Submit your Article

In the business community there is a saying: “Arrogance and Incompetence—The Deadly Elixir of Poor Performance”. Sadly, this is also becoming true in the case of Mayor of Kathmandu Metropolis, Balen Shah. His latest show of arrogance is a halt in the collection and removal of garbage from Singh Durbar complex—the Central Secretariat of the Federal Government, which is frequented by national and international dignitaries on a daily basis. He has reportedly also stopped his staff from collecting garbage from other government buildings, including the President’s Office.   The Mayor has listed 14 areas where he has alleged that despite his numerous efforts he was ‘neglected, faced irresponsible behavior and got unsuitable responses’ from the central government officials and agencies. The charges are not true. I can challenge him on these issues countering that this actually applies more to him.  To give you an example, upon my appointment to follow the instructions of the former Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba, I prioritized working with him and his staff to find a long-term, sustainable and scientific solution to Kathmandu valley’s chronic solid waste management problems. I reached out to the Mayor and his advisor and fixed a time to meet him at the place chosen by him. When my colleague and I reached the City Hall office to meet him, there was no trace of the Mayor and his staff. Upon calling his advisor, I was told he and the Mayor were busy bringing down unauthorized structures in the Baneshwor area and asked to wait. We waited for half an hour but he never turned up. After yet another attempt to meet Shah, the latter came to my office in Singh Durbar with two demands: 1) 200 ropani of land in Balkumari area and 2) Rs 20/kg subsidy on compost fertilizer. Upon the fulfillment of these demands, Shah said, he will resolve the garbage management problem on his own. His advisor insisted that they already have a plan. When I asked whether the KMC has started source segregation of garbage to manufacture compost, he bluntly told me that since he himself has Master’s Degree in Environment Engineering he and his staff have all the know-how in waste management and do not need any scientific and technical advice on this topic. He just wanted the central government to fulfill his two demands.  I then pointed out that his office may not be able to dispose of city garbage without using force as the central government may not be able to depute security personnel forever for waste disposal at the Banchare Danda landfill site. I suggested developing collaborative arrangements with local communities for working out finding long-term solutions.  To this Mayor Balen’s blunt response was: “Why not? I am feeding security personnel now and can feed them for five years”. This arrogant and i-know-all attitude is quite evident in all of his subsequent expressions and actions. The KMC brass had no control over the way the Banchare Danda sanitary landfill site was being converted by KMC crews into a dumping site of both sanitary and hazardous waste. The landfill site staff members were poorly trained, hopelessly supervised and badly motivated.  During my short tenure, we patiently worked with a more responsible and serious Chief Administration Officer of the KMC and provided him with proper guidelines prepared by experts to accomplish source segregation of garbage, implementation of ward level decentralized compost making facilities where possible and also the types of incentives to be given to encourage use compost by local communities.  My team also identified land in the Chovar Area that we thought the Federal Government could lease out to the KMC, provided they prepared a long-term feasible plan for source segregation, composting and marketing. The long-term solution of the Kathmandu valley’s solid waste management problem is possible only by securing a massive participation of citizens and compliances through awareness raising, incentives to companies and organizations for showing good behavior and by operating vibrant co-operative and collaborative governance between local, provincial and federal governments as per Local Government Operation Act (LGOA), 2074.  The very preamble of this act stresses the need for collaboration, co-existence and coordination while implementing the act that clearly outlines that while using rights and discharging responsibilities especially on areas where concurrent rights of all three levels of government is recognized by the Constitution, a spirit of co-operative and complimentary governance is followed by all, especially by local government.  