Congress 2.0 misses chance to abandon socialism and embrace liberalism

"What's in a name? That which we call a rose,
By any other name would smell as sweet," said Shakespeare.
But in politics, names matter because they help people understand a party’s ideology, which is supposed to be the guiding principle of any political party. In Nepal, however, almost all political parties seem to have taken Shakespeare’s ‘What’s in a name?’ a little too seriously. Their names promise one ideology, while their actions practice another, making the name less a reflection of their politics and more a convenient disguise for it.
And Nepali Congress is no different, let alone the leftist, or people and leaders love to call themselves communist parties.
Learning from the way the left parties – who have been promoting crony capitalism in the name of socialism – in Nepal over the past decade, many had hoped that Nepali Congress would, during its 15th General Convention, embrace a free, fair and competitive market economy. However, the grand old party (GOP) has once again disappointed.
Whatever its practice may have been, Nepali Congress has always described itself as a democratic socialist party, also as its founding principle. Therefore, although the Congress’s interpretation of socialism is theoretically different from that of the left, there has long been a public complaint that the citizens have felt little or no difference between democratic socialism and leftist socialism. One of the major reasons for growing public distrust of political parties is the vast gap between what they profess and what they actually practice.
With little expectation from the left parties on the issue, the 15th General Convention offered the Nepali Congress an opportunity to reconcile its principles with its practice.
There were two reasons for this.
First, at least through the branding of ‘Nepali Congress 2.0,’ the party had sought, through its special convention six months ago, to present itself as synonymous with transformation and generational change.
Second, Nepali Congress 2.0 has repeatedly claimed that it will not enter electoral alliances with anyone. Since party President Gagan Thapa himself has been vocal on the issue, it should also be understood as an assertion that the Congress is different from the left and will not contest elections in alliance with the left parties.
Over the past three decades, whether competing for power or sharing it, whether as opponents, rivals or political bed-partners, the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist-Leninist), or CPN-UML, and the former CPN (Maoist), or current Nepali Communist Party (NCP) – broadly speaking the left parties – have been the principal political counterparts of the Nepali Congress. Gagan Thapa had opposed former Nepali Congress 1.0 president Sher Bahadur Deuba largely because of his repeated alliances with them.
There are, of course, royalist forces and the current ruling Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP). But it would be premature to assume that Nepali Congress 2.0 will any sooner form an electoral alliance with them.
Therefore, even if Nepali Congress was not expected to make an ideological leap directly from socialism to capitalism, there was an expectation that the 15th General Convention would bring greater clarity to its economic policy. After all, the party has moved from its traditional guiding or founding principle of ‘Nationalism, Democracy and Socialism’ replacing the term Prajatantra – as it refers king and subjects and gives monarchist reflection – with loktantra – the people’s democracy – in Nepali, while retaining the same three core principles.
The political report presented by President Gagan Thapa itself acknowledges this. It states that the fundamental basis of the Nepali Congress's economic outlook is Nationalism, Democracy and Socialism. It says the democratic socialism developed by party founder and national leader BP Koirala placed not merely statistical economic growth but the life, human dignity, participation and opportunities of ordinary citizens at the center of development. The report says that, while embracing BP’s historic symbol of the ‘farmer ploughing the land,’ the party has now placed at the center of its economic development policy the reality of a ‘young person standing with a passport in hand or looking for opportunities within the country.’
If the report recognizes such a fundamental difference between BP Koirala’s era and today's economic landscape, markets, the character of markets, the role of the private sector and the role of government, then there is little justification for continuing to cling to the same old ‘democratic socialism’.
Unless, of course, the intention is to continue writing ‘socialism’ in the documents, while embracing crony capitalism in practice, just as the left has done over the years. If that is the case, could Nepali Congress 2.0 become even more controversial and alienated from citizens than its previous version?
Regardless of how differently the report interprets socialism, Nepali Congress 2.0 has clearly missed an opportunity. The word ‘socialism’ itself has become discredited in Nepal. Every Nepalis raise an eyebrow when they look at the lifestyles, houses and wealth of socialist aka communist leaders.
This should not, however, be interpreted to mean that accumulating wealth is a crime. In Nepali society, there is already a strange contradiction: making profits through trade and business and accumulating wealth through productive economic activity are often viewed with suspicion, while accumulating wealth through politics without any formal source of income is treated as a sign of greatness.
Nepali Congress 2.0 has not made it clear whose interests it actually seeks to represent.
At times it appears capitalist; at other times socialist. Such ambiguity may attract liberal left intellectuals, but economy cannot be function dynamically through such an unclear and indecisive policy.
It also appears that Nepali Congress 2.0 has not fully claimed ownership of, or embraced, the liberal economic policies pursued under Nepali Congress leadership after 1991. If the intention is to maintain such a gap between principle and practice, there was little need to elaborate on socialism at all.
If the party intends to continue writing ‘socialism’ in its documents, while doing whatever it wants in practice, it might at least have offered a word of thanks to former finance ministers Mahesh Acharya and Dr Ram Sharan Mahat.
Not only the left but the Nepali Congress itself has consistently criticized and harassed them for their liberal economic policies, alas due to which the country is still not a failure state. And today, there is hardly anyone in the Congress willing to realize that Nepal did not collapse economically even during a decade-long Maoist insurgency because of the economic policies pursued under the duo’s leadership.
This may indicate that the left leaning of democratic Nepali Congress is accelerating.
That does not mean Acharya and Dr Mahat had no shortcomings or that everything they did was correct. Their practical implementation of liberal economic policies also had procedural weaknesses. Those weaknesses could have been corrected and the policy framework taken forward. But the belief that the Nepali Congress can fool the people by using the word ‘socialism’ has rendered even the achievements made under Nepali Congress’s own leadership irrelevant.
Those, who are reluctant even to claim credit for the expansion of the private sector and the employment opportunities created within the country will struggle to convince youth that they can create jobs in Nepal, and that too projecting a youth with passport in his hands.
Had BP Koirala been alive today, what would he say?
Therefore, while Sher Bahadur Deuba has been blamed for the leftward drift of the Nepali Congress due to physical coalition, it would not be unreasonable to say that today's transformed or generationally renewed Congress – Nepali Congress 2.0 – is creating ideologically coalition.
This could also lead to allegations that the political and economic ideological commitment of Gagan Thapa, who was accused of capturing the party through the special convention and now stands unopposed at the 15th General Convention, is left tilted ideologically, which can never become the benchmark for transforming the Nepali Congress.
As the report reads, BP Koirala’s historic perspective, shaped by an era defined by land reform, illiteracy and rural poverty, centered on the ‘farmer ploughing the land’. The basis of BP’s projection of ‘farmer ploughing the land’ was production, and productivity.
However, today's Nepali is primarily a consumer, not a producer.
Yesterday, land was a source of production. Today, land is largely a transactional instrument for quick money. It produces little or no, and creates no employment, but balloons the financial market and help crash the bank and financial institutions. We have already had bad experience of cooperatives and failing of some banks and financial institutions due to land or collateral.
Therefore, socialism alone cannot solve the structural problems of current Nepali economy. Even if the diagnosis of the disease is correct, the disease will not be cured, if the medicine is wrong. Nepali Congress 2.0 has, in that sense, prescribed a wrong pill to the economic ills of today’s Nepal.
The report also states that ‘the state should function not as a trader or owner, but as a fair regulator, guardian of good governance, builder of modern infrastructure and provider of quality public services.'
Of course, the state's role should be narrowed, with the government focusing on policy formulation and monitoring the market to ensure free, fair, competitive and disciplined implementation, while allowing the market to function. Many of Nepal's problems in recent years have emerged because the state or government has become stronger while governance has remained weaker.
Thus, Nepali Congress cannot transform itself by weakening institutions, or helping to weaken them, or refusing to adopt liberal economic policies instead of socialism, which is a cliché.
Ultimately, continuity in ideology without changing the tools will not increase private-sector investment, productivity or employment.
Likewise, ‘private-sector investment,’ ‘productivity’ and ‘employment’ are among the most abused terms in Nepal today. Every political party or every so-called intellectual has memorized them. But none has been able to translate them adequately into practice.
If Nepali Congress genuinely wants the private sector to drive prosperity, it must meaningfully update its economic ideology. Clinging to the word ‘socialism’ alone by redefining it with new terminology or adding explanatory commentary will neither help transform Nepali Congress not Nepal.
(First Published in nepalkhara.com on October 7, 2026 -- https://en.nepalkhabar.com/news/detail/20070/)

