<figure><img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/2023020814028/63e39f7f9c7e80680e0d6ff5jpeg.jpg" alt="" width="1500" height="1112"/><figcaption>Chargé d'affaires L Douglas welcomes BP Koirala to the US Embassy inauguration in 1959</figcaption></figure>Having requested an appointment with the American Consulate in Calcutta, BP Koirala went to the Consulate on October 15, 1953, and talked with the American Consul, who sent a record of his conversation with Koirala to the American Embassy in New Delhi. The trenchant criticisms Koirala expressed about the dominant and controversial role India had assumed in the internal affairs of Nepal are well worth noting, particularly since BP was often accused of being ‘pro-Indian’ at the time.Back then, BP’s brother, MP Koirala, was in charge of the government, but there was no Nepali Congress member in the cabinet. King Tribhuvan had left Nepal in September for medical treatment in Switzerland. BP was president of the Nepali Congress but had held no government position since November 1951. The Congress itself was split into three factions, and the Koirala brothers remained at odds. This document (from which a few parenthetical remarks have been omitted here) is part of the U.S. State Department files on Nepal and was located in the U.S. National Archives in College Park, Maryland. American Consul Garrett Soulen who spoke with Koirala wrote the following report at the conclusion of the meeting:I [Consul Soulen] must say that after having read at least some of the press reports about B.P., I had expected a man older appearing in years and a person with more or less a firebrand temperament. I was surprised on both counts: B.P. appears to be not more than 35 or 36 (he says he is 40, with a 5-year-old son at school in Patna) and he was anything but a demagogue or a firebrand. I have seldom heard a less dispassionate recitation of facts and opinions from a purported nationalist. I was impressed with his [B.P.’s] apparent frankness and probable sincerity.I could not help but think many, many times during his conversation, “I have heard this before;” the correlation between the facts and opinions as [B.P.] recited them and like facts and opinions made to me by Sikkimese in regard to their state (Bhutan also) was striking to an extreme. The gist is “big stick GOI [Government of India] policies towards border states and against minorities in those border regions, coupled with a most inept implementation of such policies.” Despite the fact that we here in Calcutta, primarily because of the reserve exercised by Indian officials in discussing these matters, undoubtedly hear much more of the other side of the question than the GOI’s, it would appear that the implementation of GOI policy toward Nepal, Sikkim, Naga Hills, Lushai Hills, and to a lesser extent Bhutan (only because they hold themselves aloof) is always to the benefit of Indians, and especially from a monetary standpoint.Among the various subjects which B.P. brought up and on which he discoursed at some length, the following are worthy of note.<figure><img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/2023020814028/63e39f839c7e80680e0d6ff6jpeg.jpg" alt="" width="768" height="514"><figcaption> </figcaption></figure>[B.P.] saw Prime Minister Nehru August 13 and on a subsequent date. At both meetings when he endeavored to point out to Nehru the errors which the Indians were committing in Nepal in the implementation of their policy, he was cut off short and told that because of geographic location Nepal was going to have to develop under the aegis of the GOI. B.P. tried to point out that Nepalis were slowly but surely developing a nationalist spirit, that this nationalist spirit could be channeled into agreeable Indo-Nepal relations which could be mutually beneficial to both countries, or it could develop as a hard core of absolute independence from all other nations, or it could develop in such a way that Communists under the guise of nationalism and with the aid, abetment and tutelage of the Communists in Tibet (possibly with the help of Indian Communists as well) could establish a Red regime on the southern slopes of the Himalayas.When B.P. asked Nehru what Nehru’s intentions were for Nepal, Nehru reportedly was very angry with such a direct question and answered only to the effect that he, Nehru, wished to see a strong economically prosperous Nepal develop.On the Communist issue, B.P. claims Nehru lectured him severely to the effect that for the next ten years there would be no danger from Communism to India or Nepal, because “China has her hands full with her own problems.” (In our conversation this morning the USSR was never mentioned). In B.P.’s opinion, Nehru might possibly be correct with his ten-year prognostication if he is thinking only about armed invasion of the sub-continent. However, B.P. pointed out that even with plenty of problems on their hands in China, Korea, Indo-China and Tibet, the Chinese Communists and/or their Tibetan, Nepali and Indian cohorts could still carry out enough disruptive tactics, especially in the fields of economics, industry, finance and state administration, to seriously hamstring and thwart the efforts of any but a very strong, stable national government.[Regarding American TCA (Technical Cooperative Assistance)], B.P. said that until July 1953 he had been “quite friendly” with Paul Rose [head of the U.S. Point Four Program in Nepal] in Kathmandu and that although they had not discussed politics as such, B.P. thought Rose “understood his mind.” B.P. had occasionally visited Father Moran’s school [at Godawari] and had discussed many of his problems with that gentleman. He had over the previous year been in contact with other Americans and certain other foreigners, including British Ambassador Summerhayes, and certain FAO [the UN Food &amp; Agriculture Organization] people who had been to Nepal on inspection trips. During the August conversations, Nehru had brought these contacts to B.P.’s attention and in no uncertain terms had let it be known that the GOI did not approve of such activities, and that such contacts should cease, especially contacts with Americans. B.P. went no further than to say that Nehru had spoken deprecatingly about America.B.P. claims that the usurpation by the GOI of the most prominent place in Nepal’s economic and political situation is borne out by many facts. Among many which he mentioned [were that] M.P. Koirala is under the direct jurisdiction of the GOI. The GOI has also directly controlled the King. [U.S.] Ambassador Bowles’ endeavors to break through that barrier were unsuccessful. For example, a [U.S.] expert [on administration] by the name of [Merrill R.] Goodall, who is supposed to have been assigned in Nepal for a matter of three months as an adviser, lasted only two weeks before GOI forced his recall. The [American] TCA program in Nepal has been hamstrung, primarily by GOI intransigence, if not by design, which was reflected through the Government of Nepal’s lack of cooperation in getting its projects rolling. [An FAO expert] told B.P. it appeared to him that the GON was purposely holding back cooperation with TCA on the orders of the GOI.