true. The youngest child is more loved. The book I am working on is always the one that. I am reading something which is from 2021. Just four years ago. 

Did you write a memoir in 2022?

No, it’s a novel. The novel has some memoirist aspects. It’s the new novel I just finished that is coming this year. And novels are really fun.

You can take the characters to where you want!

The characters go where they want. And I watch them, I think. 

Do you let the characters go, or do you bring some restrictions?

The characters take their own life jack. It’s more like you are watching them do things. 

I guess you love all the genres, but novels should be more near to your heart. 

Yeah! I don’t know about the heart. It’s all about the book 1925. It’s a literary history. It was also really fun. I loved that work.

So, the venture which you are working on is the most exciting part! 

I think that I have written these very different kinds of things because I had a teaching job. It paid me a salary. I could write whatever I wanted to write.  I didn’t have to worry about whether I sold it, if I sold 10 copies or 10,000 copies, or 100,000.

So, you write for the sake of passion?

It’s whatever you want to do. I travel but I do not have an itinerary. I wander freely and write freely like I travel.

Have you written anything on Nepal?

Yes. I think I have a Nepal section in one of the travel books, The Kindness of Strangers.  I have already written about it.

It is said that for the same person to be a good creative writer and a good literary critic is a rare thing. You have worked as both and succeeded. Do you think you can be good in both areas?

A lot of critical people who write criticism think that they don’t have the ability to write creative kinds of fiction. I think they just don’t try it. And some novelists and some poets think that they can never do other things. So they don’t try. I tried to write a novel when I was much younger but I had not read much and had not gone to college yet. They can get in each other’s way sometimes.

Do you think it is possible to work like you? How can you balance that?

For me, that’s a very personal thing. I said I am not going to try to write great literature. I am going to write a thriller. Mystery genre does not have to be fancy; it does not have to be great literature. It can be just to tell a fun story. I think it’s somewhere in-between.

Is it due to your profession? Are you able to balance both works like literary criticism and the work which you are doing? Many professors teach how to write, but they don’t write themselves. But you have done a great job. 

Exactly, it helps. I think I became a better critic when I wrote some poetry and some fiction. I think I write better criticism, I write better fiction and poetry because I love my works as a historian, as a scholar. 

I think you started with literary criticism. Or, did you start with creative work?

I graduated from my high school. Then, I worked doing different things for ten years. Then, I started going to college. Then after graduate school, I became a professor. So during that period, I was writing poetry, I was writing songs, I tried to write fiction. My earliest attempts were creative writing. But I didn’t publish anything. And then when I started going to school, my first book was a scholarly book.

Regarding the Los Angeles Review of Books, what triggered you to start a new media only dedicated to reviews?

There is a personal reason and a historical reason. The personal reason is—I got a new job, a very good job, and a very good pay. I thought what I should do next is—something that’s not for me, not to make my career better, not something more absurdist. I should do something for the service. When all the book reviews in America were dying, the newspapers were shrinking; I grew up reading the book reviews in the newspapers. That was my introduction to literary culture. And I wanted other people to get into the conversation. I started an online service. It did not cost anything. I called my friends. It was volunteer labor. Gradually it became bigger and bigger. I had to hire staff. So, I built a board of directors and turned it into a non-profit organization so that we could take grants and gifts, and pay staff. I spent 60 hours a week for ten years.

It is like a contribution to the literary fraternity. People are writing reviews throughout the world. The representation of local literature is also accessible throughout the world.

We have readers in 200 countries.  

How do you find the representation of the Global South in producing great literary works? What is your view regarding their representation from South Asia?

I am 71 years old. When I started reading literature in the 1970s, I never heard the phrase Global South. We read Gabriel Garcia Marquez, Alejo Carpentier and Frantz Fanon. There were a dozen texts from around the world. There were a handful of people. Also VS Naipaul. Now, for the last 20 years, the idea of the Global South has been a part of every English Department, every Literature Department. Every university has people working on Global South literature; now, it’s a recognized area. The American book market is dominated by very few bestselling authors. All of the big money is going into publishing all of those few bestselling authors from the US and the UK. In the second level, there are lots of authors from Africa, India, and the East. There are a lot of writers now who are considered the important literary writers of the Four American Literary Readers who are from the Global South. So it’s a big change. If you look at Germany or any Latin American country, the publishers there publish half of the work that is translated from other languages. In America it’s three percent. It’s still a very small part. That means that even though Africa is being represented in Four American Readers, it has been represented by a small percentage of writers from Africa. Often, those are writers who have moved to England or America.

I think one should be at least second generation to become a published author in the US, like Ravi Shankar. If he was first generation in the US, it would have been more difficult for him to secure publishing from the American publishers. It may be because of the languages, the familiarity with the culture.