समाजवाद फालेर उदारवाद अँगाल्ने मौका गुमाएको कांग्रेस २.०

समाजवादको नाममा पछिल्लो एक दशकमा वामपन्थीहरूले नेपालमा जसरी आसोपासे पुँजीवादलाई प्रोत्साहन गरे, त्यसबाट शिक्षा लिँदै नेपाली कांग्रेसले स्वतन्त्र, निष्पक्ष र प्रतिस्पर्धात्मक बजार अर्थतन्त्रलाई अँगाल्ने आशा धेरैले गरेका थिए। तर यस पटक मुलुकको पुरानो राजनीतिक दलले उनीहरूलाई निराश बनाएको छ।
व्यवहारमा जे जस्तो भए पनि नेपाली कांग्रेसले आफूलाई प्रजातान्त्रिक समाजवादी भन्दै आएको छ। व्यवहारमा सर्वसाधारणले कांग्रेस र वामपन्थीहरूमा कुनै फरकपनाको महसुस गर्न नपाएको गुनासो थियो। राजनीतिक दलमाथि नागरिकको बढ्दो अविश्वासको एउटा प्रमुख कारण, व्यवहार र सिद्धान्तमा आकाशपातालको फरक पनि हो।
वामपन्थी दलहरूबाट यस विषयमा कुनै आशा नभएका कारण पनि यसपटक नेपाली कांग्रेसलाई आफ्नो १५औँ महाधिवेशनमार्फत आफ्नो दलको व्यवहार र सिद्धान्तलाई समायोजन गर्ने अवसर थियो। अर्थात्, यसका दुई कारण छन्। पहिलो, कमसेकम नेपाली कांग्रेस २.० नाममा ब्रान्डिङ गरेर भए पनि विशेष अधिवेशनमार्फत् यो पार्टीले आफूलाई रूपान्तरण तथा पुस्तान्तरणको चेष्टा गरेको थियो।
दोस्रो, नेपाली कांग्रेस २.० ले चुनावमा कसैसँग मिल्दैनौँ भन्ने दाबी गर्दै आएको छ। नेपाली कांग्रेस २.० का सभापति गगन थापाले नै यो मुद्दा बोकेर हिँडेका कारण पनि यसको अर्थ आफूलाई वामपन्थीभन्दा फरक हौँ र वामपन्थीहरूसँग मिलेर चुनाव लड्दैनौँ भनेको बुझ्नुपर्छ। नेपालमा पछिल्ला तीन दशकमा सत्तामा पौठाजोरी खेले पनि वा मिले पनि, कांग्रेसको विरोधी वा प्रतिद्वन्द्वी भने पनि वा सहयात्री भने पनि नेकपा एमाले वा नेपाली कम्युनिस्ट पार्टी (पुरानो नेकपा माओवादी) अर्थात् सोलोडोलो भाषामा वामपन्थी पार्टी नै थिए। जोसँग नेपाली कांग्रेस १.० का सभापति शेरबहादुर देउवाले पटक पटक मिलेका कारण गगनको विरोध थियो। हुन त नेपालमा राजावादी वा हालको सत्ताधारी राष्ट्रिय स्वतन्त्र पार्टी पनि छन्। तर, उनीहरूसँग नेपाली कांग्रेस २.० ले चुनावी गठबन्धन गरिहाल्ला भन्ने आकलन अहिल्यै गरिहाल्न सकिन्न।
त्यसैले सैद्धान्तिक-वैचारिक रूपमै नेपाली कांग्रेसले समाजवादबाट सिधै पुँजीवादमा फड्को नहाने पनि जसरी आफ्नो ‘राष्ट्रियता, प्रजातन्त्र र समाजवाद’को मूल सिद्धान्तबाट आज ‘राष्ट्रियता, लोकतन्त्र र समाजवाद’मा पुग्यो, हाल जारी १५औँ महाधिवेशनबाट आर्थिक नीतिमा अझै स्पष्टता ल्याउला भन्ने आशा थियो।
किनकि सभापति गगन थापाले प्रस्तुत गरेको राजनीतिक प्रतिवेदनले पनि स्विकारेको छ, ‘नेपाली कांग्रेसको आर्थिक दृष्टिकोणको मूल आधार राष्ट्रियता, लोकतन्त्र र समाजवाद हो। पार्टीका संस्थापक जननायक बीपी कोइरालाले प्रतिपादन गर्नुभएको लोकतान्त्रिक समाजवादले विकासको केन्द्रमा केवल तथ्यांकीय आर्थिक वृद्धिलाई होइन; साधारण नागरिकको जीवन, मानवीय गरिमा, सहभागिता र अवसरलाई केन्द्रमा राखेको थियो। हामीले बीपीको ‘हलो जोतिरहेको किसान’को ऐतिहासिक प्रतीकलाई आत्मसात गर्दै आज ‘हातमा पासपोर्ट बोकेर उभिएको वा देशभित्रै अवसर खोजिरहेको युवा’को यथार्थलाई आर्थिक विकास नीतिको केन्द्रबिन्दुमा राखेका छौँ।’
यसरी हिजो बीपी कोइरालाको समय र आजको आर्थिक परिदृश्य, बजार र बजारको चरित्र, निजी क्षेत्रको भूमिकाको साथै सरकारको पनि भूमिकामा स्पष्ट आकाश पताल फरक मान्ने हो भने हिजोकै लोकतान्त्रिक समाजवादको पुच्छर समातेर बस्नुमा कुनै तुक छैन।
होइन, लेख्न चाहिँ समाजवाद नै लेख्ने तर व्यवहारमा भने वामपन्थीले झैँ आसेपासे पुँजीवादलाई अँगाल्ने हो भने अर्कै कुरा हो। यसबाट त झन् नेपाली कांग्रेस २.० अघिल्लो संस्करणभन्दा पनि विवादित र नागरिकबाट परित्यक्त नहोला र?
समाजवादको अर्थबारे प्रतिवेदनले जति फरक व्याख्या गरे पनि नेपाली कांग्रेस २.० ले यो एउटा अवसर गुमाएकै हो। किनकि नेपालमा समाजवाद शब्द आफैँमा बदनाम छ। समाजवादी नेताहरूका रहनसहन, घर, सम्पत्ति देख्दा जिब्रो नटोक्ने नेपाली कोही छैन। तर, यसको अर्थ सम्पत्ति कमाउनु अपराध हो भन्ने नलागोस्। यसै पनि नेपाली समाजमा व्यापार, व्यवसाय गरेर नाफा गर्नु, धन, सम्पत्ति जोड्नु अपराध तर राजनीति गरेर बिना कुनै औपचारिक आय धन, सम्पत्ति जोड्नु महानता मानिन्छ। नेपाली कांग्रेस २.० ले  कुन वर्गको पक्षपोषण गर्न खोजेको हो, आफैँ स्पष्ट भएको देखिएन।
