The Madhesis of Nepal

K Yhome



Dramatic events in the past one year since the 2006 “April Revolution” in Nepal have been redefining the political landscape of the Himalayan nation in more ways than one. One important change is the visible rise of “marginalized” groups in national politics. The “excluded” groups - cutting across ethnic, religious and language lines - are demanding their due rights. In the midst of these changes is the rise of the Madhesis.2 This paper attempts to assess the response of the Nepalese government towards the Madhesi uprising, the shaping of the contours of the ethnic problem in the future, and its impact on peace in Nepal up in coming days and weeks and the prospects for peace in the country. The article ends with an assessment on India’s role in Nepal.

The Madhesis3

Madhesis are an important segment of the population in Nepal.4 They occupy economically the most significant region of the country with 70-80 per cent of the country’s industries being located in the Terai region. It accounts for 65 per cent of Nepal‘s agricultural production. Needless to say, the country’s economy depends heavily on the region. Strategically, the Terai belt constitutes the lifeline of Nepal. All the key transportation routes from India pass through this region, making it the gateway to the landlocked country. Almost all the country’s import and export takes place through this region. Given these factors, any disturbance in the region involving the Madhesis becomes extremely critical as it has the potential to seriously jeopardise the country.

With strikes, bans, and road blockades that continue to mark the unrest in Terai, economic activities have been brought to a virtual halt. Trade has been severely affected with goods worth millions of rupees stranded at border points and many manufacturing industries in Birgunj and Biratnagar shut down owing to crisis of raw materials. A recent report released by Nepal Rastra Bank, indicates that the country’s foreign trade recorded dismal performance during the first nine months of 2006/07, with 2.9 per cent fall in total exports. The report identifies the Terai unrest as one of the major factors for the poor performance of the export sector.

The size of the Madhesis has been a contested issue. According to the Population Census 2001 based on mother tongue for Village Development Committees (VBCs), the Madhesis population was 6781111.5 If one were to go by this figure, the Madhesis formed 29.2 per cent of the total population of Nepal in 2001. However, Madhesi political leaders, scholars, and activists have long questioned these figures. They claim that the Madhesis form 40-50 per cent of the total population of Nepal today. For instance, Jwala Singh, leader of the Janatantrik Mukti Morcha (JTMM-Singh) has claimed that Madhesis population is 14 million.6 While the truth is difficult to establish, one can safely say that the Madhesis constitute a major chunk of Nepal’s demography.

The Unrest in Terai7

Two issues need to be highlighted. First, the Madhesi issue is not a communal issue. Secondly, the Madhesi issue has not emerged in January 2007. The Madhesi question is not one of Madhesis (‘people of the plains’) vs Pahadis (‘people of the hills’). This misinterpretation of the Madhesi nomenclature by making it a community-based issue could have grave implications for the country.8 The Madhesi issue in Nepal relates to a movement against the state’s ‘discriminatory’ politics. It is a fight for recognition of rights - political, cultural as well as economic - and a struggle for equal representation and opportunity. 9

The current Madhesi protests began to surface in late 2006. The interim constitution became the rallying point, which the Madhesis claim, has failed to address the issues related to their rights. The trouble soon took a different turn when the country’s draft interim constitution came into effect on 15 January. Rapidly, the largely peaceful protests snowballed into widespread violent demonstrations, strikes and bans. Since then, the situation has only deteriorated. Three Madhesi outfits have been leading the agitations. The outfits are:

Madhesi Janadhikar Forum (MJF) or Madhesi Peoples’ Right Forum (MPRF) headed by Upendra Yadav. The outfit has been spearheading the ongoing Madhesi agitation in Terai. MJF’s main demands are: amendments to the interim constitution to include provisions for ethnic and regional autonomy with the right to self-determination and proportional representation based on ethnic population for the elections to Constituent Assembly (CA). Yadav has also been criticised from several quarters for his alleged ties with “palace forces”. The outfit’s student wing, Nepal Madhesi Student Front severed its allegiance in March accusing their leader of working with the “royalist” to subvert the CA elections.10 Interestingly, on April 26, the MJF submitted an application for party registration at the Election Commission and said that it will participate in the CA elections as a political party.

Janatantrik Terai Mukti Morcha (JTMM-Singh faction) led by Nagendra Paswan alias Jwala Singh. JTMM-Singh group is a breakaway faction of the Maoists that has been active mainly in Siraha and Saptari districts of Terai. The group spilt from JTMM led by Jaya Krishna Goit in mid-2006. The JTMM-Singh faction has been demanding for an autonomous and separate independent Terai state; equal participation of Madhesis in government security forces. In fact, on March 30, the outfit declared the Terai region a “Republican Free Terai State.”11 The group has been accused of fueling communal feelings between “people of hill origin” and “people of Terai region”, however, Singh reportedly claimed that his group is against the “system of unitary communal hill state power” and not people of hill origin.12

Janatantrik Terai Mukti Morcha (JTMM-Goit faction) led by Jaya Krishna Goit. Some of the conditions that the group has put forth for talks include declaring Terai an independent state, fresh delimitation of electoral constituencies based on populations, eviction of non-Terai officials and administrators from Terai region, among others. Both the JTMM groups want UN mediation in the talks. The group has been alleged of “divisive” campaign for its demand from industries to remove “people of hill origin” and replace them with Madhesi people or “people of plain origin” in eastern Terai region.13

Another outfit, Madhesi Tigers, a splinter group of the Maoists re-emerged in March after a long period of inaction. Madhesi Tigers is a splinter group of the CPN-Maoist formed a few years ago. Reportedly, its leader was killed in April 2005. According to the news reports, the Madhesi Tigers abducted eleven persons from Haripur area on March 1 but were released few days later.14 The past months have also seen emergence of new outfits. A group calling itself Terai Cobra has emerged in central Terai. Not much is known about this outfit. The first time it came out in public was on May 9, when it called a bandh in Bara, Parsa, and Rautahat districts in central Terai. Normal life was affected as markets and schools remain closed and traffic was disrupted.15 On 14 May, yet another outfit called Terai Army Dal, unheard of before, claimed responsibility of the bomb blast in Rautahat district that injured 14 people.16

Government Response

Has the government mishandled the Madhesi uprising? Arguably yes, if the worsening situation in the Terai is any indication. During the initial phase of violence in the Terai, the government perhaps failed to respond to the problem effectively. It was busy with other issues at hand, particularly, the peace process and the formation of government.17 The government’s indifference was compounded by differences between the government and the CPN-Maoist leadership (the Maoists joined the government in 1 April) over how to approach the problem. On 22 January a meeting of the eight-party alliance was called by Prime Minister GP Koirala to discuss the Terai situation. While the Prime Minister (PM) felt that the issues raised by the Madhesis and other groups can be resolved through dialogue, the CPN-Maoist chairman Prachanda and senior leader Babu Ram Bhattarai ruled out the possibility of dialogue with the Maoist splinter groups claiming that these groups were supported by “royalists elements and fundamental Hindu activists”.18

