(Courtesy: el Zorro)
The writing below is in response to an opinion piece published in the Kathmandu Post on Sunday, April 22, 2007. The author of the opinion piece is Mr. Peter J. Karthak, a brilliant writer and a frequent contributor on various issues related to Nepal.
Mr. Karthak's opinion piece is located at the following URL:
http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?&nid=107397
As a matter of clarification, similar to Mr. Karthak's writing, this rejoinder is not so much a commentary on the real issue at hand (the British Gurkhas' quest for fair treatment). Instead, this is an exercise at emulating Mr. Karthak's logic (and his style of writing), to demonstrate the weaknesses in the author's assumptions and the flaws in his logic
As eloquent a writer as Mr. Peter J. Karthak may be, his platform of communal slander as the basis for his dissertation on why Gurkhas are not "mercenaries," boils down to nothing more than a clever play on "big" words. That is, words on paper, presented in such a fashion so as to forward a distorted perception of Mr. Karthak's customized reality.
Mr. Karthak's presentation of history to support his theory that Prithvi Narayan Shah was in fact a mercenary is highly entertaining (in juvenile kind of way). The author's stab at injecting an ethnic dimension into the debate on the British Gurkhas' quest for parity is somewhat ridiculous; especially given that his extrapolation (generalization) stems from a sample size of eight to a population of 26 million! Words may be Mr. Karthak's forte, but numbers certainly do not appear to be!
Mr. Karthak's postulation that Prithvi Narayan Shah was a mercenary has some merit. His colourful depictions of King Shah's military exploits, the King's methods, etc. make a whole lot of sense if the intent is to superimpose a 21st century dictionary definition on a 17th century warrior. For individuals who are able to contextualize Mr. Karthak's loquacious presentation, his words amount to a whole lot of nonsense - facts, grossly out of context and skilfully distorted to support the author's own point of view.
For starters, Mr. Karthak probably knows that the very origin of the concept of a modern military began with the birth of the idea of a nation state. With higher frequencies of conflict, Kings and Emperors (in their time) gravitated away from the idea of hiring mercenaries for specific periods and instead, began permanently employing these same mercenaries. Thus the birth of the concept of a modern military and simultaneously, the emergence of the notion of nation states.
Applying the logic above, Prithvi Narayan Shah's quest to form the Nepali nation state was very much in line with the trends that defined both the movement away from the mercenary mentality (to a professional and standing military), and towards the concept of a nation state (as opposed to tiny principalities).
So in essence, Peter Karthak is correct, but his presentation of history is culled to fulfil a resentful purpose - to add an unnecessary communal dimension to a debate that has nothing to do ethnicity. To satiate Mr. Karthak's ego, he is right to point out Prithvi Narayan Shah played the role of a leader of various individual mercenary armies and Prithvi was very much a part of the historical trend that resulted in the formation of nation states.
However, this observation bears absolutely no relevance to the fact that Nepal's Gurkha/Gorkha army men (serving in various capacities for foreign employers), have always been and will always be, mercenaries.
There is no shame in being termed a "mercenary." Being "a professional soldier hired to serve in a foreign army" is a job like any other. The term itself distinguishes one solider from another on the basis of nationality, not ethnicity. And if it is Mr. Karthak's contention that Gurkha mercenaries are discriminated against by bahuns and chhetris, what he really means is that bahuns and chhetris are discriminated against British Army recruiters. Being termed a "mercenary" is not discrimination if the term is applicable; being denied employment if one is not from a certain communal background is the very definition of one form of discrimination.
Perhaps Mr. Karthak is familiar with the concept of a PMF (Private Military Firm)? "Corporate Warriors" employed by these firms are hired straight out of any number of special forces programmes that span the globe - this includes the elite British Gurkha regiments as well. Similar to the Gurkhas (Nepalese citizens serving in foreign militaries), these PMFs employ a host of mercenaries from across the globe.
The point here is that an American Special Forces operator, working for the American government is a solider. That same soldier, should he chose to seek employment with a company like (the former) Executive Outcomes, changes definitions from a solider to a mercenary. Why? That's simply how the term is defined and it has absolutely nothing to do with communal background or ethnicity.
Unfortunately, Mr. Karthak seems to be slightly behind the times. Mercenaries have evolved from Mr. Karthak's medieval definition to become rational, responsible, economic actors in a global environment where military skills are in high demand. Nepal's Gurkha forces are not an exception.
The bottom line is this: "Yes, Mr. Karthak, in the 21st century, mercenaries do win Victoria Crosses and Param Vir Chakras." And if mercenaries are deemed qualified to be entrusted with the lives of Hamid Karzai and Ahmed Chalabi, they should damn well be qualified to serve in a sentry post at Buckingham Palace or as a desk ADC to the Indian President.
In today's globalized environment, Mr. Karthak needs to understand that for a British Gurkha (or any Special Forces operator for that matter), a Victoria Cross or a Param Vir Chakra is more than a distinction - it is a qualification on a resume that commands a higher salary in the privatized military sector.
If employment came second to nationalism, there would be no British or Indian Gurkha regiments today. It has always been and continues to be economic incentives that drive mercenaries to seek employment outside their national boundaries. There's nothing wrong with this trend just like there's nothing wrong with the number of former British Gurkhas who serve in PMFs all over the world.
In summary, Mr. Karthak would do well to steer clear of fanning communal tensions in Nepal - we have enough problems to deal with already. Then again, since the entire thrust of Mr. Karthak's writing revolves around a communal / ethnicity-based theme, perhaps Mr. Karthak would consider writing on a topic that he can intelligently (not just articulately) comment on?
Thursday, April 26, 2007
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
After a Year of "Loktantra" - Is it finally time for a Democratic Alliance?
(Courtesy: el Guapo)
A year after a failed King handed power back to a group of failed politicians, the trajectory of this country's polity is finally coming into focus. The process of cooperative politics upon which the 12 Point Agreement was forged in New Delhi is on the verge of collapse. The return to a natural state of competitive politics is back on the agenda and the emergence of a united leftist front under a republican banner is imminent.
The cardinal assumption forwarded as the basis for the 12 Point Agreement was that the Maoists had had a change of heart. Civil society leaders, prominent human rights activists, and famous media personalities all advocated for an alliance between the Seven Parties and the Maoists on the premise that the Maoists were eager to enter the democratic mainstream.
To the Maoists' credit, they successfully played on the desperation of disillusioned personalities while maintaining a silent (yet emotionally charged) dedication to their original, strategic end-goals (which are anything but democratic). With help from their counterparts in India, an arrogant King without a plan, and above all, with assistance from the very groups that today, refuse to revisit their own rationale, the Maoists forged their much coveted SPAM alliance.
More than a year after the 12 Point Agreement was signed in New Delhi, there is no room left for speculation on how misleading the premise upon which fellowship was forged, truly was.
The SPA exhibited no moral inhibitions when teaming up with an organization that members of the SPA leadership themselves had termed terrorists. At the time, the King and his band of jokers were a much bigger threat in the minds of SPA leaders; the royal threat was sufficient to overlook every rational, logical (even moral) sense of duty the SPA leadership had towards guaranteeing a viable future for not just themselves, but the entire country.
Maoist leader C.P. Gajurel minced no words when he spoke at JNU on the Maoists' view of the current political establishment. Maoist leader Pushpa Kamal Dahal reiterated Gajurel's stance and lately, every speech a Maoist leader delivers, alludes to the same theme - the Maoists' end-goal of ultimately establishing a one-party communist republic is very much alive and well and every event that has transpired since the signing of the 12 Point Agreement and today, are all tactical moves designed to achieve larger, strategic end-goals.
Even with all this publicly available information, the disillusioned classes remain wed to their belief that the Maoists' inclusion in the government will somehow magically transform them into a democratic party. Media coverage on this topic is sporadic at best if not completely biased.
The limited debate that has occurred has been overshadowed by meaningless coverage of which temple the King and Queen visited, when and speculation on why? As pathetic as it is, this sort of coverage generates more debate amongst Nepal's intellectual class than the looming disembowelment of the country's pseudo-democratic core.
What the original advocates of the 12 Point Agreement need to do is understand that their collective intellectual capacities failed to grasp how skilfully their advocacy was abused by the Maoists to elevate the Maoist leadership to power.
The disillusioned intellectual classes need to urgently come to terms with the fact that it is not the mainstream that is democratizing the Maoists but the Maoists who are fully mobilized and well-positioned to define the mainstream. Which other political group in Nepal has claim to its own media outlets, its own militia, its own army, its own legal system, and to top it off, multiple sources of income (of which one is funding from the very government the Maoists are systematically dismantling)?