कतै पुँजीवादी हो कि जस्तो अनि कतै समाजवादी जस्तो देखिएर समाजमा रहेका उदारवादी वाम बुद्धिजीवीलाई आकर्षण त गर्न सकिएला। तर अर्थतन्त्रलाई चलायमान बनाउन यस्तो ढुलमुले नीति लिएर हुँदैन।
यसबाट त २०४८ सालपछिको नेपाली कांग्रेसको नेतृत्वमा चलेको उदार आर्थिक नीतिको पूर्ण स्वामित्व तथा अपनत्व पनि नेपाली कांग्रेस २.० ले नलिएको देखियो। अनि सिद्धान्त र व्यवहार यसरी नै फरक गर्ने विचार हो भने समाजवादको व्याख्या गर्न आवश्यक नै थिएन। दस्तावेजमा समाजवाद नै लेखिरहने अनि, जपिरहेन तर व्यवहारमा जे मन लाग्यो त्यही गर्ने भए त एकपटक पूर्वअर्थमन्त्रीद्वय महेश आचार्य र डा रामशरण महतलाई पनि धन्यवाद दिएको भए हुन्थ्यो।
वामपन्थीले मात्र होइन नेपाली कांग्रेसले पनि सधैँ सरापेका उनीहरूकै आर्थिक नीतिका कारण एक दशक लामो माओवादी द्वन्द्वमा पनि नेपाल टाट पल्टेन भनेर अडान लिन सक्ने कोही पनि आज नेपाली कांग्रेसमा नहुनुले नेपाली कांग्रेसको वामपन्थीकरण झन् तीव्र हुन थालेको भन्दा फरक नपर्ला। आचार्य र डा महतका कमीकमजोरी छैन, सबै ठीक गरे भनेको होइन। उदार आर्थिक नीतिको व्यावहारिक प्रयोगमा उनीहरूका पनि प्रक्रियागत कमजोरी थिए। जसलाई सच्याएर अगाडि बढ्ने अवसर पनि थियो। तर, समाजवादको नाम लिएरै मात्र नेपाली कांग्रेसले वैतरणी पार गर्छ वा समाजवादको गायत्री मन्त्र जपेपछि मात्र निर्वाण प्राप्त हुन्छ भन्ने चेतले आफ्नै पार्टीको नेतृत्वमा प्राप्त उपलब्धि पनि औचित्यहीन बनाएको छ।
आज जुन निजी क्षेत्रको विस्तार छ र जति पनि देशभित्रै रोजगारी सिर्जना भएको छ, त्यसको श्रेय लिन पनि डराउनेले नेपालमा रोजगारी सिर्जना गर्छन् भनेर युवाले कसरी पत्याउँछन्।
अनि, आज बीपी कोइराला भएका भए, के भन्थे होलान्?
त्यसैले, नेपाली कांग्रेसको वामपन्थीकरणमा जति शेरबहादुर देउवालाई दोष दिइन्छ वा दिइएको छ, त्यो भन्दा आजको रूपान्तरित वा पुस्तान्तरित कांग्रेसको पनि कम दोष छैन भन्दा अन्यथा नहोला।
यसबाट विशेष अधिवेशनमार्फत पार्टी कब्जा गरेको आरोप लागेका अनि १५औँ अधिवेशनमा प्रतिद्वन्द्वीविहीन रहेका सभापति गगन थापाको राजनीतिक, आर्थिक वैचारिक प्रतिबद्धतामा वामपन्थीकरणको गन्ध आएको आरोप पनि थपिन सक्छ। जुन नेपाली कांग्रेसको रूपान्तरणको मानक बन्नै सक्दैन।
बीपी कोइरालाको ऐतिहासिक दृष्टिकोण भूमि सुधार, निरक्षरता र ग्रामीण गरिबीले निर्देशित युगलाई प्रतिनिधित्व गर्ने ‘हलो जोत्ने किसान’ नेपालीमा केन्द्रित थियो। तर, त्यो उत्पादक थियो।
आजको नेपाली उपभोक्ता मात्र हो।
हिजो जमिन उत्पादनको स्रोत थियो। आज जमिन सिर्फ किनबेच गर्ने एउटा साधन हो। यसले कुनै उत्पादन गर्दैन, न त रोजगारी सिर्जना गर्छ। त्यसैले नेपाली अर्थतन्त्रमा रहेको संरचनात्मक समस्या समाधान गर्न समाजवादले सक्दैन। रोगको पहिचान ठीक भए पनि औषधि गलत भए रोग ठीक हुँदैन।
भलै, प्रतिवेदनमा लेखिएको छ, ‘राज्यले व्यापारी वा मालिकको रूपमा होइन, निष्पक्ष नियामक, सुशासनको संरक्षक, आधुनिक पूर्वाधारको निर्माणकर्ता र गुणस्तरीय सार्वजनिक सेवा प्रदायकको रूपमा काम गर्नुपर्छ।’ तर, विस्तारै राज्यको भूमिका खुम्च्याउँदै लाने र समयानुकूल नीति निर्माणमा मात्रै ध्यान दिने तथा बजारलाई अनुशासित रूपमा सञ्चालन गर्न अनुगमन गर्ने बाँकी बजारलाई छोड्ने हो। पछिल्ला वर्षहरूमा नेपालमा राज्य बलियो तर शासन कमजोर भएको कारण पनि धेरै समस्या आएको हो।
संस्थाहरू कमजोर बनाउने वा बनाउन सघाउने अनि समयानुकूल उदार आर्थिक नीति नअपनाएर समाजवादको व्याख्या गर्दै बस्दा नेपाली कांग्रेस रूपान्तरण हुँदैन।
अन्ततः सिद्धान्तको निरन्तरता तर औजारमा परिवर्तनले निजी क्षेत्रको लगानी, उत्पादकत्व र रोजगारी बढ्दैन। निजी क्षेत्रको लगानी, उत्पादकत्व र रोजगारीजस्ता शब्दहरू नेपालमा सबैभन्दा बढी दुरुपयोग भएका शब्दहरू हुन्। यी शब्दहरू सबै दलले कण्ठ गरेका छन्। तर, व्यवहारमा प्रतिबिम्बित गर्न भने सकेका छैनन्, सकेनन्।
नेपाली कांग्रेसले यदि साँच्चै निजी क्षेत्रले समृद्धि ल्याओस् भन्ने चाहेको हो भने आर्थिक विचारधारालाई वास्तविक रूपमा अद्यावधिक गर्नुपर्छ, परम्परागत समाजवादलाई नयाँ शब्दावलीले ढाकछोप गरेर वा व्याख्यात्मक टिप्पणी थप्दैमा परिवर्तन हुँदैन।
(First published in nepalkhabar.com on October 6, 2026 -- https://nepalkhabar.com/opinion/289087-2026-10-6-20-16-2)