Mayor Balen has either not read the LGOA in its entirety or is ignoring the fundamental principles and spirit of this vital Act under which he is supposed to discharge his duties and enjoy the rights. His regular outbursts and arrogant remarks clearly show that he does not recognize the existence of other two levels of governments while stressing his jurisdiction. His recent undiplomatic remarks further reinforce this. In a way, he is violating the basic tenet of the Constitution i.e. Sahastitwa or co-existence by not respecting and recognizing the rights and responsibilities of other two levels of government. Mayor Balen Sah’s competency in discharging the responsibility as a Mayor of the nation’s premier municipality leaves much to be desired. The LGOA, 2074 clearly tasks the Mayor with addressing the grievances related to all kinds of essential services and ensuring a proper resolution (Article 3/16). Here, the Mayor is failing miserably by shifting the blame to the Central Government from the very beginning in critical areas such as waste management, pollution control, traffic management and road maintenance. These are included in the 14 areas he claims he did not receive any co-operation. Maintaining basic sanitation is critical to preventing the  outbreak of contagious diseases. This task squarely falls under the Mayor’s job description.  By ordering his crew not to collect garbage from federal government premises he is demonstrating gross irresponsibility and negligence toward his constitutional duty of maintaining basic sanitation and health measures.  The city’s air quality is deteriorating, often reaching the level of the most polluted city in the world. He knows that one of the main sources of the pollution is badly constructed roads and traffic jams that generate dust and poisonous, poorly combusted vehicular emissions. When the air quality hits hazardous levels children and elderly populations should be warned by the municipality to take preventive measures, including the closure of schools.  Simple steps such as construction of sky bridges in most crowded areas such as Gaushala, Teaching Hospital, Narayan Gopal Chowk and Keshar Mahal Chowk would ease the traffic and reduce pollution. Mobilization of volunteers through ward offices for assisting traffic police to manage traffic in peak hours could also help. The bad and chaotic traffic is tarnishing the country’s image.  The KMC should at least make sure that public buses stop only at designated bus stops. It should be the Mayor’s first and foremost job. The unregulated buses and micros are causing havoc on the roads by speeding and under-speeding in their competition to grab passengers, thereby causing preventable traffic accidents. He has ordered no parking at several places without providing alternatives. Providing incentives such as tax breaks for constructing multi-story parking or allowing small parking businesses to start in vacant lands could provide the alternative. Illegal parking on the city roads, especially along river corridors, Maharajganj road and ring rods is creating traffic snarls.  For a while, KMC also removed some street businesses in a very selective manner. Fruit and vegetables vendors with loads equivalent to small vehicles line the roadsides, slowing down traffic and making the city ugly. Why should hawkers be allowed to sell fruits and vegetables when we have plenty of shops selling them?  Besides, unhealthy food is being sold especially to school children, which KMC has completely ignored.   As an emerging leader, Mayor Shah must reflect on his style of functioning, get rid of arrogance and focus on good governance. Remember, a large number of voters are counting on you to perform as the best mayor of the country and become a role model for other young mayors. Just blaming others will not help you fulfill your election promises. You might wish to heed to the famous Helen Keller quote: “Alone we can do so little, together we can do so much”. The author was environment advisor to former Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba

A deterrence to some nations is provocation to others. The world is divided and the US competition with both China and Russia is seeing a surge. Flouting international principles, Russia, one of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, opted for aggression against Ukraine, citing increasing foreign influence in its sphere of influence.  Amid this, the United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterrus is laying stress on the importance of multilateralism and globalization for global stability and prosperity. Despite a large majority of the UN General Assembly adopting a resolution calling for an immediate withdrawal of Russian troops from Ukraine in February 2023, we continue to live amid ‘widespread death, destruction and displacement’. President Xi Jingping’s visit to Moscow and talks with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin is the 40th in-person engagement between the two in the last decade. This friendship between Beijing and Moscow is to a greater extent political in words than realpolitik in deeds. In international relations, all correlation has precincts and is grounded on strategic national interests. Xi’s visit comes when the West nods to reduce Russia’s military capability and economic condition to a certain brink is being taken as one of the objectives to minimize Russia’s provocations and President Putin’s mistrust. China is challenging this with lethal assistance to Moscow to exasperate the US, North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) and the European Union (EU). China is performing a title role resembling the role that the US played throughout the Cold War to position China and Russia in separate races, pursuing their interests even if ideologically inclined. But the geostrategic environment and strategic interests were very dissimilar back then.   