(Courtesy: Krishna Giri)
Thanks to the CA members who have managed to appoint a Prime Minister after exhausting four months, 1/6th of the total time allocated to write the new constitution for the "New Nepal." They have not only wasted the valuable time but also squandered over 3 billion Rupees in salaries and services payments - with no results to show for the money spent. One of the poorest people in the world have paid enough in money, lives, destroyed properties for the appointment of this new Prime Minister.
Soon after his appointment, the PM was off to China to complete a tour started by de-facto Minister, Pradeep Nepal. Until now, every decision taken by the CA has raised serious questions about nationalism and patriotism. Oath-taking by the VP in Hindi to costumes worn by new PM during his swear-in ceremony have fuelled a critical paradigm shift in Nepal’s nationalism and patriotism. Equivocal nationalism demonstrated by the VP and PM has unlocked the doors to a new model - one of ethnic nationalism, a reversion back to the time long before the "Old Nepal" was even created. A clear picture is likely to emerge once Upendra Yadav meets his Indian counterpart and possibly the Indian PM in Madhesi attire. We will be privy yet again, to an historic inauguration of a new nationalism in a "New Nepal."
When nationwide protests were on-going against the VP’s swearing-in, in Hindi, the Maoists and its unions fuelled the issue wherever possible and backed up the protests unconditionally. Their intent was to take ownership of the nationalist agenda. But when it was their turn, Pushpa Dahal took his oath in Western attaire - quite a fashion statement! The VP ignored the national language and the PM ignored the national dress. One trying to be "newer" than the other in a spectacle of nonsensical drama.
But the most fascinating thing is that both individuals have expressed their positions in favour of nationalism - but their modalities are at complete odds. The VP advocated ethnic-based nationalism where as the PM stood for stateless nationalism. Some other minor parties are already representing regional nationalism. In all these different models, what's going to happen to state-based identity and with it, Nepal's collective national identity?
Nationalism remains an important part of relations between states and also of the domestic politics of many countries. Nationalism is now the moral basis of states and of the international system. Throughout Nepal’s history, past regimes have tried to advocate for nationalism to balance diplomacy between China and India. In many instances, Nepal’s nationalism played crucial roles in garnering reciprocal concessions from our neighbours.
Nationalism and the state are new phenomena given the importance they play in international relations today. One of the most difficult theoretical and applied problems of the post-Cold War era has been the search for an adequate understanding of the resurgence of religion, ethnicity and stateless nationalism in international relations. More exclusively, social scientists and policymakers have been challenged to clarify the nature and impacts of religion, ethnicity, and stateless nationalism in both sub-state and inter-state conflicts in the international system. Most observers are convinced that patriotism can leave most people more blind than they should be to their country's political imperfections, something loads of critics have argued regarding Americans since the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
Yet that sort of hyper-nationalism has not often led to the kind of violent conflict which claimed millions of people in the twentieth century. One of the major causes of most of those conflicts has been nationalism of a different kind; one that gets out of hand, turns into hatred of others, and sparks violence, often of the most brutal form. This is especially true when leaders of states can convince people that they have somehow been abused by "others." I don’t want to talk about the interstate war caused by nationalism but in brief, there is no more obvious example than World War II. Japan, Italy, and especially Germany were all led by leaders who stressed unmet nationalist goals and grievances in the years leading up to the outbreak of fighting in 1939. While psychologists and historians still debate exactly how this took place, there is little doubt that the intense emotions felt by leaders and followers alike contributed to the atrocities committed by people from all three of these countries.
There is no realistic possibility of re-creating Nepal as ethnically pure states. For instance, there is no way to envision Hutu or Tutsi states emerging out of either Rwanda or Sudan. Ethnic-based nationalism is just a cheap propaganda tool which helps spread anti-national sentiment. We have seen the results of ethnic based nationalism in Kashmir, Chechnya, Sudan, and most of the former Yugoslav republics. But, the people who take up arms in those conflicts share the same kind of deeply rooted emotions that gave rise to the Nazis.
Similarly, stateless nationalism will not play any effective roles at home or overseas because it fails to develop any strategy in foreign policy or international relations. The unfinished work of Marx in this regard took some momentum through Lenin’s foreign policy but it was not adequate for the 21st century to stay stateless and just live for ideology.
Stateless nationalism has failed to deliver emotional attachment and commitment to patriotism. When these events are left unaccounted, there are risks of losing identity and subsequently losing nationalism and patriotism. A country with a history of a unified nation should never pose different sentiments of nationalism. People must be concerned and awake about this shifting policies on nationalism.