ADB to support expansion of power transmission, battery storage capacity in Nepal through PPP

The Asian Development Bank (ADB) has signed two public-private partnership (PPP) -- first of its planned ones -- transaction advisory services agreements with the government to encourage private sector investment in power transmission and battery storage infrastructure.
ADB Country Director for Nepal Arnaud Cauchois and Nepal Electricity Authority (NEA) managing director Dirghayu Kumar Shrestha signed the agreements in Kathmandu, today.
These landmark agreements represent the first transaction advisory services for a power transmission public-private partnership and a standalone utility-scale battery energy storage system in any member country of the bank, according to the multilateral bank. "Through these deals, the bank will assist the NEA with feasibility studies, procurement, tendering, project agreements, and capacity building. The initiatives are projected to mobilise more than $200 million in private sector capital."
Highlighting the energy achievements of the nation, Cauchois noted the rapid expansion of electricity access. "Nepal has made significant progress in providing electricity to its people, with access to power increasing from 58 per cent in 2016 to 99 per cent in 2025," he said, adding that the challenge now is to translate this growth into reliable domestic supply and sustained export capacity. "Achieving this will require the timely expansion of transmission and battery storage infrastructure, with private sector participation playing a critical role in mobilising the capital, expertise, and efficiency needed to deliver these investments at scale."
NEA managing director Shrestha welcomed the collaboration, stating, "We appreciate ADB's partnership through these Transaction Advisory Services Agreements, which will help advance strategically important transmission line projects and battery energy storage systems, attract private sector investment, and support the long-term growth and sustainability of Nepal's power sector."
The first agreement concentrates on the design, financing, construction, operation, and maintenance of a 134-kilometre, 400-kilovolt transmission line spanning Tingla, New Khimti, and Dhalkebar. This project is anticipated to enhance grid reliability, allow for greater integration of renewable energy, and facilitate regional electricity trade.
The second agreement entails the design, financing, installation, and operation of a 100 to 150 megawatt-hour multisite battery energy storage system at selected substations. Operating under a public-private partnership model, this system aims to resolve peak-period grid constraints, support variable renewable energy integration, and provide essential grid management services to ensure system stability.
Together, the projects are expected to strengthen the energy system of Nepal by expanding power transmission and battery storage capacity. The investments will also improve the reliable evacuation of electricity from generation projects and open up private capital mobilisation in the energy sector.

Nepal seeks to turn geography into strategic advantage, foreign minister says

NEW YORK: Nepal must turn its position between India and China into an economic, digital and strategic advantage rather than allow geography to constrain its ambitions, Foreign Minister Shishir Khanal said today.
Speaking at an Asia Society event - in the sidelines of United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) - in New York titled ‘Steering Nepal’s Future in Asia’s Rising Century,’ Khanal said Nepal should move beyond its traditional image as a small country and position itself as a bridge connecting Asian economies, markets and civilisations.
“Nepal is not small but is strategically located,” Khanal said, adding that the size of its neighbours should not become a limit to Nepal’s ambitions.
Khanal said Asia’s rise, with about 60 per cent of the world’s population and a large share of global economic activity, presented an important opportunity for Nepal. South Asia alone has a population of about two billion, he said, adding that Kathmandu could become a centre of the region’s economic and social transformation. "Our question is no longer how Nepal can survive between two large neighbours. Our question is how Nepal can create value between them and beyond them."
Nepal’s strategy should be based on what Khanal called “developmental autonomy”, with a national goal of becoming a middle-income country within 10 years and a high-income developed country by 2050.
He said Nepal would seek to expand its economic and diplomatic policy space through broader international engagement while deepening ties with India, China and other major partners.
With India, Nepal should connect its open border more closely with production and markets, Khanal said, advocating “thick connectivity and thin borders” through greater economic interdependence.
Nepal should also use its hydropower potential to support regional economic integration, he said. Clean electricity is already being exported to Bangladesh through India, while border economic zones could help connect Nepali production to global supply chains.
With China, Nepal should pursue long-term cooperation in roads, tunnels, dry ports, aviation, digital networks and cross-border railways, he said. “Connectivity should not be measured only by kilometres of infrastructure, but by the movement of goods, services, investment, tourists and opportunities."
He also called for greater Nepal-China cooperation on glacier monitoring, disaster early-warning systems, water data sharing, climate adaptation and resilient infrastructure. Such projects, he said, should be based on transparent financing, rigorous feasibility studies and value for money.
Khanal also placed climate change among Nepal’s strategic foreign-policy priorities following the devastating floods that struck the country on August 26.
He described the disaster as a “Himalayan tsunami” and said it had caused major damage to lives, property, trade routes, bridges and Himalayan settlements.
The disaster underscored the need for effective early-warning systems, water-data sharing, predictable grant-based climate finance and practical cooperation with neighbouring countries and international partners, he said.
Beyond its immediate neighbourhood, Nepal plans to expand partnerships with the United States, Europe, Japan, ASEAN and Gulf countries, Khanal said, describing Nepal’s roughly five million-strong diaspora as a strategic asset. "Its capital and expertise should be channelled into entrepreneurship, technology and national infrastructure rather than being viewed primarily as a source of remittances."
“We want to directly mobilise their capital and expertise in entrepreneurship, technology and national infrastructure,” he said.
Khanal said small and medium-sized countries also have a role in protecting international law, sovereign equality and a rules-based international order. “Nepal was a bridge between civilisations in the past, is an economic bridge in the present, and will become a strategic bridge in the future."
While Nepal’s future must ultimately be shaped by its own people, international partnerships would be essential to achieving its development goals, Khanal said, inviting investment and cooperation from the United States, Europe, ASEAN, Latin America and other partners.