XI’s visit to Russia came with China-brokered historic deal between Iran and Saudi Arabia, which offered an important peace-building opportunity for the two countries deep-seated in their doctrines, tangled in history and pursued via proxies across the Middle East. The reestablishment of diplomatic ties between Tehran and Riyadh after seven years of bitter resentment has highlighted China’s role as a global truce-broker. This reflects China’s willingness to leverage economic clout in third-party negotiations, rejecting former reformist Deng Xiaoping’s non-interventionist mantra (hide your strengths and bide your time). Two, it marks the beginning of China’s expansion with probability of geostrategic alteration in the Persian Gulf in search for a new Middle East security order. Lastly, the viability of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa (BRICS) and Shanghai Cooperation Organisation SCO growth will be a serious challenge to the US-led world order.  Against this backdrop comes Xi’s call for the Central Asian nations’ first summit, right after his return from Moscow. This shows China’s willingness to engage all countries in the region regardless of their association with one bloc or the other.  Takeaway of XI’s visit Xi’s Moscow visit resulted in strengthening of bilateral ties covering diverse facets like the economy, trade, technology and energy, highlighting Beijing’s desire to stick to globalization, multilateralism and internationalism.  China came with more of a peace proposal than a position for peace. There was little support in Eurasia and Europe amid Kyiv’s mention of the “new geopolitical realities” of Ukrainian lands occupied by Moscow. Ukraine declined the proposal and reiterated that Russian forces should pull out in accordance with the norms of international law and the UN charter.  Resolving the conflict, though talked about, was not included in the proposal. The main focus was on building a new world order and alignment against the US as a major threat by promoting “multipolar world” and on working together to “safeguard the international system—the UN” with a recognition that global power dynamics are shifting with a declining West and an ascending China. Xi said during the goodbye handshake “Together, we should push forward these changes that have not happened for 100 years. Take care”.  Developing military trust and defense ties to counter the strengthening of NATO with the Indo-Pacific nations, and activities of QUAD and AUKUS would undermine regional peace and stability in Asia.  On the economy and energy buildup, with little choices other than to accept Chinese offers, Moscow voiced its keenness to support Chinese businesses replacing western enterprises, energy partnership and cooperation in advancing projects in oil, gas, coal, electricity and nuclear energy with “new network supply chains” also through Mongolia. Both nations have profited with bilateral trade upsurge that accounts for almost a third of all Russian exports and Moscow’s emergence as China’s top oil supplier. Notably, the two countries have agreed to seek to increase their use of the local currency yuan rather than the US dollar for cross-border trade, including in oil and gas. Amid the emergence of blocs in the context of the Ukraine war, China’s regional neighbor Japan threw support behind Kyiv.  Visits to rival capitals Recent visits of President Xi and Japanese PM Fumio Kishida have strategic implications in foreign policy and the region, given that they represent the world’s second and third largest economies. These visits come barely a month after Sino-Japan security talks in Tokyo. While Beijing is concerned about Japan’s military buildup, Tokyo is also critical of China’s military ties with Russia.  While forging the ‘blueprint for China-Russia coordination’, Xi’s 12-point paper presented to Putin is a guideline or a position rather than a proposal. Putin praised the peace proposal, while Ukraine’s allies rejected it. