This is How USAID Functions!

Monsanto Controversy

An official release of the United States Agency for International Development’s Nepal office posted on its official website on September 13  had an eye-catching headline-  "USAID teams with the Ministry of Agriculture & Cooperatives and the Monsanto Company to enhance maize production in Nepal.” On November 18, USAID posted a status on its Facebook Page--almost opposite of its own version of the earlier release.  The three paragraph text says "No new programs have been entered into by the US Government with the Government of Nepal (GoN) to introduce hybrid maize seeds."

The days between the two postings amply demonstrates how things are done in Nepal, how much USAID cares about providing facts to the media and so on.

On September 13, USAID Nepal had organized a one-day workshop in the Hotel Himalaya which was inaugurated by  Agriculture & Cooperatives (MoAC) Umakant Jha. The USAID release that followed claimed that ‘secretary Jha appreciated the opportunity to work with USAID, particularly on this maize initiative.’ But, secretary Jha later publicly refuted it and said what was attributed to him was ‘baseless and completely wrong'.  "I was present in that workshop and there was a presentation on Monsanto,” Jha said, adding “I was just listening to the discussion but I have no idea about any partnership between MoAC and USAID to bring Monsanto in Nepal." Monsanto is an American multinational agricultural biotechnology corporation which is the leading producer of hybrid glyphosate and Genetically Engineered Seeds.

Soon after Jha’s rebuttal, USAID officials told me that they had no idea what Jha ‘s statement in the media was all about, ‘ but the government of Nepal and USAID are working together to bring Monsanto in Nepal to distribute hybrid maize seeds. Stuti Basnyat, communication officer in the USAID said, "I don't know what secretary Jha told you but we are working towards having an agreement among USAID, GoN and Monsanto."

While the first release mentioned Monsanto five times, but the update in the Facebook less than two months later omitted the name . It simply talks about promoting hybrid seeds.

The two releases and the period in between have fuelled enough controversy , and there has been no convincing clarification issued from any side  Neither the GoN nor the USAID  have tried to explain how hybrid seeds are different  from the traditional ones.  Dragged into the controversy, the USAID now insists that it will only respond to an email query.  On the Nepal government side, Jha has been transferred to the Ministry of Industry, and many read his going against USAID has cost him earlier job. But the Ministry of Agriculture even without Jha refuses to bail out USAID.

Elaborating the genesis of the controversy, Dr. Hari Dahal,  MoAC Spokesperson  said that ‘ one official from USAID had come to the ministry with Monsanto proposal to discuss, but no concrete decision was taken’ . He also challenged the USAID to publicize the documents or evidence, if any, to suggest a deal was in the offing ‘Ministry of Agriculture is not as techno-savvy as USAID is, ‘but facts speak for themselves,’ MOAC officials say.

The current controversy somehow discredits the USAID that has been working in Nepal for the last six decades with substantial support to many developmental projects, and contributed a lot towards Nepal’s journey to a modern and developing country. But like some other bilateral donor agencies, USAID spending money directly in the name of development (bypassing the government)  has of late is also becoming an issue in the country.

In its the Facebook posting,  USAID  claims that  the US mission remains committed development partner to the GoN. While this is true in many ways,  the word ‘commitment’ can not bypass the existing rules of the government.  The development agency that  dismisses its official press release through a posting in the face-book is not a practice that can be called responsible. The episode may perhaps provoke many donors to review their similar approach , and perhaps it is also the time for the UN Resident office to take cognizance of this.

Majjom’s Livelihood

He was pulling the rikshwa with all his effort. He drove me from Ranja Airport to Tribhuvan Chowk, Nepalgunj and asked for one hundred and fifty rupees. 17 years old, Majjom was hesitant to share his story with me. I insisted.

He told me he has been driving rikshwa since last three years (which meant that he started to drive rikshwa from his fourteen!) I was stunned. I asked him why did he leave the school. He proved my question absolutely wrong. He said he does this means of livlihood in his off time only. Majjom goes to school in the day time and drives in morning, evening and only in off days. I gave him Rs 180 in total with Rs 30 as incentive for his zeal to make a better life. That was the only thing I could do!

I could smile with a thought that this generation is going to do ‘something’ to make a better Nepal. I am owed for Majjom’s  spirit to live and make things beautiful. The history of human civilization has been decorated by the economic activities of people.

Labor Market Can Advance ‘The Hope’

The rays of hope in the labor market of Nepal have appeared. The labor unions have agreed to formulate a new Labor Act which will help to normalize the situation of industrial sector in Nepal.

The draft of new Labor Act, the government prepared with the help of International Labor Organization (ILO) has been taken as a hope to normalize the labor issues in the industrial sector of Nepal.

One More time, lets talk about Vishakhapatnam Port

Nepal is one more time going to table the issue of Visakhapatnam port in the Inter-Governmental Committee (IGC) meeting with India . This issue has been discussed with India since more than a decade with India. The Indian Premier Dr. Manmohan Singh had agreed with his Nepali counterpart Dr. Baburam Bhattrai in latter's India visit last month. The IGC meeting is held in every six months between two countries' joint secretary level. This IGC meeting is going to be a small platform to see how much Indian side is positive to upgrade the Nepal's international and regional trade.

