Home

MR RAMESH ADHIKARI has a distinguished career spanning over three decades, contributing to election and political process reform, policy analysis, localization, federalism, civil society, media, governance, and democracy. He has collaborated with esteemed institutions such as The Asia Foundation, Open Development, DevTech System Inc, IDI International, SWN, Mott MacDonald, WSP, British Council, USAID, Action Aid International, Danish Association for International Cooperation, and UNDP across Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Afghanistan. He holds a Master of Arts in Geography and a Bachelor of Law from Tribhuvan University, along with an M.Sc. in Regional and Rural Planning from the Asian Institute of Technology. Adhikari, who is currently working  as a freelance consultant, spoke to SOUTH ASIA TIME on the likely implications of US President Donald Trump’s policies on South Asian nations. Excerpts of the interview:

How might a second Trump presidency influence US strategic interests in South Asia, particularly regarding China’s growing regional influence?

Trump’s second term has caused a lot of frustration, confusion, and undoubtedly curiosity in the Global South, especially in countries in South Asia. Trump and his team were vocal all along his campaign that they would put “America first” and an integral part of this meant reevaluating all foreign American assistance and redirecting these funds for the welfare of American citizens. We are already seeing the outcomes of this less than a month into the Trump presidency. USAID has been the cornerstone of US foreign policy, embodying the nation’s commitment to humanitarian assistance, economic development, and global stability. The Trump government has announced plans to shut down USAID completely, a move that will severely undermine American humanitarian and foreign aid initiatives on one hand and erode US’s global influence on the other hand. This will create opportunities for rival nations to strategically invest in international development as a part of their geopolitical agenda. In South Asia, given the proximity China enjoys with countries, the expansion of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) may be a concern for the Trump administration. To counter the Chinese influence in the region, US will be looking to strengthen its ties with India. During Trump’s first term, US and India strengthened their relationship, particularly in defense cooperation. As recent Trump and Modi meetings have shown, US is trying to further collaborations with India in defence cooperation, joint infrastructure projects, and private sector intelligence sharing.

The US will also be trying to curb Chinese influence in other nations in South Asia. Nepal, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Maldives, and Bhutan are all receiving some sort of technical as well as developmental aid from the Chinese government and these countries may be under greater pressure to lean more towards the US side and reduce their dependency on China. I think the relationship between the US and Pakistan would be complicated and given Pakistan’s close economic and military relationship with China, Trump could impose more restrictions on military aid and financial assistance. On the Afghanistan side, Trump might pressure Pakistan to curb extremist movements that could destabilize the region. The US may increase US engagement with India and allies, pressure Sri Lanka for port access (given China’s control of Hambantota Port), strategically engage with the Maldives to establish a US military presence to counter China’s growing maritime influence, and try to influence Nepal to keep distance from the BRI.

What changes could we expect in US-India relations under Trump, given his past emphasis on trade deals and security cooperation?

I think the US will continue its close ties with India as one of its best allies in this part of the world but we might see some renewed tensions on trade, immigration, and India’s ties with Russia. During Modi’s trip to the US in February this year, Trump announced expanded military sales to India, including F-35 jets, along with more oil and gas exports to reduce trade deficit. Both sides agreed to finalize a new defense framework and negotiate a new trade deal. The negotiations state that collaborations will focus on Trade and Economic Relations, and Security and Defence Cooperation. The new $500 bn trade goal aims to more than double the $190bn two-way trade in 2023. The negotiations for this agreement will focus on market access, tariff elimination, and supply chain integration in goods and services. As a component of the Indo-Pacific strategy (IPS), Trump will continue to support the QUAD (US, India, Japan and Australia) to counterbalance China, though Trump’s transnationalism could mean requesting India to take on larger security responsibilities. Trump’s first administration elevated defense ties through pacts like the Communications Compatibility and Security Agreement (COMCASA) and the Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement (BECA) to enable intelligence sharing and military interoperability. A second Trump term will likely encourage more arms sales and more military collaboration, especially to counter China’s influence in the Indo-Pacific. The important point is that China is a super economic power in this region, mainly through the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which is a great concern for the U.S., and Trump will work to further enhance U.S. efforts to push back China’s power by solidifying bonds with India.

