(Courtesy: el Guapo)
It takes courage to break away from "groupthink." It takes strength to articulate original analysis in politically charged environments. It takes genuine intellect to forego self-gratifying populist accolades in favor of rational, hard-hitting inquiry. Examination of this variety unfortunately, has been in short supply during Nepal's run-up to constituent assembly elections.
The radical agendas forwarded by Nepal's Maoists have prevailed. Over the period from April 2006 till the current day, the SPA (Seven Party Alliance) has literally rolled over and acceded to each and every threat of Maoist intimidation. The democrats' actions exemplify what is succinctly surmised as uninhibited Maoist appeasement. The projected perception is that the SPA alliance has "mainstreamed" the Maoists; the underlying truth is that the SPA has migrated to the Maoist agenda.
This process of migration has proved as radical as the revolutionary changes it has attempted to engender. "Made in New Delhi" with the expressed Leftist intent of undermining Nepal's Monarchy, the SPA and the Maoists have reduced the act of an historical constituent assembly election to a referendum on the Monarchy - only a referendum will not be held.
Instead, an "elected" assembly will decide the fate of Nepal's 240 year old Royal institution. The idea of a popular vote has been repeatedly dismissed for no other reason than genuine concern that the Monarchy may actually survive such a vote. The most conservative polls estimate support for the institution of Monarchy at between 40% and 50% - sufficient numbers in any democratic environment to warrant a system of direct universal suffrage. But not in Nepal.
In Nepal's case the radical Left has manipulated the political agenda sufficiently to deny the Nepali citizenry democratic opportunity on the most divisive issue in contemporary politics - the Monarchy. They have even gone a step further by deciding the outcome of the upcoming constituent assembly vote! As part of yet another concession to the Maoists, the SPA coalition has preemptively agreed to abolish the Monarchy during the first sitting of the constituent assembly.
Legally speaking, an unelected body (the SPA) has directed a future body (to-be-elected) on how to "vote" on the issue of the Nepali Monarchy. The judge, the jury and the prosecution in effect, are one in the same. And, not a single democratic entity - individual or nation-state or INGO - appears sufficiently credentialized (or adequately bold) to term the adopted approach "problematic."
Given the process and what is at stake, it is surprising that more violence has not come to fruition in Nepal. Sources such as the International Crisis Group (ICG), the United Nations Mission in Nepal (UNMIN), the Carter Center, etc., make vague allusions to the propensity for violence during and after the elections. But all reports are authored in terms that are subject to "groupthink": Basically, the assumption that violence is preordained because of the existence of groups that are opposed to elections.
The natural question then, is "but why?" And the answer is "because there's a big white elephant in the room for all who care to acknowledge it - the institution of Monarchy."
The idea that Nepal is held together by the institution of Monarchy is perhaps too traditional a viewpoint for younger Nepalis to stomach. The current King, (King Gyanendra) has also acted irresponsibly and in doing so, has lent much creed to the prevailing republican agenda in Nepal.
However, dispassionate analysis of contemporary events such as the formation of the SPA-Maoist alliance, India's direct involvement in addressing Nepal's insurgency, and the lightning rod that Nepal's Monarchy has played over the past two years, gives any sensible individual reason for pause. Not because the Monarchy is a symbol of national unity but because this current Monarch (as hated as he may be on an individual level), is in a perverted sense, the very reason behind Nepal's peace process.
The fact that the SPA-Maoist alliance came into existence as a platform upon which to jointly oppose the King, that Nepal's Maoist insurgency ended with direct Indian intervention (engendered by "February-1") and that opposition to the Monarchy still remains the only viable public distraction to a plethora of political inadequacies are inalienable truths. Certainly, the gaping functional chasm that will result from the Monarchy's abolition is a thought that gives many non-communist Nepali democrats, sleepless nights.
This notion is precisely what the "big white elephant" in Nepali politics represents. Also embedded within this reflection is the extent to which Nepal's political actors remain hostage to the notion of peace on the Maoists' terms. This is precisely the sort of ingenuous peace that Stalin would have marveled at; the type that is based on an assumed change in strategic Maoist intent when what has progressed over the duration of Nepal's peace process is tactical Maoist adaptation.
