(Courtesy: Dr. Hari Bansha Dulal)
The populist floodgates that have been thrown open have dangerously destabilized the country. In the name of equality, ethnic fundamentalism is on the rise. Law and order situation is in a shambles. Judiciary is being ridiculed and attacked. Can a nation with an acutely vulnerable judiciary, absence of law and order, and social capital (dangerously depleted by rising ethnic hatred) prosper and consolidate democracy? Nepal represents a failing democracy in which the prospects for consolidation have narrowed down significantly mainly due to the politicians´ inability to manage peoples’ expectations and to look for solutions for domestic political problems from within the country.
The ruling party has been inconsistently consistent about their lack of faith in multi-party democracy and the opposition parties do not have the required strength and vision to mainstream the Maoists. Democratic consolidation in Nepal now is a generational challenge, requiring a long-term process of locally embedded civil society development, party institutionalization, and the disarmament of insurgency groups.
Virtually nothing will be achieved at this point by blaming the Maoists for derailing the democratic process and looking for an external solution to the problem. Why would the Maoists strengthen a system in which they never had faith to begin with? The Maoists had it all figured out. They wanted to get rid of the old political structure and fill the vacuum, which they have succeeded in doing so. With their militia controlling rural areas, they knew very well that major political parties of yesteryears would not be able to stand their wrath for long. The Maoists’ calculation went awry when ethnic dissent sparked off. But they quickly figured out a way to deal with it. By accommodating Madhesi Janadhikar Forum (MJF) and Nepal Sadbhavana Party in the government, they have frozen the chances of large scale ethnic revolt that could potentially bring down their government. As far as small-scale ethnic dissent is concerned, they are ready to strike a deal even if such deals have the potential to hurt the nation in the future. Their past deals clearly show how well they have mastered the art of using “useful idiots.”
Their biggest hurdle for now is neutralizing the Nepali Army (NA) and overhauling the bureaucracy. They want to neutralize the army because it is the only institution in Nepal that can put a brake to the Maoists march towards establishment of one party rule. By neutralizing the army—the process has already begun with the formation of Army Integration Special Committee—they want to negate the possibility of a takeover by the army or an army-backed government. For the Maoists, overhauling the bureaucracy is equally important because the Maoists know it very well that the Nepali bureaucracy is not neutral. The Maoists will not hesitate to provide golden parachutes so that they can get rid of civil servants they don’t want. By doing so, the Maoists will not only substantially reduce the threat to their regime but also please donors and other external players that have been advocating for reforms in security sector and bureaucracy. Actually, it might be perceived as a step towards promoting good governance by the donors and the Maoists government might end up benefiting both diplomatically and financially.
The Maoists have never shied away from making known their desire to establish one-party rule in Nepal. The one-party rule they want to establish does not have to be like North Korea´s. They can live with the West Bengal-type model, where they can run the show without much of a threat from other political players. Probably, that is the easiest and safest route for the Maoists. All they have to do is continue what they have been doing so far—flush out the political cadres of major political parties from rural areas. That way they can guarantee the outcome of future elections and appear democratic to the external world at the same time. This formula was successfully experimented in Constituent Assembly elections and it worked out pretty well in favor of the Maoists. They might want to take this experiment to the urban areas now. But how difficult would that be when you have the covert support of security forces, and the bureaucracy is willing to do the needful?
While the Maoists are working hard to find a way within the country to consolidate their rule, the opposition parties appear clueless regarding how to preserve their political space. The leaders of the opposition parties once again want our southern neighbor to devise a survival formula for them.
What the politicians of opposition parties fail to understand is, even if they come to the power and rule the country, which is only possible through NA´s backing, they will not be able to run the show for very long. They want to rule the country that no longer exists. Today’s Nepal is drastically different from the past. Nepal, as a nation, has gone too far left. First of all, even if India supports the opposition’s quest for power, removing the Maoists from power will not be as easy as removing Gyanendra Shah. The support that Pushpa Kamal Dahal has and the scale of violence that he can unleash is no match to the support and options that the former king had. So even if opposition parties bounce back with tacit support from India and the backing of NA, which in my view is completely unacceptable and undemocratic, they will not be able to rule for long. Dahal has way more support than what Gyanendra enjoyed during his rule. And, think about the cross-mobility of communists from the CPN-UML to the Maoist party. The recent college elections have clearly shown that the younger generation in Nepal is increasingly leaning towards the left. There is nothing to be cheerful about the poor showing of the Maoists in recent student union elections. Third place is good enough. It will not take very long for student leaders from the UML-affiliated student wing to migrate to the Maoist wing. They share the same ideology.
The options that the opposition parties in Nepal have at this point are very limited. For now, they should forget about scratching the backs of foreign leaders to garner support to bounce back to power. Such move is neither democratic, nor will it help them remain in power for long. The only way to keep the Maoists deviating away from democratic path is by keeping them engaged. It will take time, which Girija Prasad Koirala and other aged leaders unfortunately do not have on their side given their age and desire to establish their siblings in politics. We had an option to taste the success that Mahendra Rajapaksa in Sri Lanka is enjoying now, but we decided not to take that route and it is now too late to even think about it. Now, it is an ideological battle between the hardcore leftists and true democrats, if any. NA should not be dragged into this fight.
Let the people of Nepal themselves realize the difference between living in a liberal society and under hardcore leftists´ rule. A revolution that will occur then after will be the real revolution for democracy. It will be a long slog but would be worthier than the shortcut our southern neighbor devises for us. Not very long ago they devised a formula to establish democracy in Nepal and we all know how well it worked out. We are the ones who are now paying for their five-decade-long expertise in democratic consolidation. Do we really need another set of formulas from them again?
