The government is bracing up for the third Nepal Investment Summit starting from March 29. It will showcase about sixty projects requiring an investment of around USD 30 billion. However, nothing can be said whether foreign investors will be interested to invest in these projects. Lessons from past events tell us that heavy foreign investment cannot be realized until there is a sound investment climate in the country.

The first investment summit in 1992 did bring some foreign investment so that the country achieved a growth rate of seven percent. The second investment summit held in 2017 was able to bring only USD 180 million out of USD 14 billion committed. The low level of investment corresponds to the low level of credibility of the government and poor investment climate.

As of 2011, Nepal had the highest minimum wage in South Asia (US$83.76 per month), followed by Pakistan (US$82.17 per month), India (US$ 64.07 per month), Sri Lanka (US$51.22 per month), and Bangladesh (US$40.46 per month).

Access to market, transparent and predictable legal environment, security, and quality infrastructure are some of the preconditions to attract foreign investment in any country. Unfortunately, none of these elements in Nepal are in good shape. Despite its location in the middle of giant markets, Nepal is unable to reap benefits either from the huge Indian or the Chinese market.

Exports of Nepalese products to the Indian market is not easy. It is an open secret of how India discourages exports of Nepalese products. Often Nepalese goods are held at the Indian checkpoints along the border disrupting the smooth flow of goods. Neither the prospective foreign investors nor the diplomatic missions stationed in Kathmandu are uninformed of this fact.

Nepal lags far behind compared to its South Asian neighbors in terms of its infrastructure development. For example, while India’s road density is 142 km per 100 square km, Nepal’s road density is only 34 km per 100 square km. Similarly, Nepal’s rank is 117th in world infrastructure quality index compared to the 27th position of Sri Lanka, and the 61st position of India. It is not just the case of roads, other infrastructures such as electricity, water supply, and communication are also not strong enough to attract FDI.

Another obstacle in inviting FDI in the country is the low labor productivity but high minimum wage of Nepalese labors. In the past, we said that investors will come to Nepal thanks to its low labor cost. But currently, the labor cost of Nepal is one of the highest in the region. As of 2011, Nepal had the highest minimum wage in South Asia (US$83.76 per month), followed by Pakistan (US$82.17 per month), India (US$ 64.07 per month), Sri Lanka (US$51.22 per month), and Bangladesh (US$40.46 per month).

According to the Global Wage Report 2018/2019, the average real wage growth for the period of 2008-2017 in Nepal is 4.7 per month that is slightly less than in India (505%) and more than in Sri Lanka (4%), Bangladesh (3.4%), and Pakistan (1.8%).

Forthcoming investment summit is being organized without improving the investment climate. As evidenced by the recent doing business report, the environment for business and investment is deteriorating in the country.

On the other hand, according to the Asian Productivity Organization (APO) databook 2017, the productivity of Nepalese labor is only 21% compared to that of Sri Lankan labor and 46% in contrast to the Indian labor. High minimum wage and low productivity make production in Nepal very costly.

The third major obstacle to invite FDI in Nepal is its fragile security situation. Extortion, frequent strikes, rowdy and militant trade unions are common in Nepalese industrial sector. The recent bombing in the Ncell premises and the government’s decision to ban the ‘Biplab’ led Maoist party has again raised suspicion on the security situation of the country.

Governance-related issues such as rampant corruption, lengthy entry and exit process for companies, lengthy visa process for foreign workers etc. are other hurdles for foreign investment. It is found that a foreign worker needs to put more than 30 signatures in terms of paper works for obtaining work permit and visa. Besides, it takes as much as 3 months to complete the process.

Forthcoming investment summit is being organized without improving the investment climate. As evidenced by the recent doing business report, the environment for business and investment is deteriorating in the country.

It appears that the government selected the projects to be showcased in the summit without thorough homework. For an investor, a genuine reason for investing in Nepal at this time could be to benefit from India’s removal from Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) program by the USA, and from the India-China trade conflict. Yet, the dream of FDI influx in the country is least likely to materialize given the existing investment climate.

Given the stark reality of investment climate, the upcoming investment summit bespeaks of a mere ritual that the government is happy to perform with full fanfare. However, as a responsible citizen, we welcome the investors in Nepal hoping that they may perhaps persuade the government to create an enabling environment for making another such summit a success.

Views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the stance of Khabarhub.

It is a pretty scary question dangling on people’s tongues whether violence has come back in Nepali politics. In the wake of Biplav’s declaration of physical assaults on the leaders of the country to redress public grievances and stern response from the government to suppress it, people got swayed by the return of violence that was seen, over ten years, not sparing the innocent people. The peace process following the halt of the Maoist war is yet to be completed.

The excesses and atrocities committed during the 10-year fight are yet to be resolved. The lost and strayed victims are yet to be traced out. The innocent victims are yet to be determined and compensated. It is at such critical time that violence is staring at the hills and dales of Nepal.

Of course, Biplav was then a part of the Maoist force. But he parted company from the mainstream Maoists and is challenging his own erstwhile colleagues in the government. Those who get sandwiched between two rivals are invariably the innocent people.

I would like to recall what I said on 26 Oct 2002, some 17 years ago, that “even if the Maoists renounce violence permanently with the successful outcome of any potential talks, there is no guarantee that violence will end forever in Nepal. The splinter group in the Maoist cadre is an indication towards this direction.”  Of course, Biplav was then a part of the Maoist force. But he parted company from the mainstream Maoists and is challenging his own erstwhile colleagues in the government. Those who get sandwiched between two rivals are invariably the innocent people.

Unfortunately, our political history is fraught with violence and bloodshed. Take the big changes enforced by Prithvi Narayan Shah, Jung Bahadur Rana and Bhimsen Thapa in the Nepalese chronicles. They tell stories full of struggles and bloodshed. Even the biggest change in 1950 was not bloodless. It is something different that the revolution ended in compromise and contract.

If we look back at the role of the gun, it has made a lot of impacts. By sheer coincidence, the Maoists looked like the great followers of the Nepali Congress. The armed rebellion, the Maoists launched in 1996, and more intensively since 2001, had a great resemblance with the one that the Nepali Congress had started in 1962.

