Submit your Article

That Bipin Joshi’s fate was an excruciating personal affront and experience culminating in an unimaginable denouement is unquestionable. His family’s natural concern ending in Bipin’s untimely demise is likewise heartbreaking. My sincere condolences and prayers to them all!

Yet, as tragic as Bipin’s passing is, and as troubling as successive governance of Nepal has been, one ought not—I would even say one cannot—ascribe all blame on the government, the nation, or diplomacy per se, as some writers have done. But I am not blaming them: this has been a flaming, contentious, protracted and emotional issue which—nonetheless-should be cautious with any criticisms.

The external affairs ministry of each citizen’s home country has the prime responsibility to find the right connections and to employ the appropriate mechanisms to seek release of particular hostages. And--whether we like it or not—some countries have more clout than others as a result of experience, connections, funding, effort and cultural insights.
The Government of Nepal’s situation and efforts should be understood in proper context: not as an excuse, rather as the reality within a Gordian Knot of expectations.

Specifically, as can be expected, the government faced emotional entreaties by immediate family as well as supporters and broader public. Diverse levels of ministerial and bureaucratic experience and competence vis à vis hostage negotiation within a highly vicious environment confronted government, demanding:

• Focused ability to deal with unexpected events emanating from official international relationships and practices.
• Focused reliance on personal, sustained propinquity with similar level authorities in all countries which may host Nepali students and workers.
• Ability to directly deal with extreme conflict scenarios, combined with a willingness to search for, enlist and learn from knowledgeable and suitable experts from outside the government. Naturally, there must already be an a priori vetted list of suitable people, though additional focused specialists may also be called on.
• Intense ethnocultural and religious insights.

In this specific circumstance, it was incumbent on the government, i.e. relevant Minister, Ambassador, allied diplomats and related experts, to have sought connections in other countries which have communication with Hamas, while recognising that Gaza also has other militant groups (i.e. Palestinian Islamic Jihad; Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine; Astal Militia; Abu Shabab militia) with whom few countries can claim communication. Twelve other countries also had their citizens killed, injured or abducted; and some were better prepared to undertake presumably lengthy efforts to retrieve their nationals.

Diplomacy within such an egregious, volatile conflict can be extremely complicated. Unrelenting internal pressure within Israel to get its own hostages out first is an unenviable but necessary focus by its government. Thus, the context was complex, tragic, and heartbreaking; as of now, it still remains unstable.
Some countries have had much more intensive and/or longer-term collaboration with Israel than others, with several being more strident in their efforts.
Whoever may have been officially involved in seeking the release of Nepalis was therefore up against any combination of:

• Parties at war prioritising their own when seeking release of hostages or prisoners.
• Realisation that, at best, only a few might be released at any one time.
• Closer relationships with Israel by some other nations, with some exerting extreme pressure that only their status, relational longevity and skills could support.

Few negotiations, if any, have been straight forward, and encompassed some combination of:

• Dealing directly with Israel
• Dealing directly with another country that had better connections with and/or within Israel
• Dealing directly with another country that had connections with Hamas (e.g. USA and Qatar. Thailand also had official talks with Hamas by a group coordinated by parliamentary speaker Wan Muhamad Noor Matha. The group conveyed to Hamas that the citizens were not party to the conflict, but instead part of the around 30,000 Thai laborers who work in the Israeli agriculture sectors. While some had been captured, about 39 were killed in the attacks and about 8,600 repatriated to Thailand). It should be noted that Wan Noor, being an Islamic scholar, may have had advantages. How many other countries’ representatives had thought of having a Muslim expert on their team?
• Dealing directly with Hamas.

Most difficulties actually arise once the preceding is determined, i.e. the (or an) appropriate intermediary or direct contact group is verified. That aspect confirmed, priorities become development of trust via a patient, step by step process of considerable preparation. A snippet of this (Infinity Loop for Optimising Development of Empathy) was outlined in the 1993 updated edition of my book “Fancy Footwork: Entrapment in and Coping with the Nepali Management Model” (Ratna Pustak Bhandar; Kathmandu). Most importantly, this is not a one-day process, rather an iterative effort, building upon hours and days of calm exchanges, slowly evolving trust by building mutual rapport and understanding of each other’s perspective.

