Nepal: Maoists start singing blues

Maila Baje

The price of power is catching up with the Maoists. Ex-rebel supremo Prachanda and his No. 2 Dr. Baburam Bhattarai are now on antidepressants, one published report tells us.
Neither has denied the report and the specifics of their maladies and treatment plans don't really matter here. The circumstances leading up to what many considered inevitable do.For most of us, that gory pile of 13,000 bodies would have been more than enough to precipitate a lifetime of hallucination. (The premise, as always, is that the Maoists started the violence and are responsible for everything.)

For a cluster of top comrades long deluded by a discredited ideology, the ends always justified the means. (One death is a tragedy, anything beyond is a statistic, Uncle Joe told us, didn't he.)
If some people weren't prepared to kill and die for their beliefs, well, they didn't deserve to live in the first place. Battlefield brutality and turgid theorizing offered a solid synthesis for a purpose-driven life.
As long as it was lived subterraneously. The first lights of peace must have proved real distracting to our supremo. The novelty was bound to wear off sooner or later. Sooner in Prachanda's case, once it emerged that his bite was nowhere as sharp as his bark. His royalist phobia had to be symptomatic of a larger condition.

As for Dr. Bhattarai, you could forgive his abrupt U-turns in the past because they occurred over a period of time. With all the detours, twists, jerks and more twists the chief ex-rebel ideologue's prose took within the first few months of the April Uprising, the aura of erudition had to evaporate.
In fairness, we don't know whether Prachanda or Dr. Bhattarai have personally killed anything bigger than mosquitoes. Still the number 13,000 must have been etched deeply inside both somewhere. With the blanket of fear lifting so swiftly in the spring of 2006, the Maoists knew they couldn't count on the docility of ordinary Nepalis.
It must be hard for the honchos to keep track of the non-government quarters gunning for their heads. How many people could really forget that hapless teacher Gyawali as he lay dying tied to that tree? Could relatives and friends of Maoist victims organizer Chilwal be lurking out there somewhere. And the widows and children of the police, soldiers and bureaucrats the "people's war" claimed. Gaur must seem like a picnic.

And this is just the beginning. How deep does the sense of betrayal really run in the movement? When you have the prime beneficiary of Prachanda's pro-Indian line, Mohan Baidya, criticizing the supremo's groveling to the south, things must be real bad.
Krishna Bahadur Mahara was already in parliament in 1991. With enough scheming with the UML and others, Dr. Bhattarai could have plotted a takeover of the state faster with far fewer lives lost and more communication towers standing. The parliamentary route might even have conferred on the Maoists the legitimacy ex-communist Boris Yeltsin enjoyed. The end result of that spree of death and destruction? A seat on the table with seven former foes.

As spokesman for the government, Communications Minister Mahara has to present a unified version of events and ideas to the nation and world. How many qualifiers and caveats can he throw out without undermining his party? Sure the ends justify the means. But that sordid royal-plot CD? Even Goebbels worked within certain rules.
Then there's Dr. Bhattarai's defense of his wife, Physical Planning Minister Hisila Yami, in her attempt to keep the capital's taps dry until she finds someone who looks good enough to run it. Even the Young Communist Leaguers need a decent bath from time to time, don't they?
The larger question becomes unavoidable. When the Maoists fail to vindicate the Great Helmsman, what becomes of the Nepalis' reputation for loyalty in times of war as well as peace?
All things considered, this whole depression shtick may still be another Maoist ruse. It could help Prachanda and Dr. Bhattarai take the insanity defense at any future war-crimes trial, couldn't it?

Source: Newsblaze, May 22, 2007

Sounds like ever

Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala, judging by his own words, attaches great importance to the unification of the two Congresses — the parent Nepali Congress led by him and the breakaway Nepali Congress (Democratic) headed by former prime minister Sher Bahadur Deuba. From time to time, Koirala has said that he will take rest from politics after accomplishing this or that task — now, unification is one, along with the constituent assembly polls. On several occasions, the unity talks were billed to have neared a breakthrough.

But now, after Monday’s Koirala-Deuba meeting, the expected merger seems to be anything but close. “The merger appears remote now. We have been suggesting that a task force should do the spadework. This has not gone down well with the NC”, Deuba said after the meeting.The NC-D president objects to the reports spread by some NC leaders saying he was demanding the second position in the unified party. In the past, there were also reports that he had insisted on the post of acting president. The NC was recently reported positive on making him senior vice president. However, according to Dr Prakash Sharan Mahat, an NC-D leader, Deuba made it clear to Koirala on Monday that he was not keen on any post for himself, but wanted the NC-D workers from the central to the village levels to be properly accommodated. But the NC is reported unwilling to apply the Deuba formula across the board. Koirala’s strategy to lure the NC-D people into the parent party individually has not quite worked.

