Submit your Article

Monish Tourangbam is a New Delhi-based strategic analyst and the honorary director at the Kalinga Institute of Indo-Pacific Studies (KIIPS). He holds an MPhil and PhD from the School of International Studies, JNU, and has taught geopolitics and international relations at Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, and Amity University, Noida. Tourangbam has also been a visiting faculty at the University of Cincinnati, Ohio, a SAV visiting fellow at the Stimson Center, Washington DC, and associate editor of the Indian Foreign Affairs Journal. He has been an Indian delegate at a number of high-level Track II Dialogues and regular commentator on US foreign policy, India’s foreign policy, geopolitics of the Indo-Pacific and South Asia besides other pertinent issues of international relations. Kamal Dev Bhattarai of ApEx talked with him about the Indo-Pacific Strategy and its implications for Nepal. 

How do you see the implementation of US Indo-Pacific Strategy 2022 in the Indo-Pacific region?

The US Indo-Pacific Strategy (IPS) more than anything else affirms the prevailing view in America’s policymaking community that the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC’s) comprehensive rise is the most prominent strategic challenge to US primacy in the international system, and more particularly in the Indo-Pacific region. “The PRC’s coercion and aggression spans the globe, but it is most acute in the Indo-Pacific,” the IPS says. Although it does mention a host of global issues including the pandemic and the climate change that require renewed American leadership, the focus of this strategy on the strategic challenges posed by China is quite apparent: That the United States needs to face such challenges squarely, and build a “free and open Indo-Pacific that is more connected, prosperous, secure, and resilient,” in concert with allies and like-minded partners is what this strategy contends. The economic, political, and military balance that was heavily tilted toward the United States and its allies in the post-Cold War era has been rapidly shifting to a much more complex environment. 

The IPS is emphatic in pronouncing the Indo-Pacific region as the most consequential in terms of its impact on the world, and one that will require the US to deliver more than ever. The cornerstone of implementing the IPS quite clearly lies in how well the United States is able to diagnose the 21st century problems that the region confronts, and devising the solutions to the range of issues traversing the military plus non-military areas.

How do South Asian countries perceive the IPS and how are they responding to it?

It will not be easy to put all the South Asian countries under one particular bracket or category, while assessing how they perceive and respond to the US Indo-Pacific Strategy. Despite being grouped under South Asia, the countries in this region possess peculiar geography and interests that shape their perceptions and responses to the IPS. Each country depending on their maritime or continental features, and their terms of engagements with the US perceive and navigate the politics, economics and security of the evolving Indo-Pacific region. For instance, the imperatives of development and security in each of the eight South Asian countries shape their strategic behaviors as well as tactical responses. 

Quite evidently, the exponential growth that India’s partnership with the US has seen in the last two decades, despite its own history of “estrangement”, is something that continues to and will overwhelmingly shape how South Asia features in US Indo-Pacific Strategy. Moreover, in deciphering the perception and responses of South Asian countries to the IPS, the China factor will loom large, because of Beijing’s growing strategic footprints in the region. While the US-China strategic competition is an overriding factor in the Indo-Pacific strategy and the military implications are quite apparent, the IPS is much more comprehensive in its scope and its non-military dimensions that are development oriented or human-centric are equally significant for the South Asian countries.

What are its implications in this region?

The looming shadow of the Indo-Pacific increasingly hovers over the politics, economics and security of South Asia. Whether South Asia occupies a pivotal position in terms of shaping the contours of the US Indo-Pacific Strategy can still be debated. The way Washington perceives the Indo-Pacific as a geopolitical region, and implements it still reflects a bias towards the maritime aspects, more particularly the Western Pacific, and the contestation with China’s growing ambitions in the South China Sea plus the Taiwan Straits. 

Moreover, South Asia does not have any treaty ally of the United States, and hence its security commitments in the region are quite different compared to those in the East Asian theater. The withdrawal from Afghanistan portends a new era in Washington’s South Asia strategy, that calls for greater resources devoted and policy attention to build an “open and free” Indo-Pacific amidst challenges posed by an assertive China. The downward slide in India-China relations, the growing US-China rivalry and the burgeoning India-US strategic cooperation, are leading to a complex competition-cooperation-confrontation dynamic affecting the dependent and independent agency of South Asian countries. 