How might Trump’s policies on immigration and H-1B visas affect South Asian countries, particularly India, Nepal, and Bangladesh?

Most H-1B visa recipients in the US are from India, and Indians account for over 70% of the total H-1B population, while a much smaller proportion are from Nepal. Most India H-1B visa recipients are IT workers while Nepalis and Bangladeshis are slightly more spread out across the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics sectors as well as health care. Trump’s executive order on immigration was akin to opening a firehose of terrible policies, drowning to the bone anyone still holding any spark of hope that Trump’s second term would not be  worse than his first. Thousands of people from the aforementioned countries are awaiting work permits and green cards and it is looking like the process will lengthen and vetting procedures will be strengthened. Some of the country cap concerns for specific visa types will impact India more than Nepal. Students who are awaiting H-1 B sponsorship to work in the USA may seek alternative options in Australia, Canada, or the UK. When it comes to low-skilled workers, Trump’s “Buy American, Hire American” agenda will likely have lasting impacts. If the Trump administration eliminates the Diversity Visa (DV) program, those seeking migration opportunities in Nepal and Bangladesh will be affected. Lastly, a large number of South Asians are waiting to get US approval on family-sponsored green cards which may be impacted due to tougher immigration policies.

Could Trump’s “America First” approach impact US foreign aid and development assistance to South Asian countries?

Trump’s “America First” policy has already impacted foreign aid and development assistance to South Asian countries, especially channeled through the USAID because the new US government aims to cut USAID, one of the long-standing institutions established in 1961. While the President has issued executive orders regarding foreign aid, it’s unlikely that such aid will cease entirely. There have been numerous legal challenges filed against this executive order, and the American courts can make judgments against the directive. Even if part of the aid is diverted, the overall amount is unlikely to be reduced significantly. One of Trump’s executive orders on “Reevaluating and Realigning United States Foreign Aid” calls for a 90-day halt on new foreign assistance commitments and spending subject to re-evaluation of all foreign aid initiatives. This has led to the termination of six programs in Nepal by mid-February, with many other programs expected to shut down in the coming days. USAID is the most significant donor in Nepal, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka in terms of democracy, governance, health, education, agriculture and food security, water and sanitation, energy, environment, and humanitarian assistance while India receives minimal US aid in relation to the economy but could see reduced support in the fields of health, energy, and technology. Both Afghanistan and Pakistan also receive significant funding from the USAID. Therefore, Trump’s America First approach will impact aid and development assistance to SA Countries, but not so much in India, which  is the region’s largest economy.

On US foreign aid distributed through programs like the MCC, or through the State Department, Department of Justice, Department of Agriculture, and Trade and Development Agencies, I think US financing will continue but channeled through different approaches as US geopolitical interests are still important to the Trump administration.

How might Trump’s trade and labor policies impact Bangladesh’s garment industry, given its heavy reliance on exports to the US?

The USA is Bangladesh’s largest export destination for ready-made garments (RMG) – in 2023 alone, Bangladesh exported almost $8.27 billion worth of RMG to the US. Trump has already announced his intent to introduce the Reciprocal Tariff Policy, which could raise tariffs or apply stricter labor compliance regulations on Bangladesh RMG industries. It is too early to say, but US companies could shift sourcing elsewhere to countries like Mexico and other SA countries if Bangladesh faced firmer regulations. Similar to that of other SA countries, If Bangladesh aligns more with the US geopolitical approaches, as designated by IPS, then it might be able to negotiate trade benefits despite Trump’s protectionist strategy overall.

Given Trump’s skepticism towards multilateral agreements, how might his return to power affect South Asia’s role in global institutions like the UN, WTO, and climate change negotiations?

Let’s talk about the WTO. Although Trump has announced that countries that impose tariffs on US products will be taxed at the same level, as per WTO rules, developing countries benefit from differential rates. Trump’s executive order, however, also targets the EU’s value-added tax. All these moves suggest that America is declaring a trade war on the world. After imposing new tariffs of 10% on Chinese products, and then 25% on steel and aluminium, Trump escalated it further, announcing on February 13 the slapping of “reciprocal tariffs” on all imported goods. This policy will have a direct impact on SA nations.

