(Courtesy: Siddhartha Thapa)
The Gorkhaland agitation and the demand for a separate state to Indian Nepalis is a sign of things that will further test the unity between the Congress and Indian communists in the days ahead.
The growing instability in Northern Bengal has the potential to foment further political instability across India; while other agitating groups across India may draw inspirations from Gorkha Janamukti Morcha (GJM)'s recent success to put enormous pressure on New Delhi, to acquiesce to their demand of a separate state.
This new development in Northern Bengal is bound to pinch the policy-makers in New Delhi and Calcutta. Theoritically, the GJM leaders have the moral high ground to press for a separate state; this is mainly because each state in India has been geographically divided along cultural and linguistic lines.
Therefore, GJM's demand for a separate state is morally and politically a just cause. Gorkhalis of Northeast and West Bengal states have been largely neglected and secluded as state governments have reduced the Indian Nepalis to second class citizens. In fact, Nepalis living for generations in Northeast and North Bengal have been denied the social, political and economic rights. They have been given unofficially a minority status.
The continued neglect of Indian Nepalis has created this feeling of 'un-Indianess' in the hearts and minds of the people living in Northeast and Darjeeling. And in the recent past, New Delhi has done very little to demonstrate seriousness over the deteriorating situation in Gorkhaland, primarily because the coalition partner continues to blackmail the Congress to retain its dictatorial autonomy in Bengal; while it hypocritically maintains a stronghold over policy matters in New Delhi.
Take for instance, the CPI-M stance on the Civilian Nuclear Deal with the United States. Had the deal gone through, the Civilian Nuclear Agreement would have put India in a globally advantageous position as its need for energy would have been largely resolved with the aim of propelling the development of the Indian economy at a greater pace.
The demand for Gorkhaland, therefore, is genuine and the Indian Nepalis must be given a separate state. Besides, North Bengal does not belong to Calcutta. It was a part of Nepal until 1816. Nepal ceded the territory to British India. Since then, Nepalis have been living as Indian nationals. They cannot be treated as Nepali nationals now.
Subash Ghising no longer holds ground in Darjeeling as he has betrayed the Indian Gorkhas by compromising with the Stalin regime which continues to rule North Bengal ruthlessly. Now Ghising has been replaced by new leaders who are politically committed to the Indian Nepalis cause --- that is a state within the Indian Union. These leaders epitomize a sense of hope that envisions an end to the Stalin rule in North Bengal.
However, even if a compromise is reached with the Marxist government due to New Delhi's insistence, the possibility of a long-term solution is impossible without New Delhi agreeing for a complete statehood.
Likewise, the growing popularity for the demand of Gorkhaland may lead to a state of mental trepidation for the Marxist and to others who doubt the allegiance of the Gorkhalis. Contrary to this thought, the Gorkhalis in India may share cultural similarities with their own kind in Nepal, but it stops right there. Gorkhalis too could argue in a similar vein questioning loyalties of other ethnic groups within India, but that would neither solve their problems nor would they garner support for their cause.
There are approximately 15 million Gorkhalis living in India and they by and large, have contributed to the economic development of India. In fact, Nepalis of Indian origin have defended India rather than Indians themselves. Had the Gorkha Rifles not been there during the partition that triggered communal violence between Hindus and Muslim, more Indians and Pakistanis would have died. Has any Indian realized and mentioned the role of the Gorkha Rifles in any book or write up?
India recruits Gorkhalis for their elite Gorkha battalions and these people have fought for India giving up their lives in pride. The recent triumph of Prashant Tamang in the Indian Idol show elucidates the achievement of an Indian above everything else and what he did was equally symbolic, he sang in Hindi, the national language of India.
Some manipulative sleuths within the ranks of CPI-M may try selling propaganda that the GJM movement has been the handwork of Nepal. However, such claims are too fanciful to be true. The truth of the matter is the UPA government must end the policy of ethnic hypocrisy and provide justice to the Indian Gorkhas.
Closed door negotiations and secret political parleys have already begun with the aim of finding a solution to Gorkhaland. But this has started on the wrong-foot. In a recently concluded all-party meeting in Calcutta, the Stalin regime chose to ignore GJM. A political confrontation of great magnitude seems unavoidable between the CPI-M and the GJM. Many Gorkhalis will lose their lives, but come what may Gorkhalis should not move an inch away from their demands. If India has fought a battle in Sri Lanka to ensure rightful dignity for the Tamils, why can't it guarantee equality to Indians at home?
An all party meeting must be convened in New Delhi and a solution must be sought at the earliest before the world begins to look at the deteriorating situation that will eventually unfold in Northern Bengal with great shock. After all, Nandigram massacre has shown the ruthless involvement of the CPI-M. Should the GJM remain adamant, the CPI-M will not hesitate to use brute force against the Gorkhalis. There is still time to resolve the issue of Gorkhaland in an amicable manner. But if the CPI-M continues to demonstrate a policy of ignorance and bullishness, things will only get worse causing great shame to India. Killing an Indian for a solution that ultimately benefits India would seem too tragic.
Monday, June 23, 2008
Thursday, June 19, 2008
The Great President Hunt
(Courtesy: Dr. Hari Bansha Dulal)
It has been more than two months since CA elections were concluded. Except for the abolishment of monarchy, which was already agreed upon, political process has not moved forward by an inch so far. It appears that unless the ongoing power sharing negotiation gains some momentum and a deal is struck, pressing issues such as skyrocketing inflation and lawlessness will have to wait. In a nation where politicians' gain come before peoples' need, do citizens have a choice?
The parties involved in the negotiation are trying hard to sell their choice for the first president of Democratic Republic of Nepal. Puspa Kamal Dahal vouches for a non-political person but proposes Ram Raja Singh for the top job. Since when did Ram Raja Singh become a non-political person? June 20, 1985's bombing, for which Singh, has taken responsibility, is not something that a law abiding non-political person gets involved in. However, when compared to the death and destruction caused by the man who is proposing him for the top job, Singh's crime is minuscule.
Although Girija Prasad Koirala has not expressed his desire to become the first president himself in public, it is an open secret. As long as the likes of Krishna Prasad Sitaula are around, is it even necessary for Koirala and Dahal to do their dirty laundry?
The Maoists were clever enough to keep Koirala guessing when it came to the issue of the first president of Nepal for the last 2 years. What the Maoists know very well but may not acknowledge in public is that, had Koirala known that he would not become the first president, he would not have pushed for a republic as hard as he did. Had the Maoists made it clear well in advance, Koirala would have refused to become a "useful idiot." So they played it smart and played it well.
Dahal and his men do not want Koirala to become the president because they seriously think that they are the ones who brought this change, and to a large extent, they are right about it. For the Maoists, making Koirala president is like acknowledging him as an agent of change. Furthermore, it opens up a space for future intervention. Given Koirala's proximity with the international players and the Nepali Army, the Maoists' game plan of swiftly marching towards the authoritarian regime may come to a grinding halt. Why take a risk? From the Maoists' stand point, it makes a perfect sense.
No matter who becomes the first president, the power sharing negotiations should come to an end pretty soon. For common Nepali citizens, Dahal's desire to checkmate Koirala and deny him the chance of fulfillment of his desire to become the first president is irrelevant. All they want at this point in time is a regular supply of fuel, textbooks for their kids, and some degree of law and order. It is, thus, completely unjustified and immoral to overlook the problems faced by the citizens and concentrate solely on sharing the pie.
It is time to move beyond the petty politicking and address the problems faced by impoverished Nepali populace. No point beating around the bush. Do what it takes and move the political process forward. If the politicians were really serious about having a well respected and accomplished citizen as a first president, they would be proposing the likes of Ganesh Raj Sharma, who not only respected the law of the land himself but also made others do it, not someone who has been involved in bombings. When the entire process is not about setting a right precedence and selecting an individual with a strong moral character, how does it matter whether it is Ram Raja Singh or the killers of Dikendra Thapa, Jitendra Sah, Ram Hari Shrestha, or for that matter, another bomber Babban Singh?
If it is all about political correctness, then why not propose Jwala Singh for the first president? A Dalit, a Madhesi, and an insurgent. What could be a better package? For the populists who value ethnicity over meritocracy and character, it would be a super deal. It might even help insurgency in the southern plains to subside. When a former insurgent can be a prime minister, why not at least discuss the prospects of an insurgent, who happens to be a Dalit and a Madhesi for the top job?
Regardless of whom the Maoists propose, when it is all said and done, there is a big probability that the Maoists might end up accepting Koirala as the first president. They are not that foolish to blow away the revolutionary gains just to appear politically correct.
How long Koirala's legacy will last in a society, which is engulfed in perpetual revolution is, altogether a different question.
Actually, the Maoists might gain by accepting Koirala as a president. The best way to preempt Koirala's anti-Maoist moves in future is to make him the president. Koirala's lust for limelight is simply too big to be underestimated. The infamous back-stabbing of Krishna Prasad Bhattarai to secure the prime ministerial berth in one of the general elections not very long ago serves as a classic example of how far Koirala can go to get what he wants. When Koirala could not contain the Maoists as the most powerful Prime Minister in the history of Nepal in the last two and half years, why should the Maoists be afraid of him as a ceremonial head of state?
Given his age, letting him become the president might be a safer bet for the Maoists.
The very minute someone else becomes the president, seven party alliance (SPA) is unofficially over. After that, political realignment will take place. The political resistance that will start after Koirala is denied his cherished dream job might be, too soon and too big, for the Maoists to contain.
Becoming a president of the youngest republic might be a dream come true for Koirala and might benefit his blind followers, but for democracy in Nepal, it will be a disaster. Once Koirala becomes the president, the ongoing appeasement of the Maoists will continue further. Having secured the place in history, it would be foolish on the part of liberal democrats to assume that Koirala will do anything to contain the Maoists and strengthen democracy. In the last two and half years, instead of containing the Maoists by forcing them to disband the YCL and surrender all their weapons, Koirala relentlessly engaged in their appeasement, which resulted in strengthening of both the political and muscle power of the Maoists. When Koirala could not understand that appeasing radicals only makes them bolder through his half a century long political career, what will he do differently and significantly after he becomes the president to force the Maoists to change their beliefs and embrace multi-party democracy?
If it is really for democracy in Nepal, the Maoists' hardheaded pursuit of having a left-leaning individual as the first president should prevail. The political realignment will occur only when Koirala is forced out. As long as Koirala enjoys the limelight, in the name of taking the peace process to its logical end, NC will keep on rationalizing the Maoists' high handedness and the march toward authoritarianism.
Related Posts:
The Nepali Congress should Focus on the Party's Reinvention, not on Koirala's Legacy
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/05/nepali-congress-should-focus-on-partys.html
Stubborn Koirala and NC's Impending Downfall
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/01/stubborn-koirala-and-ncs-impending.html
(Nepali) Congress At Crossroads
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/12/congress-at-crossroads.html
High On Oxygen
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/12/high-on-oxygen.html
It has been more than two months since CA elections were concluded. Except for the abolishment of monarchy, which was already agreed upon, political process has not moved forward by an inch so far. It appears that unless the ongoing power sharing negotiation gains some momentum and a deal is struck, pressing issues such as skyrocketing inflation and lawlessness will have to wait. In a nation where politicians' gain come before peoples' need, do citizens have a choice?
The parties involved in the negotiation are trying hard to sell their choice for the first president of Democratic Republic of Nepal. Puspa Kamal Dahal vouches for a non-political person but proposes Ram Raja Singh for the top job. Since when did Ram Raja Singh become a non-political person? June 20, 1985's bombing, for which Singh, has taken responsibility, is not something that a law abiding non-political person gets involved in. However, when compared to the death and destruction caused by the man who is proposing him for the top job, Singh's crime is minuscule.
Although Girija Prasad Koirala has not expressed his desire to become the first president himself in public, it is an open secret. As long as the likes of Krishna Prasad Sitaula are around, is it even necessary for Koirala and Dahal to do their dirty laundry?
The Maoists were clever enough to keep Koirala guessing when it came to the issue of the first president of Nepal for the last 2 years. What the Maoists know very well but may not acknowledge in public is that, had Koirala known that he would not become the first president, he would not have pushed for a republic as hard as he did. Had the Maoists made it clear well in advance, Koirala would have refused to become a "useful idiot." So they played it smart and played it well.
Dahal and his men do not want Koirala to become the president because they seriously think that they are the ones who brought this change, and to a large extent, they are right about it. For the Maoists, making Koirala president is like acknowledging him as an agent of change. Furthermore, it opens up a space for future intervention. Given Koirala's proximity with the international players and the Nepali Army, the Maoists' game plan of swiftly marching towards the authoritarian regime may come to a grinding halt. Why take a risk? From the Maoists' stand point, it makes a perfect sense.
No matter who becomes the first president, the power sharing negotiations should come to an end pretty soon. For common Nepali citizens, Dahal's desire to checkmate Koirala and deny him the chance of fulfillment of his desire to become the first president is irrelevant. All they want at this point in time is a regular supply of fuel, textbooks for their kids, and some degree of law and order. It is, thus, completely unjustified and immoral to overlook the problems faced by the citizens and concentrate solely on sharing the pie.
It is time to move beyond the petty politicking and address the problems faced by impoverished Nepali populace. No point beating around the bush. Do what it takes and move the political process forward. If the politicians were really serious about having a well respected and accomplished citizen as a first president, they would be proposing the likes of Ganesh Raj Sharma, who not only respected the law of the land himself but also made others do it, not someone who has been involved in bombings. When the entire process is not about setting a right precedence and selecting an individual with a strong moral character, how does it matter whether it is Ram Raja Singh or the killers of Dikendra Thapa, Jitendra Sah, Ram Hari Shrestha, or for that matter, another bomber Babban Singh?
If it is all about political correctness, then why not propose Jwala Singh for the first president? A Dalit, a Madhesi, and an insurgent. What could be a better package? For the populists who value ethnicity over meritocracy and character, it would be a super deal. It might even help insurgency in the southern plains to subside. When a former insurgent can be a prime minister, why not at least discuss the prospects of an insurgent, who happens to be a Dalit and a Madhesi for the top job?
Regardless of whom the Maoists propose, when it is all said and done, there is a big probability that the Maoists might end up accepting Koirala as the first president. They are not that foolish to blow away the revolutionary gains just to appear politically correct.
How long Koirala's legacy will last in a society, which is engulfed in perpetual revolution is, altogether a different question.
Actually, the Maoists might gain by accepting Koirala as a president. The best way to preempt Koirala's anti-Maoist moves in future is to make him the president. Koirala's lust for limelight is simply too big to be underestimated. The infamous back-stabbing of Krishna Prasad Bhattarai to secure the prime ministerial berth in one of the general elections not very long ago serves as a classic example of how far Koirala can go to get what he wants. When Koirala could not contain the Maoists as the most powerful Prime Minister in the history of Nepal in the last two and half years, why should the Maoists be afraid of him as a ceremonial head of state?
Given his age, letting him become the president might be a safer bet for the Maoists.
The very minute someone else becomes the president, seven party alliance (SPA) is unofficially over. After that, political realignment will take place. The political resistance that will start after Koirala is denied his cherished dream job might be, too soon and too big, for the Maoists to contain.
Becoming a president of the youngest republic might be a dream come true for Koirala and might benefit his blind followers, but for democracy in Nepal, it will be a disaster. Once Koirala becomes the president, the ongoing appeasement of the Maoists will continue further. Having secured the place in history, it would be foolish on the part of liberal democrats to assume that Koirala will do anything to contain the Maoists and strengthen democracy. In the last two and half years, instead of containing the Maoists by forcing them to disband the YCL and surrender all their weapons, Koirala relentlessly engaged in their appeasement, which resulted in strengthening of both the political and muscle power of the Maoists. When Koirala could not understand that appeasing radicals only makes them bolder through his half a century long political career, what will he do differently and significantly after he becomes the president to force the Maoists to change their beliefs and embrace multi-party democracy?
If it is really for democracy in Nepal, the Maoists' hardheaded pursuit of having a left-leaning individual as the first president should prevail. The political realignment will occur only when Koirala is forced out. As long as Koirala enjoys the limelight, in the name of taking the peace process to its logical end, NC will keep on rationalizing the Maoists' high handedness and the march toward authoritarianism.
Related Posts:
The Nepali Congress should Focus on the Party's Reinvention, not on Koirala's Legacy
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/05/nepali-congress-should-focus-on-partys.html
Stubborn Koirala and NC's Impending Downfall
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/01/stubborn-koirala-and-ncs-impending.html
(Nepali) Congress At Crossroads
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/12/congress-at-crossroads.html
High On Oxygen
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/12/high-on-oxygen.html
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Girija as Nepal's First President? Just say NO!
(Courtesy: La Verdad)
Naturally, people have voiced strong opinions on their preferences for the world's newest republic's, first President. Some have expressed vested interests behind a democratic veil, others have spoken in support of gender and ethnic equality, and yet, others have forwarded names without extending even the simplest courtesy of consulting the very individuals on whose behalf, presidential campaigns have been launched (and retracted)!! With much respect to every individual's right to personal opinion, let this writing be a case for who SHOULD NOT become Nepal's first President - namely, Mr. Girija Prasad Koirala.
