Gurkhas as Mercenaries? You Bet!

(Courtesy: el Zorro)

The writing below is in response to an opinion piece published in the Kathmandu Post on Sunday, April 22, 2007. The author of the opinion piece is Mr. Peter J. Karthak, a brilliant writer and a frequent contributor on various issues related to Nepal.

Mr. Karthak's opinion piece is located at the following URL:

http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?&nid=107397

As a matter of clarification, similar to Mr. Karthak's writing, this rejoinder is not so much a commentary on the real issue at hand (the British Gurkhas' quest for fair treatment). Instead, this is an exercise at emulating Mr. Karthak's logic (and his style of writing), to demonstrate the weaknesses in the author's assumptions and the flaws in his logic

As eloquent a writer as Mr. Peter J. Karthak may be, his platform of communal slander as the basis for his dissertation on why Gurkhas are not "mercenaries," boils down to nothing more than a clever play on "big" words. That is, words on paper, presented in such a fashion so as to forward a distorted perception of Mr. Karthak's customized reality.

Mr. Karthak's presentation of history to support his theory that Prithvi Narayan Shah was in fact a mercenary is highly entertaining (in juvenile kind of way). The author's stab at injecting an ethnic dimension into the debate on the British Gurkhas' quest for parity is somewhat ridiculous; especially given that his extrapolation (generalization) stems from a sample size of eight to a population of 26 million! Words may be Mr. Karthak's forte, but numbers certainly do not appear to be!

Mr. Karthak's postulation that Prithvi Narayan Shah was a mercenary has some merit. His colourful depictions of King Shah's military exploits, the King's methods, etc. make a whole lot of sense if the intent is to superimpose a 21st century dictionary definition on a 17th century warrior. For individuals who are able to contextualize Mr. Karthak's loquacious presentation, his words amount to a whole lot of nonsense - facts, grossly out of context and skilfully distorted to support the author's own point of view.

For starters, Mr. Karthak probably knows that the very origin of the concept of a modern military began with the birth of the idea of a nation state. With higher frequencies of conflict, Kings and Emperors (in their time) gravitated away from the idea of hiring mercenaries for specific periods and instead, began permanently employing these same mercenaries. Thus the birth of the concept of a modern military and simultaneously, the emergence of the notion of nation states.

Applying the logic above, Prithvi Narayan Shah's quest to form the Nepali nation state was very much in line with the trends that defined both the movement away from the mercenary mentality (to a professional and standing military), and towards the concept of a nation state (as opposed to tiny principalities).

So in essence, Peter Karthak is correct, but his presentation of history is culled to fulfil a resentful purpose - to add an unnecessary communal dimension to a debate that has nothing to do ethnicity. To satiate Mr. Karthak's ego, he is right to point out Prithvi Narayan Shah played the role of a leader of various individual mercenary armies and Prithvi was very much a part of the historical trend that resulted in the formation of nation states.

However, this observation bears absolutely no relevance to the fact that Nepal's Gurkha/Gorkha army men (serving in various capacities for foreign employers), have always been and will always be, mercenaries.

There is no shame in being termed a "mercenary." Being "a professional soldier hired to serve in a foreign army" is a job like any other. The term itself distinguishes one solider from another on the basis of nationality, not ethnicity. And if it is Mr. Karthak's contention that Gurkha mercenaries are discriminated against by bahuns and chhetris, what he really means is that bahuns and chhetris are discriminated against British Army recruiters. Being termed a "mercenary" is not discrimination if the term is applicable; being denied employment if one is not from a certain communal background is the very definition of one form of discrimination.

Perhaps Mr. Karthak is familiar with the concept of a PMF (Private Military Firm)? "Corporate Warriors" employed by these firms are hired straight out of any number of special forces programmes that span the globe - this includes the elite British Gurkha regiments as well. Similar to the Gurkhas (Nepalese citizens serving in foreign militaries), these PMFs employ a host of mercenaries from across the globe.

The point here is that an American Special Forces operator, working for the American government is a solider. That same soldier, should he chose to seek employment with a company like (the former) Executive Outcomes, changes definitions from a solider to a mercenary. Why? That's simply how the term is defined and it has absolutely nothing to do with communal background or ethnicity.

Unfortunately, Mr. Karthak seems to be slightly behind the times. Mercenaries have evolved from Mr. Karthak's medieval definition to become rational, responsible, economic actors in a global environment where military skills are in high demand. Nepal's Gurkha forces are not an exception.

The bottom line is this: "Yes, Mr. Karthak, in the 21st century, mercenaries do win Victoria Crosses and Param Vir Chakras." And if mercenaries are deemed qualified to be entrusted with the lives of Hamid Karzai and Ahmed Chalabi, they should damn well be qualified to serve in a sentry post at Buckingham Palace or as a desk ADC to the Indian President.

In today's globalized environment, Mr. Karthak needs to understand that for a British Gurkha (or any Special Forces operator for that matter), a Victoria Cross or a Param Vir Chakra is more than a distinction - it is a qualification on a resume that commands a higher salary in the privatized military sector.

If employment came second to nationalism, there would be no British or Indian Gurkha regiments today. It has always been and continues to be economic incentives that drive mercenaries to seek employment outside their national boundaries. There's nothing wrong with this trend just like there's nothing wrong with the number of former British Gurkhas who serve in PMFs all over the world.

In summary, Mr. Karthak would do well to steer clear of fanning communal tensions in Nepal - we have enough problems to deal with already. Then again, since the entire thrust of Mr. Karthak's writing revolves around a communal / ethnicity-based theme, perhaps Mr. Karthak would consider writing on a topic that he can intelligently (not just articulately) comment on?

After a Year of "Loktantra" - Is it finally time for a Democratic Alliance?

(Courtesy: el Guapo)

A year after a failed King handed power back to a group of failed politicians, the trajectory of this country's polity is finally coming into focus. The process of cooperative politics upon which the 12 Point Agreement was forged in New Delhi is on the verge of collapse. The return to a natural state of competitive politics is back on the agenda and the emergence of a united leftist front under a republican banner is imminent.

The cardinal assumption forwarded as the basis for the 12 Point Agreement was that the Maoists had had a change of heart. Civil society leaders, prominent human rights activists, and famous media personalities all advocated for an alliance between the Seven Parties and the Maoists on the premise that the Maoists were eager to enter the democratic mainstream.

To the Maoists' credit, they successfully played on the desperation of disillusioned personalities while maintaining a silent (yet emotionally charged) dedication to their original, strategic end-goals (which are anything but democratic). With help from their counterparts in India, an arrogant King without a plan, and above all, with assistance from the very groups that today, refuse to revisit their own rationale, the Maoists forged their much coveted SPAM alliance.

More than a year after the 12 Point Agreement was signed in New Delhi, there is no room left for speculation on how misleading the premise upon which fellowship was forged, truly was.

The SPA exhibited no moral inhibitions when teaming up with an organization that members of the SPA leadership themselves had termed terrorists. At the time, the King and his band of jokers were a much bigger threat in the minds of SPA leaders; the royal threat was sufficient to overlook every rational, logical (even moral) sense of duty the SPA leadership had towards guaranteeing a viable future for not just themselves, but the entire country.

Maoist leader C.P. Gajurel minced no words when he spoke at JNU on the Maoists' view of the current political establishment. Maoist leader Pushpa Kamal Dahal reiterated Gajurel's stance and lately, every speech a Maoist leader delivers, alludes to the same theme - the Maoists' end-goal of ultimately establishing a one-party communist republic is very much alive and well and every event that has transpired since the signing of the 12 Point Agreement and today, are all tactical moves designed to achieve larger, strategic end-goals.

Even with all this publicly available information, the disillusioned classes remain wed to their belief that the Maoists' inclusion in the government will somehow magically transform them into a democratic party. Media coverage on this topic is sporadic at best if not completely biased.

The limited debate that has occurred has been overshadowed by meaningless coverage of which temple the King and Queen visited, when and speculation on why? As pathetic as it is, this sort of coverage generates more debate amongst Nepal's intellectual class than the looming disembowelment of the country's pseudo-democratic core.

What the original advocates of the 12 Point Agreement need to do is understand that their collective intellectual capacities failed to grasp how skilfully their advocacy was abused by the Maoists to elevate the Maoist leadership to power.

The disillusioned intellectual classes need to urgently come to terms with the fact that it is not the mainstream that is democratizing the Maoists but the Maoists who are fully mobilized and well-positioned to define the mainstream. Which other political group in Nepal has claim to its own media outlets, its own militia, its own army, its own legal system, and to top it off, multiple sources of income (of which one is funding from the very government the Maoists are systematically dismantling)?

It was alright when members of Rabindra Nath Sharma's royally inclined RPP were beaten up, their faces covered in soot and shoe garlands hung around their necks. The media provided limited coverage and there was hardly any discussion of the violation of the right to speech or the right to assembly of the individuals in question. And this was considered alright, because after all, Mr. Sharma's party was prevented from speaking because of the party's allegiance to a King who attempted wholesale political reform, while playing the part of a monarch (instead of a constitutional protectorate).

However, yesterday's event in Basantapur should give everyone food for thought. Print media remaining silent on any Nepali's right to constitutionally granted freedoms and human rights being violated is pathetic. The print media's silence on Nepali Congress leader Ram Chandra Poudel (a likely candidate to replace Girija Koirala), receiving a hail of plastic water bottles, slippers and "boos" from the crowed gathered to celebrate Loktantra day, is inexcusable. Mr. Poudel was prevented from taking the podium, with known Nepali "celebrities" like Mr. Kanak Dixit and comedian Hari Bansha, shielding the NC leader from the crowed that eventually forced him off of the stage.

It is anyone's guess as to which direction Nepal's polity is leaning and equally alarming how easily a central committee member of the "invincible" Nepali Congress was shoed off stage in the heart of Kathmandu. Does Ram Chandra Poudel and the intellectual sycophants that surround his party finally understand who truly owns the republican agenda? If a leader of Mr. Poudel's stature can be prevented from speaking, how well does the Nepali Congress expect its district and village level cadre to perform during upcoming elections?

The time for a Democratic Alliance has come and is now, nearly gone. It is imperative for Centrist Forces (without royal liability) to assertively realign their agendas and brace against the inevitable leftist onslaught. The level of cohesion that leftist forces achieve within the next three months will determine the construct of Nepal's political landscape well into the next decade.

The challenge for non-leftist groups is to unite without jeopardizing the on-going sham of a peace process - a process that with each passing day, appears increasingly like a tool at the Maoists' disposal to forward their strategy under the façade of international legitimacy.

