(Courtesy: Siddhartha Thapa)
The Gorkhaland agitation and the demand for a separate state to Indian Nepalis is a sign of things that will further test the unity between the Congress and Indian communists in the days ahead.
The growing instability in Northern Bengal has the potential to foment further political instability across India; while other agitating groups across India may draw inspirations from Gorkha Janamukti Morcha (GJM)'s recent success to put enormous pressure on New Delhi, to acquiesce to their demand of a separate state.
This new development in Northern Bengal is bound to pinch the policy-makers in New Delhi and Calcutta. Theoritically, the GJM leaders have the moral high ground to press for a separate state; this is mainly because each state in India has been geographically divided along cultural and linguistic lines.
Therefore, GJM's demand for a separate state is morally and politically a just cause. Gorkhalis of Northeast and West Bengal states have been largely neglected and secluded as state governments have reduced the Indian Nepalis to second class citizens. In fact, Nepalis living for generations in Northeast and North Bengal have been denied the social, political and economic rights. They have been given unofficially a minority status.
The continued neglect of Indian Nepalis has created this feeling of 'un-Indianess' in the hearts and minds of the people living in Northeast and Darjeeling. And in the recent past, New Delhi has done very little to demonstrate seriousness over the deteriorating situation in Gorkhaland, primarily because the coalition partner continues to blackmail the Congress to retain its dictatorial autonomy in Bengal; while it hypocritically maintains a stronghold over policy matters in New Delhi.
Take for instance, the CPI-M stance on the Civilian Nuclear Deal with the United States. Had the deal gone through, the Civilian Nuclear Agreement would have put India in a globally advantageous position as its need for energy would have been largely resolved with the aim of propelling the development of the Indian economy at a greater pace.
The demand for Gorkhaland, therefore, is genuine and the Indian Nepalis must be given a separate state. Besides, North Bengal does not belong to Calcutta. It was a part of Nepal until 1816. Nepal ceded the territory to British India. Since then, Nepalis have been living as Indian nationals. They cannot be treated as Nepali nationals now.
Subash Ghising no longer holds ground in Darjeeling as he has betrayed the Indian Gorkhas by compromising with the Stalin regime which continues to rule North Bengal ruthlessly. Now Ghising has been replaced by new leaders who are politically committed to the Indian Nepalis cause --- that is a state within the Indian Union. These leaders epitomize a sense of hope that envisions an end to the Stalin rule in North Bengal.
However, even if a compromise is reached with the Marxist government due to New Delhi's insistence, the possibility of a long-term solution is impossible without New Delhi agreeing for a complete statehood.
Likewise, the growing popularity for the demand of Gorkhaland may lead to a state of mental trepidation for the Marxist and to others who doubt the allegiance of the Gorkhalis. Contrary to this thought, the Gorkhalis in India may share cultural similarities with their own kind in Nepal, but it stops right there. Gorkhalis too could argue in a similar vein questioning loyalties of other ethnic groups within India, but that would neither solve their problems nor would they garner support for their cause.
There are approximately 15 million Gorkhalis living in India and they by and large, have contributed to the economic development of India. In fact, Nepalis of Indian origin have defended India rather than Indians themselves. Had the Gorkha Rifles not been there during the partition that triggered communal violence between Hindus and Muslim, more Indians and Pakistanis would have died. Has any Indian realized and mentioned the role of the Gorkha Rifles in any book or write up?
India recruits Gorkhalis for their elite Gorkha battalions and these people have fought for India giving up their lives in pride. The recent triumph of Prashant Tamang in the Indian Idol show elucidates the achievement of an Indian above everything else and what he did was equally symbolic, he sang in Hindi, the national language of India.
Some manipulative sleuths within the ranks of CPI-M may try selling propaganda that the GJM movement has been the handwork of Nepal. However, such claims are too fanciful to be true. The truth of the matter is the UPA government must end the policy of ethnic hypocrisy and provide justice to the Indian Gorkhas.
Closed door negotiations and secret political parleys have already begun with the aim of finding a solution to Gorkhaland. But this has started on the wrong-foot. In a recently concluded all-party meeting in Calcutta, the Stalin regime chose to ignore GJM. A political confrontation of great magnitude seems unavoidable between the CPI-M and the GJM. Many Gorkhalis will lose their lives, but come what may Gorkhalis should not move an inch away from their demands. If India has fought a battle in Sri Lanka to ensure rightful dignity for the Tamils, why can't it guarantee equality to Indians at home?
An all party meeting must be convened in New Delhi and a solution must be sought at the earliest before the world begins to look at the deteriorating situation that will eventually unfold in Northern Bengal with great shock. After all, Nandigram massacre has shown the ruthless involvement of the CPI-M. Should the GJM remain adamant, the CPI-M will not hesitate to use brute force against the Gorkhalis. There is still time to resolve the issue of Gorkhaland in an amicable manner. But if the CPI-M continues to demonstrate a policy of ignorance and bullishness, things will only get worse causing great shame to India. Killing an Indian for a solution that ultimately benefits India would seem too tragic.
Monday, June 23, 2008
Thursday, June 19, 2008
The Great President Hunt
(Courtesy: Dr. Hari Bansha Dulal)
It has been more than two months since CA elections were concluded. Except for the abolishment of monarchy, which was already agreed upon, political process has not moved forward by an inch so far. It appears that unless the ongoing power sharing negotiation gains some momentum and a deal is struck, pressing issues such as skyrocketing inflation and lawlessness will have to wait. In a nation where politicians' gain come before peoples' need, do citizens have a choice?
The parties involved in the negotiation are trying hard to sell their choice for the first president of Democratic Republic of Nepal. Puspa Kamal Dahal vouches for a non-political person but proposes Ram Raja Singh for the top job. Since when did Ram Raja Singh become a non-political person? June 20, 1985's bombing, for which Singh, has taken responsibility, is not something that a law abiding non-political person gets involved in. However, when compared to the death and destruction caused by the man who is proposing him for the top job, Singh's crime is minuscule.
Although Girija Prasad Koirala has not expressed his desire to become the first president himself in public, it is an open secret. As long as the likes of Krishna Prasad Sitaula are around, is it even necessary for Koirala and Dahal to do their dirty laundry?
The Maoists were clever enough to keep Koirala guessing when it came to the issue of the first president of Nepal for the last 2 years. What the Maoists know very well but may not acknowledge in public is that, had Koirala known that he would not become the first president, he would not have pushed for a republic as hard as he did. Had the Maoists made it clear well in advance, Koirala would have refused to become a "useful idiot." So they played it smart and played it well.
Dahal and his men do not want Koirala to become the president because they seriously think that they are the ones who brought this change, and to a large extent, they are right about it. For the Maoists, making Koirala president is like acknowledging him as an agent of change. Furthermore, it opens up a space for future intervention. Given Koirala's proximity with the international players and the Nepali Army, the Maoists' game plan of swiftly marching towards the authoritarian regime may come to a grinding halt. Why take a risk? From the Maoists' stand point, it makes a perfect sense.
No matter who becomes the first president, the power sharing negotiations should come to an end pretty soon. For common Nepali citizens, Dahal's desire to checkmate Koirala and deny him the chance of fulfillment of his desire to become the first president is irrelevant. All they want at this point in time is a regular supply of fuel, textbooks for their kids, and some degree of law and order. It is, thus, completely unjustified and immoral to overlook the problems faced by the citizens and concentrate solely on sharing the pie.
It is time to move beyond the petty politicking and address the problems faced by impoverished Nepali populace. No point beating around the bush. Do what it takes and move the political process forward. If the politicians were really serious about having a well respected and accomplished citizen as a first president, they would be proposing the likes of Ganesh Raj Sharma, who not only respected the law of the land himself but also made others do it, not someone who has been involved in bombings. When the entire process is not about setting a right precedence and selecting an individual with a strong moral character, how does it matter whether it is Ram Raja Singh or the killers of Dikendra Thapa, Jitendra Sah, Ram Hari Shrestha, or for that matter, another bomber Babban Singh?
If it is all about political correctness, then why not propose Jwala Singh for the first president? A Dalit, a Madhesi, and an insurgent. What could be a better package? For the populists who value ethnicity over meritocracy and character, it would be a super deal. It might even help insurgency in the southern plains to subside. When a former insurgent can be a prime minister, why not at least discuss the prospects of an insurgent, who happens to be a Dalit and a Madhesi for the top job?