<figure><img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/2023020814028/63e39f869c7e80680e0d6ff7jpeg.jpg" alt="" width="1000" height="668"><figcaption> </figcaption></figure>Nepal at the present time has 11,000 men under arms. Five thousand of these men are supposedly under training with the Indian Military Mission. The remaining 6,000 are under the Nepalese Army command. The Indian Military Mission rankles most Nepalese officers, and the same feeling against it is held by the majority of the rank and file. In B.P.’s opinion, there was absolutely no necessity for the GOI to set up this separate headquarters for its military mission. In fact, the mission itself is much too large, and its scope of operations is much broader than contemplated by any Nepali who entered into the negotiations. According to B.P., the Nepali Army needs outside assistance training in only two categories: (1) engineering troops, and (2) artillery. According to him, the Gurkhas have earned a world-wide reputation as excellent infantrymen not only in world wars but also in the continuous skirmishes and incidents in which the British (with Gurkha troops) have been engaged for many years. Nepalese officers, who during the last war had certain Indian officers under their command, now find themselves with those same officers in command of them, for training purposes but nevertheless on Nepal’s soil. Nepali army officers consider themselves superior soldiers to the Indian, and although they may not have as “smart a step or cut of uniform,” they are only too willing to stand on their reputation earned through actual battle experience. Nepali Army officers are fearful that the Indian Military Mission will break down the morale of the Nepali troops, for the Indian officers tend to be haughty with the Nepali officers and on many occasions criticize them in front of Nepali troops. Evidently B.P. took up the matter of the Indian Military Mission with Nehru in August, for he remarked that Nehru had said, “Well, we have at least made your troops smart,” (meaning good appearing for parade ground exhibitions). B.P. claims that the anti-Indian feeling (which he did not specifically mention as such) pervaded the entire Nepalese Army and the police force. He believes both units have a majority of men who are extremely nationalistic in outlook.<figure><img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/2023020814028/63e39f899c7e80680e0d6ff8jpeg.jpg" alt="" width="2000" height="2042"><figcaption> </figcaption></figure>Trade with Tibet is considerable. [B.P.] implied that India encouraged such trade and especially for Indian manufactured articles. He said that the Chinese in Tibet were assiduously cultivating Nepalese traders there, and that although these men were of small account financially and at present of little moment politically, nevertheless practically all of them were coming back into Nepal favorably impressed and to a certain extent condoning the Chinese action in Tibet. B.P. feels that these men, with their tales, have had and will continue to have a disturbing influence on the people in the mountains. He said it was not so much a question about the correctness or propriety of what the Chinese had done and were doing in Tibet, as it was the impression made on [Nepalese traders] of how much easier it is to live under a stable government (even totalitarian) than it is to live and do business in a country with practically no government.[Regarding the Indo-Nepal trade agreement of 1950], I cannot remember all the various details [B.P.] mentioned. The gist of it was, however, that India is now pressing for the Government of Nepal (which means private traders as well) to handle all of their imports into Nepal through GOI offices. I remember one specific example of what appears to be economic exploitation: Nepal imports considerable quantities of betelnut, primarily from Malaya. It used to be possible for a Nepali trader to deal directly with a trader in Malaya or some intermediary for this commodity. Now it has to be obtained through the GOI, and if there is a licensee in India for the import of this commodity, the Nepali trader must deal through that licensee, in effect making the Indian an extra middle man to squeeze out a bit more blood from the turnip.<figure><img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/2023020814028/63e39f8d9c7e80680e0d6ff9jpeg.jpg" alt="" width="500" height="379"><figcaption> </figcaption></figure>When B.P. was speaking about exports, imports, Indian policy, etc., he said that in August Nehru, in pointing out to him the dangers of becoming dependent upon “great countries,” had told B.P. about [U.S.] Ambassador Allen’s representation to Nehru, because India had exported a ton of thorium to Communist China; the Battle Act was mentioned in this connection. [The U.S. Mutual Defense Assistance Control Act of 1951 banned U.S. assistance to countries doing business with the Soviet Union, and India refused to accept any American-imposed limits on its trade.] Nehru was evidently incensed over that episode and had spoken very disparagingly about the United States in that connection.B.P. claims to have very drastically revised his opinion of Nehru over the past year and a half. He said that in mid-1951 he had been warned by Jai Prakash Narayan that he, B.P., was putting much too much trust in Nehru for the good of Nepal. Narayan had continued with a softening remark to the effect that one must not put that much trust in any foreign nation’s prime minister, for countries, like people, are still antagonistic toward each other and try to take advantage. Since mid-1951, B.P. has realized more and more that Nehru is not the master of his own destiny and feels that during the past year Nehru has taken a backward step from his previous high ideals and ideology. B.P. implied that this change may have been forced upon Nehru, and actually said that a small group in the Ministry of External Affairs has been responsible for most of this retrogression. He gave Nehru the benefit of the doubt on general policy matters, but blamed Nehru for being so busy with so many things that he could not properly control his lieutenants. B.P. said that when he spoke to Nehru about generalities, they were in near agreement, but when it came to discussion of the implementation of policy, Nehru invariably became upset to the point of anger and would not listen to reason. B.P. believes that Nehru’s subordinates force upon Nehru their own ideas when it comes to implementation [of policy]; the result is probably not what Nehru had anticipated. B.P. said there is the possibility that Nehru is the kind of man who believes he must back up his subordinates in the decisions which they take whether they are right or wrong—in any event, the developing situation is not one which could be considered conducive to good Indo-Nepal relations.<figure><img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/2023020814028/63e39f909c7e80680e0d6ffajpeg.jpg" alt="" width="1250" height="920"><figcaption> </figcaption></figure>B.P. stated categorically that the situation within Nepal was deteriorating and had been for the past nine months. He claims to be most anxious over the way the Communist situation will develop this next winter and spring. As he expressed it, the Communist Party is under ban but is still operating quite openly. The people are extremely dissatisfied not only with their economic ills but with the fact that their government is not a government, that day by day it becomes more and more a puppet, subject to the whims of GOI. The Nepalese people, at least those in the Valley, are fast losing faith in what government there is, and as a result, seeing practically only one alternative—Communism—are slowly but surely tending to listen more and more to the promises and claims put out by its adherents.B.P. asked for nothing. He did say that he had hoped on his last visit to New Delhi to see Ambassador Allen but that circumstances had been inopportune. He mentioned the fact that he had no contact with the [U.S.] Embassy. I offered no help in this regard, but merely expressed my pleasure in having had an opportunity to listen to him.Note: The above passage has been reprinted by permission from the recent book, America Meets Nepal, 1944-1952: Problems, Personalities and Political Change, by Daniel W. Edwards. Read also:<a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/last-days-with-bp-koirala/">Last Days with BP Koirala</a> <a href="https://archive.nepalitimes.com/news.php?id=11692#.Y7jap-xBz9E">Forgetting to remember BP</a>, Ted Riccardi<a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/america-nepal-and-the-royal-coup/">America, Nepal and the Royal Coup</a>, Tom Robertson<a href="https://archive.nepalitimes.com/news.php?id=6932#.Y7jbnexBz9E">Back at Sundarijal &gt;1</a>