It was alright when members of Rabindra Nath Sharma's royally inclined RPP were beaten up, their faces covered in soot and shoe garlands hung around their necks. The media provided limited coverage and there was hardly any discussion of the violation of the right to speech or the right to assembly of the individuals in question. And this was considered alright, because after all, Mr. Sharma's party was prevented from speaking because of the party's allegiance to a King who attempted wholesale political reform, while playing the part of a monarch (instead of a constitutional protectorate).
However, yesterday's event in Basantapur should give everyone food for thought. Print media remaining silent on any Nepali's right to constitutionally granted freedoms and human rights being violated is pathetic. The print media's silence on Nepali Congress leader Ram Chandra Poudel (a likely candidate to replace Girija Koirala), receiving a hail of plastic water bottles, slippers and "boos" from the crowed gathered to celebrate Loktantra day, is inexcusable. Mr. Poudel was prevented from taking the podium, with known Nepali "celebrities" like Mr. Kanak Dixit and comedian Hari Bansha, shielding the NC leader from the crowed that eventually forced him off of the stage.
It is anyone's guess as to which direction Nepal's polity is leaning and equally alarming how easily a central committee member of the "invincible" Nepali Congress was shoed off stage in the heart of Kathmandu. Does Ram Chandra Poudel and the intellectual sycophants that surround his party finally understand who truly owns the republican agenda? If a leader of Mr. Poudel's stature can be prevented from speaking, how well does the Nepali Congress expect its district and village level cadre to perform during upcoming elections?
The time for a Democratic Alliance has come and is now, nearly gone. It is imperative for Centrist Forces (without royal liability) to assertively realign their agendas and brace against the inevitable leftist onslaught. The level of cohesion that leftist forces achieve within the next three months will determine the construct of Nepal's political landscape well into the next decade.
The challenge for non-leftist groups is to unite without jeopardizing the on-going sham of a peace process - a process that with each passing day, appears increasingly like a tool at the Maoists' disposal to forward their strategy under the façade of international legitimacy.
RELATED LINKS:
The Idiot’s Guide to the Maoist Playbook
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/01/idiots-guide-to-maoist-playbook.html
Surreal Politics - How Nepal’s Intellectual / Political Class, Continue to Look the Other Way…
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/01/surreal-politics-how-nepals.html
The "New Nepal" - The Maoist Way or the Highway?
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2006/12/new-nepal-maoist-way-or-highway.html
The Lessons the Mainstream will teach our Maoists
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2006/11/lessons-mainstream-will-teach-our.html
A year after a failed King handed power back to a group of failed politicians, the trajectory of this country's polity is finally coming into focus. The process of cooperative politics upon which the 12 Point Agreement was forged in New Delhi is on the verge of collapse. The return to a natural state of competitive politics is back on the agenda and the emergence of a united leftist front under a republican banner is imminent.
The cardinal assumption forwarded as the basis for the 12 Point Agreement was that the Maoists had had a change of heart. Civil society leaders, prominent human rights activists, and famous media personalities all advocated for an alliance between the Seven Parties and the Maoists on the premise that the Maoists were eager to enter the democratic mainstream.
To the Maoists' credit, they successfully played on the desperation of disillusioned personalities while maintaining a silent (yet emotionally charged) dedication to their original, strategic end-goals (which are anything but democratic). With help from their counterparts in India, an arrogant King without a plan, and above all, with assistance from the very groups that today, refuse to revisit their own rationale, the Maoists forged their much coveted SPAM alliance.
More than a year after the 12 Point Agreement was signed in New Delhi, there is no room left for speculation on how misleading the premise upon which fellowship was forged, truly was.
The SPA exhibited no moral inhibitions when teaming up with an organization that members of the SPA leadership themselves had termed terrorists. At the time, the King and his band of jokers were a much bigger threat in the minds of SPA leaders; the royal threat was sufficient to overlook every rational, logical (even moral) sense of duty the SPA leadership had towards guaranteeing a viable future for not just themselves, but the entire country.
Maoist leader C.P. Gajurel minced no words when he spoke at JNU on the Maoists' view of the current political establishment. Maoist leader Pushpa Kamal Dahal reiterated Gajurel's stance and lately, every speech a Maoist leader delivers, alludes to the same theme - the Maoists' end-goal of ultimately establishing a one-party communist republic is very much alive and well and every event that has transpired since the signing of the 12 Point Agreement and today, are all tactical moves designed to achieve larger, strategic end-goals.
Even with all this publicly available information, the disillusioned classes remain wed to their belief that the Maoists' inclusion in the government will somehow magically transform them into a democratic party. Media coverage on this topic is sporadic at best if not completely biased.
The limited debate that has occurred has been overshadowed by meaningless coverage of which temple the King and Queen visited, when and speculation on why? As pathetic as it is, this sort of coverage generates more debate amongst Nepal's intellectual class than the looming disembowelment of the country's pseudo-democratic core.
What the original advocates of the 12 Point Agreement need to do is understand that their collective intellectual capacities failed to grasp how skilfully their advocacy was abused by the Maoists to elevate the Maoist leadership to power.
The disillusioned intellectual classes need to urgently come to terms with the fact that it is not the mainstream that is democratizing the Maoists but the Maoists who are fully mobilized and well-positioned to define the mainstream. Which other political group in Nepal has claim to its own media outlets, its own militia, its own army, its own legal system, and to top it off, multiple sources of income (of which one is funding from the very government the Maoists are systematically dismantling)?
It was alright when members of Rabindra Nath Sharma's royally inclined RPP were beaten up, their faces covered in soot and shoe garlands hung around their necks. The media provided limited coverage and there was hardly any discussion of the violation of the right to speech or the right to assembly of the individuals in question. And this was considered alright, because after all, Mr. Sharma's party was prevented from speaking because of the party's allegiance to a King who attempted wholesale political reform, while playing the part of a monarch (instead of a constitutional protectorate).
However, yesterday's event in Basantapur should give everyone food for thought. Print media remaining silent on any Nepali's right to constitutionally granted freedoms and human rights being violated is pathetic. The print media's silence on Nepali Congress leader Ram Chandra Poudel (a likely candidate to replace Girija Koirala), receiving a hail of plastic water bottles, slippers and "boos" from the crowed gathered to celebrate Loktantra day, is inexcusable. Mr. Poudel was prevented from taking the podium, with known Nepali "celebrities" like Mr. Kanak Dixit and comedian Hari Bansha, shielding the NC leader from the crowed that eventually forced him off of the stage.
It is anyone's guess as to which direction Nepal's polity is leaning and equally alarming how easily a central committee member of the "invincible" Nepali Congress was shoed off stage in the heart of Kathmandu. Does Ram Chandra Poudel and the intellectual sycophants that surround his party finally understand who truly owns the republican agenda? If a leader of Mr. Poudel's stature can be prevented from speaking, how well does the Nepali Congress expect its district and village level cadre to perform during upcoming elections?
The time for a Democratic Alliance has come and is now, nearly gone. It is imperative for Centrist Forces (without royal liability) to assertively realign their agendas and brace against the inevitable leftist onslaught. The level of cohesion that leftist forces achieve within the next three months will determine the construct of Nepal's political landscape well into the next decade.
The challenge for non-leftist groups is to unite without jeopardizing the on-going sham of a peace process - a process that with each passing day, appears increasingly like a tool at the Maoists' disposal to forward their strategy under the façade of international legitimacy.
RELATED LINKS:
The Idiot’s Guide to the Maoist Playbook
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/01/idiots-guide-to-maoist-playbook.html
Surreal Politics - How Nepal’s Intellectual / Political Class, Continue to Look the Other Way…
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/01/surreal-politics-how-nepals.html
The "New Nepal" - The Maoist Way or the Highway?
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2006/12/new-nepal-maoist-way-or-highway.html
The Lessons the Mainstream will teach our Maoists
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2006/11/lessons-mainstream-will-teach-our.html
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Indian Foreign Policy and the Dynamics of Regional Politics
(Courtesy: Siddhartha Thapa)
The fourteenth SAARC summit, like past summits was poignantly marked with rhetoric, applauses, vague promises and strict adherence to obsessive protocol. But, unfortunately, like other past summits, the New Delhi summit failed to depart from the paradigm of inaction and identify the core problem plaguing development and democratization in South Asia: terrorism.