Regardless of whom the Maoists propose, when it is all said and done, there is a big probability that the Maoists might end up accepting Koirala as the first president. They are not that foolish to blow away the revolutionary gains just to appear politically correct.
How long Koirala's legacy will last in a society, which is engulfed in perpetual revolution is, altogether a different question.
Actually, the Maoists might gain by accepting Koirala as a president. The best way to preempt Koirala's anti-Maoist moves in future is to make him the president. Koirala's lust for limelight is simply too big to be underestimated. The infamous back-stabbing of Krishna Prasad Bhattarai to secure the prime ministerial berth in one of the general elections not very long ago serves as a classic example of how far Koirala can go to get what he wants. When Koirala could not contain the Maoists as the most powerful Prime Minister in the history of Nepal in the last two and half years, why should the Maoists be afraid of him as a ceremonial head of state?
Given his age, letting him become the president might be a safer bet for the Maoists.
The very minute someone else becomes the president, seven party alliance (SPA) is unofficially over. After that, political realignment will take place. The political resistance that will start after Koirala is denied his cherished dream job might be, too soon and too big, for the Maoists to contain.
Becoming a president of the youngest republic might be a dream come true for Koirala and might benefit his blind followers, but for democracy in Nepal, it will be a disaster. Once Koirala becomes the president, the ongoing appeasement of the Maoists will continue further. Having secured the place in history, it would be foolish on the part of liberal democrats to assume that Koirala will do anything to contain the Maoists and strengthen democracy. In the last two and half years, instead of containing the Maoists by forcing them to disband the YCL and surrender all their weapons, Koirala relentlessly engaged in their appeasement, which resulted in strengthening of both the political and muscle power of the Maoists. When Koirala could not understand that appeasing radicals only makes them bolder through his half a century long political career, what will he do differently and significantly after he becomes the president to force the Maoists to change their beliefs and embrace multi-party democracy?
If it is really for democracy in Nepal, the Maoists' hardheaded pursuit of having a left-leaning individual as the first president should prevail. The political realignment will occur only when Koirala is forced out. As long as Koirala enjoys the limelight, in the name of taking the peace process to its logical end, NC will keep on rationalizing the Maoists' high handedness and the march toward authoritarianism.
Related Posts:
The Nepali Congress should Focus on the Party's Reinvention, not on Koirala's Legacy
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/05/nepali-congress-should-focus-on-partys.html
Stubborn Koirala and NC's Impending Downfall
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/01/stubborn-koirala-and-ncs-impending.html
(Nepali) Congress At Crossroads
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/12/congress-at-crossroads.html
High On Oxygen
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/12/high-on-oxygen.html
It has been more than two months since CA elections were concluded. Except for the abolishment of monarchy, which was already agreed upon, political process has not moved forward by an inch so far. It appears that unless the ongoing power sharing negotiation gains some momentum and a deal is struck, pressing issues such as skyrocketing inflation and lawlessness will have to wait. In a nation where politicians' gain come before peoples' need, do citizens have a choice?
The parties involved in the negotiation are trying hard to sell their choice for the first president of Democratic Republic of Nepal. Puspa Kamal Dahal vouches for a non-political person but proposes Ram Raja Singh for the top job. Since when did Ram Raja Singh become a non-political person? June 20, 1985's bombing, for which Singh, has taken responsibility, is not something that a law abiding non-political person gets involved in. However, when compared to the death and destruction caused by the man who is proposing him for the top job, Singh's crime is minuscule.
Although Girija Prasad Koirala has not expressed his desire to become the first president himself in public, it is an open secret. As long as the likes of Krishna Prasad Sitaula are around, is it even necessary for Koirala and Dahal to do their dirty laundry?
The Maoists were clever enough to keep Koirala guessing when it came to the issue of the first president of Nepal for the last 2 years. What the Maoists know very well but may not acknowledge in public is that, had Koirala known that he would not become the first president, he would not have pushed for a republic as hard as he did. Had the Maoists made it clear well in advance, Koirala would have refused to become a "useful idiot." So they played it smart and played it well.
Dahal and his men do not want Koirala to become the president because they seriously think that they are the ones who brought this change, and to a large extent, they are right about it. For the Maoists, making Koirala president is like acknowledging him as an agent of change. Furthermore, it opens up a space for future intervention. Given Koirala's proximity with the international players and the Nepali Army, the Maoists' game plan of swiftly marching towards the authoritarian regime may come to a grinding halt. Why take a risk? From the Maoists' stand point, it makes a perfect sense.
No matter who becomes the first president, the power sharing negotiations should come to an end pretty soon. For common Nepali citizens, Dahal's desire to checkmate Koirala and deny him the chance of fulfillment of his desire to become the first president is irrelevant. All they want at this point in time is a regular supply of fuel, textbooks for their kids, and some degree of law and order. It is, thus, completely unjustified and immoral to overlook the problems faced by the citizens and concentrate solely on sharing the pie.
It is time to move beyond the petty politicking and address the problems faced by impoverished Nepali populace. No point beating around the bush. Do what it takes and move the political process forward. If the politicians were really serious about having a well respected and accomplished citizen as a first president, they would be proposing the likes of Ganesh Raj Sharma, who not only respected the law of the land himself but also made others do it, not someone who has been involved in bombings. When the entire process is not about setting a right precedence and selecting an individual with a strong moral character, how does it matter whether it is Ram Raja Singh or the killers of Dikendra Thapa, Jitendra Sah, Ram Hari Shrestha, or for that matter, another bomber Babban Singh?
If it is all about political correctness, then why not propose Jwala Singh for the first president? A Dalit, a Madhesi, and an insurgent. What could be a better package? For the populists who value ethnicity over meritocracy and character, it would be a super deal. It might even help insurgency in the southern plains to subside. When a former insurgent can be a prime minister, why not at least discuss the prospects of an insurgent, who happens to be a Dalit and a Madhesi for the top job?
Regardless of whom the Maoists propose, when it is all said and done, there is a big probability that the Maoists might end up accepting Koirala as the first president. They are not that foolish to blow away the revolutionary gains just to appear politically correct.
How long Koirala's legacy will last in a society, which is engulfed in perpetual revolution is, altogether a different question.
Actually, the Maoists might gain by accepting Koirala as a president. The best way to preempt Koirala's anti-Maoist moves in future is to make him the president. Koirala's lust for limelight is simply too big to be underestimated. The infamous back-stabbing of Krishna Prasad Bhattarai to secure the prime ministerial berth in one of the general elections not very long ago serves as a classic example of how far Koirala can go to get what he wants. When Koirala could not contain the Maoists as the most powerful Prime Minister in the history of Nepal in the last two and half years, why should the Maoists be afraid of him as a ceremonial head of state?
Given his age, letting him become the president might be a safer bet for the Maoists.
The very minute someone else becomes the president, seven party alliance (SPA) is unofficially over. After that, political realignment will take place. The political resistance that will start after Koirala is denied his cherished dream job might be, too soon and too big, for the Maoists to contain.
Becoming a president of the youngest republic might be a dream come true for Koirala and might benefit his blind followers, but for democracy in Nepal, it will be a disaster. Once Koirala becomes the president, the ongoing appeasement of the Maoists will continue further. Having secured the place in history, it would be foolish on the part of liberal democrats to assume that Koirala will do anything to contain the Maoists and strengthen democracy. In the last two and half years, instead of containing the Maoists by forcing them to disband the YCL and surrender all their weapons, Koirala relentlessly engaged in their appeasement, which resulted in strengthening of both the political and muscle power of the Maoists. When Koirala could not understand that appeasing radicals only makes them bolder through his half a century long political career, what will he do differently and significantly after he becomes the president to force the Maoists to change their beliefs and embrace multi-party democracy?
If it is really for democracy in Nepal, the Maoists' hardheaded pursuit of having a left-leaning individual as the first president should prevail. The political realignment will occur only when Koirala is forced out. As long as Koirala enjoys the limelight, in the name of taking the peace process to its logical end, NC will keep on rationalizing the Maoists' high handedness and the march toward authoritarianism.