Thus, without according a “respectable” status to NC-D people at all levels, NC unification seems unlikely, at least for the present.And the CA polls are now just about six months away. So, Koirala can wait. Some even allege, probably with justification, that some powerful external forces friendly to the non-Left have been encouraging Congress unity just for electoral gains. Whatever the truth, unity should be based on ideological and policy agreement on vital issues. Besides, if the clash of egos and personal interest of the top leaders is severe, a lasting unity is not possible. No unity would serve any purpose other than presenting a drama of artificial coming together to deceive the public. The truth of the matter is, the public is not so interested in the unity or non-unity of the Congress or of any other party.

The public also remembers the fact that the NC government led by Deuba, while Koirala was the party president, had made a series of moves leading ultimately to regression in the country. And since 1990, Koirala, Deuba, and K P Bhattarai, a former NC president, have, among them, held the office of the PM 11 times. But such long innings hardly led to good governance and a strengthening of democracy. Moreover, there is the persistent issue of internal democracy in the Koirala-led Congress, and some in the NC-D have even suggested that the demand for internal democracy should form something of a rider in the unity talks. If the NC wants to turn over a new leaf on these important counts, only then will Congress unification hold any meaning for the Nepali people.

Source: The Himalayan Times, May 23, 2007

Nation-building: Emerging challenges to peace process

Dhurba Rizal

The complexities of the peace process, while it might excite some, will depress others. Global peacemaking and conflict resolution experiences show that getting the two sides to the conflict to sit down and work out a negotiated settlement accounts for roughly 20 per cent of the work towards building lasting peace. The remaining 80 per cent involves keeping the two sides committed to the settlement, implementing its terms and articles and helping bring order and normalcy in society.In this context, there are many loopholes in Nepal’s peace process. The SPA and the Maoists seem to be more concerned about power-sharing and less about consolidating peace. Otherwise, they would not have spent so much time on just two political issues: the dissolution of reinstated parliament and the formation of an interim government and an interim parliament. They seem to harbour dissimilar and contesting visions about the nature of the state, the status of monarchy, modality of elections, economy, nationalism, foreign policy and power-sharing. The conflict-affected groups — ethnic and indigenous people, Dalits, women, Madhesis and youth — are demanding a legitimate space in decision-making. Pro-King forces are questioning the legitimacy of the eight-party establishment. New polarisations between the Left and the democratic forces, between republican and monarchist forces and between nationalistic and subsidiary identities are certain to make the transition difficult.The peace process has so far delivered an oligarchy of party leaders rather than a popular democracy.

Party leaders have shown no appetite for pluralism — the interim legislature has no opposition, and consensus decisions leave power in the hands of few party leaders. Ad hoc pre-negotiation of important issues threatens to undermine the constitutional process. Mainstream parties have also devoted little attention to the question of constitutional reforms. Few have instituted internal changes to tackle corruption, patronage and exclusion.The principal challenges facing the peace process include diverting attention from solely political issues to economic and socio-cultural factors too; reformation of both the armies and arms management; dealing with the Maoists and the monarchy; state restructuring; strengthening of governance and guaranteeing that the nation does not plunge back into conflict. Other challenges are: unchanging attitude of political leaders, bureaucracy and judiciary; little progress in electoral preparation for the CA polls; political, social, cultural and economic exclusion and the resulting unrest in Tarai and other parts; geopolitics, role of India and international community; bringing democracy and peace to the grassroots level; internally displaced people and lack of people-to-people reconciliation; partisan role of civil society leaders; security sector reforms; discrepancy in the number of Maoist weapons as compared to their combatants and use of child soldiers; government’s failure to deliver in the face of high expectations; and an opaque, elite-driven approach to politics.

Many observers are cautiously optimistic about the peace process in Nepal. Even a slight misreading of the prevalent situation can leave room for renewed conflict. The parties and Maoists are increasingly marginalising monarchy, security and traditional forces. The major actors are in open competition for legitimacy and public support.The prizes of sustained peace are clear: It will allow Nepal to build a genuine democracy where human rights are respected and real development emphasised. Conflict resolution is intrinsically linked to inclusive nation building. The foundation of change is unity in diversity supported by inclusive democratic system with accommodating democratic leadership. This can strengthen unity and Nepal’s distinctiveness in the international scene.Sustainable resolution of conflicts requires wider participation of all the parties and their interest mediation, rather than just those of conflicting parties. Peace cannot be created if the outcome of negotiation creates its own enemies.

Emanuel Kant asserted in his treatise Perpetual Peace, “No treaty of peace shall be held valid in which there is tacitly reserved matter for a future war.” Unless the root causes of the conflict are addressed and the Maoists democratised, sustainable peace cannot be achieved in Nepal and conflict may reignite.Peace is not just the absence of war, but also epitomises economic prosperity, social harmony, unity and brotherhood. The present peace process might excite some but it also reminds others of the relapse of armed conflict after peace agreements in conflict-torn states such as Sri Lanka, Cambodia, Liberia and Angola. Thus, in order to consolidate peace process, parties to the conflict should keep their nerve and honour their commitments to peace and genuine democracy.