Many credit Mr. Koirala with leading Nepal's peace process, for bringing peace, stability and some measure of democracy to Nepal. They claim that in the absence of Girija's leadership, the Maoists would still be in insurgency mode, that Nepal would still be a Kingdom and that the Nepali people would remain deprived of their god given right to freedom.
But let us not forget that without Mr. Koirala, there probably would have been no Maoist insurgency to begin with. Let us take a moment to recollect that had Mr. Koirala and his old party given sustenance to inclusive democracy after 1990, operations Romeo and Sierra Kilo-II, the Lauda Air scandal and dozens of other episodes that undermined Nepal's democratic transition would never have transpired.
Instead of positioning this debate in the limited context of the past 2.5 years, let us take a moment to reflect on Mr. Koirala's larger legacy - a legacy which extends as far back as 1990 (after he stopped hijacking planes and printing fake Indian currency). It was during this timeframe when Girija's lust for power, recognition and political chicanery defined an entire generation of political malfeasance. Unmitigated corruption, intra-party power struggles and a penchant for manipulative, self-serving politics is the real legacy that Mr. Koirala will leave behind.
Koirala's supporters claim that he fought for democracy his entire life and so he deserves recognition in the "New Nepal." But does the "New Nepal" deserve a beginning marred by the political baggage that Girija Prasad Koirala would bring to the Presidency? Girija may have spent his teenage years following his older brother's lead, but the real question is what Girija did when his struggle yielded the opportunity democratize Nepal. If Mr. Koirala is such model for democratic leadership, is the type of democracy that defined the post-1990 period the type of democracy Nepalis want, post 2008?
A democratic myth is precisely what Mr. Koirala's sycophants like to propagate - that democracy for Nepal, is somehow tied to the legacy of the Nepali Congress and that the Nepali Congress, is nothing without Girija Prasad Koirala's leadership. What sophistry! If it's one man that has continually undermined democracy within Nepal's largest democratic party, it is Girija. The one (perhaps the only) thing Nepalis have Girija to thank for, is the birth of rebels within the ranks of the Nepali Congress. Rebels like Narahari Acharya and Gagan Thapa who have successfully leveraged republican sentiment to undermine Girija Koirala and his coterie.
What of the new generation of leaders within the Nepali Congress? What about the new generation of Nepalis, period? How enthusiastic are they about the thought of Koirala's legacy extending far beyond its useful tenure?
What about the thousands of Maoists and the thousands of state security forces who died during Nepal's insurgency? Is it their desire to see the man who resigned as prime minister because the Army wouldn't fight the Maoists, now serve as the "New Nepal's" first President? Is the attempted re-writing of Girija's legacy and the continuation of his brand of caste-based politics, the reason so many Nepalis had to die? It's horrible enough that Nepalis had to suffer immeasurable emotional loss fighting a war that could have been avoided. Must Nepalis now bear insult to injury by witnessing Girija become Nepal's first President?
Nepal's Presidency isn't a consolation prize for second best. It's not a trophy that Girija deserves for being the "most useful idiot." This is a post that will be burdened with immense responsibility and compromise, a position that a capable, healthy, non-senile, non-octogenarian should hold. Nepal's new President will reside over not just the most politically challenging period in Nepal's history, but possibly over the most economically challenging period the world has seen in decades. Given all practical considerations, is Nepal's Presidency a job for a man who can barely stand, let alone think straight? Is it a job for a man pumped up on steroids just to make occasional public appearances?
With Nepal's royal legacy in the past, Girija Koirala's utility is over. Like the man formerly known as King Gyanendra, Girija should gracefully bow out of the political scene as the man formerly known as "most useful idiot." From winning the Nobel Peace Prize to becoming Nepal's first President, one cannot help but wonder what other dreams of grandeur, interactions with former U.S. President Jimmy Carter, planted in Girija's head. Be that as it may, it's time for Girija to wake up, smell the republican coffee, get off the steroids, and let the "New Nepal" breathe.
There is no room in the "New Nepal" for an old Girija, the politics of his variety, or his shameless lust for power. Democracy is facilitated in Nepal by Girija's retirement into obscurity and a democratic polity is more likely in the absence of Nepali Congress supporters, who are little more than Girija's servants. It is Girija who continues to impede Nepal's political progress and it's time for him to get out of the way.
Related Posts:
The Nepali Congress should Focus on the Party's Reinvention, not on Koirala's Legacy
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/05/nepali-congress-should-focus-on-partys.html
Stubborn Koirala and NC's Impending Downfall
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/01/stubborn-koirala-and-ncs-impending.html
(Nepali) Congress At Crossroads
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/12/congress-at-crossroads.html
High On Oxygen
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/12/high-on-oxygen.html
Naturally, people have voiced strong opinions on their preferences for the world's newest republic's, first President. Some have expressed vested interests behind a democratic veil, others have spoken in support of gender and ethnic equality, and yet, others have forwarded names without extending even the simplest courtesy of consulting the very individuals on whose behalf, presidential campaigns have been launched (and retracted)!! With much respect to every individual's right to personal opinion, let this writing be a case for who SHOULD NOT become Nepal's first President - namely, Mr. Girija Prasad Koirala.
Many credit Mr. Koirala with leading Nepal's peace process, for bringing peace, stability and some measure of democracy to Nepal. They claim that in the absence of Girija's leadership, the Maoists would still be in insurgency mode, that Nepal would still be a Kingdom and that the Nepali people would remain deprived of their god given right to freedom.
But let us not forget that without Mr. Koirala, there probably would have been no Maoist insurgency to begin with. Let us take a moment to recollect that had Mr. Koirala and his old party given sustenance to inclusive democracy after 1990, operations Romeo and Sierra Kilo-II, the Lauda Air scandal and dozens of other episodes that undermined Nepal's democratic transition would never have transpired.
Instead of positioning this debate in the limited context of the past 2.5 years, let us take a moment to reflect on Mr. Koirala's larger legacy - a legacy which extends as far back as 1990 (after he stopped hijacking planes and printing fake Indian currency). It was during this timeframe when Girija's lust for power, recognition and political chicanery defined an entire generation of political malfeasance. Unmitigated corruption, intra-party power struggles and a penchant for manipulative, self-serving politics is the real legacy that Mr. Koirala will leave behind.
Koirala's supporters claim that he fought for democracy his entire life and so he deserves recognition in the "New Nepal." But does the "New Nepal" deserve a beginning marred by the political baggage that Girija Prasad Koirala would bring to the Presidency? Girija may have spent his teenage years following his older brother's lead, but the real question is what Girija did when his struggle yielded the opportunity democratize Nepal. If Mr. Koirala is such model for democratic leadership, is the type of democracy that defined the post-1990 period the type of democracy Nepalis want, post 2008?
A democratic myth is precisely what Mr. Koirala's sycophants like to propagate - that democracy for Nepal, is somehow tied to the legacy of the Nepali Congress and that the Nepali Congress, is nothing without Girija Prasad Koirala's leadership. What sophistry! If it's one man that has continually undermined democracy within Nepal's largest democratic party, it is Girija. The one (perhaps the only) thing Nepalis have Girija to thank for, is the birth of rebels within the ranks of the Nepali Congress. Rebels like Narahari Acharya and Gagan Thapa who have successfully leveraged republican sentiment to undermine Girija Koirala and his coterie.
What of the new generation of leaders within the Nepali Congress? What about the new generation of Nepalis, period? How enthusiastic are they about the thought of Koirala's legacy extending far beyond its useful tenure?
What about the thousands of Maoists and the thousands of state security forces who died during Nepal's insurgency? Is it their desire to see the man who resigned as prime minister because the Army wouldn't fight the Maoists, now serve as the "New Nepal's" first President? Is the attempted re-writing of Girija's legacy and the continuation of his brand of caste-based politics, the reason so many Nepalis had to die? It's horrible enough that Nepalis had to suffer immeasurable emotional loss fighting a war that could have been avoided. Must Nepalis now bear insult to injury by witnessing Girija become Nepal's first President?
Nepal's Presidency isn't a consolation prize for second best. It's not a trophy that Girija deserves for being the "most useful idiot." This is a post that will be burdened with immense responsibility and compromise, a position that a capable, healthy, non-senile, non-octogenarian should hold. Nepal's new President will reside over not just the most politically challenging period in Nepal's history, but possibly over the most economically challenging period the world has seen in decades. Given all practical considerations, is Nepal's Presidency a job for a man who can barely stand, let alone think straight? Is it a job for a man pumped up on steroids just to make occasional public appearances?
With Nepal's royal legacy in the past, Girija Koirala's utility is over. Like the man formerly known as King Gyanendra, Girija should gracefully bow out of the political scene as the man formerly known as "most useful idiot." From winning the Nobel Peace Prize to becoming Nepal's first President, one cannot help but wonder what other dreams of grandeur, interactions with former U.S. President Jimmy Carter, planted in Girija's head. Be that as it may, it's time for Girija to wake up, smell the republican coffee, get off the steroids, and let the "New Nepal" breathe.
There is no room in the "New Nepal" for an old Girija, the politics of his variety, or his shameless lust for power. Democracy is facilitated in Nepal by Girija's retirement into obscurity and a democratic polity is more likely in the absence of Nepali Congress supporters, who are little more than Girija's servants. It is Girija who continues to impede Nepal's political progress and it's time for him to get out of the way.
Related Posts:
The Nepali Congress should Focus on the Party's Reinvention, not on Koirala's Legacy
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/05/nepali-congress-should-focus-on-partys.html
Stubborn Koirala and NC's Impending Downfall
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/01/stubborn-koirala-and-ncs-impending.html
(Nepali) Congress At Crossroads
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/12/congress-at-crossroads.html
High On Oxygen
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/12/high-on-oxygen.html
On Marxism, Maoism and Nepal
(Courtesy: Mr. Bhisma Karki)
Far from retreating before the scary ghosts and often dark sky of our time, you have been able, inspired by a profound and burning idealism, to perceive, behind the veils that hide it, the strife that burns at the heart of this world. You, my fatherly friend, have always been for me the living proof that idealism is no illusion but the true reality.
- Karl Marx in a letter to his father, Heinrich Marx
Who is not stirred to the core by these lines? They are excerpt from the notes I took on Marxian thoughts about 23 years ago, which have luckily survived. To the great majority of ardent supporter of communism, Marx’s idealism was more moving than the nitty-gritty details of his thoughts. His was a life devoted to study and the cause of world communism. The chronic poverty that Marx had to go through in his life of exile did not deter him from championing the cause of downtrodden people of the world and authoring several books of quality of world classics. Throughout his life, Marx set an example of philosopher scaling the highest peak in thought and the encyclopedic sweep of scholarship. It is no wonder that Marxism inspired great struggle for the establishment of society based on equality and the continual progress. In the dissemination of communism, Marx’s heroic life also played important role.
I do not wish to offer a learned critique of Marxism, which may take years of study. I find the Marxian thought fascinating. To that extent I discuss them here presenting the flavor when they are put in practice. After teenage exposure to Marx, my youthful dream was to read and seek to acquire, if possible, deeper understanding of the complete works of Marx and Engels. I wanted to read and study Marx in order to comprehend the mystery of the world and how it changes.
When you read Marx, it is difficult not to be dazzled by his unrivalled genius and idealism. Although I hero–worshiped Marx, I never associated myself with the communist organizations in Nepal. They are too crude for any person of sensibility. Moreover, when one acquires some acquaintance with diverse thoughts propounded by other philosophers and thinkers, one begins to find that other competing thoughts and philosophy are also equally fascinating and admirable.
As opposed to the noble idealism of Marx is the development and practice of his thought in the destructive direction in most of the communist regimes. The practice of communism in Russia following the Bolshevik triumph was very bloody; out of the womb of Marxism came into being a hideous regime responsible for the destruction and death of millions of people. The Bolshevik thirst for blood was never satiated. The flower of Russian humanity perished at the altar of the dialectical machine of a communist regime which demanded more and more blood. The chilling description of the cruel purges and terror under Stalin is given vividly by Arthur Koestler in his book, Darkness at Noon.
When Lenin died, there was a collective leadership for some years and finally it ended up with Stalin outfoxing all the other rivals one by one. After Stalin consolidated his grip on power, many of the old guards of the 1917 revolution met very violent and often humiliating end. The rise of Stalin was the greatest misfortune to afflict Russia in those unhappy times. Why did the majority of Bolshevik old guards, in spite of their lifelong service and devotion to the communist cause, perish at the hand of Stalin? Their destruction was logical necessity because they were found to be in opposition, even small, to the stand of communist party which was looked upon both as supreme and infallible. The possibility of dissidence around them made them centre of subversion. Any possibility of future subversion was to be ruthlessly suppressed because in a future conflict or war, it would lead to the defeat or overthrow of the soviet communist bastion.
In the dialectical twist of the logic, their life would only weaken the Soviet communist bastion. The self-elimination was the supreme sacrifice that they could make for the communist party. Hence people like Kamenev, Zinoviev and Bukharin went through drama of macabre self-condemnation before they were liquidated. The great hero of Russian revolution, Trotsky also died a most tragic death when Stalin’s agent smashed Trotsky’s head with a hatchet.
All these people in the leadership of communist revolution shared hardships and sufferings to further the cause of communism. Even when confronting the most unjust death, they remained loyal to the communist regime. They confessed to the imaginary crimes; they did not swerve from the party line because they hoped party would, once the challenge to communist regime is met, rehabilitate them either now or in future. The trial of dissident or opponent in communist regime was mockery of justice.
How can Stalin order the execution of his former politburo friends and other people with whom he shared the difficulties and tribulations for building up communism? What happened to the idea of camaraderie and friendship in Communist Russia? The notion of friendship is beautiful. Was it only a Bourgeois affectation? Why was Stalin not willing to work with former Bolshevik colleagues and instead engendered their fall in the most cold-blooded way? The famous author, Solzhenitsyn says Lenin was uncommonly evil. He calls Stalin a man of vilest soul.
The Russian people endured the cruelties and violence of the brutal Stalinist regime in the hope that they were making the sacrifices for the advancement of communism. It was the fondest belief in which the ends justified the harsh suffering of present. But how can one find peace with the communism when the outcome is the death of millions of people as in Stalinist Russia, Cambodia and Mao’s China, and now in Nepal? The list of infamy goes on. This is not the idealism of Marx with which millions of people found resonance. The grim hardship and suffering was demanded by communist regime but it did not lead to the rosy future. In fact, the future was and is even grimmer for the communist country .Not to forget, there was not only hardship and suffering but also limitless enthusiasm for communism and unwavering faith in its triumph in building a new world in the early days of communist struggle, which turned out to be a chimera.
The communist experiment of 20th century was in one sense the worst disaster and in other sense the worst crime against humanity; and, moreover it was the path chosen in the case of Soviet regime under Stalin with the cold calculation. From the communism in practice emerges not an ideal society, but a totalitarian state which, in the absence of naked force and terror, disintegrates rapidly. The only bond that binds communist society is the ruthless repression of the police state, certainly not a bond of universal brotherhood. So, without a complete control and repression along totalitarian line, communist regime cannot survive. The power concentrated in the hand of elite politburo without accompanying check and balance leads to dangerous consequences, as seen in the Soviet Union and elsewhere.
No matter how grand Marx’s theory is, it has been a failure as far as its usefulness to serve the welfare of man is concerned. There are many critics of Marx and Marxism, who discovered the folly and fault in the Marx’s thought. According to English philosopher Bertrand Russell both Marx and Hegel were muddle headed. “In relation to any political doctrine there are two questions to be asked: (1) Are its theoretical tenet true? (2) Is its practical policy likely to increase human happiness?” says Russell. On both counts, the answer is disappointing, in spite of power of the early communist movement in creating giant global upheaval. “Communism is,” says Russell, “doctrine bred of poverty, hatred and strife.”
There were many important Marxist theoreticians in Russia who contributed to the further development of Marxism. Some of the prominent names are Lenin, Trotsky, Plekhanov, Bukharin, etc. Later on, Stalin also claimed to be a theoretician by proposing the consolidation of socialism in one country rather than stirring a world revolution as propounded by Trotsky. In one of the prewar underground meeting, Stalin tried to present a theoretical paper. Someone in the audience quipped, “ Koba, don’t make a fool of yourself. This is not your field.” The variant of Marxism called Maoism is at the focal point of Nepal’s current turmoil. Mao was not a man of intellectual turn of mind. He developed his guerrilla strategy from experience. His red book is full of mundane observations. His boast that power comes from the barrel of gun is just a stupid remark. In the decaying and disintegrating China, Mao was able to win the people by offering the hope of order and progress. It was not in the power of the nationalists under Chiang-Kai-Sek to beat the Mao’s guerilla; it was the age of communism.
In Nepal, the Marxian thought continues to attract a large following. But this mass, for lack of stimulation of the intellectual curiosity, remains unfortunately in the mental prison of degrading version of Marxism. The Nepali communist’s understanding of Marxism is confined to some simple insurrectionary shibboleths and clichés.
For the future of Nepal, we must defy the Maoism which has been nothing but ritual of violence, terror and inhumanity. Nepal’s post 1990 democracy was full of promises, if not robust; Maoist terrorists smothered its soul by the most inhuman insurrection. By means of the violent campaign, one may mobilize the backward people into frenzy and even seize power, as is obvious from the success of the Maoist terrorist in Nepal’s recent election. Behind the success of the Maoist lies a propaganda machine, converting acts of terrorism and crime into the deeds of justice and valor. But, to paraphrase Petrarch, all the wickedness and filth run together in a Nepali sewer called Maoist party. The triumph of Maoist terrorism is paved with evil.