 

Weak Economic Diplomacy is a Constant Problem for Nepal's Regional and International Trade

Since more than a decade Nepal is constantly requesting with India to get facility of using the Visakhapatnam port for a better trade with the third countries. Almost in each of the bilateral meeting, Nepali side keeps the issue on table. India never says, 'No'. But till the date, India is not ready to materialize its words into action. One more time India has agreed to give the facility of using Visakhapatnam port during the premier Dr. Baburam Bhattari's visit in last month--October. Nepal is suffering from different problems, like congestion, in Kolkata and Haldiya ports.

In few many informal discussions, officials from Ministry of Commerce and Supply admit that Nepal is lacking the diplomatic effort to push India. This is just a reflection of Nepal-India trade issues. Keep in mind that, we have more than 50 years old Treaty of Trade and Transit with India.

Our Northern neighbor, China is constantly working on its part to upgrade the infrastructures in the border for more volume of trade between Nepal and China. In April 2010, China gave the zero-tariff treatment to the 3 hundred 61 products, which is almost 95 percent of Nepal's total products, to reduce the trade imbalance between two countries.

But where do we have the supply list, what China is expecting to import from Nepal? What China wants to export in Nepal, does china consider Nepal as a potential market for its quality products? Chinese Ambassador to Nepal Qui Guohong is emphasizing on establishing the Trade Areas and Special Economic Zones to vitalize the trade between two countries.

These two cases with our two neighboring countries show that both of them have their own economic diplomacy. What we lack here in Nepal is the sound economic diplomacy. We don't have a balanced approach to our neighbors when it comes to the economic diplomacy. There are enough cases of our unwillingness to maintain the balance. The Chinese pro-activeness in bilateral trade increment and India's cosmetic flavor in the political levels implicitly signify that Nepal do not have its own standard in the diplomatic level to enhance the trade.

The supply-side constraints of our country are understandable but what we are not acknowledging is the 'comfort-zone' of our diplomats towards widening the trade partners. This is the time to get one clear answer why Nepal is not being able to have a direct discussion with Bangladesh about the transit and at the same time why China gives grant to the military force of Nepal but any support to enhance the situation of industrial sector? These questions deserve the answers and answer is 'lack of economic diplomacy of country'.

Nepal has specifically three Commercial Ambassadors in India, Hongkong and Tibet. What our Commercial Ambassadors are doing over there and what is the reason behind government's initiation few months back to send the commercial ambassadors to Spain and Portugal? United States of America could have been one option to send the commercial ambassador or to any another country with which we have a significant volume of bilateral trade. The Trade and Investment Framework Agreement (TIFA) between Nepal and America, which happened this year, is one of the examples of Nepali side's recklessness while signing any agreement either it’s a bilateral one or a multilateral one. The TIFA is just a formality. Honorable ambassador to USA Dr. Shankar Sharma himself is a scholar of economic discipline but what happened while signing the agreement was embarrassing to any citizen of Nepal. Nepal has got not a single privilege from TIFA that other LDCs have not got already from USA.

Nepal entered into the World Trade Organization (WTO) membership in 2004. This forum is one of the most vibrant multilateral platforms for any country in the world. WTO negotiations are always stressful for country like Nepal which has the huge amount of trade with one country--India--with whom the WTO norms do not apply. Nepal's clear failure in economic diplomacy is not being able to revise the Treaty of Trade and Transit, 1960 with India.

Here arises a prominent question that why everything seems functioning and sound in the political level between Nepal and India but in diplomatic levels? This implies our failure on economic diplomacy. India's sound, favorable and supportive face is not the real, if it was it would have been ready to let Nepal and Bangladesh have a bilateral talk for their betterment. But it doesn't in practical term. Again it goes to the same bottle that we have very weak position in every way.

China's proactive approach to strengthen the bilateral trade is also within the circle of doubt. There are rooms which prove again that China's intention is not clear. It has given the zero-tariff treatment to Nepali products and at the same time helping to develop the dry port in Tatopani but this is just a rosy gift to Nepal. China has given the zero-tariff treatment for 4 thousand 7 hundred 21 products from different Least Developed Countries (LDCs). What China is doing with Nepal might be something but do we have any guts say no for that we don't need and tell them what our priorities are. We have the Currently, Nepal and China has Rs 36 billion trade and Nepal suffers Rs 32 billion trade imbalance.

Nepal needs to take decisive actions : IMF

In the IMF's latest notice http://www.imf.org/external/np/sec/pn/2011/pn11134.htm, it has strongly suggested Nepal to make a 'structural reform'. 'Nepal's central bank leadership is being more and more immature and taking very short term measures in the financial sector', blames Dipendra Bahadur Kshetry, the vice president of National Planning Commission http://www.npc.gov.np/.

By showing the inefficiency of Nepal's Central Bank, IMF has said that for the productivity and potential growth there should be the structural reform as soon as possible. Another point that the Nepal side should be aware is that IMF has asked it to take the 'decisive action' to balance the fragile situation of economic situation.