Some have suggested that one's religion prevented the ‘Western world’ from caring about a Hindu captive. Such a perspective is unfair, as there were hostages from 13 countries and many—of various religions—died in custody, let alone in the Oct 7 attack at Be’eri. Finding avenues for obtaining release of any hostage is, and has been, a very complex affair.

Other criticism exists regarding allowing students to travel and work in conflict-prone areas instead of prioritizing citizens’ safety. In this sense, Israel has actually provided many Nepalis with earning and learning opportunities whilst engaged in normally safe and useful work. Over 30 years ago Israel had established a highly securitized border which, while having proved to have been exceptionally effective, unfortunately became lax; and the IDF admitted to gross human errors by neglecting intelligence reports. Immediately after the incursion, Israel evacuated 200,000 people from border areas shared with the Gaza Strip and Lebanon. In this respect, acknowledgement must be afforded to the GoN for having precautionarily flown out from Israel, within 4 days of the incursion, over 300 of its citizens.

But even a few interior areas distant from Gaza—Eilat, Tel Aviv, even Jerusalem—had drone and rocket attacks. Thus the area of the students’ work had remained safe up to Oct 7.

But if such restrictions were to be formalised, how would the government have prevented over 5000 Nepali (mainly construction) contract workers dying in certain Asian countries; and over 70 Nepalis recruited—some surreptitiously—by Russia, dying in the war with Ukraine. How much effort has the government made to stem such enticements to its citizens? What alternatives currently exist to satisfy a decent living for the families of these citizens? Again, while I am not absolving GoN, the complexity of negotiating in a context of extreme violence demands the symbiotic consideration and understanding of the above points.

It began like a spark—a few viral posts, a digital storm of frustration—and then, in less than 48 hours, entire governments fell in Nepal. Similar protests, revolts and revolutions are erupting across continents, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and beyond. What once took decades of blood and barricades, this new generation accomplished with hashtags, livestreams and open-source strategy.

To the older world, it looks impossible—even suspicious. Surely, some whisper, there must be a “deep state” behind it. Surely, no revolution can succeed without a charismatic leader, a party or a manifesto. They forget: this is not history repeating itself—this is history rewriting itself. GenZ is not waiting for a leader. They are the leader—collectively.

The death of representation

For centuries, humanity has lived under the illusion of representation — governments, kings, parties and parliaments all claiming to “speak for the people.” In reality, they spoke over the people—governing through distance, hierarchy and fear. The digital age shattered that illusion. Technology has exposed what was once hidden—the corruption, the manipulation, the spectacle of power feeding upon itself. The youth who grew up online, whose first teachers were memes, open data and AI chatbots, have no patience for deception. They are subconsciously tired of 'power over people'. They want 'power with people'. They may not yet articulate it in manifestos or doctrines, but their message is unmistakable: “We are done being governed.”

48 hours that shook the world

What took the French Revolution years of bloodshed and the Arab Spring months of protest, the GenZ revolution in Nepal did in two days.

• How?
• Because networks move faster than armies.
• Because code travels quicker than bullets.
• Because consciousness, once shared, cannot be contained.

These uprisings are not about replacing one ruler with another—they are about rejecting the very idea that anyone should rule.

Governance sans government

For the first time in human history, we possess the tools to organize without centralized authority. Imagine digital direct-democracy platforms built on blockchain, AI moderators ensuring fairness and open-source decision-making systems where every voice counts—instantly and equally. This is not a utopia. This is a prototype.

From community-managed food chains to transparent public budgeting through smart contracts, from AI-powered education to global data-driven healthcare—governance without government is already emerging in fragments. GenZ will simply connect the fragments.

The only dilemma ahead

The only dilemma GenZ faces now is a psychological one—they have shaken the old systems, but they may not yet fully see the vision of government-less governance. In moments of uncertainty, they risk falling back into the same old representative traps—supporting one or another version of the systems they just overthrew.

The challenge, therefore, is not to revert, but to reimagine. The future demands that GenZ move forward, not sideways—that they design governance beyond governments, coordination beyond control, and community beyond hierarchy. If they dare to continue the experiment, they might just complete the democratic dream humanity began dreaming centuries ago.