The salvation of our bleeding motherland Nepal can come through the service of man of excellence in character and mind. In no way is the sweat and toil of common man is to belittled. To make that a reality, Nepali brothers and sisters let us follow Mahatma Gandhi. He was one of the greatest human beings of all time. Mao’s magic is temporary, but Gandhi’s message of nonviolence and love are eternal truth. Let the Gandhian love and nonviolence shine brightly upon our cursed country.
(For comments, please write to bhkarki@gmail.com)
Related Posts:
Convince Us It’s Bullets to Ballots
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/04/courtesy-roop-joshi-as-of-this-writing.html
Respect Electoral Mandate
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/05/courtesy-dr.html
Democracy - Nepali Style
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/12/democracy-nepali-style.html
Far from retreating before the scary ghosts and often dark sky of our time, you have been able, inspired by a profound and burning idealism, to perceive, behind the veils that hide it, the strife that burns at the heart of this world. You, my fatherly friend, have always been for me the living proof that idealism is no illusion but the true reality.
- Karl Marx in a letter to his father, Heinrich Marx
Who is not stirred to the core by these lines? They are excerpt from the notes I took on Marxian thoughts about 23 years ago, which have luckily survived. To the great majority of ardent supporter of communism, Marx’s idealism was more moving than the nitty-gritty details of his thoughts. His was a life devoted to study and the cause of world communism. The chronic poverty that Marx had to go through in his life of exile did not deter him from championing the cause of downtrodden people of the world and authoring several books of quality of world classics. Throughout his life, Marx set an example of philosopher scaling the highest peak in thought and the encyclopedic sweep of scholarship. It is no wonder that Marxism inspired great struggle for the establishment of society based on equality and the continual progress. In the dissemination of communism, Marx’s heroic life also played important role.
I do not wish to offer a learned critique of Marxism, which may take years of study. I find the Marxian thought fascinating. To that extent I discuss them here presenting the flavor when they are put in practice. After teenage exposure to Marx, my youthful dream was to read and seek to acquire, if possible, deeper understanding of the complete works of Marx and Engels. I wanted to read and study Marx in order to comprehend the mystery of the world and how it changes.
When you read Marx, it is difficult not to be dazzled by his unrivalled genius and idealism. Although I hero–worshiped Marx, I never associated myself with the communist organizations in Nepal. They are too crude for any person of sensibility. Moreover, when one acquires some acquaintance with diverse thoughts propounded by other philosophers and thinkers, one begins to find that other competing thoughts and philosophy are also equally fascinating and admirable.
As opposed to the noble idealism of Marx is the development and practice of his thought in the destructive direction in most of the communist regimes. The practice of communism in Russia following the Bolshevik triumph was very bloody; out of the womb of Marxism came into being a hideous regime responsible for the destruction and death of millions of people. The Bolshevik thirst for blood was never satiated. The flower of Russian humanity perished at the altar of the dialectical machine of a communist regime which demanded more and more blood. The chilling description of the cruel purges and terror under Stalin is given vividly by Arthur Koestler in his book, Darkness at Noon.
When Lenin died, there was a collective leadership for some years and finally it ended up with Stalin outfoxing all the other rivals one by one. After Stalin consolidated his grip on power, many of the old guards of the 1917 revolution met very violent and often humiliating end. The rise of Stalin was the greatest misfortune to afflict Russia in those unhappy times. Why did the majority of Bolshevik old guards, in spite of their lifelong service and devotion to the communist cause, perish at the hand of Stalin? Their destruction was logical necessity because they were found to be in opposition, even small, to the stand of communist party which was looked upon both as supreme and infallible. The possibility of dissidence around them made them centre of subversion. Any possibility of future subversion was to be ruthlessly suppressed because in a future conflict or war, it would lead to the defeat or overthrow of the soviet communist bastion.
In the dialectical twist of the logic, their life would only weaken the Soviet communist bastion. The self-elimination was the supreme sacrifice that they could make for the communist party. Hence people like Kamenev, Zinoviev and Bukharin went through drama of macabre self-condemnation before they were liquidated. The great hero of Russian revolution, Trotsky also died a most tragic death when Stalin’s agent smashed Trotsky’s head with a hatchet.
All these people in the leadership of communist revolution shared hardships and sufferings to further the cause of communism. Even when confronting the most unjust death, they remained loyal to the communist regime. They confessed to the imaginary crimes; they did not swerve from the party line because they hoped party would, once the challenge to communist regime is met, rehabilitate them either now or in future. The trial of dissident or opponent in communist regime was mockery of justice.
How can Stalin order the execution of his former politburo friends and other people with whom he shared the difficulties and tribulations for building up communism? What happened to the idea of camaraderie and friendship in Communist Russia? The notion of friendship is beautiful. Was it only a Bourgeois affectation? Why was Stalin not willing to work with former Bolshevik colleagues and instead engendered their fall in the most cold-blooded way? The famous author, Solzhenitsyn says Lenin was uncommonly evil. He calls Stalin a man of vilest soul.
The Russian people endured the cruelties and violence of the brutal Stalinist regime in the hope that they were making the sacrifices for the advancement of communism. It was the fondest belief in which the ends justified the harsh suffering of present. But how can one find peace with the communism when the outcome is the death of millions of people as in Stalinist Russia, Cambodia and Mao’s China, and now in Nepal? The list of infamy goes on. This is not the idealism of Marx with which millions of people found resonance. The grim hardship and suffering was demanded by communist regime but it did not lead to the rosy future. In fact, the future was and is even grimmer for the communist country .Not to forget, there was not only hardship and suffering but also limitless enthusiasm for communism and unwavering faith in its triumph in building a new world in the early days of communist struggle, which turned out to be a chimera.
The communist experiment of 20th century was in one sense the worst disaster and in other sense the worst crime against humanity; and, moreover it was the path chosen in the case of Soviet regime under Stalin with the cold calculation. From the communism in practice emerges not an ideal society, but a totalitarian state which, in the absence of naked force and terror, disintegrates rapidly. The only bond that binds communist society is the ruthless repression of the police state, certainly not a bond of universal brotherhood. So, without a complete control and repression along totalitarian line, communist regime cannot survive. The power concentrated in the hand of elite politburo without accompanying check and balance leads to dangerous consequences, as seen in the Soviet Union and elsewhere.
No matter how grand Marx’s theory is, it has been a failure as far as its usefulness to serve the welfare of man is concerned. There are many critics of Marx and Marxism, who discovered the folly and fault in the Marx’s thought. According to English philosopher Bertrand Russell both Marx and Hegel were muddle headed. “In relation to any political doctrine there are two questions to be asked: (1) Are its theoretical tenet true? (2) Is its practical policy likely to increase human happiness?” says Russell. On both counts, the answer is disappointing, in spite of power of the early communist movement in creating giant global upheaval. “Communism is,” says Russell, “doctrine bred of poverty, hatred and strife.”
There were many important Marxist theoreticians in Russia who contributed to the further development of Marxism. Some of the prominent names are Lenin, Trotsky, Plekhanov, Bukharin, etc. Later on, Stalin also claimed to be a theoretician by proposing the consolidation of socialism in one country rather than stirring a world revolution as propounded by Trotsky. In one of the prewar underground meeting, Stalin tried to present a theoretical paper. Someone in the audience quipped, “ Koba, don’t make a fool of yourself. This is not your field.” The variant of Marxism called Maoism is at the focal point of Nepal’s current turmoil. Mao was not a man of intellectual turn of mind. He developed his guerrilla strategy from experience. His red book is full of mundane observations. His boast that power comes from the barrel of gun is just a stupid remark. In the decaying and disintegrating China, Mao was able to win the people by offering the hope of order and progress. It was not in the power of the nationalists under Chiang-Kai-Sek to beat the Mao’s guerilla; it was the age of communism.
In Nepal, the Marxian thought continues to attract a large following. But this mass, for lack of stimulation of the intellectual curiosity, remains unfortunately in the mental prison of degrading version of Marxism. The Nepali communist’s understanding of Marxism is confined to some simple insurrectionary shibboleths and clichés.
For the future of Nepal, we must defy the Maoism which has been nothing but ritual of violence, terror and inhumanity. Nepal’s post 1990 democracy was full of promises, if not robust; Maoist terrorists smothered its soul by the most inhuman insurrection. By means of the violent campaign, one may mobilize the backward people into frenzy and even seize power, as is obvious from the success of the Maoist terrorist in Nepal’s recent election. Behind the success of the Maoist lies a propaganda machine, converting acts of terrorism and crime into the deeds of justice and valor. But, to paraphrase Petrarch, all the wickedness and filth run together in a Nepali sewer called Maoist party. The triumph of Maoist terrorism is paved with evil.
The salvation of our bleeding motherland Nepal can come through the service of man of excellence in character and mind. In no way is the sweat and toil of common man is to belittled. To make that a reality, Nepali brothers and sisters let us follow Mahatma Gandhi. He was one of the greatest human beings of all time. Mao’s magic is temporary, but Gandhi’s message of nonviolence and love are eternal truth. Let the Gandhian love and nonviolence shine brightly upon our cursed country.
(For comments, please write to bhkarki@gmail.com)
Related Posts:
Convince Us It’s Bullets to Ballots
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/04/courtesy-roop-joshi-as-of-this-writing.html
Respect Electoral Mandate
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/05/courtesy-dr.html
Democracy - Nepali Style
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/12/democracy-nepali-style.html
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
First President to the Indigenous People
(Courtesy: Krishna Giri)
I do not want to craft any statement on the legitimacy of the declaration of the ‘Republic’. The country is now a ‘Republic’. Chief Justice Kedar Giri had no guts to discuss the legitimacy of this historic event and put aside the writ to prove that the country has no ‘rule of law’. The country is being ruled by Maoist bullying overshadowed by Indian and western interference. Nepal has become a strategic play ground to play ‘dirty politics’ for neighbors and westerners. There are few reasons:
1.We are between the two giants, largest democracy and largest People’s Republic
2.Either side are having record economic growth to shake the world
3.They are going to be one of the world ‘superpower’ in economy, labor and military
4.The US and EU will play any dirty tricks to shatter these countries and the region
5.Unlike Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine, Nepal is a safe heaven for foreigners to play the filthy game
6.Either to suppress or to elevate the ‘Tibet’ issue, Nepal is the focal point
7.India and China have bitter experience of war and on top of that, they have their own domestic issues which can blow them apart and west knows that very well
8.Western interests have made a tangible foundation in Nepal; thanks to the political unrest and puppetries of leaders
The west may not have much interest on who becomes our first President but they have long road map to stick in Nepal for their own rationales. Even though the US can not influence its next neighbour down the coast from Miami, we know how they are performing in the world stage.
The US and its allies have prolonged their triumph in a range of places after WWII. Korean war, Vietnam war, Kosovo war, Indo-China war, Indo-Pak war, Iraq war are some muscle breakers where as Palestine, Zimbabwe, Yugoslavia, fall of USSR and fall of Berlin wall are some fruitful results of their diplomacies. Where they eying now? Is it Great wall or Red Fort? Or both? Where do we end up if our national interests are guided and vested by foreign interests?
The bunker style US Embassy is not there for enjoyment. Neither they can stop themselves from going to war nor can they stop themselves from destroying other nations (diplomacy). Sadly, they play all games through our own leaders. Our leaders are too busy to make a history by becoming the first X, Y and Z. They want to be written in history not because of their work but because of their role number.
Two months are gone but still we don’t have any names or consensus to announce the first President. As long as the King was there, things were easy. Blame everything to the King and the Army. Do people still think these comrades are the ‘blessing in disguise’? I doubt it. Looking at their roles and diversion they playing for last two years, there is not much left to hide.
I am not just talking about Maoists. I am talking about the all leaders who just play the blame game. Chasing that dethroned King will not always give justification and recognition. Leaders can guide their cadres to destroy the statues and properties of the ex-royals but history has proved that the Kings had played crucial roles not just to unite this country but keeping it united in difficult times, and hence the last King deserved a respectful exit from the Palace.
To be frank and fair, Nepal’s monarchy was dumped by consensus. Monarchy was dumped even before setting provisions for the to-be new head of state. They want to spread the new style of charismatic leadership in 21st Century from this Himalayan nation but unfortunately they have demonstrated to the world that they are just a bunch of amateur politicians.
‘Consensus’ has become the most powerful word in Nepali politics. SPAM’s consensus is the constitution, peoples mandate, government, judiciary and every thing else. And it looks like these ‘consensuses’ will govern new Nepal for years to come and 28million people will be watching. Let us not forget how we got here. No one can erase the last 10 years of ‘people’s war’ and its consequences from Nepal’s history book. The destruction, atrocities, anarchy and the lives lost. Let the next generation make their judgments about that ‘dark decade’ in Nepal’s history.
Based on the enormous ethnic diversity in Nepal, the first ‘President’ of new Nepal should be nominated from the Indigenous communities. There are 59 identified Indigenous communities in Nepal. To admire their communal status and the pain caused in the past, one of the Indigenous leader who has contributed his/her acceptable life to fight for inclusive democracy and rights of Indigenous people should be honored as the first President of new Nepal.
I am opposed to the proposal of ‘neutral person’ or ‘non political person’ as the first president. Marathon speeches on Indigenous people, their rights and their recognition would not give any answers. Time has come to act and appoint an Indigenous President. Doing so will not only give the country a chance to honor Indigenous people but also stops these cold blooded leaders to fight for the position. I don’t want to take out the topic of ‘chhetri and brahmin dominance’ in Nepali politics again but if this dominance is not to come to an end, this will not give smooth transition to this new Nepal.
We have recently seen the rise of ethnic based parties in Terai. These are not good signs if we want to see a sovereign united Nepal. If we do not respect them on time, no one can rule out the eruption of disintegration alliance when small groups are already waging armed separatist movements.
Further more, to address to these sentiments, we must convey a message as a nation, not as party. All citizens should be able to call this nation their home and be proud of that. To grow these attitudes in peoples’ mind, we have to include people from Indigenous communities not only in the candidates list but also in the high profile portfolios. To esteem the principles of inclusive democracy and create a profound history, there is no auspicious occasion than this to declare an Indigenous leader as the first President of Nepal.
Related Posts:
Endless Possibilities in the Republic of Nepal
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/05/endless-possibilities-that-accompany.html
Riding the Republican Bandwagon
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/04/riding-republican-bandwagon.html
I do not want to craft any statement on the legitimacy of the declaration of the ‘Republic’. The country is now a ‘Republic’. Chief Justice Kedar Giri had no guts to discuss the legitimacy of this historic event and put aside the writ to prove that the country has no ‘rule of law’. The country is being ruled by Maoist bullying overshadowed by Indian and western interference. Nepal has become a strategic play ground to play ‘dirty politics’ for neighbors and westerners. There are few reasons:
1.We are between the two giants, largest democracy and largest People’s Republic
2.Either side are having record economic growth to shake the world
3.They are going to be one of the world ‘superpower’ in economy, labor and military
4.The US and EU will play any dirty tricks to shatter these countries and the region
5.Unlike Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine, Nepal is a safe heaven for foreigners to play the filthy game
6.Either to suppress or to elevate the ‘Tibet’ issue, Nepal is the focal point
7.India and China have bitter experience of war and on top of that, they have their own domestic issues which can blow them apart and west knows that very well
8.Western interests have made a tangible foundation in Nepal; thanks to the political unrest and puppetries of leaders
The west may not have much interest on who becomes our first President but they have long road map to stick in Nepal for their own rationales. Even though the US can not influence its next neighbour down the coast from Miami, we know how they are performing in the world stage.
The US and its allies have prolonged their triumph in a range of places after WWII. Korean war, Vietnam war, Kosovo war, Indo-China war, Indo-Pak war, Iraq war are some muscle breakers where as Palestine, Zimbabwe, Yugoslavia, fall of USSR and fall of Berlin wall are some fruitful results of their diplomacies. Where they eying now? Is it Great wall or Red Fort? Or both? Where do we end up if our national interests are guided and vested by foreign interests?
The bunker style US Embassy is not there for enjoyment. Neither they can stop themselves from going to war nor can they stop themselves from destroying other nations (diplomacy). Sadly, they play all games through our own leaders. Our leaders are too busy to make a history by becoming the first X, Y and Z. They want to be written in history not because of their work but because of their role number.
Two months are gone but still we don’t have any names or consensus to announce the first President. As long as the King was there, things were easy. Blame everything to the King and the Army. Do people still think these comrades are the ‘blessing in disguise’? I doubt it. Looking at their roles and diversion they playing for last two years, there is not much left to hide.
I am not just talking about Maoists. I am talking about the all leaders who just play the blame game. Chasing that dethroned King will not always give justification and recognition. Leaders can guide their cadres to destroy the statues and properties of the ex-royals but history has proved that the Kings had played crucial roles not just to unite this country but keeping it united in difficult times, and hence the last King deserved a respectful exit from the Palace.
To be frank and fair, Nepal’s monarchy was dumped by consensus. Monarchy was dumped even before setting provisions for the to-be new head of state. They want to spread the new style of charismatic leadership in 21st Century from this Himalayan nation but unfortunately they have demonstrated to the world that they are just a bunch of amateur politicians.