The Prime Minister’s address to the nation on January 31 and February 7, calling upon the agitating groups for dialogue evoked mixed reactions. While the PM’s address received positive response from some groups, it failed to improve the deteriorating situation. Under intense pressure from various quarters, the government formed a committee for talks with the agitators on February 2 under Mahanth Thakur, the Minister of Agriculture. Despite this initiative, the government was increasingly coming under criticism from both within the SPA and other political parties.19 Amid growing pressure from Madhesi and other communities, the government on February 2 decided to amend the two-week old interim constitution and assured the inclusion of all communities in the organs of the state.20 However, differences among the parties delayed the PM’s second address to the February 7. The eight-party alliance voiced its collective support to the PM’s address and signed a commitment paper that they were serious about the movement in Terai and would want to resolve it by addressing the Madhesi people’s demands and aspiration.

Meanwhile, the MJF responded positively to the PM’s second address by suspending their protest programme for ten days. On the other hand, the JTMM-Goit faction criticised the PM’s address. While the JTMM-Singh faction and the MJF initially showed willingness for dialogue, the JTMM-Goit rejected talks offer saying that the government has not created conducive atmosphere for talks. Soon the MJF followed suit and on 19 February, it said it would resume agitation alleging that the government did not show seriousness. The Thakur committee’s invitation for dialogue with the agitating groups never took off. Rather more conditionalities were put before the government to start the government for the dialogue. The interminable unrest in the Terai also pushed the NSP-A to take a tougher position, even threatening to pull out of the SPA if the government did not adopt the proposal to amend the constitution before March 6.

As though the rapidly growing tension and violence was not enough, the Gaur incident, in which a clash between the MJF and the CPN-Maoist aligned Madhesi Mukti Morcha (MMM) took place on March 21, 27 people were killed and many injured, further excerbated the tension.21 Reacting to the incident the eight-party alliance in a press statement said that the government must take stern measures against such acts and safeguard life and property of the people. In the wake of the Gaur incident and in the midst of CPN-Maoists demand to ban the MJF, the government prohibited any MJF programmes.

Efforts to curb the increasing violence remained ineffective as also the invitation for dialogue remained a non-starter. In the face of the deteriorating law and order situation, the government formed the Peace and Reconstruction Ministry and appointed a new three-member committee on April 11 headed by Ram Chandra Poudel entrusted with the task to hold talks with all the protesting groups. By appointing a new ministry and a new team for talk, the government wanted to send a message that it was serious about the issues raised by the agitators. In a significant development, the MJF and the government held their first formal talks on June 1 in Janakpur. It was reported that the two sides agreed on some of the demands raised by the MJF.22 However, a final agreement is yet to be reached.

While the government expressed its concern over the continued incidents of violence and called all agitating groups for talks, the situation in many parts of Terai remained chaotic with killings, extortions and strikes marking the protests. The violence has been taken a new direction with the rise in clashes between Madhesi outfits and Maoist sister organisations. This has further complicated matters.

Prospects and Recommendations

The situation in Terai remains grim with no signs of improvement. There is nothing to suggest that protests and violence will subside in the near future. Killings, strikes, demonstrations and clashes may continue. Even as the government insists on talks with the agitating groups, there has been a reluctance to address the core Madhesi problems and demands.

In the event of any outfit entering into an agreement with the government, the level of violence may be brought down. However, so long as other groups indulge in violent activities, the situation may only worsen in the coming weeks with serious implications, given the explosive nature of the issue. And now with new outfits emerging, the complexities are only growing for the government because even if any outfit enters into dialogue with the government, the possibility of dissidents joining the new groups to carry on their violent activities cannot be ruled out.
It is feared that the situation if allowed to deteriorate further, may result into ethnic riots. However, the recent incidents indicate that the danger seems to have been averted owing to the new dimension that the violence has acquired i.e. - the Madhesi vs the Maoists, which is as dangerous.
The urgent imperative is that all the agitating groups including the Maoists must desist from violence. The first priority of the government should be to seriously address the demands of the protesters. The Madhesi groups should not forget that their real cause is political. The present political situation in Nepal provides all ethnic groups the opportunity to resolve their problems amicably. Therefore, it would be folly on the part of the Madhesis to play the spoiler. The SPA and the CPN-Maoist also need to display more maturity.

India’s Role

India has been playing a constructive role in Nepal’s political transition. On several occasions New Delhi has expressed its desire to see Nepal resolve its internal problems and move towards establishing a stable democracy. On the development front, India has been engaged in education, infrastructure, and health projects in Nepal. Since India’s shares a long porous border with Nepal’s Terai, the trouble in the region is of great concern to it. Trade between the two countries depends on this region, as all the trading points are located there. Since violence has erupted in the Terai, India has shown serious concern over the volatile situation. Also of major concerns to India is the possiblity of the spill over of violence in Terai into India. The Indian government has been closely watching the developments in the Terai and has constantly been in touch with Nepal’s government.23

Notes:

1. The assessments in this essay are based on developments till June 2007.
2. Several other “marginalized” groups such as the Nepal Federation of Indigenous Nationalities (NEFIN), am umbrella organisation of 54 indigenous and ethnic groups, the Kirats; the Tharus; the Muslims among other groups have been protesting and demand the government to address the issues of ethnic groups.
3. The term Madhesi is derived from the word Madhesh meaning “mid-land” in Nepali and is defined as the lowland plains in the southern slopes of Nepal bordering Indian states of Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal and Uttaranchal. It refers to the Terai region (See Figure I). The foothill of the Chure hill is considered the dividing line between the Pahar (the hills) and the Madhesh (the plains). Hence, the people occupying the Terai belt are called Madhesis. The name is a generic term and also a topographic reference. The Madhesis include different cultural and linguistic groups - Maithili, Bhojpuri, Awadhi, Tharu, Hindi, Urdu, and other local dialects.
4. There is currently a debate in the academic discourse on whether all groups in the Terai can be considered Madhesis. I have argued elsewhere that a Madhesi “identity” has came about as a result of long state “discriminatory” politics. See “Constructing Identity: The case of the Madhesis of Nepal Terai” Paper presented at Social Science Baha conference on Nepal Terai: Context and Possibilities in Kathmandu on 10-12 March 2005.
5. This figure included all the mother tongues spoken in the Terai - Bhojpuri, Maithili, Awadhi, Tharu, as also Hindi, Urdu, Bangla, Rajbansi, Santhali including Punjabi and Marwari (though their share is marginal).
6. See “The Himalayan Times”, January 15, 2007.
7. The origin of the movement can be traced back to early 1950s. Several political parties and organisations - the Terai Congress in the 1950s; the Nepal Sadbhavna Council in the 1980s and later the Nepal Sadbhavna Party (NSP) in the 1990s - emerged at different point of time to fight for the Madhesi cause. All these organisations have fought against state’s “discriminatory” laws of citizenship and language as well as recruitment policies to the armed forces and bureaucracy. However, the problems persisted undressed under different regimes for decades. It was in this context that when the “People’s War” of the Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist (CPN-Maoist) emerged in the mid-1990s some sections of the Madhesis joined the Maoists, which had promised political, economic and social rights. With this background, an attempt is made to understand the current Madhesi agitations in Nepal.