(Originally published at: http://www.myrepublica.com/portal/?action=news_details&news_id=3146)
Sunday, March 29, 2009
Friday, March 27, 2009
Arun III Project: Nepal’s Electricity Crisis and it’s Role in Current Load Shedding and the Potential Role 10 Years Hence
(Courtesy: Ratna Sansar Shrestha, FCA)
Abstract
It, has become fashionable to blame “cancellation” of Arun III project, by the World Bank in 1995, in reference to current electricity crisis, inferring that had it been implemented consumers in Nepal would not have been facing current load shedding problem. Now is time for a dispassionate and detached analysis of the two scenarios, the Arun III route and the route sans Arun III. The analysis of alternative scenarios demonstrates that the implementation of Arun III 201 MW project in 1995 would have not eliminated load shedding from 2000 onwards; in fact the power deficit would have been of a higher magnitude. Now, Arun III planning is for a new incarnation with a capacity of 402 MW, expected to be completed within next 10 years. But as the output of this proejdct has been slated for export, it, too, will not alleviate load shedding problem of Nepal.
Nepal is facing severe electricity crisis due to supply constraint and it has already been forecast that the load shedding is here to stay in the increasing magnitude. During this year’s wet season Nepal faced the problem of flood which resulted in loss of life and limb as well as property in the hilly areas and Terai in Western Nepal. Besides, the breach of Koshi embankment played a havoc in East Nepal where people got drowned (and unfortunately killed, too) and displaced, homes washed away, and farmers’ investment of time, energy and resources in the cultivation of their land washed out (in some areas even fertile land was converted to sandy “beach”). Moreover, communication network and infrastructure including road network was brought to disarray. Industries in the area also suffered due to break down of transportation system; either because of failure to access raw materials and other supplies or because of inability to supply finished product to its customers (most of the industries suffered on both counts).
In the past, Nepal Electricity Authority (NEA) used to trot out the excuse of no water in rivers whenever it came up with a new load shedding schedule or made changes in them resulting in the increased hours of load shedding. However, this rainy season, even in the abundance of water (or flood!), NEA imposed a load shedding of 2 hours each day, two days a week, till third week of August 2008. With effect from 27th August, 2008 the load shedding hours was increased to 16.5 hours/week which kept on increasing ad nauseaum. The Chief of Load Dispatch Center of NEA announced in a program in Butwal on 11th November 2008 that there will be load shedding at the rate of 10 hours/day in Marga (November-December), which will go up to 12 hours/day in Paush (December-January) and it will peak at 14 hours/day during Magh (January-February) this year[i].
Many a pages have been written wherein the root cause of Nepal’s electricity crisis has been ascribed to the cancellation of Arun III by the World Bank in 1995, scheduled to be completed in 2005. Besides the journalists of many hues, a number of luminaries have also “invested” time and energy to write on this topic, including a special chapter dedicated to this subject, forming a part of the book by a renowned economist, who has occupied the position of finance minister of Nepal a number of times over last two decades and was the first Vice Chair of National Planning Commission of democratic Nepal in 1991[ii]. It is high time to examine/analyze if there is any truth in it. Irrespective of whether there is an iota of truth in this logic or not, it is also time to draw lessons from this phenomenon so that Nepal is able to learn from this episode and undertake projects for implementation in future prudently. In other words, a dispassionate and detached analysis is called for to test if the argument attributing current load shedding problem to the cancellation of Arun III project by the World Bank is rooted to ground reality or not and find out what lessons could be learnt from this episode. This entails conducting an autopsy of this logic, as it will also be able to throw ample light on the intellect and mindset of the hydrocracy (intelligentsia, politicos and bureaucracy involved in water resource sector) in Nepal.
FOR A FULL VERSION OF THIS TEXT, PLEASE REFER TO THE FOLLOWING SITE:
http://ratnasansar.blogspot.com/2009/03/arun-iii-project-nepals-electricity.html
[i] Source: Kantipur of November 13, 2008.
[ii] Mahat, Dr Ram Sharan, 2005: In Defence of Democracy, Adroit Publishers.
Abstract
It, has become fashionable to blame “cancellation” of Arun III project, by the World Bank in 1995, in reference to current electricity crisis, inferring that had it been implemented consumers in Nepal would not have been facing current load shedding problem. Now is time for a dispassionate and detached analysis of the two scenarios, the Arun III route and the route sans Arun III. The analysis of alternative scenarios demonstrates that the implementation of Arun III 201 MW project in 1995 would have not eliminated load shedding from 2000 onwards; in fact the power deficit would have been of a higher magnitude. Now, Arun III planning is for a new incarnation with a capacity of 402 MW, expected to be completed within next 10 years. But as the output of this proejdct has been slated for export, it, too, will not alleviate load shedding problem of Nepal.
Nepal is facing severe electricity crisis due to supply constraint and it has already been forecast that the load shedding is here to stay in the increasing magnitude. During this year’s wet season Nepal faced the problem of flood which resulted in loss of life and limb as well as property in the hilly areas and Terai in Western Nepal. Besides, the breach of Koshi embankment played a havoc in East Nepal where people got drowned (and unfortunately killed, too) and displaced, homes washed away, and farmers’ investment of time, energy and resources in the cultivation of their land washed out (in some areas even fertile land was converted to sandy “beach”). Moreover, communication network and infrastructure including road network was brought to disarray. Industries in the area also suffered due to break down of transportation system; either because of failure to access raw materials and other supplies or because of inability to supply finished product to its customers (most of the industries suffered on both counts).
In the past, Nepal Electricity Authority (NEA) used to trot out the excuse of no water in rivers whenever it came up with a new load shedding schedule or made changes in them resulting in the increased hours of load shedding. However, this rainy season, even in the abundance of water (or flood!), NEA imposed a load shedding of 2 hours each day, two days a week, till third week of August 2008. With effect from 27th August, 2008 the load shedding hours was increased to 16.5 hours/week which kept on increasing ad nauseaum. The Chief of Load Dispatch Center of NEA announced in a program in Butwal on 11th November 2008 that there will be load shedding at the rate of 10 hours/day in Marga (November-December), which will go up to 12 hours/day in Paush (December-January) and it will peak at 14 hours/day during Magh (January-February) this year[i].