Both were dissidents and harbored serious political disgruntlement. It is almost 60 years that King Mahendra scrapped the parliamentary constitution and dissolved the parliament. He not only dismissed democratically elected B.P.Koirala government but also threw all the members of his cabinet behind bars. It indeed invited armed but unsuccessful retaliation from the exiled Congressmen.

Violence has eventually gained credence in our political culture, if not in our constitution. The constitutional framework, at present or in the past, did not make room for a violent activity but violence made its presence felt in the country. The government has formed a committee to hold dialogues with such groups, which mushroomed especially in the lower plain of Nepal. Fortunately, most of them renounced the guns and joined the peaceful stream.

The party as such did not abandon violence as a means of achieving a political end. It resorted to it against the Ranas and against King Mahendra. Who is not? The communists are ideologically believers in violence and many of our leaders were involved in Jhapa incidents of violence.  Even many of the RPP leaders, who were dominant during the Panchayat period, had got their hands smeared with blood in the course of suppressing the so-called enemies of the erstwhile establishment.

The Maoists preached and practiced violence without any qualm of conscience. They are at the helm of affairs today. In the present context, it is the communists fighting against the communists. By sheer coincidence, both the communist parties, one at Singh Durbar and the other in the western hills, are known by the same name. Even Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli made a caustic remark on it and expressed disdain at his opponents.

Violence has eventually gained credence in our political culture, if not in our constitution. The constitutional framework, at present or in the past, did not make room for a violent activity but violence made its presence felt in the country. The government has formed a committee to hold dialogues with such groups, which mushroomed especially in the lower plain of Nepal. Fortunately, most of them renounced the guns and joined the peaceful stream.

In the midst of the Maoist war, the government agreed to hold peace talks with the rebels, who had no other mandate of the people except the power gained through the barrel of the gun. All the political parties approved the talks thereby taking cognizance of a violent force beyond the periphery of the national constitution. The same call has been repeated now. Many political parties and leaders have asked the Oli government to hold talks with the Biplav group instead of clamping down a ban on his group and dragging them to mainstream politics.

Those who are in power are found to be treating violence with greater violence. Since the inception of the Maoist menace in Nepal, all the prime ministers followed the same retaliatory policies against them. K.P. Bhattarai stated many times during his tenure of office that the army and the police would take care of the Maoists and solve the problem. They never did. Girija Prasad Koirala tried to deal with it like a law-and-order problem and mobilized the police forces. He failed. Surya Bahadur Thapa and Lokendra Bahadur Chand were not different in their handling of the problem when they became prime ministers. Sher Bahadur Deuba went too far ahead by declaring them as terrorists and clamped down a state of emergency. Now it is the turn of Prime Minister Oli to appear tough and aggressive against the Biplav force.

What need to be emphasized is that until the real issues of the people are addressed, violence will remain an unavoidable feature of Nepalese political life. Poverty and desperation in the Nepalese society are its perennial source. Nepal’s geography is a favorable factor for it. It is just a question of new disgruntled organizers how far they could go in making it an effective instrument.

In the wake of the current violence, we crave for peace talks leading to permanent peace. Peace talks by itself are no solution. It is again only a means to a solution. That might bring about a political solution but does not eradicate violence. To do away with violence we must get to the roots of our problems. They are development, justice, and equity. The government should logically concentrate on achieving them.

Explicably, Nepal’s political crisis and instability is not merely an outcome of Nepal’s internal political failure, rather its instability is a strategic outcome of the West to contain China and maintain surveillance over India’s relation with Russia and Iran.

Nepal, a country that acts as a bridge between the rising powers, China and India has plunged into an unending political instability and chaos, thereby ruining its economy. Nepal’s underdevelopment and political instability stand as a paradox to the leap of economic prosperity by its immediate neighbors.

Since Nepal is located between India and China, it draws a lot of attention from the West. In fact, it is the meddling by the West that has resulted in the poor fate of Nepal. Meddling of the West in Nepal is inspired by the motives of encircling China through its influence along the Nepal-China border, pushing Indo-US relations to the interest of the US and using Nepal as a window of intelligence in monitoring developments in relation to South Asia, Central Asia and particularly, Nepal’s Neighbors; China and India.

International organizations and foreign non-governmental organizations were not only driven towards dampening of communist spirit. They were also titled towards promoting Christianity.

By virtue of this unwanted ‘attention’ from the West, Nepal is rendered a scapegoat of the strategy employed by the western powers to contain both India and China. To serve its purpose of making Nepal a fragile state, the West implemented the following measures.

Transplantation of Neo-liberalism     

The most prominent after-effects of neo-liberal policies in the Nepalese context is apparent in post 90’s political change. Economic liberalization was used to destroy the nascent foundation of industrialization and public undertakings in the country. The structural adjustment policy used by the IMF and World Bank and western donor agencies destroyed the rising trend of industrial endeavors. Financial system handed over to the middle man and unethical corporatists. The industrial growth that had reached to around 16 percent in the early ’90s deteriorated to minus 6 percent in 2002.

As a result of the neo-liberalist game plan, several growing industries were destroyed. Butwal Thread Factory, Himal Cement Factory, Birgunj Sugar Mill, Agricultural Equipment factory, Trolley Bus, Nepal National Construction Company, Nepal Engineering Consultancy Service Centre, Nepal National Computer Centre, Harisiddhi Brick Factory, Hetauda Clothing Factory, Rosin and Turpentine Factory, Nepal Ropeway, Janakpur Tobacco Factory, Godawari Marble Industry, Godawari Iron, Biratnagar Jute Mill, Herbal Processing Plant and National Trading Limited among other public undertakings were auctioned in the name of liberalization. Thus, public control in the industrial sector was shattered.

Dampening leftist revolutionary spirit      

Transplantation of liberalization was primarily done to institutionalize western liberal political structure. This would as per the western assumption prevent the rise of communists in Nepal. Contrary to the assumption of western power blocks, the communists emerged as powerful stakeholders in Nepalese polity after 1990. Enthusiastic local organizations working towards change which was run through party workers with high dedication and spirit became a challenge to West’s agenda.

