Submit your Article

In today’s global economy, tariffs have evolved from mere protectionist barriers to tools of geopolitical strategy. The US-China tariff war, which began during Donald Trump’s first term in 2018, has already brought about a decisive shift in global trade flows.

The latest US decision to extend targeted tariffs on selected Indian goods has been framed as a ‘leveling measure’. Yet, it has also created new impetus for India to deepen market access discussions with Washington and strengthen its position as a reliable trading partner. This move could be a catalyst for India to negotiate more favorable long-term terms by demonstrating its manufacturing flexibility.

Nepal also has many goods on the top list of goods imported from neighboring India. This means that the new US customs policy will inevitably have an impact on Nepal-India trade and the overall economy of Nepal. After the upgrade to a developing country, Nepal’s preferential market access facility (GSP) period has expired and the country has started to face a 10 percent customs duty, which seems to be an opportunity for the country not to increase it.

After this, it can be expected that investment will flow into Nepal from abroad and exports will increase. A large part of Nepal's trade—both exports and imports—depends on India. According to the data of the Customs Department, 64 percent of Nepal’s imports in the fiscal year 2024-25 came from the Indian market.  Similarly, India accounted for 67 percent of total exports. Since this is the case, changes in the US-India trade policy are certain to affect Nepal.

The US has imposed a 50 percent reciprocal tariff on India and a 10 percent tariff on Nepal, which is expected to give Nepal a competitive advantage in trade, but Nepal needs to take concrete steps from product development to export promotion to produce the quantities it can export to the US.

Looking at the past, the US is Nepal’s second largest export destination after India. Nepal exported goods worth Rs 18.32bn to the US in 2024-25, which is six percent more than the previous year.

This should be taken as an encouraging and positive step. In addition, to make all this sustainable and increase further, it is necessary and imperative for Nepal to create a joint mechanism between the government and the private sector to reduce transshipment risks and take advantage of customs rates.

There should be no delay on this front. The US has imposed only 10 percent reciprocal customs duty on Nepal. In such a situation, if trade negotiations with India fail and a 50 percent customs duty is imposed on India, there will be a 40 percent difference in customs rates between Nepal and India.

Even if the recently-imposed additional 25 percent customs duty is withdrawn, the difference in customs rates between these two countries will be 15 percent. Even a 15 percent difference in customs rates is very large in international trade. Nepal should be able to use this situation to its advantage.

Nepal’s main exports to the US are woolen carpets, rugs, ready-made garments, felt goods, clay and other metal utensils and handicrafts. In addition, apart from India, the US has imposed a 19–20 percent customs duty on other countries in the region—Bangladesh, Pakistan and Sri Lanka—which gives Nepal a competitive advantage.

In short, India has been exporting more goods such as carpets, textiles and rugs to the US than to Nepal. Similarly, Bangladesh is the largest exporter of ready-made garments in South Asia.

And, the US is also importing from it. Nepal also uses Indian land for trade with third countries. Although the trade war between India and the US could also bring uncertainty to Nepal’s trade routes with third countries, its likelihood is low.

The new US tariff policy seems to make Indian goods more expensive in the US market. As a result, Indian manufacturers may have to restructure their production systems. If India starts losing the US market, the Nepali market will also become more expensive, given chances of India adopting a policy of reducing production. Most of the industries operating in Nepal import raw materials from India and this means our production costs may go up. Machinery parts, industrial equipment, clothing and agricultural products from India are most likely to become more expensive in Nepal, exposing the Nepali populace to the risk of a high inflation. 

In addition, the Indian rupee will weaken further as India’s exports are affected and dollar income decreases. This problem will be further complicated by the fact that Nepal’s currency is ‘pegged’ with the Indian currency. This is also the reason why Nepal’s monetary policy has not been independent.

This will naturally have an impact on the Nepali rupee. As a result, not only will Nepal’s dollar income decrease, payments will also become more expensive. In that case, the interest on foreign loan assistance will be expensive and so will the repayment.

The Nepali market may also benefit from the Indo-US trade war. If Indian products cannot enter the US market easily, India may adopt a policy of reducing prices and seeking alternative markets. Nepal can benefit from that. If India adopts this policy, the price of Indian goods imported into Nepal, such as food, industrial raw materials, and machinery parts, may decrease. According to public data, Nepal currently exports ready-made garments worth around Rs 4bn to the US. There is no doubt that this is likely to increase many times over in a few years if the existing customs duty remains in place.

If this policy works in the long term, the ‘backward forward linkage’ of the export-oriented Nepali industry is certain to become even stronger. After the 2015 earthquake, the US had given Nepal preferential market access to 77 different items. The Nepal government should take the initiative for similar preferential market access. For now, it is too early to analyze how Trump’s policies will pan out. But if implemented, India’s export earnings will decrease. The direct impact of this will be a decrease in dollar income for India as well as Nepal, making foreign payments expensive. This will ultimately mean a surge in inflation. There is also the danger of the US aggressive ‘tariffs’ triggering a global economic recession. 

Over the years, the use of chemical pesticides in Nepal has increased so notably that it has raised serious concerns about human health and environmental sustainability. From residues in the food we eat to the degradation of soil health and biodiversity loss, the long-term consequences of excessive pesticide use are becoming harder to ignore. In Nepal, where agriculture remains the primary livelihood for around 60 percent of the population, the dependence on synthetic chemicals is not just a farming issue; it is a public health and environmental crisis in the making. 

Climate change has led to the emergence of new pests and the expansion of pest habitats, causing farmers to rely more heavily on chemical pesticides to protect their crops. While effective in the short term, the widespread and often unregulated use of synthetic pesticides triggers long-term consequences. These include the development of pest resistance, contamination of soil and water resources, accumulation of toxic residues in food, and alarming impacts on human health and biodiversity. Children, pregnant women, and farm workers are particularly vulnerable to pesticide exposure, with studies linking prolonged contact to respiratory issues, hormonal disruptions, and even cancer. 

Recent studies have shown that vegetables in Nepal often contain pesticide residues exceeding the maximum residue limits (MRLs), rendering them unsafe for human consumption. 

The increasing import of chemical pesticides over recent years highlight Nepal's growing reliance on synthetic pest control measures. As in the fiscal year 2023/24 alone, the country imported 1,664 active ingredient (a.i.) tons of chemical pesticides (PQPMC, 2025). The rising trend reflects an urgent need to question the sustainability and safety of our current pest management practices. 

In the face of these growing challenges, biopesticides present a promising and necessary alternative. Derived from natural organisms or substances like bacteria, fungi, viruses, and botanical extracts, biopesticides control pests without causing harm to the environment, human health, or beneficial organisms. Unlike synthetic pesticides, they are biodegradable, target-specific, and less likely to cause pest resistance. 

Common examples of biopesticides include Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt), which controls caterpillars; neem-based formulations for a broad spectrum of pests; Trichoderma species that act against fungal pathogens; and Jholmal, a locally prepared bio-mixture made from cow/buffalo urine, dung, botanicals, and beneficial microorganisms for pest and disease management, and is currently being promoted in Nepal. These eco-friendly options not only help protect crops effectively but also support soil health, pollinator survival, and long-term agricultural sustainability. 

Biopesticides are no longer just something used by the organic farmers as a choice; they are now essential for mainstream agriculture, especially in the face of climate and health challenges. As climate change continues to alter pest dynamics, and as chemical residues threaten public health, a shift toward safer alternatives is not just desirable but urgent. The adoption of biopesticides supports multiple Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), including SDG 2 (Zero Hunger), SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being), SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production), SDG 15 (Life on Land) and SDG 13 (Climate Action). Nepal’s smallholder farmers, who are already facing the brunt of climate impacts, can benefit from locally available and low-cost biopesticide options like Jholmal, which enhance both resilience and productivity. 

Despite their proven benefits, the widespread adoption of biopesticides in Nepal faces several challenges. A major barrier is the lack of awareness and technical knowledge among farmers, many of whom are unfamiliar with how biopesticides work, how to apply them effectively, or how they differ from conventional pesticides. In addition, biopesticides are often not readily available in rural markets, and when they are, they tend to be more expensive or perceived as less effective due to slower action. Limited private sector involvement and insufficient government incentives have also contributed to a weak supply chain and low investment in local production. Without strong institutional support and market linkages, the transition from chemical to biological pest management remains slow and fragmented. 