In South Asia, the US is a distant power in terms of geography but not as far as strategy and influence are concerned. While South Asian countries seem to hedge their bets between India and China, the role of the US cannot be discounted. The US’ strategy in South Asia has largely focused on the triangular axis of India, Afghanistan and Pakistan, but its Indo-Pacific strategy has been widening the menu of military and non-military engagements in the subcontinent. As far as hardcore security implications are concerned, how South Asian countries perceive and respond to America’s evolving concept of integrated deterrence will be significant.

Compared to other countries, there has been much discussion in Nepal about IPS, how do you see such debates in Kathmandu?

The evolving debates in Nepal on the IPS and the Indo-Pacific as a geopolitical plus geo-economic region expectedly reflects the permutations and combinations resulting from Nepal’s own perception of its core development needs and security imperatives. With the Nepalese parliament ratifying the US engineered Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), Beijing smells a brewing concoction of American infringement on its growing strategic footprints in South Asia and the Himalayas, in particular. While the Himalayas witnessed US-China power tussle during the Cold War as well, it has traversed a long way from ideological rivalry through rapprochement to the new great power competition of the 21st century. 

Lately, the US is attempting to re-engage a mountainous Nepal in need for development aid and assistance, at a time when a proximate power like China looms large with its plans under the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). At the same time, Nepal by dint of history and geography cannot ignore the overwhelming influence of India. The varying political views within Nepal and the pressures from Washington and Beijing witnessed during the negotiations leading to the ratification of the MCC is symptomatic of US-China competition trends witnessed across the larger Indo-Pacific region. How Kathmandu maximizes its gains and minimizes its losses amidst the Indo-Pacific geopolitics and geo-economics will be the test of Nepal’s diplomatic toolkit and the practice of its relative autonomy.

Nehru Joshi is the program coordinator at Genius IB World School. ApEx talked to her about Nepal’s education system, students and teaching-learning process and more. 

How can we create a more children-friendly learning environment in schools? 

The notion of education has significantly evolved beyond the traditional confines of textbook-centric learning. We're currently witnessing an exhilarating transformation phase within our education system, where learning extends far beyond the pages of textbooks and four walls of a classroom. Today’s education models are child-friendly and immersive, focusing on holistic development, hands-on experiences, and real-world application. We’re integrating technology into our classrooms, not just for the sake of using gadgets, but to make learning interactive, engaging, and relevant. We focus increasingly on experiential learning—taking learners outside the traditional settings to learn through experience.This approach encourages creativity, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence, ensuring learners are not merely carrying book bags, but are actively engaging with the knowledge and skills necessary for the 21st century. It’s an exciting time for education, as we ensure that every child feels supported, challenged, and inspired in our education system, not just academically but in all facets of their development.

What are the ways to make our education more practical oriented? 

Integrating hands-on learning experiences, applying real-world contexts, and fostering interdisciplinary learning within educational curriculums are crucial steps toward making education more applicable and engaging for learners. Such an approach not only cultivates critical thinking and problem-solving skills but also encourages learners to analyze and understand concepts deeply. By adopting inquiry-based learning, we can encourage learners to examine context from both local and global perspectives. This engagement helps become a lifelong learner and fosters an international-mindedness. This educational method facilitates engagement with complex issues beyond traditional subject boundaries, potentially improving academic outcomes.

 There are views that private sector education is too expensive and so they should be converted into public schools. What are your views on it? 

Private-sector education, while often associated with higher costs, plays a crucial role in the broader educational ecosystem. One of the core strengths of private schools is their ability to provide highly personalized education. This is due in part to smaller class sizes, which enable teachers to engage more deeply with each student, understanding their unique learning styles, challenges, and strengths. Moreover, private schools often have the flexibility to adopt innovative teaching methods and pedagogies. This agility allows them to adapt to the latest educational research and technological advancements, offering students a relevant and forward-thinking education that prepares them for the complexities of the modern world. In addition, the diverse extracurricular programs contribute to the holistic development of students. These programs, ranging from performing arts, mental and emotional wellness, visual arts, design and technology to sports and beyond, are essential for nurturing well-rounded individuals who excel not only in their academic pursuits but also in their personal growth.

In Nepal, where education is a pivotal element for development, the partnership between private and public schools can be particularly impactful. Private institutions can bring in their expertise in curriculum development, teacher training, and the integration of technology in education. This synergy can help uplift the overall quality of education, making it more accessible and inclusive. Such partnerships can serve as a bridge, ensuring that the advantages of private education are not confined to those who can afford it but are extended to a wider population, ultimately strengthening Nepal’s education system.