Quintessentially, the drama attached to the SAARC summit was rather enchanting. Nepal, a prominent boat shaker in South Asian politics came out clearly favoring China to be given member status, this invariably in the long run will challenge India's hegemony and influence in the region. To add to SAARC's endless list of agonies, the addition of Afghanistan does no good, it further strains the mathematics of the beleaguered SAARC treasury. On the global front, powerful countries are coming together as efficient trading blocs and protecting the interest of member states within the trading bloc, unlike SAARC which remains bitterly divided. And despite some positive signs of economic development much to the credit of the IT sector boom and relocation of multi-nationals in South Asia; the rise in terrorism and political instability in the region has halted the consolidation of further success.
In the past Indo-Pak rivalry accounted for much of SAARC's failure and even to this date, the tension between these South Asian giants has hampered much of the progress at SAARC. But much has changed over the decade; India and Pakistan are not the only countries susceptible to terrorism and instability. A common feature in the politics of all South Asian countries is the resurgence of communist and religious extremism.
So are New Delhi and Islamabad the regional spoilers?
Pakistan's geographic location makes it a non-contender and a lesser player compared to India. On all accounts New Delhi has indeed failed on three fronts: stabilizing the region, effective exportation of democracy in its back yard, and conflict management. Peace is a prerequisite to development. Unlike other regional trading blocs, South Asia is marred by instability and contrary to the philosophy of other regional trading blocs; South Asian politics lacks a binding force. On the other hand the in the European Union - democracy, free market and stability in the region are desired objectives of all its member states.
For instance, the made in Delhi '12 point agreement', might yield dividends in Kathmandu but at the expense of the survival of democratic discourse. Where as in Bangladesh, India finds it hands unbound in taking strong measures against a military government. Worse still is Bhutan, where tragic ethnic cleansing, the relocation and repatriation of these refugees to a third country remain unsolved, though seventeen long years have passed by. The price that Nepal has had to pay has been dear, growing frustration among refugees has resulted in refugees posturing extreme nationalistic sentiments and in some cases resorting to violence. And last of course, Sri Lanka, where various groups within Tamil Nadu supported the LTTE. Unfortunately the see-saw change of policy in Delhi vis-à-vis Sri Lanka, costs many lives in the Indian army and tragically that of India's visionary Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi.
Therefore, for any successful overtures in South Asia – India needs to re-evaluate its foreign policy and national security and in conjunction, identify the main threats to its national security. It might also be prudent for the administration in New Delhi to question its policy makers in the South Block about a most pertinent issue - is South Asia headed towards disintegration? To find answers, policy makers and politicians in New Delhi need to identify interest groups within India that have worked in tandem with various extremist groups in South Asia.
It is no secret that the weapons in the Maoist armory were provided largely by radical communist sympathizers in West Bengal and Kerala. Historically speaking, BP Koirala was funded by various socialist parties around the world in collaboration with Indian socialists to provide him with arms. Similarly, the CPI-M has without a doubt provided moral support to the Maoists and more significantly, introduced them to the secret arms market of India.
Second, radical Islamic groups within India have perpetrated the ranks of various political parties in Bangladesh. But in regard to radical Islam, Pakistan 's notorious Islamic fugitives have outdone Indian Islamic radicals in disturbing the existence of a quasi- secular political balance in Bangladesh.
In the case of Sri Lanka, Karunanidhi in the early 80's not only provided monetary assistance but also sanctuary to Prabhakaran and his associates against the Lankan government. And in Bhutan, continued support to an autocratic regime and the reluctance of India to pressurize the Druk government on the repatriation of refugees languishing in Nepal are all parts and parcel of the fallacies of Indian policy in South Asia.
India and Pakistan have to recognize the unifying element in South Asian politics. Unfortunately, home-grown terrorism has contributed towards instability and extremism. First – the unprecedented growth of communism and the notion of self-determination have the proponents of mustering secession movements in India. Although India might have made gargantuan leaps economically, its failure to protect democracies in its backyard has undoubtedly questioned India's intentions and abilities in the global arena. If India cannot solve problems effectively in its own backyard how can she play a greater role in international relations?
The only solution to the advancement of South Asian regional development is a re-evaluation of policy at South Block and Race Course Road. But on a substantive policy level – it must be realized that both radical communism and religious extremism are the biggest threat to peace time politics in South Asia. And the only real response is a collective comprehensive security mechanism and the identification of common threats and rapid socio-economic response to the disgruntled masses. But more importantly it is imperative that India departs from a policy of 'democratic hypocrisy'.
The fourteenth SAARC summit, like past summits was poignantly marked with rhetoric, applauses, vague promises and strict adherence to obsessive protocol. But, unfortunately, like other past summits, the New Delhi summit failed to depart from the paradigm of inaction and identify the core problem plaguing development and democratization in South Asia: terrorism.
Quintessentially, the drama attached to the SAARC summit was rather enchanting. Nepal, a prominent boat shaker in South Asian politics came out clearly favoring China to be given member status, this invariably in the long run will challenge India's hegemony and influence in the region. To add to SAARC's endless list of agonies, the addition of Afghanistan does no good, it further strains the mathematics of the beleaguered SAARC treasury. On the global front, powerful countries are coming together as efficient trading blocs and protecting the interest of member states within the trading bloc, unlike SAARC which remains bitterly divided. And despite some positive signs of economic development much to the credit of the IT sector boom and relocation of multi-nationals in South Asia; the rise in terrorism and political instability in the region has halted the consolidation of further success.
In the past Indo-Pak rivalry accounted for much of SAARC's failure and even to this date, the tension between these South Asian giants has hampered much of the progress at SAARC. But much has changed over the decade; India and Pakistan are not the only countries susceptible to terrorism and instability. A common feature in the politics of all South Asian countries is the resurgence of communist and religious extremism.
So are New Delhi and Islamabad the regional spoilers?
Pakistan's geographic location makes it a non-contender and a lesser player compared to India. On all accounts New Delhi has indeed failed on three fronts: stabilizing the region, effective exportation of democracy in its back yard, and conflict management. Peace is a prerequisite to development. Unlike other regional trading blocs, South Asia is marred by instability and contrary to the philosophy of other regional trading blocs; South Asian politics lacks a binding force. On the other hand the in the European Union - democracy, free market and stability in the region are desired objectives of all its member states.
For instance, the made in Delhi '12 point agreement', might yield dividends in Kathmandu but at the expense of the survival of democratic discourse. Where as in Bangladesh, India finds it hands unbound in taking strong measures against a military government. Worse still is Bhutan, where tragic ethnic cleansing, the relocation and repatriation of these refugees to a third country remain unsolved, though seventeen long years have passed by. The price that Nepal has had to pay has been dear, growing frustration among refugees has resulted in refugees posturing extreme nationalistic sentiments and in some cases resorting to violence. And last of course, Sri Lanka, where various groups within Tamil Nadu supported the LTTE. Unfortunately the see-saw change of policy in Delhi vis-à-vis Sri Lanka, costs many lives in the Indian army and tragically that of India's visionary Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi.
Therefore, for any successful overtures in South Asia – India needs to re-evaluate its foreign policy and national security and in conjunction, identify the main threats to its national security. It might also be prudent for the administration in New Delhi to question its policy makers in the South Block about a most pertinent issue - is South Asia headed towards disintegration? To find answers, policy makers and politicians in New Delhi need to identify interest groups within India that have worked in tandem with various extremist groups in South Asia.
It is no secret that the weapons in the Maoist armory were provided largely by radical communist sympathizers in West Bengal and Kerala. Historically speaking, BP Koirala was funded by various socialist parties around the world in collaboration with Indian socialists to provide him with arms. Similarly, the CPI-M has without a doubt provided moral support to the Maoists and more significantly, introduced them to the secret arms market of India.
Second, radical Islamic groups within India have perpetrated the ranks of various political parties in Bangladesh. But in regard to radical Islam, Pakistan 's notorious Islamic fugitives have outdone Indian Islamic radicals in disturbing the existence of a quasi- secular political balance in Bangladesh.
In the case of Sri Lanka, Karunanidhi in the early 80's not only provided monetary assistance but also sanctuary to Prabhakaran and his associates against the Lankan government. And in Bhutan, continued support to an autocratic regime and the reluctance of India to pressurize the Druk government on the repatriation of refugees languishing in Nepal are all parts and parcel of the fallacies of Indian policy in South Asia.
India and Pakistan have to recognize the unifying element in South Asian politics. Unfortunately, home-grown terrorism has contributed towards instability and extremism. First – the unprecedented growth of communism and the notion of self-determination have the proponents of mustering secession movements in India. Although India might have made gargantuan leaps economically, its failure to protect democracies in its backyard has undoubtedly questioned India's intentions and abilities in the global arena. If India cannot solve problems effectively in its own backyard how can she play a greater role in international relations?