Based on this fundamental misperception, Nepal's peace process is described as a "compromise" when in essence, the process has been designed to eliminate a significant power-broker. The peace process has been praised as a spectacular "reconciliation" when in fact, the process has been built on a foundation of hatred and distrust directed at an individual - King Gyanendra. Although Nepal's political pundits are loathe to admit it, these are the real reasons why heightened violence following constituent assembly elections are highly probable.
The act of holding Nepal's constituent assembly elections are depicted as the culmination of the country's struggle for functional democracy (and lasting peace) when in fact, it is just the beginning of an extended and uncertain round of instability. The most "useful of idiots" have gone to the extreme of adopting US Presidential candidate Barrack Obama's tag line - "Change, yes we can" - as a self-deluded affirmation that the abolition of Nepal's Monarchy guarantees democracy for Nepal. If only the SPA and Maoists could abolish others of Nepal's problems the way they intend to abolish its Monarchy!
While many contend that the abolition may serve as a catalyst in the general direction of democracy, others posit that it also points to the emergence of yet another Bhutan - an Indian protectorate which takes orders directly from New Delhi. Inside observers of Nepali politics consistently point to magnified Indian influence in Nepal - particularly through the office of the current Prime Minister. The mainstream media outlets are wary of publishing anything that may be marginally against Indian intersts because their incentive structures are wed to ad-revenues which are largely controlled by Indian avenues in Nepal. As the theory goes, the power vacuum created by the Nepali Monarchy's departure is already being filled by Indian Agents who exercise hefty influence derived from the South Block.
Nepal's traditional politicians it seems, have learned little by way of their self-professed political miscalculations. It was the current Prime Minister, Girija Prasad Koirala under whose administration the armed Maoist insurgency began. It is now the Royally re-vitalized Koirala who champions the "mainstreaming of the Maoists" as his administration's primary accomplishment.
Steroids appear to have given PM Koirala an extended lease on life but they have done little to sharpen his intellectual acumen - politicking is a means to an end, not an end in itself. This is a lesson that Korala's party, the Nepali Congress will painfully learn long after Koirala's eventual demise.
Nepal's republican bandwagon is nearing the end of its journey. Where the drivers of this entourage take the country next, is anyone's guess. But one thing is certain. The process that has led to this event has been severely flawed. The emanating repercussions are sure to haunt the current generation of democratic leaders as they are gradually phased out. The majority of the consequences however, will be borne by an emerging generation of democrats, poised to ascend Nepal's halls of power with their hands tied behind their backs.
Related Posts:
Checkmate or Comeback King?
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/03/courtesy-chiran-j.html
Nepal's CA Elections - Assume Nothing
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/02/nepals-ca-elections-assume-nothing.html
The Pitfalls of Relying on Indian Benevolence
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/01/pitfalls-of-relying-on-indian.html
4 comments:
Nepal's political pendulum is currently in suspended animation at the extreme Left, leaving Nepali politicians little room to maneuver. Inaction based on this premise is hardly a good excuse but the inability of the entire international community and related interest groups to propose approaches to democratically decide the fate of Nepal's oldest institution is in one word, "unfortunate."
There would be no room for debate if a referendum were held and the Monarchy were put to sleep once and for all. Given what is being done, questions will forever linger. Very unfortuante indeed.
Yes, the question will linger, but New Nepal will simply move on – where, that’s another thing altogether. Mind you, there is bound to be a pretender or two around for comic relief.
But isn’t it a matter of historical record – or, soon to be, that just as King Gyanendra almost single-handedly destroyed the institution that made Nepal, the role he played in delivering New Nepal is no less? In that sense - and not just by virtue of ascending the throne twice, this Prince would be perfectly justified in claiming to have outdone both the Badamaharajdhiraj and King Tribhuwan!
Yes refrendum is the best solution. But silence of international communities toward this going to bring great disaster in Nepal like in Afghanistan. Nepal is going to be a playground to international communities to interfere Chinese politics and economy.
This last line, now that we are seeing the Maoists win, is prophetic!
"The emanating repercussions are sure to haunt the current generation of democratic leaders as they are gradually phased out. The majority of the consequences however, will be borne by an emerging generation of democrats, poised to ascend Nepal's halls of power with their hands tied behind their backs."
Post a Comment