Do you agree that SEE should be canceled? 

My perspective is that while standardized assessments have their place in evaluating certain academic achievements, they shouldn’t be the sole measure of a child’s progress or potential. The real essence of education extends far beyond what can be captured in a standardized test. We’re preparing students not just academically but for life, which involves a myriad of skills and attributes that standardized tests simply cannot assess. Instead, we should prioritize ongoing assessment strategies that monitor a child’s holistic development, including language proficiency, interpersonal skills, creative thinking, critical thinking, emotional skills, and problem-solving abilities. This approach recognizes and nurtures the diverse strengths and challenges of each child, offering continuous feedback for timely support. It respects the fact that learning is a process, not a destination, and that each child progresses through this process at their own pace and in their own way. Unlike standardized tests that capture a mere snapshot, ongoing assessments provide a comprehensive view of a child’s capabilities, fostering well-rounded individuals ready to face complexities with confidence.

There are preparations to keep school education under the local government, is it justifiable?

In my opinion, decentralizing education to keep it under local government control can significantly contribute to country development and economic growth by tailoring education to local needs, cultures, and economic conditions. This approach allows for more agile implementation of educational programs, closer quality assurance, and more effective monitoring of outcomes. By involving local communities in decision-making, it not only enhances democracy in education but also ensures that educational strategies are more aligned with local priorities, which can lead to increased relevance and effectiveness of education. This relevance can drive better educational outcomes, leading to the local economic context, thereby stimulating economic growth. Moreover, local control can foster innovation in teaching methods and curriculum design, as local authorities can more easily experiment and innovate based on immediate feedback and results, contributing further to the overall development of the country’s education system.

Dr Pooneh Bagheri Zadeh is the Course Director for Computer Science at Leeds Beckett University (LBU). She is dedicated to advancing research in new technologies and methodologies to improve the research environment at the university. Dr Zadeh spent nearly three years as a senior research fellow specializing in 3D technology like vision, construction and TV. She recently led a group of students to Nepal for a student exchange program in computer science held at the British College (TBC). Babita Shrestha from ApEx interviewed her about the exchange program and  students’ projects which they were working on.

Why is a student exchange program in computer science and engineering important?

Nepal and the UK are on opposite sides of the globe, each with its own unique culture and educational system. Yet, despite these differences, TBC and LBU offer the same courses, materials and assessment strategies across all three years of study. It’s like creating a bridge between two distant worlds through education. Ultimately, it’s not just about swapping cultures and knowledge; it’s about fostering a sense of belongingness and enriching the educational landscape for everyone involved.

What’s the future like for student exchange programs in computer science considering their impact and accessibility?

After our first visit last year, we’re back for our second round. We faced some challenges before, but this time, things have been much smoother. My team and I have made some adjustments to the program. We started building teams and fostering connections among students earlier, encouraging discussions about potential projects. This year, our focus has been on addressing real issues in Nepal through technological innovation, benefiting both countries. It’s not just about collaboration but making a positive impact as well. And to ensure everything aligns well, we strategically chose March to coincide with our Easter break and Nepal’s favorable weather conditions.

During the exchange program, what specific areas of projects students engaged themselves in to address real-world challenges?

At first, we divided our students into four groups, each comprising two students from TBC and two from LBU. Before our trip to Nepal, each group decided on a topic aimed at addressing issues in Nepal. Last time, I brought Raspberry Pi from the UK, but this time, we use in-house technology—Arduino, which has various sensors . While the UK students were familiar with Raspberry Pi, they learned about Arduino alongside the Nepalese students. And it was surprising to me how the students quickly grasped Arduino concepts during workshops on the first day.

In terms of projects, Group A focused on developing a ‘Flood and Landslide Detection System’ using ultrasonic sensors connected to Arduino. This system can measure water levels and soil moisture, providing crucial information to authorities to prevent floods, which happens to be one of the major issues in Nepal. Group B developed a ‘Real-Time Traffic Management System’ using infrared sensors to count vehicles in lanes. Based on traffic flow, the system adjusts traffic lights to regulate traffic, making use of smart technology to enhance traffic control.

Group C made a ‘Smart Gardening System’ with sensors that check soil temperature, light, moisture and pH. If anything’s off, it waters the soil, great for indoor gardening. Group D created a ‘Quality Water Control System’ that checks if water is safe to drink using pH sensors. The results show on a portable device, handy for checking water safety anywhere.