‘Consensus’ has become the most powerful word in Nepali politics. SPAM’s consensus is the constitution, peoples mandate, government, judiciary and every thing else. And it looks like these ‘consensuses’ will govern new Nepal for years to come and 28million people will be watching. Let us not forget how we got here. No one can erase the last 10 years of ‘people’s war’ and its consequences from Nepal’s history book. The destruction, atrocities, anarchy and the lives lost. Let the next generation make their judgments about that ‘dark decade’ in Nepal’s history.
Based on the enormous ethnic diversity in Nepal, the first ‘President’ of new Nepal should be nominated from the Indigenous communities. There are 59 identified Indigenous communities in Nepal. To admire their communal status and the pain caused in the past, one of the Indigenous leader who has contributed his/her acceptable life to fight for inclusive democracy and rights of Indigenous people should be honored as the first President of new Nepal.
I am opposed to the proposal of ‘neutral person’ or ‘non political person’ as the first president. Marathon speeches on Indigenous people, their rights and their recognition would not give any answers. Time has come to act and appoint an Indigenous President. Doing so will not only give the country a chance to honor Indigenous people but also stops these cold blooded leaders to fight for the position. I don’t want to take out the topic of ‘chhetri and brahmin dominance’ in Nepali politics again but if this dominance is not to come to an end, this will not give smooth transition to this new Nepal.
We have recently seen the rise of ethnic based parties in Terai. These are not good signs if we want to see a sovereign united Nepal. If we do not respect them on time, no one can rule out the eruption of disintegration alliance when small groups are already waging armed separatist movements.
Further more, to address to these sentiments, we must convey a message as a nation, not as party. All citizens should be able to call this nation their home and be proud of that. To grow these attitudes in peoples’ mind, we have to include people from Indigenous communities not only in the candidates list but also in the high profile portfolios. To esteem the principles of inclusive democracy and create a profound history, there is no auspicious occasion than this to declare an Indigenous leader as the first President of Nepal.
Related Posts:
Endless Possibilities in the Republic of Nepal
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/05/endless-possibilities-that-accompany.html
Riding the Republican Bandwagon
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/04/riding-republican-bandwagon.html
Tuesday, June 03, 2008
Hyperopic Maoists and Myopic Pundits
(Courtesy: Dr. Hari Bansha Dulal)
Not even 72 hours had passed since the raising of glasses to celebrate victory over the despised monarch, Puspa Kamal Dahal's gibe, "due to the foolishness of Gyanendra, republic has been established. If the NC and UML also continue demonstrating their foolishness, people's republic will be established" forced the left-leaning civil society pundits to drop to their knees and puke till they got sober.
Dahal's words forced our pundits to get into a sober mode even before they fully got kick out of their drinks. This is what happens when the greed to remain in the limelight at the cost of ideological dilution takes a front-seat and the desire to become politically correct all the time overrides objectivity.
In order to become politically correct, the very same pundits that relentlessly advocated endless appeasement of the Maoists, are now sticking their heads out of line and saying the exact same thing that we have been saying (the end goal of the Maoists is to establish a totalitarian regime) for the last two and a half years.
With the Maoists' intention getting clearer, the left-leaning civil society members afflicted by myopia have finally started to see the rust in Maoists' sickle. They have woken up when the Maoists are actually preparing to strike their political opponents and the press in the head with their hammer.
A clarion call by a civil society pundit, who once thought that peace was not possible without the appeasement of the Maoists at this point in time when the Maoists have everything they need: popular mandate, international community's support, and their cadres willingness to fight till the finish -- might be too little and too late. The Maoists are on a march to deliver the exact same thing that the late King Mahendra delivered from the extreme right almost half a century ago. The only difference this time around is that, they will be delivering the exact same thing but from the extreme left. Does it make a difference if they declare Nepal a one-party communist state or not as long as they are successful in replicating King Mahendra's model?
With the Maoists' intention getting clearer and nervousness reigning in, in the ultra-liberal camp, the much talked about consensus politics has vanished into thin air. Politics is slowly but surely getting confrontational. The humiliating defeat in the CA elections and the constant flurry of gibes from the top-rung Maoist leaders have forced both the major political parties of yesteryears and pundits crushed with political baggage to confront an uncomfortable reality.
The NC and the UML happily traveled along "Prachanda path" when they were strong. Now, they want to deviate when they are weak. Will the Maoists let them off the hook without surrendering the power? The Maoists obviously did not fight the decade long bloody insurgency to put old guards of Nepali politics back into the power.
If we look realistically, with the Nepal Army in a silent mode and India on its side, the Maoists do not need an October revolution. The subtle threat is more than enough to bring Koirala's government to its knees. It is just a matter of time.
With the emergence of the Maoists as the largest party in the Constituent Assembly, India's betting reference has changed. It is more interested in geopolitical gain against China rather than help the democratic process in Nepal. In order to preempt China's influence over the Maoists, India is now fully backing the Maoist rule. Surprisingly, it is even ready to review the 1950 agreement.
With Lok Sabha elections round the corner in India, foreign minister of India Pranab Mukherjee will obviously not jeopardize his chances of winning election by displeasing the leftists in West Bengal, who want to see their fellow comrades rule in Nepal. Why would Pranab scuttle his own chances of wining upcoming Lok Sabha election by backing the losers in Nepal? Both politically and personally, it does not make any sense.
It might be an unpleasant thing for some populists in Nepal and abroad to hear that the only institution that has the required strength and the motivation to counter the Maoist threat is the Nepal Army. But like it or not, that's the truth.
However, a million dollar question is, Will the Nepal Army stand against India's will and support the very people that once asked the army to obliterate the Maoists but later on not only joined hands with the Maoists but also set up inquiry commissions to investigate human right abuses committed by them?
For the generals within the army, unless they have a bigger role to play, supporting anyone from the democratic camp doesn't make any sense at this point in time. If the Maoists are somehow able to convince the generals, saluting Puspa Kamal Dahal would not be as painful as expected by many.
The political parties of yesteryears are in a very difficult situation now. And, the worst thing is that, it is them, who invited this trouble. Left-leaning civil society pundits and the so-called intellectuals that gather in coffee houses in Kathmandu are only part of the problem. Why would they want to be in the bad books by asking politicians to stay away from joining hands with people whose views are diagonally opposite, when the game is all about sharing the pie?
The politicians with in the NC and UML are surrounded by sycophants that do not dare to ask their masters to stick to the party's basic ideology and principles. If you are a real democrat, you dare to stand up and say that the party is deviating from its basic principles, when dilution of principles takes place, not justify the riding of populist bandwagon.
By openly threatening the media and expressing his desire to establish a people's republic, Puspa Kamal Dahal has already shown his true color. The democratic forces should immediately form an alliance if they want to survive politically. That alliance should then work relentlessly towards smoothing its relationship with the Army. Before Puspa Kamal Dahal and India convinces the Nepali Army to work with the Maoists, democratic forces should try wining the trust of the army.
Unless the NC, UML, and other parties that believe in multiparty democracy get unequivocal support from the army and convince India that they can overrun the Maoists, India will not change its betting preferences. India loves to ride the winning horse. Than Swe of Myanmar and Maumoon Abdool Gayyom of the Maldives are living examples.
The game is almost over. Act before it is too late to do anything!
Related Posts:
The Problem with Nepali Political Civil Society - The Leftist, the Cowards, and the Compromised
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/10/problem-with-nepali-political-civil.html
The Pitfalls of Relying on Indian Benevolence
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/01/pitfalls-of-relying-on-indian.html
Nepali Congress Lost in Democratic Translation
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/05/nepali-congress-lost-in-democratic.html
Kanak Mani Dixit The Nuanced
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/04/kanak-mani-dixit-nuanced.html
Riding the Republican Bandwagon
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/04/riding-republican-bandwagon.html
Not even 72 hours had passed since the raising of glasses to celebrate victory over the despised monarch, Puspa Kamal Dahal's gibe, "due to the foolishness of Gyanendra, republic has been established. If the NC and UML also continue demonstrating their foolishness, people's republic will be established" forced the left-leaning civil society pundits to drop to their knees and puke till they got sober.
Dahal's words forced our pundits to get into a sober mode even before they fully got kick out of their drinks. This is what happens when the greed to remain in the limelight at the cost of ideological dilution takes a front-seat and the desire to become politically correct all the time overrides objectivity.
In order to become politically correct, the very same pundits that relentlessly advocated endless appeasement of the Maoists, are now sticking their heads out of line and saying the exact same thing that we have been saying (the end goal of the Maoists is to establish a totalitarian regime) for the last two and a half years.
With the Maoists' intention getting clearer, the left-leaning civil society members afflicted by myopia have finally started to see the rust in Maoists' sickle. They have woken up when the Maoists are actually preparing to strike their political opponents and the press in the head with their hammer.
A clarion call by a civil society pundit, who once thought that peace was not possible without the appeasement of the Maoists at this point in time when the Maoists have everything they need: popular mandate, international community's support, and their cadres willingness to fight till the finish -- might be too little and too late. The Maoists are on a march to deliver the exact same thing that the late King Mahendra delivered from the extreme right almost half a century ago. The only difference this time around is that, they will be delivering the exact same thing but from the extreme left. Does it make a difference if they declare Nepal a one-party communist state or not as long as they are successful in replicating King Mahendra's model?
With the Maoists' intention getting clearer and nervousness reigning in, in the ultra-liberal camp, the much talked about consensus politics has vanished into thin air. Politics is slowly but surely getting confrontational. The humiliating defeat in the CA elections and the constant flurry of gibes from the top-rung Maoist leaders have forced both the major political parties of yesteryears and pundits crushed with political baggage to confront an uncomfortable reality.
The NC and the UML happily traveled along "Prachanda path" when they were strong. Now, they want to deviate when they are weak. Will the Maoists let them off the hook without surrendering the power? The Maoists obviously did not fight the decade long bloody insurgency to put old guards of Nepali politics back into the power.
If we look realistically, with the Nepal Army in a silent mode and India on its side, the Maoists do not need an October revolution. The subtle threat is more than enough to bring Koirala's government to its knees. It is just a matter of time.
With the emergence of the Maoists as the largest party in the Constituent Assembly, India's betting reference has changed. It is more interested in geopolitical gain against China rather than help the democratic process in Nepal. In order to preempt China's influence over the Maoists, India is now fully backing the Maoist rule. Surprisingly, it is even ready to review the 1950 agreement.
With Lok Sabha elections round the corner in India, foreign minister of India Pranab Mukherjee will obviously not jeopardize his chances of winning election by displeasing the leftists in West Bengal, who want to see their fellow comrades rule in Nepal. Why would Pranab scuttle his own chances of wining upcoming Lok Sabha election by backing the losers in Nepal? Both politically and personally, it does not make any sense.
It might be an unpleasant thing for some populists in Nepal and abroad to hear that the only institution that has the required strength and the motivation to counter the Maoist threat is the Nepal Army. But like it or not, that's the truth.
However, a million dollar question is, Will the Nepal Army stand against India's will and support the very people that once asked the army to obliterate the Maoists but later on not only joined hands with the Maoists but also set up inquiry commissions to investigate human right abuses committed by them?
For the generals within the army, unless they have a bigger role to play, supporting anyone from the democratic camp doesn't make any sense at this point in time. If the Maoists are somehow able to convince the generals, saluting Puspa Kamal Dahal would not be as painful as expected by many.
The political parties of yesteryears are in a very difficult situation now. And, the worst thing is that, it is them, who invited this trouble. Left-leaning civil society pundits and the so-called intellectuals that gather in coffee houses in Kathmandu are only part of the problem. Why would they want to be in the bad books by asking politicians to stay away from joining hands with people whose views are diagonally opposite, when the game is all about sharing the pie?
The politicians with in the NC and UML are surrounded by sycophants that do not dare to ask their masters to stick to the party's basic ideology and principles. If you are a real democrat, you dare to stand up and say that the party is deviating from its basic principles, when dilution of principles takes place, not justify the riding of populist bandwagon.
By openly threatening the media and expressing his desire to establish a people's republic, Puspa Kamal Dahal has already shown his true color. The democratic forces should immediately form an alliance if they want to survive politically. That alliance should then work relentlessly towards smoothing its relationship with the Army. Before Puspa Kamal Dahal and India convinces the Nepali Army to work with the Maoists, democratic forces should try wining the trust of the army.
Unless the NC, UML, and other parties that believe in multiparty democracy get unequivocal support from the army and convince India that they can overrun the Maoists, India will not change its betting preferences. India loves to ride the winning horse. Than Swe of Myanmar and Maumoon Abdool Gayyom of the Maldives are living examples.
The game is almost over. Act before it is too late to do anything!
Related Posts:
The Problem with Nepali Political Civil Society - The Leftist, the Cowards, and the Compromised
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/10/problem-with-nepali-political-civil.html
The Pitfalls of Relying on Indian Benevolence
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/01/pitfalls-of-relying-on-indian.html
Nepali Congress Lost in Democratic Translation
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/05/nepali-congress-lost-in-democratic.html
Kanak Mani Dixit The Nuanced
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/04/kanak-mani-dixit-nuanced.html
Riding the Republican Bandwagon
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/04/riding-republican-bandwagon.html
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Endless Possibilities in the Republic of Nepal
(Courtesy: Bhaire)
For die-hard monarchists, the dawn of the Republic of Nepal is a death-knell of biblical proportions. But for people who are tired of being painted with the Royalist brush (that comes from their principled opposition to Maoist tyranny, blackmail and unmitigated violence), the birth of a Nepali republic offers limitless possibilities.
Catalogued below are some of the immediate benefits that Maoist opponents will have, in a Republic of Nepal.
Focused Frustration Where it Belongs
The Nepali population has remained hostage to peace on the Maoists’ terms and excess Royal baggage since April 2006. Whether King Gyanendra had benevolent intentions or not is largely a moot point at this juncture. However, closed-door admission from some of the King’s harshest critics, that Maoist rule is likely to be one hundred times worse than the option that King Gyanendra offered, speaks volumes about the current mindset of Nepal’s disillusioned liberal democrats.
No matter how representative and progressive the Maoist delegation to Nepal’s constituent assembly may be, no matter how hard the Maoists’ (and their allies) try to paint their violent rise to power as a necessary evil, the scars of Maoist-perpetrated atrocities remain deeply embedded in Nepali society. Nepalis may be forgiving people but to assume that those who have suffered grueling physical and mental abuse will forget the actions of their tormentors overnight, is wishful thinking. With the distraction of the Monarchy soon to be gone, collective frustration is more likely to find its true source – the Maoists.
End of the Maoist-Monarchy Nexus
Throughout the course of Nepal’s insurgency, the Maoists have remained the Monarchy’s prime beneficiaries. Maoist leaders are known to have been protected on direct orders from the now defunct office of the Principal Military Secretariat. Evidence of such protection is available not only from former Royal Military Aides (who are soon to join the Maoist ranks), but also from army helicopter pilots and mission commanders who received contradictory orders from the Royal Palace and the Army Headquarters, on numerous occasions.
Also to their benefit, the Maoists have successfully leveraged the falsehood of equating their opponents with the rank and file of hardcore Royalists. By propagating such fabrication, the Maoists succeeded in keeping national and international opposition at bay – why would anyone in the 21st century want to be perceived as protecting a system of monarchy over the Maoist option of democracy?
With the declaration of Nepal as a republic state, the Maoists’ will have gained the temporary illusion of a moral victory but will also suffer the consequences of their lost “ally” and universal “punching bag.”
Liberal Democrats Smell the Coffee
The Maoists have repeatedly informed their supporters and critics alike that their version of democracy is different from the Western version (whatever this may be). The Maoists are on record saying that their economic revolution will be a mixture of proletariat and bourgeoisie economics (one being the antithesis of the other). Despite the vocabulary the Maoists deliberately invent to keep their critics hoping, the rational interpretation of Maoist rhetoric couldn’t be further from liberal, multi-party democracy.
Unfortunately, for a minority, ultra-liberal, “peace at any cost” crowd, the song the Maoists’ have been singing has been music to their ears because King Gyanendra has been around as the common punching bag to hate on. For the Maoists’ the Monarchy has been a perfect focal point to keep the minds of a large, uninformed decision-makers, fixated upon; and the liberal, educated crowd, even while they preach reconciliation and peace, remain to this day, blinded by personal vendetta and revenge against a monarch who temporarily denied them mobile phone and internet services.
Long gone are the days when liberal democrats would court arrest only to pick up their satellite phones (from their supposed cells) to dial Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, and tell the world about the “autocrat” Gyanendra. These fools know better than to try such games with the Maoists – they have recent examples to remind them of the potential repercussions from the YCL.
On May 28 2008, Nepal’s liberal democrats will celebrate the birth of a republic; a few months’ down the road, they are equally likely to be yearning for a second shot at the elections that King Gyanendra offered.
India’s Long Term Interest
A lot of people are worried about India’s excessive leaning towards the Maoists. The same people also express dissatisfaction at the Americans’ coddling of the Maoists. Not coincidentally, these are the same idiots who were all too happy to be Indian servants at one time and closed-door sycophant of the former American Ambassador James F. Moriarty.