To accelerate the transition toward sustainable pest management, a coordinated and multi-stakeholder approach is essential. First, government policies should actively promote biopesticides by including them in subsidy schemes. Investment in research and local production of bio-based inputs should be prioritized, enabling farmers to access affordable and effective products tailored to Nepal’s diverse agroecological zones. Extension services must be reoriented to include biopesticide training through farmer field schools, demonstration plots, and digital platforms. The private sector, too, has a critical role to play in developing, distributing, and marketing biopesticides, especially when incentivized through public–private partnerships. Finally, awareness campaigns targeting farmers, consumers, and policymakers can help shift perceptions and generate demand for safe, sustainable pest control solutions.

The overuse of chemical pesticides is not just an agricultural concern; it is a public health, environmental, and sustainability crisis. Thus, biopesticides offer a safer and more sustainable way to manage pests without damaging our soil, food, or ecosystems. If we want safe food and a clean environment, we must act now. With the right support from the government, private sector, and awareness among farmers and consumers, biopesticides can become a powerful solution against pest management.  The future of farming lies not in fighting nature, but working with it. By adopting biopesticides today, Nepal can cultivate a healthier tomorrow; for its land, its farmers, and its people.

The author holds Master's degree in Agricultural Economics and is currently working as a research intern at the International Water Management Institute (IWMI)

The 70th anniversary of the establishment of bilateral relationships between Nepal and China is an important milestone for both nations but it is obvious to say that Nepal has been benefitting the most from this relationship.

Over the years, Nepal proved to be a reliable and trusted partner for Beijing and it is worthy to observe that Kathmandu was able to forge a strong relationship with China without putting its own strategic interests in jeopardy. Co-habiting a space hemmed between India and China, while it can bring multiple advantages, can also be a tricky endeavor.

Balancing off different interests and trade-offs between New Delhi and Beijing requires high skills in navigating foreign diplomacy without forgetting in the equation, the role of the United States that, with the exception of the incumbent administration in Washington, has also been a strong and important partner for Kathmandu.

Thanks also to the presence of different communist parties in the country, Beijing has been able to assert its influence and it is remarkable how swiftly China has been capable of boosting not only its development assistance but also its soft power in Nepal.

I often read mesmerizing reports from reporters invited to China to observe firsthand and then report and explain back home the huge improvements in the lives of Chinese citizens over the last 30 years, enhancements that have been accompanied by a turbo state-led capitalism that supported China’s rise. I have a huge admiration for China’s history and ancient civilization while as someone who grew up in the West, I have also a critical view of certain policies and positions taken by Beijing.

I never expected China to turn itself into a democracy but at the same time, I do not have an uncritical view of some of its approaches related to human rights and freedom of expression. Yet I always had a strong desire to try to understand the nuances of certain policies because in politics as well as in governance, we cannot simplify everything through “white and black” lenses and this is particularly true for a complex country like China.

Because understanding the ways the Chinese Communist Party works and the multilayered governance structure of its political and administrative systems are complex endeavors that require a lot of expertise.

In short, observing and trying to make sense of what is happening in China is indeed a fascinating thing and I do believe that the West should make a much bigger effort at grasping the nuances of China’s political system.

Nepal, despite its links with India, has managed, quite successfully, at building important bridges with China. At the same time, even in relation to the Road and Belt Initiative, Beijing’s flagship global program, Nepal has been able to push back with due respect and smartness. At the same time, the civil society of Nepal has been able to forge stronger relationships with peers in China and slowly a stronger knowledge of the country is emerging and this is a good thing.

Yet, I do feel that members of the press corps and activists should also develop a more holistic understanding of China. I never believed that a paradise on Earth exists, a nation capable of embodying perfection in all its spheres of life where no problems exist. This not only applies to China but also Europe, Australia or the United States of America or any other nation.

As a European, I can be proud of our democratic credentials and freedom of speech I can enjoy back home. I can also certainly assert that the EU has also been struggling with double standards and I wish the Europeans could always walk the talk in matters of upholding human rights domestically but also in their foreign policies. So, I do not take it easily to criticize the second biggest power on Earth, especially when China has been doing a lot for the nation that has been hosting me for many years.

Yet, as Nepal’s consciousness of India has matured over the years because the citizens of the former know very well the mindset, culture, politics and foreign policies of the latter, I do believe that slowly a more “complete” view of China will emerge.

From Beijing’s perspective, this inevitable evolution of views is not necessarily a negative thing because real partnerships require the space also to vent some criticisms or simply different perspectives. As China might sometimes vent its frustrations toward Kathmandu, it is normal that Nepal can be in a position to question certain policies and positions taken by Beijing, not out of disrespect, but simply out of sincere and trustworthy commitment to make the bilateral relationship stronger. This would happen because the rapport between the two will be enhanced when the interests of the smaller partner are better addressed and the latter becomes more assertive.

Nepal learned how to navigate its relationships with its south neighbor, developing a sense of self-confidence in also pushing back whenever needed. At the end of the day, such a level of candid approach might annoy New Delhi but at the end of the day, India knows that the relationships are stronger when both parties feel comfortable at expressing each other even if the positions are different.

Eventually, the same would happen with the northern neighbor. This would represent a new level of relationships between China and Nepal that, rather than being one-sided, are more mutually beneficial because they are more balanced.

Finally, I want to take an appreciative view of what China has been doing for Nepal. With the exception of the Ring Road work that I believe has been poorly designed (see the number of lethal accidents that have occurred so far since the revamped partial motorway has opened from Koteshwar to Kalanki), China has been playing a huge and very generous role in supporting Nepal.

I recently read of plans that China will build a bone marrow transplantation facility at the BP Koirala Memorial Cancer Hospital in Bharatpur, Chitwan.

There are also discussions on important expansions at Civil Service Hospital in Kathmandu, a hospital entirely built by China that, since its start of operations, has already seen important upgrades. These are key infrastructure projects for Nepal, very tangible initiatives at direct benefit of local peoples. At the same time as Nepal is proceeding to graduate from the category of least developed nations, would it not also be essential for Kathmandu to start doing something to help China? I do understand that this might look like a ridiculous proposition but instead I do believe that Nepal is about to reach the point where it can also show gratitude to its northern neighbor.

As Kathmandu tries to learn more about the almost unimaginable improvements in the lives of Chinese people and how Beijing has been prioritizing the right to development, Nepal can also show its templates and success stories. For example, how the nation halved its poverty and levels of social exclusions and how its political system, despite its own issues like instability and corruption, proved to be indispensable for such progress. Nepal could also do much more in promoting its culture and way of dealing with internal problems and differences and why not establish an exchange program where hundreds of Chinese students come here to learn about the country?

If millions of Chinese students have flocked to the USA, why not have some of them also learn Nepal’s way to development and prosperity? Frankly speaking, the university system in Nepal, while having its own share of challenges, also counts with some best practices. Higher education is just one area where Nepal could do something to reciprocate China’s generosity.  Without a doubt, there are many other areas where Nepal can do its bits to show that it is not taking China’s generosity for granted.

Nepal will make 97 of its Himalayan mountains free to climb for the next two years in a bid to boost tourism in some of its more remote areas, BBC reported.

It comes as permit fees to summit Mount Everest, the world's highest peak, during peak season will go up to $15,000 (£11,170) from September - the first increase in nearly a decade.

Nepal's tourism department said it hopes the initiative will highlight the country's "unexplored tourism products and destinations". 

Mountaineering generates a significant source of revenue for Nepal, which is home to the world's 10 tallest mountains. Climbing fees brought in $5.9m last year, with Everest accounting for more than three quarters of that, according to BBC.

US President Donald Trump has announced a steep 50 percent tariff on imports from India, effective Aug 27, a move economists say marks another escalation in Washington’s trade war tactics.

The tariffs do not stop with India; Bangladesh, Pakistan and Sri Lanka have also been hit with higher rates. Nepal, however, faces a comparatively modest 10 percent tariff. Economic experts believe this lower rate could give Nepal a temporary edge in the US market, especially in products like hand-knotted carpets and readymade garments. But they caution that the benefit will only materialize if Nepal can ramp up production.