What is the significance of computer science education in today’s digital age?

I believe computer science education is like learning how to use a powerful tool that helps us in our daily lives. It’s not just a luxury anymore; it’s become a necessity in society. With everything becoming digital, knowing about computers is essential. And because technology is always changing, learning computer science keeps us up-to-date and ready for whatever comes our way. It prepares us for the future.

How does it empower individuals and societies in terms of innovation and progress?

It really boosts people and communities by giving them the ability to keep up with constant changing technology. This means always being ready to learn and adapt to new things. With these skills, individuals can stay at the forefront of innovation and creativity. Ultimately, this also prepares them to be more competitive in the job market and contributes to overall progress and innovation in society.

Given your extensive experience as an External Examiner Researcher and computer science, can you share how new tech advancement helps protect digital stuff and catch cybercriminals?

Because of my teaching experiences at various universities, I’ve explored different research areas, particularly in computer science, computer vision, digital forensics and cybersecurity. Currently, I have a PhD student who’s researching drone detection and classification using deep learning and machine learning methods. In the UK, criminals sometimes use drones to smuggle drugs into prisons and other restricted areas. To address this, the project utilizes visual systems and cameras, along with deep learning techniques, to detect these drones. Additionally, I’m working on a project in digital cybersecurity. We’re developing technology like body cameras, smart glasses and smart doorbells, which help prevent crime by capturing evidence at crime scenes.

What are your big plans for doing more projects and working with others in computer science and engineering?

We have a great team of people who have done lots of research in areas like IoT (internet of things) and cloud computing. While I’m here in Nepal, I’ve asked the head of the school and the computer science course leader to help us find more ways to work together. We want to make sure we’ve got solid plans in place for when I get back to the UK. I’m hoping we’ll see more people getting involved in research, both here and back home. And with our exchange program, we’re aiming to tackle projects that really make a difference in our communities.

Pankaj Saran is a former diplomat with 40 years of experience in foreign, strategic and national security affairs. He has served in key positions within the Government of India in the Prime Minister’s Office, the National Security Council Secretariat, and Ministry of External Affairs and in several Indian missions abroad. 

He has served as India’s Ambassador to Russia and India’s High Commissioner to Bangladesh, and as head of the Northern Division in the Ministry of External Affairs dealing with Nepal and Bhutan.  Saran is presently convenor of NatStrat, a Delhi-based independent Centre for Research on Strategic and Security Issues. He is also a member of the National Security Advisory Board and a Distinguished Fellow of the National Maritime Foundation. 

He is a regular commentator and writer on foreign affairs, security and strategic issues. Kamal Dev Bhattarai talked with him about the changing geopolitical situation in South Asia and its implications for Nepal. 

How do you see the changing geopolitical scenario in South Asia?

The rise of India is the most dominant feature of South Asia over the past few years. This is important because India is geographically the largest country in South Asia. It is the largest country in the world in terms of population. So what happens inside India is a matter of interest not just to the world but also to the smaller countries of South Asia. This is the first trend I have observed over the past few years. Second is there is a growing integration between the South Asian countries which is a very healthy trend. With the exception of Pakistan and Afghanistan, all other regions are today well-connected both at the government level and individual level, societal and economic levels. Third is we are finding greater interests in extra-regional powers. For example, China, the United States and to some extent Europe and Japan are showing more interest in the matters of South Asia. In a nutshell, South Asia has become more important in the global landscape than it was before.

How does India view the growing interests of extra-regional power in South Asia, mainly the US?

In South Asia, every country is a sovereign country, so they have the right to decide their respective foreign policy. Every country has the freedom to decide what kind of freedom they have with other countries. For India, it cannot comment on what kind of foreign policy any country can pursue. What India on its part is trying to do is to create an atmosphere in the region which helps the countries to develop and achieve their aspirations whether their developmental aspirations or economic aspirations or political aspirations. Its ‘neighborhood first policy’ has various dimensions such as increasing connectivity, building institutional mechanisms which will last and bind the countries which is an ongoing process. 