Himalaya Airlines to start direct flight on Kathmandu-Hangzhou-Kathmandu route

Himalaya Airlines (IATA: H9), Nepal's international private airline, is expanding its commercial flight operations in China with the launch of direct scheduled flight service between Tribhuvan International Airport (TIA) in Kathmandu, and Hangzhou Xiaoshan International Airport (HGH) in Hangzhou China. The inaugural flight is scheduled for Wednesday, September 30, 2026, marking a defining milestone in Nepal's civil aviation history and international connectivity, according to a press note issued by the Himalaya Airlines.
With this launch, Himalaya Airlines will become the first and only commercial carrier in the history of civil aviation to operate a direct scheduled flight on the Kathmandu-Hangzhou-Kathmandu sector, establishing a new and strategically significant air corridor between Nepal and one of China's major cultural hubs, it claims.
Hangzhou is the capital and largest city of Zhejiang province in eastern China. It is one of China's Eight Ancient Capitals and is best known internationally for its cultural legacy and the scenic West Lake. The city is home to three UNESCO World Heritage Sites: The West Lake Cultural Landscape, the Grand Canal, and the Archaeological Ruins of Liangzhu City.
The Kathmandu-Hangzhou route is strategically aligned with Himalaya Airlines' broader mission to develop direct air connectivity to ten key tourism and economic centres across China, with the long-term objective of promoting Nepal-China tourism and trade, the airliners says, adding that the service is expected to serve a wide range of travellers, including leisure tourists, business travellers, trade delegations, students, and cultural exchange participants from both nations. "Commencing at the onset of Nepal's peak autumn tourism season, the route is expected to provide a meaningful boost to inbound tourism and the broader hospitality sector, supporting the country's economic recovery and growth objectives."
Himalaya Airlines will initially operate two weekly frequencies on the route. Outbound flights from Kathmandu will depart every Wednesday and Sunday, with return flights from Hangzhou operating every Monday and Thursday. The airline will review and consider increasing frequency in response to passenger demand and load factors, it adds.
The Kathmandu-Hangzhou flight (H9 225) will depart Tribhuvan International Airport at 17:15 (Nepal local time) on September 30, 2026, arriving at Hangzhou Xiaoshan International Airport at 01:05 (China local time) the following day. The return flight, Hangzhou-Kathmandu (H9 226), will depart Hangzhou Xiaoshan International Airport at 02:05 (China local time) on October 1, 2026, and land at TIA at 06:20 (Nepal local time) the same day.
"Himalaya Airlines aims to operate flights to ten different tourism and economic centres across China to welcome one million Chinese tourists to Nepal," vice-president of Himalaya Airlines Vijay Shrestha said ahead of the launch of the new route.
"We have pioneered trailblasing new routes to China, leading the way ahead of conventional market trends," he said, adding that the introduction of the Kathmandu-Hangzhou service is a testament to that commitment. "With this route, Himalaya Airlines aims to connect two historical and cultural hubs of Nepal and China."
The aoirlines will create memorable travel experiences while upholding the highest standards of safety and service quality, he said, "We look forward to welcoming passengers on board and facilitating the discovery of the extraordinary beauty and opportunities that both Nepal and China have to offer."
Himalaya Airlines (H9) is a Nepal-China joint venture International Airlines, established in 2014 with two complimenting objectives: to promote people-to-people contact between Nepal and other countries, as well as to boost Nepal’s trade and tourism industries. The joint venture alliance is between Tibetan Civil Aviation Development and Investment Company Ltd (TCADIC) and Yeti World Investment Pvt Ltd.
H9 young fleet consists of total 4 aircraft: three Airbus 320-214 (180 all-economy seats) and one Airbus 319-115 (144 all economy seats). H9 is currently operating passenger flights to prominent countries of Middle East & South Asia, the airliner further claims.

Call for institutional arrangements for integrated development of textile and clothing sector