RELATED LINKS:

The Idiot’s Guide to the Maoist Playbook
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/01/idiots-guide-to-maoist-playbook.html

Surreal Politics - How Nepal’s Intellectual / Political Class, Continue to Look the Other Way…
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/01/surreal-politics-how-nepals.html

The "New Nepal" - The Maoist Way or the Highway?
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2006/12/new-nepal-maoist-way-or-highway.html

The Lessons the Mainstream will teach our Maoists
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2006/11/lessons-mainstream-will-teach-our.html

Indian Foreign Policy and the Dynamics of Regional Politics

(Courtesy: Siddhartha Thapa)

The fourteenth SAARC summit, like past summits was poignantly marked with rhetoric, applauses, vague promises and strict adherence to obsessive protocol. But, unfortunately, like other past summits, the New Delhi summit failed to depart from the paradigm of inaction and identify the core problem plaguing development and democratization in South Asia: terrorism.

Quintessentially, the drama attached to the SAARC summit was rather enchanting. Nepal, a prominent boat shaker in South Asian politics came out clearly favoring China to be given member status, this invariably in the long run will challenge India's hegemony and influence in the region. To add to SAARC's endless list of agonies, the addition of Afghanistan does no good, it further strains the mathematics of the beleaguered SAARC treasury. On the global front, powerful countries are coming together as efficient trading blocs and protecting the interest of member states within the trading bloc, unlike SAARC which remains bitterly divided. And despite some positive signs of economic development much to the credit of the IT sector boom and relocation of multi-nationals in South Asia; the rise in terrorism and political instability in the region has halted the consolidation of further success.

In the past Indo-Pak rivalry accounted for much of SAARC's failure and even to this date, the tension between these South Asian giants has hampered much of the progress at SAARC. But much has changed over the decade; India and Pakistan are not the only countries susceptible to terrorism and instability. A common feature in the politics of all South Asian countries is the resurgence of communist and religious extremism.

So are New Delhi and Islamabad the regional spoilers?

Pakistan's geographic location makes it a non-contender and a lesser player compared to India. On all accounts New Delhi has indeed failed on three fronts: stabilizing the region, effective exportation of democracy in its back yard, and conflict management. Peace is a prerequisite to development. Unlike other regional trading blocs, South Asia is marred by instability and contrary to the philosophy of other regional trading blocs; South Asian politics lacks a binding force. On the other hand the in the European Union - democracy, free market and stability in the region are desired objectives of all its member states.

For instance, the made in Delhi '12 point agreement', might yield dividends in Kathmandu but at the expense of the survival of democratic discourse. Where as in Bangladesh, India finds it hands unbound in taking strong measures against a military government. Worse still is Bhutan, where tragic ethnic cleansing, the relocation and repatriation of these refugees to a third country remain unsolved, though seventeen long years have passed by. The price that Nepal has had to pay has been dear, growing frustration among refugees has resulted in refugees posturing extreme nationalistic sentiments and in some cases resorting to violence. And last of course, Sri Lanka, where various groups within Tamil Nadu supported the LTTE. Unfortunately the see-saw change of policy in Delhi vis-à-vis Sri Lanka, costs many lives in the Indian army and tragically that of India's visionary Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi.

Therefore, for any successful overtures in South Asia – India needs to re-evaluate its foreign policy and national security and in conjunction, identify the main threats to its national security. It might also be prudent for the administration in New Delhi to question its policy makers in the South Block about a most pertinent issue - is South Asia headed towards disintegration? To find answers, policy makers and politicians in New Delhi need to identify interest groups within India that have worked in tandem with various extremist groups in South Asia.

It is no secret that the weapons in the Maoist armory were provided largely by radical communist sympathizers in West Bengal and Kerala. Historically speaking, BP Koirala was funded by various socialist parties around the world in collaboration with Indian socialists to provide him with arms. Similarly, the CPI-M has without a doubt provided moral support to the Maoists and more significantly, introduced them to the secret arms market of India.

Second, radical Islamic groups within India have perpetrated the ranks of various political parties in Bangladesh. But in regard to radical Islam, Pakistan 's notorious Islamic fugitives have outdone Indian Islamic radicals in disturbing the existence of a quasi- secular political balance in Bangladesh.

In the case of Sri Lanka, Karunanidhi in the early 80's not only provided monetary assistance but also sanctuary to Prabhakaran and his associates against the Lankan government. And in Bhutan, continued support to an autocratic regime and the reluctance of India to pressurize the Druk government on the repatriation of refugees languishing in Nepal are all parts and parcel of the fallacies of Indian policy in South Asia.

India and Pakistan have to recognize the unifying element in South Asian politics. Unfortunately, home-grown terrorism has contributed towards instability and extremism. First – the unprecedented growth of communism and the notion of self-determination have the proponents of mustering secession movements in India. Although India might have made gargantuan leaps economically, its failure to protect democracies in its backyard has undoubtedly questioned India's intentions and abilities in the global arena. If India cannot solve problems effectively in its own backyard how can she play a greater role in international relations?

The only solution to the advancement of South Asian regional development is a re-evaluation of policy at South Block and Race Course Road. But on a substantive policy level – it must be realized that both radical communism and religious extremism are the biggest threat to peace time politics in South Asia. And the only real response is a collective comprehensive security mechanism and the identification of common threats and rapid socio-economic response to the disgruntled masses. But more importantly it is imperative that India departs from a policy of 'democratic hypocrisy'.

The Essence of Constitutional Assembly

(Courtesy: Kalyan Dev Bhattarai)

Today the whole country is revolving around the issue of a constitutional assembly (CA) and the politicians are doing their best to deceive the innocent democracy and peace loving Nepalese citizens to fool them in the name of CA.

There can be no doubt on the need of CA at this juncture of the country, which was the demand of the Maoist and wishes of the people expressed during the Andolan 2062-63. Many intellectual like us supported the demand of CA from the beginning, when the so-called political leaders of seven parties were against the CA. But unfortunately, today Maoists are not only fooled by the seven political parties but the CA is also being postponed indefinitely and its basic essence is being contorted and mislead.

The essences of the CA are People's participation, people's concurrences on the issues, wide representation, and is basically different from the ritual parliamentary elections. Taking into consideration the methodology adopted for the proposed CA in the interim constitution, one can say that the so-called CA will only be a mockery of it, fulfilling the covert wishes of the corrupt, selfish politicians, as it does not fulfil any of the essence required of a CA.

The wide participation of the people being one of the main essences of the CA, how an assembly election, where only the political parties' representatives are allowed to participate barring the people's participation can claim itself as a CA election? The interim constitution provides that only the politicians will represent the CA. This means only maximum of 3 % of the population will be participating in the process excluding the rest of the people. The total cumulative number of levy-paying cadres of all the political parties in the country will not be more that 7 lacks.

Simply by voting a political party, the voters do not become the members of the party. Such vote is the compulsion due to faith in democracy and is only an endorsement for the selection of thieves from the bunch of dacoits, who stands in the election as party representatives. It is only intellectual bankruptcy to consider such endorsement as selection of people's representation. 97 % of the people are not members of any political parties and only endorse the party candidates with the hope that they will act as per their declared manifestos, which has proven to be wrong every time, so far.

I wonder when and how the so-called political representatives turns out to be people's representative as claimed by politicians, when they stand and nominate themselves in the election as party representative, ask for support and act as party representatives in the assembly?

The other essence of CA is that it should be able to decide, once for all, on the major social, economical political etc. issues of the country. However none of the political parties have put forward single issue for the verdict of the people. There are many political issues like the declaration of republican State, PM's direct election, barring the parliamentarians from being ministers, confiscation of properties accumulated without legitimate source, capital punishment for the heinous crimes, and many others. Politicians will never put such important issues forward, as they are in politics to fool the people for their vested and selfish interests.


If the CA is not able to decide on such important social, political economical and regional issues, the so-called CA will be only a fraud. Before we go for election of CA, we should put forward all the major political, social and economical and regional issues to be solved through the people's verdict. Unfortunately, our so-called CA is only for fooling the people, as the new Constitution is to be prepared not by the people's representatives but by the representatives of the political parties. Hence they will not make decisions on important issues affecting people's lives.

The other equally important essence of CA is wide representation of different sectors, covering professions, castes, religions, regions, sex, etc. In our so-called CA only and only politicians are represented barring others from various sectors. From the past experiences, one can easily say that the nominations will be from the same corrupt, useless bunch of party cadres whose only objective is to loot the country's treasury. If Maoists think they can make new Nepal with the help of such proven dacoits, then it is as foolish a belief of putting 60-70 new potatoes in a sack of rotten potatoes and hoping that the whole sack of potato will turn out to be good.

The other essence of CA is that it should be different from parliamentary elections as CA is not to rule the country but to prepare the ruling document. It is against the simple rule of law that those who rule the country should not be allowed to prepare the ruling documents. Unfortunately, in our case, same politicians who rule the country are also allowed to prepare the ruling document. In such situation, to expect that the rulers will prepare a document that is beneficial to people will be foolish. Their interest will be to fulfil their vested interests and will make such a document that provides them enough avenues to loot the country's treasury.

With these notions, I suggest the coming CA should be for the people, by the people and of the people, barring the political parties from participating as political entities and to stand as an independent Nepali citizen, prepare the constitution and hand it over to the political parties to run the country as per the constitution with the full support of people.

Thoughts on a Republic

(Courtesy: Roop Joshi)

It seems that Nepal is soon to be a Republic. This has been proclaimed repeatedly across the political spectrum. The first sitting of the Constituent Assembly hangs like Damocles’ sword over the nation. Now there is talk that the decision on the monarchy may be taken even before the CA. It is therefore timely to indulge in a retrospection of Plato’s epitome on political philosophy, The Republic.

One of the issues which this timeless dialogue by the Greek philosopher - mentor of Aristotle and student of Socrates - dealt with, 1,600 years ago, is what an “ideal” State would be like. The state would have four great virtues: courage, wisdom, temperance and justice. Plato further divided human beings based on their intelligence, strength and courage. Those who have the most amount of these virtues are fit to rule the state – rule by the best, the Greek word for which is “aristocracy”. Over the centuries, the term “aristocracy” has been denigrated to mean government by people of the highest social class or by hereditary nobility. The true meaning of the word is simply government by those who have the greatest virtues to govern.

On the other hand, in Plato’s opinion, a “Democratic government” holds out the promise of equality for all of its citizens but delivers only the anarchy of an unruly mob, each of whose members is interested only in the pursuit of private interests. In his hierarchy of government forms, a democracy is almost at the bottom, with only tyranny following it.