The only solution to the advancement of South Asian regional development is a re-evaluation of policy at South Block and Race Course Road. But on a substantive policy level – it must be realized that both radical communism and religious extremism are the biggest threat to peace time politics in South Asia. And the only real response is a collective comprehensive security mechanism and the identification of common threats and rapid socio-economic response to the disgruntled masses. But more importantly it is imperative that India departs from a policy of 'democratic hypocrisy'.
Thursday, April 19, 2007
The Essence of Constitutional Assembly
(Courtesy: Kalyan Dev Bhattarai)
Today the whole country is revolving around the issue of a constitutional assembly (CA) and the politicians are doing their best to deceive the innocent democracy and peace loving Nepalese citizens to fool them in the name of CA.
There can be no doubt on the need of CA at this juncture of the country, which was the demand of the Maoist and wishes of the people expressed during the Andolan 2062-63. Many intellectual like us supported the demand of CA from the beginning, when the so-called political leaders of seven parties were against the CA. But unfortunately, today Maoists are not only fooled by the seven political parties but the CA is also being postponed indefinitely and its basic essence is being contorted and mislead.
The essences of the CA are People's participation, people's concurrences on the issues, wide representation, and is basically different from the ritual parliamentary elections. Taking into consideration the methodology adopted for the proposed CA in the interim constitution, one can say that the so-called CA will only be a mockery of it, fulfilling the covert wishes of the corrupt, selfish politicians, as it does not fulfil any of the essence required of a CA.
The wide participation of the people being one of the main essences of the CA, how an assembly election, where only the political parties' representatives are allowed to participate barring the people's participation can claim itself as a CA election? The interim constitution provides that only the politicians will represent the CA. This means only maximum of 3 % of the population will be participating in the process excluding the rest of the people. The total cumulative number of levy-paying cadres of all the political parties in the country will not be more that 7 lacks.
Simply by voting a political party, the voters do not become the members of the party. Such vote is the compulsion due to faith in democracy and is only an endorsement for the selection of thieves from the bunch of dacoits, who stands in the election as party representatives. It is only intellectual bankruptcy to consider such endorsement as selection of people's representation. 97 % of the people are not members of any political parties and only endorse the party candidates with the hope that they will act as per their declared manifestos, which has proven to be wrong every time, so far.
I wonder when and how the so-called political representatives turns out to be people's representative as claimed by politicians, when they stand and nominate themselves in the election as party representative, ask for support and act as party representatives in the assembly?
The other essence of CA is that it should be able to decide, once for all, on the major social, economical political etc. issues of the country. However none of the political parties have put forward single issue for the verdict of the people. There are many political issues like the declaration of republican State, PM's direct election, barring the parliamentarians from being ministers, confiscation of properties accumulated without legitimate source, capital punishment for the heinous crimes, and many others. Politicians will never put such important issues forward, as they are in politics to fool the people for their vested and selfish interests.
If the CA is not able to decide on such important social, political economical and regional issues, the so-called CA will be only a fraud. Before we go for election of CA, we should put forward all the major political, social and economical and regional issues to be solved through the people's verdict. Unfortunately, our so-called CA is only for fooling the people, as the new Constitution is to be prepared not by the people's representatives but by the representatives of the political parties. Hence they will not make decisions on important issues affecting people's lives.
The other equally important essence of CA is wide representation of different sectors, covering professions, castes, religions, regions, sex, etc. In our so-called CA only and only politicians are represented barring others from various sectors. From the past experiences, one can easily say that the nominations will be from the same corrupt, useless bunch of party cadres whose only objective is to loot the country's treasury. If Maoists think they can make new Nepal with the help of such proven dacoits, then it is as foolish a belief of putting 60-70 new potatoes in a sack of rotten potatoes and hoping that the whole sack of potato will turn out to be good.
The other essence of CA is that it should be different from parliamentary elections as CA is not to rule the country but to prepare the ruling document. It is against the simple rule of law that those who rule the country should not be allowed to prepare the ruling documents. Unfortunately, in our case, same politicians who rule the country are also allowed to prepare the ruling document. In such situation, to expect that the rulers will prepare a document that is beneficial to people will be foolish. Their interest will be to fulfil their vested interests and will make such a document that provides them enough avenues to loot the country's treasury.
With these notions, I suggest the coming CA should be for the people, by the people and of the people, barring the political parties from participating as political entities and to stand as an independent Nepali citizen, prepare the constitution and hand it over to the political parties to run the country as per the constitution with the full support of people.
Today the whole country is revolving around the issue of a constitutional assembly (CA) and the politicians are doing their best to deceive the innocent democracy and peace loving Nepalese citizens to fool them in the name of CA.
There can be no doubt on the need of CA at this juncture of the country, which was the demand of the Maoist and wishes of the people expressed during the Andolan 2062-63. Many intellectual like us supported the demand of CA from the beginning, when the so-called political leaders of seven parties were against the CA. But unfortunately, today Maoists are not only fooled by the seven political parties but the CA is also being postponed indefinitely and its basic essence is being contorted and mislead.
The essences of the CA are People's participation, people's concurrences on the issues, wide representation, and is basically different from the ritual parliamentary elections. Taking into consideration the methodology adopted for the proposed CA in the interim constitution, one can say that the so-called CA will only be a mockery of it, fulfilling the covert wishes of the corrupt, selfish politicians, as it does not fulfil any of the essence required of a CA.
The wide participation of the people being one of the main essences of the CA, how an assembly election, where only the political parties' representatives are allowed to participate barring the people's participation can claim itself as a CA election? The interim constitution provides that only the politicians will represent the CA. This means only maximum of 3 % of the population will be participating in the process excluding the rest of the people. The total cumulative number of levy-paying cadres of all the political parties in the country will not be more that 7 lacks.
Simply by voting a political party, the voters do not become the members of the party. Such vote is the compulsion due to faith in democracy and is only an endorsement for the selection of thieves from the bunch of dacoits, who stands in the election as party representatives. It is only intellectual bankruptcy to consider such endorsement as selection of people's representation. 97 % of the people are not members of any political parties and only endorse the party candidates with the hope that they will act as per their declared manifestos, which has proven to be wrong every time, so far.
I wonder when and how the so-called political representatives turns out to be people's representative as claimed by politicians, when they stand and nominate themselves in the election as party representative, ask for support and act as party representatives in the assembly?
The other essence of CA is that it should be able to decide, once for all, on the major social, economical political etc. issues of the country. However none of the political parties have put forward single issue for the verdict of the people. There are many political issues like the declaration of republican State, PM's direct election, barring the parliamentarians from being ministers, confiscation of properties accumulated without legitimate source, capital punishment for the heinous crimes, and many others. Politicians will never put such important issues forward, as they are in politics to fool the people for their vested and selfish interests.
If the CA is not able to decide on such important social, political economical and regional issues, the so-called CA will be only a fraud. Before we go for election of CA, we should put forward all the major political, social and economical and regional issues to be solved through the people's verdict. Unfortunately, our so-called CA is only for fooling the people, as the new Constitution is to be prepared not by the people's representatives but by the representatives of the political parties. Hence they will not make decisions on important issues affecting people's lives.
The other equally important essence of CA is wide representation of different sectors, covering professions, castes, religions, regions, sex, etc. In our so-called CA only and only politicians are represented barring others from various sectors. From the past experiences, one can easily say that the nominations will be from the same corrupt, useless bunch of party cadres whose only objective is to loot the country's treasury. If Maoists think they can make new Nepal with the help of such proven dacoits, then it is as foolish a belief of putting 60-70 new potatoes in a sack of rotten potatoes and hoping that the whole sack of potato will turn out to be good.
The other essence of CA is that it should be different from parliamentary elections as CA is not to rule the country but to prepare the ruling document. It is against the simple rule of law that those who rule the country should not be allowed to prepare the ruling documents. Unfortunately, in our case, same politicians who rule the country are also allowed to prepare the ruling document. In such situation, to expect that the rulers will prepare a document that is beneficial to people will be foolish. Their interest will be to fulfil their vested interests and will make such a document that provides them enough avenues to loot the country's treasury.
With these notions, I suggest the coming CA should be for the people, by the people and of the people, barring the political parties from participating as political entities and to stand as an independent Nepali citizen, prepare the constitution and hand it over to the political parties to run the country as per the constitution with the full support of people.
Saturday, April 14, 2007
Thoughts on a Republic
(Courtesy: Roop Joshi)
It seems that Nepal is soon to be a Republic. This has been proclaimed repeatedly across the political spectrum. The first sitting of the Constituent Assembly hangs like Damocles’ sword over the nation. Now there is talk that the decision on the monarchy may be taken even before the CA. It is therefore timely to indulge in a retrospection of Plato’s epitome on political philosophy, The Republic.