Sometimes, it happens at a fast pace, sometimes it happens at a slow pace, and sometimes there are obstacles. Like other regions, South Asia is affected by Covid-19 and Russia-Ukraine war. India is trying to help the smaller countries in this region. We believe that South Asia always remains an area which does not witness geopolitical competition. Because the priorities of the region are clearly oriented to economic and development issues. From an Indian perspective, it is better not to involve this region in the geopolitical competition and contestation in the world. We have already suffered during the cold war and it was of no benefit to this region. We do not want to go back to those days. Countries of the Global South have different priorities. 

Having relationships and cooperation with other countries with global and major power is legitimate. But we should not allow global major powers to exploit the vulnerabilities of small countries or Global South to create a difficult situation for them. The cooperation is natural but it should not translate into creating problems or forcing or using smaller countries by using their vulnerabilities to create problems for other countries either inside the reason and in the world. We have to find a new system or method in conducting international politics which does not increase tensions but it contributes to a greater atmosphere of peace and stability. Competition is fine. 

The United States is competing with China which is declared policy of both countries, it is not a secret. The question is whether this competition translates into conflict. This is a question that we have to ask ourselves. We do not like to be stuck in such a situation.

India is projecting itself as a leader of the Global South. How can the countries of this region benefit from it?  

From the G20 Summit, what India realized is that the global narrative was completely dominated by Europe and by what happened in Ukraine. The result was the problem of day-to-day management of economic development and not finding any reflection in the mass media. Among the global elites, India was able to sense the mood of the South and it held two summits: one before the G20 Summit and another after that to provide them a platform to share each other’s problems and concerns. And it was a great success. 

When it comes to Nepal, what India is focusing on is the practical implementation of policies toward Nepal. There are many aspects of activities between Nepal and India whether it is trade, economic cooperation or cultural or any aspects, and for me these cooperation are very important. India is providing help to Nepal in those areas where Nepal needs such help and it is understanding Nepal’s concerns and aspirations.

And for me these are core issues of bilateral relationship. Maintaining a close communication with Nepal at all levels is critical. If India’s growth can help Nepal to achieve its own national ambitions that will be a good situation. That is the constant efforts that you carry Nepal along to help and enable Nepal to take benefit from India’s growth. It is a reality that India is the fastest growing economy in the world and today its growth rate is higher than China. When India itself is changing so fast that gives opportunity to its immediate neighbors. There is an open border between two countries, there is free movement of the people so there are huge opportunities for Nepal.

But it seems that it is not happening, what are the bottlenecks?

I think it is happening. What we should think and try is to move beyond government. Governments have the role to play and they are playing their role in all that is going on. But there is much more in the relationship than the government.  Both societies have a deep stake in each other’s success and welfare. Every section of the society has a role to play and we should not leave this relationship only to the government. It is too important and too complicated to say that only the government can handle all the problems. 

The governments can provide a pathway, it can provide a broad ecosystem, it can provide atmosphere, and framework but other sections of society should play a vital role. Nepal is in need of employment and more investment which is a primary goal of the Nepal government. We have to see in what way India can help Nepal. One is obviously financial assistance, line of credits and development cooperation but there is more than that. I can see the huge potential of tourism. The Indian middle-class is growing fast and they are looking for a destination. Nepal should see India as a strategic depth. The good news is that India is doing well and Nepal has an opportunity and you should exploit it.

How does India view China’s growing concerns in Nepal?

What Nepal does with China and how it conducts its relationship is a matter for the Nepalese government to decide on which India cannot say anything. But, what I also say is that no relationship whether it is between Nepal and China or between India and any other countries should be constructed or developed in a way that harms the interests of someone else’ interests. This is a basic principle of international relationship. 

All countries are equal, equally sovereign and they have the right to conduct relationships but those relationships should not be at the expense of someone else's interests or no relationship should adversely affect the security interest of some other countries. Geography is a reality. Geography dictates the certain natural relationship and we should respect what nature has given to us—how geography has bound Nepal and India together. 

There is a certain affinity between two countries which will remain for the long run and no one can change it. You cannot artificially change the reality of geography and culture. You do not want any territory or country that is used for any activities that hurts some other country’s national security interests. No one would like it neither Nepal nor India and even for China any actions to be taken by any countries which it feels hurts its national security interests. This is a very natural and logical reaction. The fact is that India’s relationship today with China is in a difficult position. We are hopeful that we can persuade the Chinese to look at India differently to address India’s core concerns. But having said that we also trade with China, we have investment, so it is a complicated relationship. Everyone in India looks at Nepal through Indian eyes.