Despite the importance of Nepal’s textile and clothing sector to exports and employment, longstanding institutional gaps and fragmented support have prompted calls for a dedicated body to consolidate the sector’s collective voice and strengthen coordination and support, according to entrepreneurs.
Speaking at a policy dialogue ‘Institutional arrangements for integrated development of textile and clothing sector’ organised by South Asia Watch on Trade Economic and Environment (SAWTEE), with support from the International Labour Organisation (ILO), they called an urgent need for such an institutional arrangement to build shared understanding among stakeholders.
In her trigger presentation, Programme Coordinator at SAWTEE Dikshya Singh, highlighted that Nepal's textile and clothing sub-sectors; ranging from yarn and fibre to garments, carpets, pashmina, silk, hemp, and allo; are represented by a patchwork of scattered, sub-sector-specific associations, with none speaking for the value chain as a whole. "Hence, there is a need for an institution that can unite this fragmented advocacy into a single institutional voice," she said, adding "Such an entity would coordinate backward linkages (sourcing inputs domestically) with forward linkages in manufacturing, branding, and market access, treating the sector as a unified value chain rather than disconnected sub-sectors."
Calls to establish such a body have grown louder in recent months since the plan received a positive response from the Prime Minister, as reported in the media following his meeting with the textile and clothing sector entrepreneurs.
President of Nepal Carpet Manufacturers and Exporters’ Association Balaram Gurung, on the occasion, highlighted the important role previously played by the Nepal Carpet and Wool Development Board in providing focused institutional support to the carpet sector. He also noted that the Board’s functions were later merged with the Trade and Export Promotion Centre (TEPC), leaving the sector without a dedicated institution. Drawing on this experience, he stressed that the proposed body should provide similar sector-specific support, or the former Board should be reinstated.
Likewise president of the Nepal Pashmina Industries Association Dhan Prasad Lamichhane stressed the need to develop an integrated pashmina ecosystem spanning the entire value chain, from farm to fibre to fashion, with stronger linkages across sheep rearing, fibre production, dyeing, knitting and garment manufacturing. He emphasised the need for legislative changes required to facilitate commercial farming of sheep in mountainous regions of Nepal, which could help domestic sourcing of wool.
Immediate Past President of the Nepal Wool Felt Producers and Exporters Association Amrit Khadka emphasised the need to establish such institutional body through a parliamentary Act. He also identified policy and regulatory gaps as a major concern, noting that the sector has been requesting amendments to existing policies and regulations for a long time, but that the process has yet to move forward. He further stressed the need for greater representation of both the public and private sectors in efforts to develop the felt industry.
First Vice President of the Garment Association of Nepal Basanta Raj Adhikari pointed out that compared to the competitors, Nepali product is expensive, lower in quality, and slower on delivery; hence, Nepal lacks the capacity to fulfil bulk orders from large buyers. He said unless skill shortages and testing infrastructure gaps are addressed, Nepal's garment sector will remain confined to small, niche orders.
Similarly, Textile Expert Prakash Jha called for the establishment of a council to consolidate and represent the voices of stakeholders across the textile and clothing sectors. He suggested that the proposed council could be placed under the Ministry of Industry, Commerce and Supplies, with participation from the Ministries of Agriculture, Forests and Environment; Finance; and Labour, as well as representatives of industry associations, businesses and technical experts.
He further suggested that the council should develop mechanisms to achieve financial sustainability, including through fees related to rules of origin, certificates of origin and membership. He proposed that the council’s mandate should also cover research and regulation of imported clothing, monitoring of free trade agreements and other trade agreements, and recommending measures for export market diversification.
Chief Executive Officer of Alternative Technology Shreeniwas Sharma highlighted, "how Galaicha software has improved Nepal’s carpet industry by facilitating digital design, cost calculation and production tracking. He noted that similar technological solutions could be adopted across other subsectors, including handicrafts and garments, while emphasising the need to combine technology adoption with laobur upskilling. He suggested that the proposed institution could help connect industries with appropriate technology providers and facilitate wider adoption of such solutions. He stressed that Nepal has the technological capacity to do more, but stronger industry–technology linkages are needed to translate these capabilities into practical outcomes.
Participants, on the occasion, pointed out that the proposed institution's mandate and governance structure required careful design. Several stressed the need for clarity on whether the body's primary role should be coordination or promotion, and called for trade union representation, noting unions could contribute to improving worker productivity rather than being seen as adversarial to business. Others stressed that the council needed meaningful private-sector representation and real decision-making authority, cautioning against it becoming 'another bureaucratic institution' burdened by administrative hurdles. It was also suggested that leadership rotate across sub-sectors like garments, carpets, and felt to ensure balanced representation, alongside inclusion of researchers, experts, and government representatives.
One participant called for an apex body under the Government of Nepal, citing India's model, with sub-committees for each sub-sector to prevent domination by any single industry.
Chair of the session Dr Posh Raj Pandey summarised the key points of the discussion, highlighting the need to address supply-side constraints and strengthen institutional coordination in the textile and clothing sector. He stressed the importance of a stronger governance mechanism to consolidate fragmented institutions, support export promotion and regulatory compliance, and prepare the sector for challenges arising from preference erosion after LDC graduation.

Current multipolar world is strategically vital for Nepal and Bangladesh: Prof Imtiaz (interview)

Retired from Dhaka University, Professor Imtiaz Ahmed is a renowned intellectual not only in South Asia but also in global arena. He had taught International Affairs in Dhaka University for decades. After his retirement from Dhaka University, Prof Ahmed is in Kathmandu for a mission. He is leading a Master’s program offered by Asian Institute of Diplomacy and International Affairs (AIDIA), in academic partnership with Kathmandu University (KU). Since he is leading Masters in International Affairs, Economy and Diplomacy (MIAED) programme, Nepalkhabar’s Consulting Editor Kuber Chalise talked to Prof Ahmed about a plethora of issues including Asian Century, multipolar world, Gen Z movement both in Bangladesh and Nepal, and so on.  Excerpts:

The world is fast changing. You have been teaching international affairs since long. How was the world when you were teaching international affairs in the classroom and how is it today, when you are outside the classroom?
Then the world was bipolar, which means mainly on one hand the west led by US, and on the other hand you had Soviet Union leading eastern Europe. In the 80s, the world largely became unipolar. Particularly after the dismantling of the Soviet Union by Gorbachev. But then midway I think around some people say 86, some people make it later, the world started moving toward a multipolar world. So, I have seen bipolar, unipolar and the coming of multipolar world. So, we are in an exciting time, I think. And I have to say that I enjoyed international relations very much. If I look at the transformation, it has been incredible.

Which is very exciting time for you as a professor?
I think multipolar, there is no doubt about it because the world has never seen multipolar. This is for the first time on a global scale. There were multipolar in Europe. There was little bit of multipolar in Africa, in South Asia. But on a world scale, this is for the first time the world is becoming multipolar. And it is so exciting because all the economies have an opportunity to play a role including Nepal. The big powers were playing their role in the unipolar and bipolar world. But in multipolar world even small powers can play a role. So that means the coming days are more exciting for the small countries like Nepal, like Bangladesh because they have the role.

How do you define that Nepal or Bangladesh, these small states can play a role in this multipolar world?
Well, this is something that needs more brainstorming, including research, including education. And this is where I think AIDIA’s attempt to, and I believe we are already far ahead, in launching this Master's program in International Relations, Economy and Diplomacy (MIAED) can make a difference. Because we still need lot of brainstorming how to handle a multi-polar world. We know that there can be opportunities and there can be good outcomes. But to make that fruitful, it's important we develop the entire structure in a way, where young minds can contribute. And this is where I think AIDIA’s MIAED program can make a difference.