This is not to decry democracy, despite Plato’s views which were utopian, but to realize that it can easily lead to the tyranny of the mob, each pursuing personal benefits. By the same token, Plato’s aristocracy is also an ideal concept, but the logic behind it cannot be denied. Ideally a monarchy would provide an individual with an abundance of the virtues of courage, wisdom, temperance and justice – something like the “Ram rajya” in Hindu mythology. “Ram rajya” is held up as the perfect example of governance by a wise and just king who placed the good of his people always above his personal interests. No matter that Ram was a reincarnation of Lord Vishnu. His human qualities, tempered with divine awareness, have always been held in admiration. The point being made here is that, in Plato’s Ideal Republic, “aristocracy” overshadows “democracy”. And let us not forget that Plato’s Republic is one of the fundamental expositions of political theory.

Ancient Greek political theories aside, 21st century reality is that democracies are the order of the day and are here to stay. A “representative democracy” (and here the definition of the Founding Fathers of the United States is relevant) is where representatives of the people are elected and whose power to govern is limited by laws enshrined in a constitution. These democracies are a deliberate attempt to diminish the threat of “mobocracy” thereby protecting minority groups from the tyranny of the majority by placing checks on the power of the majority of the population. The power of the majority of the people is checked by limiting that power to electing representatives who govern within limits of overarching constitutional law rather than the popular vote having legislative power itself. Moreover, the power of elected representatives is also checked by prohibitions against any single individual or group having legislative, judicial, and executive powers. In the words of John Adams, one of the signatories to the US Declaration of Independence and the 2nd President of the US, this is "a government of laws, and not of men.". Plato’s concern regarding the possible tyranny of the mob is thus nullified. “By the people, of the people, for the people” is the ringing cry of democracy. But who are the “People”? In Nepal, is it the 85% rural population, 52% illiterate, 40% subsisting below the poverty line? Are they being represented adequately in government? The current Interim Government can hardly lay claim to representing them. An outdated election and the barrel of guns by no means represent anyone.

Having defined the essence of democracy, and keeping in mind that Nepal is struggling today to nurture a vibrant multi-party democracy, let us consider the institution of Monarchy. Modern monarchies, in all cases, are symbols of continuity and statehood. The majority of monarchies that exist in the world today are symbolic, whether they are termed “ceremonial”, “figurehead”, or “constitutional”, i.e. they do not have political power. Cambodia reverted to a constitutional monarchy, enshrined in its 1993 constitution, after the tumultuous years of the communist (Khmer Rouge) holocaust and Vietnamese domination. In Spain, Francisco Franco ensured the resumption of a monarchy upon his death in 1975. Malaysia, certainly one of the foremost democracies in Asia, elects a king every five years from among the hereditary rulers of the nine states of its federation. Japan’s emperor continues to serve as a symbol of nationhood and unity. Thailand’s king, the longest reigning monarch in the world currently, is revered by his countrymen. The monarchies of the United Kingdom and Europe remain while the nations themselves are fully functional democracies. Surely, there is much to be learnt from the monarchies of the nations mentioned above – which, incidentally, are all Democracies.

Is it then far-fetched to assert that the institution of monarchy can still promote stability and a national identity in Nepal? Note the italics: the institution is being considered here, not an individual. The incumbent of the throne plays second fiddle to the institution if the latter is strong and well accepted. In the present context, the King does have a grandson and alternatively there is also the late Princess Sruti’s daughter. A ceremonial monarchy can very well be filled by a minor. Therefore, let us not be too hasty in discarding an institution that can serve the nation well at this crucial cross-road in its history. Here is an institution that has survived the last 238 years through many challenges, not least of which was the 104 years of Rana oligarchy. It is surprising and sad to see the achievements of King Prithivi Narayan Shah and his brother, Bahadur Shah, in creating a single unified Nepal in 1769 marginalised by the republicans. Did not King Tribhuban snatch back democracy from the Ranas in 1950? Did not King Birendra surrender to the wishes of the Nepali people to have a multi-party democracy in 1990?

So when the issue of republic versus monarchy is debated, and it is hoped that a mature vibrant debate will take place immediately, let us not rush to discard anything. Let us not be like the imprudent individual who discards his winter coat ignoring the upcoming winter. Finally, let us ensure that the outcome of this debate is dictated by the majority of the Nepali people, not by the tyranny of a mob or any self-interested group.

Emulating a Singaporean Model -Overhauling the Leadership First

(Courtesy: Chiran Thapa)

Almost every political leader in Nepal has referenced Singapore's success story during his/her political career. The political leaders have constantly boasted of an ability to tow Nepal out of the political and economic abyss and transform it into a prosperous nation like Singapore. However, as the adage goes it’s easier said than done. A simple observation would affirm that Nepal is very far from replicating the Singaporean success. A progressive overhaul of the political leadership is the most exigent need of the nation and it is the first step towards emulating the Singaporean success model,

What makes Singapore such an appealing example for reference amongst Nepali leadership is the country's speedy road to success. In merely three decades, the world witnessed a tiny forsaken island transform itself from a languid laid-back British colonial outpost to a vibrant economic powerhouse. Given the outstanding pace at which economic growth and development progressed in Singapore, it became a preferable exemplar.

Ironically, when Nepali leaders conveniently reference the Singaporean benchmark, simply to sway the constituents, a majority of them have very little understanding or knowledge of the formulas and processes that contributed to Singapore’s success. Rather than just fixating on its speedy progress, it is prescribable to concentrate on the host of salient contributors to the country’s success - amongst which, the astute political leadership stands pre-eminent. Its geographical location, meticulously crafted policies, a highly educated and ethical populace have all blended together to effectuate a brilliant recipe of success. But above all, the main credit must go to the political leadership. It was the visionary and robust leadership of Lee Kwan Yew and his associates that propelled Singapore from a small impoverished island to a prosperous paragon among nations. The leadership's dedication to develop the nation, their incorruptible demeanour, and their knack for crafting meticulously effective public policies are unprecedented. It was Lee and his associates in the government that formulated all the policies--from international trade to trash collection--thus controlling and regulating all aspects of the society.

Albeit critics find the heavy regulation and control strikingly similar to the communist societies, the Singaporean government is at variance because it persevered by very effectively delivering services to their populace. Unlike the communist regimes that crumbled on their own weights, the Singaporean leadership was able to fortify its legitimacy and strength by adequately delivering basic amenities like housing, employment, healthcare, education and physical security. Additionally, under the stewardship of the leadership, the country was able to cultivate a highly educated and disciplined workforce, enhance social cohesion and ensure physical security. Also, it was able to attract substantial foreign investment by providing political stability and ultimately developed a model society.

Another aspect of the Singaporean model noteworthy of mentioning is the educational level attained by the leadership. Almost every top leader holds a high academic degree from a renowned academic institution. It is not just the degree they hold but also the spectacular academic achievements they have made in their academic careers. Most of the leaders were academic prodigies with distinction grades. Negligible exceptions aside, for a majority of them, their ascendancy to the top was based on merits rather than familial linkages.

However, antithetical to the Singaporean Model, the Nepali political leadership is widely accepted to be the supreme inhibitor of growth and success of the country. Although the history of parliamentary democracy is very brief, the stint has adequately exposed the true colours of the Nepali leadership. In bitter contrast to the Singaporean leadership's commitment and dedication that propelled Singapore towards prosperity, the Nepali leadership's ineptness and indifference has plunged the nation into despair and disarray. While Singaporean leaders receive global veneration for their impressive leadership, the Nepali ones are critically loathed even by their own constituents. Furthermore, what succinctly reflects the status of a leader in Nepal is a synonymous term used to characterize it--a crook. Unlike the Singaporean leaders who are garlanded with accolades of morality, integrity, and competence, their Nepali counterparts are labelled with inescapable tags of malfeasance, corruption, nepotism and incompetence.

The incompetence is further compounded by the Nepali leaders’ low levels of education. Others aside, there is no better example to reflect this reality than the example of the current supreme leader, the Prime minister. Few might doubt his decades of involvement in politics but many are highly sceptical about his academic credentials. There are claims that he never even completed his high school. But what gives more weight to this scepticism is the fact that there has never been any mention of his academic degrees anywhere. Even in his biography on the government’s webpage, there is no mention of any academic career. Regardless, Nepal's leadership has never been gauged by the academic credentials or leadership abilities but more by particular affiliations and involvement in political activities. Furthermore, the system of meritocracy is almost inexistent. And it is the political leadership that is alleged of establishing and entrenching a culture where credentials are superseded by nepotism.

So what quality of deliverance can be expected from the leadership whose credentials are gauged either by the number of participation in political protests or by the decibels of their shrieks during those rallies? How is Nepal supposed to move forward when those who are entrusted with the steering wheel of the nation are directionless and are incessantly wrangling for control? More so, what kind of progress can a nation anticipate from those who were in the past heavily involved in plundering and destroying the nation's assets and have now thrust themselves into the leadership platform?

Quintessentially, leaders are role models for a society. Their values, ethics and public responsibility are supposed to set a precedent for the society. Since they are bestowed with power to influence, their every action has great impact. It is an accepted truth that not everyone is a born leader; most acquire and develop the trait. Nonetheless, a leader must possess the ability to lead and motivate, should have a guiding vision and a passion for public service but above all must hold high integrity. Additionally, the globalized era has not only necessitated a global interaction but has also made the process of policy-making even more complex. Given this reality, proper education plays a cardinal role. However, despite holding the reins of power for more than a decade, Nepali leaders have clearly failed to acquire and develop these virtues. On the contrary, their portfolios are tainted by decadence and empty promises.

Hence, given the prevalent deficiency in the current leadership's abilities, the prospects of emulating a Singaporean model under this leadership are highly suspect. As long as there is an impotent authority presiding over country's decision making process, the possibility of the country gearing forward towards prosperity is slim.

Today, given those bleak prospects, there is a growing demand for an overhaul in the leadership. For the sake of the country's progress, it has become imperative to replace the old faces with new ones. Clearly the old-guards have been unsuccessful in meeting the aspirations of the Nepali people. Therefore a fresh, energetic, dedicated and educated group of leaders should be allowed to step in for the task. Inevitably, this emerging generation of young leaders that have so far been sidelined and compelled to operate under the shadows of the old-timers will emerge and take charge. The old leadership can still make good of their promise to transform Nepal into Singapore. Step down with honour, make way for the new generation of leaders, and let them engineer their “Singaporean model.