One of the issues which this timeless dialogue by the Greek philosopher - mentor of Aristotle and student of Socrates - dealt with, 1,600 years ago, is what an “ideal” State would be like. The state would have four great virtues: courage, wisdom, temperance and justice. Plato further divided human beings based on their intelligence, strength and courage. Those who have the most amount of these virtues are fit to rule the state – rule by the best, the Greek word for which is “aristocracy”. Over the centuries, the term “aristocracy” has been denigrated to mean government by people of the highest social class or by hereditary nobility. The true meaning of the word is simply government by those who have the greatest virtues to govern.
On the other hand, in Plato’s opinion, a “Democratic government” holds out the promise of equality for all of its citizens but delivers only the anarchy of an unruly mob, each of whose members is interested only in the pursuit of private interests. In his hierarchy of government forms, a democracy is almost at the bottom, with only tyranny following it.
This is not to decry democracy, despite Plato’s views which were utopian, but to realize that it can easily lead to the tyranny of the mob, each pursuing personal benefits. By the same token, Plato’s aristocracy is also an ideal concept, but the logic behind it cannot be denied. Ideally a monarchy would provide an individual with an abundance of the virtues of courage, wisdom, temperance and justice – something like the “Ram rajya” in Hindu mythology. “Ram rajya” is held up as the perfect example of governance by a wise and just king who placed the good of his people always above his personal interests. No matter that Ram was a reincarnation of Lord Vishnu. His human qualities, tempered with divine awareness, have always been held in admiration. The point being made here is that, in Plato’s Ideal Republic, “aristocracy” overshadows “democracy”. And let us not forget that Plato’s Republic is one of the fundamental expositions of political theory.
Ancient Greek political theories aside, 21st century reality is that democracies are the order of the day and are here to stay. A “representative democracy” (and here the definition of the Founding Fathers of the United States is relevant) is where representatives of the people are elected and whose power to govern is limited by laws enshrined in a constitution. These democracies are a deliberate attempt to diminish the threat of “mobocracy” thereby protecting minority groups from the tyranny of the majority by placing checks on the power of the majority of the population. The power of the majority of the people is checked by limiting that power to electing representatives who govern within limits of overarching constitutional law rather than the popular vote having legislative power itself. Moreover, the power of elected representatives is also checked by prohibitions against any single individual or group having legislative, judicial, and executive powers. In the words of John Adams, one of the signatories to the US Declaration of Independence and the 2nd President of the US, this is "a government of laws, and not of men.". Plato’s concern regarding the possible tyranny of the mob is thus nullified. “By the people, of the people, for the people” is the ringing cry of democracy. But who are the “People”? In Nepal, is it the 85% rural population, 52% illiterate, 40% subsisting below the poverty line? Are they being represented adequately in government? The current Interim Government can hardly lay claim to representing them. An outdated election and the barrel of guns by no means represent anyone.
Having defined the essence of democracy, and keeping in mind that Nepal is struggling today to nurture a vibrant multi-party democracy, let us consider the institution of Monarchy. Modern monarchies, in all cases, are symbols of continuity and statehood. The majority of monarchies that exist in the world today are symbolic, whether they are termed “ceremonial”, “figurehead”, or “constitutional”, i.e. they do not have political power. Cambodia reverted to a constitutional monarchy, enshrined in its 1993 constitution, after the tumultuous years of the communist (Khmer Rouge) holocaust and Vietnamese domination. In Spain, Francisco Franco ensured the resumption of a monarchy upon his death in 1975. Malaysia, certainly one of the foremost democracies in Asia, elects a king every five years from among the hereditary rulers of the nine states of its federation. Japan’s emperor continues to serve as a symbol of nationhood and unity. Thailand’s king, the longest reigning monarch in the world currently, is revered by his countrymen. The monarchies of the United Kingdom and Europe remain while the nations themselves are fully functional democracies. Surely, there is much to be learnt from the monarchies of the nations mentioned above – which, incidentally, are all Democracies.
Is it then far-fetched to assert that the institution of monarchy can still promote stability and a national identity in Nepal? Note the italics: the institution is being considered here, not an individual. The incumbent of the throne plays second fiddle to the institution if the latter is strong and well accepted. In the present context, the King does have a grandson and alternatively there is also the late Princess Sruti’s daughter. A ceremonial monarchy can very well be filled by a minor. Therefore, let us not be too hasty in discarding an institution that can serve the nation well at this crucial cross-road in its history. Here is an institution that has survived the last 238 years through many challenges, not least of which was the 104 years of Rana oligarchy. It is surprising and sad to see the achievements of King Prithivi Narayan Shah and his brother, Bahadur Shah, in creating a single unified Nepal in 1769 marginalised by the republicans. Did not King Tribhuban snatch back democracy from the Ranas in 1950? Did not King Birendra surrender to the wishes of the Nepali people to have a multi-party democracy in 1990?
So when the issue of republic versus monarchy is debated, and it is hoped that a mature vibrant debate will take place immediately, let us not rush to discard anything. Let us not be like the imprudent individual who discards his winter coat ignoring the upcoming winter. Finally, let us ensure that the outcome of this debate is dictated by the majority of the Nepali people, not by the tyranny of a mob or any self-interested group.
Sunday, April 08, 2007
Emulating a Singaporean Model -Overhauling the Leadership First
(Courtesy: Chiran Thapa)
Almost every political leader in Nepal has referenced Singapore's success story during his/her political career. The political leaders have constantly boasted of an ability to tow Nepal out of the political and economic abyss and transform it into a prosperous nation like Singapore. However, as the adage goes it’s easier said than done. A simple observation would affirm that Nepal is very far from replicating the Singaporean success. A progressive overhaul of the political leadership is the most exigent need of the nation and it is the first step towards emulating the Singaporean success model,
What makes Singapore such an appealing example for reference amongst Nepali leadership is the country's speedy road to success. In merely three decades, the world witnessed a tiny forsaken island transform itself from a languid laid-back British colonial outpost to a vibrant economic powerhouse. Given the outstanding pace at which economic growth and development progressed in Singapore, it became a preferable exemplar.
Ironically, when Nepali leaders conveniently reference the Singaporean benchmark, simply to sway the constituents, a majority of them have very little understanding or knowledge of the formulas and processes that contributed to Singapore’s success. Rather than just fixating on its speedy progress, it is prescribable to concentrate on the host of salient contributors to the country’s success - amongst which, the astute political leadership stands pre-eminent. Its geographical location, meticulously crafted policies, a highly educated and ethical populace have all blended together to effectuate a brilliant recipe of success. But above all, the main credit must go to the political leadership. It was the visionary and robust leadership of Lee Kwan Yew and his associates that propelled Singapore from a small impoverished island to a prosperous paragon among nations. The leadership's dedication to develop the nation, their incorruptible demeanour, and their knack for crafting meticulously effective public policies are unprecedented. It was Lee and his associates in the government that formulated all the policies--from international trade to trash collection--thus controlling and regulating all aspects of the society.
Albeit critics find the heavy regulation and control strikingly similar to the communist societies, the Singaporean government is at variance because it persevered by very effectively delivering services to their populace. Unlike the communist regimes that crumbled on their own weights, the Singaporean leadership was able to fortify its legitimacy and strength by adequately delivering basic amenities like housing, employment, healthcare, education and physical security. Additionally, under the stewardship of the leadership, the country was able to cultivate a highly educated and disciplined workforce, enhance social cohesion and ensure physical security. Also, it was able to attract substantial foreign investment by providing political stability and ultimately developed a model society.
Another aspect of the Singaporean model noteworthy of mentioning is the educational level attained by the leadership. Almost every top leader holds a high academic degree from a renowned academic institution. It is not just the degree they hold but also the spectacular academic achievements they have made in their academic careers. Most of the leaders were academic prodigies with distinction grades. Negligible exceptions aside, for a majority of them, their ascendancy to the top was based on merits rather than familial linkages.
However, antithetical to the Singaporean Model, the Nepali political leadership is widely accepted to be the supreme inhibitor of growth and success of the country. Although the history of parliamentary democracy is very brief, the stint has adequately exposed the true colours of the Nepali leadership. In bitter contrast to the Singaporean leadership's commitment and dedication that propelled Singapore towards prosperity, the Nepali leadership's ineptness and indifference has plunged the nation into despair and disarray. While Singaporean leaders receive global veneration for their impressive leadership, the Nepali ones are critically loathed even by their own constituents. Furthermore, what succinctly reflects the status of a leader in Nepal is a synonymous term used to characterize it--a crook. Unlike the Singaporean leaders who are garlanded with accolades of morality, integrity, and competence, their Nepali counterparts are labelled with inescapable tags of malfeasance, corruption, nepotism and incompetence.