original

674x448

610x380

500x500

400x266

400x240

400x203

301x200

1250x600

1084x550

Conversation between BP Koirala and the American Consul in Calcutta in 1953

<img width="675" height="849" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109191116/636bee754b0ad905ca02ef48jpeg.jpg" alt=""/>It was a hazy winter afternoon  when without warning at exactly 1PM, soldiers appeared on the streets of Kathmandu. Singha Darbar was cordoned off. Politicians, including Prime Minister B P Koirala who had been elected a year-and-half previously, were picked up simultaneously from their homes or offices, and hauled off to prison.   On Tuesday, 15 December it will be exactly 60 years since that fateful day which would determine the course of Nepal’s history for decades. King Mahendra and Prime Minister BP Koirala met at the palace for dinner a few days before the putsch. The King had just returned from a four-month trip to Japan, the United States and UK, and top secret plans were already in place for the coup d'état. Years later, Koirala related how towards the end of that meal, Mahendra (wearing trademark shades even though it was dark inside the room) gestured to Queen Ratna to leave and told him: “There cannot be two lions in a cage.”BP writes in his memoir that he had a ‘love hate’ relationship with Mahendra, who appreciated his work ethic, but was increasingly jealous of his popularity. The King’s aversion to political parties was well known, zamindars hated BP’s new land reform bill, and Mahendra sensed that Nehru’s India and Mao’s China, for different reasons, could live with a coup, as long as it did not make Nepal unstable.So, on पुस १, २०१७ (first day of the month of Pous 2017) the King made his move. In a speech he accused the Nepali Congress government of “failure to maintain law and order, being anti-national, corrupt and unaccountable”. The Swiss Ambassador was visiting Kathmandu from New Delhi on 15 December, and wrote a long cable to Berne about how BP Koirala had earlier talked about the difficulty of maintaining Nepal’s neutrality amidst Cold War tensions.US Ambassador Henry E Stebbins had met King Mahendra on 9 December in which he was given no hints of what he was planning, even though preparations must have been at an advanced stage. After the coup, Stebbins wrote to President Eisenhower: ‘…we feel that the King’s motives in taking the precipitate action he did were guided less by the issues of corruption and Communism than by a growing fear that his own personal position and prestige were dwindling and that if he did not act soon, it might be too late . . . the real motive behind the move was the preservation of the monarchy and the Shah dynasty in its absolute form.’However, just as Mahendra reckoned, Nepal’s two giant neighbours went along. China’s annexation of Tibet had spooked the Indians and Americans, and the British were focused on continued Gurkha recruitment. In fact, Queen Elizabeth was in Kathmandu on a royal visit within two months of the coup, and even went tiger hunting in Chitwan. History repeats itself repeatedly in Nepal. In 2005, King Gyanendra staged a carbon copy royal-military coup. Like his father and Stebbins, Gyanendra hoodwinked British Ambassador Keith Bloomfield into thinking that a coup was the last thing on his mind. Gyanendra’s speech on 1 February 2005 was identical to Mahendra’s in 1960. The son followed his father’s footsteps. On the 60th anniversary of पुस १ Nepal comes another full circle as supporters of a return to a Hindu monarchy exploit the political disarray, infighting, governance failure and corruption, to march on the streets demanding the secular republican constitution be scrapped. Some of the geopolitical dynamics of the Cold War in 1960 are also playing out again as Washington and New Delhi align against Beijing. Hindutva politics  in India may also be pushing the pendulum back to the right in Nepal. Tune in to Tom Robertson's article on Nepali Times Weekend Longreads on Saturday 12 December with declassified papers with new revelations about the US response to King Mahendra's coup.