From voting to evolving

Democracy, as we know it, was built for a slower world—when messages took weeks to travel and citizens met once every five years to vote. But GenZ doesn’t wait five seconds to express themselves.

They are building an always-on democracy—participatory, responsive, transparent. They will not vote once and surrender. They will live in a continuous loop of co-creation, decision, feedback and correction—a living, breathing organism of collective intelligence. AI will not rule them; it will serve them—as a neutral tool to manage data, not to manipulate truth.

The end of fear

Every system of control has thrived on fear: fear of chaos, fear of punishment, fear of one another. But the GenZ revolution is not born of fear—it is born of clarity. They have realized that humanity’s greatest experiment—government—has reached its evolutionary limit. It cannot evolve faster than the world it tries to govern. It cannot think collectively enough to solve collective crises.

The liberation that philosophers only imagined and (godless) religions only promised is now a technological possibility: a world without rulers, where cooperation replaces coercion and community replaces authority.

A global self-reboot

The GenZ uprisings are not the end of civilization. They are the upgrade. Old systems will resist, of course. Power never surrenders easily. But no wall can hold back a generation that speaks in code, builds reality in the cloud and dreams beyond flags and borders. The real question is no longer whether governments will survive—it is whether they are still necessary.

In the near future, we may look back on presidents, parliaments and police states the way we now look at feudal lords—relics of a primitive stage in human evolution. And somewhere, between a livestream and a blockchain vote, a GenZ coder will whisper the words that mark the dawn of a new civilization.

The festival of Chhath, which typically begins six days after Diwali-- the festival of lights-- is not only a celebration of devotion but also a symbolic act of fighting against water pollution. Devotees stand and take dips in the water while offering prayers to the Sun god, believing that their closeness to water connects them with the divine and that the benevolent Sun God blesses their families.

As a matter of fact, Chhath aims to unite people in the fight against the environmental hazards. The four-day long festival, which observes the third day as Sandhya Arghya (evening offering), and the final day of Usha Arghya (morning offering), is celebrated on the banks of rivers or ponds. The very essence of this festival rests on the cleanliness of the surroundings, the Ghat and the water. The devotees undertake a rigorous fast of more than 36 hours, offering prayers to both the setting and the rising Sun while standing in the water. They take holy dips and present Prasad to the Sun during both offerings. 

Selection and cleanliness of Ghat

The male members of every family have a solemn duty to reserve an area at the Ghat, the bank of watercourse, by drawing a circle or square in the sand in which their respective family members could take shelter (in sitting mode) on the third and fourth day, that is on the day of evening and morning prayers.  

As there is fair struggle among devotees to secure the best spots, every family reaches with broom and hoe tools to clean and reserve an area at the Ghat. The Chhath spots come alive with the sparkle of hundreds of lit earthen lamps and bulbs used in well-designed tents. 

It has become a common practice to use Sound boxes and other musical instruments to play devotional songs and music to please the gods. However, the devotional songs do not necessarily cause disturbance in society. In Nepal, there have been no cases filed against Chhath Puja organizers for causing noise pollution or disturbance due to these songs. However, in Mumbai, India, every year some members of society file cases against Chhath organizers for audible disturbances caused to residents near Juhu Beach argues Kathryn C Hardy in her work Indian Sound Cultures, Indian Sound Citizenship (2020) published by University of Chicago Press.  

In Nepal's Terai/Madhesh, it is considered auspicious to use cow dung to purify the sand or worshiping spot. Cow dung is valued for its purifying properties, cleansing the area and preparing it perfectly for worshiping the gods. 

Among many values associated with the festival, the value of ‘Suddhi’ (cleanliness) stands out as a fundamental principle, deeply woven into the spiritual and social fabric of the celebration.  Cleanliness, or 'Shuddhi' in Sanskrit, is not merely a physical state but a spiritual and moral concept. It encompasses purity of mind, body, and environment, reflecting a holistic approach to living in harmony with oneself and the cosmos. This principle finds profound expression during the festival, which serve as occasions to purify and rejuvenate both the individual and the community. 

