Cloud of doubt hangs over the new Nepal

SOMINI SENGUPTA

THE country’s socially marginalised minorities are taking an aggressive tone in seeking proper representation and politicians find these demands coming too soon after the restoration of democracy, writes SOMINI SENGUPTA.

A YEAR after the return of democratic rule to Nepal, the scene in parliament went something like this:No sooner had it officially opened for business on Monday afternoon, nearly six hours past schedule and with the benches barely filled to quorum, than some parliamentarians rushed the dais, raising fists and shouting slogans to protest a police crackdown in the southeast early this year.The speaker’s pleas for them to return to their seats were ignored. Within 10 minutes, unable to do any legislative work, parliament was adjourned. It was the third such useless session in less than two weeks.The scene represented much more than the routine fracas of democracy. It was a snapshot of the new, though not entirely unexpected, fissures that have cut through Nepal’s body politic, as it struggles to recover from more than a decade of Maoist insurgency and redefine the very ground rules of its nationhood.The divisions stem from old grievances over how Nepal’s many ethnic groups, castes and language minorities will be treated by the state, long dominated by members of the upper-caste elite from the hills. The parliamentarians who raised the ruckus represented the people of the southeastern plains, known here as Madhesis, who had staged an uprising that the police quashed.

The politicians, who now include the Maoists, who have joined the cabinet, have been caught off guard by the ferocity of the complaints."We are in an awkward position," said Ram Chandra Poudel, the beleaguered Minister for Peace and Reconstruction, on Monday, adding that he had not expected to face so many grievances from so many quarters, so soon after the restoration of democracy. "These demands may be genuine, but they should not come out so aggressively."As if on cue, the next day, a particularly aggressive show of frustration against the government occurred. When Poudel tried to speak at a rally to commemorate the anniversary of democratic rule in a public square in Kathmandu, he was hit by empty bottles and booed.Ambling through the public square were members of the Maoists’ latest subsidiary, a pack of young men and women known as the Young Communist League and led by former guerillas. They said they had been assigned to provide security. Among their duties these days is the demolition of illegal structures, traffic management, capturing people accused of being gangsters and acting against what they call "regressive forces". At times, that includes disrupting other political party meetings or thrashing political opponents.

The new uncertainties have come in a country transforming itself remarkably fast. A year ago, King Gyanendra, who had seized absolute control of the state, was forced by a swell of street protests to return the government to an elected parliament. The government signed a peace deal with the Maoists, ending a 11-year war. The Maoists then sequestered their fighters and put weapons into cantonments, monitored by the United Nations.An interim constitution was put in place. A coalition government took over, including even the Maoists. Over the last year, symbols of the old Nepal were scrapped: A new national anthem was drafted, "Royal" was dropped from the name of the Nepalese army and state-owned Nepal Airlines, and the government promised to tax the king’s property.A critical issue remains unresolved in the new Nepal, and it is the root of widespread public frustration: Whether and how Nepal will become a federal state with some degree of autonomy for its ethnic groups and regions.It is a question that has sparked a sometimes violent uprising over the last three months by the Madhesis, who say people from the hills have long discriminated against them. Demands for representation have come from other socially marginalised groups, too, like low-caste Dalits and indigenous people, called Janjatis.

Nepal seems to be in no immediate danger of sliding into prolonged ethnic conflict. But the questions that confront Nepal are nothing short of existential. "What is the new Nepal? What does it mean to be a Nepalese? That’s absolutely what’s being debated," said Manjushree Thapa, a writer.That debate has made the peace process miss a crucial deadline. June elections to choose a national assembly to rewrite the constitution have been indefinitely postponed. A new constitution will determine many vital issues, including whether Nepal will retain its monarchy.Abolishing the constitution is the Maoists’ principal demand, and they now want the government to declare Nepal a republic rather than wait for the voters’ verdict.The Maoists have vowed to resume what they call "the people’s movement", fearful that the palace may try to stage a comeback. Last week, two cabinet members suggested that elections could be organised by November, when there is a tiny window in Nepal’s difficult social and climatic calendar — after the rains and autumn festival season and before the harvest. The UN urged the government to act to hold elections quickly.

Representation was the fuel that fired the Madhesi revolt in the plains early this year. They were particularly aggrieved by the interim constitution, which, when promulgated in January, included no mention of regional or ethnic autonomy."They are not honest, they are not sincere, they talk about republic but they are not ready to share political rights with marginalised people," Jeetendra Dev said. He included the United Marxist-Leninist, his party, whose Madhesi wing he heads.Poudel noted that the government had since agreed to the demand for federalism, though it had yet to resolve the details."They’re the same as before," said Laxmi Dahal, 29, a trade union advocate who attended the commemoration on Tuesday of the return to democracy. Last year, she said, she marched in the pro-democracy demonstrations and was beaten by the police during one. On Tuesday, she said she had come to "warn" the political leaders to keep their word to those who had marched for freedom.In the crowd, Bijay Paudel, a graduate student, echoed Dahal’s misgivings. "Everyone wants a change, but the political parties which have been leading the nation are not listening to the voice of the people." — NYT

Source: NSTONLINE, April 30, 2007