Submit your Article

Every morning, Ram Narayan Kahar (name changed) wakes up early to start working on his field which is a block away from his ancestral home. His family has been living and farming in Siddharthanagar Municipality, previously known as Bhairahawa, of Lumbini province, for at least six generations. Recently, when we had a chance to talk to him on a fine morning, Ram Narayan and his family members were busy preparing their fields for rice plantation. “Things are not the same for us anymore. We have not been able to produce as much rice lately,” Ram Narayan said in a low, concerned voice. 

He further added, “It has been challenging to procure enough good-quality water to irrigate the land, and working outdoors has been challenging due to the rising air pollution in Bhairahawa.” He pointed to his wife and youngest son while informing us that many of his family members have lately been having respiratory problems. When asked about his family’s history of medical consultations, he said they were not in a position to bear the high medical costs. 

His family members rather take a leave from work to recover from sickness, while also bearing the consequences of losing income by missing work. He summed up this family’s plight by reciting a popular Nepali movie song, Gaai ta badhyo dhungro ma mohi chaina mohi chaina, gariba ko chameli boldine kohi chaina. (“Even though we may have a cow tied the butter-pot, we don’t have butter; oh my dear, there is also no one to speak in favor of the poor like us.”) 

Ram Narayan’s family is representative of the poor families across Nepal. As the country is headed towards economic development, the pressure on the environment has gone unseen. The question of who suffers the most from environmental degradation has been largely overlooked in policy considerations. Like Ram Narayan, a significant section of the marginalized populations of Nepal rely heavily on agriculture and other outdoor works for their economic sustenance. 

Given that they face higher exposure to environmental hazards like ambient air pollution, these marginalized people often bear higher health and socioeconomic burdens of environmental degradation, such as physical sickness and loss of income and productivity. As they are typically not covered by benefits like paid sick leaves and health insurance, their opportunity costs of exposure to environmental pollution are much higher. Hence environmental degradation threatens the country’s homogenous development, which it does by instigating a vicious cycle of poverty, health and socioeconomic disparities and further marginalization—a veritable poverty trap for the socioeconomically vulnerable communities. 

In terms of policy making, what can be done to address the growing environmental inequity in Nepal? The long-term objective should be to improve the quality of the environment—be it by improving the overall quality of the air or water resources—by strictly regulating polluting activities. A plethora of research has shown that improvement in the overall environment translates to significant health and socioeconomic improvements for the marginalized communities. 

Immediately, policymakers should focus on designing policy actions that help bridge the environmental exposure gaps across socioeconomic subgroups. There could be specific programs targeting marginalized workers such as the provision of health insurance. Similarly, subsidizing and providing financing options for environmental protection measures—such as drinking water filters, cleaner cooking stoves, and face masks while working outdoors—and maintaining their robust supply chains can help. 

Finally, environmental awareness programs are needed to increase public awareness and individual actions, especially among the more exposed marginalized groups. These recommendations are in the spirit of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that highlight the importance of good health and well-being (SDG goal 3), reducing inequality (SDG goal 10), and creating sustainable cities and communities (SDG goal 11). 

The author has a Phd in Economics from the University of New Mexico

In a major blow to Chinese engagement in infrastructure development in the Himalayan region, the Nepali Army (NA) on June 3 temporarily suspended the contract of two Chinese companies working on the Kathmandu-Terai Fast Track for failing to expedite construction. The army had signed two separate contracts, worth some Rs 25 billion, with China State Construction Engineering Corp. Ltd and Poly Changda Engineering Co. Ltd on 14 May 2021 for the construction of three tunnels, a few bridges, and a partial road under the project. One group in the army was reportedly reluctant to suspend the contracts.

The suspension happened in the backdrop of growing Nepal-US rapprochement after the July 2021 government-change in Kathmandu, followed by Nepal’s clear position on developing BRI projects ‘only’ under Chinese grant/assistance or investment. There was a brief diplomatic squabble via media between the US and China over the ratification of the MCC compact by the Nepali parliament. While China attempted to prevent the ratification, the American response was interpreted by Global Times as interference in Nepal’s internal affairs.

