Kathmandu vs Nepal!

My parents just returned from a tour of the western regions of Nepal, and they were deeply shocked to see young children walking for miles along narrow, dangerous highways just to attend school. On their return, my father described Kathmandu as a paradise in comparison, marvelling at how every facility and convenience is concentrated here, while beyond the valley, such basic amenities are practically non-existent.

At the same time, I had just returned from fieldwork in Kalikot, working on a project in collaboration with both national and international non-governmental organizations. During the journey back from Kalikot to Surkhet, one of my colleagues made an emotional comparison. She said, "Kalikot is the real Nepal." I resonated with her statement. Kalikot is a district so rugged that our project sites were at least two days' walk from the nearest motorable road. Food shortages are a constant reality, and the level of education is disheartening—very few people make it through higher education. The lack of education has bred a sense of disconnect, as the locals often quarrel over trivial matters. Basic services like healthcare are abysmal, and there’s no access to electricity or clean drinking water. Even we, as field workers, had to resort to open defecation, which could sometimes be amusing but often felt deeply humiliating. The place is clearly struggling, despite having immense potential for development.

In contrast, Kathmandu feels like America—everyone wants to be here, to live where all the facilities are readily available. Even the organization we worked for, initially registered in Jumla, has now moved its headquarters to Lalitpur. So, while Kathmandu may be the capital of Nepal, it doesn’t represent the country as a whole. I really liked her comments. However, when you take a closer look, the gap between remote places like Kalikot and Kathmandu isn't as wide as it seems. I think you know what I mean!