(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.
These are the opinions of individuals with shared interests on Nepal..... the views are the writers' alone (unless otherwise stated) and do not reflect those of any organizations to which contributors are professionally affiliated. The objective of the material is to facilitate a range of perspectives to contemplate, deliberate and moderate the progression of democratic discourse in Nepali politics.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Looking Past the Moment of Truth
Dear Nepali Perspectives, I had written what is below in response to an article that came out on Republica. I may have written someth...
-
(Courtesy: Rajat Lal Joshi) Nishchal Basnyat, a Harvard student who bills himself as a co-author of a book on India, and proclaims to have w...
-
(Courtesy: Sano Baje) For those of us who have lived with this phenomenon all our lives, what is described below is no big revelation. Howev...
-
(Courtesy: La Verdad) The government and the Maoists think the 5 bomb blasts in Kathmandu were intended to disrupt the CA elections. What a...
4 comments:
Maoist will never be a believer in multiparty. But SPA will refrain from acknowledging this- by the time supposed election comes around, all the other party will get is a piece meal seats, courtesy of Maoist.
Is there really a chance for a referendum on the monarchy? Isn't a republic already taken for granted? Are there a substantial number of people who support the monarchy (the institution, not a person)? Why don't we hear from these people? Questions...questions...
I don't know why people are stressing out about the Maoists being in the government. I also don't know why it's such a big deal for the peace process.
An objective view would state that the Maoists in the government was a foregone conclusion after April, 2006.
Also, objectively speaking, since the whole country is held hostage to the peace process, justice, law and order will just have to sit on the sidelines for now, till another group is fed up and sends a rocket up Sitoula's ass.
Alas. Politics becomes such a farce when 10% of the literate Nepalis fight over freedom of speech when 90% are wondering about where to get the next meal.
The questions posed by Horatio above have become even more relevant as we hear that SPA-M may take the decision on the monarchy even before the Constituent Assembly. What gives SPA-M the right to do this? How can they presume that they speak for the people? The people can speak only through a national referendum. A bunch of politicians who were elected 8 years ago or who are in government through armed rebellion cannot take this decision. I'd like to read others' comments on this issue.
Post a Comment