Submit your Article

I was five-years-old when I met Rover—a mongrel I picked outside my house in New Road— for the first time. Beige in color and with the most adorable black nose. He did not come with a name tag but I named it after our Land Rover. After a couple of days, my uncle, who didn’t want a dog in the house, took Rover to our factory. Rover died of food poisoning a couple of weeks later.

With time, my love for dogs has only grown. I talk to dogs, be it at my friend’s place or on the street. I have had five dogs of my own till date: Rover, Shimpu, Zimbu, Pasa Precious, all now resting in peace, and Ba:la Princess, who lives with me right now. All through my life, the veterinarians have had issues with how I pamper and spoil my dogs. Dr. Pranav Joshi from Vet for Pets Clinic warned me that I was not only allowing Ba:la Princess to get on my head but also letting her do jumping jacks. That said, he appreciates how I love her like my own daughter. Dr. Joshi keeps repeating a mantra to all his dog owners. If you don’t have three things, don’t get a dog: money, time and space.

By money, I don’t mean you should have enough to purchase a St Bernard or a Rottweiler. When we bring a pooch home, it comes with an expense. Even if you are a vegetarian, let’s accept that dogs need a large portion of meat in their diet, after all, they are pure carnivores. If you have a big dog, their basic food intake is equivalent to that of three adult humans. An adult German Shepard or a Labrador Retriever needs 300-500 grams of meat a day. It is a big misconception that dogs like bones. Chewing a bone is an activity and they do it to alleviate boredom and to satisfy the innate urge to chew. They need toys to keep themselves busy and like toddlers they also get easily bored with their toys. Bones definitely are a good option but not the only one. 

If you have noticed a dog eat, they do not chew but swallow the food. They do the same with bones mixed with their food. Those bones can get stuck in their intestines and might rupture organs. A good vet will recommend you avoid giving bones, especially chicken bones, to your dogs as they have sharp ends. It will be unfair to feed your dogs just leftovers from your kitchen, even though it is a regular practice in Nepal. You need to have a good budget to give a good life to your four-legged companion. We don’t compromise with the needs of our children, do we?

Dogs are from the wolf family. They live and move in packs. That is why when dogs are domesticated they believe the family they are living with is their pack. So when they are left alone they suffer from separation anxiety. A lot of times we hear people complain about dog’s destructive behavior when left alone, and their relative calmness when they see their family. As we keep dogs for companionship, it is also vice-versa. They too need companions. In Kathmandu, I see people spend thousands to buy a dog as a status symbol and later it spends 99 percent of its time with the caretaker or helper.

When we speak of space, we talk about two spaces. The first is the space where a dog can run, play and exercise. When they consume a large amount of meat protein, they need to burn it. So the larger the dog, the more space you need to have for them to exercise. I understand the sentiment and desire to keep a big dog in an apartment, but then you need to make it sweat and exercise. There should be a committed time you make for your dog. They need to walk or run to burn the energy or else they are again extremely destructive. A tired dog is a disciplined dog. 

The second kind of space is the space to poop. The streets outside your house is not a place for your pooch to poop. It is a pretty normal practice in Nepal to let the dog outside on the streets in the morning or at night for their disposal and pretend you didn’t see them poop. There should be a proper arrangement of their daily disposals. The Kathmandu Metropolitan City is coming up with a strict rule to control such behaviors and is planning to register dogs in ward offices. How effective it is going to be, only time will tell.

I strongly believe having a dog is the best thing that can happen to me. They understand my vibes, they love me unconditionally, they are my antidepressants and they are always around. Their memory is worse than a goldfish’s. I yell at Ba:la Princess for five minutes and send her out of the room. Ten seconds later I call her and she is back wagging her tail and in love with me like never before. Lastly, I try not to be too judgmental about people, but if they say they don't like dogs I question their existence. I don’t trust a person if dogs don’t trust them.

Among other things, some liberals and pseudo-liberals are hell bent on portraying PM KP Oli as trying to re-establish Nepal as a Hindu country—and I personally hope PM Oli is indeed working toward that objective.

But again, Oli has been blamed for many things, some justifiable, some ludicrous. For some blaming him is a passion, for some a fashion and for some wannabe copycat liberals, blaming or suspecting Oli for the things he is yet to do is the only way to establish their liberal credentials. And when you attack both Oli and Hinduism and the majority’s aspirations of a Hindu state, it becomes doubly easier for you to gain the membership of the “elite liberal club of the most bigoted liberals” and be seen as the most enlightened thinker. 