Many a pages have been written wherein the root cause of Nepal’s electricity crisis has been ascribed to the cancellation of Arun III by the World Bank in 1995, scheduled to be completed in 2005. Besides the journalists of many hues, a number of luminaries have also “invested” time and energy to write on this topic, including a special chapter dedicated to this subject, forming a part of the book by a renowned economist, who has occupied the position of finance minister of Nepal a number of times over last two decades and was the first Vice Chair of National Planning Commission of democratic Nepal in 1991[ii]. It is high time to examine/analyze if there is any truth in it. Irrespective of whether there is an iota of truth in this logic or not, it is also time to draw lessons from this phenomenon so that Nepal is able to learn from this episode and undertake projects for implementation in future prudently. In other words, a dispassionate and detached analysis is called for to test if the argument attributing current load shedding problem to the cancellation of Arun III project by the World Bank is rooted to ground reality or not and find out what lessons could be learnt from this episode. This entails conducting an autopsy of this logic, as it will also be able to throw ample light on the intellect and mindset of the hydrocracy (intelligentsia, politicos and bureaucracy involved in water resource sector) in Nepal.
FOR A FULL VERSION OF THIS TEXT, PLEASE REFER TO THE FOLLOWING SITE:
http://ratnasansar.blogspot.com/2009/03/arun-iii-project-nepals-electricity.html
[i] Source: Kantipur of November 13, 2008.
[ii] Mahat, Dr Ram Sharan, 2005: In Defence of Democracy, Adroit Publishers.
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Murari Raj Sharma - A Relic of the “Old Nepal”
(Courtesy: Kaila Baje)
In an interview entitled “Foreign Minister Yadav has Violated all Diplomatic Protocols,” EX-Nepali Ambassador to the United Kingdom, Murari Raj Sharma, makes an impassioned appeal to his readership by spewing all sorts of nonsensical logic on how he has been victimized. The following writing will categorically nullify each of Sharma’s allegations and will go further to demonstrate why Sharma’s false sense of entitlement, his bahunist hubris, and his familial ties to Girija Prasad Koirala, easily justify Foreign Minister Upendra Yadav’s actions.
First off all, this is the “New Nepal.” There is no space here for the type of shenanigans that sustained the feudal/nepotistic structures of the “Old Nepal.” In other words, Murari Raj Sharma’s blood relations to Girija Prasad Koirala no longer holds the type of political currency it once did. As a political appointee of the FORMER Prime Minister of Nepal, it is only befitting that Murari Raj Sharma, like his cohort of political appointees, also become a FORMER Ambassador.
As his first act as Ambassador, the FORMER appointee to the United States of America (Dr. Suresh Raj Chalise), is rumored to have replaced pictures of FORMER King Gyanendra with those of Girija Prasad Koirala. No, not in his private bedroom, or even the Ambassador’s residence, but in the Nepali Embassy in Washington DC. Chalise is on record, touring various think-tanks in the American capital, extolling the virtues of the Nepali Congress and how this party was responsible for ending Nepal’s civil war by “mainstreaming” the Maoists. As expected, Chalise did was he was sent to do - represent Nepal’s interests and in the process, uplift his political party’s international standing.
Even more could be expected of Murari Raj Sharma. This is why it made perfect sense for Nepal’s new government to rescind Sharma’s appointment because Sharma was scheduled to interact with high level British dignitaries. By doing so, Nepal’s Foreign Minister did quite the opposite of “disrespecting” British dignitaries. Instead, he made a calculated move to thwart a disinformation campaign by Murari Raj Sharma which was certain to have dwelled far less on Nepal’s national interests and much more on Sharma’s personal interests - propagating the falsehood of Nepal’s democracy as contingent on the auspices of Girija Prasad Koirala and his Nepali Congress.
Second, Murari Raj Sharma’s unfounded sense of entitlement is pasted all over his interview. Vetting process or not, Sharma was a political appointee of an era long past when the process of vetting was dominated by members of Sharma’s own political allegiance - the Nepali Congress. Sharma’s past claims of having “fought for democracy” in Nepal are preposterous distortions of the truth for his struggle centered squarely around securing his own future, then his Party’s and had little if anything to do with Nepal.
Further, one can hardly term the Sharma’s actions as those of a democrat when he is seen in open defiance of a democratically established Foreign Minister. What gives Sharma the right to question the verdict of a system that he supposedly helped create?
The other disturbing attribute of Sharma’s rant revolves around his rent-seeking behavior. For some pathetic reason, Sharma seems to think that the services he purportedly rendered in the name of restoring Nepal’s democracy, earned him the right to become an Ambassador. What chicanery! If Sharma’s logic were to hold true, there are thousands of Nepalis who deserve Ambassadorships before Sharma’s candidacy should even be considered as a back-up to a third-rate list.
In reality, Sharma’s sense of false entitlement is nothing more than a remnant of past feudal structures that once prevailed in Nepal. Aiding the process of Nepal’s transformation to a modern nation-state necessarily implies wiping the slate clean of such feudalist tendencies. Foreign Minister Upendra Yadav has done Nepali a favor by clearly signaling a departure in Nepal’s foreign affairs, from the rent-seeking characteristics of Murari Raj Sharma.
Also, Consider that Sharma used to be one of the closest confidants of Panchayati Prime Minister Marich Man Singh. After 1990, Sharma became a key figure in Nepal’s Customs Department, then a Foreign Secretary, Nepal’s Ambassador to the United Nations and finally, Nepal’s Ambassador to the United Kingdom. A product of hard work? Perhaps. A fortunate recipient of divine intervention? Could be. An offspring of the culture of sycophancy that continues to pervade the Nepali Congress’s internal “democratic” structure? Now we’re talking!
If Murari Raj Sharma had anything on his mind other than himself, if he had even a drop of diplomatic blood running through his veins, Sharma, like his cohorts, would have left his duty station in November of 2008. His excuse of personal embarrassment at having to cancel appointments with British dignitaries pales in comparison to the national embarrassment he has created for the Nepali nation-state.
