Nepal and foreign aid

The world we live in is one, but there are 195 countries. Out of 195 numbers, 193 are members of the United Nations, and the two are none-member observer states - the Holy See and the State of Palestine. Most of us know some big countries are Russia, Canada, China, United States, Brazil, Australia, India, etc. Some are small, like Monaco, Vatican City, Liechtenstein, San Marino, Tuvalu, Nauru, Malta, Maldives. Some countries are wealthy and developed - Germany, Australia, Switzerland, Sweden, Netherlands, France, Denmark, USA, Great Britain etc. On the other hand, some are underdeveloped or least developed -South Sudan, Chad, Burundi, Sierra Leone, Burkina Faso, Mali, Liberia, Mozambique, etc. Our country Nepal is listed in No. 30 in the UN list of least developed countries.

We all know some countries of the

rich world have been helping poor, underdeveloped, or least developed countries for their development in different ways - technical assistance, advisory services, constructing roads, factories, etc.. Humanitarian aid such as food supplies and services, grants, loans, etc. Generally, it is called foreign aid and also called international aid, economic or foreign assistance.

It is understood that even personally when you help, support anyone - your near and dear or any other party or individual, you wish that your help should not be misused and use it for the given purposes. And at least you will be obliged and appreciate the support and goodwill even if there was no other selfish motive. From that point, one could easily understand that the friendly countries give you something naturally expect something though there are no significant sorts and conditions. While criticizing MCC, the Aid Programme of the USA, the most controversial aid programme so far talked, heard, criticized, and condemned in our country, one of the top Nepal Communist Maoist leaders said on his TV talk that the donation (daan) should never have any conditions linked to it.

But so far, I understand there are always some conditions the duties of the aid receiving country, minor or significant. The donor country always expects something from you even if there are no written conditions, at least your appreciation, goodwill, love and, friendly support when needed. It is generally known that donor countries give aid to any country keeping in mind one or more of the following points. To strengthen relation

2. On an excellent behaviour expected by the donor

3. To influence in different ways- political, cultural, educational, etc

4. To construct and create the infrastructure needed by the donor for itself - roads, electric, industries, factories

5. Commercial benefit for both - donor and the receiver

diplomatic

6. To strengthen a military ally

7. Humanitarian cause

8. Philanthropic, altruistic purposes

9. To earn goodwill and have good wishes and support when needed.

The aid receiving country should be wise enough to think whether the aid would be for the necessity and benefit of the nation when any assistance the donor country offers. We often know the donors, INGOs come in disguise in the name of social service to achieve their goals when we read the autography books about the spies who disclosed their role after the retirement. Sometimes even the professional agriculturists, engineers, medical doctors, professors have different tasks and motives assigned to them, quite different from the job.

Someone being a medical doctor or a teacher would be involved more in converting religion than the professional job. Similarly, someone being a professor would be working to achieve their political goal. But it does not mean that receiving assistance is always wrong.

We all know no country is bound to agree, treaty, or negotiate with any other country. Similarly, no government is bound to have general advice or technical advice, foreign assistance, donation, grant, loan, etc. In the same way, Nepal, being a sovereign country, is not bound to be involved in any negotiation with any government; however, the country is big or small. Before making any agreement or negotiation with any party, government, or organization, we must care for our interests and benefit. That is clear. After agreeing, there should not be grumbling against it. We should not be unaware that all the countries of the world have their interest and they always try to achieve their interest, their goal. In this context, I am happy and proud to quote the following excerpts from the speech of Commanding General Bahadur Shumshere Jung Bahadur Rana, the Nepalese Minister, delivered at the Legation, 123 Kensington

Palace Gardens, London on 7 November 1934. It shows how politely and proudly our then government under the Rana Prime Minister (Shree Teen Maharaj) Juddha Shumshere Jung Bahadur Rana did not accept the earthquake relief fund offered by our friendly country Great Britain when we had a big earthquake in 1934. Imagine what prestige we and our country could have had at that time and think what a low reputation we have now during the time of this so-called democratic system. I am happy to possess the original copy of that speech titled" Reception by the Nepalese Minister," published in the Magazine in Great Britain on Jun. 31, 1935. It was most surprising to hear that India cheated us whenever we had an agreement or treaty with India. I always questioned whether India cheated us, or we were fooled by our leaders, negotiators?. No country could force us to sign in the paper where we have no consent. So far, I understand that we were cheated, betrayed by our leaders, not by any other government or country, even if we were cheated in any agreement or treaty. Regarding MCC, the USA's highly criticized grant programme in Nepal, I also see from the same logic. I do not see any point in attacking the

USA regarding the agreement affecting the two countries diplomatic relations. The USA may have an interest in doing it. It is up to you to agree or not. No one can force you to sign. You should sign in it if you see there is a benefit for you. If not, you can deny it diplomatically and politely. By formulating and introducing our present constitution, we, our country, were cheated in many ways. Here also, we blame foreign countries for introducing a secular country where most Hindus live. We blame foreign countries for introducing federalism in our tiny country and removing monarchy where still people have more faith in the monarch than in the political leaders. But I think even in this case we should blame our leaders, not the other countries. Our government betrayed us; our leaders and political parties betrayed us, not by others. Even if the foreigners could do it and did it because of the dishonesty and betrayal of our leaders, unless we understand it and learn to condemn our betrayal and not to be their followers, our problem will be where it is. I feel we all are the fools who voted and will be fools who will vote these betrayals in putting them in power.