Trump withdrew from the Paris Agreement on climate change as he had done during his first term, and it could mean reduced US climate financing for vulnerable South Asian nations such as Nepal, Bangladesh, and the Maldives. Budget cuts to international agencies like UNICEF, UNFPA, UNHCR the WHO, and international climate programs during the Trump administration can potentially have long-term effects on SA countries that are relying on these agencies for funding and technical assistance. For example, UNICEF has been contributing notably to the health and education of Nepalese, Indian, and Bangladeshi children whereas WHO working to combat infectious diseases and slow down responses to future pandemics in this part of the world.

How might Trump’s approach to trade and tariffs impact Nepal’s exports to the US, especially in sectors like garments and handicrafts?

The total trade between Nepal and U.S. amounted to $241.4 million, in 2024. US exports (vaccines, antisera, toxins and cultures, soybeans, and coal briquettes) amounted to $120.5 million whereas Nepali exports (carpets, pashmina, handicrafts, animal food, and felt goods) were $120.9 million. However, the trade balance between these countries has been fluctuating. Data shows Nepal’s exports to the U.S. have accelerated at an average annual rate of 7.85% for the past 5 years whereas U.S. exports to Nepal with an average annual growth of 34.3% in the same interval. Nepal-US trade is dynamic and evolving, as both countries try to expand their trade and investment opportunities. However, the Reciprocal Tariff Policy which could impose higher tariffs for Nepali exports or higher labor compliance measures in Nepal would directly affect Nepal, making Nepali goods less competitive in the US markets. As Nepal has a relatively small volume of exports, its bargaining power for a fair trade deal is also limited, unless tied to US strategic interests. But the slender hope is that if America puts tariffs on Chinese products, Nepal may benefit somewhat, but there’s a long way to go.

Given Trump’s transactional foreign policy style, what are the chances of Nepal securing stronger US engagement in areas like economic investment, MCC implementation, and geopolitical balancing?

In South Asia, Nepal is the only country that is receiving MCC funds aimed at improving Nepal’s transport, energy, and economic sector. We have to remember that the MCC was signed during Trump’s first term in 2017, as such, Trump is on board with the overall strategy and goals of the project. It is obvious that the MCC is the US’s move to counter Chinese influence, specially through the BRI, and President Trump could reinforce US’s commitment to MCC projects in Nepal. Elon Musk, Trump’s close ally and head of the newly created DOGE, has been vocal in favouring bilateral, private-sector-led investments over foreign aid. As such, if Nepal were to offer investment-friendly policies, this would enable US businesses to invest in hydropower, tourism, and infrastructure. One key aspect of Nepal’s foreign policy is that it has always pursued a non-aligned policy and tried to maintain an even equidistance from the US, China, and India. However, the new US president may try to coax Nepal out of China’s Belt and Road Initiative, which would present diplomatic challenges given that Nepal has economic ties with China as well as with India.

Nepal joining the US Indo-Pacific framework may provide economic and security cooperation from the US but this support will most likely come with strings. The US approached Nepal for their support and participation in every activity of the IPS as well as the State Partnership Program (SPP); however, Nepal’s government decided against joining the IPS and SPP in 2021. Nepal could be under pressure to get engaged into IPS and SPP, and could benefit from this US engagement through strategic alignment while realizing the necessity of balancing in between the US, China, and India in order to avoid unwanted political pressures. A second Trump administration will likely adopt a more aggressive strategy towards Chinese involvement in SA, which would exert pressure on Nepal to restrict Chinese economic engagements and increase the U.S. presence which would be difficult to counterbalance.

DR DRONA PRAKASH RASALI is a Nepalese-Canadian population and public health expert, and

currently an adjunct professor at the University of British Columbia in Canada. He

has championed health equity, community empowerment and social justice. He co-founded the Emotional Well-Being Institute of Canada (2021), and previously played a key role in

establishing Nepal Open University (2016) and founded the NepalDalitinfo Network (2003). His

45-year long professional career spans leadership roles in veterinary science, genetics,

epidemiology, public health and higher education, earning him prestigious honors like the

Fellowship of the American College of Epidemiology and the Canadian Public Health

Association’s Honorary Life Membership Award. Dr Rasali is serving as the chairperson, Sahayatra International Alliance for Social Justice. He spoke to SOUTH ASIA TIME on contemporary issues. Excerpts of the interview:

Could you pls let us know regarding the Global Conference for a Caste Free World 2025 being organised in Toronto in May this year? What are the main objectives of this conference?