Bangladesh and Nepal both are in South Asia. Once upon a time, we used to talk about South Asia and still we are talking about South Asia region. But in between, there is this institution called SAARC. But now, people think it's non-starter. So, why? What was the problem?
Well, one of the biggest problems with SAARC has been the conflict between India and Pakistan. So, my experience with SAARC also has been quite particular. We have a little bit of success story. I wouldn't say full success story and that is to do with the South Asian University. I was instrumental in establishing it as I wrote the first paper on South Asian University. And later on, I was the original team member from Bangladesh side when Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh agreed to have this which is now called main campus in Delhi but the regional campuses are yet to come out. So, but still that's one kind of achievement.
The idea was to build a South Asian mind. Unless and until we have the regional campuses, I don't think we are having a South Asian mind. What we now have is an Indian University of South Asia rather than a South Asian University. There may be one or two other achievements in SAARC but not much. But now with the political stalemate, I think we need an out of the box thinking of how to revive SAARC. And I would say that we need to take lessons maybe from ASEAN, which now is ASEAN plus three. I think SAARC should also go know, SAARC plus three or SAARC plus four including Japan for example, include China for example, not to mention US. So, if we can include more actors, maybe SAARC will have a better future.

But again, the problem will be the same. India is there, Pakistan is there and you cannot change neighbours!
Well, it is interesting point but keep in mind that India and Pakistan are both in Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). So, if India and Pakistan can be in the SCO, why can't India and Pakistan together in SAARC, may be SAARC plus three or SAARC plus four? So, I am an optimist. I have always been an optimist person but going back to the old charter, would be difficult. I see it's time for us to reinvent. It's an interesting idea but the world has really become very complex and multipolar. Now, I will give you one more example why SAARC flus three or four can be done. And that is if you look at the trade regimes of all the South Asian countries, the largest you know, in terms of if you look at even bilateral trade, it is with China. Even India's largest trading regime is now China. So, China for example is economically almost a South Asian country.
So, I believe if we want to move further and if we want to develop South Asia to the extent some of the Asian economies have done, we need to work very hard and I believe a SAARC plus three or SAARC plus four can make a difference.

The trade within SAARC countries is less than 5 percent, though the trade outside SAARC is much more. So maybe this platform may not work !
No, you see, I think one of the mistakes was to start with economics and trade. You see, economics is a very complicated because it works on scarcity. And scarcity is also psychologically not an interesting concept because it emanates fear. So, if you start with scarcity, then you can't go very far. And that's the reason why I thought of writing concept of this South Asian University, focus on education and change in the mindset first. The mindset has not changed. So, with the trade and you have rightly pointed out with 5% intra-South Asian trade, we are not going to go very far. But if we had worked on other disciplines, and then come to trade, probably things would have been different.

But again, at the same time isn’t economy the only thing that brings these countries South Asian countries together !
Without Nepal-India trade there is no possibility of growth. Without even China-India, there is no growth possibility. So, trade and economy is the integral part of all these agreements or disagreements across the world, not only in South Asia. So, at the same time they are the most important basic thing also to link countries or to link the societies or people. That is where I think we got stuck because most, well, all the South Asian countries they produce almost the same thing. So, it's more competitive rather than cooperation. And all tend to go outside South Asia to profit.
In economy and in trade also, like you said, the countries in South Asia are producing the same thing and there is competition. But why can't we think that a product can be co-produced with the help of Nepal, Bangladesh and India. We can produce the same thing and sell it outside. There is a large room for that.
Absolutely. Nobody has thought about that till date. Well, on the bilateral basis there are something of that like an Ready-Made Garments (RMG). I think this is where we are failing because the mindset is such and not to mention the rules and regulations are so strict and rigid. We still carry the colonial rules and regulations. We need to change but, as I said, if the mindset is always kind of emanates fear that other is trying to take over because these are all new states, in a sense. All are post-colonial states. Nepal probably would be an exception in that case not been colonized but overall, our education has been highly colonized. And again, I have to say this is one thing that we are trying to address in the Master's Programme that we are launching in Kathmandu. And one of the pillars of MIAED course is decolonising international relations. We need to decolonize ourselves first. The reason we got stuck is because we haven't thought out of the box.

Don't you think multilateralism is much more complex compared to bilateralism?
Well, economically we are already multilateral because we are living in the age of globalization. Take for example, Bangladeshi garments, which is number two in the world after China. But I am wearing made in Bangladesh dress but that's little because the machines come from Germany, now they all they come from China. And cotton comes from India or East Africa or Central Asia. And then the design probably is from Paris or in New York or Italy. This is the unique part of this whole developmental economics because you can't have production of everything in one particular country.

And the electricity to run that company may have come from Nepal?
If you are already multilateral economically, what it needs that we need to transform that economic multilateralism into political multilateralism. And that is where the mindset has not really come up. Economically we are all connected. You can't have an economy now in the age of globalization because production has become international. This is the unique part of the of this whole developmental economics. Because you can't have production of everything in one particular country. So, if production is international, I see no reason why we can't transform ourselves into a political multilateralism.

Lately, Nepal, India and Bangladesh are trying to create joint venture to invest in hydropower and start energy trade. So, do you think this energy trade or like we have said the garments could propel this regionalism and kickstart the regional platform like SAARC again?
Absolutely. And it can go beyond SAARC. You know, this idea of energy corridor, when it comes to Nepal and Bangladesh it is only limited to 40 megawatts and that again on a seasonal basis. So, you know, once you have the grids and everything, you can really extend that and multiply that. Now, on the other hand, there's also a discussion now when our Prime Minister Tarek Rahman visited this time to Beijing, President Xi Jinping proposed the idea of Bangladesh, Myanmar, China economic corridor. And in that economic corridor, energy corridor is a critical one. After many years even Myanmar, their ambassador sat with Bangladesh counterpart to discuss the energy corridor between Myanmar and Bangladesh. Although we have a serious problem of the Rohingya issue. The issue of energy has become very critical after this Iran-US war and Hormuz. So, I believe we need to work very fast to make ourselves totally autonomous, if not independent, so that South Asia can grow collectively together. But if the mindset is ‘I will grow, I will not let others grow’, or if there is that tension, then we are not going to go very far.