Kunda Dixit

‘Putsch Ek’

<img width="675" height="849" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109181144/636be7739c7e80680e0877ffjpeg.jpg" alt=""/>It was a hazy winter afternoon  when without warning at exactly 1PM, soldiers appeared on the streets of Kathmandu. Singha Darbar was cordoned off. Politicians, including Prime Minister B P Koirala who had been elected a year-and-half previously, were picked up simultaneously from their homes or offices, and hauled off to prison.   On Tuesday, 15 December it will be exactly 60 years since that fateful day which would determine the course of Nepal’s history for decades. King Mahendra and Prime Minister BP Koirala met at the palace for dinner a few days before the putsch. The King had just returned from a four-month trip to Japan, the United States and UK, and top secret plans were already in place for the coup d'état. Years later, Koirala related how towards the end of that meal, Mahendra (wearing trademark shades even though it was dark inside the room) gestured to Queen Ratna to leave and told him: “There cannot be two lions in a cage.”BP writes in his memoir that he had a ‘love hate’ relationship with Mahendra, who appreciated his work ethic, but was increasingly jealous of his popularity. The King’s aversion to political parties was well known, zamindars hated BP’s new land reform bill, and Mahendra sensed that Nehru’s India and Mao’s China, for different reasons, could live with a coup, as long as it did not make Nepal unstable.So, on पुस १, २०१७ (first day of the month of Pous 2017) the King made his move. In a speech he accused the Nepali Congress government of “failure to maintain law and order, being anti-national, corrupt and unaccountable”. The Swiss Ambassador was visiting Kathmandu from New Delhi on 15 December, and wrote a long cable to Berne about how BP Koirala had earlier talked about the difficulty of maintaining Nepal’s neutrality amidst Cold War tensions.US Ambassador Henry E Stebbins had met King Mahendra on 9 December in which he was given no hints of what he was planning, even though preparations must have been at an advanced stage. After the coup, Stebbins wrote to President Eisenhower: ‘…we feel that the King’s motives in taking the precipitate action he did were guided less by the issues of corruption and Communism than by a growing fear that his own personal position and prestige were dwindling and that if he did not act soon, it might be too late . . . the real motive behind the move was the preservation of the monarchy and the Shah dynasty in its absolute form.’However, just as Mahendra reckoned, Nepal’s two giant neighbours went along. China’s annexation of Tibet had spooked the Indians and Americans, and the British were focused on continued Gurkha recruitment. In fact, Queen Elizabeth was in Kathmandu on a royal visit within two months of the coup, and even went tiger hunting in Chitwan. History repeats itself repeatedly in Nepal. In 2005, King Gyanendra staged a carbon copy royal-military coup. Like his father and Stebbins, Gyanendra hoodwinked British Ambassador Keith Bloomfield into thinking that a coup was the last thing on his mind. Gyanendra’s speech on 1 February 2005 was identical to Mahendra’s in 1960. The son followed his father’s footsteps. On the 60th anniversary of पुस १ Nepal comes another full circle as supporters of a return to a Hindu monarchy exploit the political disarray, infighting, governance failure and corruption, to march on the streets demanding the secular republican constitution be scrapped. Some of the geopolitical dynamics of the Cold War in 1960 are also playing out again as Washington and New Delhi align against Beijing. Hindutva politics  in India may also be pushing the pendulum back to the right in Nepal. Tune in to Tom Robertson's article on Nepali Times Weekend Longreads on Saturday 12 December with declassified papers with new revelations about the US response to King Mahendra's coup.