The Global Conference for a Caste-Free World 2025 (www.sahayatraintl.com/global-conference) will be organized in Toronto on May 25-27, 2025 on the auspices of Sahayatra International Alliance for Social Justice, which is registered as a non-profit organization with the Government of Canada. Its main goal reflected by the conference theme is Building Solidarity towards equality, social justice and abolition of caste- system of discrimination extant in societies such as in Nepal, India and elsewhere. We are considering Nepal as a focus country for this conference. The main objectives of this conference are to look back to historical development of caste-based discrimination, taking stock of its current situation and critically envisioning of the future state of its abolition in the society.

What issues you will be discussing in the conference? Any info re participants and speakers confirmed so far?

Everything in the spheres of global caste impacting on over 250 million people traditionally oppressed by descent in the societies around the world will be on the table. Especially, historical developments of structural caste/race system, academic research on various facets of caste systems and their impacts such as resulting in their socio-economic, cultural and health disparities, strategic education and activisms towards abolition of caste-system, policy making for reparation leading social change, strides of inclusion and reservation, emerging diasporic caste system and its impacts in new societies such as in Canada and the United States, and mitigation measures to curb it from its unacceptable growth, and also caste system in the context of climate change will be major topics of discourse during the conference. Over 15 academic leaders from the United States, Canada, India and Nepal who are invited to deliver their keynote speeches have confirmed their acceptance- some of them are globally renowned, and many more scholars and students are expected to deliver their research and policy analysis findings and insights through abstract submissions for oral and poster presentations. Many grassroots to national activists working against caste-discrimination in various countries are expected to congregate for their interactions in the conference. All of them will promote solidarity and provide inputs to evidence-based policy making at various levels- local to national to global. 

What next after the conference? How do you plan to follow up the outcome of the conference?

At the end of the conference, we plan to release “Toronto Declaration” that is expected to serve the purposes of guiding principles for the future course of action, particularly in research and education in academic institutions, activism among civil societies and policy making in various jurisdictions from local, provincial and national governments to international communities including the United Nations. Our future plan will be following up with the concerned stakeholders on topical issues raised in the Toronto Declaration. Additionally, we hope to continue organizing such global conferences in future years in various other cities like London, Washington/Baltimore, Hong Kong in collaboration with respective local organizations and academic institutions.  

Could you tell us briefly how the historical caste system in Nepal and India has shaped the social, economic, and political exclusion of Dalits today?

For much of the time throughout the medieval era and recent past centuries, the states dominated by feudal lords made people to believe falsely that caste hierarchy of humans came magically from the divine source from the ancient times. However, recent anthropological and genomic sequencing evidence have proved that humans that evolved from primates moved around and intermixed to make up the current structures of the populations in the societies spread around the world. The hierarchical caste system that first emerged around 4,000 years ago was formed by intermixing of the Eurasian Steppe Mountain pastoralists and Anatolian-Iranian farmers from the Fertile Crescent area coming down as migrants to Indus valley with local Dravidian people who had already established a civilized society. Most of the migrants were men, and naturally they intermixed with the Dravidian women resulting in admixture populations. However, the people at the ruling class or learned class tried to adopt endogamy much later after they secured a critical mass of dominant group to conquer and rule the masses. That’s when, originally for the purpose of distribution of agricultural surplus in favor of ruling class, division of labor and disproportionate distribution of outputs from the labor emerged and led to the formation of caste groups, guided by what is now known as Manu Smriti scripture. Similar people of Anatolian-Iranian farmers and Eurasian Steppe Mountain pastoralists had migrated to the westward in Europe, where they intermixed with the Indigenous hunters and gatherers there, and had borne similar idea of hierarchical society which evolved into White supremacy as we know today. In the whole of Indian sub-continent, it is proven that the only pure Indigenous people remaining are a small nomadic tribe that is still found in Andaman Island. Other than that, everyone else is genetically an admixture of the three groups of two migrants and Indigenous Dravidians. In the context of Dalits in Indian sub-continent, they are much complex admixtures people, as people were constantly upgraded and downgraded into different castes depending upon the rulers’ will  Thus, traditional caste system is totally a man-made social construct that has pushed the Dalits to continued state of oppression leaving them at the lowest stratum of the society with no access to resources and knowledge to flourish in socio-economic, cultural and political spheres. The National Social Exclusion Survey, 2018 in Nepal showed the measurable index that Hill Dalits and Terai Dalits are currently discriminated and excluded 12 and 9 times, respectively, more than the level of exclusion among Brahmins and Kshetris. Dalits that command about 15% of the Nepal’s total population are hardly visible in any spheres of power, influence or resources.     