But when we created SAARC, or even BIMSTEC or even BBIM, the whole idea was to grow together by promoting the free flow of goods and people across the border. And at one point of time, we even had envisioned single currency in SAARC before Euro. Single Euro came into practice but we failed. So, where did we fail?
Again, I would say mindset. I'll give you one example. The idea of South Asian University, for example, is a good one because the charter clearly points out that the objective is to develop a South Asian mind. Now, when it started, they insisted in having everything in Delhi for example, which had to be negotiated and at the very end the compromise was that the main campus will be in Delhi. Now, what it means that there will be other campus as well. And so, in the beginning they gave a five years moratorium that for five years regional campus can't be made. That five years has gone, it's already like 20 years now, nothing has come up. But look at the mindset, the idea was that each campus would be called by the name like the city Delhi campus, Colombo campus, Dhaka campus but moment you have a main, then it becomes very problematic for example for Pakistan, you know, or even Bangladesh would say what is this main thing. And there are good examples. The West Indies have done that, universities of West Indies which has campuses in different countries in West Indies. But the mindset is such that they insisted that it be Delhi and it could be called main campus. So, we ended up as I said earlier into an Indian university of South Asia. And more interestingly when the disciplines were decided, as I wrote the concept paper, the original idea was to have post-discipline faculties, something like faculty of peace studies or faculty of water futures, faculty of comparative religion. So, all disciplines can come and work. But then the person, who was given the charge, though he was a nice man and passed away, he insisted on the traditional disciplines, regular courses, regular biochemistry, economics. I think it's still time to rectify that. Now that is again, I go back to the Master's Programme of AIDIA.

The AIDIA-MIAED programme that you are leading, says Asian century. I think around 2010, intellectuals had said the epicenter of global economy is going to shift towards Asia. If we go by data also, Asia contributes almost 50% to the global GDP. So, having all these advantages and economic might also, why Asia couldn't get its role in the global politics?
Well, if you take whole of Asia, no. I believe you can't rule out China has a global position now. It has a very bigger position. It has already economically, if you look at the PPP, surpassed United States. So, some Asian economies have really done well. I would also include Singapore which is only 6 million Island, but it has really done remarkable. Also, you have South Korea and not to mention Vietnam is coming up. I think what has happened with Asia is there is a kind of a re-rise of Asian economies because back in 18th century China for example was the largest economy, even undivided India. I would say undivided India was the second largest economy in the world. Because I always talk about Bangladesh because back in 18th century when undivided India was the largest economy, Bengal was the richest province. And that's the reason why the colonial powers Britain came through Bengal. They stayed for nearly 200 years, which we never thought.
So, what we are having now is a re-rise of Asia. And this is the reason one of the pillars of AIDIA-MIAED is Asian futures. There are altogether four pillars; decolonizing international relations, Asian futures, Multipolarity and artificial intelligence (AI). So, it's structured in a way where we need new scholars, new thinkers and this program hopefully will help build minds which will transform Asia even more.

In 2024 Bangladesh witnessed Gen Z movement. And in 2026 Nepal witnessed the Gen Z movement, which only in 48 hours the whole regime changed. Compare Bangladesh movement, the media and intellectuals claim that Bangladeshi textbook is followed in Nepal or it's replicated. Do you think it is possible in today's world to go on experimenting the same thing from one country to another?
No, I think, there may be similarities with all uprisings and revolutions. And since it is happening at one time, even in Sri Lanka. Even people connect this with India's recent Cockroach Janata Party movement. Keep in mind that whether it is uprising or revolution, there is always the youth had a role to play. Back in 71 when we had a serious war with Pakistan, a liberation war, I was just a class 9 student. But I left my parents. I did not tell them. I went to India. I literally slept on the pavement to join the Mutibahini. But I was not an exception. There were young students, who also were participating in the liberation war. So, that is always in all age. Every generation has aspiration to change. So, I don't know why they give the name because, if I take Bangladesh, all the regime change that has taken place in Bangladesh, all the uprising and the demonstrations except one or two, all started in Dhaka University. That means students were always involved. So, I don't think this is the end of Gen Z. There will be more Gen Z. Well, naming, branding, is it good or bad? I'm not really sure. I don't want to go into that. But the point is youth getting engaged in social movement is nothing new.
So, what has happened in Nepal or in Sri Lanka or in Bangladesh and you can take Tunisia, Egypt. Yes, there is a little bit of similarity and that's the reason you have to be very careful of whether you are falling into trap or not, whether the expectation is too much or not. Because in our case for example in Bangladesh, the expectation was very high. But that created different kinds of problem. Some wanted early election, some did not. So, we had election one-and-a-half year later. Whereas Nepal held very quickly election on time and Nepal got elected government. So, there may be some similarities but I think each of these uprisings or revolutions, whatever you say, happened due to absolutely domestic issues. You know, at the end of the day, it's people who sacrifice. Yes, external actors may have interest, may have instigated in one way or other, may have even supported one way or other, but that they can do because there is a space for them to do. If the space is not there, if there is no what you call division, if there is no authority and structure or exploitation or dissatisfaction or alienation, then I don't think the external factor works. It's the internal dynamics that we have to look into. And then of course, one can see some similarities but I will rule out that somebody on the top is doing everything. I don't think that is how it works it had been in the past like you say Cold War era, there is the when the world was bipolar one faction and another faction they used to do such things. Maybe that is why people are today also saying someone is orchestrating. All these are all planned things.

What do you think, like you said in the beginning, in the multipolar world, the small states like Nepal has a role. So, how do you think the small states should be prepared to play that role?
Well, first I have to say that I don't take Nepal to be a small state. I think the small power is okay but not a small state. Largely because there is a UN definition of small state and also, I believe if I am not wrong, WHO also has a definition of small state. Nepal doesn't fall into that definition. It's a small power. I think what we need to see the positive side of Nepal is that first Nepal was never colonized. That allows Nepal in many ways to maneuver in a way particular thought processes it doesn't have the hang-ups that some of the South Asian countries have, including Bangladesh or India, we are highly colonized. Ashish Nandy used to always say that the British have left, the physical colonialism has gone but mental colonialism still remains. So, we are highly mentally still colonized. So, Nepal has an advantage of not being colonized. So, it can actually have an education structure qualitatively different from rest of the South Asian countries. Although, because the Nepali scholars studied in the West or studied in India or in South Asia, they also get infected by the colonial discourse and ends up with the colonized mind. So, advantage is in history. The second advantage is Nepal's geographical position. Being at the center, literally the center of the earth. With the Himalayas and Mt Everest, it's the center of the earth, or the third pole. So, you are at the center. But more importantly Nepal has two big economies; one is China and another is India. And what a potential these two countries or two economies have. China has already shown. It's only that India is lagging behind for its own internal dynamics and I'm sure they have to rectify that and come up with extraordinary thinking to go even further. But you know with these two economies, there's no reason why Nepal will not emerge also as a developed economy because it can always fall back on both sides it should decide on not to be either or that's the only thing the moment it decides that we would engage with the multipolar world. And India is a polar as much as China is another polar, and not to mention other polar is also important.  I believe Nepal has a big future, and that is the reason AIDIA-MIAED has one of the pillars as Asian futures with Nepal at the center.
(First published in nepalkhabar.com -- https://en.nepalkhabar.com/news/detail/19802/)