New Delhi’s new dealings in Nepal

Nepal’s cricket team first beat powerhouse West Indies in two out of three matches in September, the first time it won a match and then a series against a test-playing nation.&nbsp; Then the Rhinos played six qualifiers in Oman for the 2026 T20 World Cup which is being held in India and Sri Lanka from 7 February to 8 March next year. The national team qualified comfortably with two games to spare, and won all six matches anyway. In the three months before the World Cup, cricketers will play the second season of the Nepal Premier League from 17 November to 13 December.&nbsp; After a hugely successful first season, steady upgrades have been made. The flood-lit Tribhuvan University Cricket Ground has been fitted with 15,000 seats, even though this takes away from the festival-like atmosphere of fans on their feet on the grassy slope.&nbsp; Last season, matches began at noon and three in the afternoon. Late-evening matches in winter under flood lights will increase attendance and viewership.&nbsp; There is also now technology that will display how far a six was hit and how fast a ball was bowled. Foreign players who will play in the league include Chris Lynn, D’arcy Short, Ravi Bopara, and Sohail Tanvir, all good ex-international players that people have heard of.  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/20251101031128_9db0830fb65d0743e3d36cc4b4473e61d750789028a130f5dff8a619307b0215.jpg" data-media-id="editor_0" data-image-id="20251101031128_9db0830fb65d0743e3d36cc4b4473e61d750789028a130f5dff8a619307b0215" data-rendition-name="original" width="1365" height="1803" loading="lazy" alt="Nepal cricket"> <figcaption>Aasif Sheikh drives through the covers on his way to 69 off 41 vs Samoa.</figcaption> </figure>  But the most important point of the Nepal Premier League will be to prepare and experiment for the World Cup, which starts less than two months after the NPL ends. Team Nepal will be extra eager to play well, given that the matches are happening in South Asia and Nepali fans can make the trip.&nbsp; Head coach Stuart Law will be watching each NPL match keenly, to gain more insight into how to best use his current starters.&nbsp; As each of the eight teams are only allowed a maximum of four foreign players in their starting eleven, Law and Nepali fans will also be scouting new talent who will be hungry to emerge and prove themselves to earn a place in the World Cup Squad.&nbsp; ALL-ROUNDERS One of the most unusual features of the current Nepali squad is how many all-rounders there are. Kushal Bhurtel, Rohit Paudel, Kushal Malla, Gulshan Jha, and Dipendra Singh Airee are all regular starters, and they all bat and bowl. Opener Aasif Sheikh is also the wicketkeeper.&nbsp; Airee, of course, is also an excellent fielder. In the first five games of the qualifiers, he got a record five runouts with direct hits, and was on a roll with a run in every single game. This depth means that almost always seven players bowl for Nepal, and the wealth of options keeps the opponent batting order guessing, but it may create hesitancy within the team in tough situations against stronger teams.&nbsp; Countries at the top level of the sport tend to have more specialists. Perhaps Stuart Law might want to tell Bhurtel to really focus on his batting, or Airee to hone his bowling, which seems to be their strengths. The team would be better off with them performing one aspect consistently well than being hit or miss with both. &nbsp;  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/20251101031128_c30fdbab65736ea728f2f94fa121d2169e4d3627194ce1fe9de26eebdb3fc5b3.jpg" data-media-id="editor_1" data-image-id="20251101031128_c30fdbab65736ea728f2f94fa121d2169e4d3627194ce1fe9de26eebdb3fc5b3" data-rendition-name="original" width="957" height="1269" loading="lazy" alt="Nepal cricket"> <figcaption>Lalit Rajbhansi with tricky left arm spin, 3/13 vs Samoa.</figcaption> </figure>  POWERPLAYS The Nepali team likes batting first. It chased only against Japan, but they struggle to put up really competitive scores of say, above 170 unless two batsmen do really well.&nbsp; In the second match against the West Indies, Aasif Sheikh’s 68 and Sundeep Jora’s 63 set up Nepal at 173/6. Against Samoa, Aasif Sheikh had 69 and Airee had 53, before Lokesh Bam’s fierce 39 off 12 featuring 4 sixes set up 211/4.&nbsp; Besides these games, Nepal tends to score up to 150 batting first. To the experienced teams that Nepal will face at the world cup, this is not at all an intimidating score. One reason is that Nepal just cannot seem to get going in the first six powerplay overs, when there are limited fielders on the boundaries.&nbsp; A solution to this might be to promote Gulshan Jha up the order. Although Jha has also been an excellent batter in the end overs, using him at three or four might help set up a more productive powerplay and bigger scores. He should try it out with the Karnali Yaks.&nbsp; Despite all the controversy that comes with Sandip Lamichhane, and his strange decision to sit out the West Indies series minutes before the first match started, his output with the ball is undeniable.&nbsp;  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/20251101031128_453d54ce627367c537d459c38d260d8aca1d56949c49c8023de582f3e72bb678.jpg" data-media-id="editor_2" data-image-id="20251101031128_453d54ce627367c537d459c38d260d8aca1d56949c49c8023de582f3e72bb678" data-rendition-name="original" width="1499" height="1000" loading="lazy" alt="Nepal cricket"> <figcaption>Nepalis turn out to support the team vs Samoa at Al Ameret Stadium in Oman.</figcaption> </figure>  He took wickets in each of the six qualifiers, most notably five vital ones in the match against Qatar that Nepal won by five runs. Lamichhane also gives away very few runs, which cuts some of the more part-time bowlers some slack.&nbsp; Airee is also economical, and his 3/22 was vital in the one-run win against the UAE. Together with Lamichhane the duo constricted the opposition in the middle overs. Veteran Sompal Kami has not been as productive with the ball, and gave away a lot of runs in the series against the West Indies.&nbsp; This is a weakness, because Kami does not contribute with the bat much. While his experience is valuable to ground the young Nepali team, Stuart Law should look out for fast bowlers during the NPL to help balance out quality spinners.&nbsp; One of the most impressive and professional parts of Nepal’s winning streak has been the attention to detail. The players have been generally excellent in the field, giving away very few runs due to wides or no balls. They had three run outs against the UAE and two against Qatar and Japan and in the first game against the West Indies.&nbsp; The fielders seem much calmer and focused when executing difficult catches, a welcome change from past complacency. This attention to detail makes the difference in narrow games and keeps morale high.&nbsp; The Nepali team has performed well, but besides the narrowly-beaten UAE, all the matches were against teams ranked lower in the world T20 rankings. And the series against the West Indies was against a weakened team. In the world cup, Nepal will be facing much stronger teams and will lack the element of surprise it had in the 2024 World Cup.&nbsp; If Nepal wants to keep improving, it now has to be able to dominate teams like Kuwait and Oman. It also should set up more series with associate nations like Scotland, Ireland, Namibia and The Netherlands. This will help accurately gauge the team’s progress and expose its weaknesses.