Related Posts:
The Nepali Congress should Focus on the Party's Reinvention, not on Koirala's Legacy
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/05/nepali-congress-should-focus-on-partys.html
Stubborn Koirala and NC's Impending Downfall
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/01/stubborn-koirala-and-ncs-impending.html
(Nepali) Congress At Crossroads
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/12/congress-at-crossroads.html
High On Oxygen
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/12/high-on-oxygen.html
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Girija as Nepal's First President? Just say NO!
(Courtesy: La Verdad)
Naturally, people have voiced strong opinions on their preferences for the world's newest republic's, first President. Some have expressed vested interests behind a democratic veil, others have spoken in support of gender and ethnic equality, and yet, others have forwarded names without extending even the simplest courtesy of consulting the very individuals on whose behalf, presidential campaigns have been launched (and retracted)!! With much respect to every individual's right to personal opinion, let this writing be a case for who SHOULD NOT become Nepal's first President - namely, Mr. Girija Prasad Koirala.
Many credit Mr. Koirala with leading Nepal's peace process, for bringing peace, stability and some measure of democracy to Nepal. They claim that in the absence of Girija's leadership, the Maoists would still be in insurgency mode, that Nepal would still be a Kingdom and that the Nepali people would remain deprived of their god given right to freedom.
But let us not forget that without Mr. Koirala, there probably would have been no Maoist insurgency to begin with. Let us take a moment to recollect that had Mr. Koirala and his old party given sustenance to inclusive democracy after 1990, operations Romeo and Sierra Kilo-II, the Lauda Air scandal and dozens of other episodes that undermined Nepal's democratic transition would never have transpired.
Instead of positioning this debate in the limited context of the past 2.5 years, let us take a moment to reflect on Mr. Koirala's larger legacy - a legacy which extends as far back as 1990 (after he stopped hijacking planes and printing fake Indian currency). It was during this timeframe when Girija's lust for power, recognition and political chicanery defined an entire generation of political malfeasance. Unmitigated corruption, intra-party power struggles and a penchant for manipulative, self-serving politics is the real legacy that Mr. Koirala will leave behind.
Koirala's supporters claim that he fought for democracy his entire life and so he deserves recognition in the "New Nepal." But does the "New Nepal" deserve a beginning marred by the political baggage that Girija Prasad Koirala would bring to the Presidency? Girija may have spent his teenage years following his older brother's lead, but the real question is what Girija did when his struggle yielded the opportunity democratize Nepal. If Mr. Koirala is such model for democratic leadership, is the type of democracy that defined the post-1990 period the type of democracy Nepalis want, post 2008?
A democratic myth is precisely what Mr. Koirala's sycophants like to propagate - that democracy for Nepal, is somehow tied to the legacy of the Nepali Congress and that the Nepali Congress, is nothing without Girija Prasad Koirala's leadership. What sophistry! If it's one man that has continually undermined democracy within Nepal's largest democratic party, it is Girija. The one (perhaps the only) thing Nepalis have Girija to thank for, is the birth of rebels within the ranks of the Nepali Congress. Rebels like Narahari Acharya and Gagan Thapa who have successfully leveraged republican sentiment to undermine Girija Koirala and his coterie.
What of the new generation of leaders within the Nepali Congress? What about the new generation of Nepalis, period? How enthusiastic are they about the thought of Koirala's legacy extending far beyond its useful tenure?
What about the thousands of Maoists and the thousands of state security forces who died during Nepal's insurgency? Is it their desire to see the man who resigned as prime minister because the Army wouldn't fight the Maoists, now serve as the "New Nepal's" first President? Is the attempted re-writing of Girija's legacy and the continuation of his brand of caste-based politics, the reason so many Nepalis had to die? It's horrible enough that Nepalis had to suffer immeasurable emotional loss fighting a war that could have been avoided. Must Nepalis now bear insult to injury by witnessing Girija become Nepal's first President?
Nepal's Presidency isn't a consolation prize for second best. It's not a trophy that Girija deserves for being the "most useful idiot." This is a post that will be burdened with immense responsibility and compromise, a position that a capable, healthy, non-senile, non-octogenarian should hold. Nepal's new President will reside over not just the most politically challenging period in Nepal's history, but possibly over the most economically challenging period the world has seen in decades. Given all practical considerations, is Nepal's Presidency a job for a man who can barely stand, let alone think straight? Is it a job for a man pumped up on steroids just to make occasional public appearances?
With Nepal's royal legacy in the past, Girija Koirala's utility is over. Like the man formerly known as King Gyanendra, Girija should gracefully bow out of the political scene as the man formerly known as "most useful idiot." From winning the Nobel Peace Prize to becoming Nepal's first President, one cannot help but wonder what other dreams of grandeur, interactions with former U.S. President Jimmy Carter, planted in Girija's head. Be that as it may, it's time for Girija to wake up, smell the republican coffee, get off the steroids, and let the "New Nepal" breathe.
There is no room in the "New Nepal" for an old Girija, the politics of his variety, or his shameless lust for power. Democracy is facilitated in Nepal by Girija's retirement into obscurity and a democratic polity is more likely in the absence of Nepali Congress supporters, who are little more than Girija's servants. It is Girija who continues to impede Nepal's political progress and it's time for him to get out of the way.
Related Posts:
The Nepali Congress should Focus on the Party's Reinvention, not on Koirala's Legacy
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/05/nepali-congress-should-focus-on-partys.html
Stubborn Koirala and NC's Impending Downfall
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/01/stubborn-koirala-and-ncs-impending.html
(Nepali) Congress At Crossroads
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/12/congress-at-crossroads.html
High On Oxygen
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/12/high-on-oxygen.html
Naturally, people have voiced strong opinions on their preferences for the world's newest republic's, first President. Some have expressed vested interests behind a democratic veil, others have spoken in support of gender and ethnic equality, and yet, others have forwarded names without extending even the simplest courtesy of consulting the very individuals on whose behalf, presidential campaigns have been launched (and retracted)!! With much respect to every individual's right to personal opinion, let this writing be a case for who SHOULD NOT become Nepal's first President - namely, Mr. Girija Prasad Koirala.
Many credit Mr. Koirala with leading Nepal's peace process, for bringing peace, stability and some measure of democracy to Nepal. They claim that in the absence of Girija's leadership, the Maoists would still be in insurgency mode, that Nepal would still be a Kingdom and that the Nepali people would remain deprived of their god given right to freedom.
But let us not forget that without Mr. Koirala, there probably would have been no Maoist insurgency to begin with. Let us take a moment to recollect that had Mr. Koirala and his old party given sustenance to inclusive democracy after 1990, operations Romeo and Sierra Kilo-II, the Lauda Air scandal and dozens of other episodes that undermined Nepal's democratic transition would never have transpired.
Instead of positioning this debate in the limited context of the past 2.5 years, let us take a moment to reflect on Mr. Koirala's larger legacy - a legacy which extends as far back as 1990 (after he stopped hijacking planes and printing fake Indian currency). It was during this timeframe when Girija's lust for power, recognition and political chicanery defined an entire generation of political malfeasance. Unmitigated corruption, intra-party power struggles and a penchant for manipulative, self-serving politics is the real legacy that Mr. Koirala will leave behind.
Koirala's supporters claim that he fought for democracy his entire life and so he deserves recognition in the "New Nepal." But does the "New Nepal" deserve a beginning marred by the political baggage that Girija Prasad Koirala would bring to the Presidency? Girija may have spent his teenage years following his older brother's lead, but the real question is what Girija did when his struggle yielded the opportunity democratize Nepal. If Mr. Koirala is such model for democratic leadership, is the type of democracy that defined the post-1990 period the type of democracy Nepalis want, post 2008?
A democratic myth is precisely what Mr. Koirala's sycophants like to propagate - that democracy for Nepal, is somehow tied to the legacy of the Nepali Congress and that the Nepali Congress, is nothing without Girija Prasad Koirala's leadership. What sophistry! If it's one man that has continually undermined democracy within Nepal's largest democratic party, it is Girija. The one (perhaps the only) thing Nepalis have Girija to thank for, is the birth of rebels within the ranks of the Nepali Congress. Rebels like Narahari Acharya and Gagan Thapa who have successfully leveraged republican sentiment to undermine Girija Koirala and his coterie.