Related Postings:

http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2006/09/hedging-against-nepals-leadership.html

http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2006/10/leadership-development-for-new-nepal.html

Constitutional Liberalism

(Courtesy: Siddhartha Thapa)

The peace process so far has been built on wishful thinking, hope and trust. The induction of Maoists into the interim government is also no exception – they were inducted purely with the hope and trust built over the last year with the SPA.

However, by inducting the Maoist into the government without the completion of credible arms management and a total renunciation of violence, the government has embarked on a high risk gamble. Unfortunately, the most worrisome aspect is that Girija has played his last card by inducting the Maoists into government. Implicit in this action is the realization that all options to mainstream the Maoists have been exhausted – we can only now hope that the Maoists will "walk the talk." But what if the Maoist fail to relinquish the violence that has been the number element of their so-called "political" campaign?

Democracy is a process and elections a part of this process (not an end in itself). At present, 118 out of the 193 countries in the world have embraced a democratic setup (of some sort), encompassing 54.8 % of the world's population.

The real challenge however, remains the transition to sustainable constitutional liberalism. For instance Iran holds elections on regular intervals, but its constitution legalizes the muzzling of press freedom. Zimbabwe has elected Robert Mugabe who in return has eliminated political opponents. And Saddam Hussein held elections, and that in turn legitimized his audacious brutality. Even Gyanendra claimed his fifteen month rule as a democratic one. The question of course, is whether these are examples of democratic exercises of democratic elements used to forward undemocratic designs?

Examples of a democracy gone awry are aplenty; often the end result is a tyrannical (illiberal) democracy. Given the continuation of Maoist violence and the ideology it supports – a one party communist republic - what is the guarantee that elections to a Constituent Assembly will not result in an illiberal democracy?

The real challenge to Nepal's peace process is the institutionalization of an inclusive democracy through constitutional liberalism. There is truly no alternative to constitutional liberalism.

But like other countries that have undergone difficulties during their own transitional phases, Nepal too is faced with gargantuan challenges that are hindering the prospects of a permanent solution. The first of these challenges is extremism.

Over the years, Nepal has witnessed the most adverse political circumstances. Each is directly correlated to the lack of skilled, quality leadership. With the political leadership's failure to guarantee a functioning democratic platform, individuals collectively resorted to extremism to fulfil their aspirations. As a result, the notion of 'self-determination' gained prominence as a catalyst to muster individual rights.

Extremism, however; in any form, has no ethics. It is based upon completely destroying state infrastructure and cleansing all social associations. Plainly speaking, the focus of extremism is on rewriting history. For extremists, the end always justifies their means, regardless of the suffering, loss of life. Events, atrocities, body counts are all relegated to lifeless statistics, later to be showcased to "honour" the "scarifies" made for extremist visionaries to come to power.

Yet another challenge to Nepal's peace process is guaranteeing individualism that is the bedrock of constitutional liberalism. Individualism is a vital theme that contributed to the changing politics of Nepal. With the advent of the internet and the media boom, communication barriers have been broken, making people increasingly aware; and, as a result the expectations of the common people have soared.

Today, in this ever-increasingly transparent society, individual freedom is the hypothesis through which the future of Nepal will be charted. Where morality and ethics will be based on individual perception, essentially meaning that the 'goal' in life is the attainment of a sense of individualism, that distinguishes one human from the next.

On the political front, the another serious challenge (to Nepal's peace process) is that of containing the armed Maoist militia. The rebel militia which numbers anywhere between 10,000 – 25,000 possesses small arms.

The distinction between the PLA and the militia is critical. While the PLA has fought the security organs of the state, the militia has been responsible for staging kangaroo courts, patrolling villages, abducting, extorting and canvassing Maoist ideology through the country. If the government chooses to continue ignoring the importance of disarming the militia, the forthcoming Constituent Assembly election results will overwhelmingly tilt in the favour of the Maoists.

For the greater Nepali population to participate in the Constituent Assembly elections, it is essential that all legitimate voters are roped into the electoral process – not just those that favour a particular ideology or fear a particular group. Therefore it is extremely critical for the government and the Maoists to prioritize the issue of rehabilitating displaced people prior to the election of constituent assembly.

But the rehabilitation of displaced people may not be desirable to the Maoists. The majority of displaced people fled their homes due to pressure from the rebel militia. And during the early phase of the "people's war," the Maoist militia had specifically targeted members of opposition political parties. As most political opponents of the rebels fled in an exodus to Kathmandu and other safety nets, the void created by the abrupt exodus was filled by ardent rebel sympathizers and the militia in villages throughout rural Nepal - the returnees could upset the balance of Maoist hegemony throughout the countryside.

Given the volatile situation of the country, in is inevitable that the SPA-M leaders will mutually consent to postponing elections, leading to an era of 'eight party rule with unachievable bogeys (once more). Elections are an important facet of a functioning democracy but holding them does not guarantee democratic discourse.

Democracy can only work if it guarantees freedom and accommodates divergent views. If the elections to a constituent assembly do not progress in the direction of constitutional liberalism, the whole exercise will lead to yet another political collision. So instead of falling over each other, congratulating the ruling parties on the "progress" of the peace process, we would be doing ourselves an even larger favour by logically questioning (and working towards) what is more important - the sustenance of the peace process (for sure), but simultaneously, the envisioning of an achievable set of goals, associated timelines and ultimately, a process that yields not just "peace and democracy," but also authentic constitutional liberalism.

Maoists and the Interim Government

(Courtesy: Roop Joshi)

To the victors belong the spoils. In the Interim Government, the Maoists, among their five cabinet portfolios, have bagged three particularly significant portfolios: Information and Communication; Local Development; and Women, Children and Social Welfare. Nepali Congress has kept the "prestige" portfolios of Home, Defense and Finance; UML has the other prestige portfolio of Foreign Affairs. It is ambiguous how long these portfolios will be maintained after the Constituent Assembly elections. It is even more ambiguous when the CA elections will actually take place.

What is interesting is the Maoists' choice of portfolios. Unlike the post 1 February 2005 government, the Maoists know the importance of “public relations” and “winning hearts and minds”. The ministries now headed by Maoist Ministers are those which can most influence the opinion of the masses, cultivate the civil society and strengthen the party's prestige and influence.

Local Development means just that. If the people at the local grassroots level perceive the Maoists as their benefactors, winning their hearts and minds is a foregone conclusion. Government administration at the district and village/municipality levels will now be the prerogative of the Maoists. The networking which they have already established during their underground days will be further strengthened.

Leading the Information and Communication Ministry, all the outlets of modern media can now be influenced to provide the public relations for the Maoists' vision of a new Nepal. This is a valuable opportunity to influence the views of those especially at the local level, whether they relate to the Constituent Assembly elections or should there be a referendum on the institution of Monarchy.

Social Welfare is the umbrella for all societal changes and women's issues can spearhead initiatives in this area. The betterment of the conditions of women and children is a politically safe issue. Roughly half of the Nepalese population is women. Again, if women perceive their interests being championed by the Maoists, their votes will be ensured.

It can only be hoped that the SPA realizes the above and has admitted to itself that the Maoists can do the best job in these areas for Nepal. Of course, the political parties who are not members of SPAM have had no say in this matter; they have been relegated to the periphery of the national polity in this so-called "democratic era".

As an unfortunate side note, the plan to decide the fate of the institution of monarchy (as opposed to an individual monarch) by a simple majority vote in the first session of the Constituent Assembly is also a farce. Nothing but a national referendum can truly indicate a "democratic" conclusion of this issue, which has been relevant to the country for over 200 years. Let us nor forget that there would not be a “Nepal”, were it not for Prithivi Narayan Shah, the first king of Nepal and the precursor of the present Shah dynasty. In fact, if sovereignty and national unity are given the importance they deserve, even a referendum may be unnecessary on the future of the institution of Monarchy in Nepal (not necessarily any particular monarch).

If the Maoists have accepted a multi-party democracy for Nepal, which they say they have, there is cause for optimism. But if the current participation in the government is just a tactical ploy, there is an imminent need to be on guard. The actions of the Maoists even after the signing of the Peace Accord do not provide much confidence as to their intentions. We need to remember how Lenin took over Russia, despite the international situation being vastly different today. Let us watch very closely how well the Interim Government functions: how quickly it ensures law and order, how wisely it resolves the interests of the Madhesis, and how it tackles the socio-economic needs of the country.

What Next?

(Courtesy: Dr. Hari B. Dulal)

The Youth Communist League (YCL) has recently been in the news for the wrong reasons. First, it was ill treatment of the royalists in Birtamod, Jhapa; this was followed by an attempt to disrupt the Madhesi People's Rights Forum (MPRF) protest in Birgunj; physical harassment of hotelier Hari Shrestha; and then came a failed attempt to foil the MPRF's mass meeting in Gaur.
Finally, the one that caused everyone to raise their eyebrows was the carnage in Gaur where the instigation of MPRF's men by the YCL cadres took an ugly turn. Twenty-nine YCL cadres were mercilessly slaughtered in cold blood and many more were injured by MPRF's cadres.

The Maoist arrogance, MPRF's political shortsightedness and inability to keep protests peaceful, and the government's inability to effectively deal with the Maoists and address the grievances of ethnic groups has been slowly pushing the country into the vortex of a full-blown civil war. The April revolution had provided a perfect platform for the re-establishment of peace and democracy. But inability on the part of the Seven Party Alliance (SPA) to effectively handle the situation and manage people's aspirations and the Maoist insincerity towards peace and democracy has left a million dreams lie shattered.

It is time to analyze what went wrong, who are the culprits, and what can and needs to be done to bring the country back onto the track. It is time to ask an indelible question: Why have the so-called leaders failed, over and again? Are we better off now than when the Maoists were in the jungles? Has the government's endless concessions to the Maoists contributed to anything other than increased insecurity, chaos, and blurred future prospects?

The glib idea held by SPA that providing political power will automatically lead to “moderation” of the Maoists is the main culprit behind the present mess. What the political leaders at the helm of the affairs have failed to realize is that political power only begets the desires of the radicals to perpetuate and aggrandize power and does not contribute towards “moderation.” Bringing the radicals to the helms of power has never resulted in moderation. It simply does not work. On the contrary, after coming to power, they get even more “strong headed” and rhetorical.

After coming to power, Hitler did not budge an inch from what he had set down in Mein Kampf , nor did Mussolini disband the Fascists and stop killing his political opponents.
Iran's Ayatollah Khomeini's list of opponents that were to be silenced kept getting larger and bigger after he came to power in 1979. Even after being in power for four decades, the moderation of Fidel Castro never happened; he never toned down. The moderation of Kim Jong Il of North Korea and Hugo Chavez of Venezuela doesn't appear realistic either.