8. K. Yhome, “Madhesis: A Political Force in the Making?,” Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies, New Delhi, Article no. 2058, 5 July 2006
9. K. Yhome, “The Madhesi Issue in Nepal”, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies, New Delhi, Article no. 2228, 2 March 2007
10. See “Nepal News”, March 25, 2007, http://www.nepalnews.com
11. See “The Himalayan Times”, March 31, 2007.
12. See “The Himalayan Times”, January 15, 2007
13. See “Nepal News”, January 19, 2007, http://www.nepalnews.com
14.See “Kantipur Online”, March 1, 2007, http://www.kantipuronline.com; also see “Nepal News”, March 4, 2007, http://www.nepalnews.com
15.See “Nepal News”, May 10, 2007, http://nepalnews.com
16.See “Kantipur Online”, May 15, 2007, www.http://www.kantipuronline.com
17. A source close to the government told this author in March that the government had initially “underestimated the potential of the Madhesi uprising.” For political reasons the name of the source is keep undisclosed.
18.See “Kantipur Online”, January 24, 2007, http://kantipuronline.com; also see “Nepal News”, January 23, 2007, http://www.nepalnews.com
19.NSP-A on February 2 announced that it would participate only in those meetings that discuss Madhesi issues. The traditionally “royalist” party, Rashtriya Prajatankri Party (RPP) accused the government of not been serious toward the real issue of the Madhesis and that the attitude has been fueling more crises in the country. See “Nepal News”, February 3, 2007, http://www.nepalnews.com
20. On February 5, top leaders of five political parties, namely the Nepali Congress (NC), CPN-Maoist, Communist Party of Nepal-United Marxist Leninist (CPN-UML), Nepali Congress-Democratic (NC-D) and NSP-A agreed on three major political issues: the interim constitution would be amended with firm commitment to a federal structure of governance in future; the election constituencies will be delineated in proportion to the population with special provision for sparely populated districts in the hill region; and to express commitment for representation of people from all castes and creed in state organ. See “Kantipur Online”, February 3 & 5, 2007, http://www.kantipuronline.com/
21. See “Kantipur Online”, March 21, 2007, http://www.kantipuronline.com
22. See. “Nepal News”, June 2 2007. http://www.nepalnews.com
23. A Nepali delegation met India’s Prime Minister and External Affairs Minister in New Delhi on January 30 where both the Indian leaders expressed their concern over the violence in Terai. Again, India’s External Affairs Minister reiterated India’s concern to a delegation of Nepali politicians when the latter called on him in New Delhi on January 31, 2007. See “The Himalayan Times”, January 31 and February 1, 2007. A Nepali delegation comprising senior leaders of the eight-political parties came to New Delhi on May 31 to held talks with Indian leaders, see http://www.nepalnews.com May 31, 2007.

Source: Indian Defence Review, Vol. 22.3, Decemeber 4, 2007

Barriers Of Dalits Inclusion

Bharat Nepali

Nepali people are eagerly waiting to see the materialisation of the republic free from violence and unrest. The historic Jana Aandolan II (Peoples Movement II) 2062/063 gave the seven political parties and their leaders the mandate to work in the direction for materializing this dream of the Nepali people. However, the postponement of Constituent Assembly elections twice was disappointing. The parties within the seven party alliance were responsible for the postponement of the polls. Everyone expects that the polls won?t be postponed for the third time.

Efforts

Currently, political obstacles are gradually diminishing with the government?s genuine efforts to address the issues raised by various excluded groups. The issue of Dalit inclusion should not be kept apart in respect to the sacrifices and participation of the Dalits in the peaceful joint people?s movement. No doubt, the Dalits have suffered from discrimination and deprived of many facilities in the country and they want the CA elections to be held as soon as possible because they expect the CA will do the needful as regards their problems. Nepal is a country inhabited by various caste/ethnic groups with distinct cultures and languages and different religion persuasions. Dalits, as shown by the latest census, constitute around 14 per cent of the total population. They are discriminated by the so-called upper caste because of the deep-rooted belief fostered by the religion itself. Dalits are not only deprived from development opportunities but also from exercising their basic human rights. For bringing Dalits on an equal footing, special provisions are needed in every process of the making of the new Nepal. The issue of social exclusion is coming up as one of the major problems in the country. It is slowly getting magnified affecting the lives of Dalit, which is a matter of grave concern for all.

A study on ?Essence and Challenges of Special Provisions for Dalit Inclusion: An Institutional Analysis of Various Organizations? published by NNDSWO shows a sad situation of Dalits? participation and inclusion in the development field. A total of 36 organizations from government, NGOs, INGOs, bilateral and multilateral organizations jointly carried out the study to find out the essence and challenges of Dalit inclusion within the efforts and processes. The study obviously showed that the mandate of the organization were to contribute towards the promotion of human rights, establishment of equitable society and reduction of poverty.

Out of the 36 organizations, 37 per cent practice the programming approach of poverty reduction. It reveals that the executive board/management committee was dominated by the so-called upper caste people accounting for 36 per cent while only 1.7 % Dalits worked as members. The composition of staff according to caste and ethnicity shows a great disparity of Brahmin (24.58 %) to that of Dalits (4.5 %). Senior positions have been occupied by Brahmins (40.9 %), Chhetri (27.3 %) and Newar (22.7 %) among the INGOs. In government offices also the senior positions have been occupied by the upper caste Brahmin (77.8 %) whereas there were no Dalits. The fact is that the Brahmins have a larger pool of highly qualified and competitive people which the Dalits lack.

Organizations working for development need to provide strong commitment to improve the status of Dalits through the provision of positive discrimination. Lack of competent people for leadership among the Dalits, intra-Dalit discrimination, lack of awareness and narrow mentality, religious belief, superstition, rigid hierarchical social structure, poverty, inadequate policy implementation, lack of commitment and willingness from concerned authorities are the major barriers to develop and implement special provisions for the participation and inclusion of Dalits. While many government, INGOs, bilateral and multilateral agencies in Nepal have made effective efforts towards improving the situation of marginalized communities they serve, the truth is that Dalits still remain oppressed and excluded. The government and non-government sectors look less serious in trying to remove these foremost barriers.