Speaking of diplomatic norms and precedents, Murari Raj Sharma’s shameless public mud-slinging conveniently erases his own record of defying such norms. It was certainly not diplomatic of Sharma to continue abusing Nepali tax payers’ funds when he refused to vacate the Ambassador’s residence in New York - after he had been relieved of his duties as Nepali Ambassador to the UN. Double-dipping in the Nepali Government’s and the UN’s coffers was a brazen breach of conduct in 2003. Refusing to vacate the Nepali Embassy’s premises in London is just as egregious a crime, in 2008/2009.
If Sharma truly believes that the termination of his appointment has breached legal precedents, he, like all Nepali citizens, is welcome to challenge Upendra Yadav’s decision in a Nepali court. As a self-proclaimed democrat of democrats, Sharma of all people should demonstrate confidence in the rule of law; he should be equally prepared to face the consequences of his insubordination should he be found guilty of breaching the norms he accuses Foreign Minister Upendra Yadav of breaching.
Further, the allegations that Murari Raj Sharma has launched against B. P. Yadav (another democratically established leader in Nepali politics) are serious. Should Sharma have proof to back up his allegations, he is welcome to present his case before a Nepali court of law. Yet, such thinking appears alien to a disenfranchised sycophant who appears more concerned with creating controversy for the Nepali government (on behalf of his lord Koirala and Lady Sujata), than serving the interests of the Nepali people.
On a human level, the personal challenges Murari Sharma currently faces (his child’s education and his wife’s medical treatment), inspire sympathy. On a professional and democratic level, Sharma’s refusal to vacate the Nepali Embassy’s premises in London, and take leave to tend to his personal matters, are appalling! Is there anything democratic about Nepali tax payers subsidizing Sharma’s personal expenses?
There are reasons why the Nepali Congress is in demise and reasons why the Maoists, despite their stated objective of establishing a one-party communist republic, increasingly present the best of the worst alternatives for ordinary Nepalis. Characters like Murari Raj Sharma represent “glowing” examples of the increasing disenchantment that Nepali people feel, when it comes to the Nepali Congress. The Murari’s of our time are the epitome of why a democratic culture continues to evade Nepal. Emerging leaders in the Nepali Congress would do well to distance themselves from the likes of Murari Raj Sharma and the distasteful, double-standards his generation of politicians represent.
Foreign Minister Upendra Yadav had every right to terminate Murari Raj Sharma’s appointment. Moreover, given the ethnic dimensions to Sharma’s outburst (and the breach in protocol embodied by Sharma’s letter to a fellow bahun, Pushpa Kamal Dahal), Minister Yadav has even more reason to assert his democratically bestowed position by insisting that Sharma vacate the Nepal government’s property, immediately.
In an interview entitled “Foreign Minister Yadav has Violated all Diplomatic Protocols,” EX-Nepali Ambassador to the United Kingdom, Murari Raj Sharma, makes an impassioned appeal to his readership by spewing all sorts of nonsensical logic on how he has been victimized. The following writing will categorically nullify each of Sharma’s allegations and will go further to demonstrate why Sharma’s false sense of entitlement, his bahunist hubris, and his familial ties to Girija Prasad Koirala, easily justify Foreign Minister Upendra Yadav’s actions.
First off all, this is the “New Nepal.” There is no space here for the type of shenanigans that sustained the feudal/nepotistic structures of the “Old Nepal.” In other words, Murari Raj Sharma’s blood relations to Girija Prasad Koirala no longer holds the type of political currency it once did. As a political appointee of the FORMER Prime Minister of Nepal, it is only befitting that Murari Raj Sharma, like his cohort of political appointees, also become a FORMER Ambassador.
As his first act as Ambassador, the FORMER appointee to the United States of America (Dr. Suresh Raj Chalise), is rumored to have replaced pictures of FORMER King Gyanendra with those of Girija Prasad Koirala. No, not in his private bedroom, or even the Ambassador’s residence, but in the Nepali Embassy in Washington DC. Chalise is on record, touring various think-tanks in the American capital, extolling the virtues of the Nepali Congress and how this party was responsible for ending Nepal’s civil war by “mainstreaming” the Maoists. As expected, Chalise did was he was sent to do - represent Nepal’s interests and in the process, uplift his political party’s international standing.
Even more could be expected of Murari Raj Sharma. This is why it made perfect sense for Nepal’s new government to rescind Sharma’s appointment because Sharma was scheduled to interact with high level British dignitaries. By doing so, Nepal’s Foreign Minister did quite the opposite of “disrespecting” British dignitaries. Instead, he made a calculated move to thwart a disinformation campaign by Murari Raj Sharma which was certain to have dwelled far less on Nepal’s national interests and much more on Sharma’s personal interests - propagating the falsehood of Nepal’s democracy as contingent on the auspices of Girija Prasad Koirala and his Nepali Congress.
Second, Murari Raj Sharma’s unfounded sense of entitlement is pasted all over his interview. Vetting process or not, Sharma was a political appointee of an era long past when the process of vetting was dominated by members of Sharma’s own political allegiance - the Nepali Congress. Sharma’s past claims of having “fought for democracy” in Nepal are preposterous distortions of the truth for his struggle centered squarely around securing his own future, then his Party’s and had little if anything to do with Nepal.
Further, one can hardly term the Sharma’s actions as those of a democrat when he is seen in open defiance of a democratically established Foreign Minister. What gives Sharma the right to question the verdict of a system that he supposedly helped create?
The other disturbing attribute of Sharma’s rant revolves around his rent-seeking behavior. For some pathetic reason, Sharma seems to think that the services he purportedly rendered in the name of restoring Nepal’s democracy, earned him the right to become an Ambassador. What chicanery! If Sharma’s logic were to hold true, there are thousands of Nepalis who deserve Ambassadorships before Sharma’s candidacy should even be considered as a back-up to a third-rate list.
In reality, Sharma’s sense of false entitlement is nothing more than a remnant of past feudal structures that once prevailed in Nepal. Aiding the process of Nepal’s transformation to a modern nation-state necessarily implies wiping the slate clean of such feudalist tendencies. Foreign Minister Upendra Yadav has done Nepali a favor by clearly signaling a departure in Nepal’s foreign affairs, from the rent-seeking characteristics of Murari Raj Sharma.