Ngũgĩ wa Thiong’o from Kenya. He was a famous author in Kenya. His fames were around the world, while he still lived in Kenya. But he had gotten into trouble with the government.  And he was imprisoned. He fled to America. So he lived in America for 20/25 years. So writers like that have much more access to American readers because they live in America, give readings in America and are part of the scene. There are a number of authors who live in both places and cultures. I know there are hundreds of great African writers who Americans have never heard of and have never translated.

What languages do you speak besides English?

I speak some French and some Spanish.

Amlan Mukherjee has been serving as the Managing Director of Unilever Nepal Limited since April 2020, bringing with him over three decades of experience in Unilever’s global operations. His leadership has been instrumental in steering the company through the challenges posed by the Covid-19 pandemic, ensuring both employee welfare and business continuity. Under his guidance, Unilever Nepal achieved a 19 percent increase in profit after tax, reaching Rs 1.834bn, and delivered the highest dividends in the company’s history. Beyond financial achievements, Mukherjee has championed several corporate social responsibility initiatives. Notably, he led Unilever Nepal’s collaboration with the Nepali Army for the ‘Mountain Cleanup Campaign 2023’, aiming to preserve the nation’s Himalayan environment by collecting and recycling waste from major peaks. On 30th March, Ponds Skin Institute unveiled their new tagline, Miracle Happens, which highlighted the efficacy of three essential skincare. In this context, Sabika Shrestha of ApEx interviewed him about the skincare industry, trends, and other issues. Excerpts:

What was the objective behind hosting the event?

As you know that Ponds is one of the most established skincare brand globally and what we try to do is to understand the needs of the consumers because in today’s day, unlike before, the consumer skincare needs are evolving and they are evolving on the basis of environment, temperature, skin types and hence one fits for all time is over. Hence, what we try to do through this event is to understand those skincare needs and then bring in the products which address those needs. We invest a significant amount of money in terms of bringing in the best-in-class machinery and technologies so that the consumers can get the best products.

How has the brand evolved over time?

Twenty years ago we took this revolutionary step of bringing in the modern skincare solutions for consumers. While the skincare regimen—cleansing, toning, and moisturizing—are timeless, we at Ponds build products to address specific concerns like skin type, pollution, and environment. Our formulations continue to evolve based on the needs of our consumers to deliver far greater results.

What sets Ponds apart in the global market?.

With 125+ years of heritage, Ponds operates in 60 countries and has five best in class research centers in five different parts of the world. This gives us the opportunity to understand the consumer needs and adapt accordingly. We can anticipate global trends and introduce products in our local markets. To me that is the biggest advantage between Ponds and the other skin care brands which we find in Nepal and in South Asia.

How is Ponds positioning itself as a market leader in Nepal?

With digital advancement, the world is a very small space. If Nepali consumers are demanding for products that are trending in the rest of the world, then we need to be ready to fulfill that need. And that’s what Unilever stands for and that is what Ponds stands for. There is a consumer need. We get the consumers, and we either bring that product from our existing range, or we do that research and introduce that product. That is our Pond’s place.

Does beauty relate to the overall well-being of an individual?

Absolutely. We at Ponds believe that beauty is holistic, that inner well-being reflects on the skin. Stress, for example, can cause skin pigmentation. So, Ponds blends scientific research with deep consumer insights to nurture both inner and outer beauty.

What are the evolving consumer needs and preferences in Nepal’s skin industry?

Nepal has a high beauty consciousness, with consumers well-informed about global trends. Pollution and climate create unique skin care challenges (e.g., acne, dryness). Ponds addresses these with targeted solutions, ensuring that our Nepali consumers receive the same premium care as global audiences.

What are your thoughts on introducing budget friendly skin care products?

You know, word budget depends on and varies from person to person. Today, our consumers are willing to spend on taking care of their skin. It is unfair to overcharge them, but we ensure quality products. So, it is important to see that there are consumers who need the basic skin care regime, and we have that for you. Then there are consumers who have specific skin care regimes, who have specific needs for their skin care needs, and we have products for them as well. We let our consumers decide by putting out a wide variety of products all across the price line.

How do you encourage men to follow a skincare routine?

For today’s men, taking up the beauty care regime is not a taboo. They are much more open, much more receptive to the fact that they also have skin care needs as much as their women counterparts. They are driving that change. The men’s beauty care industry is very promising. Ponds already also has a specific men’s range, and the market is growing.

So there’s no gender bias when it comes to skin care?

You know, from the company’s standpoint, there is definitely no gender bias but the point is that still today, I would say, it’s changing, but not as fast as we would like to. Men are getting conscious, but at the same time, maybe because of their approach, attitude, they are still not that open as women to get into this skin care regimen lifestyle. But, the way we have picked up the trend, there is lots of social noise, lots of social media interest in terms of skin care, changes from the male also.

Do you have a skincare routine?

Definitely. I lead a company which deals with beauty products. I have to practice what I preach.