The incompetence is further compounded by the Nepali leaders’ low levels of education. Others aside, there is no better example to reflect this reality than the example of the current supreme leader, the Prime minister. Few might doubt his decades of involvement in politics but many are highly sceptical about his academic credentials. There are claims that he never even completed his high school. But what gives more weight to this scepticism is the fact that there has never been any mention of his academic degrees anywhere. Even in his biography on the government’s webpage, there is no mention of any academic career. Regardless, Nepal's leadership has never been gauged by the academic credentials or leadership abilities but more by particular affiliations and involvement in political activities. Furthermore, the system of meritocracy is almost inexistent. And it is the political leadership that is alleged of establishing and entrenching a culture where credentials are superseded by nepotism.
So what quality of deliverance can be expected from the leadership whose credentials are gauged either by the number of participation in political protests or by the decibels of their shrieks during those rallies? How is Nepal supposed to move forward when those who are entrusted with the steering wheel of the nation are directionless and are incessantly wrangling for control? More so, what kind of progress can a nation anticipate from those who were in the past heavily involved in plundering and destroying the nation's assets and have now thrust themselves into the leadership platform?
Quintessentially, leaders are role models for a society. Their values, ethics and public responsibility are supposed to set a precedent for the society. Since they are bestowed with power to influence, their every action has great impact. It is an accepted truth that not everyone is a born leader; most acquire and develop the trait. Nonetheless, a leader must possess the ability to lead and motivate, should have a guiding vision and a passion for public service but above all must hold high integrity. Additionally, the globalized era has not only necessitated a global interaction but has also made the process of policy-making even more complex. Given this reality, proper education plays a cardinal role. However, despite holding the reins of power for more than a decade, Nepali leaders have clearly failed to acquire and develop these virtues. On the contrary, their portfolios are tainted by decadence and empty promises.
Hence, given the prevalent deficiency in the current leadership's abilities, the prospects of emulating a Singaporean model under this leadership are highly suspect. As long as there is an impotent authority presiding over country's decision making process, the possibility of the country gearing forward towards prosperity is slim.
Today, given those bleak prospects, there is a growing demand for an overhaul in the leadership. For the sake of the country's progress, it has become imperative to replace the old faces with new ones. Clearly the old-guards have been unsuccessful in meeting the aspirations of the Nepali people. Therefore a fresh, energetic, dedicated and educated group of leaders should be allowed to step in for the task. Inevitably, this emerging generation of young leaders that have so far been sidelined and compelled to operate under the shadows of the old-timers will emerge and take charge. The old leadership can still make good of their promise to transform Nepal into Singapore. Step down with honour, make way for the new generation of leaders, and let them engineer their “Singaporean model.
Related Postings:
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2006/09/hedging-against-nepals-leadership.html
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2006/10/leadership-development-for-new-nepal.html
Almost every political leader in Nepal has referenced Singapore's success story during his/her political career. The political leaders have constantly boasted of an ability to tow Nepal out of the political and economic abyss and transform it into a prosperous nation like Singapore. However, as the adage goes it’s easier said than done. A simple observation would affirm that Nepal is very far from replicating the Singaporean success. A progressive overhaul of the political leadership is the most exigent need of the nation and it is the first step towards emulating the Singaporean success model,
What makes Singapore such an appealing example for reference amongst Nepali leadership is the country's speedy road to success. In merely three decades, the world witnessed a tiny forsaken island transform itself from a languid laid-back British colonial outpost to a vibrant economic powerhouse. Given the outstanding pace at which economic growth and development progressed in Singapore, it became a preferable exemplar.
Ironically, when Nepali leaders conveniently reference the Singaporean benchmark, simply to sway the constituents, a majority of them have very little understanding or knowledge of the formulas and processes that contributed to Singapore’s success. Rather than just fixating on its speedy progress, it is prescribable to concentrate on the host of salient contributors to the country’s success - amongst which, the astute political leadership stands pre-eminent. Its geographical location, meticulously crafted policies, a highly educated and ethical populace have all blended together to effectuate a brilliant recipe of success. But above all, the main credit must go to the political leadership. It was the visionary and robust leadership of Lee Kwan Yew and his associates that propelled Singapore from a small impoverished island to a prosperous paragon among nations. The leadership's dedication to develop the nation, their incorruptible demeanour, and their knack for crafting meticulously effective public policies are unprecedented. It was Lee and his associates in the government that formulated all the policies--from international trade to trash collection--thus controlling and regulating all aspects of the society.
Albeit critics find the heavy regulation and control strikingly similar to the communist societies, the Singaporean government is at variance because it persevered by very effectively delivering services to their populace. Unlike the communist regimes that crumbled on their own weights, the Singaporean leadership was able to fortify its legitimacy and strength by adequately delivering basic amenities like housing, employment, healthcare, education and physical security. Additionally, under the stewardship of the leadership, the country was able to cultivate a highly educated and disciplined workforce, enhance social cohesion and ensure physical security. Also, it was able to attract substantial foreign investment by providing political stability and ultimately developed a model society.
Another aspect of the Singaporean model noteworthy of mentioning is the educational level attained by the leadership. Almost every top leader holds a high academic degree from a renowned academic institution. It is not just the degree they hold but also the spectacular academic achievements they have made in their academic careers. Most of the leaders were academic prodigies with distinction grades. Negligible exceptions aside, for a majority of them, their ascendancy to the top was based on merits rather than familial linkages.
However, antithetical to the Singaporean Model, the Nepali political leadership is widely accepted to be the supreme inhibitor of growth and success of the country. Although the history of parliamentary democracy is very brief, the stint has adequately exposed the true colours of the Nepali leadership. In bitter contrast to the Singaporean leadership's commitment and dedication that propelled Singapore towards prosperity, the Nepali leadership's ineptness and indifference has plunged the nation into despair and disarray. While Singaporean leaders receive global veneration for their impressive leadership, the Nepali ones are critically loathed even by their own constituents. Furthermore, what succinctly reflects the status of a leader in Nepal is a synonymous term used to characterize it--a crook. Unlike the Singaporean leaders who are garlanded with accolades of morality, integrity, and competence, their Nepali counterparts are labelled with inescapable tags of malfeasance, corruption, nepotism and incompetence.
The incompetence is further compounded by the Nepali leaders’ low levels of education. Others aside, there is no better example to reflect this reality than the example of the current supreme leader, the Prime minister. Few might doubt his decades of involvement in politics but many are highly sceptical about his academic credentials. There are claims that he never even completed his high school. But what gives more weight to this scepticism is the fact that there has never been any mention of his academic degrees anywhere. Even in his biography on the government’s webpage, there is no mention of any academic career. Regardless, Nepal's leadership has never been gauged by the academic credentials or leadership abilities but more by particular affiliations and involvement in political activities. Furthermore, the system of meritocracy is almost inexistent. And it is the political leadership that is alleged of establishing and entrenching a culture where credentials are superseded by nepotism.
So what quality of deliverance can be expected from the leadership whose credentials are gauged either by the number of participation in political protests or by the decibels of their shrieks during those rallies? How is Nepal supposed to move forward when those who are entrusted with the steering wheel of the nation are directionless and are incessantly wrangling for control? More so, what kind of progress can a nation anticipate from those who were in the past heavily involved in plundering and destroying the nation's assets and have now thrust themselves into the leadership platform?
Quintessentially, leaders are role models for a society. Their values, ethics and public responsibility are supposed to set a precedent for the society. Since they are bestowed with power to influence, their every action has great impact. It is an accepted truth that not everyone is a born leader; most acquire and develop the trait. Nonetheless, a leader must possess the ability to lead and motivate, should have a guiding vision and a passion for public service but above all must hold high integrity. Additionally, the globalized era has not only necessitated a global interaction but has also made the process of policy-making even more complex. Given this reality, proper education plays a cardinal role. However, despite holding the reins of power for more than a decade, Nepali leaders have clearly failed to acquire and develop these virtues. On the contrary, their portfolios are tainted by decadence and empty promises.
Hence, given the prevalent deficiency in the current leadership's abilities, the prospects of emulating a Singaporean model under this leadership are highly suspect. As long as there is an impotent authority presiding over country's decision making process, the possibility of the country gearing forward towards prosperity is slim.
