Joe Biden and Nepal
As the Democratic Party nominee for the 2020 US election Joseph Biden takes the victory lap by flipping the battleground states of Georgia and Pennsylvania, a large swarm of Nepalese netizens have been observed celebrating a return to a “normal” US presidency. Nepalese denizens on social media platforms had been actively following the presidential campaigns but since the election day, the craze has been unprecedented.
Some Nepalis are happy because the incumbent president of the US Donald Trump who pronounced their homeland as “nipple” is finally being ousted while others are amused by the mail-in votes system. Some are celebrating the victory of good over evil immediately after the Nepali festival of Dashain which bears the same theme while others are hopeful that immigration to US will be eased after Biden assumes presidency. But there is still a significant number of netizens who are frustrated with their brethren’s craze towards the domestic politics of a nation half-way across the globe.
While I am no expert when it comes to politics, I attempt to explain what might be the significance of a Biden presidency to Nepal.
Tourism and Climate Change
In 2019, the travel and tourism sector of Nepal contributed 7.9 % to the annual GDP with massive influx of tourists from India, China, the US, Sri Lanka and the UK among other nations. While some tourists are attracted to Nepal’s heritage and wildlife, a vast majority embark on the visit to either view, trek or scale the wide stretch of magnificent mountains. The country with a meagre $29 Billion GDP makes about $4.5 million from royalty from mountaineering expeditions alone in addition to creation of hundred thousands of jobs in the tourism sector.
But the natural tourism sector of Nepal is at risk. The snowline is receding, the Himalayan glaciers are melting and the significant progress made over the years in conservation of wildlife could be overturned before we can even realize it. This explicitly means that the tourism sector will lose jobs, revenues and portion of the GDP. All due to climate change.
While other aspects of his foreign policy is unclear, president-elect Biden has pledged to rally global action to address climate change. Unlike his predecessor Trump, Biden views climate change as a global threat. He has mentioned in his manifesto that on the day one of his tenure, the US will rejoin the 2015 Paris Climate Accord from which Trump withdrew in 2017. In addition, he has expressed commitment to hold a global climate summit within a hundred days of his presidency and even outlined a comprehensive plan to reach net-zero carbon emission by 2050.
Biden’s plans means a global battle against climate change will be spearheaded by the richest country in the world. A world-wide plan to fight against a common enemy means a likely downfall of the foe. Climate change could be addressed before it is irreversible. And in the process of doing so, the high snowlines of the Himalayas could be restored, the wildlife be saved, the glaciers stopped from melting and Nepal’s GDP kept from shrinking.
Probable Indo-China conflict, peace in south Asia
There is conflict brewing in South Asia. Even if uninvolved, Nepal will face the consequences. India and China, the two ideologically contrasting hegemonic leaders of Asia, are not just fighting over a piece of land but regional order. Whichever nation comes on top of the ongoing conflict will be the big brother of Asia, not just in speech but literally.
The haughty attitude China has recently adopted is a result of years of strategic and linguistic change in its diplomacy, introducing itself as a contributor as opposed to the US’ role of a leader, slowing building a new world order. The rise of one world order means the fall of another. The rise of one power means the fall of another. The rise of China means the fall of America.
How did the greatest democracy of the world reach this situation? How did it lose its global influence. My answer in two words: Donald Trump. (Let me be clear that I am a politically moderate person, neither leftist not rightist, right at the middle.)
Trump had a background in business, not politics. And his foreign policy reflected so. There have been more sanctions and tariffs than alliances and treaties in his tenure. He took the US leadership of the world order for granted often imposing hegemonic sanctions on less powerful nations. And when it came to treaties and alliances, he walked out the existing ones but replaced them with new ones. He has cut the US’ contribution to North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) promising to pull out of it in a second tenure. He has already completed the same two steps with the Paris agreement. He has made the US a foe of each and every Muslim-majority nation. He has behaved like a clown during meetings with foreign leaders. He has made a clown of the US with a “groundbreaking” deal with North Korea which was never taken seriously by the communist nation. To summarize, the world has stopped taking the US seriously.
Contrary to Trump, Biden is a seasoned politician with a half-century of years of involvement. His traditional approach to diplomacy will mean that America will rejoin the Paris agreement, increase funding for NATO, express belief in international organizations such as the WHO and build back the smooth relations with Muslim-majority nations. All of these steps will strengthen the US’s grip on the existing world order, which in turn, will suppress the Chinese superiority. The sleeping giant can mock a lone US-backed India but it will not dare to do so when the US has its traditional alliances including NATO as its backup. What this means is that the probable wars in south Asia will not take place, and Nepal, which could have been a battleground between the two giants, will enjoy peace like it has for decades.
MCC vs BRI
Nepal has not yet been able to decide whether it will accept international aid via China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) or the Millennium Challenge Corporation compact offered by the US under its Indo-Pacific strategy. It is clear that both the nations wish to achieve their geo-political goals by offering their financial packages which means accepting one of the packages will be observed as a refusal of inclusion in the strategy of another. Basically, it is a choice to be either included in the old world order led by the US or the new world order being constructed by China and Kathmandu is not benefitting from indecision especially when both are deliberately pushing for their package.
Under Trump presidency neither of the nations had any grounds on which they could condemn the other since both had the same goal of extending their interests. However, Biden has added another front to this debate: the fossil-fuel usage by the BRI. He has explicitly condemned the BRI claiming that China is outsourcing its pollution via the strategy, feeding fossil-fuel to underdeveloped nations, such dependence on fossil fuel will result in difficult transition to green energy.
If Biden is to call a global meet to jointly address the issue of climate change, the decision-makers in Nepal (if Nepal joins the meet) will have the moral obligation of refuting fossil fuel and opting for MCC compact. Nepal is not doing so great with promoting green energy, but that might change with one decision.
In addition to this new variable in the equation, we can expect the Biden leadership to push MCC compact as fiercely as its predecessor has. But there might also be another result in the tussle between the two countries. The president-elect of the United States is known for his moderate approach to politics, which means, that the US and China might be able to reach a reasonable compromise geo-politically and if the Nepali leadership too can extend moderation, Nepal could be able to enjoy the benefits of both the compacts without losing confidence from either of the nation.
Immigration and student visa
Donald Trump has long been the ringleader of stringent immigration policy by the US. It was through his rhetoric on immigration and promise of a border wall that he won a significant number of votes in 2016 election. During his tenure, his administration introduced a series of policies to reduce the number of immigrants in the nation and increase the rate of deportation of immigrants.
Among his immigration-controlling policies, one that struck a hot debate was proposed in September, whereby he proposed revamping visas enforcing international students to apply for extension within fixed period of times overhauling the previous system of five-years F1 visa. Under this rule, students from countries such as Nepal which have higher visa overstay rates would have to renew their visas every two years.
The mentioned policy created a cloud of uncertainty for more than 11,000 Nepalese students in the US and discouraged more students from dreaming of an American education. A populist leader like Trump, given another four year, would have realized this dream through presidential directives and orders and support from the Senate. But such will not be a case with Biden. Biden has hinted at a greater push for innovation primarily due to the competition with China. And to achieve this goal, like his progressive counterparts in his party, he will try to tempt more international students into pursuing the American dream, brining more competition to the American scholars and fueling race for innovation within the US.
This does not, however, mean that the visa approval rates in Nepal will be affected significantly for international students. We can expect the rates to increase, but just by slight margin.
Human Rights and India
Among other problems created during the four years Donald Trump took helm of the country, the negligence to human rights violations by the government of India has been an act of ideological clash with the democratic principle of liberty. (Will update this part later, need to do some assignments.)
Indirect blow to the ruling communist party