There is a colossal failure of intellect, effort, and imagination on the part of SPA. In order to understand the Maoist totalitarian aspirations, it takes an effort of imagination. It is necessary to put one's self inside the Maoist minds, to see things as they see them, to understand their beliefs, strategy, and actions.

However, it is not an easy task to analyze another's mind when it is so fundamentally different from one's own. It takes effort and the bitter truth is that the SPA leaders never made an effort to understand the Maoist beliefs, strategy, and actions. Had they made an effort to understand the Maoist traits, they would have understood what the Maoists are up to and learnt how to deal with them effectively. They would not have endlessly seceded to the Maoist demands and turned a blind eye to their atrocities.

Out of many mistakes, one of the major mistakes that the SPA government has been making is that it sees the ongoing ethnic movement through the lens of CPN (Maoist). Prime Minister Koirala, whose popularity skyrocketed during and after the April revolution, runs a risk of losing his newfound popularity if he does not desist from watching the ethnic movement through the Maoist prism. The delay in solving the ethnic movement will have far reaching repercussions.
The Gaur carnage should serve as an eye-opener, both to the government and the Maoists.

Prachanda and his fellow ideologues might have never imagined that the people, whom they thought to be oppressed, could rise so quickly and counter the Maoist fiefdom by gunning down their fellowmen. It is absolutely understandable; however, the right to pick up guns is not Prachanda's or for that matter, the Maoist rebels' private domain. Nobody should be condoning the violence, but now, it appears that the only way to challenge the Maoist fiefdom is through the use of force, as the government has failed miserably to enforce law and order and provide ample security to its citizens.

The government has failed to take actions against the Maoists that have flouted the law and provide security to its citizens. The perpetrators of Lahan's killing, Nepalganj's riot, and Birtamod's inhuman acts are still at large. The government and the so-called human rights activists prefer to remain silent when the rights of ordinary citizens are infringed by the Maoist rebels. Why are the human rights of the YCL members killed in Rautahat more precious than the innocent Madhesi killed in Lahan, scores of Madhesis intimidated and harassed in Nepalganj, and the royalists subjected to the inhuman treatment at the hands of YCL cadre in Birtamod?
Unlike most human rights activists in Nepal, who are leftist ideologues and value human rights of leftists to be more precious than those in the center and the right, the government should get over the biases and strive towards protecting the rights to the life and liberty of all citizens, irrespective of their political ideology and affiliations.

As far as Gaur's carnage is concerned, before jumping to hasty conclusions, it is necessary to put things in context. What options did the MPRF cadres have at that point in time, when the YCL members showed up to foil their mass meeting? They basically had two options: (a) be humiliated and leave the ground for the YCL members (b) retaliate and teach the YCL members a lesson, so that from next time onwards they would learn to respect others' rights to protest. The royalists' fate in Birtamod, Jhapa has already taught the MPRF and other groups a good lesson on what happens if you appear weak. The only mistake the MPRF members committed in this case was that they went much farther than just teaching the YCL cadres a good lesson. The inhumane killings of the rowdy YCL cadres that occurred in Gaur were certainly a deplorable act and a colossal failure on part of MPRF to keep the protests peaceful.

If the sister organizations of the Maoists such as YCL that are working towards the establishment of a totalitarian regime are not sufficiently opposed, from within and outside the country, they will proceed to do exactly what they believe in. The followers of totalitarian regimes are brainwashed ideologues that see things only in black and white. For them, the grey area does not exist.

According to British Prime Minister Tony Blair, “You cannot teach people to hate and ask them to practice peace.” These ideologues have been taught to hate people that do not share their ideology and it is impossible to discipline them without using some kind of force or through the strict rule of law. As the latter is virtually non-existent in present-day Nepal, other groups might soon run out of options to protect themselves and their rights and be forced to follow the retaliatory path adopted by MPRF, unless the government acts strongly and dares to punish the Maoists for their atrocities. If the law and order situation is not improved and the YCL cadres engaged in infringing on the rights of others are not punished, the Gaur-type carnage may occur frequently.

The perpetrators of not only the Gaur carnage, but also of the Lahan and Birtamod incidents and riots of Nepalganj, should be brought to justice. The SPA government that has a tendency of falling into the Maoist spell should not get charmed this time around and commit the mistake of outlawing MPRF. If MPRF is outlawed, as suggested by Prachanda, it will open the door for a full-fledged civil war and turn Nepal into a killing field. Are we ready for a civil war?

Where are Moriarty's Haters Now?

(Courtesy: Comrade Libre)

There's a joke making the SMS rounds in Nepal. It goes as follows:

Mrs. Prachanda: "I'm pregnant."
Prachanda: "How is this possible? I've been living underground for the last decade???"
Mrs. Prachanda: "I'm still pregnant."
Prachanda: "Damn those Royalists! Those 'regressive' forces have struck again!!"

Although there's no connection between Mrs. Dahal's pregnancy and American Ambassador James F. Moriarty, there's definitely a strong correlation between increasing public awareness and what Moriarty, and like-minded individuals, have been alluding to all along - that the Maoists are ideologically incapable of adapting to a political environment, devoid of violence.

The Maoists' branding political developments (outside of their narrow world-view) as "Royalist"-initiated or "regressive," has reached an all-time high on the scale of stupidity. American Ambassador Moriarty was branded a Royalist sympathizer for the exact same reasons the Maoists call the Madhesi Janadhickar Forum (MJF), selective members of the Nepal's business community and any other group that opposes Maoist intimidation, violence and coercion, "Royalists."

The Maoists' arcane "red book" is an inadequate tool with which to interpret 21st century political phenomena. Their brain-washed cadre know nothing about original thought and remain content regurgitating "scripture" from their little "red books." The "broken record" approach is the only approach Maoists have been taught and it is the only approach they have the mental capacity to employ - whether in politics or life.

For the Maoists, the idea of democratic opposition is a complete anomaly. Hence, the application of the term "Royalist" as a panacea to any phenomenon that outdated Maoist ideology is incapable of explaining. The Maoists have proved, time and again, their inability to rationalize political opposition. They need to urgently learn that as along as opposition is not of the armed variety, it is completely legitimate in democratic politics.

Unfortunately for Nepal, the Maoists continue to live by their mantra that "power comes from the barrel of a gun." This has always been, and continues to be the Maoists' guiding principle. Despite the plethora of apologists who actively advocated the signing of the 12 Point Agreement (on the basis of changed Maoist ideology), there is absolutely no evidence to even marginally substantiate that the Maoists' strategic end-goals have changed.

As repeatedly pronounced by various members of the Maoist leadership, the Peace Process currently underway is merely a tactical adaptation, necessary to achieve higher, strategic objectives. As a matter of public record, the Maoists' strategic objectives include the following: the establishment of a one-party communist republic, a dedicated thrust in support a Compact Revolutionary Zone (CRZ), and by default, the systematic eradication all non-Maoist political ideology from Nepal.

While over-zealous civil society and human rights activists feed off the UN's $88 million "peace dividend" to Nepal, the Maoists continue, unrelentingly down a path of radical politics. Hundreds of cases of intimidation, of reporters being threatened for publishing news harmful to the Maoist "image," of ordinary citizens being taxed twice and thrice, of extortion drives, of armed politics, have all gone undocumented.

With standing orders from the Home Ministry to not confront the Maoists, the public remains completely exposed to Maoist atrocities. Never mind a handful of Maoists who were arrested as a public stunt. Rather, consider that the cop (who restrained the armed Maoist body guard from entering parliament), was first reprimanded by the valley Deputy Inspector General (DIG) and then re-assigned outside of Kathmandu, the following day. Why? Because the poor chap did his job.

Then there came back-to-back allegations from the Maoists that first, they had collected information of a plot by the Royal Palace to assassinate SPA politicians and second, that the Royalists had engineered another plot to kill American dignitaries.

Even though the "evidence" was presented in the House, not a single politician demonstrated the courage to point out the very serious nature of what the Maoists had alleged or to evaluate the "evidence," which of course, turned out to be completely bogus. Nepali politicians seem to show no hesitation when begging for American aid, but when it comes to protecting American citizens in Nepal, not a single snivelling politician, said a word. There is only one term to describe this - "shameful."

The Maoists continue to blatantly disrespect diversity in political ideology. Last week, the nation was shocked by images of RPP party members wearing "shoe garlands," with soot rubbed on their faces. In a few months' time, UML cadre will face similar humiliation and at the end of the line, the Nepali Congress (the bahun-baad faction which is most the feudal of all political institutions in Nepal), will face the brunt of the leftist backlash, alone.

Then came the icing on the cake of intolerance - a fire fight in the midst of the much hyped peace process, that resulted in 28 deaths. Is this not a violation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement? Or does armed Maoist militia exchanging fire with MJF personnel, somehow differ from Maoists "hi-jacking" 13 Army trucks or beating businessmen for not paying extortion fees? Can't wait to hear about the conspiracy theories on this tragedy!

So where are Moriarty's critics today? Where are the Civil Society and Human Rights activists who were falling over each other, kissing Prachanda's ass in public? Where are the self-proclaimed "protectors" of Nepal's democracy when what little we have, is being systematically dismantled. Do these idiots finally understand where Moriarty and like-minded people were coming from when they warned of the nation being held "hostage" to the peace process (under the pretext of "regressive" activism)?

What Nepal is witnessing dangerously borders on all-out anarchy. The accounts listed above aren't sporadic, these are systematically orchestrated events, with Maoist sponsors on one end and anti-Maoist elements (and possibly Royalists) on the other end. While Maoist sympathizers and their Maoist handlers maintain that Royalist and anti-Maoist elements are synonymous, the Madhesi movement has invalidated this myth, completely. What next?

Regardless of what the Maoist leadership says, with every passing day, they are losing their grip on their own organization. With every passing day, the Maoists are getting more and more desperate and it is no secret that desperate people tend to commit desperate acts.

Welcome to the New Revolution… with no idiot king as a focal punching bag, this revolution definitely won't be "televised." Even with all the atrocities that persist, Nepal will be lucky to get an occasional column in a right-wing rag like the Washington Times - that too, written by elements that grovel to known, left-wing extremists like Prachanda and his clowns. Yet another irony on a never-ending list of ironies that collectively, describe the tragedy that Nepal is.