The problem of caste discrimination is a fundamental barrier to poverty reduction, and social injustice and requires every political and social organization so as to increase the access of Dalits to resources and opportunities. Dalits will remain excluded if the problem of caste discrimination is not properly addressed. All the government and non government organizations working for the development of the society should increase the level of commitment and efforts for Dalit development programmes and should invest more in this area. They should implement measures to ensure the participation and inclusion of Dalits in its structure and contribute for the positive discrimination to benefit the Dalits. Therefore, there is a need to do more to sensitize the state and non-government sectors (NGOs, INGOs, bilateral and multilateral agencies) in promoting Dalit rights and bringing them in the national mainstream by removing barriers and creating conducive environment for Dalit inclusion.

Wide Gap

The gap between commitment from the decision-makers and implementation of inclusive policies remains wide within the organization, especially in the institutional and policy levels. Political parties and civil society organizations should play a vital role to increase the proportional representation of Dalits in the political process. Therefore, the need of the hour is to ensure the representation of the Dalits in the new Nepal which may definitely help to formulate the required plans and policies for their upliftment.

Source: The Rising Nepal, January 14, 2008

NC Unification : Indecisiveness Affects CA Polls

Vijaya Chalise

Leaders from both the Nepali Congress are feeling enormous pressure to unite prior to the Constituent Assembly (CA) election. The sole purpose of the unification, as Nepali Congress-Democratic (NC-D) leader Minendra Rijal puts it, is to influence the CA election. The NC needs to show good electoral performance, and for it unification is a must, says he. Consequently, the urgency for Nepali Congress (NC) unification seems further inspired by the political polarisation in the upcoming Constituent Assembly polls. In addition, the anti-communist paranoia of the United States and other foreign political players might inspire the political forces to become polarised.For the second time, the left parties in Nepal have a majority in the interim Parliament following the promulgation of the interim constitution, and should they establish a working alliance, then they will be in a good position to win a majority in the upcoming election to the Constituent Assembly.

Strong pressure

However, even in the face of strong pressure from within the party cadres and from foreign powers like India and the US, the unification course of the Nepali Congress (NC) and Nepali Congress (D) has yet to gear up. Political analysts say the situation took a new turn after the new U.S. ambassador, Nancy Powell, met with the Nepali Congress leader and gave suggestions to expedite the unification process. It is believed that after Prime Minister and NC president Girija Prasad Koirala and NC-D president Sher Bahadur Deuba meet to sort out their problems, the merger would pick up momentum. Positive signals are, however, not forthcoming, with the NC-D leaders accusing the mainstream Congress party of not showing interest in the party unification. Even the NC leaders charge that the people responsible for bringing the two parties together have not been showing interest and that their indifferences have been delaying the process. The unification process of the Congress, which split five years ago due to lack of internal democratic exercise, has been slackening for months even after the formation of the task forces.

The NC-D wishes to forge unity at all levels. It includes allocating equal positions in the party high command, something that the NC has maintained reservation about. Obviously, it is not easy to unite the party by keeping people from both the sides happy. NC leader Narahari Acharya, who leads a republican camp within the party, says the basis of the unity should be based on inclusive democracy. Calls are growing within the Congress for amending its fundamental documents, including organisational set-up.Many of them want a greater intra-democratic environment within the party. Since long, second generation leaders have stressed the need for a transfer of power from the old hat to them. Ram Chandra Poudel and Sailaja Acharya, the senior leaders after Koirala, and their supporters see several reasons for changing Koirala's leadership. However, they fear the rift in the party will only widen if they challenge his leadership. NC (D) President Sher Bahadur Deuba, while welcoming a respectful unification between the two NC groups that split in early 2002, had once claimed that the much-hyped party unification was nothing but a hoax promoted for cheap publicity. He thinks unification is not possible only on the strength of verbal commitment as such words need to be backed by practical steps. He is in favour of respectful unification - unification of feelings, a dignified place for workers at all levels and clarification of certain ideological obscurities such as the issue of ceremonial monarchy. Otherwise, in his opinion, it will be nothing but a repetition of conspiracies, betrayals and division.

Deuba says he is not against unification, but it should not be in the interest of a handful of leaders at the top. It should address the issue of the cadres at the grassroots. Deuba's distrust is understandable because Koirala himself was leading the party when it split four years ago. Many cadres believe he could have saved the division at that time. Apparently, extensive homework is needed for the unification of the two NCs as uniting just for the sake of it would not bear the desired results. This unification should positively consider the feelings of Jana Andolan-II. Obviously, all the NC cadres and followers, who desire to see a new Nepal totally free of autocratic past practices, would like true and sentimental unification instead of differences being patched up in a hurry. Responding to Deuba's scepticism, Prime minister and Nepali Congress president Koirala once said in Biratnagar that the leaders were prepared to reconcile with an open heart, and that the unification of the party would be carried out in a respectable manner. While addressing party cadres in his hometown, Koirala assured complete party unity by bracing reunification in its entire structure, starting from the villages up to its upper level. But, whether Koirala can provide all members of both the parties as well as the central leaders the same status is doubtful.

Obviously, unification starting at the grassroots level to the general convention, then at the level of the central committee, as prescribed by Koirala, does not appear easy as there are many lobbies and interest groups in both the parties. Even the oldest democratic party, the Nepali Congress, has a bad reputation as far as intra-party democracy is concerned. This also might cause hurdles in unifying the two parties. Visibly, the inability of the Congress to unite has affected the pace of the Constituent Assembly polls. Due to the indecisiveness, the Congress has not been able to take a decision on whether to back a constitutional monarchy or to go for a republican set-up during the election. Neither has it been able to make internal preparations for the poll.

Obligation

Undoubtedly, the NC faces a twofold pressure. Majority of the young cadres within the party are building pressure to go for a republican set-up. On the other hand, some quarters within the party as well as foreign forces think left influence can be curtailed only if the NC joins hands with conventional forces. The indecisiveness caused by such pressure has delayed preparations for the Constitution Assembly election. Obviously, this has delayed the entire peace process. Only 82 days are left before the CA elections, however, none of the parties have hit the campaign trail. The political parties in power should show greater enthusiasm to institutionalise the verdict of the April movement and the subsequent comprehensive Peace Accord that had clearly spelt out that the CA would determine the fate of the monarchy. It is the obligation of the political parties to fulfil their commitment.