But these people need to develop ulcers, unnecessarily. The Indian government will pursue its interests in Nepal, relentlessly and in lieu of a single power center that rose to the occasion when Moriarty was offering cover, the Americans are right to be pushing soft power tactics upon the Maoists.
The Indians and the Maoists share a common cause – both want King Gyanendra and Nepal’s Monarchy gone. But after this feat is accomplished, all bets are off. There is a reason why Indian Ambassador Rakesh Sood is fervently opposed to any constitutional amendments that could prolong the Monarchy’s lifeline. The Indians are in as much a hurry to sideline the Monarchy as they are to begin containing the Maoists’ power play.
There is not a moment in living memory when the Indians have placed all of their backing behind a single horse in Nepal and they are not about to start now; specially with a radical left-wing outfit, which by ideological doctrine, is incapable of serving long-term Indian interests. Once Nepal becomes a republic, the Maoists’ utility to Indian interests is as good as yesterday’s paper.
Conclusion
So what does all this mean? It means that with the elimination of the Monarchy, a one-party system in Nepal, is more likely than ever. The exact nature of such a system will become clearer over the coming weeks. Needless to say however, Nepal is likely to surprise the international community yet again, for what is expected, is most likely not going to be delivered.
For once, Prachanda’s communist sixth sense is serving him well. His Stalinist vocabulary is out of touch with the times, but Prachanda’s expectation of a “counter-revolution” is right on the money. Far too much has changed in Nepal, far too quickly and if history is any indication, radical changes are radically unstable.
The Monarchy as a logical counter-weight to the Maoists’ is a theory that has been tried and has failed. Rather than serving as a formidable challenge to the Maoists’, King Gyanendra’s disorganized campaign was perhaps the biggest power boost the Maoists’ could have wished for.
However, with the political liability of the Monarchy gone, the door to much needed, democratic (and if necessary, forceful) opposition to the Maoists, opens on Mary 28, 2008. With a convergence of national and international power centers, an unjustly humiliated military, disillusioned liberal democrats, and a civil society that is all too eager to please whoever can threaten them most subtly, Nepal is ripe ground for a real revolution.
All hail the Republic of Nepal!
Related Posts:
All the Right Agendas
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/04/all-right-agendas-nepali-national.html
Riding the Republican Bandwagon
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/04/riding-republican-bandwagon.html
All Attention on the Army
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/02/all-attention-on-army.html
For die-hard monarchists, the dawn of the Republic of Nepal is a death-knell of biblical proportions. But for people who are tired of being painted with the Royalist brush (that comes from their principled opposition to Maoist tyranny, blackmail and unmitigated violence), the birth of a Nepali republic offers limitless possibilities.
Catalogued below are some of the immediate benefits that Maoist opponents will have, in a Republic of Nepal.
Focused Frustration Where it Belongs
The Nepali population has remained hostage to peace on the Maoists’ terms and excess Royal baggage since April 2006. Whether King Gyanendra had benevolent intentions or not is largely a moot point at this juncture. However, closed-door admission from some of the King’s harshest critics, that Maoist rule is likely to be one hundred times worse than the option that King Gyanendra offered, speaks volumes about the current mindset of Nepal’s disillusioned liberal democrats.
No matter how representative and progressive the Maoist delegation to Nepal’s constituent assembly may be, no matter how hard the Maoists’ (and their allies) try to paint their violent rise to power as a necessary evil, the scars of Maoist-perpetrated atrocities remain deeply embedded in Nepali society. Nepalis may be forgiving people but to assume that those who have suffered grueling physical and mental abuse will forget the actions of their tormentors overnight, is wishful thinking. With the distraction of the Monarchy soon to be gone, collective frustration is more likely to find its true source – the Maoists.
End of the Maoist-Monarchy Nexus
Throughout the course of Nepal’s insurgency, the Maoists have remained the Monarchy’s prime beneficiaries. Maoist leaders are known to have been protected on direct orders from the now defunct office of the Principal Military Secretariat. Evidence of such protection is available not only from former Royal Military Aides (who are soon to join the Maoist ranks), but also from army helicopter pilots and mission commanders who received contradictory orders from the Royal Palace and the Army Headquarters, on numerous occasions.
Also to their benefit, the Maoists have successfully leveraged the falsehood of equating their opponents with the rank and file of hardcore Royalists. By propagating such fabrication, the Maoists succeeded in keeping national and international opposition at bay – why would anyone in the 21st century want to be perceived as protecting a system of monarchy over the Maoist option of democracy?
With the declaration of Nepal as a republic state, the Maoists’ will have gained the temporary illusion of a moral victory but will also suffer the consequences of their lost “ally” and universal “punching bag.”
Liberal Democrats Smell the Coffee
The Maoists have repeatedly informed their supporters and critics alike that their version of democracy is different from the Western version (whatever this may be). The Maoists are on record saying that their economic revolution will be a mixture of proletariat and bourgeoisie economics (one being the antithesis of the other). Despite the vocabulary the Maoists deliberately invent to keep their critics hoping, the rational interpretation of Maoist rhetoric couldn’t be further from liberal, multi-party democracy.
Unfortunately, for a minority, ultra-liberal, “peace at any cost” crowd, the song the Maoists’ have been singing has been music to their ears because King Gyanendra has been around as the common punching bag to hate on. For the Maoists’ the Monarchy has been a perfect focal point to keep the minds of a large, uninformed decision-makers, fixated upon; and the liberal, educated crowd, even while they preach reconciliation and peace, remain to this day, blinded by personal vendetta and revenge against a monarch who temporarily denied them mobile phone and internet services.
Long gone are the days when liberal democrats would court arrest only to pick up their satellite phones (from their supposed cells) to dial Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, and tell the world about the “autocrat” Gyanendra. These fools know better than to try such games with the Maoists – they have recent examples to remind them of the potential repercussions from the YCL.
On May 28 2008, Nepal’s liberal democrats will celebrate the birth of a republic; a few months’ down the road, they are equally likely to be yearning for a second shot at the elections that King Gyanendra offered.
India’s Long Term Interest
A lot of people are worried about India’s excessive leaning towards the Maoists. The same people also express dissatisfaction at the Americans’ coddling of the Maoists. Not coincidentally, these are the same idiots who were all too happy to be Indian servants at one time and closed-door sycophant of the former American Ambassador James F. Moriarty.
But these people need to develop ulcers, unnecessarily. The Indian government will pursue its interests in Nepal, relentlessly and in lieu of a single power center that rose to the occasion when Moriarty was offering cover, the Americans are right to be pushing soft power tactics upon the Maoists.
The Indians and the Maoists share a common cause – both want King Gyanendra and Nepal’s Monarchy gone. But after this feat is accomplished, all bets are off. There is a reason why Indian Ambassador Rakesh Sood is fervently opposed to any constitutional amendments that could prolong the Monarchy’s lifeline. The Indians are in as much a hurry to sideline the Monarchy as they are to begin containing the Maoists’ power play.
There is not a moment in living memory when the Indians have placed all of their backing behind a single horse in Nepal and they are not about to start now; specially with a radical left-wing outfit, which by ideological doctrine, is incapable of serving long-term Indian interests. Once Nepal becomes a republic, the Maoists’ utility to Indian interests is as good as yesterday’s paper.
Conclusion
So what does all this mean? It means that with the elimination of the Monarchy, a one-party system in Nepal, is more likely than ever. The exact nature of such a system will become clearer over the coming weeks. Needless to say however, Nepal is likely to surprise the international community yet again, for what is expected, is most likely not going to be delivered.
For once, Prachanda’s communist sixth sense is serving him well. His Stalinist vocabulary is out of touch with the times, but Prachanda’s expectation of a “counter-revolution” is right on the money. Far too much has changed in Nepal, far too quickly and if history is any indication, radical changes are radically unstable.
The Monarchy as a logical counter-weight to the Maoists’ is a theory that has been tried and has failed. Rather than serving as a formidable challenge to the Maoists’, King Gyanendra’s disorganized campaign was perhaps the biggest power boost the Maoists’ could have wished for.
However, with the political liability of the Monarchy gone, the door to much needed, democratic (and if necessary, forceful) opposition to the Maoists, opens on Mary 28, 2008. With a convergence of national and international power centers, an unjustly humiliated military, disillusioned liberal democrats, and a civil society that is all too eager to please whoever can threaten them most subtly, Nepal is ripe ground for a real revolution.
All hail the Republic of Nepal!
Related Posts:
All the Right Agendas
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/04/all-right-agendas-nepali-national.html
Riding the Republican Bandwagon
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/04/riding-republican-bandwagon.html
All Attention on the Army
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/02/all-attention-on-army.html
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
Political violence: A Crime That Pays?
(Courtesy: Dr. Hari Bansha Dulal)
The Maoist comrades did it again. The only difference this time around is that the man they killed belonged to their own party. By killing Ramhari Shrestha in cold blood, and that too under Ian Martin’s nose, the Maoists have made it crystal clear that, they can kill people anywhere they like.
Given the secretive nature of modus operandi of the Maoist cadres involved and the Maoist party’s reluctance to hand over the perpetrators to the law enforcement agencies, the motive behind the killing might never be fully revealed. However, from media reports it is quite clear that there was a financial motive behind the killing of Shrestha. If so, what are our revolutionaries up to? Interested in jumping to a petit-bourgeois class while proletariats that voted for them en masse are waiting for their masters to alter Nepali society, by overthrowing feudal structures?
While the Maoists’ “cold-blooded killing machine” periodically exterminates educators, journalists, and businessmen, the perpetrators of the crimes never get apprehended and punished. It has become a kind of policy of the CPN (Maoist) to seek forgiveness for the crimes committed by its ill-trained and irrational cadres and get away with it. Equally astonishing is the helplessness exhibited by the state.
Be it the murder of educator Mukti Nath Adhikari, journalists duo Dikendra Thapa and Jitendra Sah, or physical assault on noted physician Dr Gyanendra Giri, has any of the Maoist cadre involved in the crime been apprehended and punished? Living in a land, where the murderers of educators and journalists walk free must be, utterly unsatisfying and psychologically taxing.
Why are the Maoists still intimidating and killing people? Will they ever stop? The people are struggling to find answers to these questions. And, the answers you get now from the top-rung Maoist politicians may not match experiences that you might encounter in the future.
If you ask the Maoists about their revolution, the chances of telling us that the revolution will get over only after the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat is almost hundred percent. So, in the context of perpetual revolution, will the means adopted so far be abandoned? In a country like ours, where the end justifies the means, is it even necessary to abandon the radical violence and murderous path that the Maoists have been walking so far?
Mao, the great hero and icon of the Maoist ideologues in Nepal, shortly after taking control of Mainland China in 1949, ordered the killing of millions of his political enemies, including Christians. Tens of thousands were killed during the ‘Cultural Revolution’ and approximately fourteen to twenty million died from starvation during the “Great Leap Forward.”
Likewise, Josef Stalin is believed to have killed approximately thirteen million people in various purges.
Parade Magazine, in its “The world’s 10 worst dictators” list compiled in 2005, has Kim Jong Il as the worst dictator alive. While Kim, who has developed an extreme personality cult, ranked first, Chinese president Hu Jintao and former Cuban president Fiedel Castro ranked third and ninth worst dictators. The communist dictators by no means are the crusader of personal and political freedom.
Although there is no universal consensus, it is believed that more than one million people have been killed after the junior Kim took over North Korea in 1994. There are no exact numbers, but conservative estimates suggest that an estimated one hundred and fifty thousand North Koreans are performing forced labor in prison camps created to punish alleged political dissidents.
In China, the communist party still controls all media. Thousands of “Internet security agents” are employed by the state to monitor internet use. Hundreds of thousands of Chinese are serving “re-education” sentences in labor camps across China. The recipients of such “re-education” through labor sentence, according to Human Rights Watch, have no right to a hearing, no right to counselling, and no right to any kind of judicial determination of their case. The number of executions carried out in China every year is more than all other nations combined.
Fiedel Castro executed and imprisoned thousands of Christians in his early years. Even though he allowed gospel crusades to be televised on the national television network after the worldwide collapse of communism between 1989 and 1991, the political dissidents and Christians jailed prior to 1991 are yet to receive amnesty.
If we look at one-party communist states that are revered by the Nepali Maoists, radical violence and extermination of the political opponents is the most common and successful method of political and social control. It is a method adopted by the communist dictators to preempt dissident activities that could pose a threat to the survival of their regime. By asking the Maoists to renounce radical violence and killings, Nepali people are asking the Maoists to toss away the most trusted method of political and social control. When would the Maoists give up the most trusted and tested method of political and social control? Politically, it does not make any sense.
In the last week’s BBC Nepali Sewa’s “Sajha Sawal,” Gagan Thapa argued about the ethical and psychological issues associated with the housing of YCL cadres in camps. From an ethical point of view, his arguments were strong and valid. However, what upcoming charismatic leaders like Thapa should understand is that, the YCL is created with a political purpose to weaken the political opponents and administer social control. And, as long as that motive is served, the Maoists would never dismantle the YCL.
CPN (Maoist) leader Ram Bahadur Thapa while addressing an interaction program at Reporter’s club on May 24, without mincing words made is ample clear that his party was bent on expanding the YCL as they want to win all 240 seats in the next election. Instead of arguing on psychological issues associated with the housing of youth in camps, it is time to develop a strategy that would make the existence of the YCL politically unprofitable for the Maoists. Only then, they would be forced to downsize or dissolve the YCL altogether. Till then it shall stay put. The youth leaders like Gagan Thapa should gear his energy towards oiling the youth machine for counter mobilization. Counter mobilization is the best bet and the only game in town.
The Maoists should be allowed to form the government but only after amending the existing constitution. It is true that, given the horse-trading culture of legislatures we have, replacing the two-thirds majority required for forming or changing a government with a simple majority will lead to the frequent change of the government. But it is only through the replacement of the two-thirds majority required for forming or changing a government with a simple majority, the democratic forces in Nepal can stop the Maoists from seizing the state’s instrument of force and coercion and their immediate use to destroy or control all independent sources of power, such as the social and religious institutions, the professions, private businesses, schools and of course, the family.
It may not be ethically correct to ask for it now, especially not when you are a loser. But when you have ideologues like Ram Bahadur Thapa who want to strengthen the YCL to win all 240 seats in the upcoming elections, you got to do what you got to do to survive politically and save the nation from becoming a one-party communist state.
Related Posts:
Young, Confused and Lost (YCL) – The Hammer of the Maoist “Party” of Nepal
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/05/young-confused-and-lost-ycl-hammer-of.html
All the Right Agendas
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/04/all-right-agendas-nepali-national.html
UNMIN Chief Confronts Nepal Media Once Again!
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/03/unmin-cheif-confronts-nepal-media-once.html
Kanak Mani Dixit The Nuanced
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/04/kanak-mani-dixit-nuanced.html
The Maoist comrades did it again. The only difference this time around is that the man they killed belonged to their own party. By killing Ramhari Shrestha in cold blood, and that too under Ian Martin’s nose, the Maoists have made it crystal clear that, they can kill people anywhere they like.
Given the secretive nature of modus operandi of the Maoist cadres involved and the Maoist party’s reluctance to hand over the perpetrators to the law enforcement agencies, the motive behind the killing might never be fully revealed. However, from media reports it is quite clear that there was a financial motive behind the killing of Shrestha. If so, what are our revolutionaries up to? Interested in jumping to a petit-bourgeois class while proletariats that voted for them en masse are waiting for their masters to alter Nepali society, by overthrowing feudal structures?
While the Maoists’ “cold-blooded killing machine” periodically exterminates educators, journalists, and businessmen, the perpetrators of the crimes never get apprehended and punished. It has become a kind of policy of the CPN (Maoist) to seek forgiveness for the crimes committed by its ill-trained and irrational cadres and get away with it. Equally astonishing is the helplessness exhibited by the state.
Be it the murder of educator Mukti Nath Adhikari, journalists duo Dikendra Thapa and Jitendra Sah, or physical assault on noted physician Dr Gyanendra Giri, has any of the Maoist cadre involved in the crime been apprehended and punished? Living in a land, where the murderers of educators and journalists walk free must be, utterly unsatisfying and psychologically taxing.
Why are the Maoists still intimidating and killing people? Will they ever stop? The people are struggling to find answers to these questions. And, the answers you get now from the top-rung Maoist politicians may not match experiences that you might encounter in the future.
If you ask the Maoists about their revolution, the chances of telling us that the revolution will get over only after the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat is almost hundred percent. So, in the context of perpetual revolution, will the means adopted so far be abandoned? In a country like ours, where the end justifies the means, is it even necessary to abandon the radical violence and murderous path that the Maoists have been walking so far?
Mao, the great hero and icon of the Maoist ideologues in Nepal, shortly after taking control of Mainland China in 1949, ordered the killing of millions of his political enemies, including Christians. Tens of thousands were killed during the ‘Cultural Revolution’ and approximately fourteen to twenty million died from starvation during the “Great Leap Forward.”
Likewise, Josef Stalin is believed to have killed approximately thirteen million people in various purges.
Parade Magazine, in its “The world’s 10 worst dictators” list compiled in 2005, has Kim Jong Il as the worst dictator alive. While Kim, who has developed an extreme personality cult, ranked first, Chinese president Hu Jintao and former Cuban president Fiedel Castro ranked third and ninth worst dictators. The communist dictators by no means are the crusader of personal and political freedom.