Western power block was aware that a politically and economically fragile Nepal was required to implement its containment strategy against China and India.

Hence to dampen the communist revolutionary spirit NGO’s were regarded as effective instruments. The then CPN (UML) was a particular target of this. CPN (UML) intellectuals and cadres were given easy access to western funding through several NGO’s and INGO’s. 1990’s change which restored multiparty democracy in Nepal opened the door for entry of foreign non-nongovernmental organizations (FNGOs). The glaring fact that there are more than 254 FNGOs and INGOs actively engaged in Nepal point out to the intensity of West’s intrusion done through them.

Proselytization through Christianity 

International organizations and foreign non-governmental organizations were not only driven towards dampening of communist spirit. They were also titled towards promoting Christianity. Amongst the 254 NGOs and INGOs, 15 percent are engaged in promoting Christianity. They appear to be carrying out activities under the pretext of development activities. These organizations are also able to invoke the doctrine of ‘religious secularism’, thus, establishing solid constitutional grounds for recognition and growth of religious proselytization of Hindus and Buddhist’s into Christianity. Marginalized communities were the primary target of proselytization.

Diversion of national issues 

Western power block was aware that a politically and economically fragile Nepal was required to implement its containment strategy against China and India. For this purpose, the scheme of ethnic cleavage followed by the notion of federalization was injected into Nepalese politics. This was primarily done subsequent to the 90’s change of Nepal into a multiparty democracy. Coinciding with the political change in the country, academic works relevant to ‘identity politics’ was brought forth. The primary objective was to instill a perception within the Nepalese people on the dissimilarity and a sense of discrimination by one group over others.

This activity was largely carried out to weaken Nepal’s socio-cultural mosaic so that the West’s agenda of containment could easily be executed in politically unstable Nepal. Even after the political change of 2006 and during the tenure of both the constituent assemblies, the notion of ethnic federalism was heavily promoted by FNGOs and INGOs. UNDP Constituent Assembly Support conducted several programs on the theme.

Ethnic identity-based federalism was promoted as the only durable means of the peace process in Nepal. However, the second constituent assembly that promulgated the constitution of Nepal did not include the idea of state restructuring and federalism based on ethnic identity. Thus, Nepal was saved from perpetually being thrown into a chaos of ethnic conflict.

With this strategic goal, the western power block maintains relations with Countries like Nepal, Bangladesh, and Bhutan and so on, even if their political significance in international affairs is negligible. Nepal’s geopolitical location makes it vital for executing the strategic objective against India and China.

Since this strategy of the West was unsuccessful, Nepal was dragged into a state of post-constitution conflict. Various sections of Nepalese society disillusioned by identity politics were encouraged to protest the newly promulgated constitution.

Resisting China’s presence in Nepal

Several public enterprises established by China as friendly assistance were destroyed in the pretext of liberalization. Such enterprises were indiscriminately auctioned to private individuals in a manner of sabotage. Basbari Shoe Factory established by the Government of China as a gift to Nepal was sold to an Indian company in a heavily devalued manner. To uproot China’s presence from Nepal was the hidden agenda behind this. Bhrikuti Paper Factory, another gift of China was also subsequently closed within the neo-liberal design and foreign companies were granted access to the Nepalese paper market. These included, removal of Trolley-Bus Transportation system, another gift of China, represent a humiliating treatment of China’s good faith in Nepal’s development endeavors.

Political leadership here lacked prudence in a flourishing relationship with China. No attention was paid towards taking China into confidence to resolve the political crisis in Nepal. China was ignored for a long time under the pretext that all the political problems in Nepal could be resolved through the help of India alone.

Due to its shortsightedness, Nepal rather earned an image of Indian satellite state in matters of political affairs. The fact of how Khampa Rebellion was orchestrated, clearly portrays that the western power block does not want China’s presence in Nepal.

A weaker Nepal is a desired choice of the western power block. Hence, the above-mentioned activities were orchestrated with an underlying goal to keep Nepal under the western leverage and to implement the ‘Double Containment Strategy’. It is now evidenced that Nepal’s political instability is an outcome of the double containment strategy opted by the western power block. Explicably, Nepal’s political crisis and instability is not merely an outcome of Nepal’s internal political failure, rather its instability is a strategic outcome of the West to contain China and maintain surveillance over India’s relation with Russia and Iran.

With this strategic goal, the western power block maintains relations with Countries like Nepal, Bangladesh, and Bhutan and so on, even if their political significance in international affairs is negligible. Nepal’s geopolitical location makes it vital for executing the strategic objective against India and China.

Keeping China and India divided is also one of the major strategic thrusts of the ‘Double Containment strategy.’ This factor also highlights the significance of Nepal’s geopolitical location as a strategic hotpot. With this intention of keeping intact the ‘Double Containment strategy’ of China and India through Nepal, the game continues to unfold. Pernicious effort to confuse masses within Nepal and to manufacture conflict is still in execution. If kept unchecked and unresolved, this would derail Nepal from its development prospects, and more importantly, it would be fatal in strategic terms to both India and China.

A western educated CK Raut and a long-time associate of Pushpa Kamal Dahal, Netra Bikram Chand came into limelight when the government decided to settle the issues raised by Raut on the one hand and declare Chand as a criminal outfit, on the other.

There may be a cause to declare Chand’s revolutionist movement as criminal as it was continuously involved in a series of bomb blasts, extortion and other likewise activities. Yet, what prompted PM Oli to negotiate with a secessionist overnight? That has left many surprised.

Not to be too biased, if PM Oli has used CK Raut’s personal image and his party strength to counter his rival RJP in Province no. 2 politics – it will merely be a dream as Raut and his party has no political base at all.

The obvious reason could be the vacuum created in the Madhes politics after Rastriya Janata Party (RJP) withdrew its support to Nepal Communist Party government to protest against eleven years imprisonment to its Tharu leader, Resham Chaudhary.