Source: The Rising Nepal, August 31

Unresolved issues: Political conference necessary for CA

Shailendra Kumar Upadhyay

Last week witnessed certain developments on the political front that have increased uncertainties surrounding CA polls scheduled for November 22 although the Election Commission has published a detailed poll schedule. The ongoing agitation of Tarain groups and Janajatis, political party’s lethargy in educating the masses on the importance of a constituent assembly, the indifference and opposition of the Madhesis and Janajatis and the new political position taken by the CPN-Maoist are factors which need serious attention.

On August 22, the Tamang National Liberation Front declared a successful bandh against the indifference of the coalition government to Janajatis’ demands. On August 23, the MJF declared that unless their demands were fulfilled within a week it would declare a movement for the ‘liberation’ of the people. The same day a statement by the UNMIN head Ian Martin urged the political parties to go to villages to motivate the people with regard to CA election. He made it clear that most of the reports he had received concerned inactivity of political parties.

One of the gravest developments was the Maoist demand for postponement of CA election till April-May 2008 and declaration of a republic in order to curtail conspiracies against the election. The formation of the coalition government and the interim parliament had acknowledged the Maoists as one of the three major political parties. On the basis of such an acknowledgement, the Maoist stand has to be taken up seriously.

There are 84 days to go for the scheduled election. But how can any credible election be held in an atmosphere of uncertainty and violence? In order to create an atmosphere conducive to free and fair election, dissenting voices have to be listened to and talks have to be conducted with a view to arriving at consensus. However, the government team that is conducting negotiations is lethargic and biased. Even before the talks are conducted a member or two of the team makes his ideas public and spoils the atmosphere for the talks.

Dialogues with different dissenting parties should have the single objective of arriving at consensus among negotiating parties. Such consensus cannot be achieved by listening to the grievances of a particular party only, as issues involved have wide dimensions and affect multiple parties, communities and groups. So a new mechanism has to be created to promote interaction among all dissenting groups and eight party alliance.

How serious are the political parties about holding the election on time? Till date, only the CPN-UML seems serious about the need for timely election. Smaller parties like Jana Morcha and NWPP are also seen active in election campaigning. And yet other major political parties have not made any initiative to go to the people. The question of maintaining the eight party alliance is also crucial to achieving the mandate of Jana Andolan II. However, one can easily discern that the partners in the alliance are drifting apart.The question of proportional representation has been raised by a big segment of population. The MJF as well as Dalits and Janajatis have been demanding adoption of a single system of proportional representation. CPN-UML is the only political party which took this stand from the very beginning. Now the Maoists have thrown their weight behind proportional representation. To ridicule the Maoists for shifting their position from their stand during the signing of draft interim constitution is insensitive in a democratic society. The Maoists have fathomed the popular will in favour of proportional representational system and have followed the people’s will by displaying their democratic credentials. In a democracy, it is only right that any individual, group or party change its position in honour of public opinion. It is hypocritical to assert that one has to stick with a pre-conceived opinion come what may.

The issue of proportional representation was not received well by others in the beginning because this was thought of as a CPN-UML agenda. Today the question of convening a political conference is not being considered as this is branded as CPN-Maoist agenda. Such an attitude is not good for maintaining the alliance or honouring popular will. In order to solve the numerous issues of grave importance, convening of a widely participated political conference has become inevitable. Only such a forum could address the issues before the nation and provide a sound guideline for the CA which is to be the baseline of a new Nepal.The political conference should include all those who are willing to negotiate and even those unwilling to negotiate and create law and order problems. Thus, they can be isolated, divided and punished. Because of the constraint of time a political conference must be convened, which could, in turn, also tackle the issue of whether a new Nepal would be a federal republic.

Source: The Himalayan Times, August 29, 2007

Immature democracy : What good will it do?

Ganga Thapa

A clear preference for democracy is evident in its acceptance and expansion around the world. While democracy is a multi-faceted concept, sovereignty calls for competent citizenry, responsible state and proper resource allocation mechanisms. Following the April revolution, concern for legitimacy, accountability and participation in the democratic process is gaining ground, but there has been no compatible progress on the democratic front, or in political and institutional reforms to increase direct participation of citizens in policy and decision-making process. Even positive aspects of the democratic process have been undermined by party leadership.

Strengthening democracy entails going through a long and complex process of building state institutions. Democracy, by its nature, is supposed to reflect disagreements and conflicts. But the failure to develop a conceptual framework for citizen participation by institutionalising ties between state and non-state actors has left Nepal with “partial” or “undemocratic delegative democracy”, particularly in the absence of actors who can transform policies and institutions into political resources.

Nonetheless, Nepal has never enjoyed Nonetheless, Nepal has never enjoyed quality governance, which consists of three dimensions: system persistence, inclusiveness and effectiveness. An accountable government responsive to its citizens can be set up through electoral process; its absence only exacerbates the lack of adequate institutions, excessive legislation and formalities, patron-client nexus, and other cultural bottlenecks and characteristics.Democracy leads towards inclusion, enabling citizens to participate directly and indirectly. By any measure, people now have an opportunity to engage in a constitutional mechanism which can dampen aristocratic values and discriminatory social practices with distinctive changes in ground rules. This should be done to make the mechanism vastly different from the old ‘stakeholder democracy’.

In the absence of strong state structures, social constructivist understanding and institutional credibility, democracy post-royal regime has at best been a mixed blessing. Some believe that democracy in an ethnically diverse society can indeed be fostered by broad-based, aggregative and multiethnic political parties. But the fragile institutions of political parties are endangered by excessive clout of their leadership. As a result, they are not successful in bringing about attitudinal and behavioural changes among the people. The issues of power, politics and ground realities can be comprehended by the way the electoral process is progressing. Democratic ideal is essentially about a core set of values such as political autonomy, equality of interests and reciprocity. Although the quest for freedom is universal, it is not the top priority when people have to fear for their very survival.It is too early to draw conclusions on long-term effects of the CA elections. If it acts as an instrument of democracy and can help institutionalise peace and democracy, it can be assumed that there is a link between citizens’ choice and their participation in policy making. Even if the CA polls succeed in achieving and maintaining peace, its ultimate outcome would not be evident until second or third general elections under a new system. Free elections are a prerequisite for instituting legitimate power flows and making the state adhere to the rule of law. This will, in turn, bolster state capabilities through administration, market and civil society and permit broad participation. These three sectors are crucial to building sustainable political and economic networks that help shape the state and enhance justice and political legitimacy.

While there is no consensus on what constitutes free and fair elections, Mackenzie puts forward four prerequisites: a) independent judiciary to interpret electoral laws, b) competent and non-partisan administration to conduct elections, c) well organised political parties that can present their policies, traditions and candidates before the voters and d) general acceptance of rules of the game. Many have argued that in addition to free and fair election and counting, the political parties must get an opportunity to compete on equal footing, all people should have equitable access to media, political environment must be free of intimidation, and public grievances must be settled promptly and justly. Another key element is monitoring of elections by national and international observers who can play a significant role in boosting public confidence in democratic transition.Consensus should not only be directed at acquiring political goals. CA elections must be viewed as an instrument of citizens’ influence associated with a vision for building legitimate political system rather than to reward or punish incumbents. Until the old structures that reward vested interests are dismantled and replaced by new ones, neither a “democratic society” nor “free and fair elections” can be realised.