Let’s be clear: Just because they have issues with the Hindu state does not mean the whole of Nepal has problems with it. You illiberal liberals of the leftist kind could have problems with Oli providing a couple of millions to one of the holiest Hindu temples in the world, Pashupatinath, or his insistence on Lord Ram being born in Nepal, I don’t, and nor do many of us. We see it as Oli finally accepting the fact that the majority of Nepal is Hindu and it makes no sense to alienate us with the irreligious leftist ideology that has only caused misery wherever it was/is practiced.

But why are you self-professed liberals concerned though, beats me. On the one hand you argue that Nepali people are aware and revolutionary and secularism is an achievement and no Nepali wants to do away with it. But on the other hand, you feel threatened by PM Oli’s moves. Isn't that contradictory? If the majority doesn’t want to revert to Hindu state like you all argue, then, why do you feel threatened by Oli supporting a major Hindu temple and or insisting Ram was born in Nepal? Maybe it’s because liberal left’s favorite pastime is to create contradictions and indulge in senseless ramblings.

The problem with the mainstream Nepali media is that it is dominated by a group of ultra-leftist thinkers in liberal garb. Their views are repeated to the point that people who feel differently have to think 10 times before arguing against them—that is if they get the chance/space in the media to present their views. Freedom of expression is understood and practiced as freedom to promote leftist ideology and that has led to silencing of the rational other-than-leftist liberal voices. That is why we are bombarded with pieces highlighting the dangers of doing away with “hard won” achievements including the secular state. And it gets funnier: we are made to believe that if we revert to non-secular state, Nepal will witness the Indian Rastriya Swayamsevak Sangh(RSS)-brand of militant Hinduism, and the minorities’ rights would be curtailed and all sorts of liberal nonsense.

But what they don’t tell you is that the leaders did away with Hindu state despite the majority population opposing it. If we go by the number of letters sent to the second Constituent Assembly, most letter-writers wanted to retain Nepal’s Hindu country status. But in this land of bizarre democracy their suggestion was ignored, thereby going against the very idea of a constituent assembly. The hastily written constitution was imposed by a group of leaders and their (i) liberal narrative setters and no wonder it is failing.

And no, Nepal will not be importing or influenced by the RSS-brand of “militant” Hinduism if we become a Hindu country. There is absolutely no evidence to support it. Even when it was a Hindu kingdom, we seldom experienced religious clashes and not at all the gruesome kind a la India. Even the rare occurrences of religious clashes in old Nepal are increasingly rarer in today's “new” Nepal because Nepalis of all faiths are going to the Islamic countries to work and are sharing rooms with each other and getting to understand each other more. And let’s not forget the most gruesome and excruciating violence we witnessed in Nepal had nothing to do with religion but with the radical leftist ideology.

We have far more violent radical left youth organizations and not a single RSS-like organization in the country. So, the whole argument is absurd and inserted just to show the writers know what is happening in the neighborhood, and we should take them seriously for their worldly views—or it could be that they need to meet the word-requirement for an article and in the absence of real rational arguments, they just write all things irrational to bring the word count up to 1,000. That's another reason for you, the readers, not to take these pieces seriously.

Further, none of the pieces by democratic and liberal writers advocating secularism in the country calls for letting people decide whether they want a secular or a Hindu state. If you are so democratic and believe in the people, why not use your privileged status of a narrative setter and opinion maker and use the media space generously provided by the equally “liberal” and “enlightened” editors to call for a referendum on the issue and settle it once and for all? No constitution is un-amendable and if you are so threatened by the Hindu state and yet believe that the majority of rational Nepalis will vote against doing away with the hard-won secularism, why not argue for a referendum so that you and the group you represent feels validated? If you win, more power to you.

And as for the argument, suspicion rather, that PM Oli is working in cahoots with his Indian counterpart Narendra Modi to do away with secularism and we should oppose it, what happened to your patriotism and pride when your revered leaders were working with the Indian establishment to do away with monarchy and Hindu state? So working with foreigners to promote your agenda is fine and even democratic and patriotic, but when it's against your and your agenda, it's a betrayal and regression?

This is more of your frustration at India for not opposing PM Oli's moves than anything to do with secularism and Hinduism. Had India opposed PM Oli, you would be the ones singing PM Modi’s praises. You illiberal liberals are the ones inviting foreign intervention and that India chose not to intervene on your and your leaders’ behalf has made you lose your sanity, so to speak. And you see a conspiracy.

Come on, give us a break! Go ahead, call me a rightist or hurl whatever colorful adjective you can think of. Make my day, illiberal liberals. I expect nothing less.