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the “world should not be fooled” by a potential Sino-Russian peace plan that would ‘freeze’ in place the territories seized by Russian forces. The other focal issue was calling on the partners and counterparts in third countries to use the yuan as an alternative to the American dollar for mutual trade. Putin said, “we are in favor of using the Chinese yuan for trade between Russia and other countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America”. Reading between the lines, China appears bent on ‘soft power’ projection and has reinforced its dominance over Russia and as a beneficiary economically securing comprehensive trade agreements with cheap energy resources. In return, Putin has secured the much-needed patronage over Ukraine and just received a warrant from the International Criminal Court. Though the Chinese claim to be neutral, they are leaning more toward Russia as “great neighboring powers” against the west and appear determined to strengthen their global influence.  Coinciding with Xi’s Russia visit came Kishida’s visit to Ukraine. He is the first head of government of the G7 grouping to visit a country in conflict since World War II. Kishida’s visit to Kyiv and Bucha, where hundreds of civilians were killed by Russian forces, was meant to “show respect to the courage and patience of the Ukrainian people who are standing up to defend their homeland... and show solidarity and unwavering support”. Japan has contributed over $7bn to Ukraine and accepted over 2,000 displaced Ukrainians.   In New Delhi, while inviting PM Modi to attend the G7 meet in May, Kishida called for developing and Global South countries to raise their voices to defend the rules-based international order, help stop Russian war and action plans for a new Indo-Pacific initiative for a greater security and economic cooperation aimed at countering China’s influence in the region. As part of Japan’s new national security strategy adopted in December, 2022, it includes the use of development aid more strategically in support of like-minded emerging economies and infrastructure cooperation. In the defense realm, it includes deployment of long-range cruise missiles to strengthen its strike-back capability, support for maritime security and a provision of coast guard patrol boats and equipment.  The visit has four subtexts. One, the Asian powers in Europe’s conflict signify the importance of globalization in addition to echoing the linkages between European and Asian democracies and autocracies having geostrategic significance. Predicaments are well-observed in Taiwan, which is in the close vicinity of Japan, which recently held a summit with South Korea in more than a decade to normalize ties and forge a united front against North Korea. Two, Japan’s reassurance of its backing to the strategic ally (the US) and the West’s appeals in the context of this geopolitical turmoil. Third is the prevailing competition between China and Japan in East Asia leading to the uncertainty of neutrality and re-alignment when the global powers focus in the Indo-Pacific Region. Fourth is the reconstruction and humanitarian aid with ‘absolute rejection of Russia’s one-sided change to the status quo by invasion and force’. To conclude, it is an economic and image buildup to China. Xi brushed off Western criticism of his growing ties with Putin: “It is China’s strategic choice and will not change due to a temporary incident.” Chinese state media also reported, “Consolidating and developing China-Russia relations is China’s strategic choice made on the basis of its fundamental interests”.  The Xi-Putin summit did not produce a clear pathway on settling the Ukraine crisis as there was no confession that Russian invasion and military actions created the grounds for enduring violence and humanitarian crisis.   Firstly, the summit was part of ongoing efforts to advance a world order that counters Washington’s democratic allies, building on mistrust toward the US. Remarkably, China refused to join the blockade against Russia, providing Moscow with diplomatic, political and economic support instead. Secondly, Moscow is more isolated at the global stage and feeling the pain of sanctions while China is more likely to augment its global impression than truly safeguarding an arrangement to end the war as an impartial peace broker. Lastly, China will use this occasion to secure its position in Central Asia, Russia’s sphere of influence, to weaken Russia’s ties with India, one of China’s key rivals in South Asia. But it will, most likely,  fail to move the needle when it comes to ending the war.  The West and Russia with China are turning the war in Ukraine into a global contest, the aftermath of which will determine who gets to set the global political and economic rules for the coming decades.  The author is a Strategic Analyst, Major General (Retd) of the Nepali Army, and is associated with Rangsit University, Thailand