According to the Department of Customs, Nepal exported goods worth Rs 18.32bn to the US in the last fiscal year, while imports from the US reached Rs 25.97bn, leaving Nepal with a trade deficit of more than Rs 7bn. The US is Nepal’s second-largest export destination after India, with roughly 320 products shipped to the world’s largest economy annually.

Former Finance Secretary Chairperson of High-Level Economic Reforms Advisory Commission, Rameshore Khanal, believes higher tariffs on Indian goods could push some US buyers toward Nepal. India sends about 18 percent of its exports to the US, including garments and pharmaceuticals. If those products become more expensive, Nepal could see new demand for similar items, he added.

“Bangladesh and India will struggle to compete in garments if their export tariffs to the US remain double or more than Nepal’s,” Khanal said. “This could also attract foreign investors to set up manufacturing in Nepal to take advantage of the lower rate.”

Still, a recent study by the South Asia Watch on Trade, Economics and Environment (SAWTEE) warned that Nepal’s advantage might be short-lived, as the US could change its tariff policy if it signs new trade deals with larger economies. The study, titled “Decoding US’ Reciprocal Tariff: A Nepal Perspective”, urges Nepal to prepare a long-term trade strategy, improve the investment climate, diversify export markets and expand its product base to reduce foreign trade risks.

Industry leaders say the immediate impact on Nepal will be minimal, as the US tariffs target finished goods exported from India, not raw materials that may be re-exported via Nepal. “Only if global prices of certain goods rise will Nepal feel the effect,” said Akash Golchha, executive member of the American Chamber of Commerce in Nepal. “It will only be a problem for India because the revised rate applies to them.”

According to Golchha, even if a product is an American brand, if it is manufactured in India and sent to Nepal, it makes no difference. “This is for finished goods, not raw materials. If India imports raw materials from the US, manufactures them, and sends them to Nepal, there is no duty on that,” he said. “Since the US has raised tariffs only on India’s exports, goods going from Nepal will not be affected.”

Still, the shift in trade flows could lower prices for some imports into Nepal, as Indian manufacturers look for alternative markets to offload goods originally intended for the US.

Kshitij Dahal, senior research officer at SAWTEE, also said higher US tariffs would not make any impact on Nepal. “There are chances of Indian and Bangladesh garment manufacturers entering Nepal to open their factories to benefit from low tariffs for Nepal,” he added. Dahal expects foreign direct investment to come into the country to benefit from low tariffs. “However, since it is uncertain how long the US will maintain such tariffs, it is difficult to be certain about these possibilities for Nepal.”

While the new tariffs offer an opening for Nepal’s exports, the uncertainty over how long the US will maintain these rates makes it difficult to plan investments. Trade experts say Nepal must act quickly to exploit its comparative advantages in the US where it already enjoys preferential US access for 77 products.

Khanal believes Nepal should court garment manufacturers from Bangladesh and India to relocate production to Nepal. “With the US not raising tariffs on Nepal and the MCC compact moving forward, there is a real chance of attracting investment in Nepal and boosting exports,” he added.

Land is more than a physical resource—it represents the foundation of culture, livelihoods and dignity in Nepal. However, centuries of discriminatory policies have systematically stripped communities like the Tharu, Limbu, and Chepang of their ancestral lands, consequently deepening poverty, exacerbating ethnic tensions, and causing extensive environmental harm.

The 2015 Constitution offers hope: Article 37 ensures every citizen’s ‘right to appropriate housing’ and protection from unlawful evictions, while Article 51(e) calls for scientific land reforms to eliminate ‘dual ownership’, curb ‘absentee land ownership’, and manage land for productivity, ecological balance, and farmers’ access to resources. Yet the crisis remains staggering—the Land Issue Resolving Commission reports roughly 89,144 landless Dalit families, 168,888 other landless families, and 875,164 unmanaged settler families, potentially affecting 1.5m families or 6m people. The High-Level Land Reform Commission (2065) estimates 5.5m landless people, with women owning merely 16 percent of land and Dalits controlling only one percent of agricultural land.

A controversial law

Despite these constitutional mandates, Nepal’s government has tabled a Bill to Amend Some Nepal Acts Related to Land, closely mirroring a previously withdrawn ordinance. Although claiming to address longstanding governance issues, it has generated intense controversy due to concerns that it may facilitate elite capture, enable exploitation by land brokers, benefit real estate businesses, and cause significant environmental damage—including deforestation in the Chure region and misuse of forests, public lands and national parks.

The High-Level Land Reform Commissions, established at various periods in Nepal’s history, have consistently warned against ‘cosmetic’ reforms that fail to tackle semi-feudal structures. Instead, they advocate comprehensive changes to prioritize marginalized groups and protect ecosystems. Through historical institutionalism and political ecology frameworks, this analysis explores the urgent need for equitable reforms aligned with constitutional mandates and Supreme Court rulings.

Historical roots of land injustice

Nepal’s land problems originated centuries ago with policies systematically favoring high-caste elites over indigenous groups, dismantling communal systems that sustained communities. Cox (1990) demonstrates how the 1768 Gorkha conquest centralized land control and disrupted the Limbu’s ‘Kipat’ system—a communal tenure where land was collectively owned and could not be sold, preserving cultural identity and economic stability.

Historical institutionalism reveals how these policies are permanently locked in inequalities. The 1886 ‘male tenure’ policy allowed cultivators, predominantly Brahmans, to claim ‘Kipat’ lands through ‘subinfeudation’—dividing and transferring rights—turning indigenous Limbus into tenants on their ancestral territory. The 1964 ‘Land Reform Act’, while aimed at redistribution, was undermined by loopholes allowing elites to retain control, fueling ethnic tensions. The 1968 ‘Kipat abolition’ completely stripped groups like the Limbu and Chepang of their foundations.

This pattern repeated throughout Nepal. The Chepang’s ‘Kipat’ lands, granted in 1848, became ‘Raikar’—state-owned, taxable land—by 1854, pushing communities into poverty. In Dang valley, the Tharu’s Barghar system, a sophisticated communal model for equitable land use, collapsed after 1950s malaria eradication allowed Hindu settlers to seize prime lands, displacing 3,000 Tharus by 1980. The Limbu’s ‘Satya Hangama’ movement, seeking ‘Kipat’ restoration, was crushed by 1946, reflecting ‘legal pluralism’—the clash between customary and state laws.

According to the HLLRC (2065) report, today’s reality starkly reflects these injustices: 47 percent of small farmers control merely 15 percent of land, while three percent of large farmers hold 17 percent, and 20 percent of fertile land lies unused due to speculative holding by bureaucrats and brokers. Semi-feudal practices persist—dual ownership, absenteeism, and bonded labor systems like Haliya, Kamaiya, Haruwa, Charuwa, Kamalari and Gothala encompass approximately one million agricultural laborers. Women, despite working 18 hours daily, hold only 16 percent of land ownership. Indigenous peoples, one-third of the population, face systematic encroachment. Around 1.02m families (5.5m people) remain landless, forcing migration to India and abroad.

Global lessons

Nepal’s challenges mirror global land inequities. Westwood (1984) shows how the US South’s failed “land redistribution’—General Sherman’s 1865 promise of ‘forty acres and a mule’ to freed slaves—was reversed by political forces restoring elite control. Gates (1976) demonstrates how the 1862 ‘Homestead Act’ favored speculators over genuine settlers while displacing Native Americans. In Muscovy, ‘absentee land management’ triggered ‘peasant revolts’ (Melton, 1978).

Spence (1985) defines ‘landlessness’ as systematic exclusion creating ‘dead capital’—land unusable for loans or investment due to insecure tenure. Political ecology frameworks highlight how power imbalances enable elite capture, echoing Nepal’s current Bill concerns. Smith (2018) notes ‘global land use’ tensions harm marginalized groups, while Hrabovszky (1987) warns ‘land use pressure’ risks deforestation.