The pledge of G7 countries to donate a billion Covid-19 vaccine doses to low-income countries has been praised by many as a unified front to intensify international efforts against the pandemic. But the question is whether this pledge will adequately address the deep gap between rich and poor countries’ access to vaccines.

Without an effective global vaccination plan, one billion doses of Covid-19 vaccines could be just a drop in the ocean compared to the World Bank’s estimate of 11 billion doses needed to end the Covid-19 crisis globally.

The delay in global vaccination rollout is as much about the stockpiling of vaccines by the US, the UK and other rich countries as it is about lack of seriousness on the part of the Western leaders, who could have agreed to waive the intellectual property protection and other export-related regulation on an exceptional basis to allow developing countries to produce these vaccines themselves. Moreover, keeping China, India and Russia out of the global vaccine discussions will not strengthen global efforts against this global problem. An effective global vaccine regime should monitor the production, supply and distribution of all vaccines.

Delays in vaccination rollout are not only reversing development gains for millions but also deepening global inequality. The UN ‘Sustainable Development Report 2021’ estimates a loss of four million jobs globally, and about 120 million people falling back into extreme poverty. According to Mckinsey, a management consulting firm, women's jobs are 1.8 times more vulnerable to the crisis than men’s. About 11.5 million migrant domestic workers, mostly women, have been left unpaid and stranded in the Middle East.

Nepal’s Covid-19 vaccines woes have been compounded not only by the global vaccine inequality, but also by its political crisis, failure in diplomacy, mismanagement, and corruption issues. The inefficiency in the procurement process, the rent-seeking behaviors of politicians and businesses, India’s own Covid-19 crisis, and China’s emphasis on non-disclosure agreements contributed to the delay of vaccine procurement. The non-transparent, uneven and unequal distribution of Covid-19 vaccines in the capital city and other parts of the country is also creating anger and frustration among people.

Nepal failed to effectively engage in vaccine diplomacy when it was hit by the second wave of ‘Covid-19 catastrophe’. With more than 8,000 new infections a day, Nepal’s health and humanitarian crisis was proportionally bigger than that of India, but Nepal failed to effectively mobilize its foreign missions to receive international support to address Nepal’s health and humanitarian crisis. Initially, the Prime Minister of Nepal, instead of asking for global support, was even claiming that the situation was under control.

Although belated, Nepal engaged its President to write letters to foreign leaders for vaccines, but except China, no other country has yet replied. In particular, Nepal has failed to convince India that the delay in supplying the second dose of vaccines has fueled anti-Indian sentiment in Nepal with the perception that India might be more interested in Nepal’s political crisis than its health crisis.

Nepal has so far received 4.2 million doses of Covishield vaccine from India and 1.8 million doses of Vero Cell vaccine from China. Some of those who have taken the first dose of Covishield are still waiting for the second dose after many weeks. The government is finally planning to purchase four million doses of Vero Cell vaccine, but it is too little, too late for a population of 30 million. According to many epidemiologists, 60-70 percent of the population needs to acquire resistance to safely achieve herd immunity against Covid-19. Thus Nepal should immediately increase the number of vaccine doses to be procured from China to at least 10 million (one-third of Nepal’s population).

Moreover, Nepal should also use its effective diplomacy to secure enough doses of AstraZeneca and Covishield vaccines for those who have taken the first dose of Covishield or for those above 64 who are yet to get the first shot. (Vero Cell has not been recommended for those above 64.) Nepal should also actively engage to secure as many doses of vaccines as possible from the US and UK-announced vaccine pledges.

What we learned from the first and second waves of Covid-19 is that if we cannot manage the pandemic, we cannot prevent the humanitarian and economic crises. Nepal currently seems to have fallen into a vicious cycle of Covid-19 pandemic and economic despair. Covid-19 has exacted humanitarian and economic costs on the society, while Nepal is also experiencing severe financing gaps due to the economic downturn.

Sustainable and resilient recovery from Covid-19 will require a deliberate effort to accomplish three main goals within the next 6-12 months. First, vaccines, vaccines and vaccines. Nepal needs enough vaccines to cover at least 60 percent of its population within the next six months to prevent the next wave of Covid-19 pandemic.

Second, Nepal’s health infrastructure needs to be urgently revamped so that the country has the capacity, infrastructure, and human resources to effectively handle and manage any future pandemic. It is time to upgrade state-run hospitals and make them well equipped with enough manpower, oxygen, ventilators, ICUs, ISO certified testing labs, adequate number of beds, and specialized viral and communicable diseases units.  All measures announced in the new federal and provincial budgets regarding the prevention, control, testing, and treatment of Covid-19 need to be properly and timely implemented. The main issue is whether the allocated budget can be spent to upgrade Nepal’s health infrastructure given a significant gap between policies and their implementation.