Four major international crises are pointing at an increasingly volatile world.  First, Sino-US competition is centered on the growth of Chinese domination versus retention of American supremacy. However, this division does not seem much relevant to broader geo-economic interests of China and the US as bilateral trade continues.  As a result of globalization, interdependency has reduced the world to the size of a small village, and any sort of supply chain disruption poses a greater threat to the world economy; which therefore requires a higher level of resilience in the supply chain.  For instance, the Black Sea Grain Corridor is still operating despite Russia's ongoing invasion of Ukraine. Millions of Africans in fragile states would face a food catastrophe if it were blocked. The need for a diversified supply chain system has arisen as a result of recent global events, such as the Covid-19 pandemic, the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and potential economic slump in coming days, with the shutdown of the Silicon Valley Bank and the Credit Suisse crisis ringing alarm bells. In absolute Western understanding, the pandemic made us rethink about moving the world's industrial center from China to another location so that the rest of the world won’t suffer.  However, shifting the center of production or diversifying the supply chain has a geopolitical significance. The idea was to relocate the base to India during the Covid-19 pandemic, which worked out nicely in terms of narrating the alleged Chinese involvement in the Covid-19 virus eruption that caused significant damage to the world economy. In the larger picture, China is rising as the greatest fear factor in the US. From think tanks’ documents to the Biden Administration’s National Security Strategy Paper (released on October 22) outrightly describes, China has both the intent and the power to reshape the international order. That fear factor becomes deadly when Sino-Russian eternal friendship goes on without disturbance. However, China and Russia both have divergent objectives in global politics yet converged in countering the US with Russia’s dire need of investment in the Siberian region’s gas plants development and Chinese interest in getting Russian energy uninterrupted. Reading from the Chinese body language, it’s clear that China will continue to be Russia’s friend until and unless her economic interests aren’t hurt globally. Second, China is not only concentrated in Russia for alliance building but also focusing on the Middle East. Despite being applauded by the US, the China-brokered Saudi-Iran deal has its own implications for reshaping Middle Eastern politics away from a purely British-American sphere of influence, given that regional powers like Saudi Arabia are increasingly diversifying their relationships away from the US security umbrella to other dominant powers in Asia—Saudi is handling herself wonderfully.  In an effort to draw in another emerging international power, Riyadh is purchasing American weapons and ammunition and selling her fossil fuel to China—complete strategies to create a win-win situation for them. Saudi Arabia, with its massive profits earned from the ‘production and price control strategy’ of oil during the Russian invasion of Ukraine, knows that this is not sustainable. So, diversifying economic activities from oil to non-oil sectors is necessary and here comes the Saudi-Vision 2030—a complete remake of Saudi in the areas from Tourism to Telecommunications. For this, getting an abundant amount of Chinese investment and tourists is a boon for the Saudis. Riyadh’s growing alignment with Russia-China and the operation of OPEC+ with Russia—the price and production control strategy of oil—is irritating Americans.  When the US was preparing for the midterm election in November 2022, OPEC + countries decided to cut oil production to 2m barrels per day. This was designed completely under Russian interest to put the Biden administration in trouble.  A number of think tanks and politicians in the US have accused Saudi Arabia of supporting fundamentalist groups throughout the Middle East and of having a poor record on human rights and even requested the US government to cut ties with that country. This has frustrated Saudi Arabia, which has opened doors for China.  Before Saudi-Iran resetting of ties, China-Saudi ties were bolstered to pave the road for future partnership. Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia and Iran's support for opposing forces in the Yemen War and the former’s improvement of relations with Israel cast doubt on Israeli efforts to discredit Iran's nuclear program as a serious threat to Israel’s internal security and stability, particularly by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. With hidden inside-outside players, the Middle Eastern political landscape is deeply muddled by the confluence of oil, the petrodollar, and religion. Drawing from the lesson of Western sweat and blood history in managing Middle East politics, China needs to work hard. Third, the interests of Indo-Pacific Strategy (IPS) and North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) are progressively converging in Asia; both security theaters are primarily focused on containing Chinese supremacy. IPS primarily carried forward by the United States’ and  QUAD and NATO under the Euro-Atlantic Security vision may be centered