A fundamental right

Land represents a fundamental human right central to dignity and survival. Enemark et al. (2014) connect ‘land administration’—managing ownership, value, and use—to Universal Declaration of Human Rights' Article 17 (property) and Article 25 (living standards). ‘Tenure security’ aligns with Article 37 of Nepal’s Constitution. The ‘Social Tenure Domain Model’ recognizes a ‘continuum of land rights’, protecting informal tenure, though facing elite capture risks.

Nepal’s crisis produces profound impacts. Economically, losing ‘Kipat’ and Barghar lands drives poverty and migration through ‘dead capital’. Culturally, these losses sever indigenous traditions. Politically, suppressed movements like ‘Satya Hangama’ mirror global exclusion patterns. Environmentally, ‘land use pressure’ creates risks like Chure deforestation. Socially, bonded labor and inequalities persist with women and Dalits systematically marginalized.

Beyond cosmetic changes

The proposed bill must adopt the HLLRC’s structural reforms rather than perpetuating elite capture. Genuine transformation requires ending ‘dual ownership’ and ‘absentee land ownership’, redistributing land to tillers, and prioritizing Dalits, women and indigenous groups. Land classification must scientifically separate agricultural and non-agricultural uses. Agricultural land should be classified by production zones—grain, fruit, vegetable, cash crops, medicinal herbs, grazing, tea, coffee, cardamong, sugarcane, jute and special zones. Non-agricultural land needs residential, industrial and environmental protection designations. Special measures for fragile ecological zones like Chure and Mahabharat are essential.

Clear policies on priority rights and compensation are critical. As the HLLRC states, “Competition essential for capitalist development must be among equals.” Reforms must promote cooperatives, overhaul corrupt administration, and implement collaborative governance with monitoring to prevent land grabs while ensuring constitutional compliance.

A vision for lasting justice

Nepal’s 1.5m landless families face a pivotal moment. The proposed Bill must move beyond ‘cosmetic’ reforms by implementing the HLLRC’s blueprint to dismantle semi-feudal systems, restore ‘customary tenure’ like Barghar and Kipat systems, and protect ecosystems like Chure and Mahabharat. By aligning with constitutional mandates and Supreme Court rulings, Nepal can ensure equitable land access, empower marginalized groups, and boost agricultural productivity through cooperatives and modern methods.

Learning from global failures and local traditions, Nepal can establish a new standard for land justice, ensuring no community remains landless or voiceless. The choice is clear: continue cosmetic fixes preserving centuries of injustice, or embrace transformative reforms that Nepal’s Constitution demands and marginalized communities deserve.

Kathmandu has long served as Nepal’s political, economic, and cultural epicenter, anchoring the nation’s governance and commerce. However, the capital faces mounting challenges due to rapid urbanization, severe congestion, environmental degradation, and significant natural disaster risks, particularly earthquakes. These pressures have fueled discussions about the feasibility of establishing a new or expanded National Capital Region (NCR) to alleviate the strain on Kathmandu and promote balanced national development. Among the potential candidates, Chitwan District, located in Bagmati Province, emerges as a compelling choice due to its strategic location, robust infrastructure, and growing economic vitality. 

Why Chitwan?

Chitwan district stands out as a prime candidate for hosting a National Capital Region due to its unique combination of geographic, economic, and infrastructural advantages. The district’s central position in Nepal positions it as a critical link between the country’s eastern and western regions, facilitating efficient logistics and connectivity. Major highways, including the East-West Highway and Prithvi Highway, traverse Chitwan, seamlessly connecting it to key cities across Nepal. This robust road network supports the movement of goods, services, and people, making Chitwan a natural hub for commerce and administration. Additionally, Bharatpur Airport, which currently operates flights to Kathmandu and Pokhara, holds significant potential for expansion. With targeted investments, the airport could accommodate regional and even international air traffic, further enhancing Chitwan’s accessibility and economic reach.

Economically, Chitwan is a powerhouse within Nepal. Bharatpur, the district’s largest city, ranks as the country’s fourth-largest urban center and is experiencing rapid growth in population and infrastructure. The city is home to a diverse array of industries, including agriculture, trade, and education, with prominent institutions such as agricultural research centers and medical colleges driving economic activity. By positioning Bharatpur as a commercial and administrative hub, Nepal could diversify its urban landscape, reducing the overwhelming dependence on Kathmandu. This shift would not only alleviate congestion in the capital but also stimulate economic growth in Chitwan, creating new opportunities for employment and investment.

Beyond its logistical and economic strengths, Chitwan offers a more resilient environment for urban development compared to Kathmandu. Unlike the capital, which sits in a seismically vulnerable valley, Chitwan rests on relatively stable land, reducing the risks posed by earthquakes. The district also provides ample space for planned urban expansion, allowing for the development of modern infrastructure tailored to the needs of a growing population. While certain areas of Chitwan face flood risks, these challenges can be addressed through careful urban planning and investment in flood mitigation measures. By leveraging its geographic and environmental advantages, Chitwan could serve as a sustainable foundation for a new national capital region.

Expanding the national capital region: Neighboring territories

To maximize the sustainability and impact of a National Capital Region centered in Chitwan, incorporating neighboring districts into the plan is essential. This expansion would foster greater economic and administrative coordination, creating a regional framework that balances growth across multiple areas. Nawalpur, also known as Nawalparasi East, lies to the west of the Narayani River and offers significant industrial potential. Its strategic location makes it a vital link between Chitwan and Lumbini Province, facilitating trade and logistics across southern Nepal. Nawalpur’s flat terrain and access to resources position it as an ideal location for developing major industrial zones and business hubs, which could complement Chitwan’s economic activities and drive regional prosperity.

Makwanpur district, located to the north of Chitwan, is another strong candidate for inclusion in the NCR. Hetauda, the capital of Bagmati Province, is a well-established industrial and trade center with a strategic position at the crossroads of Chitwan, Kathmandu, and eastern Nepal. Expanding Hetauda’s infrastructure could support industrial growth and urban development, creating a secondary hub within the NCR that complements Bharatpur’s administrative and commercial functions. Hetauda’s existing industrial base, coupled with its proximity to major highways, makes it a natural fit for the regional framework, enabling seamless coordination across the NCR.

Eastern Tanahun and western Bara also present compelling opportunities for inclusion. Tanahun, located to the northwest of Chitwan, is home to emerging urban centers that could contribute to the NCR’s growth. Its proximity to Chitwan ensures easy integration into the regional network, allowing for coordinated development of infrastructure and services. Bara, to the south, is a key industrial hub, particularly in the area of Simara, which hosts significant industrial activity and an airport. This airport could serve as a secondary transit hub for the NCR, supporting Bharatpur Airport and enhancing the region’s connectivity. By incorporating these districts, the NCR would create a robust network of urban and industrial centers, fostering economic synergy and balanced development across central Nepal.

Challenges and considerations

While the prospect of establishing a National Capital Region in Chitwan and its surrounding districts holds immense promise, several challenges must be addressed to ensure its success. Political and administrative resistance poses a significant hurdle, as relocating or expanding the capital region would require broad consensus among stakeholders. Local interests, regional power dynamics, and bureaucratic inertia could complicate the decision-making process, necessitating careful long-term planning and transparent communication to build support. Engaging local communities and addressing their concerns will be critical to overcoming resistance and ensuring the project’s viability.

Environmental sustainability is another key consideration. Chitwan is home to the renowned Chitwan National Park, a UNESCO World Heritage Site and a critical ecological asset. Urban expansion in the region must be carefully managed to avoid disrupting the park’s delicate ecosystem and biodiversity. Sustainable urban planning practices, such as green infrastructure and eco-friendly construction, will be essential to preserving Chitwan’s natural resources while accommodating growth. Additionally, flood risks in certain areas of the district must be mitigated through advanced engineering solutions, such as improved drainage systems and river management strategies, to ensure the safety and resilience of new developments.

The development of a National Capital Region will also require substantial financial investment in infrastructure. Expanding highways, upgrading Bharatpur Airport, and developing utilities such as water, electricity, and telecommunications will demand significant resources and coordination between government agencies, private investors, and international partners. Securing funding for these projects while maintaining fiscal responsibility will be a complex but necessary task. Public-private partnerships and international development assistance could play a pivotal role in financing the NCR’s infrastructure, ensuring that the region is equipped to support its growing population and economic activity.