Despite constitutional and legal protections, why does caste-based discrimination persist in many countries, and what are the main barriers to effective enforcement of these laws?

It is totally a structural issue, not an individual performance issue. Current constitution of Nepal is greatly progressive and takes into accounts of the plights of Dalits as most vulnerable and marginalized population. For reparation of this situation, the Constitution makes provisions for free education of Dalits up to higher education, makes provision for reservation in political representation, education and employment, and promises to provide land and other amenities towards their flourishing in the society. All these provisions are going in positive directions even if they may not be adequate to the extent of the damaging oppression that is extant in society.  Even then, we are not sure how many years it is going to take for implementation and enforcement of all those provisions already committed to be realized in full, as there is no sign of the Parliament taking initiatives for making necessary laws and regulations in the spirit enshrined in the constitution. There is huge structural problem that hinders Dalits to be adequately represented in enforcement and implementation. Dalits are caught up in a vicious cycle of low access to power and resources leading to low ability to reach the status of power and resource accumulation that, in turn, keep them in the low conditions of livelihoods, and the cycle goes on. 

How does caste discrimination intersect with issues like land rights, access to education, and employment opportunities for Dalits in both rural and urban areas?

Unlike India, where an urban society is fairly progressive in general compared to rural areas, Nepal has no substantive difference between rural and urban areas and both harbor the heavy burden of superstitious human values- but, there may be some differences between accessible areas in the eastern and western parts compared to mid-western and far western parts of Nepal. In general, caste discrimination in its structural form is rampant throughout the country. Accesses to land rights, education and employment are interrelated and the land rights is the basic need. If a Dalit family is landless, it is most likely that they have no education and then no formal employment leading to low livelihood status. 

What lessons can Nepal and India learn from international human rights mechanisms or movements that have successfully tackled similar forms of systemic discrimination?

Human rights mechanism has been a strong deterrent to caste-discrimination, even though it may not always explicitly address structural casteism per se. In countries like Canada, where human rights mechanism is well established, caste-discrimination has no place and is readily curbed by several human rights related law codes. Nepal and India have a lot to learn about the essence of human rights and apply its mechanism in both literal meaning and its spirit. Nepal and India both have been hung up in the traditional superstitious values of mankind rather than the human values of ‘here and now’ such as humans are born equal; they must have rights and privilege to produce equal outcomes in their livelihoods.

How do gender and caste intersect in the experiences of Dalit women, and what additional challenges do they face in accessing justice and empowerment?

Intersectionality in caste discrimination is huge by gender. Women face double jeopardy of caste-discrimination compared to men. They have additional responsibility for giving birth and protecting their children that in turn makes them more vulnerable to caste-discrimination. Women bear the most burden of caste-discrimination in families. As a result, the women, subjected to caste-discrimination, carry on what is known as “intergenerational trauma” more than men. The impacts of intergenerational trauma are expressed into various health outcomes at disproportionate level. Recently, I did one related study in the United States where women’s intergenerational trauma is reflected among African American women resulting in their higher rates of low birthweights as a health outcome of their newborn than in White women.

What policy or grassroots-level initiatives have been most effective in challenging caste-based discrimination, and how can these be scaled up or replicated?

Many researchers have published their studies recommending political representation at every level of decision making as the primary gateway to challenge the caste-based discrimination. In the context of Dalits, the political representation means ensuring presence of their own representatives in educational institutions, government bureaucracy, law enforcement and judiciary, and policy making bodies. The entry point to achieve political representation is through constitutional provision of having their elected representatives, and followed by the provisions of education for Dalits, which would lead to improvement in their livelihoods through growth in their employment and income status.  All these considerations should be applied to local grassroots, provincial and national levels to ensure its reach for scaling up to cover the whole population.