CPN is a weak opposition in Province no 2 compared to Sanghiya Samajbadi Forum and RJP. To minimize their role, it needs another powerful faction to ally with which can counter Forum and RJP, and even Nepali Congress. Therefore, NCP could have thought that CK Raut’s ‘Free Madhes Alliance’ could help it to establish well in Province no. 2 if it is brought into mainstream politics.

Another reason to bring it in the mainstream could be as per the grand design of the west as a part of its strategy. If it is so and proved accordingly, the NCP government will be dragged into another controversy similar to supporting the ‘Universal Peace Federation – a holy wine episode’. Perhaps it will be more sensational as it is related to undermining nation’s territorial integrity as claimed by Bhim Rawal.

Not to be too biased, if PM Oli has used CK Raut’s personal image and his party strength to counter his rival RJP in Province no. 2 politics – it will merely be a dream as Raut and his party has no political base at all. So, one can easily imagine why and how PM Oli reached a decision to compromise with a secessionist group that had not even reached a level of strategic stalemate with the state. It looks either he or his think tanks are fully immature or he is guided by the westerners.

On the contrary, the government has failed to understand that a majority of people are gradually getting frustrated with it due to its own activities.

In respect to Chand’s revolutionist faction, it was slowly threatening the state mechanism. However, it had also not reached the level of strategic stalemate with the security forces. So, the government could have decided to counter it through a defensive policy with increased surveillance at the sensitive installations and offensive policy to counter extortion as well as increased vigilance at the public places.

The government has failed to render good governance and minimize corruption. Thus, people feel insecure from the government itself. In such a scenario, public confidence in the demands of counter-revolutionists considerably deteriorates.

The government’s role in such a situation should be to win and enhance its confidence among people. Instead of improving governance and adopting a policy that widens the gap between the revolutionist and the commoners – the government has opted for a punitive policy by dubbing ‘Biplab’ led NCP as a criminal outfit. On the contrary, the government has failed to understand that a majority of people are gradually getting frustrated with it due to its own activities.

The recent development in national politics related to the agreement between the government and secessionist leader CK Raut evoked mixed reactions from the ruling party, civil society, and the media.

However, the announcement of forming a new party called ‘Janamat Party’ by CK Raut has abated the speculations to a bit since his party publicly announced that they would join the mainstream politics abiding by Nepal’s constitution and its territorial integrity.

The NCP government led by KP Oli entered into an 11-point agreement with CK Raut on March 8, which welcomes the decision of Raut to join mainstream politics by abandoning his long-cherished demand for secession of Madhes from the country as a separate independent state.

It had come as a piece of stunning news for all sections, including the ruling party members. Some civil society members opposed the agreement on the ground CK Raut had not publicly renounced his secessionist design. Former PM and opposition leader Sher Bahadur Deuba, while welcoming the agreement, cautioned all concerned against any attempt to tamper with the country’s territorial integrity, including its sovereignty and national independence.

Some NCP stalwarts like Bhim Rawal complained of the failure of the party in power to consult other party members on an important issue like this and vociferously criticized the agreement, in particular its reference to ‘abhimat’ (people’s mandate) which, as Rawal alleged, could be interpreted as a call for referendum on the issue of free Madhes.

It is true that the wildly enthusiastic followers and supporters of Raut, soon after the agreement, held rallies shouting slogans for free Madhes. Even those who welcomed the agreement felt embarrassed and uneasy when Raut did not prevent his unruly followers from raising provocative voice for a separatist movement in defiance of the spirit of just concluded agreement.

The government, in particular, Home Minister Ram Bahadur Thapa categorically stated that the agreement would be null and void if Raut interpreted ‘people’s mandate’ mentioned in the agreement as an understanding to hold ‘referendum’ on secession.

There has been speculation that there was some kind of understanding between the apex court and the government, with the result that the court had ordered the release of Raut just one day before the government entered into an agreement with the secessionist leader. Reacting to such dramatic development, a section of the media became critical of the agreement and viewed it as something imposed from by some alien forces much the same way as had been the case with the Delhi-sponsored 12-point understanding much to the detriment of Nepal’s national interest.

The media in its commentary goes so far as to question the nationalistic credentials of PM Oli. It reaches the conclusion that Nepal is no longer safe from the evil designs of inimical forces both from within and without.

Now that an agreement has been signed welcoming Raut to join national politics, and that he has renamed his party as ‘Janamat Party’, we must give both sides the benefit of doubt while calling upon them to sincerely implement the agreement in letter and spirit keeping in mind the larger interest of the entire country and its people who crave for peace, freedom, justice, security and development and are opposed to any kind of separatist movement.

Tarai Madhes is an integral part of Nepal and the government must ensure constitutionally guaranteed fundamental rights and freedoms to the people living in that region without letting them grumble against discriminatory practices if such practices persist.

Most of us are unhappy not because we have less but because we think so. The moment we make a correct assessment of what we have in terms of physical possessions and social relationships, most of us will find ourselves in a different world of contentment.

People often claim to be spiritual. Some of them may be genuinely spiritual. But the question is how to determine if one is really spiritual. There are, of course, ways to ascertain it.

Most of them are under the illusion that spirituality would sweep them away from their social, professional and economic activities. That is one misapprehension that scares them away from getting oriented to spirituality. Nothing could be further from the truth. These false impressions have unwittingly left a fear psychosis.

Much has been said about the power of spirituality. There are many legendary spiritual figures who have demonstrated supernatural power and influence in their life.

Some people fear that if they embrace a spiritual way of life and thinking, they might too turn into ascetics, who abandon their family and career.

Most of them are under the illusion that spirituality would sweep them away from their social, professional and economic activities. That is one misapprehension that scares them away from getting oriented to spirituality. Nothing could be further from the truth. These false impressions have unwittingly left a fear psychosis.

Spirituality is, in simple terms, good for an attitudinal change. It is true that without a change in attitude we cannot achieve happiness. Most of us are unhappy not because we have less but because we think so. The moment we make a correct assessment of what we have in terms of physical possessions and social relationships, most of us will find ourselves in a different world of contentment.