Designating Chitwan District as the core of a new National Capital Region, with the inclusion of neighboring districts such as Nawalpur, Makwanpur, Tanahun, and Bara, offers a transformative opportunity for Nepal. This strategic move would decentralize governance, reduce the strain on Kathmandu, and promote balanced economic development across the country. By leveraging Chitwan’s central location, robust infrastructure, and economic potential, Nepal could create a modern, resilient, and sustainable administrative hub. The inclusion of neighboring districts would enhance the NCR’s economic and logistical capabilities, fostering regional synergy and long-term growth.

However, realizing this vision will require overcoming significant challenges, including political resistance, environmental concerns, and the need for substantial infrastructure investment. Through strategic planning, stakeholder engagement, and a commitment to sustainability, these obstacles can be addressed effectively. A well-executed National Capital Region centered in Chitwan could not only alleviate Kathmandu’s congestion but also establish a dynamic new center for governance, commerce, and innovation. This bold initiative has the potential to reshape Nepal’s urban landscape, driving economic progress and improving the quality of life for its citizens for generations to come.

Non-communicable diseases such as cardiovascular, chronic respiratory complications and cancers are found increasing in Nepal. 

Dr Manita Pyakurel of Nepal Non-Communicable Disease Alliance said the cases of non-communicable disease are on the rise in Nepal. 

Among key non-communicable diseases, cardiac and chronic respiratory complications, and cancers are reportedly high, she shared. 

Dr Pyakurel further informed that heart disease accounts for 30 percent, chronic respiratory diseases 10 percent and cancer nine percent. 

Nearly 51 percent of total deaths were caused by non-communicable diseases in Nepal in 2010, some 15 years back, it has been reported. 

The number of mortalities had increased to 60 percent in 2014, and whopped to 66 percent in 2016. By 2019, around 71.1 percent of total deaths were attributed to non-communicable diseases according to the Global Burden of Disease report. 

It has stated that the cost of treating non-communicable diseases is immoderately rising in Nepal. 

Globally, non-communicable diseases are responsible for the mortality of 4.3 million people per annum.  

This year marks the 70th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between Nepal and China. Over these seven decades, the two neighbors have forged a relationship grounded in mutual respect, non-interference, and shared aspirations for development, peace, and prosperity. This is a unique model of partnership rooted in trust and mutual respect

On 1 Aug 1955, Nepal and  China formally established diplomatic relations. Seventy years later, this historic milestone provides a timely moment to reflect on a multifaceted partnership that has evolved from ancient civilizational exchanges into a dynamic 21st-century cooperation model. Built on the core principles of sovereign equality, mutual respect, and non-interference, Nepal-China relations continue to hold significant relevance for Nepal’s foreign policy trajectory and development ambitions.

A relationship rooted in geography, shaped by history

Nepal and China are more than just neighbors; they share more than seventeen centuries-old ties through trade, religion, culture, and kinship across the Himalayas. The exchanges between Lumbini and Lhasa, between artists and monks, are testimonies to a relationship that predates formal diplomacy. The 1956 Nepal-China Boundary Agreement and subsequent treaties not only delineated borders but also laid the foundation for long-term cooperation.

In modern diplomatic history, China has consistently respected Nepal’s territorial integrity and political independence, while Nepal has firmly adhered to the One-China Policy. This diplomatic symmetry has helped both countries build a resilient and trust-based relationship, despite changing geopolitical dynamics in South Asia and beyond.

Development, connectivity, and the promise of the BRI

China has played a critical role in Nepal’s development efforts through grants, soft loans, and infrastructure projects. From the construction of the Araniko Highway in the 1960s to ongoing efforts in energy, hydropower, airport expansion, and digital connectivity, Chinese cooperation has left visible footprints in Nepal’s development landscape. 

The signing of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) framework agreement in 2017 marked a new phase in economic diplomacy. While its implementation has been slow and requires better clarity and transparency, the Trans-Himalayan Multi-Dimensional Connectivity Network—envisioned under the BRI—holds transformative potential for Nepal, particularly in trade facilitation, energy transit, and cross-border infrastructure.

Nevertheless, Nepal must approach such initiatives with strategic foresight—ensuring debt sustainability, environmental safeguards, and equitable benefits for local communities.

Beyond infrastructure: People, culture, and soft power

Nepal-China relations are increasingly shaped by people-to-people engagement. Thousands of Nepali students pursue higher education in China, supported by scholarships. Cultural exchange programs, tourism, and media collaboration have helped build a more nuanced understanding between the two societies.

China established the Confucius Institute in Nepal to promote Chinese language and culture. Regular cultural delegations, exhibitions and performances are organized to strengthen people-to-people relations. There is a growing dissemination of Chinese narratives in Nepali media, especially around regional geopolitics and BRI. Chinese media outlets such as Xinhua News Agency and China Radio international have partnership with Nepali media.

China promotes Nepal as a tourism destination among Chinese citizens and has included Nepal in approved travel destinations. Joint branding of heritage sites such as  Lumbini is  part of soft tourism diplomacy. In times of crisis, such as the 2015 Gorkha Earthquake and the Covid-19 pandemic, China provided critical humanitarian support to Nepal, reinforcing a spirit of solidarity. Such gestures are not merely symbolic but serve as catalysts for strengthening trust among the general public.

The strategic imperative for Nepal

As Nepal seeks to graduate from Least Developed Country (LDC) status and achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), strategic partnerships with neighbors like China become indispensable. However, Nepal must adopt a clear, consistent, and country-owned foreign policy, grounded in national interest and inclusive development priorities.

The trade imbalance between Nepal and China remains a persistent challenge. Addressing it requires improved access to the Chinese market, support for Nepali agricultural and handmade exports, and the upgrading of border infrastructure at key points like Rasuwagadhi, Tatopani and Mustang. Furthermore, as climate change disproportionately affects the fragile Himalayan ecosystem, Nepal and China should deepen cooperation on climate resilience, biodiversity conservation, and green technology transfer.

Looking ahead: Rethinking the next chapter

As Nepal and China commemorate 70 years of friendship, both countries must reimagine their cooperation in light of emerging global challenges—climate change, poverty, digital transformation, and regional security. Future collaboration must focus not only on infrastructure, but also on green development, youth exchange, public health, and social inclusion.

Diplomatic anniversaries are more than ceremonial milestones—they are opportunities to reflect, renew, and re-energize relationships as well as to reimagine the future. The 70th anniversary offers both Kathmandu and Beijing the chance to reaffirm their strategic trust, expand areas of cooperation, and ensure that their partnership contributes meaningfully to regional harmony and Nepal’s long-term national interest. Nepal must seek cooperation for changing from landlocked to land linked.

The 70th anniversary of Nepal-China relations should catalyze a broader conversation among policymakers, academics, and civil society about what an equitable, future-oriented partnership looks like in a rapidly changing global order.

In this next phase, cooperation must move beyond state-to-state interactions and become more inclusive of youth, local governments, academic institutions, and marginalized communities—ensuring that the benefits of diplomacy and development reach the grassroots.

As a small but strategically located nation, Nepal must continue to walk a balanced diplomatic path—maintaining friendly ties with both its neighbors while protecting its autonomy and advancing a just, inclusive development agenda.

The Nepal-China partnership, built over seven decades, can continue to be a model of asymmetric yet respectful diplomacy—one that champions sovereignty, mutual benefit, and the shared dreams of two peoples.

As we look ahead, the friendship between Nepal and China must continue to be guided by the principles of equality, mutual benefit, and peaceful coexistence. A true celebration of this historic milestone would be not only in looking back with pride—but also looking forward with purpose.

The author is former Nepali ambassador to China

Every time Sumana Chhetri from Kathmandu goes to watch Nepal’s football team match, she feels the burden of the nation’s expectations on the players’ shoulders. The roar of the crowd, the thrill of a goal, and the heartbreak of a miss can be nerve-wracking. 

Similarly, Anish Bhandari from Butwal recalled the agonizing moment in Nepal’s cricket history when Nepal lost to South Africa by just one run in the T20 World Cup. “It was a heartbreaking loss for the entire nation,” he added. 

Still, Bhandari admired the way the team played. “The performance was praiseworthy. They nearly defeated a nation far better equipped with infrastructure than Nepal,” he said.

