As touching as this story truly is, it is far from reality. If Harvard had somebody with even the slightest knowledge of global affairs in their ad-com then this guy would not have been accepted into the university. As I write this almost five after after it was posted, I hope that the four years of Harvard education has taught you, dear essay writer, enough to restrain yourself from labeling the Nepali Civil Conflict as a fight between the "People" and "Maoist Extremists". This simplistic interpretation of the conflict was in fact the same rhetoric used by extremist-monarchists to usurp power and *dismantle* democracy on February 1, 2005.
The views in the essay reflect a prejudiced interpretation of the civil conflict, one that is viewed through the elitist lens of the city folks. Dear essay writer, you see the conflict as that between "good" and "evil", where you have portrayed the state army as the warriors of justice. Please go tell that to the folks living in rural Nepal, in places like Rolpa and Rukum, where army personnel have raped, kidnapped, disappeared, and murdered uncountable innocents in cold blood.
I apologize for this random digression, but it had to be said out of respect to those who have perished, whose lives destroyed by those very soldiers this essay portrays as heroes. I am no fan of the Maoists myself, for they too have committed atrocities but we need to treat all guilty sides as such, not just those we do not like.
PS: The civil conflict in Nepal has ended (at least for now), and in fact the Maoist rebels have joined mainstream politics. In the 2008 parliamentary election, the Maoists won the plurality of seats in the parliament with more than 35% of the seats (more than the combined number of seats won by next two largest parties in parliament, which alone should indicate who the "people" had supported all along).