Many authentic findings have established that people keep on postponing to enjoy a state of happiness in the hope of getting something more than what they have at their disposal. If they turn their head around and change their outlook, they have every reason to be satisfied with their life. Spirituality helps people to turn around this way from darkness to light, dissatisfaction to satisfaction and unhappiness to happiness.

Spirituality being something personal, a question arises if it can be put to a test. How to determine whether somebody is spiritual or not? I think we can do it through self-examination. In order to understand spirituality in person, one has to first understand the five basic senses that man is made of. They are the eyes, ears, nose, tongue, and touch. They are the instruments of information and knowledge duly acquired by our mind.

However, the mind is not the synonym of man, the term we use to express the inner being. Nevertheless, the mind is used in common parlance to denote our attention and inner being. In that sense, the mind receives the knowledge and stocks it in what we often express as intellect. In the internal world, there is something beyond and above the mind.

This entity different from the mind is a constant observer watching what is going on inside us. It does not distinguish the good from bad, correct from false and harmful from beneficial. Observation is the only task it is capable of doing. We can call it the spirit, the soul or super-consciousness. It is known differently. However, the function it performs is one and the same. That is an observation in our internal world.

We can say in general that those who are familiar with these phenomena and their interrelationship are spiritual. They should be able to differentiate the internal from the external. What goes on inside does not necessarily reflect outside. Nor does every external factor have its impact inside. One can master over the inner phenomena by following spiritual discipline. But there is no way one can command over the external forces responsible for happenings outside.

However, a spiritual person tends not to be affected by such bias and is found to think often objectively. A spiritual initiate starts changing opinion on issues and people shirking away from the inherent bias. In other words, we can say that prejudice gets on loosening with the passage of time and helps develop objectivity in every circumstance.

Those who are spiritually aware eventually develop a power to grasp this distinction between them. The dual beings of a doer and an observer can act externally in sync with their inner sources. In these circumstances, they may appear at times ridiculous, incongruous or out-of-place, but they find themselves clear on what they act upon or do not. This is one way of testing spirituality in oneself.

The second way of testing spirituality is to see if one has developed a self-supervisory power. With spiritual awareness, one is able to look at oneself and keeps a constant vigil over oneself. If one is angry, he/she is conscious of anger hovering over. The fact that one is aware of one’s own anger acts as a tempering factor and, as a result of it, anger starts losing its absolute grip over one.

The result of the expression of anger is not as disastrous as it would have been if its rage were let loose uncontrolled or un-tempered. Similarly, a truly spiritual person is able to examine one’s own social conduct and behavior and make a judgment if one is going out of bounds or is acting within the accepted decorum.

The third way of testing is to see if one is developing an attitude of neutrality. We find most of the people in society holding very strong opinions on controversial issues. They believe they are correct in their outlook whereas those holding opposite views are wrong. Prejudice plays a vital role in such opinionated people.

However, a spiritual person tends not to be affected by such bias and is found to think often objectively. A spiritual initiate starts changing opinion on issues and people shirking away from the inherent bias. In other words, we can say that prejudice gets on loosening with the passage of time and helps develop objectivity in every circumstance.

The fourth method of testing is to see if the spiritual initiate appreciates others’ conditions and opinions. There are people who give a damn to others’ opinion. They never try to understand as to why other people act or acted the way they do or did. This kind of attitude of critical appreciation creeps in those who are getting spiritually inclined.

The fifth criterion of the test can be applied to whether one’s outlook is getting broadened or not. Broadening of viewpoint on an individual, social and global issues should naturally flow from the spiritual initiates. Spiritual awareness liberates man from the bondage of pride and prejudice and helps embrace a broad view of the universe in the course of time. That is how spirituality helps people to find their proper place and feel a sense of fulfillment in their life.

We may all agree that with the demise of state-sponsored tyrannies liberal democracy has emerged as the final form of government, akin to what Fukuyama declared the ‘end of history’ three decades ago. That was a period of a big shift since European nations were first shuffled into a sovereign order by the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648.

One of the striking features of this great political quake has also been the emergence of general discourse on good government and democratization or transition to democracy. New and strikingly diverse populist movements continue to hold political prominence due to severe institutional inertia and market insecurities that have made democratic reforms prone to new patterns of social and political mobilizations.

However, its repeated failure to adequately consolidate democratic institutions and overcome problems of discrimination and economic disparity is largely due to weird manipulations of political mafia from among limping proletarians of orthodox Marxism-Leninism-Maoism through pompous democrats.

Today, the basic points of political debate revolve around the question whether shared norms and beliefs can determine a public policy. The old Platonic view that a citizen might be unable to comprehend the complexities of government to understand the crude realities and so, politics must be secured from the impact of public opinion now seems as implausible as Almond and Powell’s made on civic culture that remained fixated on and dominated by power elites for decades and now face serious challenge.

Much of what we know about Nepal is that since 1948 it has faced three waves of democracy and seven constitutions. However, its repeated failure to adequately consolidate democratic institutions and overcome problems of discrimination and economic disparity is largely due to weird manipulations of political mafia from among limping proletarians of orthodox Marxism-Leninism-Maoism through pompous democrats. Many people now realize that the old problems of perennial order such as dominant state and fragmented society remain largely in place. This induces one to visualize two kinds of threat: return of authoritarianism or roller-coaster form of conflict. Nepal’s current phenomenon is also linked to its geostrategic position and Omni directional foreign policy which is incompatible for peace, prosperity and stability.

 Whether Nepalese transition fits well in the standard parameters of democratization literature is an open-ended puzzle.

Nepal’s political matrix for structural changes is evident, especially in terms of the manoeuvres to solve the fundamental issues to set up democratic pluralism despite manifestation of populism by classic left and right diehards. The question is whether the transitional journey is indeed toward the rule of law, accountability, responsiveness, freedom, and equality.

Even today, it would be no exaggeration to say that division exists in Nepalese society between the powerful elite which constitutes a small minority of the population but has been able to constantly remain dominant in terms of social, political and economic powers.