Source: The Himalayan Times, August 8, 2007

Nepal's Failed Unification

Rishikesh Ram Bhandari

As different Nepal and Liberia are, there exist important commonalities in regime hegemonies, state structure and social exclusivity that are crucial in understanding Nepal's current transition. Both of these relatively new states are struggling to establish their identities and cast away historical legacies that have restricted multidimensional national expression. Comparing histories from the very outset to the current day, we find some compelling parallels.ParallelsIn order to extinguish the problems of slavery by repatriation to Africa, the United States established the American Colonisation Society (ACS). The freed slaves, called Americo Liberians, started a colony, defeating numerous little kingdoms and ultimately gaining independence from the United States in 1847. On the other side of the hemisphere, a few decades earlier, Prithvinarayan Shah waged his unification campaign to create a modern Nepal. His dream took shape once he captured the three kingdoms in the Kathmandu Valley. After independence, the ACS had to consolidate a deeply divided nation. Naming itself from the Latin liberare, Liberia was confined only to capital Monrovia, which was occupied by the Americo Liberians. The indigenous Liberians had not been absorbed into the national mainstream and did not identify with this imposed 'Liberia'. The Americo Liberians made use of existing tribal chieftaincies to extend their domain. As a result, the chieftains got a fused role, both as the customary lawgiver as the local clan chief and an administrative role of the new government in Monrovia.After Prithvinarayan Shah and the subsequent Shah Kings conquered the baise and chaubise rajyas, the subjugated kingdoms' rulers were still kept in place, only to be governed from Kathmandu. Thus, the rajas became administrative functionaries of the Shah Kings, and it is through the conduit of such minor kings that the capital was able to extend its control. In this way, the minor kings maintained equilibrium between the Shah King and the subjects.When ACS created its colony, it did not do so by taking over one nation, but numerous little ethnic entities. Similarly, Prithvinarayan Shah did not usurp only one national consciousness. There was no overarching identity space that Prithvinarayan Shah had filled with his cavalry. Because of this, it was hard, ideologically, for the kingdoms to unite in expulsing the aggressors. Furthermore, as the deposed kings were still in considerable power as they were given administrative functions under the new Nepal, they lacked enough incentive to revolt and were absorbed into the ruling class. As a result, a distinct two-layered rule was created - the ruling class and the ruled. This crafted state structure allowed Prithvinarayan Shah to wield force to maintain a politically unified (yet) divided nation.In both countries, the state existed as a vacuous shell, and the diverse ethnicities never became incorporated into the mainstream. It was necessary for the ruler to exercise absolute hegemony to keep the state intact. Liberians did this by making the True Whig Party the sole party and extending membership only to Americo Liberians, hence on social lines. Indigenous Liberians were even yet to be called citizens of the state. The Shahs and the Ranas employed the same strategy by keeping the monarchy and ultimately the oligarchy intact by limiting power within the thakuri kshetriyas. The feudal land structure reinforced the Rajas' hegemony down to the village and also became a tool to further suppress the marginalised. Prithvinarayan Shah's much touted chaar jaat chhattis barna ko fulbaari (garden of four castes and thirty six sub-castes) is reduced to mere propaganda (rhetorical ploy) when we see how social cohesion was based not on an egalitarian playing field for all castes but a distinct hierarchy that subjugated identities of every ethnicity outside the maharaja's aristocracy. The scramble for Africa internally buttressed the TWP as it had to ward off imperialistic forces. Americo Liberians even used indigenous Liberians as bonded labourers to encourage investment for plantations, later on drawing the attention of the League of Nations. On the other hand, the East India Company had been sending off aggressive signals which Prithvinarayan Shah tried to counter by hastening his unification campaign to forge a strong nation. Ultimately, the Ranas used the extractive framework to gain support from the East India Company by exporting people as mercenaries for the British army. The Sepoy Mutiny of 1857 and the two world wars are prime examples. The Gurkhas were allegedly welcomed into the British troops for their bravery and valiant behaviour, but we must realise that this was a form of slave trade grounded on foreign policy objectives, repression and economic destitution, and is a form of resource plunder.After more than 150 years of hegemonic rule, an indigenous Liberian, Samuel Doe toppled the Americo Liberians' regime promising a new Liberia. However, as the state ACS-TWP crafted state structure had been so embedded that he found it easier to operate in the system rather that to bring change. The same situation resulted in Nepal when the political parties gained power. The democracy they brought in was not inclusive and participatory. It was only with the sheer force of the April movement that the ethnic minorities started to really clamp down about their rights and identities. Since King Gyanendra had been symbolically vanquished, the ethnic minorities who had been subjugated to maintain the garden of Prithvinarayan Shah started to display the deep divisions that were never dealt with since the unification process started two centuries ago. Once a hegemonic structure is toppled, the repressed identities come to surface. The ethnic issues that are being raised are a result of the improper unification process based on imposing a coercive and extractive feudal structure. LessonsLiberia is well into post conflict reconstruction and reconciliation. Nepal needs to learn an important lesson about ethnicity from Liberia. There are important lessons that Nepal can learn from Liberia. Labelling ethnic tensions as mere political propaganda of the regressive royalists shall only serve to elude us about the suppressed ethnic tension. We need to realise that ethnic tensions could not have been played up if cleavages had not existed in the first place. Therefore, all effort must be taken to create a new and inclusive participatory democracy.

Source: The Rising Nepal, August 2, 2007

Reforms that CA polls call for

Hari Bansh Jha

At this time, no issue is more talked about than election and electoral reforms. This is to be expected in a country where successive governments have been postponing CA polls for over five-and-a-half decades on one pretext or the other. But the momentum for CA elections gained ground only in the aftermath of Jana Andolan II, with CA polls proposed for June 2007.Even though the date for CA election has been fixed for Nov. 22, 2007, doubts persist considering the deteriorating law and order situation. Amidst such speculation, the Centre for Economic and Technical Studies (CETS), a research organisation, organised a two-day seminar in the Kathmandu Valley recently on “Issues and Challenges of Electoral Reforms in Nepal” in cooperation with Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung (FES), a research wing of the Social Democratic Party of Germany.