What of the new generation of leaders within the Nepali Congress? What about the new generation of Nepalis, period? How enthusiastic are they about the thought of Koirala's legacy extending far beyond its useful tenure?
What about the thousands of Maoists and the thousands of state security forces who died during Nepal's insurgency? Is it their desire to see the man who resigned as prime minister because the Army wouldn't fight the Maoists, now serve as the "New Nepal's" first President? Is the attempted re-writing of Girija's legacy and the continuation of his brand of caste-based politics, the reason so many Nepalis had to die? It's horrible enough that Nepalis had to suffer immeasurable emotional loss fighting a war that could have been avoided. Must Nepalis now bear insult to injury by witnessing Girija become Nepal's first President?
Nepal's Presidency isn't a consolation prize for second best. It's not a trophy that Girija deserves for being the "most useful idiot." This is a post that will be burdened with immense responsibility and compromise, a position that a capable, healthy, non-senile, non-octogenarian should hold. Nepal's new President will reside over not just the most politically challenging period in Nepal's history, but possibly over the most economically challenging period the world has seen in decades. Given all practical considerations, is Nepal's Presidency a job for a man who can barely stand, let alone think straight? Is it a job for a man pumped up on steroids just to make occasional public appearances?
With Nepal's royal legacy in the past, Girija Koirala's utility is over. Like the man formerly known as King Gyanendra, Girija should gracefully bow out of the political scene as the man formerly known as "most useful idiot." From winning the Nobel Peace Prize to becoming Nepal's first President, one cannot help but wonder what other dreams of grandeur, interactions with former U.S. President Jimmy Carter, planted in Girija's head. Be that as it may, it's time for Girija to wake up, smell the republican coffee, get off the steroids, and let the "New Nepal" breathe.
There is no room in the "New Nepal" for an old Girija, the politics of his variety, or his shameless lust for power. Democracy is facilitated in Nepal by Girija's retirement into obscurity and a democratic polity is more likely in the absence of Nepali Congress supporters, who are little more than Girija's servants. It is Girija who continues to impede Nepal's political progress and it's time for him to get out of the way.
Related Posts:
The Nepali Congress should Focus on the Party's Reinvention, not on Koirala's Legacy
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/05/nepali-congress-should-focus-on-partys.html
Stubborn Koirala and NC's Impending Downfall
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/01/stubborn-koirala-and-ncs-impending.html
(Nepali) Congress At Crossroads
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/12/congress-at-crossroads.html
High On Oxygen
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/12/high-on-oxygen.html
On Marxism, Maoism and Nepal
(Courtesy: Mr. Bhisma Karki)
Far from retreating before the scary ghosts and often dark sky of our time, you have been able, inspired by a profound and burning idealism, to perceive, behind the veils that hide it, the strife that burns at the heart of this world. You, my fatherly friend, have always been for me the living proof that idealism is no illusion but the true reality.
- Karl Marx in a letter to his father, Heinrich Marx
Who is not stirred to the core by these lines? They are excerpt from the notes I took on Marxian thoughts about 23 years ago, which have luckily survived. To the great majority of ardent supporter of communism, Marx’s idealism was more moving than the nitty-gritty details of his thoughts. His was a life devoted to study and the cause of world communism. The chronic poverty that Marx had to go through in his life of exile did not deter him from championing the cause of downtrodden people of the world and authoring several books of quality of world classics. Throughout his life, Marx set an example of philosopher scaling the highest peak in thought and the encyclopedic sweep of scholarship. It is no wonder that Marxism inspired great struggle for the establishment of society based on equality and the continual progress. In the dissemination of communism, Marx’s heroic life also played important role.
I do not wish to offer a learned critique of Marxism, which may take years of study. I find the Marxian thought fascinating. To that extent I discuss them here presenting the flavor when they are put in practice. After teenage exposure to Marx, my youthful dream was to read and seek to acquire, if possible, deeper understanding of the complete works of Marx and Engels. I wanted to read and study Marx in order to comprehend the mystery of the world and how it changes.
When you read Marx, it is difficult not to be dazzled by his unrivalled genius and idealism. Although I hero–worshiped Marx, I never associated myself with the communist organizations in Nepal. They are too crude for any person of sensibility. Moreover, when one acquires some acquaintance with diverse thoughts propounded by other philosophers and thinkers, one begins to find that other competing thoughts and philosophy are also equally fascinating and admirable.
As opposed to the noble idealism of Marx is the development and practice of his thought in the destructive direction in most of the communist regimes. The practice of communism in Russia following the Bolshevik triumph was very bloody; out of the womb of Marxism came into being a hideous regime responsible for the destruction and death of millions of people. The Bolshevik thirst for blood was never satiated. The flower of Russian humanity perished at the altar of the dialectical machine of a communist regime which demanded more and more blood. The chilling description of the cruel purges and terror under Stalin is given vividly by Arthur Koestler in his book, Darkness at Noon.
When Lenin died, there was a collective leadership for some years and finally it ended up with Stalin outfoxing all the other rivals one by one. After Stalin consolidated his grip on power, many of the old guards of the 1917 revolution met very violent and often humiliating end. The rise of Stalin was the greatest misfortune to afflict Russia in those unhappy times. Why did the majority of Bolshevik old guards, in spite of their lifelong service and devotion to the communist cause, perish at the hand of Stalin? Their destruction was logical necessity because they were found to be in opposition, even small, to the stand of communist party which was looked upon both as supreme and infallible. The possibility of dissidence around them made them centre of subversion. Any possibility of future subversion was to be ruthlessly suppressed because in a future conflict or war, it would lead to the defeat or overthrow of the soviet communist bastion.
In the dialectical twist of the logic, their life would only weaken the Soviet communist bastion. The self-elimination was the supreme sacrifice that they could make for the communist party. Hence people like Kamenev, Zinoviev and Bukharin went through drama of macabre self-condemnation before they were liquidated. The great hero of Russian revolution, Trotsky also died a most tragic death when Stalin’s agent smashed Trotsky’s head with a hatchet.
All these people in the leadership of communist revolution shared hardships and sufferings to further the cause of communism. Even when confronting the most unjust death, they remained loyal to the communist regime. They confessed to the imaginary crimes; they did not swerve from the party line because they hoped party would, once the challenge to communist regime is met, rehabilitate them either now or in future. The trial of dissident or opponent in communist regime was mockery of justice.
How can Stalin order the execution of his former politburo friends and other people with whom he shared the difficulties and tribulations for building up communism? What happened to the idea of camaraderie and friendship in Communist Russia? The notion of friendship is beautiful. Was it only a Bourgeois affectation? Why was Stalin not willing to work with former Bolshevik colleagues and instead engendered their fall in the most cold-blooded way? The famous author, Solzhenitsyn says Lenin was uncommonly evil. He calls Stalin a man of vilest soul.
The Russian people endured the cruelties and violence of the brutal Stalinist regime in the hope that they were making the sacrifices for the advancement of communism. It was the fondest belief in which the ends justified the harsh suffering of present. But how can one find peace with the communism when the outcome is the death of millions of people as in Stalinist Russia, Cambodia and Mao’s China, and now in Nepal? The list of infamy goes on. This is not the idealism of Marx with which millions of people found resonance. The grim hardship and suffering was demanded by communist regime but it did not lead to the rosy future. In fact, the future was and is even grimmer for the communist country .Not to forget, there was not only hardship and suffering but also limitless enthusiasm for communism and unwavering faith in its triumph in building a new world in the early days of communist struggle, which turned out to be a chimera.
The communist experiment of 20th century was in one sense the worst disaster and in other sense the worst crime against humanity; and, moreover it was the path chosen in the case of Soviet regime under Stalin with the cold calculation. From the communism in practice emerges not an ideal society, but a totalitarian state which, in the absence of naked force and terror, disintegrates rapidly. The only bond that binds communist society is the ruthless repression of the police state, certainly not a bond of universal brotherhood. So, without a complete control and repression along totalitarian line, communist regime cannot survive. The power concentrated in the hand of elite politburo without accompanying check and balance leads to dangerous consequences, as seen in the Soviet Union and elsewhere.