In fact, Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Wang Wenbin on 18 February 2022 stated that “China opposes coercive diplomacy” while commenting on news that the US had urged Nepal to endorse the compact. Moreover, there has been a flurry of high-level visits from the US, including of Under-Secretary of State Uzra Zeya on 20 May 2022. Nepal Army chief and Prime Minister Deuba are scheduled to visit the US in June and early July respectively.

The contract was given to Chinese companies during the tenure of CPN-UML’s KP Oli as prime minister, who is commonly seen as a pro-China leader, despite the parliamentary Public Accounts Committee’s (PAC) advice to follow due process. The same contact has been suspended by the ruling Congress under Sher Bahadur Deuba, who is known for his pro-US bent.  Earlier, the Budhi Gandaki project, which was allocated to a Chinese developer by UML-Maoist coalition government in June 2017, was similarly canceled in November 2017 by a Congress government. There is a strong belief among Indian business community and policymakers that Indian projects face inordinate clearance delays at concerned ministries whenever there is a left government in Kathmandu.

Broadly, there are two reasons for the suspension of Chinese contracts. First, the government found that the Chinese contractors have failed to maintain the desired work pace. In a review meeting in January 2022, a parliamentary committee had directed concerned ministries to expedite the Kathmandu-Terai-Madhes fast track project.

Second, the CPN-UML government had overruled the PAC’s April 2021 directive which found that the army had flouted the country’s financial regulations in giving the contract to Chinese companies. The army had selected only two of 43 interested companies as suitable. The PAC had instructed a halt to the contract process as it lacked transparency. The committee had also instructed the Public Procurement Monitoring Office to remove obstruction by preparing necessary documents, guidelines and procedures as soon as possible while proceeding with the contract for the participation of international companies. This could have been one reason behind the misunderstanding between the then CoAS and the former Defence Minister, Ishwar Pokharel who was sacked by Prime Minister Oli in October 2020.

Taking into consideration the PAC suggestions, which were ignored by the Oli government while giving the project to two Chinese contractors, the Congress government has put the contract under review and ordered a temporary halt.

This is not a new thing with Chinese companies and contractors in Nepal. Media reports speak of frequent clashes between Nepali and Chinese workers and delays in delivery of projects across the country. Interestingly, most of these cases are either suppressed at the government level or misinformed to the media under Chinese pressure. For example, China Railway Construction Corporation (CRCC), which was responsible for road-building in Nepal's Sindhupalchowk district, witnessed local resistance over landslides and damages to houses in June 2021. Similarly, the China-sponsored Damak Clean Industrial Park faced stiff opposition from locals in January 2021. The Butwal-Narayanghat road section expansion project was delayed due to protests by laborers demanding minimum wage.

The Chameliya project has seen cost overruns and the contractor being dragged into a corruption case. China Gezhouba, which bagged the engineering procurement construction (EPC) contract of Upper Trishuli 3A, unsuccessfully tried to upgrade the project's capacity to 90 MW in 2013, flouting the contract document. Further, the government had to terminate the contract with China Railway 15 Bureau Group because of slow progress in tunnel-digging works of the Melamchi Water Supply Project. Chinese contractors have also been blamed for delays in building a substation of a transmission line at Dhalkebar as well as the Kulekhani III Hydropower Project.

After their tactic of acquiring projects through political means and flouting contract norms failed, Chinese Embassy officials in Kathmandu started criticizing the new Deuba government over delays in allocating projects to Chinese companies. Speaking at a virtual press meet on 22 April 2022, Chinese Ambassador to Nepal Hou Yanqui said “the policy inconsistency of the Government of Nepal has put Chinese investors into trouble.”

Moreover, China has been dissatisfied with the Congress government’s decision to build Budhi Gandaki with national investment. At the same time, China understands the importance of having a left government in Kathmandu to address its security (Tibet) concerns and safeguard economic interests in the Himalayas. So China would want a return of a communist government after the forthcoming parliamentary elections.

