Only steam leaves the pot. For a country like Nepal, some of the most educated, some of the most enterprising people have left the country over decades. But the love for country is intact, it is strong. And the homeland could benefit hugely from that crowd.
In this era of the Internet and globalization, the phrase "brain drain" is old fashioned, it is passe. I personally think the best I can do for Nepal is by planting one foot in NYC and another in Nepal.
And the dual citizenship concept is key. It has so far been thwarted by the sick people who form the current political class in Nepal. These people have a vested interest in keeping the country poor. These people are untouched by the daily arrivals of body bags from the Gulf states. This political class feels threatened by the Nepali diaspora. They dragged their feet on the dual citizenship issue for as long as they could, for close to a decade. And now they have offered a citizenship without political rights to the NRNs. It would be a grave mistake to accept it. I am less concerned about the NRNs. For me this arrangement would be the biggest hindrance to Nepal's rapid economic growth anyone could put in place.
Why would people who are supposed to lead Nepal to prosperity are so hellbent on getting in the way of the country's rapid economic growth? Obviously we have a democracy in name only in Nepal right now. The political leaders don't feel the need to act in the best interests of the people.
They will do what they will do. But it is shameful the most educated, the most accomplished Nepalis on the planet would be so eager to accept this deal. No deal would be better than this bad deal.
How to Obtain Dual Citizenship
Dual Citizenship in the Age of Mobility
In the past, including the recent past, policymakers considered dual citizenship a problem. Leading politicians of previous centuries saw it as an abhorrence of the natural order, the equivalent of bigamy. Citizenship and political loyalty to the state were considered inseparable. Policymakers worried that dual citizens would not integrate into the country to which they had emigrated but rather would maintain exclusive loyalty to the country of original citizenship. And, in times of war in the 19th and early 20th centuries, they feared “foreign” interference by citizens belonging to the enemy......... Moreover, democratic legitimacy was at stake. Policymakers feared that dual citizenship would violate the principle “one person, one vote.” Also, diplomats were worried that they could not protect their citizens in the country whose citizenship the newly naturalized citizen also held........... Yet, over the last few decades, an astonishing change has taken place: an increasing number of policymakers regard dual citizenship not as a problem for integration, legitimacy, foreign policy, and diplomatic protection, but rather as a possibility that needs to be negotiated from various standpoints, ranging from simple pragmatic tolerance to active encouragement. Certainly, dual citizenship is not a completely new phenomenon, but we have witnessed its rapid spread only recently. More than half of all the states in the world, countries of immigration as well as emigration, now tolerate some form or element of dual citizenship.