The End Game

(Courtesy: Siddhartha Thapa)

"The mere absence of war is not peace", said J. F. Kennedy during the Cuban missile crisis. This statement is relevant to Nepal's context today. Despite repeated assurances from the Maoists that they have retracted from violent politics, the reality is vastly different. Clearly, the Maoist have made a travesty out of the peace process and arms management. It has become obvious that the elections to the Constituent Assembly cannot be held in the stipulated time frame for mid June. This unfortunate circumstance is mainly due to the failure of the government to confine Maoist to peacetime politics. This failure consequently led to the rapid deterioration of law and order. The ramification of the postponement of the elections is immense – a fluid political vacuum.

The government still has not learnt from the Maoist war. It is this war, which forced the nation into a grinding halt. It is also the Maoists who have distanced the country from peacetime democratic politics. Deeper understanding is needed to comprehend the issues plaguing the country's transition into a peaceful nation with a sustainable democracy.

Our portly political pundits need to understand that the discontented ethnic groups that have been staging agitations across the country are just now in the initial phase of their revolution. The issues of seclusion and minority rights have the necessary ingredients for the brewing of a greater revolution. Therefore, the continued dillydallying and delay in addressing ethnic issues, has the potential to push country into further quagmire – with the rise of a series of mini and counter revolutions, which could lead to the disintegration of the nation state. The ethnicity dilemma could and should have been solved at the beginning of its insurrection but unfortunately, the demands set forth by the various agitating groups have soared due to continued negligence from the government. On the other hand the Maoist insurgency has served an ideal benchmarking model for agitating groups to attain political limelight and power through the use of arms and violent politics.

The recent turmoil and continued political unrest in the Terai has exposed that in the absence of elections, the major political parties are rapidly losing their base; proving that it is only the Maoists, by using force, and indigenous groups that retain some control over rural Nepal. In more recent times the blatant violation of the peace process by the Maoists and the continued intimidation conducted by its cadres has been reciprocated with brute force by agitating groups. The Maoist influence in the Terai has been questioned for the very first time. It is interesting to note that the Maoist high command has toured the southern belt as a precautionary damage control measure.

Prime Minister Koirala's effort to induct the Maoist into government was based on the thesis that once the rebels are inducted in govern- ment, the vantage of being in opposition would no longer be a luxury enjoyed by the Maoist and they would be forced to change and act within the norms of multi party politics.Unfortunately the violence and brutality perpetuated by the Maoists has not subsided. Maoists are unquestionably the primary political party in the alliance. The revolt by the indigenous groups for equality indicates that confrontation is inevitable. The demands put forward by the indigenous group contravene Maoist school of thought – radical communism. The ramifications of these developments are critical.

Since Maoists are now a part of the interim government, any attack against the Maoist will be termed as an attack against the govern- ment. Prachanda recently declared that the Maoist have been eyeing Home and Defense ministries as a precondition to join govern- ment. This means that once the Maoist join the government, the state security organs might be used to crush any voice or ethnic movement that calls for change and opposes Maoist rhetoric. If these minis- tries are allocated to the Maoists, it will ignite violent unrest and mar Nepal's transition towards permanent peace and democracy.

It is foreboding that even while in government the Maoists have failed to abide by the peace agreement and renounce violence. As the election date nears, Maoist violence might reach its peak and the Prime Minister be forced to postpone the vote fearing fraudulent and violent elections. Till the time of the elections the Maoist might have incapaci- tated state organs, political opponents and built a case of public discontent against the government creating an environment for protests engaging in a dual role – govern- ment and opposition.

The state organs lack the required leadership to thwart Maoist designs. The Prime Minister has also failed to boost government confidence. Going by the government's lack of policy, the indications are that in any event, the Maoist will capture state power- either through forcing fraudulent elections or by brewing public discontent against the government.

Ethnic Groups and Race Based Federalism: A Recipe for Disaster for Nepal

(Courtesy: Khagendra Thapa)

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. once said “Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter." It seems that Nepal has no leader who can speak out the truth and not just repeat like a parrot what the Maoists comrades have been saying ever since the SPA came to power with the blessings from the Comrades as well as our friendly neighbor to the south.

With the untimely death of the 1990 constitution, the Seven Party Alliance (SPA) and their comrades the Maoists together code named as SPAM have claimed to represent all the people of Nepal and the interest of the Nepalese people whether the people like it or not. SPAs claim to represent the people because they were elected more than seven years ago. The Maoists comrades claim to represent the people because they have been able to coerce the people to support them by intimidation, extortion, armed kidnapping, and cheap slogans. Together the SPAs and the Maoists, the so called SPAM have become the most powerful political force or so they claim. With the mighty Prime Minister Mr. Girija Koirala in the driving seat and his Comrade Prachanda in the front seat together with all the heroes of Janandolan II and eleven years old insurgency veterans, the bus carrying the Interim Constitution was in motion. Unfortunately, the arrogance of SPAM was challenged by both the Terai residents (Madhesi Group) and the Janajatis. The Interim constitution also made provision to form an interim parliament with the addition of 83 Maoists and 48 other members who are part of SPAM. After all, the scrapping of the old constitution may not have been an excellent idea.


Lack of Patriotic and Visionary Leadership

It is indeed very sad for the people of Nepal that there is not a single national level patriotic and visionary leader with clean image. Right now, Mr. Girija Koirala is the leader of SPAM. However, Mr. Koirala is not accepted by all the people. First of all, he is the leader of the half Congress party. The other half of the Congress party is led by Mr. Deuba. Mr. Koirala’s behavior during the Tanakpur Treaty with India and his lack of interest to safeguard the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the country puts a question mark on his patriotism. In addition, Mr. Koirala as a Head of State and Head of Government failed to express his opposition to the encroachment of Nepalese territory in various border areas by India including in Kalapani, Susta, Illam, Jhapa. Saptari, Banke and Bardia. In fact, even the Ranas who ruled the country for 104 years were more patriotic than any of the SPAM leadership. For example, during the British Rule of India, Nepal maintained all even numbered borders and the Brirish maintained all the odd numbered pillars every year. That kind of border maintenance was abandoned both by multiparty rulers and Panchayati rulers.

Secondly, Mr. Koirala does not have a clean image. His involvement in various scandals during the time he was prime minister for the major part of multiparty government from 1990 to 2001. In fact, Mr. Koirala refused to present himself to the court when he was summoned by the court on corruption charges.

Thirdly, Mr. Koirala does not have any vision or any other plan to develop and help the country and the people. He is a happy camper as long as he is in power.

Fourthly, majority of the leaders of all political parties do not have clean image. Many of them have been involved with corruption, nepotism, favoritism, and influence peddling. Some of them even have criminal records including murder.

How about the Maoists Comrades? What kind of credibility do they have? Well, as we all know 13,000 Nepalese people lost their lives as a direct result of the so called people’s war started by the Maoists insurgents. Another 26,000 committed suicide because they could not bear the pain and suffering caused by the war. Over a million people were internally displaced. Many more people left the country in total despair without any hope for themselves and for their children. Today, there are hundreds of thousands of Nepalese people working as laborers (often doing the most dangerous and life threatening jobs which nobody else would do) in many Gulf countries as well as in Malaysia and South Korea.

Several millions if not billions of dollars of worth infrastructure including government offices, schools, transmission towers, bridges, roads, etc have been destroyed. All this happened because of the people’s war. The comrades must take the responsibility for the injustices done to the people. So these Maoists leaders whose hands are stained with the blood of the people are also intoxicated with the blood of the 13,000 Nepalese people. Therefore, it would be an exercise in futility to expect any thing good from these self proclaimed leaders who got where they are today with the use of guns and bombs and also with a little bit of help from the extremely friendly neighbor in the south.

According to Sobhakar Parajuli (Kathmandu Post, Feb,. 28, 2007) “The Maoists spread a reign of terrorism in villages and urban areas. They have yet to return the property of innocent people seized during their so-called people's war. They continue to extort money and threaten the villagers. Madi ambush is still fresh among the relatives of those killed. Now Prachanda regrets that it was their mistake when he was aware of the fact that traveling in the bus were innocent passengers. Such regretting words do not convince the people. Rather, Prachanda appears cruel and inhumane in the eyes of the common people.”
Well then, are there any other leaders in the SPAM or any other political parties who have long term plan to lift the nation out of poverty, illiteracy, hunger, disease, and outdated caste system? Do any of them have a way to stop the exploitation of the poor and destitute people from the clutches of feudal landlords and crooked business man? Unfortunately, the answer is no.

All these leaders are chanting the same Mantra as the Maoists Comrades. For example, the comrades have been chanting the mantra of Federalism and Constituency Assembly (CA) elections and every one of the leaders both inside and outside SPAM chant the same mantra without even understanding what does constituency assembly or Federalism mean? What are the long term implications of these activities? Does Federalism lead us to a better future? Or it would lead to the fragmentation of the nation thereby multiplying the interethnic conflicts. Would it help us to provide better education to our children? Would it help us to provide better health care to our people? Would it help us to improve the well being of our people? Would it improve the standard of living our people? Would it help us to maintain the peaceful relationship among our multiethnic and multi linguistic people? If so please tell us exactly how it would happen. Is it magical in nature? Does it mean that as soon as the King is exiled or executed and CA elections held and Federalism established, Nepal will turn into another heaven?

People want to know what your plan for economic development is. What are the SPAM plans for education, healthcare, environmental issues, and exploitation of the poor people? Every dissident group is in a destructive mood right now. The infrastructure that was built by donations or borrowed money has been destroyed by our comrades as well as others who think they deserve a bigger piece of existing pie. No one wants to work to increase the size of the pie so that every one will have enough.

What kind of Leader Do Nepalese People Want?

Unfortunately, Nepal never had a visionary leader who puts personal interests above political party interests and national interests above political party interests. None have shown any vision for the future of the nation. No leader has been acceptable to all ethnic groups and people of different political affiliations. If we are to build our nation strong and prosperous we need to have political leader who has the following characteristics:

1. Since Nepal is a multi-ethnic nation where no group is in majority, we need a leader who is completely unbiased and can get along with people of all regions and ethnic backgrounds irrespective of their culture, language, political affiliations and caste. In other words, the leader must be able to live and work with Kamis, or Sarkis, or Sherpas, or Tharus, or Danuwar, or Satars, or Limbus, etc. This can only happen if the leader has the interests of the people and the nation above his/her personal interests.

2. People need a leader who has high moral and ethical standards and as such s/he has the ability to tell others to follow high ethical and moral values.

3. The leader must also be motivating and charismatic so that s/he can influence the people and motivate them to work hard to improve their own livelihood and neighborhood.
The leader must also possess a clear sense of purpose (or mission) - clear goals - focus – commitment.