Although there is no universal consensus, it is believed that more than one million people have been killed after the junior Kim took over North Korea in 1994. There are no exact numbers, but conservative estimates suggest that an estimated one hundred and fifty thousand North Koreans are performing forced labor in prison camps created to punish alleged political dissidents.
In China, the communist party still controls all media. Thousands of “Internet security agents” are employed by the state to monitor internet use. Hundreds of thousands of Chinese are serving “re-education” sentences in labor camps across China. The recipients of such “re-education” through labor sentence, according to Human Rights Watch, have no right to a hearing, no right to counselling, and no right to any kind of judicial determination of their case. The number of executions carried out in China every year is more than all other nations combined.
Fiedel Castro executed and imprisoned thousands of Christians in his early years. Even though he allowed gospel crusades to be televised on the national television network after the worldwide collapse of communism between 1989 and 1991, the political dissidents and Christians jailed prior to 1991 are yet to receive amnesty.
If we look at one-party communist states that are revered by the Nepali Maoists, radical violence and extermination of the political opponents is the most common and successful method of political and social control. It is a method adopted by the communist dictators to preempt dissident activities that could pose a threat to the survival of their regime. By asking the Maoists to renounce radical violence and killings, Nepali people are asking the Maoists to toss away the most trusted method of political and social control. When would the Maoists give up the most trusted and tested method of political and social control? Politically, it does not make any sense.
In the last week’s BBC Nepali Sewa’s “Sajha Sawal,” Gagan Thapa argued about the ethical and psychological issues associated with the housing of YCL cadres in camps. From an ethical point of view, his arguments were strong and valid. However, what upcoming charismatic leaders like Thapa should understand is that, the YCL is created with a political purpose to weaken the political opponents and administer social control. And, as long as that motive is served, the Maoists would never dismantle the YCL.
CPN (Maoist) leader Ram Bahadur Thapa while addressing an interaction program at Reporter’s club on May 24, without mincing words made is ample clear that his party was bent on expanding the YCL as they want to win all 240 seats in the next election. Instead of arguing on psychological issues associated with the housing of youth in camps, it is time to develop a strategy that would make the existence of the YCL politically unprofitable for the Maoists. Only then, they would be forced to downsize or dissolve the YCL altogether. Till then it shall stay put. The youth leaders like Gagan Thapa should gear his energy towards oiling the youth machine for counter mobilization. Counter mobilization is the best bet and the only game in town.
The Maoists should be allowed to form the government but only after amending the existing constitution. It is true that, given the horse-trading culture of legislatures we have, replacing the two-thirds majority required for forming or changing a government with a simple majority will lead to the frequent change of the government. But it is only through the replacement of the two-thirds majority required for forming or changing a government with a simple majority, the democratic forces in Nepal can stop the Maoists from seizing the state’s instrument of force and coercion and their immediate use to destroy or control all independent sources of power, such as the social and religious institutions, the professions, private businesses, schools and of course, the family.
It may not be ethically correct to ask for it now, especially not when you are a loser. But when you have ideologues like Ram Bahadur Thapa who want to strengthen the YCL to win all 240 seats in the upcoming elections, you got to do what you got to do to survive politically and save the nation from becoming a one-party communist state.
Related Posts:
Young, Confused and Lost (YCL) – The Hammer of the Maoist “Party” of Nepal
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/05/young-confused-and-lost-ycl-hammer-of.html
All the Right Agendas
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/04/all-right-agendas-nepali-national.html
UNMIN Chief Confronts Nepal Media Once Again!
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/03/unmin-cheif-confronts-nepal-media-once.html
Kanak Mani Dixit The Nuanced
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/04/kanak-mani-dixit-nuanced.html
Monday, May 19, 2008
Late Awakening
(Courtesy: Dr. Hari Bansha Dulal)
The Maoists are slowly closing in on the democratic forces in Nepal. They have started to mount pressure on Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala to resign and have made it crystal clear that the Young Communist League (YCL), which in their view is, an equivalent of youth wings of the NC and the UML is not going to be disbanded anytime soon. Instead of facing dissolution, the YCL is rather getting active. It has decided to launch a month-long nationwide campaign.
By asking Prime Minister Koirala to submit his resignation to the speaker of parliament and facilitate a peaceful handover of power in public, Dr Baburam Bhattarai has delivered the masterstroke! The Maoists are all set to disown the very person, who helped them reach where they are now. Is this a sign of an end of utility of "useful idiots" for the Maoists?
After tirelessly honeymooning for more than two years, the politicians within the NC and the UML have finally started realizing working with the Maoists is difficult. The likes of Ram Chandra Poudel have started to talk what people like me have been telling for the past two and a half years. We wrote countless articles trying to explain the dangers associated with the continued appeasement and political cohabitation. But so long as the prospects of remaining in the power were bright, power hungry people like Poudel never bothered to listen to sane voices that would have given a reason for a logical pause.
The lust for power and the risk of being branded "reactionaries" undoubtedly subdued otherwise a logical caution. Now, when Poudel sees power slipping out of his grip, he is all of a sudden perturbed by the Maoists' dictatorial bent. What an awakening! If the democrats around the world started grasping the threat posed by the radicals this late, within no time, the majority of the democratic state will be bogged down by radical communists and insane Islamofacists.
Can someone actually ask ideologically bankrupt and unprincipled democrats like Poudel, who see the dictatorial bent of the Maoists only now? When did the Maoists actually abandon the idea of establishing a one-party communist state, if they ever did? The Maoists, at no point throughout the peace process or the entire period of insurgency, have expressed anything but a full-fledged commitment to the Maoists' strategic end-goal: the establishment of a one-party communist republic. Any misrepresentation of the Maoists' strategic intent has come from outside the party -- mainly from the left-leaning civil society pundits and the likes of Ram Chandra Poudel.
So for Ram Chandra Poudel to realize the dictatorial bent of the Maoists, at this point in time, after they have threatened to forcefully kick Prime Minister Koirala out of office is a crude awakening.
The so-called democrats that are squirming now wrote their political obituaries the very day they ventured out on a political cohabitation with the Maoists. Instead of squirming now, when it is too late to do anything about the Maoists' motives, it is time to put up a brave face and prepare oneself to become proud prisoners of the past mistakes. It's impossible to break the golden rule of cause and effect; no matter what, you reap what you sow.
In Nepal, for those who never had a choice between bread and freedom, it was quite obvious to side with the Maoists. But for those, who had both bread and freedom, the inability on part of important few like Poudel to see the imminent danger that unholy alliance with the Maoists posed is going to cost dearly.
Both internal and external actors are to be blamed for the current state of affairs. There was a political stagnation when King Gyanendra embarked on his idiotic venture of absolute monarchy. While this man, who became king by default (design component cannot be discredited altogether) was desperate to walk along the path that his shrewd father walked finely nearly half a century ago, two things were happening concurrently. First, the NC and the UML were trying hard to remain indefinitely in the power without facing the electorate. Second, the Maoists that were getting routinely eliminated by the Bhairavnath battalion in the Kathmandu valley were looking for ways to safely root themselves in the valley for the urban centered revolution.
It was King Gyanendra's foolishness that forced democratic forces to go defensive. Instead of working with the democratic forces, which would have made the fight against radical communism much easier, King Gyanendra preferred to ride pompous egoist—Tusli Giri.
For India, this was the best opportunity to get rid of monarchy, whose diehard nationalist course unlike that of King Jigme's in Bhutan always collided with India's security and economic interests in Nepal. As far as the Maoists were concerned, it was once in a lifetime opportunity to utilize rank and files of the NC and the UML that King Gyanendra was trying to obliterate as "useful idiots" in order to leapfrog to a higher level of their revolution pyramid.
In other words, King Gyanendra's idiotic move basically provided an opportunity to everyone that had been waiting for the window of opportunity to open to push through their own little agendas. While all the parties involved tried to outsmart each other, only the Maoists had both the strategy and the end goal handy.
What next? The Maoists have won the elections—fair and square and hence deserve a chance to govern. King Gyanendra should exit and the political parties of yesteryears should do what losers do in politics --- come up with vision and goals that resonate with constituents. The people are mentally prepared to get rid of monarchy and give the Maoists a chance to govern. So be it.
The easiest way for the NC and UML politicians that put bounty on the heads of the Maoist ideologues and deployed military to fight insurgency would be to instigate Nepal Army to commit coup d'etat. But this is not going to benefit the poor Nepali citizens who have been longing for peace for more than a decade. Nor are they ready for another decade long bloodshed. By voting overwhelming for the Maoists, the people have made it clear that they are ready to bow in front of the butcher and get pardoned rather than side with the losers and get hacked.
As keen observers, we all know that the Maoists have neither scored suicide goals in the past, nor will they score in the future. We also know that given the desire of Puspa Kamal Dahal to rule for decades, the days ahead are not going to be easy for the democrats. But we have no choice but to fight it out democratically. It might take years to dislodge the radicals out of power but the good thing about it is that, during the course of democratic struggle, true and principled democrats will get a chance to come to the forefront.
Related Posts:
Nepali Congress Lost in Democratic Translation
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/05/nepali-congress-lost-in-democratic.html
Convince Us It’s Bullets to Ballots
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/04/courtesy-roop-joshi-as-of-this-writing.html
The Nepali Congress should Focus on the Party's Reinvention, not on Koirala's Legacy
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/05/nepali-congress-should-focus-on-partys.html
The Maoists are slowly closing in on the democratic forces in Nepal. They have started to mount pressure on Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala to resign and have made it crystal clear that the Young Communist League (YCL), which in their view is, an equivalent of youth wings of the NC and the UML is not going to be disbanded anytime soon. Instead of facing dissolution, the YCL is rather getting active. It has decided to launch a month-long nationwide campaign.
By asking Prime Minister Koirala to submit his resignation to the speaker of parliament and facilitate a peaceful handover of power in public, Dr Baburam Bhattarai has delivered the masterstroke! The Maoists are all set to disown the very person, who helped them reach where they are now. Is this a sign of an end of utility of "useful idiots" for the Maoists?
After tirelessly honeymooning for more than two years, the politicians within the NC and the UML have finally started realizing working with the Maoists is difficult. The likes of Ram Chandra Poudel have started to talk what people like me have been telling for the past two and a half years. We wrote countless articles trying to explain the dangers associated with the continued appeasement and political cohabitation. But so long as the prospects of remaining in the power were bright, power hungry people like Poudel never bothered to listen to sane voices that would have given a reason for a logical pause.
The lust for power and the risk of being branded "reactionaries" undoubtedly subdued otherwise a logical caution. Now, when Poudel sees power slipping out of his grip, he is all of a sudden perturbed by the Maoists' dictatorial bent. What an awakening! If the democrats around the world started grasping the threat posed by the radicals this late, within no time, the majority of the democratic state will be bogged down by radical communists and insane Islamofacists.
Can someone actually ask ideologically bankrupt and unprincipled democrats like Poudel, who see the dictatorial bent of the Maoists only now? When did the Maoists actually abandon the idea of establishing a one-party communist state, if they ever did? The Maoists, at no point throughout the peace process or the entire period of insurgency, have expressed anything but a full-fledged commitment to the Maoists' strategic end-goal: the establishment of a one-party communist republic. Any misrepresentation of the Maoists' strategic intent has come from outside the party -- mainly from the left-leaning civil society pundits and the likes of Ram Chandra Poudel.
So for Ram Chandra Poudel to realize the dictatorial bent of the Maoists, at this point in time, after they have threatened to forcefully kick Prime Minister Koirala out of office is a crude awakening.
The so-called democrats that are squirming now wrote their political obituaries the very day they ventured out on a political cohabitation with the Maoists. Instead of squirming now, when it is too late to do anything about the Maoists' motives, it is time to put up a brave face and prepare oneself to become proud prisoners of the past mistakes. It's impossible to break the golden rule of cause and effect; no matter what, you reap what you sow.
In Nepal, for those who never had a choice between bread and freedom, it was quite obvious to side with the Maoists. But for those, who had both bread and freedom, the inability on part of important few like Poudel to see the imminent danger that unholy alliance with the Maoists posed is going to cost dearly.
Both internal and external actors are to be blamed for the current state of affairs. There was a political stagnation when King Gyanendra embarked on his idiotic venture of absolute monarchy. While this man, who became king by default (design component cannot be discredited altogether) was desperate to walk along the path that his shrewd father walked finely nearly half a century ago, two things were happening concurrently. First, the NC and the UML were trying hard to remain indefinitely in the power without facing the electorate. Second, the Maoists that were getting routinely eliminated by the Bhairavnath battalion in the Kathmandu valley were looking for ways to safely root themselves in the valley for the urban centered revolution.
It was King Gyanendra's foolishness that forced democratic forces to go defensive. Instead of working with the democratic forces, which would have made the fight against radical communism much easier, King Gyanendra preferred to ride pompous egoist—Tusli Giri.
For India, this was the best opportunity to get rid of monarchy, whose diehard nationalist course unlike that of King Jigme's in Bhutan always collided with India's security and economic interests in Nepal. As far as the Maoists were concerned, it was once in a lifetime opportunity to utilize rank and files of the NC and the UML that King Gyanendra was trying to obliterate as "useful idiots" in order to leapfrog to a higher level of their revolution pyramid.
In other words, King Gyanendra's idiotic move basically provided an opportunity to everyone that had been waiting for the window of opportunity to open to push through their own little agendas. While all the parties involved tried to outsmart each other, only the Maoists had both the strategy and the end goal handy.
What next? The Maoists have won the elections—fair and square and hence deserve a chance to govern. King Gyanendra should exit and the political parties of yesteryears should do what losers do in politics --- come up with vision and goals that resonate with constituents. The people are mentally prepared to get rid of monarchy and give the Maoists a chance to govern. So be it.
The easiest way for the NC and UML politicians that put bounty on the heads of the Maoist ideologues and deployed military to fight insurgency would be to instigate Nepal Army to commit coup d'etat. But this is not going to benefit the poor Nepali citizens who have been longing for peace for more than a decade. Nor are they ready for another decade long bloodshed. By voting overwhelming for the Maoists, the people have made it clear that they are ready to bow in front of the butcher and get pardoned rather than side with the losers and get hacked.
As keen observers, we all know that the Maoists have neither scored suicide goals in the past, nor will they score in the future. We also know that given the desire of Puspa Kamal Dahal to rule for decades, the days ahead are not going to be easy for the democrats. But we have no choice but to fight it out democratically. It might take years to dislodge the radicals out of power but the good thing about it is that, during the course of democratic struggle, true and principled democrats will get a chance to come to the forefront.
Related Posts:
Nepali Congress Lost in Democratic Translation
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/05/nepali-congress-lost-in-democratic.html
Convince Us It’s Bullets to Ballots
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/04/courtesy-roop-joshi-as-of-this-writing.html
The Nepali Congress should Focus on the Party's Reinvention, not on Koirala's Legacy
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/05/nepali-congress-should-focus-on-partys.html
Sunday, May 18, 2008
Mayday, Mayday?
(Courtesy: Armugam Ananta)
The political pandits have indicated that the ‘civilized’ threat - to return to the jungle - was largely instrumental in the election results going Maoist’s way. It is well known that people were subjected to threats of extremely sinister nature should the outcome from each locale run counter to Maoist’s fatwa. Wide scale booth capturing and use of extreme coercive threats has perhaps been over looked by all concerned as the ‘necessary evil’ for the ‘peaceful’ conduction of the election!
Both NC and UML were beaten in their own game. Given their assumed vote bank and past records the two biggies had believed that the Maoists would creep in towards the bottom at best. Locally renowned analysts fared no better either. It is said that the Nepal Army was the only one which had correctly predicted the out come. Ironically the most astonished were the Maoists themselves who had not believed that the threats would work to this level.
Fearing a poor outcome at best and humiliation at worst, Maoist saw advantage in going to the extreme by creating a situation that led to second election postponement. Hoping that it would fare better under the proportional representation system it coerced in making the changes through the constitution amendment. They were against the PR system earlier only exposes the level of indecisiveness and immaturity among the top Maoists. But as the results started coming in it became obvious that the Maoists had ‘laddus’ in both the hands, as the saying goes in Nepali.
Fighting this election would have been quite difficult matter altogether had it been held fairly. And the Maoists knew that very well. Maoists failed miserably to seize the opportunity provided by the election to inculcate the power of persuasion (minus the guns and threats, of course) to its foot soldiers. Its leaders, on their part, have always talked soft and denied all excesses committed by its ex soldiers in the YCL attire. That was, and it still is, the ground reality. It is a reason enough to call this election, though peaceful, neither free nor fair.
Wrong footed by the unexpected results our neighbour to the South has already started damage control exercise trying to appease the Maoists. Historically, they always maintained a two ‘tongued’ approach on dealings with Nepal. They were talking sweet to Maoist duo on one phone, while at the same time, using another phone blockading exports of essential raw materials like clinker, cement and steel etc.
The South block and the Bihar government were quick to set up a seminar with most Nepali parties and the agenda was naturally Water for ‘mutual benefit’. We know how ‘beneficial’ these have been to Nepal. Besides the unequal treaty of 1950 there are many contentious issues that are still open. Maoists can prove their anti royalist credentials by righting the wrong, supposedly at the hands of King Mahendra on the Kalapani. The logical question is would the Maoist be any better then its predecessors?