Politically, the revolution for republic in 2006 ended the combat phase of the Maoists’ conflict, bringing them into the mainstream. Whether Nepalese transition fits well in the standard parameters of democratization literature is an open-ended puzzle. In fact, the impetus for a democratic republic had come primarily from an indigenous groundswell in which the reformers were sufficiently powerful to break down the old order.

 It is clear that democracy is a culture of debate. So, theories of deliberative democracy recognize the inclusion of everybody being affected by a decision as the most important criterion for its legitimacy.

Yet, the inability of political parties to manage good governance and internal contradictions, both political and socioeconomic, continued to be virtually monopolized by the few. An irony is that although the republic has dismantled the legal barriers to political participation by women and representation of ethnic or religious minorities, the inner ring, or the nucleus in control of state power and resources of the country, is composed of the same elite group.

Subsequent rings of the society emanate toward the periphery, with the extreme periphery which is farthest from the center consisting of the majority of rural population: predominantly peasants, who severely lack representation and opportunities.

This type of politics has failed to extend the network so that the citizens may share information about their interests, needs and preferences and generate political efficacy that plays a significant role in shaping political participation and civic engagement to duly foster a progressive and participatory democracy.

There is, of course, less agreement over the precise significance of democracy or model of democracy and even concerning people’s political choices and preferences in democracies in terms of finding points of unity in the human condition and perhaps even on fledgling global citizenship. It is clear that democracy is a culture of debate. So, theories of deliberative democracy recognize the inclusion of everybody being affected by a decision as the most important criterion for its legitimacy. That is why democracy has become increasingly prevalent in recent decades.

The central dogma of Nepali politics is largely due to volatile and fragmented party system. Its ‘contentious politics’ is manifested in compliant behavior, dissenting attitude, and deficient leadership skills. This type of politics has failed to extend the network so that the citizens may share information about their interests, needs and preferences and generate political efficacy that plays a significant role in shaping political participation and civic engagement to duly foster a progressive and participatory democracy.

To sum up, we find that good governance is virtually the missing link in Nepal in order to systematically respond to the shifts in public opinion and to mobilize against injustices in the absence of developed civic virtues by a reputed mechanism. Yet, the present phase of democratization is considerably different in comparison to the earlier periods in the sense that now is the first time that the question of fundamentally restructuring Nepali society has actually been raised.

The coeval situation in the world politics is seeing a major shift in the global power-structure that is unfolding a new dimension within itself. Particularly, the rise of China and India as crucial stakeholders in terms of economic as well as political dynamics is a major catalytic factor for this shift. These shifting paradigms are starkly felt across the world, either implicitly or explicitly. This development has, as a matter of fact, brought forth a commodious challenge to the monopoly and dominance of the USA and its allies in the world politics and economic affairs. This development unfailingly leads towards reshaping the existing Euro-American power structure into something beyond.

Realization of this power-based notion leads to the materialization of their goals. By gaining such power, a state may achieve ability to force other states do what they otherwise would not. Hence, the rise of new powers in the world politics, in accordance with this power-centric theory, is considered as a momentum of attaining the dominant power status.

Western understanding of this paradigm shift or rise of new nations is distinct to that of common people across the globe and involves or associates a “fear-psyche of losing their dominant status in world politics.” Consequently, the US and its allies are obsessively involved in defining the international politics from the perspective of the principle that considers politics as an instrument of super power to dominate the weak as against the need of cooperation for shared development.

The history of colonial plunder demonstrates that the Western powers amassed massive wealth colonizing other countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America. In search of unlimited power and wealth these powers imposed a brute dominance of colonial rule.

Realization of this power-based notion leads to the materialization of their goals. By gaining such power, a state may achieve ability to force other states do what they otherwise would not. Hence, the rise of new powers in the world politics, in accordance with this power-centric theory, is considered as a momentum of attaining the dominant power status. This has been the main tenet of political thought of the Western concerning emergence of new nations in the political realm. This theory essentially negates the phenomenon of new nations’ rise and regards it as a threat to its dominant position. This perception continues to manifest in the real world historically and in modern days as demonstrated by the maneuvers of the Western powers. The adventure for uninhibited plunder in terms of colonization was the most spectacular instance in the 18^th, 19^th and 20^th century.

In the contemporary scenario, this attitude focused on dominant power status is relentlessly reverberated through zero sum game policy adopted by America and its allies in the contemporary era.

The history of colonial plunder demonstrates that the Western powers amassed massive wealth colonizing other countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America. In search of unlimited power and wealth these powers imposed a brute dominance of colonial rule. They ruled these territories with reckless atrocities and brutality exploiting common people and plundering the nations of their wealth. This dreadful historical instance demonstrates the political culture of dominance and greed for power in international affairs exercised by the Western state system. In the contemporary scenario, this attitude focused on dominant power status is relentlessly reverberated through zero sum game policy adopted by America and its allies in the contemporary era.

A module of diplomacy based on ‘development and cooperation’ rather than ‘gunboat’ diplomacy practiced by the West is the primary departure made by the BRI. Diplomacy based on this module is shifting the world politics into a new vision of ‘a shared future.’

A particular reflection of this is starkly represented by the current security strategy document adopted by the Trump administration. The security strategy document pinpoints the People Republic of China as ‘antithetical’ to the values of America and Europe. Further, it accuses China of trying to ‘displace the influence’ of America in the Indo-pacific region. A particular focus is towards the state-led socialist economic model opted by China and its Belt Road Initiatives (BRI) is the target.

However, an analysis of the deep seated intent of the Western power bloc portrays a different scenario. Viewed from this perspective, the Western presence, particularly the American presence in the Indian Ocean will work as a strategy of containing India as well.

The understanding of the Western bloc that a powerful Asia, or pertinently a powerful China, is a threat to the existing international order represents political philosophy of the West driven by the theory of binary opposition. Reality is however different to the American assumption based on that philosophy. With growing belief of people, through the BRI initiative, China has projected a positive image of economic cooperation and development in global spectrum. This definitely represents or reshapes a new form of diplomacy in the realm of international politico-economic order. A module of diplomacy based on ‘development and cooperation’ rather than ‘gunboat’ diplomacy practiced by the West is the primary departure made by the BRI. Diplomacy based on this module is shifting the world politics into a new vision of ‘a shared future.’