Today, given those bleak prospects, there is a growing demand for an overhaul in the leadership. For the sake of the country's progress, it has become imperative to replace the old faces with new ones. Clearly the old-guards have been unsuccessful in meeting the aspirations of the Nepali people. Therefore a fresh, energetic, dedicated and educated group of leaders should be allowed to step in for the task. Inevitably, this emerging generation of young leaders that have so far been sidelined and compelled to operate under the shadows of the old-timers will emerge and take charge. The old leadership can still make good of their promise to transform Nepal into Singapore. Step down with honour, make way for the new generation of leaders, and let them engineer their “Singaporean model.
Related Postings:
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2006/09/hedging-against-nepals-leadership.html
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2006/10/leadership-development-for-new-nepal.html
Wednesday, April 04, 2007
Constitutional Liberalism
(Courtesy: Siddhartha Thapa)
The peace process so far has been built on wishful thinking, hope and trust. The induction of Maoists into the interim government is also no exception – they were inducted purely with the hope and trust built over the last year with the SPA.
However, by inducting the Maoist into the government without the completion of credible arms management and a total renunciation of violence, the government has embarked on a high risk gamble. Unfortunately, the most worrisome aspect is that Girija has played his last card by inducting the Maoists into government. Implicit in this action is the realization that all options to mainstream the Maoists have been exhausted – we can only now hope that the Maoists will "walk the talk." But what if the Maoist fail to relinquish the violence that has been the number element of their so-called "political" campaign?
Democracy is a process and elections a part of this process (not an end in itself). At present, 118 out of the 193 countries in the world have embraced a democratic setup (of some sort), encompassing 54.8 % of the world's population.
The real challenge however, remains the transition to sustainable constitutional liberalism. For instance Iran holds elections on regular intervals, but its constitution legalizes the muzzling of press freedom. Zimbabwe has elected Robert Mugabe who in return has eliminated political opponents. And Saddam Hussein held elections, and that in turn legitimized his audacious brutality. Even Gyanendra claimed his fifteen month rule as a democratic one. The question of course, is whether these are examples of democratic exercises of democratic elements used to forward undemocratic designs?
Examples of a democracy gone awry are aplenty; often the end result is a tyrannical (illiberal) democracy. Given the continuation of Maoist violence and the ideology it supports – a one party communist republic - what is the guarantee that elections to a Constituent Assembly will not result in an illiberal democracy?
The real challenge to Nepal's peace process is the institutionalization of an inclusive democracy through constitutional liberalism. There is truly no alternative to constitutional liberalism.
But like other countries that have undergone difficulties during their own transitional phases, Nepal too is faced with gargantuan challenges that are hindering the prospects of a permanent solution. The first of these challenges is extremism.
Over the years, Nepal has witnessed the most adverse political circumstances. Each is directly correlated to the lack of skilled, quality leadership. With the political leadership's failure to guarantee a functioning democratic platform, individuals collectively resorted to extremism to fulfil their aspirations. As a result, the notion of 'self-determination' gained prominence as a catalyst to muster individual rights.
Extremism, however; in any form, has no ethics. It is based upon completely destroying state infrastructure and cleansing all social associations. Plainly speaking, the focus of extremism is on rewriting history. For extremists, the end always justifies their means, regardless of the suffering, loss of life. Events, atrocities, body counts are all relegated to lifeless statistics, later to be showcased to "honour" the "scarifies" made for extremist visionaries to come to power.
Yet another challenge to Nepal's peace process is guaranteeing individualism that is the bedrock of constitutional liberalism. Individualism is a vital theme that contributed to the changing politics of Nepal. With the advent of the internet and the media boom, communication barriers have been broken, making people increasingly aware; and, as a result the expectations of the common people have soared.
Today, in this ever-increasingly transparent society, individual freedom is the hypothesis through which the future of Nepal will be charted. Where morality and ethics will be based on individual perception, essentially meaning that the 'goal' in life is the attainment of a sense of individualism, that distinguishes one human from the next.
On the political front, the another serious challenge (to Nepal's peace process) is that of containing the armed Maoist militia. The rebel militia which numbers anywhere between 10,000 – 25,000 possesses small arms.
The distinction between the PLA and the militia is critical. While the PLA has fought the security organs of the state, the militia has been responsible for staging kangaroo courts, patrolling villages, abducting, extorting and canvassing Maoist ideology through the country. If the government chooses to continue ignoring the importance of disarming the militia, the forthcoming Constituent Assembly election results will overwhelmingly tilt in the favour of the Maoists.
For the greater Nepali population to participate in the Constituent Assembly elections, it is essential that all legitimate voters are roped into the electoral process – not just those that favour a particular ideology or fear a particular group. Therefore it is extremely critical for the government and the Maoists to prioritize the issue of rehabilitating displaced people prior to the election of constituent assembly.
But the rehabilitation of displaced people may not be desirable to the Maoists. The majority of displaced people fled their homes due to pressure from the rebel militia. And during the early phase of the "people's war," the Maoist militia had specifically targeted members of opposition political parties. As most political opponents of the rebels fled in an exodus to Kathmandu and other safety nets, the void created by the abrupt exodus was filled by ardent rebel sympathizers and the militia in villages throughout rural Nepal - the returnees could upset the balance of Maoist hegemony throughout the countryside.
Given the volatile situation of the country, in is inevitable that the SPA-M leaders will mutually consent to postponing elections, leading to an era of 'eight party rule with unachievable bogeys (once more). Elections are an important facet of a functioning democracy but holding them does not guarantee democratic discourse.
Democracy can only work if it guarantees freedom and accommodates divergent views. If the elections to a constituent assembly do not progress in the direction of constitutional liberalism, the whole exercise will lead to yet another political collision. So instead of falling over each other, congratulating the ruling parties on the "progress" of the peace process, we would be doing ourselves an even larger favour by logically questioning (and working towards) what is more important - the sustenance of the peace process (for sure), but simultaneously, the envisioning of an achievable set of goals, associated timelines and ultimately, a process that yields not just "peace and democracy," but also authentic constitutional liberalism.
The peace process so far has been built on wishful thinking, hope and trust. The induction of Maoists into the interim government is also no exception – they were inducted purely with the hope and trust built over the last year with the SPA.
However, by inducting the Maoist into the government without the completion of credible arms management and a total renunciation of violence, the government has embarked on a high risk gamble. Unfortunately, the most worrisome aspect is that Girija has played his last card by inducting the Maoists into government. Implicit in this action is the realization that all options to mainstream the Maoists have been exhausted – we can only now hope that the Maoists will "walk the talk." But what if the Maoist fail to relinquish the violence that has been the number element of their so-called "political" campaign?
Democracy is a process and elections a part of this process (not an end in itself). At present, 118 out of the 193 countries in the world have embraced a democratic setup (of some sort), encompassing 54.8 % of the world's population.
The real challenge however, remains the transition to sustainable constitutional liberalism. For instance Iran holds elections on regular intervals, but its constitution legalizes the muzzling of press freedom. Zimbabwe has elected Robert Mugabe who in return has eliminated political opponents. And Saddam Hussein held elections, and that in turn legitimized his audacious brutality. Even Gyanendra claimed his fifteen month rule as a democratic one. The question of course, is whether these are examples of democratic exercises of democratic elements used to forward undemocratic designs?
Examples of a democracy gone awry are aplenty; often the end result is a tyrannical (illiberal) democracy. Given the continuation of Maoist violence and the ideology it supports – a one party communist republic - what is the guarantee that elections to a Constituent Assembly will not result in an illiberal democracy?
The real challenge to Nepal's peace process is the institutionalization of an inclusive democracy through constitutional liberalism. There is truly no alternative to constitutional liberalism.
But like other countries that have undergone difficulties during their own transitional phases, Nepal too is faced with gargantuan challenges that are hindering the prospects of a permanent solution. The first of these challenges is extremism.
Over the years, Nepal has witnessed the most adverse political circumstances. Each is directly correlated to the lack of skilled, quality leadership. With the political leadership's failure to guarantee a functioning democratic platform, individuals collectively resorted to extremism to fulfil their aspirations. As a result, the notion of 'self-determination' gained prominence as a catalyst to muster individual rights.
Extremism, however; in any form, has no ethics. It is based upon completely destroying state infrastructure and cleansing all social associations. Plainly speaking, the focus of extremism is on rewriting history. For extremists, the end always justifies their means, regardless of the suffering, loss of life. Events, atrocities, body counts are all relegated to lifeless statistics, later to be showcased to "honour" the "scarifies" made for extremist visionaries to come to power.