4. The leader must also be able to work with others and be highly optimistic and results oriented
Ability to encourage and nurture others so that s/he can make a difference in the lives of the people.

5. Ability to understand what others say, rather than listening to how they say things. One could partly sum this quality up as "ability to walk in someone else's shoes" Or know where the shoe pinches.

6. The leader must be able to display a passion for, and have a strong conviction of, what they regard as the moral correctness of their vision. They engage in outstanding or extraordinary behavior and make extraordinary self-sacrifices in the interest of their vision and mission.

7. The leader must be inspirational and communicate with people in an understandable way and live by example. S/he must have high self confidence, determination and persistence.
The leader must have ability to delegate authority to reliable and competent people.

The question is do we have any leaders who display even five of the above qualities? You be the judge.


Culture of Death, Destruction, and Violence

It is no secret that Maoists got where they are today using ruthless violence, destruction, murder, looting, kidnapping, intimidation, and extortion. They also used cheap and unrealistic slogans to attract people to their line of thinking. For example, Comrade Prachanda when he first showed up in public promised to turn Nepal into another Switzerland. It seems he was repeating the rhetoric of another great leader Mr. Krishna Prasad Bhattarai who proclaimed that he was going to make Nepal as developed as Singapore within five years when he was the prime minister.

Comrade Prachanda even went to the extent of claiming that he can make greater Nepal by declaring the Sugauli Treaty signed with the British in 1816 null and void. This comes from the same leader who wants to give the right to self determination to all those ethnic groups who are demanding for it. Comrade Prachanda! Tell us the truth do you want to break the country into smaller countries or build a greater Nepal? Your statements are conflicting and confusing.

Now the Maoists comrades are in power with the successful use of force, destruction of public and private property, extortion, and intimidation. The success of Maoists is now being copied by other groups. They have learned that it pays to be violent and act of violent crimes can get results. With the lessons learned from the Comrades, other groups whether they are Terai residents, Khambuwans, Tamurats, Magarats and many others are using the time tested Maoists tactics to get what they want. There is a culture of violence, death and destruction in Nepal now. Every one wants to stop the movement of vehicles and burn tires causing great amount of financial loss to the working class.

One of the dangerous promises that the comrades used was to turn Nepal into a Federal Republic where each indigenous group of people will have an autonomous republic. For example, they promised different autonomous regions for such ethnic groups as Gurungs, Magars, Newars, Tamangs, Tharus, and many others.


How Can an Autonomous Regions be Achieved?

According the 2001 Census of Nepal, the population of Nepal consists of the following categories in terms of percentage:

(clicke HERE for table)

There are 72 other categories of people in Nepal which are not listed in the above table. The criteria used to cut off was any groups which are less than 0.5% of the total population are not quoted as these would not be needed to make the point clear.

Let us say, for example, as promised by Maoists Comrades that we all agree that Limbuwan and Khambuwan are given an autonomous region in the eastern Nepal. From the above table one can see that they constitute a population of 4.37% when both groups are combined. Now, the problem is the region where they want their autonomous region also have many other ethnic groups including Magars, Gurungs, Bahuns, Chhetries, Kamis, Damais, Sarkis, Newars, Tamangs, and the list goes on and on. If they are given autonomy in the area then what are the other people who have been living there for hundreds of years going to do? Do they have to move to somewhere else? If so where would they go? Let us forget about the Bahuns and Chettris who are supposedly the exploiters and let them go to hell. However, what is a poor Kami or a poor Damai is going to do. Where would they go? Kamis and Damais like Newars, Bahuns, Sarkis, and Chettris are spread all over Nepal.

Representation of Ethnic Groups

The recent revolts by the Terai residents and the various ethnic groups from the mountains have been claiming the fair representation in administration, army, police, etc. There is no question that their demands are appropriate and justified. However, these demands cannot be addressed by CA election or the introduction of Federalism.


Empowerment of Local Governments and not Federalism is the Answer

According to the 2001 census of Nepal, there are 103 different ethnic groups in Nepal. They speak at least 90 different languages. Some of the ethnic groups are as small as 164 people. For example, according to the 2001 census of Nepal there are only 164 Kusundas in Nepal and these people are no where else in the world. Different groups of people especially the ones demanding the autonomy are spread out through out the nation. Therefore, introduction of Federalism or declaration of self governing regions based on ethnic groups will spell disaster for the whole country. It would not even benefit the group that is claiming autonomy. The ethnic groups such as Magars, Tharus, Tamangs, Newars, only constitute 7.14%, 6.75%, 5.64%, and 5.48% respectively. Moreover, these groups are not living in a particular locality. They are pretty much spread out through out the country except the Tharus who mainly reside in the Terai belt.

Therefore, the best way to kill the snake without breaking the stick would be to empower the local governments. It will be a true democratic way of resolving the demands of terai residents as well as the various ethnic groups of the hill areas.

What Kind of Power would the Local Government Have?

The ultimate objective should be to give the power to raise tax, be responsible for taking care of school education, primary health care, local self governance including public safety (hiring local police), passing the rules and regulations on the local governance, and judiciary. Well, that gives the local elected bodies complete authority. It will all be democratic because the people will elect not only the local government officials but also the judges and the chief of the police. People must be alert and ask for transparency, accountability, and rule of law. This will be the ultimate democracy which will satisfy the demands of all ethnic groups no matter how small or how large they are.

Table-1

Bahunism Extended to Other Cultures and People - Analysis of Character and Physical Features as Templates

(Courtesy: Professor B. B.)

Paper-1

Ok, so the Bahunist code has now been articulated by Sano Baje (http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/03/bahunists-and-bahunism-mini.html). Here's his rap sheet on Bahunism: historical resentment bred from working as priests in palaces; a Svengaliness; gaining status through birth-right and perpetuating this system while talking righteously about equality and democracy; overall connivance - and all the while pretending to smell like a rose. But what does a Bahunist look like and can this look be used as a template to extend across other races and cultures?

The features of a Bahunist: a longish face, large fleshy ears, a large nose that can be sharp or bulbous, eye color ranging from hazel to almost blue, plenty of hair (back hair is a dead give-away), bushy eyebrows, and fair of skin - almost European in looks at times. Although this isn't universal, Baburam Bhattarai, for example, looks like a constipated ferret.

Having established the basic Bahunist look, remember that Sano Baje notes that not all Brahmins are Bahunists. Indeed, a janajati friend of mine, told me he called his Gurung friend a Bahun. But my interest is not in Nepali Bahunists using Sano Baje's template but to explore whether character and physical attributes can be applied to others using a totally scientific method - the kind of scientific method proposed by Marx and Engels and adopted by the great modern Nepali Scientific duo - Professors Prachanda and Baburam.

Being a Ph.D like Baburam and extremely intelligent like him, I've come up with an empirical scale that ranges from 0 to 10 with 10 representing the highest level of Bahunism while 0 represents a total lack of Bahunism. In this scientific scale, "looking like a Bahunist" carries somewhat more weight than "acting" like one.

Let's begin children.

Ian Martin, Head of UNMIN: Off the charts 10. Put a janai on him, yellow and red tika, and a white dhoti can you couldn't tell the difference. He'd be hired on-the-spot to do my son's Bartaman.

Daniel Lak, Columnist, Nepali Times: 9. He doesn't get a 10 because he sounds like he's babbling in his columns - Bahunists are more articulate. Seems also that he could eat a whole tin of ghee and several dozen puris in on sitting.

African Americans: 0. Yes ZERO. Brothers are the anti-thesis of Bahunism. Brothercool and Bahunism are like oil and water - they don't mix. Brothers are tooooo fly, no lie. But remember, Kofi Annan or any brother working for the UN doesn't count.

Chinese: 5. This is a tough one. Being hairless definitely moves them massively down the scale. But recent incidents in New York, where the owners of a Chinese restaurant was busted for handing out one menu for Chinese patrons and another for foreigners (with higher prices) is Bahunism gone wild. So the yin and the yang balance to give them a 5.

George Bush, President, United States: 0. Too stupid.

Patrick Leahy, US Senator, Vermont: 7. Yakked like crazy during King Gyanendra's moves and helped topple the buffoon King but now silent as a mouse when it comes to Maoist atrocities. Definitely, bartaman material.

Ambassador Moriarty, US Ambassador to Nepal: 0. Cowboys follow the brothercool effect - unless in movies like Brokeback Mountain.

Hillary Clinton, Candidate for US President: 6. She would be close to a 10 except for her husband who lowers her Bahunist score because of his propensity for dropping his pants on demand, offset only by the classic Bahunist "I did not have sex with that woman" claim.

Indian Ambassadors (all of them): 10. Need I say more here.

Ban Ki Moon, GS, United Nations: 0. If you eat dogs, you're bitulo, unholy and don't even rate.

Robert De Niro, actor, director, writer, producer: 0. C'mon, you talkin' to me.

Jack Nicholson, actor: 0. Not when you play a ruthless Irish King-like Don Frank Costello in the "The Departed" that wins Scorcese his long-awaited Oscar.

George Clooney, actor: 6. No one said Bahunists are ugly and lack charm, talent, and wit. He is a 6 only because of his looks - not because of his Svengaliness.

Howard K. Stern, self-alleged father of Anna N. Smith's daughter: 10 to 10th power (this, children, is what is known as an outlier in statistics). This guy is scum.

King/potentially ex-King Gyanendra: Null score. There's another scale for Royalists which will be posted shortly. In that scale, propensity for repeated self-inflicted wounds stemming from stupidity, hiring bad advisors, and the heavi-ness of one's jowls and overall looks will be key scoring factors.

Bahunists and Bahunism - A mini-Dissertation on the Caretakers of Nepal's Feudal Tradition

(Courtesy: Sano Baje)

For those of us who have lived with this phenomenon all our lives, what is described below is no big revelation. However, for the benefit of those who think Nepali politics boils down to a struggle between Royalists and Maoists, or democrats and autocrats, or centrists and extremists, they are only partially correct. There is one other critical grouping that serves as chief sponsor of the political turmoil in Nepal - the Bahunists.

Who are the Bahunists?

So who (what) exactly are the Bahunists? Well, those who believe in Maoism are Maoists; those who believe in the Royal tradition are Royalists. Similarly, those who believe in the "Bahun-baad" tradition, are the Bahunists.

What is the "Bahun-baad" tradition and who precisely are the Bahunists? Ask any Janajati, Dalit, Newar, Madhesi (or non-Brahmin individual) - he or she will provide you a dissertation on what "Bahun-baad" is and exactly how much damage the Bahunists have done to the idea of liberal democracy in Nepal.