But passion alone cannot sustain performance. Sushil Narsingh Rana, a World Athletics Coaches Education and Certification System (CECS) Level II Lecturer and former National Athletics coach, said there is a lack of coaches and sports facilities at the grassroots level.

“This problem is often overlooked, yet it remains one of the most pressing issues,” he said. “Even in Kathmandu, facilities fall short.” 

Rana emphasized the urgent need for trained coaches to identify and nurture young talents. 

Another significant barrier to sports development in Nepal is societal attitude. “This sports field in our society is often seen as a man’s domain,” said Neema Chaudhary, drawing on her own experience. She recalled the skepticism she faced when playing football with boys. Her own family members were unsure of her choice. 

Silika Shakya, program director at The WE United Project, echoed this concern. “Girls in rural Nepal still face so many barriers, ranging from family disapproval to lack of safe spaces,” she said. “Sports are still widely seen as a man’s game, and even talented girls are not taken seriously.”

These stereotypes, however, are being challenged. Many successful female athletes fought against society expectations, community pressure, and cultural norms just to keep playing. “Their persistence is rewriting the narrative,” Shakya said. “Yet, more effort is needed.” 

According to UNESCO, values-based sports can help address global concerns like inactivity and inequality. Aligning with Sustainable Development Goal 4, this approach promotes inclusive practices in education and sports. Shakya underscored the role of schools in reshaping attitudes by providing equal opportunities to both genders. She also urged the brands and companies to promote women’s sports, sending a powerful message of validation and visibility. 

Rana noted the importance of school in changing the structural reform by treating sports not merely as recreation.“A student can be excellent in both academics and athletics, and this story needs to be shared”, he said. 

The government’s allocation of Rs 6.8bn for sports this fiscal year is a promising step, reflecting a notable increase from the previous year. Rana, however, cautioned that most of the budget focuses on stadium construction while ignoring grassroots development. “Stadiums are necessary, but real work begins from the low-level foundation,” he said. 

Injuries and mental health are further neglected areas. Rana pointed out that a lack of focus on sports psychology and mental well-being could hamper a player’s career. “It is not just about performance but about overall well-being,” he added.  

Women in particular face unique challenges, as they are expected to focus on domestic responsibilities and behave in a certain way. Shakya warned that these cultural pressures can cause girls to drop out or never even try. “I believe visibility changes minds. When families and community leaders see girls confidently playing, learning, and leading without compromising their values, they see new possibilities,” she said. 

The media also plays a pivotal role in shaping the narrative. Sports journalist Aakriti Singh acknowledged the imbalance in coverage. “Sports like cricket and football dominate headlines, whereas emerging sports such as table tennis, athletics, and para-sports are overlooked,” she said. Singh added women’s sports receive far less airtime, fewer headlines, and limited post-match analysis compared to men’s events.

Looking ahead and comparing Nepal’s potential, Singh said Nepal can be a strong sporting nation, especially by focusing on youth, inclusivity, and regional strengths. “The government should integrate sports in schools and develop district-level competitions. It should target sports where Nepal has a comparative advantage, such as  mountain sports, martial arts, football, and volleyball,” she said.

While the National Sports Council (NSC) oversees sports development, its policies often lack long-term vision, and execution is inconsistent. Critically assessing the current state of sports development in Nepal, especially in comparison to neighboring countries, requires examining infrastructure, policy, funding, talent development, and performance on the international stage. Singh believes this gap can be closed with clear, consistent investment and governance reform.

“Just like India has been providing targeted funding, training, and exposure for young and elite athletes, Nepal should also implement a similar system for its athletes,” she said. 

According to UN Women, the interest in women's sport is rapidly growing—73 percent of people now watch women’s sports at least a few times a year, nearing the 81 percent who watch men’s matches. Shakya reaffirmed the transformative power of sports. “At WE United, we’ve seen how sports can empower girls to break free from long-standing gender roles,” she said. “We train and support female coaches, so that young girls can see women leading, teaching, and thriving in sports.” 

Rana believes that for true reform in sports, it must remain free from politics and favoritism. “We need professionalism and a national calendar to streamline events,” he said. “This field should be run by educated and experienced individuals.”

Nepal’s sports journey is one of passion and resilience. Recognizing both the passion of the people and the dedication of athletes, the government must act promptly to strengthen sports infrastructure in both urban and rural settings. 

Over the past few months, Nepal and India have stepped up engagement on multiple fronts, including long-overdue meetings of bilateral mechanisms. While the exact date of Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli’s visit to New Delhi is yet to be finalized, Indian officials confirm that preparations are underway, and the visit is likely to take place before Dashain. India has also been engaging with a wide cross-section of Nepali society in the lead-up.

Nepal-India relations faced significant turbulence, especially after 2015, which strained bilateral ties. However, in recent months, both sides appear to be moving toward a reset. Kathmandu and New Delhi have now prioritized economic and development partnerships over longstanding contentious issues.

Two key unresolved matters, the map row and the report prepared by the Eminent Persons’ Group (EPG), remain sensitive. While political parties such as the Nepali Congress, CPN (Maoist Centre), and various Madhes-based parties have largely shelved the EPG issue, some CPN-UML leaders continue to raise it, albeit with less intensity.

India’s renewed outreach to Kathmandu comes amid a shifting regional context: Donald Trump’s inauguration and subsequent US aid cuts to Nepal, political developments in Bangladesh, and a brief but deadly India-Pakistan conflict. In late July, New Delhi hosted an all-party delegation of Nepali members of parliament. According to the Indian readout, the discussions centered on expanding the multifaceted bilateral partnership.

On July 28 and 29, the seventh meeting of the India-Nepal Boundary Working Group (BWG) was held in New Delhi. The BWG had been inactive since 2019 due to the map dispute. Although this meeting did not address contentious territorial issues, both sides adopted updated modalities for inspecting, repairing, and maintaining boundary pillars, and agreed to expedite work in these areas. They also finalized a three-year work plan and committed to using advanced technologies for boundary-related tasks.

In the third week of July, the home secretary-level meeting between the two countries covered the full spectrum of bilateral security cooperation and border management. The two sides finalized the text of an agreement on mutual legal assistance in criminal matters. They also agreed to work toward the early conclusion of a revised extradition treaty, another longstanding and sensitive issue.

India also launched a collaborative initiative in partnership with the UN World Food Programme to support rice fortification and supply chain management in Nepal. The project aims to address gaps in Nepal’s fortified rice supply chain, particularly in procurement, data collection, and human resource capacity, through knowledge exchange with India’s successful public distribution system. It offers Nepali stakeholders the chance to learn from India’s experience in applying digital technologies to food logistics.

Speaking at a public event this week, foreign affairs expert Mohan Lohani, as quoted by the Press Trust of India, said that India is advancing rapidly in economic growth, development, and technological innovation. “Nepal should try to benefit from the progress made by our southern neighbor,” he said.

Another foreign policy expert, Nischal Nath Pandey, advised Prime Minister Oli to travel overland for his New Delhi visit, arguing that it would allow him to observe India’s significant progress in infrastructure, especially road transport.” During the tenure of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, India has made remarkable progress in development and road connectivity, and Nepal should learn from the experiences gained by India,” Pandey said.

As preparations for Prime Minister Oli’s India visit continue, both sides are working to finalize a major project or agreement to be announced during his meeting with Prime Minister Modi. Government officials suggest that resolving issues related to the long-pending Pancheshwar Multipurpose Project could be one such announcement. According to sources, the Indian side has conveyed that when the two prime ministers meet, a substantial breakthrough should be unveiled.

The Nepal-China diplomatic relation has entered into 70 years from today onward. 

To mark the occasion, the 70th year of the establishment of the diplomatic ties between Nepal and China is being celebrated with several program in Kathmandu and Beijing today. 

The historical relation that had officially begun after the wedding of then Tibetan King Songtsen Gampo with Princes Bhrikuti has been further expanded in the modern era. 

Diplomatic relations with China were established on the day today, August 1, 1955. 

Both countries have accorded high priority to promote bilateral relations based on the principles of Panchasheel i.e. peaceful coexistence, mutual cooperation, territorial integrity, respect for sovereignty, and non-interference. 