on the ‘believed’ flash points of Asia, namely Taiwan Strait, Iran, South China Sea, Nepal and the Korean Peninsula. One of the crucial flash points that circle around India and China is Nepal, where Sino-US rivalry has increased to a greater extent. The delicate geopolitical position of Nepal might provide a safe haven for international political adventurism, but this dark cloud could be troublesome for Nepal itself to manage, given its economic and political fragility. Interestingly, a number of localizing IPS ideas are taking shape amid all this. While Japan's recent declaration to alter its wartime security policy and get ready for new challenges is exciting in itself. This announcement raises concerns for the stability of Asia. In addition, India has adopted a rather unique strategy in the current world politics. Being a Middle Power, it has developed a tendency to fit in any circumstance. Example includes India’s ever-growing relations with Russia and its rival, the US, despite the Russian invasion of Ukraine. India got waived in the US Countering American Adversary Through Sanction Act (CAATSA) despite its continuing trade relations with Russia. This is because India can be a very important partner for the US in South Asia in the context of increasing Sino-US rivalry. Fourth, the Russian invasion of Ukraine has brought up an urgent need for a new security architecture in Europe, the lesson learning of energy dependence on a single supply, the reaffirmation of energy as a strategic commodity (this is also completely relevant in Nepal’s hydro sector as partners in Nepal are understanding it as simple commodity goods despite India’s repeated stance that this is a strategic matter) and growing unified voice of the global south for multilateralism. The global economic recession ignited by the Covid-19 pandemic added heavily by the Russian invasion of Ukraine resulted in higher inflations. This forced central banks to raise interest rates, which took a toll on economic growth. Above all, economic pundits rely on the fact that relaxation of Covid-19 restrictions and the rise of demand in the Chinese economy could keep the global economy on track. At last, all these four crises are the product of the friction between the West versus Sino-Russia.

In Nepal, the term ‘third gender’ has been used, which is derived from the root word Tritiya Prakriti (‘person of third nature’ in Sanskrit language). There were more than two genders recognised in East and South Asia, and most of African and other indigenous societies until Christianity or Islam took over. Gender variant people have existed throughout the world and across time, celebrated in some cultures, denigrated in others. Some societies did not just recognize people who embodied a gender identity beyond the binary, for example, hijra, kothi, maruni, janana, nastri, napumshak communities in South Asia, two-spirit people among some Native American cultures, waria, kathoi in Southeast Asia and Fa’afafine in Pacific Islander communities, they were/are well-respected and had/have important roles, largely accepted by all, to play in society. While the blunt classificatory instruments of colonial rule imposed new and bureaucratic restrictions on gender assignment/self-identification, these communities persisted, and continue to this day to provide alternate ways of thinking about gender that evade the externally imposed binary classification. Now, due to centuries of long and ardent missionary propaganda, and the role of the western media, these cultural influences are so strong that even these above-mentioned people of third nature don’t wish to use their traditional identity to introduce themselves, and often prefer the English word ‘transgender’. It’s important to note here that the word ‘third’ does not mean third in terms of a ranking order. Instead, it just means not so obvious, special, middle gender; something similar to the meaning when we say ‘the third eye’, indicating thereby merely the fact that there are more than two. These communities of non-binary genders thus have to face a dilemma in their thinking process. Substituting western/modern words for the terms traditionally used to signify gender have become an easy way out for them, instead of accepting and living out who they are culturally conditioned to be bodywise, emotionally, and spiritually. Let’s try to understand with an example. What’s the thought when one says, “I am (born) in the wrong body.”