Source: The Himalayan Times, May 23, 2007

Participatory Approach In Motivation

Kedar Prasad Bhandari

In human resource management, the participatory approach has been considered an important tool in motivating employees. The participatory approach, also known as participative management, is a process in which the subordinates involve in the decision-making function with their immediate superior. Complex jobsIn the recent decades, there has been a paradigm shift in the management of human resource. In Nepal, participatory approach can be said to have begun with the financial sector reforms in the mid-1980s. Propelled by liberalisation and globalisation, the participatory approach received more prominence in an institutional manner after 1990.

The Local Self-Governance Act can also be taken as an initiative for promoting participatory management at the government level. Today, jobs have become extremely complex. So it is difficult for managers to know everything what their employees do. In fact, participative management empowers the subordinates who know the actual problem and can contribute to make better decisions. Decision-making is not an easy job for managers. They have to win the confidence of all the employees working in their organisations. It is necessary to consult the employees of different inter-dependent departments to bring uniformity in their performance.

This helps develop the concept of team, committee and group meetings to resolve complex problems. Employees do not undermine a decision during implementation as they have been involved in making that decision. Participation provides intrinsic rewards for the employees, and it makes their jobs more interesting and meaningful. Broadly, there are two means of motivating employees through their participation: Quality of Work Life and Self-managed Work Team. Quality of work life is defined as an attempt to develop a formal programme to integrate the employees' needs and well-being with the intention of improving productivity, greater worker empowerment and higher level of job satisfaction. It supports a highly democratic treatment of employees at all levels and encourages them in the decision-making process. Its emphasis is on maintaining a quality working environment for the employees. A quality working environment includes financial incentives, opportunity to develop personal skills and ability, safety working conditions, and the opportunity to participate in problem solving and decision-making.

In essence, there are three means through which Quality of Work Life (QWL) can be improved. The Quality Circle (QC) is a concept first started in Japan in the early 1960s to improve the quality of products. Quality circles consist of work teams composed of 8-10 employees from the same work area who meet regularly to define, analyse and solve quality and work-related problems in their specific area of operation. The membership is strictly voluntary, and meetings are usually held once a week, normally for an hour before or after the job is over.

An organisation may have several Quality Circles operating at a time to deal with different people in different areas. The members are given some form of training in problem solving to work effectively. The Quality Circle is designed to improve the working conditions and enable self-development of the employees. The focus of the Quality Circle is to encourage the employees to accept responsibility for improving quality. The Quality Circle is effective in bringing about a short-term improvement in the quality of work life, but it is less effective in creating more permanent changes. Sharing of ownership by the employees is another emerging concept in participatory management. It is a plan in which the employees are offered ownership of the organisation as a benefit package. This may be done by stimulating them to buy equity shares.

It has become an important tool in motivating the employees.It is believed that if the employees own the shares of an organisation, they would be motivated to work effectively to increase the value of their shares. Similarly, as both owner and employees can participate in meetings, they can put forward their views, ideas, and opinions while making decisions. Business organisations in Nepal are also adopting the concept of employee ownership. Most of the joint stock companies offer 5 per cent of their public issued shares to the employees. Moreover, the concept of a flexible work schedule has developed in the recent years. In this plan, employees are allowed to choose their own arrival and departure times within specified limits fixed by the organisation.

Basically, the work time is divided into two groups: 'core time' and 'flexitime'. During the core time, all the employees must be present in the office, but in flexitime, the employees are free to select their own starting and departure time based on their convenience. Flexitime is popular in the USA. In flexitime, employees may involve in personal works like payment of utility bills, visiting children's schools and banks. This system is helpful in reducing absenteeism, overtime payment, employees' turnover and provides convenience to the employees. Another concept that has emerged in the recent years is Self-managed Work Team. It is also known as self-directed autonomous work groups consisting of 5-15 members. It is a formal group of employees that operates without a manager and is responsible for a complete work process.

All the members of the team are skilled in their own area of profession. The team members are jointly responsible for performing the task. They are responsible for planning and scheduling works, assigning tasks to members, collective control over the pace of work, making operating decisions and taking action on problems.Team members perform their work independently through mutual participation so it provides a higher level of job satisfaction. In such team work, the role of the supervisor decreases and may even be eliminated. It allows sufficient time to the manager to involve in creative managerial functions. Today the Self-managed Work Team concept is popular in most of the business organisations.Participatory approach in new context In fact, participatory approach is based on democratic norms. Given the changed context, Nepalese entrepreneurs and managers should try to include all the employees working in an organisation. The participatory approach should be given focus in the changed context in order to democratise the entire organisational system and accelerate productivity for faster economic development through wider participation.

Source: The Rising Nepal, May 23, 2007