The author is a Research Fellow, MP-IDSA. Views are personal

Operating with Emotional Intelligence (EI) means being smarter with feelings. This means being able to acknowledge, identify, label and understand emotions in self and others. It means understanding that our emotions affect the way we see ourselves, others and the world and therefore taking this into consideration to regulate our behaviors. 

Without emotional intelligence, we are quick to make assumptions. Conversely, if we are emotionally intelligent, we understand that most misunderstandings and miscommunication comes down to assumptions we make and therefore ask: khas ma k bhaeko ho (‘what really happened’)? As the saying goes, we don’t respond to what happens. We respond to our perception of what happens. 

When we lack EI, we take things personally and therefore, are quick to either blame or self-blame. Having EI means understanding that underneath judgments and blame we have about ourselves, about others or judgments others have about us, are difficult feelings and unmet needs. Identifying, labeling and understanding these feelings and needs are crucial to solving problems.

A lack of EI means reluctance to communicate what’s truly important. We give in to a deep fear about the judgments others will have if we communicate what it is that we need. Fear of rejection means it feels safer to not communicate rather than risking asking for something and not getting it. With EI, we understand that anything we say or do comes down to needs that are important to us in that moment (and this can't be automatically understood by others). Therefore we make the effort to transform vague expectations like ‘I wish they supported me’ to a specific request that would meet the need like ‘Can you write this section of this report for me by Sunday?’ to forming a clear agreement ‘Okay, so we have agreed that you’ll write half of the section by Tuesday’.

A few examples of these principles played out in everyday interactions:
Without EI: My teammates are so irritating! (Notice the lack of accountability for one’s feelings.)

With EI: When the meeting starts 10 minutes later than scheduled and that too without prior agenda being communicated, I feel irritated because I would have liked: a) to make the best use of my time b) focus on the other project where my inputs have a direct impact on the outcome. I’d like to request my manager if we can start communicating agendas prior to the meeting. (notice how we take full accountability for our feelings and needs and look for an action that would help.)

Without EI: I had to come to this party because of them! (Notice the lack of accountability for the choice we’ve made.)

With EI: Although initially I was reluctant to come to the party because I wanted time for myself, I still chose to come because coming here would be a way for me to show my support to the newly wed. I’d like to leave earlier than my friends because I still want some time for myself after this. (Notice how we take accountability for our choice.)

Listening with and without Emotional Intelligence:

When the other person says: “You’ve changed so much! You don’t like hanging out with us these days!”

Without EI: This person is insulting me in front of everyone! Of course I wouldn’t hang out with such insensitive people. No wonder I’ve outgrown them!

With EI: I’m upset that this person would question my intention. I’d appreciate if he was curious about me first. But it also seems like he wants to connect and socialize with me but as I haven’t hung out with this group for over six months, he seems annoyed at my lack of participation.

When the other person says: “You’re an amazing team player!”

Without EI: I’m not good at accepting compliments. I’ll just laugh it off by saying it is not a big deal.

With EI: I feel so joyful to know that I’ve been able to contribute as a team member. Can you tell me what exactly I said/did that helped you? Knowing this would help me better understand what it is that I could continue doing.

To catch yourself operating without emotional intelligence, use the following lens:

We are quick to diagnose (blame, judge, criticize).

We deny responsibility for their choice (I had to do it).

We speak in terms of who deserves what rather than trying to truly connect with others (they will know how I felt when they go through something similar!)

We make constant demands of others (by inducing fear, shame or guilt).

The author is co-founder of My Emotions Matter, an education initiative that helps individuals and teams learn the mindset and skills of Emotional Intelligence. Learn more at myemotionsmatter.com

During his 2017 Nepal visit, Yashwant Sinha, ex-foreign minister of India and a benevolent of this country, was highly impressed with the workings of Nepal’s newly elected local governments. It was the first local government on the saddle after the promulgation of the new constitution in 2015. He was influenced on a few accounts: the participation of local people in the identification of their common problems, their ability to come up with local solutions, and to implement them via their own users’ committees with financial and technical backstopping of their elected local governments.