? Where is this notion of the ‘wrong body’ coming from? What/who made you believe that you are in a ‘wrong body’? Who taught you and made you believe that some ‘other body’ is the ‘right body’ for you, instead of the one you were born with? Western theology and myths tell us that when God created the world (stars, sun, moon, rivers, valleys, trees, animals, food), he created a man (Adam). After a while, God realized that the man he created was lonely and needed a helper/companion. He decided to create a woman to help and entertain that man, Adam, and thus created a woman, Eve. Thus, according to Western faith/culture system (Christianity, Judaism, and Islam), God did not create any gender other than man and woman. This is at the very root of the binary that is being imposed today. This faith tradition impacts transgender persons adversely. It lays down that a male can only become a man, a female can only become a woman. Other options, whereby a male wishes to become a woman (or vice-versa), are seen as antithetical to the grand plan laid out by God. It’s thus understood as something that we mere mortals should not interfere with or tamper. To try to do so is variously seen as unnatural, sinful, and even criminal. But in Eastern faith traditions and culture systems there is no creator god! ‘Creation’ is not an exclusive phenomenon, and is instead an integral part of a long drawn out and cyclical process, wherein creation, its sustenance, and its destruction are all part and parcel of the same continuous long cycle and are intimately linked to each other. Thus, anything that has ‘existence’ is part of the magic of this eternal cycle, and there is no value judgment attached to it. Everything, and every phenomenon in nature is ‘natural’. Human beings are not competent to question this grand scheme, nor capable of attaching value-driven interpretations of right and wrong on natural phenomenons. Human beings become part of this cycle through their actions (Karma), and every consequence in the life of an individual is a result of their karma. Thus men, women, and several other genders are part of humanity and part of nature and existence. They all are living their own ‘karma’. Therefore, one cannot say that any one gender is better or ‘more right’ than any other gender. Hence, no one can be urged to become a man or a woman. One is what one is, naturally, as a consequence of past karma, and that’s that. Therefore, historically everyone was, (and still are in many indigenous communities) respected regardless of their gender and sexual identity. In the mid-18th century, Judaeo-Christian morality was given the imprimatur of ‘scientific pathology’, and homosexuality was classified as a mental illness. This happened likely under the influence of that set of biblical ideas wherein sodomy is sinful, women were created to help and entertain men, and copulation was sanctioned only within heterosexual matrimony (preferably in the missionary position). Until a few decades ago, and very much within recent memory, even in supposedly advanced and modern countries like the USA and the UK, homosexual people were diagnosed as mentally sick. Thus even the scientific edifice of modern society worked toward conditioning many gays and lesbians to start believing that they had a mental disorder. Many cruel and inhuman therapies, including electric shock therapy and overdoses of numbing drugs were administered to ‘change people’. Of course, since it was not ‘science’ but morality-driven prejudices that created the so-called pathology in the first place, none of these therapies actually worked. Since the early 80s of the last century, gay rights activists fought against such unscientific claims, and the harm such pseudo-sciences caused. As a result, homosexually was finally removed from the list of mental health disorders. The cycle of pain, suffering, and discrimination that gay men underwent, and their successful struggle to engineer change and claim their rights is today being replicated for persons whose gender identification defies the binary of man and woman and the straightjacketed roles assigned to each. The structures that contribute to creating dominant discourses and ideas are heavily influenced by the West, and sadly, it is still stuck with the pathologizing diagnosis of gender dysphoria attributed to those persons whose gender characteristics or features differ from the accepted binary of men and women. Not surprisingly this time too, it is driven by the same biblical belief, and Judaeo-Christian morality. Often the religiously leaning conservatives are at the forefront of driving this pseudo science. Such an unquestioned and faith-driven attitude is deep-rooted and strong. Under the influence of religious scholars, whose dominance in thought engineering has been at work for many many centuries, today many persons of differing gender characteristics and features themselves believe that they have gender dysphoria. They end up seeking unnecessary, costly, and potentially harmful treatments, including sex reassignment surgery, hormone therapy, etc. Having been made to believe such biblical propaganda, they regard not being a man or woman as a social and pathological problem. They end up thinking that they are in the wrong body. Eastern philosophy creates space for everyone, thus instead of problematising something that is natural, it creates a support structure that’s inclusive. Its terminology is also therefore inclusive. Third Gender is such a term. It breaks and extends