Yet another challenge to Nepal's peace process is guaranteeing individualism that is the bedrock of constitutional liberalism. Individualism is a vital theme that contributed to the changing politics of Nepal. With the advent of the internet and the media boom, communication barriers have been broken, making people increasingly aware; and, as a result the expectations of the common people have soared.
Today, in this ever-increasingly transparent society, individual freedom is the hypothesis through which the future of Nepal will be charted. Where morality and ethics will be based on individual perception, essentially meaning that the 'goal' in life is the attainment of a sense of individualism, that distinguishes one human from the next.
On the political front, the another serious challenge (to Nepal's peace process) is that of containing the armed Maoist militia. The rebel militia which numbers anywhere between 10,000 – 25,000 possesses small arms.
The distinction between the PLA and the militia is critical. While the PLA has fought the security organs of the state, the militia has been responsible for staging kangaroo courts, patrolling villages, abducting, extorting and canvassing Maoist ideology through the country. If the government chooses to continue ignoring the importance of disarming the militia, the forthcoming Constituent Assembly election results will overwhelmingly tilt in the favour of the Maoists.
For the greater Nepali population to participate in the Constituent Assembly elections, it is essential that all legitimate voters are roped into the electoral process – not just those that favour a particular ideology or fear a particular group. Therefore it is extremely critical for the government and the Maoists to prioritize the issue of rehabilitating displaced people prior to the election of constituent assembly.
But the rehabilitation of displaced people may not be desirable to the Maoists. The majority of displaced people fled their homes due to pressure from the rebel militia. And during the early phase of the "people's war," the Maoist militia had specifically targeted members of opposition political parties. As most political opponents of the rebels fled in an exodus to Kathmandu and other safety nets, the void created by the abrupt exodus was filled by ardent rebel sympathizers and the militia in villages throughout rural Nepal - the returnees could upset the balance of Maoist hegemony throughout the countryside.
Given the volatile situation of the country, in is inevitable that the SPA-M leaders will mutually consent to postponing elections, leading to an era of 'eight party rule with unachievable bogeys (once more). Elections are an important facet of a functioning democracy but holding them does not guarantee democratic discourse.
Democracy can only work if it guarantees freedom and accommodates divergent views. If the elections to a constituent assembly do not progress in the direction of constitutional liberalism, the whole exercise will lead to yet another political collision. So instead of falling over each other, congratulating the ruling parties on the "progress" of the peace process, we would be doing ourselves an even larger favour by logically questioning (and working towards) what is more important - the sustenance of the peace process (for sure), but simultaneously, the envisioning of an achievable set of goals, associated timelines and ultimately, a process that yields not just "peace and democracy," but also authentic constitutional liberalism.
Tuesday, April 03, 2007
Maoists and the Interim Government
(Courtesy: Roop Joshi)
To the victors belong the spoils. In the Interim Government, the Maoists, among their five cabinet portfolios, have bagged three particularly significant portfolios: Information and Communication; Local Development; and Women, Children and Social Welfare. Nepali Congress has kept the "prestige" portfolios of Home, Defense and Finance; UML has the other prestige portfolio of Foreign Affairs. It is ambiguous how long these portfolios will be maintained after the Constituent Assembly elections. It is even more ambiguous when the CA elections will actually take place.
What is interesting is the Maoists' choice of portfolios. Unlike the post 1 February 2005 government, the Maoists know the importance of “public relations” and “winning hearts and minds”. The ministries now headed by Maoist Ministers are those which can most influence the opinion of the masses, cultivate the civil society and strengthen the party's prestige and influence.
Local Development means just that. If the people at the local grassroots level perceive the Maoists as their benefactors, winning their hearts and minds is a foregone conclusion. Government administration at the district and village/municipality levels will now be the prerogative of the Maoists. The networking which they have already established during their underground days will be further strengthened.
Leading the Information and Communication Ministry, all the outlets of modern media can now be influenced to provide the public relations for the Maoists' vision of a new Nepal. This is a valuable opportunity to influence the views of those especially at the local level, whether they relate to the Constituent Assembly elections or should there be a referendum on the institution of Monarchy.
Social Welfare is the umbrella for all societal changes and women's issues can spearhead initiatives in this area. The betterment of the conditions of women and children is a politically safe issue. Roughly half of the Nepalese population is women. Again, if women perceive their interests being championed by the Maoists, their votes will be ensured.
It can only be hoped that the SPA realizes the above and has admitted to itself that the Maoists can do the best job in these areas for Nepal. Of course, the political parties who are not members of SPAM have had no say in this matter; they have been relegated to the periphery of the national polity in this so-called "democratic era".
As an unfortunate side note, the plan to decide the fate of the institution of monarchy (as opposed to an individual monarch) by a simple majority vote in the first session of the Constituent Assembly is also a farce. Nothing but a national referendum can truly indicate a "democratic" conclusion of this issue, which has been relevant to the country for over 200 years. Let us nor forget that there would not be a “Nepal”, were it not for Prithivi Narayan Shah, the first king of Nepal and the precursor of the present Shah dynasty. In fact, if sovereignty and national unity are given the importance they deserve, even a referendum may be unnecessary on the future of the institution of Monarchy in Nepal (not necessarily any particular monarch).
If the Maoists have accepted a multi-party democracy for Nepal, which they say they have, there is cause for optimism. But if the current participation in the government is just a tactical ploy, there is an imminent need to be on guard. The actions of the Maoists even after the signing of the Peace Accord do not provide much confidence as to their intentions. We need to remember how Lenin took over Russia, despite the international situation being vastly different today. Let us watch very closely how well the Interim Government functions: how quickly it ensures law and order, how wisely it resolves the interests of the Madhesis, and how it tackles the socio-economic needs of the country.
To the victors belong the spoils. In the Interim Government, the Maoists, among their five cabinet portfolios, have bagged three particularly significant portfolios: Information and Communication; Local Development; and Women, Children and Social Welfare. Nepali Congress has kept the "prestige" portfolios of Home, Defense and Finance; UML has the other prestige portfolio of Foreign Affairs. It is ambiguous how long these portfolios will be maintained after the Constituent Assembly elections. It is even more ambiguous when the CA elections will actually take place.
What is interesting is the Maoists' choice of portfolios. Unlike the post 1 February 2005 government, the Maoists know the importance of “public relations” and “winning hearts and minds”. The ministries now headed by Maoist Ministers are those which can most influence the opinion of the masses, cultivate the civil society and strengthen the party's prestige and influence.
Local Development means just that. If the people at the local grassroots level perceive the Maoists as their benefactors, winning their hearts and minds is a foregone conclusion. Government administration at the district and village/municipality levels will now be the prerogative of the Maoists. The networking which they have already established during their underground days will be further strengthened.
Leading the Information and Communication Ministry, all the outlets of modern media can now be influenced to provide the public relations for the Maoists' vision of a new Nepal. This is a valuable opportunity to influence the views of those especially at the local level, whether they relate to the Constituent Assembly elections or should there be a referendum on the institution of Monarchy.
Social Welfare is the umbrella for all societal changes and women's issues can spearhead initiatives in this area. The betterment of the conditions of women and children is a politically safe issue. Roughly half of the Nepalese population is women. Again, if women perceive their interests being championed by the Maoists, their votes will be ensured.
It can only be hoped that the SPA realizes the above and has admitted to itself that the Maoists can do the best job in these areas for Nepal. Of course, the political parties who are not members of SPAM have had no say in this matter; they have been relegated to the periphery of the national polity in this so-called "democratic era".
As an unfortunate side note, the plan to decide the fate of the institution of monarchy (as opposed to an individual monarch) by a simple majority vote in the first session of the Constituent Assembly is also a farce. Nothing but a national referendum can truly indicate a "democratic" conclusion of this issue, which has been relevant to the country for over 200 years. Let us nor forget that there would not be a “Nepal”, were it not for Prithivi Narayan Shah, the first king of Nepal and the precursor of the present Shah dynasty. In fact, if sovereignty and national unity are given the importance they deserve, even a referendum may be unnecessary on the future of the institution of Monarchy in Nepal (not necessarily any particular monarch).
If the Maoists have accepted a multi-party democracy for Nepal, which they say they have, there is cause for optimism. But if the current participation in the government is just a tactical ploy, there is an imminent need to be on guard. The actions of the Maoists even after the signing of the Peace Accord do not provide much confidence as to their intentions. We need to remember how Lenin took over Russia, despite the international situation being vastly different today. Let us watch very closely how well the Interim Government functions: how quickly it ensures law and order, how wisely it resolves the interests of the Madhesis, and how it tackles the socio-economic needs of the country.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)