The top leadership of both countries is actively working to further strengthen the relationship, noted Rajeshwar Acharya, Nepal's former ambassador to China. 

As a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, China has played a tangible role in global politics, emphasizing an effective world governance system based on law, cooperation and partnership for international peace and security, and the construction of a shared future, he added. 

Meanwhile, Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli is scheduled to attend a reception to be hosted by Chinese Ambassador to Nepal, Chen Song this evening on the occasion, PM's private secretary said.

As the global telecommunications industry accelerates toward 6G and 5G becomes standard in many countries, Nepal is witnessing an unexpected surge in 2G network users, especially in rural areas.

According to data released by the Nepal Telecommunications Authority (NTA), the telecom sector regulator, the number of 2G subscribers in the country more than doubled in the fiscal year 2024/25. Within the period, 2G users increased from 1.46m in mid-July 2024 to over 3.15m in mid-July this year—a jump of more than 1.7m users in just one year.

This rise stands in stark contrast to global trends and highlights the persistent digital divide within the country. While urban populations have largely moved on to faster networks like 4G, rural areas continue to depend heavily on basic 2G connectivity. This is not due to a lack of awareness about advanced technology, but rather to infrastructural limitations and the challenging geography of Nepal’s remote regions, say officials of NTA. 

In many rural areas, newer-generation networks are either unavailable or unreliable. This leaves local people with little choice but to rely on the aging 2G network.

Even as 2G sees renewed growth, Nepal Telecom, the state-owned telecom operator, announced plans to phase out its 2G services on the 1800 MHz band within this fiscal year to repurpose the spectrum for more advanced technologies and push for wider adoption of 4G and 5G.

Private player Ncell has also announced plans to discontinue 2G services in 2027. It plans to shut down 3G this year.

Progress on 5G, however, has been slow. Although NTA permitted Nepal Telcom to start 5G testing five years ago, the state-owned telco has not been able to roll out the service. Officials of Nepal Telecom, however, say that 5G testing will begin later this year with initial launches planned in Kathmandu and other major cities.    

Ncell, another major GSM operator, has temporarily put its 5G rollout plans on hold. CEO Jabbor Kayumov recently indicated that launching 5G is challenging under current conditions, pointing to a steady decline in telecom revenues over the past five years.

My trip to Muktinath, a sacred temple in Nepal’s Mustang district, began as a spiritual  pilgrimage. I expected silence, mountains and maybe some personal clarity. What I didn’t  expect was that the road itself—the actual journey—would teach me something deeper: why nations like Nepal struggle, not because of poverty or geography, but because of  broken systems. The Himalayas were everything I hoped for. Vast, ancient, silent. The  mountains don’t speak, but they say everything. In that silence, something inside you  wakes up. You feel tiny—but not in a diminished way. You feel connected, humbled, part of  something timeless. 

And then, the road reminds you: you’re still in Nepal. 

At first, everything was smooth. Well-paved stretches give you a sense of order, of progress.  Then suddenly—no warning—dust, potholes, mud, cliffs. No signs. No explanation. Just a sharp jolt. That’s when it hit me: this road is Nepal. Not just physically, but politically and  economically. It reflects how the country moves. Or fails to move. 

Economists Daron Acemoglu and James A Robinson, in their book Why Nations Fail, say  that nations don’t collapse because they’re poor or small—they fall when their institutions  become extractive. That means systems designed not to serve everyone, but to benefit a  small elite. When power is centralized, unaccountable and unresponsive to the people,  things fall apart. Just like the road. That road had moments of beauty—and then chaos. Like  when a traffic jam would appear out of nowhere. No rules, no traffic police. Just honking,  pushing and disorder. Yet somehow, people moved. It was dysfunctional, but it  functioned. That’s Nepal. A country where people no longer expect the system to help—but  find ways to survive anyway. 

Our driver embodied that spirit. He was fearless, navigating landslides and blind turns like a local James Bond. I was terrified. “Why are you scared?” he said. “There’s nothing to be  scared of.” It wasn’t bravery, it was normal for him. Because in Nepal, danger isn’t an  emergency. It’s routine. At one point, we passed a fresh landslide where the road had  barely been cleared. No warning signs. Just a man standing in the dust, motioning to  drivers. No uniform, no authority, just someone stepping in where the state had stepped  out. That moment stuck with me. In a nation where public services falter, ordinary people fill the void. Not because they have to—but because they must. 

And this is the tragedy: people become excellent at surviving systems that should have  protected them in the first place. 

Nepal’s economy feels just like that road. It’s moving—but always at risk. You can plan but never predict. And yet, life continues. People open shops, raise families, guide tourists, offer tea to strangers. They trust not in government, but in each other. That kind of social  capital is rare—and powerful. On those roads, I saw something remarkable: trust among  strangers. No road signs. No clear rules. But still, drivers cooperated. Because they had to.  That trust wasn’t built by policy. It came from culture. From the deep understanding that if people don’t care for each other, no one else will. 

But culture isn’t enough to build a country. Why Nations Fail makes it clear: without inclusive institutions—where opportunity is open to all, leadership is accountable, and  policies are shaped by participation—no amount of individual effort can fix systemic collapse. When policies are made by people who never walk the road, they forget where it  leads. I couldn’t help but ask: how often do our leaders walk these roads themselves? Do they feel the same jolts? Do they see the villagers’ patching holes with rocks? Or the  mothers selling noodles near construction dust while their kids play in broken corners of  concrete? Or do they see only blueprints and budgets? 

Nepal’s institutions feel just like those road bumps—sudden, unexplained and dangerous.  Too often, leaders govern without grounding. They change policies without clarity. They  promise without delivery. And still, people adapt. They move forward because it’s the only direction available. 

At Muktinath, I finally reached stillness again. Cold wind, ancient stones, sacred silence. You don’t need to understand everything to feel something shift inside. You just breathe.  And for a moment, it’s enough. But when I looked back at the journey, the literal road and  the metaphor it became, I couldn’t ignore the deeper lesson. Nepal doesn’t lack potential. It doesn’t lack spirit, creativity or community. What it lacks is leadership that walks the same road the people do. Institutions that work for everyone. Roads that are built not just  to impress, but to endure. 

Acemoglu and Robinson remind us that even countries that start the same—like North and South Korea—can end up in vastly different places if one builds extractive institutions and  the other builds inclusive ones. One stagnates, the other grows. It’s not fate. It’s a choice. Still, I believe change is possible. I see it in the eyes of young Nepalis—those who question, who leave and return, who imagine something better. I see it in those who fix what isn’t  their job to fix. In communities that cooperate even when the state fails. 

So yes, the mountains healed me. But the road taught me the truth. 

Nations don’t fail because their people are weak. They fail when their systems are weak. And  unless we rebuild those systems—with inclusion, accountability, and connection—we’ll  keep driving blind, hoping to avoid the next collapse. 

And still, despite it all, Nepal moves forward. Bumpy. Risky. Beautiful. Still going.

In recent years, Nepal has witnessed exponential growth in the use of various social media platforms. The most popular social media platforms include Facebook, X (formerly Twitter), TikTok, Instagram, Snapchat, Instagram and LinkedIn. Among these, Facebook maintains strong dominance over the Nepali social media landscape. According to data from the NapoleonCat, there were 16,479,500 Facebook users in Nepal as of Aug 2024, accounting for 51.6 percent of the population. Of these, 55.9 percent were male.

However, Facebook’s user base is gradually declining as adult users shift toward TikTok and GenZ increasingly favors platforms like TikTok and Instagram. Meanwhile, X is gaining popularity, particularly among news-savvy and politically-engaged users. But it has also become a tool for political propaganda, with ‘cyber armies’ from various political parties engaging in online smear campaigns and character assassination. This toxic environment is pushing intellectuals and thoughtful users away from the platform.

LinkedIn, on the other hand, is growing steadily in popularity among professionals seeking networking and career development opportunities. The spread of misinformation, disinformation, hate speech and cybercrime has become a pressing issue globally. Many countries are grappling with how to regulate social media in ways that respect freedom of speech while addressing these concerns. While many European nations have developed balanced approaches, several South Asian countries, including Bangladesh, are using social media regulations to suppress political opposition. 