Furthermore, a situation of non-demystified friendliness is effected by the West with India to distance its relation with China. This would in turn linger the transformation of the entire Asia into a prosperous region.

Complexity of global affairs concerning the above mentioned scenario comprises of two opposing trends – US propagation of global monopoly representing the Western dominance and the Chinese dream of shared future. Hence the world order is rather not threatened by the rise of China but by the ‘fear-psyche of the West of losing its monopoly.’ Hence, it represents a strategy to contain People’s Republic of China as well as other countries disfavored by America and its allies. India, another rising power is not distinct to this ideology and implications caused by it. At the face value, this might seem incorrect given the fact that India, though implicitly, is within the bound of American containment. However, an analysis of the deep seated intent of the Western power bloc portrays a different scenario. Viewed from this perspective, the Western presence, particularly the American presence in the Indian Ocean will work as a strategy of containing India as well. By securing a dense presence in the Indian Ocean; the US wants to make sure that its objectives are not negatively affected by China or Iran.

Rather, the rise of Asian powers mean far lesser resort to violence, subversion and other forms of interventions which runs counter to the Western way.

A careful analysis reveals that the American policy on the Indian Ocean is also centered in cutting off India’s closer communication and ties with Iran and Russia. This represents a double containment strategy opted by the Western power bloc aimed at taming India as well as China. Furthermore, a situation of non-demystified friendliness is effected by the West with India to distance its relation with China. This would in turn linger the transformation of the entire Asia into a prosperous region. The Double Containment Strategy seems to be motivated mainly by the following reasons:

1. To prevent China and India from emerging as major stakeholders and key players in the global affairs both  in  terms of political as well as economic prowess.

2. To keep intact the monopoly of Western framework and assumptions in international affairs.

3. To prevent China from accomplishing the vision of ‘common destiny and shared future’ that would bolster the prospect of New World order, thus challenging the existing one.

4. To maintain its dominant influence within the Indo-Pacific region thus, limiting the rising influence of India and China in the region.

With this backdrop of changing diorama of international politics, the rise of China and India should not be looked at only through the Western lens. Rather, the rise of Asian powers mean far lesser resort to violence, subversion and other forms of interventions which runs counter to the Western way. The rise of China and India as crucial players in the international politics may break through the persistent regressive status quo in the realm of world politics, leading towards a rational and just global system.

By the 11-point agreement with CK Raut, a secessionist campaigner for an independent Madhesh state, Nepal government is feeding the people with a semantic puzzle. The government claim that Raut has abandoned his separatist path and joined the mainstream national politics is utterly nebulous in character.

Because, in the same breath, the Raut side has claimed to have asserted themselves by making the government concur to their demand for an independent state through a referendum. People are at pains to distinguish what is real and what is apparent. Are they throwing dust into people’s eyes or are people taken for a ride?

Prime Minister KP Oli looks obviously aspirant to go down in history like Girija Prasad Koirala who is injudiciously credited for bringing the violent Maoists in peaceful democratic politics. That is why he compared Raut with Prachanda for their inherent guts revolting against the establishments.

The agreement is a big surprise. Both sides feel aplomb in arriving at it. Both tend to make it a win-win outcome. However, the net result is that both stand where they were. Raut’s success lies in legitimizing his stand whereas the government’s achievement is covered in its claim to have brought a secessionist group in a peaceful and democratic process.

Prime Minister KP Oli looks obviously aspirant to go down in history like Girija Prasad Koirala who is injudiciously credited for bringing the violent Maoists in peaceful democratic politics. That is why he compared Raut with Prachanda for their inherent guts revolting against the establishments.

Unfortunately, he failed to distinguish between an established violent element and a non-violent but separatist force. Prachanda did abandon the guns but Raut has not abandoned his separatist character. Rather he has reinforced his stand. He has nowhere confessed that he has given up the cause of secession. Raut has time and again reiterated that his stand has not changed but it has entered into a new phase of struggle.

It is evident that the Alliance for Independent Madhesh, as such, has not changed. The agreement does not oblige Raut to change the basic objective of the group. What he has agreed is to adopt the democratic way to achieve his objective. Has he not been pursuing his goal by a peaceful and democratic way? The title of his organization has made it amply clear what his final goal is. It is, to say the least, to establish an independent Madhesh.

On the other hand, the government will play with the words and try to shift the responsibility to the parliament. The constitution makes it obligatory to get a resolution passed by two-thirds majority of the members sitting and voting for holding a referendum.

For this, he will be over-ground instead of under-ground. He will enjoy validity and legal recognition in his movement what used to be considered seditious in the eyes of the state. He and his colleagues will enjoy political freedom that was hitherto denied to them.

All his jailed colleagues will be released. Compensation will be provided to those killed or injured during his movement. The agreement has committed the government to treat the Alliance for Independent Madhesh as a democratic political force. If so, the government has granted Raut to further pursue what he has been doing so far.

The agreement has brought and continues to bring, the term ‘referendum’ in sharp controversy. The term has already gained a special status in the constitution. It says that decision can be taken on the basis of a referendum on subjects of national importance. However, the constitution also prohibits any amendment that might have an adverse consequence on sovereignty, geographical integrity, independence and sovereign rights of the people. That means the main goal of the Raut’s alliance aims at hurting the geographical unity and integrity of Nepal. His group will insist that a referendum is called for deciding this question.

On the other hand, the government will play with the words and try to shift the responsibility to the parliament. The constitution makes it obligatory to get a resolution passed by two-thirds majority of the members sitting and voting for holding a referendum.

It is just like the agreement the government entered into with Dr. Govinda KC. When Prime Minister Oli broke the concurrence he shifted his responsibility to the parliament for endorsing his commitment. The parliament refused to listen to Dr. KC’s plea and passed the bill relating to medical education. The constitution leaves indeed wide space for all types of contending parties and arguments. This is going to apply in the case of agreement between the government and Raut. That will lead to never-ending debate.