Should we really be shifting our paradigm in nationalism? I do not think we have reached that point to make such a gigantic step - we are certainly not prepared for it. This new government in "New Nepal" should not abandon the traditional concept of state-based nationalism. Nationalism is not an election promise and this country can not afford ethnic or stateless nationalism. The government must concentrate on things that can unite Nepal including national dress, national language, national flag, and our proud history.
These are the opinions of individuals with shared interests on Nepal..... the views are the writers' alone (unless otherwise stated) and do not reflect those of any organizations to which contributors are professionally affiliated. The objective of the material is to facilitate a range of perspectives to contemplate, deliberate and moderate the progression of democratic discourse in Nepali politics.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Looking Past the Moment of Truth
Dear Nepali Perspectives, I had written what is below in response to an article that came out on Republica. I may have written someth...
-
(Courtesy: Rajat Lal Joshi) Nishchal Basnyat, a Harvard student who bills himself as a co-author of a book on India, and proclaims to have w...
-
(Courtesy: Mr. Ripley) When self-absorbed Nepalese elites dictate their vision of the “how-things-should-be” to the Nepalese , it’s the mass...
-
(Courtesy: La Verdad) The government and the Maoists think the 5 bomb blasts in Kathmandu were intended to disrupt the CA elections. What a...
4 comments:
Interesting discussion on stateless versus state-based nationalism. By definition, "nationalism" must be based on the nation not on ethnic or regional sentiments. Nepal MUST promote and maintain nationalism based on being a Nepali, being proud of the Nepali flag, Nepal's history, its culture (multi-ethnic as it is), and it's religion (Hinduism, of course). It has been a long time since we have been able to say "I am Nepali" with pride. If nothing else, the new government must place the promotion of Nepali nationalism in the forefront of its policies. We count on the new PM to take the lead in this.
Think Palestine when word Nepal crops up.
Much seemed to have been made or is being made of our PM not wearing 'Daura-suruwal', speaking hindi with Indian leaders in India and so on. First of all let us agree that Nepal is a multi-ethnic, multi-linguil and multi-religious country.
Claiming that 'daura-suruwal' is our national dress is wrong because when we say 'national' it should really represent all in the nation. But, it is not the case: actually 'daura-suruwal' was adopted by the royalties and by the ruling elite of 'Brahmin-Chhetri' and imposed on other ethnic groups since the royal coup of 2017 BS. Same can be said about Nepali language imposed as 'national language' and Hindu religion imposed as 'national religion'. I need not repeat here how serious the repurcussions have been. The imposition of Nepali language as the national language has ensured that a certain group has virtually monopolised the bureaucracy for last 20-25 years and now we have to look for non-native Nepali speakers in the civil service.
Imposition of a national religion has undermined and even hurt the feelings of non-Hindus.
These wrongs of the past have been corrected with the advent of a new Democratic Republican Nepal.
By not wearing 'daura-suruwal' the PM has been very considerate of the feelings of other ethnic groups although the so-called 'nationalists' might accuse him of adopting something which is colonial. That is true but the suit is something which is universally accepted whether we like it or not. Just like the dress for army and police elsewhere: they are of the same color and design. Why are we accepting our soldiers and policemen wearing what the army and police personnel in other countries wear? In the times of Shah kings the army dress was different and so also of the police.
As for the PM speaking Hindi in India he is not the first one: Kishunji has done it, Man Mohanji has done it, Girijaji has done it...I am not so sure about Sher Bahadurji...Yes had he spoken in chaste English people would have admired him much more...he could have used an interpreter and spoken in Nepali..
The conclusion therefore is that there can be a national flag, a national anthem but there can be no 'one national language' but 'several national languages'. Yes there can be a 'lingua franca' (Nepali language in Nepal, Russian in former USSR and so on). There cannot also be no one religion as national religion because many different people practice different practices and no one should ever try to impose 'one religion'.
One more point to my comments published here. We Nepalese have protested very strongly the imposition by the King of Bhutan of a national dress (worn by him and northern Bhutanese) on Nepalese living in the south and wearing 'daura-suruwal' to preserve their identities. If that move was wrong then imposition of 'daura-suruwal' on all Nepalese in Nepal (from east to west and from north to south)cannot be right either.
By the same token it is also wrong to impose any language as the only 'national language'. Look what has happened to other ethnic languages; children from ethnic groups are taught Nepali right from the begining and the families are also given the impression that unless their children cannot speak Nepali right from the childhood, they will be left behind in their career. This is absolutely wrong because children do pick up languages pretty fast. But this imposition of Nepali language has made sure that the overwhelming number of children from ethnic minorities cannot speak their mother tongue. This is very true in case of us valley Newars and this has done unrepairable damage to the upkeep of our culture and special identity as Newars.
Post a Comment