the binary of man and woman to include those that are not. It therefore also fosters a society where it’s OK to be different without having to militate against or tamper with one’s body. Occidental philosophy by contrast is about pathology and transformation, with the end goal being to conform to standards set by the outside. It’s not about acceptance and creating space for everyone, but about tampering to fit a pre-set mold. Thus also its terminology. ‘Trans’ means change. It seeks to tamper what’s naturally present, to change it. And to do this it convinces anyone who does not conform that they not only have a problem, but that they are a problem. It creates self conflicted mindsets. It is important to explore this further, so let us enumerate this out? Problems of unquestioningly accepting transgenderism on faith: 1) Trangenderism establishes the wrong notion that to be a human up to par, one must become a man or a woman. Otherwise, one becomes less of a human. Because of this belief, one tries everything, including sex reassignment surgery, to become a man or a woman. 2) It devalues diversity among humans with regard to sexual and gender identity while reinforcing the binary gender system, thereby making everyone who does not conform to sexual/gender norms feel bad/low about themselves, reinforces low self-esteem, and indirectly supports patriarchal norms, which idolizes heterosexuality. 3) It results in unnecessary medical intervention to alter one’s nature, which potentially can bring physical, mental, and health problems in life at any time. Such medical interventions are costly, and while slightly easier for male to female gender transitioning, they are extremely difficult and far more expensive for female to male gender transition, which is unfair to the latter. Needless to say, there are other practical problems associated with transgenders that have been discussed extensively and openly in the last few decades. For example, we can take the issue of transgender people’s participation in sports. The issue of sporting ethics arises because allowing transwomen to compete along with other women in sports seems to provide an unfair advantage to transwomen, but permission for transmen to compete along with men creates a distinct disadvantage for the majority of transmen. If one sees the fact that women’s sports was separated out from men’s sports because women’s and men’s physiologies are different, then one fails to see the logic of allowing transmen to compete in men’s sports and/or transwomen to compete in women’s sports. The only explanation that fits this insistence is that of the orthodoxy of gender binary, wherein everyone has to fit into one of the two set criteria, and even if ‘naturally existing’ in reality, a third (or fourth) category will not be acknowledged or created. Many eastern, African, and other indigenous faiths and cultures have historically accepted, and some are still accepting, of more than two genders. In some cultures, 5 or even 7 genders have been acknowledged and accepted. In the Tantra tradition as practiced in the mountain regions, all these genders were considered divine. Every gender had/have their important roles to play in these societies. No one was/is considered sick, or weak, or diseased because their gender trait is different from the norm. It is a proper and unconditional celebration of gender diversity. To be born male but to grow up with feminine features and presentations if that is one’s nature is a cause of celebration. Similarly, to be born female and to grow with masculine features and presentations, if that is one’s nature is celebrated too. Intersexed people are/were considered having special devine powers and well-respected. We see therefore that in these societies, unlike in the west, no one was/is needed to transit from their core self, their nature, their ‘prakriti’. One can simply be who one is and still be celebrated and valued. No one has to consider their natural state as being pathologically afflicted. The inherent human dignity of everyone is preserved and protected without interference. It is a culture where patriarchy has as much weight as matriarchy, and both are equally valued. The government of Nepal has introduced a policy that requires a medical certificate of sex change surgery if one wishes to apply for citizenship identity documents that recognise their gender as different from their sex at birth. One fails to understand why the government cannot find the moral courage to rely on the wisdom and inclusivity fostered by Nepal’s inclusive, rich, dignity-reinforcing customs, faith-traditions, and culture. It’s a misfortune of cultural genocidal proportions when a government is motivated by imported morality, customs, and ideas, to create legal frameworks that oppress its citizens, while ignoring the much better, inclusive and rights-affirming national traditions. The author is a LGBTIQA+ activist. He was the first openly gay national-level legislator in Asia