By Babbler

Nepal’s public expenditure is largely concentrated in non-productive sectors. A significant portion of the national budget is spent on maintaining the offices of the President, Vice President, ministries, the House of Representatives, the National Assembly, provincial governors, chief ministers, provincial assemblies, district coordination committees, and 753 local governments.

Government revenue is insufficient to cover these expenditures. As a result, the government is compelled to borrow billions of rupees to bridge the funding gap. How can the country achieve prosperity when such a large share of its revenue is spent on non-productive sectors rather than on development and economic growth?

 

PM BALEN’S UNCONSTITUTIONAL TEAM

The Constitution does not recognize the members of Prime Minister Balen Shah’s secretariat as constitutional officeholders. They have neither been recruited through the Public Service Commission nor taken the oath of office and secrecy required of civil servants. Nevertheless, they have become the principal officials running the Prime Minister’s Office.

The Prime Minister exercises executive authority and has access to highly sensitive information related to national security and defense. Members of his secretariat also have access to such confidential information. The team consists of 27 members, two of whom enjoy facilities equivalent to those of cabinet ministers. This is indeed unusual.

The Cabinet has also decided that each minister may appoint five aides who receive facilities equivalent to those of government secretaries. Is this not an unnecessary financial burden on the national treasury? In reality, government secretaries are experienced career bureaucrats entrusted with advising and assisting ministers. Unfortunately, their role has been marginalized while unelected and constitutionally unrecognized aides increasingly dominate the ministries.

 

BLUNDER COMMITTED BY THE INDIAN DEEP STATE

India’s relationship with its smaller neighbors should be based on friendship, cooperation, and mutual support. However, successive Indian governments—or, more precisely, what some describe as India’s permanent establishment or “deep state”—have often pursued policies that have strained relations with neighboring countries. As a result, India has lost the goodwill of several of its neighbors.

When the United States found it increasingly difficult to maintain its global dominance, it became involved in conflicts across different regions. We can say, this is a war on civilization. Iraq, one of the cradles of ancient civilization, was devastated by war. Afghanistan and Iran also became central to American strategic interests. Political instability has likewise affected several South Asian countries.

Some observers now argue that India itself has become a target of external geopolitical competition. They contend that the Cockroach Janata Party movement in India has, to some extent, been influenced by elements linked to the American deep state. If India fails to recognize such geopolitical strategies in time, it may face serious internal challenges that threaten its unity.

India should first abandon any perception of hegemonic behavior and work toward building trust and harmony with its neighboring countries. Such an approach would strengthen regional stability while helping preserve India’s unity, rich heritage, and ancient civilization. That is the lesson to be learned.

QUOTES OF THE WEEK

There are reports that Iran has developed an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) capable of striking targets 10,000–14,000 kilometers away and has already conducted a nuclear test. If that is true, then Trump’s reckless obstinacy could accelerate a shift in the global balance of power, potentially leading to the United States losing its status as the world’s sole superpower.

–Babu Lal Bhandari

—

What kind of Nepal did King Birendra envision? If his proposal to declare Nepal a “Zone of Peace” had been implemented, what would Nepal look like today?

–Bhumi Raj

—

Rather than working to reform the health sector, Dr. Govinda KC would go on hunger strikes whenever he felt compelled to do so. At one time, when Dr. KC was on a hunger strike, Toshima Karki and Sushmit Pokharel—who strongly supported him—were among his advocates. Today, they are a member of Parliament and a minister, respectively. Dr. KC is once again on a hunger strike. Now, should his demands be fulfilled, or should there be a moment of reflection and regret?

–Om Kumar Thapa

—

I never knew before that our neighboring country, India, was a dictatorship.

–Ananda Nepali

—

After coming under the influence of Ravi’s group, the Prime Minister’s adviser Kumar Ben quietly traveled to New Delhi. He met separately with Indian Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri and RAW chief Parag Jain before returning. However, despite those meetings, there is still no confirmation regarding Prime Minister Shah’s proposed visit to India.

–Prakash Timalsina

—

What kind of national identity card is this if it still requires India’s recognition?

–Ratan Bhandari

—

Our state system is still not conducive to production, employment, and development. Politics that fails to deliver results in these areas faces an increasingly difficult path. The decentralization of information and the changing aspirations of the younger generation mean that politics is no longer about enjoying the privileges of power—it is about overcoming the enormous challenge of fulfilling the people’s aspirations.

–Surya Raj Acharya

—

I heard that a statement was issued from Geneva protesting by Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the ICJ on alleged pressure on three Supreme Court judges to resign.

For a long time, it has been widely said that appointments in Nepal’s judiciary are heavily politicized, based on power-sharing arrangements, and that corruption is widespread within the judicial system. Instead of speaking out on those issues, the organizations concerned have chosen to issue a statement about alleged pressure on judges. As a student of law, I cannot help but wonder whether this reflects a double standard. Do the organizations that issued the statement have an answer to this question?

–Dwarika Nath Dhungel

—

A useful fact to know: Britain’s new Prime Minister, Andy Burnham, wore a formal suit and tie when he went to Buckingham Palace last Monday for his official appointment by King Charles. He had stopped wearing ties about a decade ago. Even while serving as Mayor of Manchester, he rarely wore one and preferred casual attire. But now, he has begun appearing in formal dress at the official residence, government offices, and Parliament. His change in style has attracted attention not only in Britain but also in the American press.

–Dhruba H. Adhikary

—

With the United States and Russia—both global powers—deeply involved in the Iran and Ukraine wars, it appears that the “Golden Color” jet project is heading toward a crash at a critical turning point. Disruptions to supply chains, the energy crisis, tax policies, rising construction costs, and the government’s own administrative uncertainty and lack of trust, driven by its insistence on introducing new measures, make it almost certain that the economy will decline to 22.18 trillion.

–Gokul Prasad Baskota

—

Excerpted and compiled by Sushma Shrestha.