The accord is full of contradictions. On the one hand, the signatories admit that Federal Democratic Nepal is an independent, sovereign and indivisible country. It is the duty of each Nepali citizen to safeguard the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Nepal. On the other hand, it grants official recognition to the Alliance for Independent Madhesh, which is not possible without breaking the country into pieces.

It has also raised the question on the supremacy of the sovereign power of the people or the country. The agreement states that the signatories strongly believe that the achievement of various objectives including political, social and economic should be made through peaceful and democratic means. They have agreed to resolve existing dissatisfaction in different places including in Tarai-Madhesh through democratic means based on people’s mandate, in line with the spirit of the sovereignty vested in the hands of people in Nepal’s constitution.

It stipulates that the people, by virtue of exercising sovereign power, can change even the integral character of the country. In other words, people are entitled even to break the country. If that is so, the mandate of the people can go to the extent of dividing the country. However, the constitution as such does not allow such an action. Who is superior? Amidst such confusion, it is might that becomes right. Is this what the agreement looks for ahead?

Accepting a new political and administrative system is akin to an entrepreneur switching into a new business. If any person changes the business and starts new one, it takes time to be familiar with the new business, nature of product and risks factors, nature of market as well as customers. To achieve success in business, an aware entrepreneur prepares transitional strategic plans that help to minimize the risk and maximize the momentum of the business.

During transition period, there may be risk of gaps resulting from the transition where the old system is removed and a new system is yet to be completely installed. The gap can hamper the delivery of public services.

Similarly like in a business, while adopting a new political system from older one, it may require new and additional policies, laws, infrastructures, logistics, human resources and financial resources as well as changing political and administrative behavior. So, for the transformation of country from traditional type of unitary political-administrative system to federal system, it needs a bonafide strategic action plan which must incorporate the elements of capacity building of sub-national state units relating to physical, technical and management. This is because an orderly and well planned transition is essential for the successful implementation of the new system. During transition from the unitary system to an established multi-tier government, it demands new structures, rules of playing and systems to support them. During transition period, there may be risk of gaps resulting from the transition where the old system is removed and a new system is yet to be completely installed. The gap can hamper the delivery of public services.

Therefore to prevent the system from this kind of risk and possibility, a well charted and well scheduled implementation strategy is required. As per the Constitution, the federalism of Nepal is based on tri-party principles; cooperative, coexistence and coordination among the three tiers of the state units. This means the strategic plan should be developed in close consultation with three level of governments under the leadership of the central government.

Unfortunately, Nepal could not design such strategies, in due time; or before the implementation of federalism started. Actually, this task was necessary to accomplish immediately after the promulgation of the constitution. On the other hand, firstly the local elections were conducted before holding the federal and provincial elections.

The components to be considered while designing the strategy are: developing a medium term support plan in relation to sub-national governments to perform the assignments provided by the constitution for one year to three years period, timely development of sequential legislations; as well as institutional development and capacity development plan. In addition, other factors to be considered are: rearrangement and adjustment plan related to human resources, development of sub national expenditure management mechanism and capacity development plan, development of sub national level revenue/tax and expenditure management mechanism, a rational rule and formulae based  transfer plan, preparation of human resource development strategy as well as  formulation of physical infrastructure and logistics arrangement plan to perform the expenditure assignments by the subnational governments in due course and time.

However, the most important part is the need of the politicians and bureaucrats to change their capital centric behavior. Unfortunately, Nepal could not design such strategies, in due time; or before the implementation of federalism started. Actually, this task was necessary to accomplish immediately after the promulgation of the constitution. On the other hand, firstly the local elections were conducted before holding the federal and provincial elections. The elections to the HoR were conducted nearly one year after the local level elections. From hierarchies and accountability point of view, the task of developing above mentioned strategic plan is mostly the duty of the Center; so the order of elections of three levels, looked like an anti-clock wise action. This has influenced the implementation process of the federalism too. The sub-national governments are still plagued by indecisive and cautious mind set and the federalism has not geared up as desired. Its pace towards the so called prosperity is very slow. So, transitional plan of around three to five years is still required, to expedite the implementation of federalism.

On the one hand the capacity of the State and the Local level is very low, in comparison to the functions assigned by the constitution. The balance among the three side of the triangle, functions, fund and functionaries is far from the federal structure designed by the constitution.

Concerning Nepal, background issues of federalism are related to identification, disparity, imbalance development, exclusion and centralization of resources. Based on these issues, the rationalities of accepting federalism in Nepal are geographical and ethnical identification, ending of socio-economic discrimination, equitable development in all aspects and sections of lives as well as decentralizing the political, fiscal and administrative powers in lower level of political state units based on subsidiary principles. The experience of implementation of federalism in these two years is not so keen.

To some extent, the federalism has been derailed by top level self-centric leaders and their crony bureaucrats; the implementation of federalism has been slow and is trudging along the critical path.

Understanding level in political as well as in administrative level is not so well regarding the implementation of federalism and fiscal federalism. Political parties are biased on capacity building of the sub-national levels and in handing over resources and power to sub-national governments. The power and rights are granted in piece meal basis, although the constitution has granted more than two dozens major economic and revenue rights at the State and Local level. On the one hand the capacity of the State and the Local level is very low, in comparison to the functions assigned by the constitution. The balance among the three side of the triangle, functions, fund and functionaries is far from the federal structure designed by the constitution. No, significant programs are initiated and launched by the Center in relation to orientation and capacity enhancing in institutional level and educating and communicating the citizen regarding the implementation, importance and resource mobilization approach under federalism.

Formation of federal institution is polluted by the corrupt system of appointment and nomination based on personal intimacy and interest of the leaders rather than based on meritocracy and competence. To some extent, the federalism has been derailed by top level self-centric leaders and their crony bureaucrats; the implementation of federalism has been slow and is trudging along the critical path. Therefore, the correction in approach, system and behavior as well as attitude is very essential. The reform can be launched in two aspects; one is structural change and another one is reform in action.