During the deliberations, participated by over 90 personalities, including politicians, journalists, academicians, and women, plus representatives of Janajatis, Dalits and Madheshis, nearly everyone agreed that election was the only non-violent method for societal transformation. They noted that the most difficult part of election was to ensure inclusiveness while at the same time addressing the pressing demands of various agitating groups and defeating communal and reactionary elements.It was felt that low turnout of the voters might denote people’s lack of commitment and trust in the electoral system and apart from the FPtP system, the adoption of proportional system was suggested. It was also felt that low level of understanding among the people about the mixed electoral system was a big challenge. In this context, the EC needs to initiate awareness programmes to help people understand the mixed electoral system and the technicalities involved.

Likewise, the Election Constituency Delineation Committee (ECDC) was viewed as a stumbling block to CA polls for lack of experts in the panel. The EC itself isn’t free of blame for its lack of transparency. Statistics reveal that the cost-per-vote in elections had been increasing. From a meagre Rs 10 during House of Representatives (HoR) election in 1991 the amount jumped to Rs 20 in 1994 and finally to Rs 27 in 1999. For the CA polls, the cost-per-vote is likely to shoot up to Rs 107.Apart from EC, candidates and foreign agencies too spend a lot of money in the name of voters’ education. With the growth in election expenses, it is difficult for the poor, honest and deserving candidates to fight and win the elections as they cannot afford to pay for 3 G’s: Guns, gold and goons. The EC needs to monitor the flow of money during the election and devise strategies to punish those who do not follow the code of conduct. The seminar concluded: CA polls, conducted in free and fearless manner, could give a new lease of life to the nation; while failure to do so at the scheduled date might invite a larger catastrophe. The CA election is also important for its role in institutionalising the gains of the people’s revolution.

Source: The Himalayan Times, July 27, 2007

NEPAL’S OTHER INSURGENCY

Ethnic assertion? Autonomy offensive? Liberation movement? Sankarshan Thakur travels to Kathmandu and the Tarai to get a sense of the ominous new rumblings in the neighbourhood.

An alarming, and unheralded, civil war is spiralling to intensity along the sweep of India’s open frontier with Nepal. Allowed to fester, it could torpedo the fragile peace plan taking shape in Kathmandu, unleash a cascade of refugees into Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, and present New Delhi the anathema of a un mission digging into its backyard.

The erupted eye of this storm is an anarchic movement for self-determination by the plains people of Nepal. There are parallel armed insurgencies gunning for liberation, rival political groups seeking varied degrees of autonomy, and an establishment party from the region desperate to put out the fires and regain a measure of credibility in its home borough.
Madheshi ire has long been on slow-burn for reasons of institutionalised political, economic and social discrimination at the hands of a Pahadi (hill people) hegemony that has held sway over Nepali affairs for centuries — under the Shah kings, under long spells of Rana dictatorship, under democratic interregnums as well. This January, a small incident close to the border with India became the flashpoint of a volatile upsurge that both Kathmandu and New Delhi will have to contend with.

An armed Maoist patrol clashed with activists of the Madheshi Janjagaran Forum (MJF), currently the best-known face of the Madheshi rebellion, in a small town called Lahan. Ramesh Mahato, an MJF apparatchik, was shot dead. The next day, the tempers still high, Maoists snatched Mahato’s body from MJF custody and cremated it.
The chain of violence Lahan unleashed is yet to be stilled. Pitched battles have been fought between security forces and Madheshi rights activists. Government establishments have been attacked and symbols of Pahadi dominance such as the constitution, photographs of the king and the Nepali topi publicly burnt. Slogans of a new nationalism have flowered across the region. In many pockets, nervous Pahadi residents have begun to contemplate flight to the hills — properties are being put on sale, women and children are being shifted to Kathmandu, businesses are being shut. It isn’t a Pahadi exodus yet, but it could become one. “We are grabbing their illegally captured lands and handing them to poor Madheshi workers,” claims an insurgent commander in Janakpur in eastern Madhesh, “We don’t want them here and they know it.” Told that this could lead to a backlash against Madheshis in the hills, an aide retorts, “Good, that’s what we want, Pahadis in the hills and Madheshis in Madhesh.”

Scare has its reasons. More than a hundred people have been killed in street protests and organised intra-group massacres; last week alone, one or the other insurgent group struck daily, claiming 18 lives. West to east, Madhesh has remained paralysed, bandh-bound or curfew-ridden. Swept into the whirl of heated opportunity, political and insurgent groups have stoked the embers of Madheshi grievance into many flaring fires. A top un observer in Kathmandu says the situation could tip “overnight” into a perilous flashpoint. A senior Indian diplomat in the Kathmandu mission is more blunt about boil and its implications. “Take serious note now,” he says, calling both Nepal and his home country to attention, “Potentially things are very dangerous, you could have all of UP and Bihar battling fire tomorrow and the heat will reach Parliament. This movement has reared its head dramatically.”

Madhesh is an entity (see box) most Indians aren’t even aware of and Nepalis are only grudgingly beginning to recognise. There is good reason to be cautious about over-reading the signs of alarm, but it could be fatal to underestimate the implications of a suppressed nationalism exploding into protracted and violent strife through the belt. “Madheshi sentiment is running impatient,” warns Dhirendra Premarshi, a Madheshi radio artist, who keeps a firm finger on the Tarai pulse, “The foundations of Madheshi secession are probably being built, and they are being built by the Kathmandu Pahadis, who will not even recognise Madheshis as humans. The only problem is Madhesh has a crisis of leadership, there are too many people trying out too many different things to keep pace with the public mood.”

For many Madheshi leaders, this is a now-or-never battle. Elections for a new Constituent Assembly (ca) are scheduled for November, and Madheshi political groups see it as their last chance to grab their rightful share of power and consequent benefits. Rocked by the vehement powderflash in the plains, Prime Minister GP Koirala scrambled to grant placatory concessions in February — the promise of a federal state, more government jobs and nearly half the seats in the ca to Madhesh. But that has done little to assuage anger or aspiration. “Koirala made it sound as if he was a feudal granting us a favour,” says Vijaykant Karan, a Kathmandu-based political scientist and Madheshi activist. “And how can we be sure we will get the little he has promised? Madheshis don’t want to plead anymore, they will snatch what they think is theirs, they want to end centuries of slavery.”

The MJF’s manifesto is a scorching indictment of Kathmandu. “Madhesh is an internal colony of the ruling hill people. Madheshis have been subjected to extreme national oppression, poverty, exploitation and discrimination. They are politically, economically, socially and culturally depressed. They have been strategically forced to migrate to India. Their landholdings have been confiscated, their languages have been choked…” On the ground, anti-Pahadi feeling can find more visceral and graphic expression. “Saala log humlog ko dhoti-muji bolta hai aur apne hi jameen par daba ke rakha hai. Pahadi raj ab nahin chalega,” a Madheshi labourer in Janakpur tells us, “yahan Pahadi police aur Pahadi afsar kahe rahega, humko apna log chahiye. Yahi ladai hai.” (They refer to us as dhoti-wearers and pubic hair, they have suppressed us in our own country. Why must we live under Pahadi police and Pahadi officials? That can’t continue, that is the fight now.)