Honouring pure waters 

The Chhath festival glorifies the importance of pure waters. It exemplifies how clean water is central to this festival. Millions of devotees converge at the confluences of sacred rivers and ponds to observe the festival and to offer their prayers to the Sun god. 

The devotees take dip in the holy waters, believing it cleanses them of sins and purifies their souls. This spiritual cleansing is complemented by the meticulous efforts to keep the sites clean and environmentally sustainable, reflecting the deep-rooted connection between spiritual purity and environmental stewardship. 

The festival not only emphasizes on maintaining pollution-free waters but it also advocates for the conservation of soil to sustain life.  During the Chhath festival, there is a message to stand for soil conservation so that it remains fertile for future generations, ensuring abundant crop production globally to prevent famine and malnutrition. Devotees are seen worshiping God to bless them with fertile land so their households can be abundantly nourished with food. 

SDGs

The festival advocates for pollution-free soil and water, cleanliness of ponds and rivers, prayers for agricultural productivity, equality among devotees, and the use of organic foods in Prasad. Women play a central role throughout the festivities. In one way or another, these practices support and reinforce the goals of the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), including "No poverty", "Good Health and Well-being", "Clean water and Sanitation", "Sustainable cities and Communities", "Gender equality" and "Empowering women in decision making process." 

Eco-friendly 

This eco-friendly festival strictly prohibits the use of non-biodegradable materials. For example, bamboo products, crucial for the ceremonies, are preferred for their biodegradability, showing devotees' deep commitment to environmental sustainability,' argues Akanksha Yadav and Vinita Chandra, in their journal article titled “Chhathi Mai in popular imagination: Exploring narratives, worship and rituals in North India”, published in Rupkatha Journal on Interdisciplinary studies in Humanities.  

The devotees believe that their prayers reach and are addressed by the God when they offer them standing in pure waters. They feel their devotion is incomplete unless they pray while standing in clean water.  The link between Chhath festival and cleanliness extends beyond ritualistic practices to societal norms and values. Cleanliness is not only encouraged for personal well-being but also as a mark of respect for others and the environment. This ethos is reflected while preparing offering food ('Prasad') to deity and then consuming it as a divine blessing, underscoring the sanctity of cleanliness in all aspects of life.

Way forward 

Although its been nowhere prescribed for bombarding of crackers to celebrate Chhath, these days people are seen cracking crackers and ultimately contributing in air pollution. This could be taken as adverse impact of modernization on Chhath. 

The festival serves as powerful reminders of the importance of cleanliness as both a spiritual practice and a social responsibility. Through rituals, customs, and everyday behaviours, the devotees ought to uphold the principle of cleanliness as integral to their way of life, fostering harmony within themselves, their communities, and the natural world.

Its high time we uphold the purity principle of the Chhathfestival throughout the year, keeping our waters and soil clean and actively combating environmental hazards. 

(Jha is author of Beneath the Sun: Equality for Everyone, The Spirit of Chhath Festival)

Despite numerous acts, strategies, and five-year visions, our policies often overlook the lived realities and inherent dignity of our citizens. A national health insurance program may cover basic health services for mothers in rural Tarai, yet many still face malnutrition. A young graduate in Kathmandu may access education, but the lack of meaningful employment undermines their aspiration. A farmer may receive subsidies for seeds, yet without fair market access, their labor and knowledge are undervalued. These fragmented solutions reveal a deeper issue: policies that lack to honor the capabilities and dignity of the people they are meant to serve. And here, the question is raised: Do our policies see people as whole human beings?

This is where Integral Human Development (IHD) offers a different lens. Rooted in the belief that every person possesses inherent dignity, IHD insists that development must address the whole person – body, mind, spirit, dignity, and relationships. It challenges us to design policies that move beyond numbers and sectors. Unlike frameworks that reduce people to economic indicators or mere recipients of aid, IHD views individuals as agents of change embedded in families and communities.

In the context of Nepal, where federalism is still taking root and governance often struggles to balance economic growth with social justice, adopting an IHD framework could make policy more people-centered, integrated, and sustainable.