Also, Consider that Sharma used to be one of the closest confidants of Panchayati Prime Minister Marich Man Singh. After 1990, Sharma became a key figure in Nepal’s Customs Department, then a Foreign Secretary, Nepal’s Ambassador to the United Nations and finally, Nepal’s Ambassador to the United Kingdom. A product of hard work? Perhaps. A fortunate recipient of divine intervention? Could be. An offspring of the culture of sycophancy that continues to pervade the Nepali Congress’s internal “democratic” structure? Now we’re talking!
If Murari Raj Sharma had anything on his mind other than himself, if he had even a drop of diplomatic blood running through his veins, Sharma, like his cohorts, would have left his duty station in November of 2008. His excuse of personal embarrassment at having to cancel appointments with British dignitaries pales in comparison to the national embarrassment he has created for the Nepali nation-state.
Speaking of diplomatic norms and precedents, Murari Raj Sharma’s shameless public mud-slinging conveniently erases his own record of defying such norms. It was certainly not diplomatic of Sharma to continue abusing Nepali tax payers’ funds when he refused to vacate the Ambassador’s residence in New York - after he had been relieved of his duties as Nepali Ambassador to the UN. Double-dipping in the Nepali Government’s and the UN’s coffers was a brazen breach of conduct in 2003. Refusing to vacate the Nepali Embassy’s premises in London is just as egregious a crime, in 2008/2009.
If Sharma truly believes that the termination of his appointment has breached legal precedents, he, like all Nepali citizens, is welcome to challenge Upendra Yadav’s decision in a Nepali court. As a self-proclaimed democrat of democrats, Sharma of all people should demonstrate confidence in the rule of law; he should be equally prepared to face the consequences of his insubordination should he be found guilty of breaching the norms he accuses Foreign Minister Upendra Yadav of breaching.
Further, the allegations that Murari Raj Sharma has launched against B. P. Yadav (another democratically established leader in Nepali politics) are serious. Should Sharma have proof to back up his allegations, he is welcome to present his case before a Nepali court of law. Yet, such thinking appears alien to a disenfranchised sycophant who appears more concerned with creating controversy for the Nepali government (on behalf of his lord Koirala and Lady Sujata), than serving the interests of the Nepali people.
On a human level, the personal challenges Murari Sharma currently faces (his child’s education and his wife’s medical treatment), inspire sympathy. On a professional and democratic level, Sharma’s refusal to vacate the Nepali Embassy’s premises in London, and take leave to tend to his personal matters, are appalling! Is there anything democratic about Nepali tax payers subsidizing Sharma’s personal expenses?
There are reasons why the Nepali Congress is in demise and reasons why the Maoists, despite their stated objective of establishing a one-party communist republic, increasingly present the best of the worst alternatives for ordinary Nepalis. Characters like Murari Raj Sharma represent “glowing” examples of the increasing disenchantment that Nepali people feel, when it comes to the Nepali Congress. The Murari’s of our time are the epitome of why a democratic culture continues to evade Nepal. Emerging leaders in the Nepali Congress would do well to distance themselves from the likes of Murari Raj Sharma and the distasteful, double-standards his generation of politicians represent.
Foreign Minister Upendra Yadav had every right to terminate Murari Raj Sharma’s appointment. Moreover, given the ethnic dimensions to Sharma’s outburst (and the breach in protocol embodied by Sharma’s letter to a fellow bahun, Pushpa Kamal Dahal), Minister Yadav has even more reason to assert his democratically bestowed position by insisting that Sharma vacate the Nepal government’s property, immediately.
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
To Retain or Retire?
(Courtesy: Chiran Thapa)
Once again, Nepal braces for another nail biting affair. Just when it was time to heave a sigh of relief following the recruitment row, another bout of vicious sparring between the Nepal Army and the Maoists in the government is underway.
Before, the row was over recruitment. This time it is over retirement.
As a customary practice, the Nepal Army had written to the Defence Ministry to extend the tenures of eight of its Brigadier Generals. Such extensions were never stymied in the past. This time, however, the Maoist Defence Minister did not acquiesce. When the Defence ministry did not forward the extension proposal to the cabinet, time elapsed and the Generals' retirement dates passed by.
Initially, when no word came from the Defence Ministry, the Generals were asked to continue with their respective tenures by the Chief of Army Staff (CoAS). But, now that the Defence Ministry has sent a letter to the Army Headquarters to retire the Generals, it remains to be seen how the Nepal Army will respond.
This case bears some resemblance to the retirement of senior officers of the Nepal Police. Just last month, the government did not extend the tenures of the Inspector General of Police (IGP) Hem Bahadur Gurung and three Additional Inspector-Generals (AIGs). Previously too, the government had not extended the tenures of eleven senior police officers who consequently retired in September of last year. That lot included the IGP Om Bikram Rana, five AIGs and five Deputy Inspector Generals (DIGs).
But the Nepal Army's case is markedly different. For one, the Police Force is utterly politicized and the institution has had very little say over postings, promotions and retirements. The Nepal Army, however, had thus far kept such matters strictly under its institutional purview. And the Defence Ministry had never before interjected in such affairs.
Also, under the robust commandership of the current CoAS, the Nepal Army has deftly maintained the chain of command and kept the institution intact. With great dexterity, the CoAS has effectively restrained those that want to come out blazing against the former foes and those that want to sycophantically pay homage to newly ensconced political masters.
Furthermore, under his watch, the Nepal Army has kept its boots off the political landscape. Instead, it has subtly cultivated cordial relations with various political forces, the media, the foreign diplomatic corps and other luminaries.
It is these extensive cordial links cultivated by the Nepal Army that have bolstered its clout and leverage. And the recruitment and retirement tussles manifest those relationships. The retirements of the senior Police officers were hardly an issue for other political forces. But, in the Nepal Army's case, politicians of all persuasions have fervently jumped into the ring to support the Nepal Army.