Nepal’s prospects at World Cup 2026

A little more than one month into its six-month term, Nepal's interim government recalled ambassadors from 11 countries: China, Japan, Malaysia, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Russia, Spain, Germany, the UK, the US, and Japan.&nbsp;
Mostly appointed by previous governments, they have to return to Kathmandu by 6 November. The envoys who were retained, even if they were political appointees, tended to be women or from various ethnic minorities.
The recall has met with criticism back home. Prime Minister Sushila Karki is blamed for borrowing a page out of its predecessors’ playbook. Although it was a symbolically inclusive move in a diplomatic corps dominated by established groups, the government may have got its timing wrong.
On Sunday, however, the Supreme Court issued an interim order against government decision to recall the 11 ambassadors. The court questioned the neccesssity and justification of such a move, concerned that it could affect Nepal's relations with the host countries.&nbsp;
Karki has said <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/news/future-imperfect">her priority is to hold elections in March</a>, and by recalling Nepal’s emissaries from important capitals like Washington, London, Bonn, Tokyo, Abu Dhabi and Kuala Lumpur her government has cut channels of communication and support from development partners and with the international community.&nbsp;
Nepal’s anti-corruption GenZ protest and the devolution of the youth movement into <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/here-now/relocate-reallocate-recover">arson, looting, and violence</a> after the targeted killing of protestors in September put the nation in the international spotlight. And the interest was especially keen in neighbouring New Delhi and Beijing.&nbsp;
The Nepal unrest has sparked similar protests across the world from <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/here-now/nepal-genzs-inspired-filipinos">the Philippines</a> to East Timor, Madagascar and Peru. But there is also worry in India where exposure of #nepokids on social media as well as corruption in high places could instigate copycat youth unrest.
And in China, there is still a lingering memory of the deadly protests in 1989 Tiananmen Square. But the Chinese also suspect that some in the GenZ movement have links to free-Tibet. &nbsp;
Foreign policy experts in Nepal reject conspiracy theories about foreign backing for the GenZ, characterising it as mostly triggered by home-grown outrage over chronic corruption of the governing elite.&nbsp;
Throughout its history Nepal has always had to balance the geo-strategic interests of its neighbours: the British in India and the Chinese Empire, and more recently independent India and Communist China.
When former PM K P Oli resigned, he had <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/opinion/comment/when-xi-meets-modi-and-oli">just returned from a visit to Beijing</a> and was a week away from making an official visit to India. A new Nepali prime minister typically makes the first visit to India, but Oli broke that tradition last year by going to China to sign the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) framework agreement.
"Oli was China's trusted partner supporting <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/news/china-syndrome">Nepal’s participation in BRI</a> and SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization)," says geopolitical analyst Sanjay Upadhya. "Now, some in Beijing are apprehensive that there is external support for the youth protests that contributed to Oli’s sudden departure. It is perceived as a strategic setback for China."
Despite an ongoing dispute with India over a 364 sq km border territory, Nepal is heavily dependent economically on India with which it has an open border.&nbsp;
Rulers in Kathmandu have usually leaned over backwards to be closer to China to counterbalance India’s gravitational pull following a strategy of ‘equidistance’ between the two giant neighbours.&nbsp;
Growing American and Western disinterest in the region is making India and China more assertive towards smaller nations. Educator Dovan Rai says, “China is also becoming more aggressive and trying to show its presence in and around South Asia.”
She adds, “Nepal is an important neighbour for China, especially considering issues it regards as sensitive, like the Dalai Lama and Tibet.”
Indeed, the Chinese are said to be suspicious about the links that the <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/here-now/nepal-s-historic-youth-dissensus">GenZ movement</a> was infiltrated by elements linked with Free Tibet or with US-based interests.&nbsp;
What must have especially raised eyebrows at the Chinese Embassy in Kathmandu was that the Dalai Lama’s office in exile in India congratulated Sushila Karki — the first time in history it has sent such a greeting to a new prime minister of Nepal.&nbsp;
Although Nepal’s two neighbours do not see eye-to-eye, both agree and are worried about instability in Nepal, and if it might trigger a refugee crisis, empower extremist factions, or attract Western interference.&nbsp;
Nepal’s September protests were preceded and succeeded by similar movements in the region and around the world. In light of this global eruption of youth frustration, and desire to lead from the front, the hardline governments of Nepal’s two neighbours are undoubtedly wary of the possibility of similar unrest within their own borders.&nbsp;
‘India advocates democratic legitimacy, while China prioritises control and predictability. Recent upheavals demonstrate that neither democracy nor stability alone suffices for sustainable nationhood,’ Upadhya wrote in a recent blog.
With early elections scheduled for 5 March, <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/news/one-month-later">the main challenge for Karki’s transition government</a> is to maintain dialogue and establish consensus between youth groups, political parties, and other agitating forces to participate in polls — all while ensuring there is no covert external influence.&nbsp;
Indeed, with <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/here-now/nepals-democracy-keeps-doubting-itself">Nepal’s democracy</a> at stake as well as new political forces with competing interests set to battle it out in a new political landscape, experts warn that there could be powers that will want to fish in troubled waters.&nbsp;
Explains Dovan Rai: “Along with soft power, foreign countries including our neighbours could intervene in the online information space to promote their interests in Nepal. Fake narratives and disinformation could be spread &nbsp;through digital platforms. We must be careful and vigilant about our digital space.”