Nepal is no exception. For over 15 years, authorities have misused Section 47 of the Electronic Transaction Act to arrest journalists and silence critics. Recently, this trend has intensified, with ruling party leaders increasingly targeting those who voice dissent. Criticisms of the government or political parties are often misclassified as fake news or hate speech, even when it clearly is not. This raises concerns that new laws may also be exploited for similar purposes.

In February, the government introduced the Social Media Act Bill in the National Assembly, the upper house of the country’s federal parliament. The Bill has sparked public debate due to several fundamental flaws. The first and foremost is the flawed legislative process itself: government officials involved in consultations have adopted a narrow, bureaucratic perspective.

There is a belief within bureaucracy that regulation can be achieved by simply creating a department. This approach fails to recognize that regulating digital platforms is far more complex than overseeing traditional media like radio, television or print which are historically governed by the Ministry of Communication and Information Technology and its subordinate bodies.

Social media regulation is multi-faceted and far-reaching. No state agency can realistically monitor an entire population. Yet the ministry appears to consult only with stakeholders like the Federation of Nepalese Journalists (FNJ), organizations of journalists affiliated with major political parties and a handful of non-governmental organizations close to the ruling parties. Independent academics and experts outside the political sphere are largely excluded from the process.

This issue is not limited to social media bills; similar problems exist in other media-related legislation. While parliament has the authority to correct fundamental flaws, lawmakers often lack necessary expertise. Many rely on briefings from NGOs. This limited input, combined with their often weak academic backgrounds, proves insufficient. Lawmakers frequently raise concerns merely to appease journalists rather than engaging meaningfully in the legislative process.

From top to bottom, the bill is riddled with problems. The preamble fails to affirm commitment to international treaties and conventions and other legal instruments to which Nepal is a party. The country has signed international treaties and conventions expressing its full commitment to upholding freedom of speech and expression. But the principles laid out by those international conventions often clash with the narrow understanding held by many Nepali politicians who view criticism as a threat rather than a democratic right.

The 2015 constitution, like its previous versions, contains progressive provisions when it comes to safeguarding freedom of speech and expression. The draft briefly touches the constitutional provision of freedom of speech and expression but remains silent about international commitment. Regarding the international part, the bill states that as other countries are formulating the news, Nepal also needs to formulate the law which is a misrepresentation of Nepal’s international commitments.  The Supreme Court has also delivered landmark verdicts upholding these rights.

However, recent rulings by lower courts appear to contradict the precedents set by the apex court. These decisions only briefly acknowledge the constitutional guarantee of free speech, signaling a shift away from the earlier commitment to protecting this fundamental right.

The Social Media Bill reflects this trend. It fails to clearly state that its purpose is to strengthen freedom of speech and expressions. Instead, it focuses more heavily on regulating social media users, given the impression that its main intent is to restrict, rather than protect, free expression.  

Undeniably, countries across the world are moving quickly to regulate social media to mitigate its negative impacts on society and democracy. But such efforts must never come at the cost of fundamental freedoms, especially freedom of speech, expression and press. Nepal should study how other nations have successfully enacted social media without undermining democratic rights.

Before drafting the bill, the government should have consulted with representatives of major social media companies. Content regulation and moderation are core to the functioning of these platforms, and without their cooperation, any regulatory framework is likely to fail. In this context, Nepal’s top political leadership should use its diplomatic and political channels to engage with these companies. For instance, a few months ago, there was communication between Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli and Elon Musk on certain issues. This shows such outreach is possible.

Regrettably, the ministry issued a public notice demanding that social media giants register in Nepal and obtain licenses. It even set a deadline that went ignored. The ministry also threatened to shut down social media platforms, a move widely seen as immature and impractical. A more constructive approach would have been to initiate dialogue, revise the proposed provisions in consultation with these companies and then develop a feasible licensing system.

As it stands, the bill grants sweeping powers to a government-formed department to oversee all social media-related issues. Given the scale and complexity of regulating digital platforms, this is highly problematic. What’s needed is an independent, empowered commission—free from political interference, bureaucratic control, corporate influence and other vested interests. Such a body should be authorized to work directly with social media companies to ensure effective and fair regulation.

The current draft appears to be designed with the aim of removing political content critical of ruling parties. In recent years, there has been a clear trend of political parties using state agencies to target and punish critics of the government and party leadership. If passed without meaningful amendments, the bill risks becoming an extension of the Cyber Bureau, an institution that has already been misused for political purposes.

One positive aspect of the bill is its commitment to launching a large-scale awareness campaign on the responsible use of social media. It proposes to raise public awareness through publications, broadcasts, websites, seminars, public service announcements and dialogues. However, the government does not need to wait for the bill to be passed to begin this vital initiative.

In conclusion, the government must take proactive steps to address the fundamental flaws in the draft bill as it is evident that the agencies involved have failed to adequately study international best practices or documents prepared by global institutions.

With 110 bighas of land, four large ponds, a commercial building in the heart of town, and over a century of history, Nigaul Gai Gaushala, a cow farm, in Gaushala Municipality should be a model institution for animal welfare and cooperative development in Nepal. Instead, it is in financial and managerial disarray, teetering on the brink of collapse.

Established in 1926 with a donation of 200 bighas of land and 1,500 high-breed cows by the then Darbhanga Maharaj Brahmadev Thakur, the Gaushala was once a prestigious center for cow protection and dairy development. Over time, however, poor management, unpaid dues, land encroachment, and legal disputes have brought it to its knees.

Despite state-of-the-art sheds and vast landholdings, the situation inside the Gaushala is grim. Malnourished cows survive on dry chaff and minimal green fodder. “Cows have even died of starvation here,” said an office source. “We are surviving on loans. Even the feed we buy is on credit, and lenders are pressuring us.”

Office accountant Rohit Kumar Karna said that managing salaries, medicines, and basic operations has become nearly impossible. “If we could collect the dues we’re owed, this wouldn’t be the situation,” he noted.

More than Rs 63.84m remains unpaid by Gaushala Municipality, as per an agreement signed during the Gaushala VDC days. According to the 2013 deal, the Gaushala was entitled to 25 percent of cattle market contract revenue. However, that payment ceased after two years, and the municipality has since been collecting fees unilaterally.

Tensions escalated this week when a violent clash erupted between Gaushala Municipality officials and Gaushala staff over market fee collection. Four people, including a ward chairperson, were injured, with one referred to Kathmandu for further treatment.

The municipality had awarded a 15-day market fee collection contract to one party, while the Gaushala had assigned the same task to another. Both claim legal control over the land, which intensified the conflict. Mayor Dipendra Mahato maintains the market falls under local government jurisdiction, while Gaushala officials say they were never consulted.

“The biggest issue is mismanagement and lack of responsibility,” said Bir Bahadur Chaudhary, acting chief of Nigaul Gaushala. “Everyone is interested in the land and assets, but no one wants to take responsibility for the cows or the institution’s mission.”

Adding to the disappointment is the failure of a once-promising Rs 1bn high-level research project, envisioned by the National Cooperative Development Board. Despite Rs 42m already spent on infrastructure—including sheds, storage, and a milk collection center—the project has stalled due to negligence.

“This could have transformed the livestock sector in Nepal. But due to lack of follow-up, it never progressed,” said former Co-chair Saroj Kumar Sharma.

Meanwhile, more than 50 bighas of fertile land under the Gaushala’s ownership have been illegally encroached. From Jalpadevi Road to Ganesh Mandir Chowk, plots originally registered under the Gaushala’s name are now occupied without legal lease or compensation. Despite clear land records, the absence of political will, legal enforcement, or institutional protection has allowed squatters and opportunists to exploit the Gaushala’s legacy.

As Nepal’s oldest Gaushala faces an uncertain future, urgent intervention is needed. Transparency in financial dealings, legal enforcement of agreements, recovery of dues, and renewed government support could help revive the organization.

Local residents are disheartened. “This Gaushala is part of our identity. Seeing cows die of hunger while people fight over land and money is heartbreaking,” said one elderly local. There are growing calls for an all-party meeting and a new binding agreement between the Gaushala and the Municipality—to protect both the land and the lives of the animals it was created to serve.