This time too, various political forces have joined the fray to support the Army. Numerous Nepali Congress (NC) leaders have called on the President Ram Baran Yadav - who is currently the Supreme Commander of the Nepal Army, and requested him to intervene to retain the Generals.
Under the leadership of the NC President – Girija Prasad Koirala, leaders of CPN (UML), CPN (Marxist Leninist), Nepal Sadbhawana Party, Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP) and Rastriya Janashakti Party (RJP) have decided to forge an alliance against the decision to retire the Generals.
Besides the politicians, others are throwing in their weight too. A group of four former Lieutenant Generals met the President and requested him to use his “special influence” to end the controversy. They believe that such large scale retirement of the hierarchy would gravely jeopardize the structure and functioning of the institution. On the other hand, one retired Major General and a few other former junior officers have come out in support of the Defence ministry's decision saying that "the retirement is purely an administrative matter and the generals should retire as per the Defence Ministry's decision."
Amid these divergent perspectives, however, there is another distinctly inseparable element about this row. It has to do with the previous recruitment row. Recently, the Nepal Army had mulishly recruited new personnel into its ranks flouting the Defence Minister's objections. The Minister's inability to halt the recruitment process had greatly emasculated and embarrassed him and his party that is leading the government. Hence, given the history, the line between vengeance and righteousness is blurred.
This issue, however, transcends beyond the realms of vengeance or righteousness. For the Maoists, it is a face saving game coupled with their aspiration to reign over the Nepal Army. The only bulwark that stands in the Maoist path of total domination is the Nepal Army. The Maoists understand very well that if it were to get hold of the levers that controlled the Nepal Army, they can suppress and sideline any political opposition with relative ease.
Moreover, at a time when the country is in a hideous mess, this imbroglio provides the Maoist leadership with a much needed respite. This incident is being effectively exploited to divert the attention of the masses away from the inadequacies and insecurities plaguing the Nepali society. Faced with a sharply declining popularity, both nationally and internationally, the Maoists are trying to employ the Nepal Army's resistance to their advantage. By propagating Army's actions as a serious breach of democratic norms and values, the Maoists intend on garnering public support.
But most importantly, it sorely needs to demonstrate its supreme status to the people, and especially to its restive cadres and combatants. By overriding their stiff resistance in the recruitment row, the Nepal Army had given the Maoists a black eye. This incident had unmistakably demonstrated the acumen and strength of the Nepal Army.
It is no wonder why this tussle has become a must win situation for Maoists. The Maoists direly need to redeem themselves after their ignominious retreat from the recruitment row. They need to demonstrate that they are in control and that they have managed to lasso the most powerful institution in the country.
In the meantime, the Army too needs to prove that it still retains the capability to withstand and overcome political interference and that it will not be bossed around whimsically by those who want to infuse a politically indoctrinated bevy into its professional ranks.
If the Maoists are able to withhold the decision and let the Generals retire, it will set a new precedent. From the Maoist viewpoint, it would herald a new beginning in the control of the Nepal Army. This would certainly ease the way for the wholesale integration of their combatants into the National Army.
From the Nepal Army's standpoint, however, it will mark the beginning of political encroachment. And it will certainly instill a visceral sense of vulnerability amongst the troops, especially amongst the higher ranking officers.
But if the Nepal Army digs its heels firmly enough and is able to retain its Generals, then implications could be adverse for the Maoists. If Maoists are compelled to retract their decision, then it would be another humiliating blow to its stature and morale. And it would once again project the Nepal Army as a far superior force.
As this row unfolds, the prognosis is bleak. By retiring Brigadiers and upgrading the Colonels, the Maoists are perhaps hoping to prop up a new hierarchy in the Nepal Army that is more pliable to their interest. But, the new lot could easily turn out to be more radical and recalcitrant than the released ones. In any case, whichever way the tussle goes, it will most certainly poison the sour relationship that already persists between these two formidable forces. Not only that, this could possibly be the beginning of an end of an apolitical National Army.
Once again, Nepal braces for another nail biting affair. Just when it was time to heave a sigh of relief following the recruitment row, another bout of vicious sparring between the Nepal Army and the Maoists in the government is underway.
Before, the row was over recruitment. This time it is over retirement.
As a customary practice, the Nepal Army had written to the Defence Ministry to extend the tenures of eight of its Brigadier Generals. Such extensions were never stymied in the past. This time, however, the Maoist Defence Minister did not acquiesce. When the Defence ministry did not forward the extension proposal to the cabinet, time elapsed and the Generals' retirement dates passed by.
Initially, when no word came from the Defence Ministry, the Generals were asked to continue with their respective tenures by the Chief of Army Staff (CoAS). But, now that the Defence Ministry has sent a letter to the Army Headquarters to retire the Generals, it remains to be seen how the Nepal Army will respond.
This case bears some resemblance to the retirement of senior officers of the Nepal Police. Just last month, the government did not extend the tenures of the Inspector General of Police (IGP) Hem Bahadur Gurung and three Additional Inspector-Generals (AIGs). Previously too, the government had not extended the tenures of eleven senior police officers who consequently retired in September of last year. That lot included the IGP Om Bikram Rana, five AIGs and five Deputy Inspector Generals (DIGs).
But the Nepal Army's case is markedly different. For one, the Police Force is utterly politicized and the institution has had very little say over postings, promotions and retirements. The Nepal Army, however, had thus far kept such matters strictly under its institutional purview. And the Defence Ministry had never before interjected in such affairs.
Also, under the robust commandership of the current CoAS, the Nepal Army has deftly maintained the chain of command and kept the institution intact. With great dexterity, the CoAS has effectively restrained those that want to come out blazing against the former foes and those that want to sycophantically pay homage to newly ensconced political masters.
Furthermore, under his watch, the Nepal Army has kept its boots off the political landscape. Instead, it has subtly cultivated cordial relations with various political forces, the media, the foreign diplomatic corps and other luminaries.
It is these extensive cordial links cultivated by the Nepal Army that have bolstered its clout and leverage. And the recruitment and retirement tussles manifest those relationships. The retirements of the senior Police officers were hardly an issue for other political forces. But, in the Nepal Army's case, politicians of all persuasions have fervently jumped into the ring to support the Nepal Army.