Human dignity at the center of policy

In Nepal, poverty is frequently measured in income levels or material deficits. Yet dignity is eroded not just by lack of resources but also by exclusion, inequality, and absence of voice. IHD begins with dignity. Policies built on this foundation treat citizens not merely as beneficiaries but as active participants in shaping their own futures.

For example, the 15th Five-Year Plan (2019/20 to 2023/24) envisions a “Prosperous Nepal, Happy Nepali” and sets ambitious targets across various sectors. However, while the plan emphasizes economic growth, it often overlooks the holistic well-being of individuals. Integrating IHD could ensure that economic policies also promote human dignity and participation. For example, when municipalities engage women’s groups or youth clubs in planning local budgets, they do more than allocate resources; they validate the dignity of participation. When health workers treat patients as partners in care rather than passive recipients, they uphold dignity alongside service delivery. Such shifts in perspective are subtle but transformative: they foster ownership, accountability, and trust between the state and its citizens.

Breaking silos through integrated approaches

Policies in Nepal are often designed in silos: health is separated from education, agriculture from environment, and infrastructure from social protection. Yet, people’s lives are not siloed. A malnourished child cannot perform well in school, and an unemployed youth may face mental health struggles.

IHD calls for integration across sectors. Take maternal health as an example. Beyond free check-ups, safe motherhood depends on nutrition, sanitation, transport, and women’s education. Designing these elements in isolation creates gaps that undermine results. Similarly, climate change policies that prioritize infrastructure without addressing farmers’ livelihoods remain incomplete. An IHD framework would compel policymakers to ask: how do health, education, economy, and environment intersect in people’s daily lives?

Integrated policy-making is admittedly complex, but federalism has opened opportunities for local governments to coordinate across sectors. The question is whether national frameworks will empower them to take such holistic approaches or continue reinforcing silos.

Participation and accompaniment

One of the most powerful aspects of IHD is its emphasis on “accompaniment,” i.e. walking with people rather than delivering services from above. This approach recognizes that development is not simply about providing solutions but about building relationships of trust and solidarity.

Nepal already has successful models that reflect this principle. The role of Female Community Health Volunteers (FCHVs) is a case in point. They do more than disseminate health information; they accompany families, listen to concerns, and build bridges between communities and health systems. Their effectiveness comes not only from technical training but also from trust and presence. Expanding such models across sectors such as agriculture, education, disaster preparedness could make policies far more responsive and grounded in lived experiences. Accompaniment also implies long-term engagement. Too often, donor-driven projects operate on short timelines and exit once targets are met. IHD suggests that policies should commit to being present with communities through both successes and setbacks, ensuring resilience rather than dependency.

A call for action

Skeptics may argue that Integral Human Development (IHD) is too idealistic for a country facing poverty, migration, climate threats, and political instability. However, fragmented, short-term approaches have already proven inadequate. Evidence from community-driven initiatives in Nepal and elsewhere shows that when dignity and participation are prioritized, outcomes improve. Federalism itself is premised on the idea of bringing governance closer to people, an idea that resonates deeply with the IHD vision.

Hugo Flores once said, “It is very simple. If we are drafting a piece of policy or designing a project, and it is good enough to apply it to ourselves or our closest ones, then it is a good project. If not, then it is not good enough.” This principle captures the essence of IHD. Policies must be designed with empathy, care, and dignity. For instance, before opening a clinic, policymakers should ask: “Would I send my own mother here if she were sick?” If the answer is yes, it is a policy grounded in human-centered thinking; if not, it needs rethinking.

As Nepal reimagines its development path amid global and domestic uncertainties, IHD offers a timely and transformative framework. It reminds us that progress cannot be measured only in GDP growth or infrastructure projects, but in how policies nurture the whole person i.e mind, body, spirit, and community. Embracing IHD does not mean discarding economic or technical approaches; it means complementing them with a deeper, dignity-centered vision. It means designing policies that are participatory, integrated, and grounded in human relationships.

If Nepal is to craft policies that truly serve its citizens, it must move beyond fragmented targets and embrace Integral Human Development, a vision that sees every citizen not just as a statistic, but as a whole person with dignity and potential

 (The author is a graduate student of Global Affairs (Governance and Policy) at the University of Notre Dame, USA.)