No matter how grand Marx’s theory is, it has been a failure as far as its usefulness to serve the welfare of man is concerned. There are many critics of Marx and Marxism, who discovered the folly and fault in the Marx’s thought. According to English philosopher Bertrand Russell both Marx and Hegel were muddle headed. “In relation to any political doctrine there are two questions to be asked: (1) Are its theoretical tenet true? (2) Is its practical policy likely to increase human happiness?” says Russell. On both counts, the answer is disappointing, in spite of power of the early communist movement in creating giant global upheaval. “Communism is,” says Russell, “doctrine bred of poverty, hatred and strife.”
There were many important Marxist theoreticians in Russia who contributed to the further development of Marxism. Some of the prominent names are Lenin, Trotsky, Plekhanov, Bukharin, etc. Later on, Stalin also claimed to be a theoretician by proposing the consolidation of socialism in one country rather than stirring a world revolution as propounded by Trotsky. In one of the prewar underground meeting, Stalin tried to present a theoretical paper. Someone in the audience quipped, “ Koba, don’t make a fool of yourself. This is not your field.” The variant of Marxism called Maoism is at the focal point of Nepal’s current turmoil. Mao was not a man of intellectual turn of mind. He developed his guerrilla strategy from experience. His red book is full of mundane observations. His boast that power comes from the barrel of gun is just a stupid remark. In the decaying and disintegrating China, Mao was able to win the people by offering the hope of order and progress. It was not in the power of the nationalists under Chiang-Kai-Sek to beat the Mao’s guerilla; it was the age of communism.
In Nepal, the Marxian thought continues to attract a large following. But this mass, for lack of stimulation of the intellectual curiosity, remains unfortunately in the mental prison of degrading version of Marxism. The Nepali communist’s understanding of Marxism is confined to some simple insurrectionary shibboleths and clichés.
For the future of Nepal, we must defy the Maoism which has been nothing but ritual of violence, terror and inhumanity. Nepal’s post 1990 democracy was full of promises, if not robust; Maoist terrorists smothered its soul by the most inhuman insurrection. By means of the violent campaign, one may mobilize the backward people into frenzy and even seize power, as is obvious from the success of the Maoist terrorist in Nepal’s recent election. Behind the success of the Maoist lies a propaganda machine, converting acts of terrorism and crime into the deeds of justice and valor. But, to paraphrase Petrarch, all the wickedness and filth run together in a Nepali sewer called Maoist party. The triumph of Maoist terrorism is paved with evil.
The salvation of our bleeding motherland Nepal can come through the service of man of excellence in character and mind. In no way is the sweat and toil of common man is to belittled. To make that a reality, Nepali brothers and sisters let us follow Mahatma Gandhi. He was one of the greatest human beings of all time. Mao’s magic is temporary, but Gandhi’s message of nonviolence and love are eternal truth. Let the Gandhian love and nonviolence shine brightly upon our cursed country.
(For comments, please write to bhkarki@gmail.com)
Related Posts:
Convince Us It’s Bullets to Ballots
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/04/courtesy-roop-joshi-as-of-this-writing.html
Respect Electoral Mandate
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/05/courtesy-dr.html
Democracy - Nepali Style
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/12/democracy-nepali-style.html
Far from retreating before the scary ghosts and often dark sky of our time, you have been able, inspired by a profound and burning idealism, to perceive, behind the veils that hide it, the strife that burns at the heart of this world. You, my fatherly friend, have always been for me the living proof that idealism is no illusion but the true reality.
- Karl Marx in a letter to his father, Heinrich Marx
Who is not stirred to the core by these lines? They are excerpt from the notes I took on Marxian thoughts about 23 years ago, which have luckily survived. To the great majority of ardent supporter of communism, Marx’s idealism was more moving than the nitty-gritty details of his thoughts. His was a life devoted to study and the cause of world communism. The chronic poverty that Marx had to go through in his life of exile did not deter him from championing the cause of downtrodden people of the world and authoring several books of quality of world classics. Throughout his life, Marx set an example of philosopher scaling the highest peak in thought and the encyclopedic sweep of scholarship. It is no wonder that Marxism inspired great struggle for the establishment of society based on equality and the continual progress. In the dissemination of communism, Marx’s heroic life also played important role.
I do not wish to offer a learned critique of Marxism, which may take years of study. I find the Marxian thought fascinating. To that extent I discuss them here presenting the flavor when they are put in practice. After teenage exposure to Marx, my youthful dream was to read and seek to acquire, if possible, deeper understanding of the complete works of Marx and Engels. I wanted to read and study Marx in order to comprehend the mystery of the world and how it changes.
When you read Marx, it is difficult not to be dazzled by his unrivalled genius and idealism. Although I hero–worshiped Marx, I never associated myself with the communist organizations in Nepal. They are too crude for any person of sensibility. Moreover, when one acquires some acquaintance with diverse thoughts propounded by other philosophers and thinkers, one begins to find that other competing thoughts and philosophy are also equally fascinating and admirable.
As opposed to the noble idealism of Marx is the development and practice of his thought in the destructive direction in most of the communist regimes. The practice of communism in Russia following the Bolshevik triumph was very bloody; out of the womb of Marxism came into being a hideous regime responsible for the destruction and death of millions of people. The Bolshevik thirst for blood was never satiated. The flower of Russian humanity perished at the altar of the dialectical machine of a communist regime which demanded more and more blood. The chilling description of the cruel purges and terror under Stalin is given vividly by Arthur Koestler in his book, Darkness at Noon.
When Lenin died, there was a collective leadership for some years and finally it ended up with Stalin outfoxing all the other rivals one by one. After Stalin consolidated his grip on power, many of the old guards of the 1917 revolution met very violent and often humiliating end. The rise of Stalin was the greatest misfortune to afflict Russia in those unhappy times. Why did the majority of Bolshevik old guards, in spite of their lifelong service and devotion to the communist cause, perish at the hand of Stalin? Their destruction was logical necessity because they were found to be in opposition, even small, to the stand of communist party which was looked upon both as supreme and infallible. The possibility of dissidence around them made them centre of subversion. Any possibility of future subversion was to be ruthlessly suppressed because in a future conflict or war, it would lead to the defeat or overthrow of the soviet communist bastion.
In the dialectical twist of the logic, their life would only weaken the Soviet communist bastion. The self-elimination was the supreme sacrifice that they could make for the communist party. Hence people like Kamenev, Zinoviev and Bukharin went through drama of macabre self-condemnation before they were liquidated. The great hero of Russian revolution, Trotsky also died a most tragic death when Stalin’s agent smashed Trotsky’s head with a hatchet.
All these people in the leadership of communist revolution shared hardships and sufferings to further the cause of communism. Even when confronting the most unjust death, they remained loyal to the communist regime. They confessed to the imaginary crimes; they did not swerve from the party line because they hoped party would, once the challenge to communist regime is met, rehabilitate them either now or in future. The trial of dissident or opponent in communist regime was mockery of justice.
How can Stalin order the execution of his former politburo friends and other people with whom he shared the difficulties and tribulations for building up communism? What happened to the idea of camaraderie and friendship in Communist Russia? The notion of friendship is beautiful. Was it only a Bourgeois affectation? Why was Stalin not willing to work with former Bolshevik colleagues and instead engendered their fall in the most cold-blooded way? The famous author, Solzhenitsyn says Lenin was uncommonly evil. He calls Stalin a man of vilest soul.
The Russian people endured the cruelties and violence of the brutal Stalinist regime in the hope that they were making the sacrifices for the advancement of communism. It was the fondest belief in which the ends justified the harsh suffering of present. But how can one find peace with the communism when the outcome is the death of millions of people as in Stalinist Russia, Cambodia and Mao’s China, and now in Nepal? The list of infamy goes on. This is not the idealism of Marx with which millions of people found resonance. The grim hardship and suffering was demanded by communist regime but it did not lead to the rosy future. In fact, the future was and is even grimmer for the communist country .Not to forget, there was not only hardship and suffering but also limitless enthusiasm for communism and unwavering faith in its triumph in building a new world in the early days of communist struggle, which turned out to be a chimera.
The communist experiment of 20th century was in one sense the worst disaster and in other sense the worst crime against humanity; and, moreover it was the path chosen in the case of Soviet regime under Stalin with the cold calculation. From the communism in practice emerges not an ideal society, but a totalitarian state which, in the absence of naked force and terror, disintegrates rapidly. The only bond that binds communist society is the ruthless repression of the police state, certainly not a bond of universal brotherhood. So, without a complete control and repression along totalitarian line, communist regime cannot survive. The power concentrated in the hand of elite politburo without accompanying check and balance leads to dangerous consequences, as seen in the Soviet Union and elsewhere.