This time too, various political forces have joined the fray to support the Army. Numerous Nepali Congress (NC) leaders have called on the President Ram Baran Yadav - who is currently the Supreme Commander of the Nepal Army, and requested him to intervene to retain the Generals.
Under the leadership of the NC President – Girija Prasad Koirala, leaders of CPN (UML), CPN (Marxist Leninist), Nepal Sadbhawana Party, Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP) and Rastriya Janashakti Party (RJP) have decided to forge an alliance against the decision to retire the Generals.
Besides the politicians, others are throwing in their weight too. A group of four former Lieutenant Generals met the President and requested him to use his “special influence” to end the controversy. They believe that such large scale retirement of the hierarchy would gravely jeopardize the structure and functioning of the institution. On the other hand, one retired Major General and a few other former junior officers have come out in support of the Defence ministry's decision saying that "the retirement is purely an administrative matter and the generals should retire as per the Defence Ministry's decision."
Amid these divergent perspectives, however, there is another distinctly inseparable element about this row. It has to do with the previous recruitment row. Recently, the Nepal Army had mulishly recruited new personnel into its ranks flouting the Defence Minister's objections. The Minister's inability to halt the recruitment process had greatly emasculated and embarrassed him and his party that is leading the government. Hence, given the history, the line between vengeance and righteousness is blurred.
This issue, however, transcends beyond the realms of vengeance or righteousness. For the Maoists, it is a face saving game coupled with their aspiration to reign over the Nepal Army. The only bulwark that stands in the Maoist path of total domination is the Nepal Army. The Maoists understand very well that if it were to get hold of the levers that controlled the Nepal Army, they can suppress and sideline any political opposition with relative ease.
Moreover, at a time when the country is in a hideous mess, this imbroglio provides the Maoist leadership with a much needed respite. This incident is being effectively exploited to divert the attention of the masses away from the inadequacies and insecurities plaguing the Nepali society. Faced with a sharply declining popularity, both nationally and internationally, the Maoists are trying to employ the Nepal Army's resistance to their advantage. By propagating Army's actions as a serious breach of democratic norms and values, the Maoists intend on garnering public support.
But most importantly, it sorely needs to demonstrate its supreme status to the people, and especially to its restive cadres and combatants. By overriding their stiff resistance in the recruitment row, the Nepal Army had given the Maoists a black eye. This incident had unmistakably demonstrated the acumen and strength of the Nepal Army.
It is no wonder why this tussle has become a must win situation for Maoists. The Maoists direly need to redeem themselves after their ignominious retreat from the recruitment row. They need to demonstrate that they are in control and that they have managed to lasso the most powerful institution in the country.
In the meantime, the Army too needs to prove that it still retains the capability to withstand and overcome political interference and that it will not be bossed around whimsically by those who want to infuse a politically indoctrinated bevy into its professional ranks.
If the Maoists are able to withhold the decision and let the Generals retire, it will set a new precedent. From the Maoist viewpoint, it would herald a new beginning in the control of the Nepal Army. This would certainly ease the way for the wholesale integration of their combatants into the National Army.
From the Nepal Army's standpoint, however, it will mark the beginning of political encroachment. And it will certainly instill a visceral sense of vulnerability amongst the troops, especially amongst the higher ranking officers.
But if the Nepal Army digs its heels firmly enough and is able to retain its Generals, then implications could be adverse for the Maoists. If Maoists are compelled to retract their decision, then it would be another humiliating blow to its stature and morale. And it would once again project the Nepal Army as a far superior force.
As this row unfolds, the prognosis is bleak. By retiring Brigadiers and upgrading the Colonels, the Maoists are perhaps hoping to prop up a new hierarchy in the Nepal Army that is more pliable to their interest. But, the new lot could easily turn out to be more radical and recalcitrant than the released ones. In any case, whichever way the tussle goes, it will most certainly poison the sour relationship that already persists between these two formidable forces. Not only that, this could possibly be the beginning of an end of an apolitical National Army.
Monday, March 09, 2009
8 March, International Women’s Day
(Courtesy: Birat Simha)
8 March is International Women’s Day. International Women’s Day is observed around the world each year to celebrate the achievements and gains made by women and to focus on the job still to be done in working towards equality for women. International Women’s Day provides an opportunity for communities to recognise and celebrate local women’s achievements and the contribution they continue to make to their area.
I was reading in a paper the other day about a community in western Nepal which observed strict traditional customs related to maternity as well as menses. The new-born child and mother have to remain secluded, usually in the cow shed, for 11 days before the priest “purifies” the child in the ceremony commonly known as Nwaran. Similarly, women have to remain completely secluded for 5 days during their monthly menses. The former has resulted in the death of children who do not have access to proper post-natal care. The latter is yet another phenomenon of “untouchability” in our society.
A few months ago, the Miss Nepal pageant had to be scuttled due to protests from a women Maoist group which dubbed it as exploitation of women, ignoring completely that all the contenders were well educated young ladies, there is no bikini parade in the Nepal pageant, and the Miss World organization is a major donor to charities. So Nepal was not represented at the Miss World pageant in Johannesburg, South Africa last December. Ms. Russia won the crown and Ms. India was the runner up. A group of narrow-minded dogmatic women, ironically, prevented the Nepali contestants from competing for a better future.
Another glaring illustration is the treatment of widows in Nepal. When the husband dies, the wife’s bangles are broken, the vermillion on her head wiped away and she is swathed in white, never to wear red again. She has to go into hard mourning for 13 days. Some widows even wear only white for a year or for the rest of their lives. A widower can receive offers of marriage the very next day after the death of his wife.
Closer to home, I learnt recently that daughters, once married, have no legal rights on their parents’ property. I assume parents wash their hands off their daughters once they marry. She becomes the responsibility of her husband. In a way, she becomes a member of her husband’s family completely with minimal ties to her own family. I hear murmurings that this law will soon be changed, giving equal rights to sons and daughters. It is yet to be seen whether the fabled “New Nepal” will redress this inequality.