Neighbourhood watch on Nepal

Climber, expedition leader and later a supplier of bottled oxygen to Himalayan mountaineers, Henry Barclay Todd died on 3 November 2025 in his favourite place on earth, Kathmandu.&nbsp;
Todd was larger than life, a metaphor often used, yet it could not be more fitting. Standing nearly 2m tall, and possessing an unshakeable will, he lived life on a grand scale, both in body and spirit.&nbsp;
Todd was a pillar in the Himalayan climbing community, supporting many mountaineers across Nepal and Pakistan, making it possible for them to fulfil the dream of standing on the world’s highest peaks. He believed deeply in the strength, skill, and potential of the Sherpa people, and offered them opportunities that might otherwise have remained out of reach.&nbsp;
“Thank you, Henry. Your trust changed my life. Rest in peace, my leader, my teacher, my friend,” said Dorjee Gyelzen Sherpa in his tribute.
Born in 1945 to Royal Air Force officer Henry Todd and May Todd of the Women’s Royal Air Force, Henry spent his early years in Singapore. He led a lively childhood with his two brothers, far removed from the mountains that would later define his path.&nbsp;
A gifted swimmer like his father, Henry never pursued the sport professionally. Instead, after returning to Dundee as a teenager and attending seven different schools, he set off for London, where he began working for an insurance company before finding his true calling in adventure.
Henry Todd first came to Nepal in the mid-1980s and made his first attempt on Ama Dablam in 1987, an expedition that marked the beginning of an extraordinary and colourful climbing career. <a href="https://www.himalayandatabase.com/" target="_blank">The Himalayan Database</a> lists 61 expeditions that he led in Nepal alone — there were more in the Karakoram, Argentina and the Alps.&nbsp;
But Todd would joyfully say that a few hard Scottish ascents held a more personal meaning to him than even the greatest Himalayan summits.
Over the decades, he crossed paths with many legendary climbers like Anatoli Boukreev, Jerzy Kukuczka, Doug Scott and Chris Bonington as well as celebrities including members of Pink Floyd and Nobel Prize laureates whom he befriended.&nbsp;
He had a gift to never name-drop, but would simply mention that he had had lunch with Minnie Driver (niece of his long-time friend Andra) or that he had bought his first car from Donald Sutherland. For Todd, these were not bragging rights, they were simply part of the colourful tapestry of his life.
Todd’s life was filled with extraordinary experiences from surviving plane crashes, avalanches and earthquakes to quietly solving countless problems, which was one of his favourite past-times. His hands, famously large and steady, were always ready to help whether in the chaos of the mountains or the calm of a base camp.&nbsp;
With his sharp sense of humour and the beloved exclamation “Whoopie!”,he could bring lightness even to the toughest moments. He never tired of taking on challenges or helping when someone was in need, and he enriched so many people’s lives with his endless stories.
His legacy is immense. He helped build the human backbone of Himalayan climbing, enabling generations of climbers to test themselves in the world’s highest places. With his passing, an era of bold, spirited Himalayan guiding has come to a close.
Todd survived by a loving family, many close friends and a global community of climbers and Sherpas who will never forget him and his endless tales.&nbsp;
His family said in a statement: ‘Henry’s strength, warmth and unyielding belief in others will live on far above the clouds. He was indestructible in our eyes and in our hearts, he always will be.’
There will be a memorial service at Pashupati Temple in Kathmandu on 8 November 2025 around lunchtime.