No matter how grand Marx’s theory is, it has been a failure as far as its usefulness to serve the welfare of man is concerned. There are many critics of Marx and Marxism, who discovered the folly and fault in the Marx’s thought. According to English philosopher Bertrand Russell both Marx and Hegel were muddle headed. “In relation to any political doctrine there are two questions to be asked: (1) Are its theoretical tenet true? (2) Is its practical policy likely to increase human happiness?” says Russell. On both counts, the answer is disappointing, in spite of power of the early communist movement in creating giant global upheaval. “Communism is,” says Russell, “doctrine bred of poverty, hatred and strife.”
There were many important Marxist theoreticians in Russia who contributed to the further development of Marxism. Some of the prominent names are Lenin, Trotsky, Plekhanov, Bukharin, etc. Later on, Stalin also claimed to be a theoretician by proposing the consolidation of socialism in one country rather than stirring a world revolution as propounded by Trotsky. In one of the prewar underground meeting, Stalin tried to present a theoretical paper. Someone in the audience quipped, “ Koba, don’t make a fool of yourself. This is not your field.” The variant of Marxism called Maoism is at the focal point of Nepal’s current turmoil. Mao was not a man of intellectual turn of mind. He developed his guerrilla strategy from experience. His red book is full of mundane observations. His boast that power comes from the barrel of gun is just a stupid remark. In the decaying and disintegrating China, Mao was able to win the people by offering the hope of order and progress. It was not in the power of the nationalists under Chiang-Kai-Sek to beat the Mao’s guerilla; it was the age of communism.
In Nepal, the Marxian thought continues to attract a large following. But this mass, for lack of stimulation of the intellectual curiosity, remains unfortunately in the mental prison of degrading version of Marxism. The Nepali communist’s understanding of Marxism is confined to some simple insurrectionary shibboleths and clichés.
For the future of Nepal, we must defy the Maoism which has been nothing but ritual of violence, terror and inhumanity. Nepal’s post 1990 democracy was full of promises, if not robust; Maoist terrorists smothered its soul by the most inhuman insurrection. By means of the violent campaign, one may mobilize the backward people into frenzy and even seize power, as is obvious from the success of the Maoist terrorist in Nepal’s recent election. Behind the success of the Maoist lies a propaganda machine, converting acts of terrorism and crime into the deeds of justice and valor. But, to paraphrase Petrarch, all the wickedness and filth run together in a Nepali sewer called Maoist party. The triumph of Maoist terrorism is paved with evil.
The salvation of our bleeding motherland Nepal can come through the service of man of excellence in character and mind. In no way is the sweat and toil of common man is to belittled. To make that a reality, Nepali brothers and sisters let us follow Mahatma Gandhi. He was one of the greatest human beings of all time. Mao’s magic is temporary, but Gandhi’s message of nonviolence and love are eternal truth. Let the Gandhian love and nonviolence shine brightly upon our cursed country.
(For comments, please write to bhkarki@gmail.com)
Related Posts:
Convince Us It’s Bullets to Ballots
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/04/courtesy-roop-joshi-as-of-this-writing.html
Respect Electoral Mandate
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/05/courtesy-dr.html
Democracy - Nepali Style
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/12/democracy-nepali-style.html
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
First President to the Indigenous People
(Courtesy: Krishna Giri)
I do not want to craft any statement on the legitimacy of the declaration of the ‘Republic’. The country is now a ‘Republic’. Chief Justice Kedar Giri had no guts to discuss the legitimacy of this historic event and put aside the writ to prove that the country has no ‘rule of law’. The country is being ruled by Maoist bullying overshadowed by Indian and western interference. Nepal has become a strategic play ground to play ‘dirty politics’ for neighbors and westerners. There are few reasons:
1.We are between the two giants, largest democracy and largest People’s Republic
2.Either side are having record economic growth to shake the world
3.They are going to be one of the world ‘superpower’ in economy, labor and military
4.The US and EU will play any dirty tricks to shatter these countries and the region
5.Unlike Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine, Nepal is a safe heaven for foreigners to play the filthy game
6.Either to suppress or to elevate the ‘Tibet’ issue, Nepal is the focal point
7.India and China have bitter experience of war and on top of that, they have their own domestic issues which can blow them apart and west knows that very well
8.Western interests have made a tangible foundation in Nepal; thanks to the political unrest and puppetries of leaders
The west may not have much interest on who becomes our first President but they have long road map to stick in Nepal for their own rationales. Even though the US can not influence its next neighbour down the coast from Miami, we know how they are performing in the world stage.
The US and its allies have prolonged their triumph in a range of places after WWII. Korean war, Vietnam war, Kosovo war, Indo-China war, Indo-Pak war, Iraq war are some muscle breakers where as Palestine, Zimbabwe, Yugoslavia, fall of USSR and fall of Berlin wall are some fruitful results of their diplomacies. Where they eying now? Is it Great wall or Red Fort? Or both? Where do we end up if our national interests are guided and vested by foreign interests?
The bunker style US Embassy is not there for enjoyment. Neither they can stop themselves from going to war nor can they stop themselves from destroying other nations (diplomacy). Sadly, they play all games through our own leaders. Our leaders are too busy to make a history by becoming the first X, Y and Z. They want to be written in history not because of their work but because of their role number.
Two months are gone but still we don’t have any names or consensus to announce the first President. As long as the King was there, things were easy. Blame everything to the King and the Army. Do people still think these comrades are the ‘blessing in disguise’? I doubt it. Looking at their roles and diversion they playing for last two years, there is not much left to hide.
I am not just talking about Maoists. I am talking about the all leaders who just play the blame game. Chasing that dethroned King will not always give justification and recognition. Leaders can guide their cadres to destroy the statues and properties of the ex-royals but history has proved that the Kings had played crucial roles not just to unite this country but keeping it united in difficult times, and hence the last King deserved a respectful exit from the Palace.
To be frank and fair, Nepal’s monarchy was dumped by consensus. Monarchy was dumped even before setting provisions for the to-be new head of state. They want to spread the new style of charismatic leadership in 21st Century from this Himalayan nation but unfortunately they have demonstrated to the world that they are just a bunch of amateur politicians.
‘Consensus’ has become the most powerful word in Nepali politics. SPAM’s consensus is the constitution, peoples mandate, government, judiciary and every thing else. And it looks like these ‘consensuses’ will govern new Nepal for years to come and 28million people will be watching. Let us not forget how we got here. No one can erase the last 10 years of ‘people’s war’ and its consequences from Nepal’s history book. The destruction, atrocities, anarchy and the lives lost. Let the next generation make their judgments about that ‘dark decade’ in Nepal’s history.
Based on the enormous ethnic diversity in Nepal, the first ‘President’ of new Nepal should be nominated from the Indigenous communities. There are 59 identified Indigenous communities in Nepal. To admire their communal status and the pain caused in the past, one of the Indigenous leader who has contributed his/her acceptable life to fight for inclusive democracy and rights of Indigenous people should be honored as the first President of new Nepal.
I am opposed to the proposal of ‘neutral person’ or ‘non political person’ as the first president. Marathon speeches on Indigenous people, their rights and their recognition would not give any answers. Time has come to act and appoint an Indigenous President. Doing so will not only give the country a chance to honor Indigenous people but also stops these cold blooded leaders to fight for the position. I don’t want to take out the topic of ‘chhetri and brahmin dominance’ in Nepali politics again but if this dominance is not to come to an end, this will not give smooth transition to this new Nepal.
We have recently seen the rise of ethnic based parties in Terai. These are not good signs if we want to see a sovereign united Nepal. If we do not respect them on time, no one can rule out the eruption of disintegration alliance when small groups are already waging armed separatist movements.
Further more, to address to these sentiments, we must convey a message as a nation, not as party. All citizens should be able to call this nation their home and be proud of that. To grow these attitudes in peoples’ mind, we have to include people from Indigenous communities not only in the candidates list but also in the high profile portfolios. To esteem the principles of inclusive democracy and create a profound history, there is no auspicious occasion than this to declare an Indigenous leader as the first President of Nepal.