He was even more impressed by the constitutional provision of five-year time period for elected local governments, the list of exclusive powers vested on them under Schedule 8, and concurrent powers allocated to the federal, provincial, and local governments under Schedule 9 of the constitution. In an interaction, he said that in India it took more than 40 years to bring local governments under the ambit of its constitution, something Nepal could do in one go.

Decentralization and devolution of powers to the local elected bodies, the process of participatory formulation of plans, programs, and budgets, and implementation of the programs by the beneficiaries’ user groups have been the center of attraction of Nepal’s local governance for outsiders. The government of Uganda had adopted these methodologies for its rural development in 2002 after hearing a briefing by a visiting Nepali group led by the then government secretary Dr. Bimal Koirala and Local Development Ministry Secretary Khemraj Nepal. Nepal’s experiences were also shared by Pakistan, Afghanistan, and even South Africa in their tribal belt areas.     

After the promulgation of the constitution, the first election for local governments was held in 2017 in which CPN-UML had grabbed a majority of the seats (40 percent) followed by the Nepali Congress (33 percent) and CPN-Maoist Center (16 percent). The political scenario was different in 2017 as the ruling Nepali Congress and CPN (Maoist Center) had forged an alliance to contest local elections against an undivided UML.

However, it was a different story in the elections of provincial and federal parliaments only a few months later as the Maoist Center drifted away dramatically from Nepali Congress and forged an alliance with UML to gain more seats in the upcoming federal and provincial elections. Together, UML and MC got a nearly two-thirds majority (63 percent) in federal parliament and ruled six of the seven provinces. After four months of federal and provincial elections, these two parties in 2018 merged to form Nepal Communist Party (NCP). But such bonhomie could not last as the politics of Nepal took an entirely new turn in 2021. NCP was divided into three factions after a Supreme Court verdict annulling the communist merger, and Maoist Center reemerged under its old banner.

UML was further broken into two as one faction, disgruntled with off-the-cuff domineering dictates of the UML leadership, drifted away and formed a different party named CPN (Unified Socialist). These two incidents entirely changed the ‘communist calculus’ in the federal and provincial parliaments which led to the downfall of the UML government in parliament and formation of a new coalition government under NC in July 2021. 

The new NC-led coalition government had to undertake gargantuan tasks of holding timely elections for local governments, and provincial and federal parliaments as stipulated in the constitution. It has so far successfully conducted elections for 753 local governments. The elected local governments in 2017—with the combined UML-MC strength of 56 percent—had paved the way for the communists getting almost two-thirds seats in the elections for federal and provincial parliaments a few months later.

However, the scenario in 2022 is different with MC at 14 percent, CPN-US at four percent, NC at 40 percent, and Madhes based parties at 6 percent—the ruling coalition thus occupies 64 percent seats compared to UML’s 34 percent. If there is no political drama in the name of communist unity, and if the present alliance continues to be at the helm, the results of federal and provincial elections may not be dissimilar to the results of local polls.   

The local governments’ system as inscribed in the constitution has now evolved as a kind of potpourri for all kinds of political and socio-cultural issues which are being vented through the election process. It is quite interesting to note that out of little over 35,000 total representatives elected so far, about 15,000 (43  percent) of them are below 40. This figure almost tallies with the national figure of 40 percent of the country’s total youth population.  

The constitutional status of Nepal’s present local government system has proved to be accommodative of political dissidents like CK Raut, ultra-left like Netra Bikram Chand ‘Biplab’, and those like Resham Lal Chaudhary seeking ethnic identification. They openly participated in local elections with varying success. The local elections have, to an extent, washed away the old ethnic divide between Madhesi and hill people. The victory of an independent ethnic Madhesi as a mayor of Kathmandu metropolis with overwhelming votes reveals the change in the old mindset of even Kathmandu’s traditional voters.

Along with this, the victory of independent mayoral candidates in the important cities of Dharan, Dhangadhi, and Janakpur has been considered writing on the wall for major parties such as NC and UML to immediately correct their flawed modus operandi.

The contention of the Madhesi parties that all local affairs should be under the jurisdiction of provincial governments has been questioned as many sitting members of provincial parliaments resigned to contest local elections. Has the time come to rethink the practicalities of provincial governments, and devolve more power and resources to local governments?