In the home front comrades were extremely busy trying to appease the businessmen and industrialists as if repeated extortions, wildcat strikes, unruly labour union and instances of vandalism had never been a problem during the last few years. Making a ‘verbal’ U turn the Maoist duo now want massive jobs creation in new factories to be set up by the aggrieved parties!
The fundamental problem with the Maoists is that there is a complete reversal in all aspects of what they say and what they ultimately end doing. Repeated refusal to return the land and other properties Maoist seized during the conflict is one example. A very convenient reason given is that the owners have not put up an ‘application’ first! Owners, on the other hand, claim that they would be better off if strung to a tree and shot like Ram Chandra Adhikari, the headmaster, of Lamjung, than be humiliated thus. For the general public this is the common face of a Maoist at its best!
There is no denying that Nepal’s Labour act is seriously loaded against those who are primarily responsible for creating jobs. No entrepreneurs or a factory owner will move even a ‘millimetre’, forget inches, unless they get to see the fundamental changes made in the act that allows them the right to hire and fire as necessary. The present act is so regressive that any labour having worked for 240 days gets automatic right to claim a permanent status irrespective of the order status. On productivity and skills, a Nepali labour falls far behind others in the neighbourhood. In other words, despite being cheaper, a Nepali labour becomes expensive when the two are taken into consideration. So where is the advantage in creating jobs?
In a country’s politics a non performing party gets booted out while another party gets the mandate to govern the country. Getting elected once is not a mandate to run the country for ever and the Maoists should understand this first.
Running an industry is no different where one has to be intensively competitive in producing high quality products. For an industry productivity and discipline are of paramount importance. Our industries lack this competitive edge as workers take it just as a 'jagir' for life.
Labour are generally eager in demanding benefits while shy away from being competitive. It is a pity that politicians remember to talk about job creation only while making high sounding inaugural speeches. Our inflexible labour act is just concerned in protecting the ‘jagir’ of those already employed - it is least bothered about the level of unemployment in the country.
The situation does not look too bright with Dr. Baburam failing to spell out clear cut policies especially towards ‘hiring and firing’ that the industries desperately need. Jump starting an idle engine may just be one time solution. But if the Maoists insist on jump starting every time then there is no alternative for the industries than to give out a “Mayday” call as with a ship in distress.
Related Postings:
Riding the Republican Bandwagon
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/04/riding-republican-bandwagon.html
They Shoot Journalists Don't They?
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/11/they-shoot-journalists-dont-they-nepali.html
Earth to John Norris and Kanak Dixit
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/10/earth-to-john-norris-and-kanak-dixit.html
The Pain of Losing a Nation
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/09/pain-of-losing-nation.html
The political pandits have indicated that the ‘civilized’ threat - to return to the jungle - was largely instrumental in the election results going Maoist’s way. It is well known that people were subjected to threats of extremely sinister nature should the outcome from each locale run counter to Maoist’s fatwa. Wide scale booth capturing and use of extreme coercive threats has perhaps been over looked by all concerned as the ‘necessary evil’ for the ‘peaceful’ conduction of the election!
Both NC and UML were beaten in their own game. Given their assumed vote bank and past records the two biggies had believed that the Maoists would creep in towards the bottom at best. Locally renowned analysts fared no better either. It is said that the Nepal Army was the only one which had correctly predicted the out come. Ironically the most astonished were the Maoists themselves who had not believed that the threats would work to this level.
Fearing a poor outcome at best and humiliation at worst, Maoist saw advantage in going to the extreme by creating a situation that led to second election postponement. Hoping that it would fare better under the proportional representation system it coerced in making the changes through the constitution amendment. They were against the PR system earlier only exposes the level of indecisiveness and immaturity among the top Maoists. But as the results started coming in it became obvious that the Maoists had ‘laddus’ in both the hands, as the saying goes in Nepali.
Fighting this election would have been quite difficult matter altogether had it been held fairly. And the Maoists knew that very well. Maoists failed miserably to seize the opportunity provided by the election to inculcate the power of persuasion (minus the guns and threats, of course) to its foot soldiers. Its leaders, on their part, have always talked soft and denied all excesses committed by its ex soldiers in the YCL attire. That was, and it still is, the ground reality. It is a reason enough to call this election, though peaceful, neither free nor fair.
Wrong footed by the unexpected results our neighbour to the South has already started damage control exercise trying to appease the Maoists. Historically, they always maintained a two ‘tongued’ approach on dealings with Nepal. They were talking sweet to Maoist duo on one phone, while at the same time, using another phone blockading exports of essential raw materials like clinker, cement and steel etc.
The South block and the Bihar government were quick to set up a seminar with most Nepali parties and the agenda was naturally Water for ‘mutual benefit’. We know how ‘beneficial’ these have been to Nepal. Besides the unequal treaty of 1950 there are many contentious issues that are still open. Maoists can prove their anti royalist credentials by righting the wrong, supposedly at the hands of King Mahendra on the Kalapani. The logical question is would the Maoist be any better then its predecessors?
In the home front comrades were extremely busy trying to appease the businessmen and industrialists as if repeated extortions, wildcat strikes, unruly labour union and instances of vandalism had never been a problem during the last few years. Making a ‘verbal’ U turn the Maoist duo now want massive jobs creation in new factories to be set up by the aggrieved parties!
The fundamental problem with the Maoists is that there is a complete reversal in all aspects of what they say and what they ultimately end doing. Repeated refusal to return the land and other properties Maoist seized during the conflict is one example. A very convenient reason given is that the owners have not put up an ‘application’ first! Owners, on the other hand, claim that they would be better off if strung to a tree and shot like Ram Chandra Adhikari, the headmaster, of Lamjung, than be humiliated thus. For the general public this is the common face of a Maoist at its best!
There is no denying that Nepal’s Labour act is seriously loaded against those who are primarily responsible for creating jobs. No entrepreneurs or a factory owner will move even a ‘millimetre’, forget inches, unless they get to see the fundamental changes made in the act that allows them the right to hire and fire as necessary. The present act is so regressive that any labour having worked for 240 days gets automatic right to claim a permanent status irrespective of the order status. On productivity and skills, a Nepali labour falls far behind others in the neighbourhood. In other words, despite being cheaper, a Nepali labour becomes expensive when the two are taken into consideration. So where is the advantage in creating jobs?
In a country’s politics a non performing party gets booted out while another party gets the mandate to govern the country. Getting elected once is not a mandate to run the country for ever and the Maoists should understand this first.
Running an industry is no different where one has to be intensively competitive in producing high quality products. For an industry productivity and discipline are of paramount importance. Our industries lack this competitive edge as workers take it just as a 'jagir' for life.
Labour are generally eager in demanding benefits while shy away from being competitive. It is a pity that politicians remember to talk about job creation only while making high sounding inaugural speeches. Our inflexible labour act is just concerned in protecting the ‘jagir’ of those already employed - it is least bothered about the level of unemployment in the country.
The situation does not look too bright with Dr. Baburam failing to spell out clear cut policies especially towards ‘hiring and firing’ that the industries desperately need. Jump starting an idle engine may just be one time solution. But if the Maoists insist on jump starting every time then there is no alternative for the industries than to give out a “Mayday” call as with a ship in distress.
Related Postings:
Riding the Republican Bandwagon
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/04/riding-republican-bandwagon.html
They Shoot Journalists Don't They?
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/11/they-shoot-journalists-dont-they-nepali.html
Earth to John Norris and Kanak Dixit
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/10/earth-to-john-norris-and-kanak-dixit.html
The Pain of Losing a Nation
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/09/pain-of-losing-nation.html
Friday, May 16, 2008
Security Sector Reform: Taking a Regional Approach and Promoting Cooperative Security Arrangement
(Courtesy: Chiran J. Thapa)
If a regional cooperative security arrangement were to come into fruition in South Asia, it could potentially be coined as South Asian Security Initiative (SASI). Although no such arrangement is in the offing, it is about time the member states of SAARC (South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation) began exploring the possibilities and opportunities that lie in such an arrangement. And the Security Sector Reform (SSR) project in Nepal could possibly provide the platform for regional cooperation on security agendas.
The concept of "collective security" has evolved since the Peace of Westphalia in 1648. But, it was only after the two menacing World wars of the 20th century that the concept gained wider appeal. As sovereignty and territorial integrity became inviolable and sacrosanct, the idea of a consensual coalition between states and to come to each other's defense when these ideals came under attack, naturally became a welcome safeguard. And the concept was realized, in part, through the formation of the United Nations.
This global collective security arrangement, however, has not been reassuring for many states. Despite being under the UN umbrella, states have still sought to develop further reassuring mechanisms to ensure their security. This is mainly because the pursuit of power, hegemony and national interests have repeatedly trumped over the collective security principle of "all for one and one for all." But, it is also because states have discovered that cooperative regional approaches were more reliable, pragmatic and feasible in enhancing their security.
As states have increasingly coalesced to form cooperative regional coalitions, there have been other parallel developments. With the end of the cold-war, the global political order changed and so did the paradigm of security. Globalisation has led to a surge in interdependency. As conventional military threats that once dominated the security realm began to recede, other threats like global warming, terrorism, health endemics, which are more asymmetrical, complex and trans-national in nature, have come to the forefront. Therefore, as the threats become more trans-national in nature, the capacity of individual states to unilaterally mitigate these threats is diminishing.
In addition, the horizon of the "security" has broadened significantly as it has begun to encompass other social, economic and even psychological aspects. As the threat of inter-state war slowly diminishes, the norm of security too began to shift from the traditional state centric military connotation to embrace ideas of "human security" and "human rights."
This has blurred the concept of collective security and made a "cooperative security" arrangement more appropriate. Cooperative security signifies the cooperation between states to deal with threats and challenges that are non-state and less-military in nature.
Regional groupings have increasingly realized this transformative aspect of security and responded befittingly. NATO is trying to expand its horizon by including more members and has begun focusing on more than just the military discourse. The ASEAN member states have recently agreed to establish the ASEAN Security Community (ASC). Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) was founded in 1996 with the main purpose of working cooperatively on security agendas. Even the African Union (AU) has decided to form its security council to cooperate on security agendas.
SSR in a nutshell:
Security Sector Reform (SSR) is a fairly new, ambiguous and still evolving concept. Till date, there is still no universally accepted definition of SSR. Clearly, the concept is lacking a comprehensive and coherent framework. There is no distinctive operational guideline nor are there any endorsed normative principles of SSR.
Despite the lack of a coherent framework for SSR, however, there is tacit agreement amongst theorists and practitioners on some basic fundamentals. Essentially, there is convergence on five tenets.
-------------
Core security actors
Armed forces; police; gendarmeries; paramilitary forces; presidential guards, intelligence and security services (both military and civilian); coast guards; border guards; customs authorities; reserve or local security units (civil defense forces, national guards, militias)
Security management and oversight bodies
The Executive; national security advisory bodies; legislature and legislative select committees; ministries of defense, internal affairs, foreign affairs; customary and traditional authorities; financial management bodies (finance ministries, budget offices, financial audit and planning units); and civil society organizations (civil review boards and public complaints commissions)
Justice and law enforcement institutions
Judiciary; justice ministries; prisons; criminal investigation and prosecution services; human rights commissions and ombudsmen; customary and traditional justice systems
Non-statutory security forces
Liberation armies; guerrilla armies; private body-guard units; private security companies; political party militias
----------
First, the SSR as a concept is mainly envisaged for fragile and post-conflict societies. Second, the security sector is effectively categorized into four categories: a) core security actors, b) Security management and oversight bodies, c) justice and law enforcement institutions and d) Non-statutory security forces. Third, the process entails capacity building, developing oversight mechanisms, and raising the accountability standards of all the entities that are even in the faintest way involved with the security aspect. Fourth, the overarching objective of the process is to consolidate peace, prosperity and democracy by ensuring that the various security institutions perform their statutory functions effectively and efficiently. Fifth, SSR should always be a national initiative but will require a synergy between national actors and international donors.
SSR can range from a limited to a limitless concept. From a maximalist viewpoint, the agenda almost overlaps the state-building formula. In a post conflict context, state-building mainly refers to the process undertaken to revitalize the society (fragile, failing or failed) by erecting robust political, social and economic orders. Since the cardinal function of any state is to provide security to its citizens, none of these processes can be rendered attainable without security. Also, the four SSR categories illustrate how the state-building process entails the aspects that are encapsulated in SSR agenda. A minimalist approach, however, could confine the parameters to reform of the core security actors or the non-statutory security forces.
Another aspect of SSR that is worthy of mentioning is DDR (disarmament, demobilization and reintegration). There is quite a bit of confusion between DDR and SSR. Some treat DDR and SSR as two completely separate disciplines while some take the completion of DDR as a precondition for initiating the SSR agenda.
A simple analysis, however, will reveal that DDR falls within the ambit of SSR. DDR is a post-conflict process required to consolidate peace and improve the security environment. Arguably, any measure taken to improve the security of the state automatically falls within the SSR realm. Also, DDR directly involves the Core security actors and Non- statutory security forces that are outlined in the SSR agenda.
Why the regional approach?
Every single state in South Asia is riddled with some sort of strife, violence or conflict. Five out of eight states in the region fall in the top 25 list of failed states. A frosty relationship between India and Pakistan still persists and makes the threat of a nuclear war all too real. India and Pakistan are both plagued by numerous extremist and separatist groups. The Economist has ranked Pakistan as the most dangerous state in the world. Afghanistan has been one of the most fragile and deadly states for decades. The festering civil war of Sri-Lanka is certainly one of the bitterest and longest. Nepal has just endured a decade long brutal insurgency. Bangladesh is home to numerous militant groups and the country has a long history of civil-military tension. Although Bhutan and Maldives have remained out of the spotlight, both countries have considerable political and social friction.
Ironically, however, this fragile region has taken the lead in shouldering the task of global peace operations. Today Pakistan, Bangladesh, India and Nepal are amongst the top five manpower contributors to UN led peace operations. If Sri-Lanka were to be added to this list, 37.6% of the total manpower for UN peace operations is currently fielded by the South Asian region.
The imperative of a regional cooperative security arrangement is manifested primarily by the above mentioned facts. As there remains a senseless chasm between the regional need and regional capability, the exigency to engage in a regional cooperative security arrangement is thus self explanatory.
SSR project in Nepal could appropriately serve to bridge that gap. The regional approach would be a win-win situation for all. The SSR project would effectively utilize the regional potential and contribute towards enhancing the regional security and stability. Of course, Nepal will gain considerably from this endeavor as it would provide a more sustainable guarantee and ensure compliance from national actors. As for the assisting member states, it would be a great learning experience. This would help them develop expertise in the SSR discourse, which could in turn be employed in their respective national contexts as well as in international theatres.
Another factor calling for a regional engagement is actually the proper lack of UN's institutional capacity. Till date, the member states of the UN have not reached a consensus on the concept of SSR. Although the report of the Secretary General on "the role of the United Nations in supporting security sector reform" was released in January 2008 to encourage and facilitate the consensus building process, there are still no agreed upon principles, standards, policies or guidelines on SSR. Furthermore, according to a report released by "Security Council Report," - a non-profit entity, there is actually an acute shortage of SSR capacity and expertise in and outside the UN.
SSR in Nepal is a marvelous opportunity for South Asian states to come together for a common purpose and mark a new beginning of greater regional cooperation. Such an engagement will provide a great learning opportunity which could actually be used in their respective national contexts and to build UN's institutional capacity as well. Also, since states make up the international political system, insecurity of one state has translational implication and effects. Hence, a pragmatic approach to creating a more secure globe is by improving the security of individual states. For all its novelty value, such an engagement would not only breed a spirit of regional solidarity, but it would ultimately bring the globe one step closer towards peace.
Related Posts:
Special Session and After: Thinking Past the Nepali 'Post-conflict'
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/11/special-session-and-after-thinking-past.html
The Utility of a Professional Nepalese Army
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/07/utility-of-professional-nepalese-army.html
If a regional cooperative security arrangement were to come into fruition in South Asia, it could potentially be coined as South Asian Security Initiative (SASI). Although no such arrangement is in the offing, it is about time the member states of SAARC (South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation) began exploring the possibilities and opportunities that lie in such an arrangement. And the Security Sector Reform (SSR) project in Nepal could possibly provide the platform for regional cooperation on security agendas.
The concept of "collective security" has evolved since the Peace of Westphalia in 1648. But, it was only after the two menacing World wars of the 20th century that the concept gained wider appeal. As sovereignty and territorial integrity became inviolable and sacrosanct, the idea of a consensual coalition between states and to come to each other's defense when these ideals came under attack, naturally became a welcome safeguard. And the concept was realized, in part, through the formation of the United Nations.
This global collective security arrangement, however, has not been reassuring for many states. Despite being under the UN umbrella, states have still sought to develop further reassuring mechanisms to ensure their security. This is mainly because the pursuit of power, hegemony and national interests have repeatedly trumped over the collective security principle of "all for one and one for all." But, it is also because states have discovered that cooperative regional approaches were more reliable, pragmatic and feasible in enhancing their security.
As states have increasingly coalesced to form cooperative regional coalitions, there have been other parallel developments. With the end of the cold-war, the global political order changed and so did the paradigm of security. Globalisation has led to a surge in interdependency. As conventional military threats that once dominated the security realm began to recede, other threats like global warming, terrorism, health endemics, which are more asymmetrical, complex and trans-national in nature, have come to the forefront. Therefore, as the threats become more trans-national in nature, the capacity of individual states to unilaterally mitigate these threats is diminishing.