Related Posts:
Endless Possibilities in the Republic of Nepal
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/05/endless-possibilities-that-accompany.html
Riding the Republican Bandwagon
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/04/riding-republican-bandwagon.html
I do not want to craft any statement on the legitimacy of the declaration of the ‘Republic’. The country is now a ‘Republic’. Chief Justice Kedar Giri had no guts to discuss the legitimacy of this historic event and put aside the writ to prove that the country has no ‘rule of law’. The country is being ruled by Maoist bullying overshadowed by Indian and western interference. Nepal has become a strategic play ground to play ‘dirty politics’ for neighbors and westerners. There are few reasons:
1.We are between the two giants, largest democracy and largest People’s Republic
2.Either side are having record economic growth to shake the world
3.They are going to be one of the world ‘superpower’ in economy, labor and military
4.The US and EU will play any dirty tricks to shatter these countries and the region
5.Unlike Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine, Nepal is a safe heaven for foreigners to play the filthy game
6.Either to suppress or to elevate the ‘Tibet’ issue, Nepal is the focal point
7.India and China have bitter experience of war and on top of that, they have their own domestic issues which can blow them apart and west knows that very well
8.Western interests have made a tangible foundation in Nepal; thanks to the political unrest and puppetries of leaders
The west may not have much interest on who becomes our first President but they have long road map to stick in Nepal for their own rationales. Even though the US can not influence its next neighbour down the coast from Miami, we know how they are performing in the world stage.
The US and its allies have prolonged their triumph in a range of places after WWII. Korean war, Vietnam war, Kosovo war, Indo-China war, Indo-Pak war, Iraq war are some muscle breakers where as Palestine, Zimbabwe, Yugoslavia, fall of USSR and fall of Berlin wall are some fruitful results of their diplomacies. Where they eying now? Is it Great wall or Red Fort? Or both? Where do we end up if our national interests are guided and vested by foreign interests?
The bunker style US Embassy is not there for enjoyment. Neither they can stop themselves from going to war nor can they stop themselves from destroying other nations (diplomacy). Sadly, they play all games through our own leaders. Our leaders are too busy to make a history by becoming the first X, Y and Z. They want to be written in history not because of their work but because of their role number.
Two months are gone but still we don’t have any names or consensus to announce the first President. As long as the King was there, things were easy. Blame everything to the King and the Army. Do people still think these comrades are the ‘blessing in disguise’? I doubt it. Looking at their roles and diversion they playing for last two years, there is not much left to hide.
I am not just talking about Maoists. I am talking about the all leaders who just play the blame game. Chasing that dethroned King will not always give justification and recognition. Leaders can guide their cadres to destroy the statues and properties of the ex-royals but history has proved that the Kings had played crucial roles not just to unite this country but keeping it united in difficult times, and hence the last King deserved a respectful exit from the Palace.
To be frank and fair, Nepal’s monarchy was dumped by consensus. Monarchy was dumped even before setting provisions for the to-be new head of state. They want to spread the new style of charismatic leadership in 21st Century from this Himalayan nation but unfortunately they have demonstrated to the world that they are just a bunch of amateur politicians.
‘Consensus’ has become the most powerful word in Nepali politics. SPAM’s consensus is the constitution, peoples mandate, government, judiciary and every thing else. And it looks like these ‘consensuses’ will govern new Nepal for years to come and 28million people will be watching. Let us not forget how we got here. No one can erase the last 10 years of ‘people’s war’ and its consequences from Nepal’s history book. The destruction, atrocities, anarchy and the lives lost. Let the next generation make their judgments about that ‘dark decade’ in Nepal’s history.
Based on the enormous ethnic diversity in Nepal, the first ‘President’ of new Nepal should be nominated from the Indigenous communities. There are 59 identified Indigenous communities in Nepal. To admire their communal status and the pain caused in the past, one of the Indigenous leader who has contributed his/her acceptable life to fight for inclusive democracy and rights of Indigenous people should be honored as the first President of new Nepal.
I am opposed to the proposal of ‘neutral person’ or ‘non political person’ as the first president. Marathon speeches on Indigenous people, their rights and their recognition would not give any answers. Time has come to act and appoint an Indigenous President. Doing so will not only give the country a chance to honor Indigenous people but also stops these cold blooded leaders to fight for the position. I don’t want to take out the topic of ‘chhetri and brahmin dominance’ in Nepali politics again but if this dominance is not to come to an end, this will not give smooth transition to this new Nepal.
We have recently seen the rise of ethnic based parties in Terai. These are not good signs if we want to see a sovereign united Nepal. If we do not respect them on time, no one can rule out the eruption of disintegration alliance when small groups are already waging armed separatist movements.
Further more, to address to these sentiments, we must convey a message as a nation, not as party. All citizens should be able to call this nation their home and be proud of that. To grow these attitudes in peoples’ mind, we have to include people from Indigenous communities not only in the candidates list but also in the high profile portfolios. To esteem the principles of inclusive democracy and create a profound history, there is no auspicious occasion than this to declare an Indigenous leader as the first President of Nepal.
Related Posts:
Endless Possibilities in the Republic of Nepal
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/05/endless-possibilities-that-accompany.html
Riding the Republican Bandwagon
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/04/riding-republican-bandwagon.html
Tuesday, June 03, 2008
Hyperopic Maoists and Myopic Pundits
(Courtesy: Dr. Hari Bansha Dulal)
Not even 72 hours had passed since the raising of glasses to celebrate victory over the despised monarch, Puspa Kamal Dahal's gibe, "due to the foolishness of Gyanendra, republic has been established. If the NC and UML also continue demonstrating their foolishness, people's republic will be established" forced the left-leaning civil society pundits to drop to their knees and puke till they got sober.
Dahal's words forced our pundits to get into a sober mode even before they fully got kick out of their drinks. This is what happens when the greed to remain in the limelight at the cost of ideological dilution takes a front-seat and the desire to become politically correct all the time overrides objectivity.
In order to become politically correct, the very same pundits that relentlessly advocated endless appeasement of the Maoists, are now sticking their heads out of line and saying the exact same thing that we have been saying (the end goal of the Maoists is to establish a totalitarian regime) for the last two and a half years.
With the Maoists' intention getting clearer, the left-leaning civil society members afflicted by myopia have finally started to see the rust in Maoists' sickle. They have woken up when the Maoists are actually preparing to strike their political opponents and the press in the head with their hammer.
A clarion call by a civil society pundit, who once thought that peace was not possible without the appeasement of the Maoists at this point in time when the Maoists have everything they need: popular mandate, international community's support, and their cadres willingness to fight till the finish -- might be too little and too late. The Maoists are on a march to deliver the exact same thing that the late King Mahendra delivered from the extreme right almost half a century ago. The only difference this time around is that, they will be delivering the exact same thing but from the extreme left. Does it make a difference if they declare Nepal a one-party communist state or not as long as they are successful in replicating King Mahendra's model?
With the Maoists' intention getting clearer and nervousness reigning in, in the ultra-liberal camp, the much talked about consensus politics has vanished into thin air. Politics is slowly but surely getting confrontational. The humiliating defeat in the CA elections and the constant flurry of gibes from the top-rung Maoist leaders have forced both the major political parties of yesteryears and pundits crushed with political baggage to confront an uncomfortable reality.
The NC and the UML happily traveled along "Prachanda path" when they were strong. Now, they want to deviate when they are weak. Will the Maoists let them off the hook without surrendering the power? The Maoists obviously did not fight the decade long bloody insurgency to put old guards of Nepali politics back into the power.
If we look realistically, with the Nepal Army in a silent mode and India on its side, the Maoists do not need an October revolution. The subtle threat is more than enough to bring Koirala's government to its knees. It is just a matter of time.
With the emergence of the Maoists as the largest party in the Constituent Assembly, India's betting reference has changed. It is more interested in geopolitical gain against China rather than help the democratic process in Nepal. In order to preempt China's influence over the Maoists, India is now fully backing the Maoist rule. Surprisingly, it is even ready to review the 1950 agreement.