Henry Barclay Todd, 80

The autumn mountaineering season is not over yet, and already there have been 12 fatalities on Himalayan peaks in Nepal.
Of the 1,450 climbing permits issued, 436 were for Mt Ama Dablam (6,812m), 374 for Mt Manaslu (8,163m) and 186 for Himlung Himal (7,126m). There were deaths on all three mountains.
The death of two French climbers on Ama Dablam happened before unseasonal blizzards hit the mountains. But Cyclone Montha from the Bay of Bengal brought on high winds and up to 1m of snow in the peak trekking and mountaineering season.
This increased avalanche conditions, and made helicopter evacuation of stranded and injured climbers difficult. Lower down the mountains, more than 1,000 trekkers from Nepal and around the world were stuck in the Annapurnas, Manaslu circuit and the Khumbu.
However, there have also been allegations that it was not just the weather that delayed rescues. Multiple levels of bureaucracy and the need for flight permits to restricted areas like Manang and Manaslu critically delayed evacuation flights.
Italian climbers Farronato Stefano and Caputo Alessandro were found dead in their tent at Panbari Himal Camp I (6,887m) in the Manaslu area. They had been trapped by heavy snowfall since 28 October, and their bodies were found on 4 November by a team from the expedition organisers, Sherpa Alpine Trekking Service. The team was made up of high level mountain guides and expedition leader Valter Perlino.
The team had been climbing to Camp 3 but decided to descend to base camp because of thrombosis in Perlino’s left foot. The two climbers who would eventually get trapped decided to break at Camp I, a decision that would prove fatal after the projected six-day snowfall arrived two days early.
“They were sleeping in a tent and were buried under 2.5 metres of compacted snow. It happened during the night between Thursday and Friday. While they were sleeping, absurd,” said Perlino.
A deadly incident took place the morning of 3 November, when five foreigners and two Nepalis died in an avalanche on Yalung Ri at 5,630m in the Rolwaling. They were part of a larger group of 15 that were acclimatising for an attempt on the nearby Dolma Khang (6,332m).
Local authorities in Gauri Shankar Conservation Area say calls were immediately made to helicopter companies as well as various ministries in Kathmandu that have to issue permits to fly to the region bordering China.
But the permits for rescue flights to Rolwaling Valley were delayed by eight hours. Rescue flights in these areas require permission from the Ministry of Tourism, the Ministry of Defence, the Home Ministry, and the Civil Aviation Authority of Nepal (CAAN).
Experts say this should be exempted in times of emergency when time is of the essence. CAAN spokesperson Pratap Babu Tiwari claimed to not know of the avalanche on Yalung Ri and deflected questions to the permission department.&nbsp;
There was a similar tragedy on Himlung Himal in Manang as well. Australian Chin-Tark Chan, 49, was climbing with 8K Expeditions and fell ill on 27 October at about 6,800m, developing snow blindness and loss of mobility. The guides immediately called the US insurance company Global Rescue for authorisation of a longline rescue.
Global Rescue refused, saying a rescue at that height would violate Nepal’s aviation rules and put the pilot at unacceptable risk. They asked the guides to transport Chan to Camp 3 at 6,400m to a permitted altitude. Seeing it was a life-or-death situation for its client, 8K called in an aerial rescue anyway, but the helicopter could not land due to bad weather. Chan died slightly below Camp 3 on 29 October.
Global Rescue said in a statement that it was ready to send in a helicopter after Chan had been transported to Camp 3, but several hours were lost for that attempt, and the weather did not get better in the next few days.
To underscore just how dangerous helicopter rescues in the Himalaya can be in bad weather, a chopper from Altitude Air skidded off the helipad at Lobuche below Mt Everest while trying to rescue trekkers in whiteout conditions.&nbsp;
CAAN announced a ban on flights during blizzards or dense fog. While rescue missions are often heroic and courageous, they should not be foolhardy if conditions are unsafe and the risk to pilots and rescuers too high. This autumn was a lesson for future expeditions and for the Nepal government.&nbsp;
The Italian duo on Panbari were caught out by snow that arrived two days ahead of schedule, but the group on Yalung Ri should have postponed their ascent after multiple warnings from the Department of Hydrology and Meteorology to avoid high altitudes.

nehru

Conversation between BP Koirala and the American Consul in Calcutta in 1953

‘Putsch Ek’

‘Putsch Ek’

New Delhi’s new dealings in Nepal

Nepal’s prospects at World Cup 2026

Neighbourhood watch on Nepal

Henry Barclay Todd, 80

Deadly autumn in Himalayan climbing