In addition, the horizon of the "security" has broadened significantly as it has begun to encompass other social, economic and even psychological aspects. As the threat of inter-state war slowly diminishes, the norm of security too began to shift from the traditional state centric military connotation to embrace ideas of "human security" and "human rights."
This has blurred the concept of collective security and made a "cooperative security" arrangement more appropriate. Cooperative security signifies the cooperation between states to deal with threats and challenges that are non-state and less-military in nature.
Regional groupings have increasingly realized this transformative aspect of security and responded befittingly. NATO is trying to expand its horizon by including more members and has begun focusing on more than just the military discourse. The ASEAN member states have recently agreed to establish the ASEAN Security Community (ASC). Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) was founded in 1996 with the main purpose of working cooperatively on security agendas. Even the African Union (AU) has decided to form its security council to cooperate on security agendas.
SSR in a nutshell:
Security Sector Reform (SSR) is a fairly new, ambiguous and still evolving concept. Till date, there is still no universally accepted definition of SSR. Clearly, the concept is lacking a comprehensive and coherent framework. There is no distinctive operational guideline nor are there any endorsed normative principles of SSR.
Despite the lack of a coherent framework for SSR, however, there is tacit agreement amongst theorists and practitioners on some basic fundamentals. Essentially, there is convergence on five tenets.
-------------
Core security actors
Armed forces; police; gendarmeries; paramilitary forces; presidential guards, intelligence and security services (both military and civilian); coast guards; border guards; customs authorities; reserve or local security units (civil defense forces, national guards, militias)
Security management and oversight bodies
The Executive; national security advisory bodies; legislature and legislative select committees; ministries of defense, internal affairs, foreign affairs; customary and traditional authorities; financial management bodies (finance ministries, budget offices, financial audit and planning units); and civil society organizations (civil review boards and public complaints commissions)
Justice and law enforcement institutions
Judiciary; justice ministries; prisons; criminal investigation and prosecution services; human rights commissions and ombudsmen; customary and traditional justice systems
Non-statutory security forces
Liberation armies; guerrilla armies; private body-guard units; private security companies; political party militias
----------
First, the SSR as a concept is mainly envisaged for fragile and post-conflict societies. Second, the security sector is effectively categorized into four categories: a) core security actors, b) Security management and oversight bodies, c) justice and law enforcement institutions and d) Non-statutory security forces. Third, the process entails capacity building, developing oversight mechanisms, and raising the accountability standards of all the entities that are even in the faintest way involved with the security aspect. Fourth, the overarching objective of the process is to consolidate peace, prosperity and democracy by ensuring that the various security institutions perform their statutory functions effectively and efficiently. Fifth, SSR should always be a national initiative but will require a synergy between national actors and international donors.
SSR can range from a limited to a limitless concept. From a maximalist viewpoint, the agenda almost overlaps the state-building formula. In a post conflict context, state-building mainly refers to the process undertaken to revitalize the society (fragile, failing or failed) by erecting robust political, social and economic orders. Since the cardinal function of any state is to provide security to its citizens, none of these processes can be rendered attainable without security. Also, the four SSR categories illustrate how the state-building process entails the aspects that are encapsulated in SSR agenda. A minimalist approach, however, could confine the parameters to reform of the core security actors or the non-statutory security forces.
Another aspect of SSR that is worthy of mentioning is DDR (disarmament, demobilization and reintegration). There is quite a bit of confusion between DDR and SSR. Some treat DDR and SSR as two completely separate disciplines while some take the completion of DDR as a precondition for initiating the SSR agenda.
A simple analysis, however, will reveal that DDR falls within the ambit of SSR. DDR is a post-conflict process required to consolidate peace and improve the security environment. Arguably, any measure taken to improve the security of the state automatically falls within the SSR realm. Also, DDR directly involves the Core security actors and Non- statutory security forces that are outlined in the SSR agenda.
Why the regional approach?
Every single state in South Asia is riddled with some sort of strife, violence or conflict. Five out of eight states in the region fall in the top 25 list of failed states. A frosty relationship between India and Pakistan still persists and makes the threat of a nuclear war all too real. India and Pakistan are both plagued by numerous extremist and separatist groups. The Economist has ranked Pakistan as the most dangerous state in the world. Afghanistan has been one of the most fragile and deadly states for decades. The festering civil war of Sri-Lanka is certainly one of the bitterest and longest. Nepal has just endured a decade long brutal insurgency. Bangladesh is home to numerous militant groups and the country has a long history of civil-military tension. Although Bhutan and Maldives have remained out of the spotlight, both countries have considerable political and social friction.
Ironically, however, this fragile region has taken the lead in shouldering the task of global peace operations. Today Pakistan, Bangladesh, India and Nepal are amongst the top five manpower contributors to UN led peace operations. If Sri-Lanka were to be added to this list, 37.6% of the total manpower for UN peace operations is currently fielded by the South Asian region.
The imperative of a regional cooperative security arrangement is manifested primarily by the above mentioned facts. As there remains a senseless chasm between the regional need and regional capability, the exigency to engage in a regional cooperative security arrangement is thus self explanatory.
SSR project in Nepal could appropriately serve to bridge that gap. The regional approach would be a win-win situation for all. The SSR project would effectively utilize the regional potential and contribute towards enhancing the regional security and stability. Of course, Nepal will gain considerably from this endeavor as it would provide a more sustainable guarantee and ensure compliance from national actors. As for the assisting member states, it would be a great learning experience. This would help them develop expertise in the SSR discourse, which could in turn be employed in their respective national contexts as well as in international theatres.
Another factor calling for a regional engagement is actually the proper lack of UN's institutional capacity. Till date, the member states of the UN have not reached a consensus on the concept of SSR. Although the report of the Secretary General on "the role of the United Nations in supporting security sector reform" was released in January 2008 to encourage and facilitate the consensus building process, there are still no agreed upon principles, standards, policies or guidelines on SSR. Furthermore, according to a report released by "Security Council Report," - a non-profit entity, there is actually an acute shortage of SSR capacity and expertise in and outside the UN.
SSR in Nepal is a marvelous opportunity for South Asian states to come together for a common purpose and mark a new beginning of greater regional cooperation. Such an engagement will provide a great learning opportunity which could actually be used in their respective national contexts and to build UN's institutional capacity as well. Also, since states make up the international political system, insecurity of one state has translational implication and effects. Hence, a pragmatic approach to creating a more secure globe is by improving the security of individual states. For all its novelty value, such an engagement would not only breed a spirit of regional solidarity, but it would ultimately bring the globe one step closer towards peace.
Related Posts:
Special Session and After: Thinking Past the Nepali 'Post-conflict'
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/11/special-session-and-after-thinking-past.html
The Utility of a Professional Nepalese Army
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/07/utility-of-professional-nepalese-army.html
Saturday, May 10, 2008
The Bewilderness
(Courtesy: Dr. Hari Bansha Dulal)
With the successful conclusion of CA polls, all eyes are on India and the United States now. The extent to which India and the US will recalibrate their policy vis-à-vis the Maoist victory in Nepal will determine whether or not the Maoist government will have a smooth sailing.
Puspa Kamal Dahal's assertion that the Maoists are in for a long haul might prove true unless international players like India and the US tighten the screw on the Maoists and provide support to the democratic forces, which at this point in time appears highly unlikely. For India, a nation that has a substantial security and economic interests in Nepal, it simply does not make any sense to overrun a party, which has both: A private militia and people's mandate to govern. And, why should India stick to the old guards if the new kids on the block are willing to render similar services? As far as the United States is concerned, it has already outsourced its Nepal policy to India. Due to the lack of any major interest in Nepal, the US is expected to continue toeing India's policy towards Nepal.
Those in the NC and the UML who think India will not abandon the horse that served their interests faithfully for almost two decades should rethink why India should stick with a horse that lost badly in a high stake derby. They should reconcile with the fact that India loves to bet on a wining horse. If we look around, it becomes evident that, for India, its security and economic interest is far more important than democratic rights of citizens of foreign nations. Indian government's cordial relations with Myanmar's repressive junta and Banngladesh's military rule speak volume about how India hoodwinks international community when it comes to its stand on democracy.
When India can roll-out the red carpet for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran, it can definitely do so to keep Puspa Kamal Dahal at its arm's length. It is just a matter of time. The very minute India extract promises from the Maoist comrades on issues related to India's security, democrats in Nepal will be on their own. With time and change in political stature, international actors' betting preferences do change.
For the NC and the UML to beat the Maoists, they have to completely overhaul their current strategy of trying to appear more progressive than the Maoists. Nobody is going to buy that. If the NC and the UML really want to succeed, let the Maoists do what they do best, and you do what you do best — resonate with the people that are at the center of the political spectrum. It is virtually impossible to defeat a party whose very basis of existence is grounded on proletarian agendas by trying to appear more progressive than them. One of the reasons why the NC and the UML had to face humiliating defeat might have to do with this unwarranted political shift. When you, as a centrist political force completely abandon what you traditionally stood for, loyal supporters that are attached to the party on the basis of ideology have no inclination or incentive to remain wedded to the party.
Surprisingly, even after the humiliating defeat, the NC and the UML have not abandoned the Maoist-style of doing business. In a rat race of proving itself more inclusive, visionless and petty-minded politicians at the NC's helm of affairs have chosen to sacrifice people like Radheshyam Adhikari, Harihar Birahi, and Manmohan Bhattarai that make up the NC's intellectual backbone. Instead of nominating these individuals that could have made a significant contribution in drafting a liberal constitution, bewildered NC's leadership decided to nominate semi-illiterates en masse. Does this act of wholesale nomination of semi-illiterates for a responsible job of drafting a constitution, which requires a great deal of technical expertise, really serve the purpose? If the answer is no, then how justified it is to pay bench-warmers as constitution makers? Where is the fiscal responsibility?
Establishing a herd of semi-illiterates to warm benches rather than nominating experts like Radheshyam Adhikari, who have been practicing law for decades, is neither fiscally responsible thing to do, nor a good strategy to counter the Maoists' desire to mould the constitution to their liking. When will the air headed idiots within the NC realize the gravity of the situation?
In a way, the recent CA election results might prove to be blessings for those who really want to practice principle-based politics within the NC and the UML. As it will take considerable time and effort to dislodge the Maoists from the power and defeat them in the upcoming parliamentary and local elections, the fat cats within the NC and the UML that have made a fortune by remaining in power for the last two decades might not have the required patience and the desire to stay put. However, there is no guarantee. If they still decide to hang around, the dedicated cadres that really want to see their party come back to power should revolt. Now is the time for some purification.
Shashank Koirala of the NC and Shankar Pokharel of the UML have the potential to bring back the lost glory. They are neither populist nor tainted. They can actually unite the party and put up a good fight against the Maoists. In order to defeat the Maoists, you got to prove that you are different. So far, by trying to hijack their political agendas, the NC and the UML have been blurring the difference between their party and the Maoists. In the absence of visible difference, people will continue to support the Maoists.
After forming the government in the next couple of weeks, the Maoists will do their best to negate the exiting threats. The threat of takeover by the army will be negated by merging the PLA with the national army and promoting the likes of Kul Bahadur Khadka within the Nepal Army. So the only way left to bring down the Maoist government to its knees, if needed, is through revolution in the tarai. At this point in time, only Madhesi regional parties such as the MPRF and TMDP have the power to unleash enough violence to choke the power structures in Kathmandu. It is, thus, crucial for the NC and the UML to remain in good terms with these regional parties.
At this point in time, the NC and theUML neither have an agenda for counter mobilization nor have the required strength to fight back. So the days ahead are not going to be easy for them. But the game is not over yet. There is one more chance and that is the upcoming elections. In order for the NC and the UML to win the upcoming elections, they need to restructure their party and come up with a sound counter-mobilization strategy. Try to do it right this time around.
Related Posts:
Convince Us It’s Bullets to Ballots
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/04/courtesy-roop-joshi-as-of-this-writing.html
Riding the Republican Bandwagon
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/04/riding-republican-bandwagon.html
With the successful conclusion of CA polls, all eyes are on India and the United States now. The extent to which India and the US will recalibrate their policy vis-à-vis the Maoist victory in Nepal will determine whether or not the Maoist government will have a smooth sailing.
Puspa Kamal Dahal's assertion that the Maoists are in for a long haul might prove true unless international players like India and the US tighten the screw on the Maoists and provide support to the democratic forces, which at this point in time appears highly unlikely. For India, a nation that has a substantial security and economic interests in Nepal, it simply does not make any sense to overrun a party, which has both: A private militia and people's mandate to govern. And, why should India stick to the old guards if the new kids on the block are willing to render similar services? As far as the United States is concerned, it has already outsourced its Nepal policy to India. Due to the lack of any major interest in Nepal, the US is expected to continue toeing India's policy towards Nepal.
Those in the NC and the UML who think India will not abandon the horse that served their interests faithfully for almost two decades should rethink why India should stick with a horse that lost badly in a high stake derby. They should reconcile with the fact that India loves to bet on a wining horse. If we look around, it becomes evident that, for India, its security and economic interest is far more important than democratic rights of citizens of foreign nations. Indian government's cordial relations with Myanmar's repressive junta and Banngladesh's military rule speak volume about how India hoodwinks international community when it comes to its stand on democracy.
When India can roll-out the red carpet for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran, it can definitely do so to keep Puspa Kamal Dahal at its arm's length. It is just a matter of time. The very minute India extract promises from the Maoist comrades on issues related to India's security, democrats in Nepal will be on their own. With time and change in political stature, international actors' betting preferences do change.
For the NC and the UML to beat the Maoists, they have to completely overhaul their current strategy of trying to appear more progressive than the Maoists. Nobody is going to buy that. If the NC and the UML really want to succeed, let the Maoists do what they do best, and you do what you do best — resonate with the people that are at the center of the political spectrum. It is virtually impossible to defeat a party whose very basis of existence is grounded on proletarian agendas by trying to appear more progressive than them. One of the reasons why the NC and the UML had to face humiliating defeat might have to do with this unwarranted political shift. When you, as a centrist political force completely abandon what you traditionally stood for, loyal supporters that are attached to the party on the basis of ideology have no inclination or incentive to remain wedded to the party.
Surprisingly, even after the humiliating defeat, the NC and the UML have not abandoned the Maoist-style of doing business. In a rat race of proving itself more inclusive, visionless and petty-minded politicians at the NC's helm of affairs have chosen to sacrifice people like Radheshyam Adhikari, Harihar Birahi, and Manmohan Bhattarai that make up the NC's intellectual backbone. Instead of nominating these individuals that could have made a significant contribution in drafting a liberal constitution, bewildered NC's leadership decided to nominate semi-illiterates en masse. Does this act of wholesale nomination of semi-illiterates for a responsible job of drafting a constitution, which requires a great deal of technical expertise, really serve the purpose? If the answer is no, then how justified it is to pay bench-warmers as constitution makers? Where is the fiscal responsibility?
Establishing a herd of semi-illiterates to warm benches rather than nominating experts like Radheshyam Adhikari, who have been practicing law for decades, is neither fiscally responsible thing to do, nor a good strategy to counter the Maoists' desire to mould the constitution to their liking. When will the air headed idiots within the NC realize the gravity of the situation?
In a way, the recent CA election results might prove to be blessings for those who really want to practice principle-based politics within the NC and the UML. As it will take considerable time and effort to dislodge the Maoists from the power and defeat them in the upcoming parliamentary and local elections, the fat cats within the NC and the UML that have made a fortune by remaining in power for the last two decades might not have the required patience and the desire to stay put. However, there is no guarantee. If they still decide to hang around, the dedicated cadres that really want to see their party come back to power should revolt. Now is the time for some purification.
Shashank Koirala of the NC and Shankar Pokharel of the UML have the potential to bring back the lost glory. They are neither populist nor tainted. They can actually unite the party and put up a good fight against the Maoists. In order to defeat the Maoists, you got to prove that you are different. So far, by trying to hijack their political agendas, the NC and the UML have been blurring the difference between their party and the Maoists. In the absence of visible difference, people will continue to support the Maoists.
After forming the government in the next couple of weeks, the Maoists will do their best to negate the exiting threats. The threat of takeover by the army will be negated by merging the PLA with the national army and promoting the likes of Kul Bahadur Khadka within the Nepal Army. So the only way left to bring down the Maoist government to its knees, if needed, is through revolution in the tarai. At this point in time, only Madhesi regional parties such as the MPRF and TMDP have the power to unleash enough violence to choke the power structures in Kathmandu. It is, thus, crucial for the NC and the UML to remain in good terms with these regional parties.
At this point in time, the NC and theUML neither have an agenda for counter mobilization nor have the required strength to fight back. So the days ahead are not going to be easy for them. But the game is not over yet. There is one more chance and that is the upcoming elections. In order for the NC and the UML to win the upcoming elections, they need to restructure their party and come up with a sound counter-mobilization strategy. Try to do it right this time around.
Related Posts:
Convince Us It’s Bullets to Ballots
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/04/courtesy-roop-joshi-as-of-this-writing.html
Riding the Republican Bandwagon
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2008/04/riding-republican-bandwagon.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)