With Lok Sabha elections round the corner in India, foreign minister of India Pranab Mukherjee will obviously not jeopardize his chances of winning election by displeasing the leftists in West Bengal, who want to see their fellow comrades rule in Nepal. Why would Pranab scuttle his own chances of wining upcoming Lok Sabha election by backing the losers in Nepal? Both politically and personally, it does not make any sense.
It might be an unpleasant thing for some populists in Nepal and abroad to hear that the only institution that has the required strength and the motivation to counter the Maoist threat is the Nepal Army. But like it or not, that's the truth.
However, a million dollar question is, Will the Nepal Army stand against India's will and support the very people that once asked the army to obliterate the Maoists but later on not only joined hands with the Maoists but also set up inquiry commissions to investigate human right abuses committed by them?
For the generals within the army, unless they have a bigger role to play, supporting anyone from the democratic camp doesn't make any sense at this point in time. If the Maoists are somehow able to convince the generals, saluting Puspa Kamal Dahal would not be as painful as expected by many.
The political parties of yesteryears are in a very difficult situation now. And, the worst thing is that, it is them, who invited this trouble. Left-leaning civil society pundits and the so-called intellectuals that gather in coffee houses in Kathmandu are only part of the problem. Why would they want to be in the bad books by asking politicians to stay away from joining hands with people whose views are diagonally opposite, when the game is all about sharing the pie?
The politicians with in the NC and UML are surrounded by sycophants that do not dare to ask their masters to stick to the party's basic ideology and principles. If you are a real democrat, you dare to stand up and say that the party is deviating from its basic principles, when dilution of principles takes place, not justify the riding of populist bandwagon.
By openly threatening the media and expressing his desire to establish a people's republic, Puspa Kamal Dahal has already shown his true color. The democratic forces should immediately form an alliance if they want to survive politically. That alliance should then work relentlessly towards smoothing its relationship with the Army. Before Puspa Kamal Dahal and India convinces the Nepali Army to work with the Maoists, democratic forces should try wining the trust of the army.
Unless the NC, UML, and other parties that believe in multiparty democracy get unequivocal support from the army and convince India that they can overrun the Maoists, India will not change its betting preferences. India loves to ride the winning horse. Than Swe of Myanmar and Maumoon Abdool Gayyom of the Maldives are living examples.
The game is almost over. Act before it is too late to do anything!
Related Posts:
The Problem with Nepali Political Civil Society - The Leftist, the Cowards, and the Compromised
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/10/problem-with-nepali-political-civil.html
The Pitfalls of Relying on Indian Benevolence
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/01/pitfalls-of-relying-on-indian.html
Nepali Congress Lost in Democratic Translation
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/05/nepali-congress-lost-in-democratic.html
Kanak Mani Dixit The Nuanced
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/04/kanak-mani-dixit-nuanced.html
Riding the Republican Bandwagon
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/04/riding-republican-bandwagon.html
Not even 72 hours had passed since the raising of glasses to celebrate victory over the despised monarch, Puspa Kamal Dahal's gibe, "due to the foolishness of Gyanendra, republic has been established. If the NC and UML also continue demonstrating their foolishness, people's republic will be established" forced the left-leaning civil society pundits to drop to their knees and puke till they got sober.
Dahal's words forced our pundits to get into a sober mode even before they fully got kick out of their drinks. This is what happens when the greed to remain in the limelight at the cost of ideological dilution takes a front-seat and the desire to become politically correct all the time overrides objectivity.
In order to become politically correct, the very same pundits that relentlessly advocated endless appeasement of the Maoists, are now sticking their heads out of line and saying the exact same thing that we have been saying (the end goal of the Maoists is to establish a totalitarian regime) for the last two and a half years.
With the Maoists' intention getting clearer, the left-leaning civil society members afflicted by myopia have finally started to see the rust in Maoists' sickle. They have woken up when the Maoists are actually preparing to strike their political opponents and the press in the head with their hammer.
A clarion call by a civil society pundit, who once thought that peace was not possible without the appeasement of the Maoists at this point in time when the Maoists have everything they need: popular mandate, international community's support, and their cadres willingness to fight till the finish -- might be too little and too late. The Maoists are on a march to deliver the exact same thing that the late King Mahendra delivered from the extreme right almost half a century ago. The only difference this time around is that, they will be delivering the exact same thing but from the extreme left. Does it make a difference if they declare Nepal a one-party communist state or not as long as they are successful in replicating King Mahendra's model?
With the Maoists' intention getting clearer and nervousness reigning in, in the ultra-liberal camp, the much talked about consensus politics has vanished into thin air. Politics is slowly but surely getting confrontational. The humiliating defeat in the CA elections and the constant flurry of gibes from the top-rung Maoist leaders have forced both the major political parties of yesteryears and pundits crushed with political baggage to confront an uncomfortable reality.
The NC and the UML happily traveled along "Prachanda path" when they were strong. Now, they want to deviate when they are weak. Will the Maoists let them off the hook without surrendering the power? The Maoists obviously did not fight the decade long bloody insurgency to put old guards of Nepali politics back into the power.
If we look realistically, with the Nepal Army in a silent mode and India on its side, the Maoists do not need an October revolution. The subtle threat is more than enough to bring Koirala's government to its knees. It is just a matter of time.
With the emergence of the Maoists as the largest party in the Constituent Assembly, India's betting reference has changed. It is more interested in geopolitical gain against China rather than help the democratic process in Nepal. In order to preempt China's influence over the Maoists, India is now fully backing the Maoist rule. Surprisingly, it is even ready to review the 1950 agreement.
With Lok Sabha elections round the corner in India, foreign minister of India Pranab Mukherjee will obviously not jeopardize his chances of winning election by displeasing the leftists in West Bengal, who want to see their fellow comrades rule in Nepal. Why would Pranab scuttle his own chances of wining upcoming Lok Sabha election by backing the losers in Nepal? Both politically and personally, it does not make any sense.
It might be an unpleasant thing for some populists in Nepal and abroad to hear that the only institution that has the required strength and the motivation to counter the Maoist threat is the Nepal Army. But like it or not, that's the truth.
However, a million dollar question is, Will the Nepal Army stand against India's will and support the very people that once asked the army to obliterate the Maoists but later on not only joined hands with the Maoists but also set up inquiry commissions to investigate human right abuses committed by them?
For the generals within the army, unless they have a bigger role to play, supporting anyone from the democratic camp doesn't make any sense at this point in time. If the Maoists are somehow able to convince the generals, saluting Puspa Kamal Dahal would not be as painful as expected by many.
The political parties of yesteryears are in a very difficult situation now. And, the worst thing is that, it is them, who invited this trouble. Left-leaning civil society pundits and the so-called intellectuals that gather in coffee houses in Kathmandu are only part of the problem. Why would they want to be in the bad books by asking politicians to stay away from joining hands with people whose views are diagonally opposite, when the game is all about sharing the pie?
The politicians with in the NC and UML are surrounded by sycophants that do not dare to ask their masters to stick to the party's basic ideology and principles. If you are a real democrat, you dare to stand up and say that the party is deviating from its basic principles, when dilution of principles takes place, not justify the riding of populist bandwagon.
By openly threatening the media and expressing his desire to establish a people's republic, Puspa Kamal Dahal has already shown his true color. The democratic forces should immediately form an alliance if they want to survive politically. That alliance should then work relentlessly towards smoothing its relationship with the Army. Before Puspa Kamal Dahal and India convinces the Nepali Army to work with the Maoists, democratic forces should try wining the trust of the army.
Unless the NC, UML, and other parties that believe in multiparty democracy get unequivocal support from the army and convince India that they can overrun the Maoists, India will not change its betting preferences. India loves to ride the winning horse. Than Swe of Myanmar and Maumoon Abdool Gayyom of the Maldives are living examples.
The game is almost over. Act before it is too late to do anything!
Related Posts:
The Problem with Nepali Political Civil Society - The Leftist, the Cowards, and the Compromised
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/10/problem-with-nepali-political-civil.html
The Pitfalls of Relying on Indian Benevolence
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/01/pitfalls-of-relying-on-indian.html
Nepali Congress Lost in Democratic Translation
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/05/nepali-congress-lost-in-democratic.html
Kanak Mani Dixit The Nuanced
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/04/kanak-mani-dixit-nuanced.html
Riding the Republican Bandwagon
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/04/riding-republican-bandwagon.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)