Ask the Chhetris, the Thakuris, the Ranas, the Thapas, the Mallas, the Shresthas, the Tamrakars, the Kayasthas (etc.) the same question, and it is likely they will give you a different answer. Members of these groups are sure to know who the Bahunists are, but they probably don't understand the phenomenon that well.

Why? Because for centuries, Bahunists have successfully performed as the mechanism that enables (and amplifies) Nepal's feudal traditions; at the same time, the Bahunists have been successful in portraying the non-Bahunists as either the face, or the victims of feudalism.

Why are the Bahunists so Angry and Dangerous?

It is important to note that not all Brahmins are Bahunists. Just like not all Chhetris are Royalists and not all Janajatis are Maoists. This being said, all Bahunists (like other minority extremists), are bad news. Just like the hard-core Royalists give the Chhetris a bad name, the hard-core Bahunists give the Brahmins a bad name.

At least when Royalists have disagreements with other Royalists, all they do is publish trashy articles about each other in the media. When Maoists argue with other Maoists, the one with the bigger balls puts the other one in detention and then India steps in and sorts things out.

When Bahunists have arguments with other Bahunists, all hell breaks loose - look at what happened when the Bahunists in the Nepali Congress and the Bahunists in the Maoists disagreed - the whole country suffered for 12 years!! This is one of many reasons why Bahunists are bad for Nepal, just like their extremist friends from other camps.

To put it plainly, the Bahunists have functioned for ages as priests and "purohits" (mostly in the houses of high-caste Chhetris, Hindu temples, etc.) during times of unrest and war. During times of peace, they have operated in the shadows, for example, by completely Sanskritizing the exam to enter the Nepali Foreign Service, by excluding members of other ethnic groups and castes from politics, by monopolizing the state's political beaurecracy, by inserting key Bahunists in the Nepali Police, etc.

The Bahunists' fathers and forefathers accomplished the process of monopolizing state power (from within government), but some Bahunist off-spring are still angry. Why are Bahunist off-spring so violently against the idea of Monarchy? Because they are now accomplished in their own fields and find shame in the fact that their ancestors were preists in the Palace.

It's all very simple. Bahunist off-spring feel entitled to respect because of their accomplishments, but are unable to let go of their ancestral pasts and earn the respect just like everyone else. Shame is a powerful driver of hatred, as anti-Americanism flourishing the Arab world has shown. But Bahunists are embarrassed and angry for the all the wrong reasons.

If Bahunists (who have enjoyed privileged existences their whole lives) are angry, how should the Janajati and Madhesi and other minority groups feel at being repressed by the Bahunists all their lives? Remember, it may be a stupid individual like Gyanendra who sits at the wheel of the "ship," but read history - it has always been Bahunists that have guided and assisted idiots like Gyanendra, navigate the "ship."

What do Bahunists, Illiberal Democrats and the Ku Klux Klan, have in common?

In Nepal, Nepotism, sycophancy and exclusion all have one thing in common - the Bahunists. With the exception of a few "token" members from other caste groups, Nepal's politics, Nepal's education system, Nepal's public sector, Nepali media, are all completely dominated by Bahunists and their circle of semi-slaves.

When examined according to the dimensions of elite-ness and exclusivity, the Bahunists in Nepal behave much like the Ku Klux Klan (at their height), in the United States of America. The Bahunists look down on other castes, they feel superior to other classes and they advocate Bahunist supremacy, non-stop.

The "beauty" of how the Bahunists operate is that they do so under the idea of democracy, inclusion, equality and social harmony. They project the image that they are for the rights of minorities, that they are for the weak and downtrodden, that they are the most democratic of all groups.

But truly, nothing could be further from the truth. Bahunists act in favour of other Bahunists. They elevate the status of only Bahunists. They represent the very core of what is rotten in Nepal's democracy. The "Bahun-baad" phenomenon (as propagated by the Bahunists) is the single biggest threat to social harmony, to liberal democracy, to equality, and peace in Nepal.

What do you think Dor Bahadur Bista was talking about when he wrote "Fatalism and Development in Nepal?" Who do you think the International Crisis Group is referring to when they issue statements like: "Control over the peace process has not increased confidence; that all decisions were made behind closed doors by a handful of Brahman men leaves sceptics wondering if ten years of conflict has done anything to change underlying structures."

Here's another (more recent) quote from ICG: "So far the (peace) process has concentrated on building elite consensus at the expense of intense political debate or extensive public consultations."

If you guessed the Bahunists (in response to all three references above), you're absolutely right.

Who are some of the more prominent anti-Bahunists and why is their struggle not providing results?

What makes the Bahunists particularly destructive is that they are found at the top layers of every political entity in Nepal. They are at the top of the UML, they are at the top of the the Maoists, they are entrenched in the judiciary. In fact, the very core leadership of the Nepali Congress right now, are all Bahunists.

If you ever wondered about why people like Gagan Thapa, or Rabindra Shrestha (or even the JTMM) are so very annoyed with their mother organizations, it's because they resent being subdued by the Bahunists.

If you're still wondering why the Madhesi community's spontaneous uprising has been so full of passion, it's simple. It's because the Madhesis resent all decisions of political importance being made by a congregation of Bahunists. It's because they are sick and tired of Bahunists playing games with the future of Madhesis.

Like the Janajatis, the Madhesis know from experience who runs the mechanics of Nepal's feudal structure. There might be an idiot at the top of the pyramid of feudalism, but the entire base of this pyramid is full of Bahunists and their sympathizers. Thank goodness Jana Aandolan-II has clarified this beyond any credible doubt.

How do Bahunists react when they face a common threat?

When Bahunists face a threat to their powerbase, they come up with conspiracies. And not just small conspiracies, but elaborate theories that span many years and multiple dimensions. To the Bahunists, any threat to their undemocratic, exclusive, power-base is explained by a sophisticated conspiracy.

Fortunately, over the past few months, Bahunist conspiracies have gotten them into more trouble than they would care to admit.

For example, when the Bahunists came up with conspiracy theories about the Madhesi uprising being part of an elaborate Royalist design, this added anger and fuel to the Madhesi uprising.

When the Maoist Bahunists (yes, the Bahunists are at the top of the pecking order within the Maoists as well) and the Bahunists in the Nepali Congress schemed to discredit the Madhesi movement, the Madhesi movement gathered even more momentum.

When the Bahunists refused to ask one of their own to resign (in order to start negotiations with the Madhesis), naturally, the Madhesis understood exactly how much "respect" the Bahunists have for the Madhesi population.

It is hilarious when Bahunists make statement about how much they have given to the Madhesi community by "allowing" them citizenship rights. This is the Bahunists' attempt at gaining sympathy from the Madhesi community. Even more hilarious is when the Bahunists claim stake to being members of the Madhesi community (for electoral reasons).

Everyone knows that the biggest threat to continued Bahunist domination comes from movements that demand ethnic assertion, equality and proportional representation - you know, movements like the Madhesi movement and the Janajati movement.

There are thousands of examples of Royalist conspiracies that are outlined by the Bahunists (from within the Maoists and other political groups). In fact, anything that even remotely threatens the Bahunists' hold on power, is framed as a conspiracy against democracy.

Here are some excellent examples of Bahunists in action: "Janajati Nepal Banda: Royalists in Charge (and Other Headlines)" (http://www.blog.com.np/united-we-blog/2007/02/28/janajati-nepal-banda-royalists-in-charge-and-other-headlines/) and "Surya Bahadur Thapa Interview: Hidden Messages?" (http://www.blog.com.np/united-we-blog/2007/02/26/surya-bahadur-thapa-interview-hidden-messages/).

How do Bahunists react when they are under public scrutiny?

In the old days, if attacked, Bahunists would run back to their priestly duties and seek protection from Hinduism - "respect your priest, do not harm your guru, feed him well, clothe him well, bull shit, bull shit, bull shit."

In recent times, Bahunists tend to throw money at whatever problems they are having. But when half the country's population is rising against the Bahunists, they are finding that spending money alone, isn't getting them relief. This is making the Bahunists extremely nervous.

Another technique Bahunists use is that they immediately mobilize their global Bahunist network, Bahunists in the media, and Bahunists across the political spectrum, to spread misinformation, to sensitize issues and to manipulate (detract) the Nepali public's mood. As technology has grown and access to information along with it, the Bahunists have mastered the means to amplify their Bahunist cause.

What Royalists failed to understand is the distinction between love for the institution and hatred for the individual; What the Maoists understand (but intentionally ignore) is that one does not have to be a Royalist to oppose Maoist tyranny; What the Bahunists fail to understand is that whether the Maoists come to power or not, whether Nepal becomes a republic or not, the Bahunists are exposed once and for all!!

Forecasting the Future of "Bahun-baad" and the Bahunists

Of course, all "good" things come to an end. With people across Nepal awakening from the Maoist nightmare, ethnic assertion and demands for equality are at the very top of every agenda. People are demanding their rights in the most democratic way possible and such demands have caught the Bahunists off balance.

Being caught by surprise is what is bringing the Bahunists in the Nepali Congress and the Bahunists in the CPN-M together. The merger of the Bahunists from different political leanings is what is fuelling the ethnic movements across the country.

Slowly but surely, the games, the politics, the conspiracies and the machinations that underpin the "Bahun-baad" philosophy and elevate the Bahunists in Nepal, will come to an abrupt end. The days of the Bahunist democracy and Bahunist candidates representing regions that are home to other ethnic groups, are numbered. Just wait till the Constituent Assembly elections roll around.

How will the Bahunists react to this writing?

When the Bahunists read this posting (and they will most certainly read it), I am sure they will come up with one conspiracy theory after another to discredit the ideas embodied in the writing. In reading Bahunist responses, look out in particular for the following themes:

• This is a Royalist conspiracy to bring about ethnic disharmony in Nepal - Right, everything that challenges Bahunist domination is a conspiracy of some sort.
• The writing is completely flawed - it is the Chhetris, the Ranas and the Shahs who are the root of feudalism in Nepal - "238 years of the Shah dynasty, etc. Sure, that is, minus 238 years of Priests and Gurus forecasting the future of the Shah dynasty.
• The ideas captured in this article are designed specifically to derail the Constituent Assembly elections - Why in the world would we want to do that? The CA elections are guaranteed to destroy Bahunism once and for all. If anyone, it is the Bahunists who are eager to sabotage CA elections. Loss of power for the Bahunists, is a certainty.

Watch out particularly for the non-Bahun authors who comment on the ideas articulated in the writing above. Those will be the most Bahunist responses of all.