For sure, women in Nepal, as elsewhere in the world, have come a long way. Women’s literacy is over 40%, though men’s is close to 60%. Women in the work-force are visible from the women traffic police to the numerous executives and secretaries, though more of the latter to be sure. There is yet much to be done. The median age at first marriage of Nepali women is only 17. Maternal mortality rate, the number of maternal deaths per 100,000 deliveries, remains at 281, as compared to 110 for Maldives and 92 for Sri Lanka. Only 23% of Nepali women give birth attended by a trained attendant, as compared to 85% for Maldives and 96% for Sri Lanka.
Statistics alone do not tell the whole story. They are merely indicators of deep-rooted social, cultural and development issues. Until we can accept the fact that all babies, whether male or female, are born equal and have equal rights, the status of Nepali women will continue to be defiled. Parents will keep on having children until they have a son who can light their funeral pyre, thus inflating the birth rate. Women are usually not even allowed at funerals. Why should not a daughter light the funeral pyre? If women in history had the courage to burn themselves alive in the funeral pyres of their husbands, courage is in no short supply among women.
Changes in women’s status can come about only with basic attitudinal changes among men, as well as women who cling to out-dated customs. These changes need to be brought about by education, how children are brought up, and legal safeguards for women’s rights. There is still a long way to go for women to achieve equality and equity with men in Nepal. But it is a challenge that cannot be avoided. It has been proven, for example, that educated mothers have fewer and healthier children. So it is not an exaggeration to say that women shape the future.
As we celebrate International Women’s Day, let each one of us reflect on the true status of the average Nepali woman. Not the socialite or CA member, not the educated and aware, but the simple girls and women in a village. Perhaps they spend most of their time fetching water, cooking, washing clothes, and looking after their fields and cattle, if any. They are illiterate, doomed to a life unchanged for generations. Development, a nebulous term at best, requires many ingredients. A crucial one is that women have to be educated and their status must be equal to men.
(The writer is a former UNFPA Representative in Mongolia and Papua New Guinea)
8 March is International Women’s Day. International Women’s Day is observed around the world each year to celebrate the achievements and gains made by women and to focus on the job still to be done in working towards equality for women. International Women’s Day provides an opportunity for communities to recognise and celebrate local women’s achievements and the contribution they continue to make to their area.
I was reading in a paper the other day about a community in western Nepal which observed strict traditional customs related to maternity as well as menses. The new-born child and mother have to remain secluded, usually in the cow shed, for 11 days before the priest “purifies” the child in the ceremony commonly known as Nwaran. Similarly, women have to remain completely secluded for 5 days during their monthly menses. The former has resulted in the death of children who do not have access to proper post-natal care. The latter is yet another phenomenon of “untouchability” in our society.
A few months ago, the Miss Nepal pageant had to be scuttled due to protests from a women Maoist group which dubbed it as exploitation of women, ignoring completely that all the contenders were well educated young ladies, there is no bikini parade in the Nepal pageant, and the Miss World organization is a major donor to charities. So Nepal was not represented at the Miss World pageant in Johannesburg, South Africa last December. Ms. Russia won the crown and Ms. India was the runner up. A group of narrow-minded dogmatic women, ironically, prevented the Nepali contestants from competing for a better future.
Another glaring illustration is the treatment of widows in Nepal. When the husband dies, the wife’s bangles are broken, the vermillion on her head wiped away and she is swathed in white, never to wear red again. She has to go into hard mourning for 13 days. Some widows even wear only white for a year or for the rest of their lives. A widower can receive offers of marriage the very next day after the death of his wife.
Closer to home, I learnt recently that daughters, once married, have no legal rights on their parents’ property. I assume parents wash their hands off their daughters once they marry. She becomes the responsibility of her husband. In a way, she becomes a member of her husband’s family completely with minimal ties to her own family. I hear murmurings that this law will soon be changed, giving equal rights to sons and daughters. It is yet to be seen whether the fabled “New Nepal” will redress this inequality.
For sure, women in Nepal, as elsewhere in the world, have come a long way. Women’s literacy is over 40%, though men’s is close to 60%. Women in the work-force are visible from the women traffic police to the numerous executives and secretaries, though more of the latter to be sure. There is yet much to be done. The median age at first marriage of Nepali women is only 17. Maternal mortality rate, the number of maternal deaths per 100,000 deliveries, remains at 281, as compared to 110 for Maldives and 92 for Sri Lanka. Only 23% of Nepali women give birth attended by a trained attendant, as compared to 85% for Maldives and 96% for Sri Lanka.
Statistics alone do not tell the whole story. They are merely indicators of deep-rooted social, cultural and development issues. Until we can accept the fact that all babies, whether male or female, are born equal and have equal rights, the status of Nepali women will continue to be defiled. Parents will keep on having children until they have a son who can light their funeral pyre, thus inflating the birth rate. Women are usually not even allowed at funerals. Why should not a daughter light the funeral pyre? If women in history had the courage to burn themselves alive in the funeral pyres of their husbands, courage is in no short supply among women.
Changes in women’s status can come about only with basic attitudinal changes among men, as well as women who cling to out-dated customs. These changes need to be brought about by education, how children are brought up, and legal safeguards for women’s rights. There is still a long way to go for women to achieve equality and equity with men in Nepal. But it is a challenge that cannot be avoided. It has been proven, for example, that educated mothers have fewer and healthier children. So it is not an exaggeration to say that women shape the future.
As we celebrate International Women’s Day, let each one of us reflect on the true status of the average Nepali woman. Not the socialite or CA member, not the educated and aware, but the simple girls and women in a village. Perhaps they spend most of their time fetching water, cooking, washing clothes, and looking after their fields and cattle, if any. They are illiterate, doomed to a life unchanged for generations. Development, a nebulous term at best, requires many ingredients. A crucial one is that women have to be educated and their status must be equal to men.
(The writer is a former UNFPA Representative in Mongolia and Papua New Guinea)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)