Third, Nepal’s economic recovery both in formal and informal sectors remains fragile and uncertain. Almost all small, medium and large-scale businesses, such as hotels, trekking, travel and tours, airlines, cinema halls, handicraft, media houses, advertising agencies, tailoring, beauty parlors, health and fitness clubs have been hit hard. The future of millions of workers employed by these businesses is now in limbo. The unemployment rate hit the record high of over 14 percent in 2020. Although several provisions of Nepal’s new budget aim at providing relief for people and businesses, Nepal’s growing political problem and poor budget implementation may prolong Nepal’s economic recovery.

The author holds a Master of Science in International Affairs from the New School University and Specialized Postgraduate courses from Harvard University

Inspired by an article in The Economist about the secrets of the longevity of the Chinese Communist Party, in this column, I want to comment on the condition of the established political parties in Nepal. On July 1 this year, the Communist Party of China will complete 100 years of existence and more than 70 years in power. The Economist points out three reasons for the success of the party (which it calls a ‘dictatorship’): ruthlessness, ideological agility and the ability to save itself from becoming a kleptocracy. 

The suggestive undertones in the article are revealing: the West starts all observations about China, or the other world for that matter, with an air of authority granted (supposedly) by the feeling that they are the harbingers of the universal values of liberty and democracy. So, the observation about the CCP’s success has already been labeled the most successful form of authoritarianism ever.                        

At the moment, the West is having a hard time dealing with the harsh realities of the new world. Covid-19 has exposed the inadequacies many developed nations were sleeping over for decades. Misappropriated priorities, like more investment in weaponry than in health, have laid bare the truth that the self-claimed laissez faire enlightenment is self-delusional. The Trump episode and the BREXIT have also curiously highlighted the shortcomings. 

In this context, when one looks at China from the West, the scenario is nothing but perplexing. Contrary to the predictions of pundits for decades about the Chinese system’s impending collapse, the descendants of Mao and Deng have proved themselves adaptive and quick learners. They call themselves a democracy despite what the West wants to label them with, but they take that narrative to a higher level by calling it a system unique to Chinese history and culture. 

The CCP has proven to be a self-learning system that runs on a clear long term strategy, rewards performance and prefers a disciplined order over laissez faire anarchy. Although the skeptical outlook of the West about the Chinese Party continues, the party has been able to keep its stronghold over the nation because of its aversion to external influence and the ability to keep external players’ attempts to interfere at bay. With the size of the nation, and the focus on long term strategy that is now seen as ingrained in Chinese thinking, Chinese rulers were able to save themself from the devastating helping hands of outsiders. 

A recent example of the helping hands gone wrong is Iraq. The US wanted to force a power equation favorable to its interests, but the lack of in-depth understanding of local dynamics made its strategy ineffective. And now, Iraq has turned into a battlefield of interests between Iran and the US. 

Nepal, too, because of its geo-political juxtaposition and the selfishness of its elites, has become another case study where external interference has led to many quick fixes but damaging outcomes in the long run. Recently, five ex- Prime Ministers issued a statement giving a shout out to the damage such heavy-handedness of external players are causing in internal politics. This is nothing but pure opportunism, as some of the same ex-PMs have been vocal in the Indian media, asking for an intervention in Nepali politics when the power equation here is unfavorable to them. 

At the moment, the two main established political parties of Nepal are both in crisis. The Congress is unable to come out of the grip of the septenerians who have been proven to be failures again and again, and the main communist party has completely wasted an almost two-thirds majority in its ongoing internal power struggle. The Chinese example may not be of much help for us because of reasons like the difference in size and culture. But some things are still worth pondering over. 

In the 30 years since the establishment of multiparty democracy in Nepal, our political parties have failed to build a character of their own aligned to their ideals. The Nepali Congress became consumed by the forces that it fought in the past, and became the vehicle to safeguard the interests of the feudal elites in the name of democracy, as the same Panchayat-time elites of the society became influential in the party at the grassroots. The fear of communists, propaganda about the ruthlessness of their methods, and the hard power of the status quoists of the society were the feeding forces for it. Today, the Nepali Congress has turned into a rigid, feudal structure, albeit wearing a liberal mask.

But the communists of Nepal have undergone a decay worse than this. After raising expectations of the marginalized people through an armed struggle, the communist parties have turned exactly into 'straightforward kleptocracy in which wealth is sucked up exclusively by the well-connected'. So, unless a new political party establishes itself based on ruthless meritocracy, and builds a mechanism to bring to power capable young leaders from diverse backgrounds, this decay shows no sign of halting.