Kanak Dixit, journalist and Kathmandu intellectual both liberal and engaged, agrees the anger has basis. “Madheshis have never been made to feel part of Nepal, it is true,” he says. “The psychology of this country is a hill psychology, they always look down upon the plains, to the extent of there being an element of racism. Madheshis have had many issues with the Pahadis, although I must say everybody was surprised by the intensity of the outburst. The state will have to respond with sensitivity and a genuine desire to redress grievances, else this could spread.”

Madheshi protagonists, from the moderate MJF leader Upendra Yadav (see interview) to even mainstream actors like Ajay Chaurasia, a Nepali Congress MP, aren’t terribly sure of a transformation in the Pahadi mindset, even though they might hope and pray for it. “They are too used to being patronising,” Chaurasia says. “If they cannot learn now, there is bigger trouble coming, it is already too late.” Leaders such as him perhaps already sense the ground slipping underneath as Madheshi aspirations turn more radical and tug the goals of the movement beyond mere autonomy. And the MJF leadership, holding talks with the interim government in Kathmandu, might have good reason to sense they are losing support on the ground because they might be seen as people who jumped too quickly to compromise, or worse, as collaborators. “The issue is not what they will give or not give in the Constituent Assembly,” rails Rajan Mukti, a young underground militant who heads the operations of the Janatantrik Tarai Mukti Morcha (JTMM-Jwala) in Dhanusha district. “The issue is who are they to give? One Pahadi dies and he is officially named a martyr by the government, dozens of Madheshis die and there is not even a word on them. That is the issue, this is a battle for self-respect and in Nepal we will never get that, everybody knows.” Rival JTMM leader Jaikrishna Goit is more ruthless on moderates (see interview). “The Pahadis will manipulate and cheat them, they know it, this is nothing that can be sorted out through talks and compromise, this is a struggle for Madheshi self-determination, we are not looking for crumbs.”

For centuries, Madheshis complained about not being heard by the Pahadis. Now, many of them are refusing to communicate. The widespread sense that there lies little merit in trying to negotiate a deal with leaders in Kathmandu could become a major roadblock to solutions. Even the Maoist chief Prachanda, who first spoke of addressing Madheshi self-rule during his days in the jungles, is now seen as part of the Pahadi (and therefore anti-Madheshi) clique. It is not uncommon in Madhesh to hear Prachanda being clubbed with the bourgeois Pahadi establishment — Nepal is ruled by four Pahadi Bahuns (Brahmins, traditionally the ruling elite along with Chhetris, or Rajputs) — GP Koirala, Madhav Nepal, Prachanda and Baburam Bhattarai. That rankles Maoists, but they concede they made mistakes. “We slipped up on Madhesh,” admits Anil Shreshtha, party secretary of Parsa, a central Madhesh district, “When we were negotiating our entry into the interim government, we did not talk Madhesh.” Maoists are eager to pledge corrections, but Madheshis appear to have convinced themselves their failure was not an ideological lapse, it was deliberate because somewhere they too believe in Pahadi hegemony. Much of the popular Madheshi anger today is directed at Maoists; Lahan was a symptom of it.

Most of Madhesh is a doppelganger of what lies immediately south — UP and Bihar. A pitifully impoverished and under-developed rural stretch, riven by feudalism and other forms of social oppression. It lacks for good roads, power, water, healthcare, education, administration. You could land in Simra near Raxaul upon a 20-minute air-hop from Kathmandu and feel you have arrived to the worst Bihar can showcase. What’s different in Madhesh, though, is that it has seen none of India’s affirmative processes of democracy at work — no redressal of regional aspiration, no positive discrimination for the underprivileged, no sense of a political leadership that will speak for them and get purchase. For the better part, Madheshis have been subjects, not citizens. And during the few phases of democracy, they’ve felt defrauded by the Pahadis who rule Kathmandu. “We don’t have a sense of democracy,” says Chandrakishore Jha, a Madheshi editor, based in Birgunj. “How could we? The Pahadis imposed the slogan of ek des, ek bhes, ek bhasa (one nation, one dress, one language), everything about the Madheshis got crushed. All the chaos breaking out is a result of that, and the problem is nobody is sure where we are headed.”

Jha probably typifies the confounded confusion of the Madheshi mind. All around, there is a rising clamour for self-rule, but, equally, there is the absence of clarity on critical issues. What’s to be the framework of self-rule? Independence? Autonomy within Nepal? A federal self-government that gives Madheshis the right to conduct their affairs as well as a stake in power in Kathmandu? Their aspirations have spawned a hydra of militancies — too many leaders offering too many routes to salvation. “It is a movement that evolves almost daily,” says Pradeep Giri, one of Nepal’s seniormost politicians, a Pahadi who has made his home in Madhesh, “The consciousness of the Madheshi is changing, probably it is becoming more militant. It needs a leader to channel all that, but there is vacuum. But that does not mean Kathmandu can continue taking it for granted.” For the moment, perhaps, Madheshis are merely happy they have shaken the Pahadis’ many assumptions of divine right to rule.

THE THEATRE
WHAT IS MADHESH?

Nepal's southern-most strip of flat land, an 885km stretch contiguous to UP, Bihar and West Bengal. Large parts are still covered with thick malarial jungles, but this strip is also home to nearly half of Nepal's 27 million population. Also known as the Tarai, Madhesh is a recent nomenclature symbolising the region's new-found will for political self-determination.

WHY IS IT ON THE BOIL?

Because the majority plains people of Madhesh feel chronically discriminated against by the Pahadis who have always controlled power in Kathmandu. They had to fight for decades to obtain citizenship. The main Madheshi languages — Maithili, Bhojpuri, Awadhi, Tharu — are not recognised. They occupy less than 12 percent jobs in key sectors and almost none in the top bureaucracy, police or army. They have little political voice. They believe they are an internal colony of Pahadi Nepalis.

WHY SHOULD INDIA BE CONCERNED?

Greater Madheshi turmoil could unleash a huge refugee influx into UP, Bihar and parts of West Bengal. There is already an active insurgency in the region; many armed groups work out of the Indian side. Culturally and socio-economically, Madheshis mirror UP and Bihar. Besides, people maintain cross-border social and family ties. If unrest builds, India will be forced to intervene. Strategically, trouble in Madhesh could bring international agencies such as the un close on India’s borders, something New Delhi is loath to accept.

THE DRAMATIS PERSONAE
Nepal Sadbhavana Party (ANANDI)

The Tarai’s traditional party, has championed regional issues. Currently lacks for ground credibility because it is part of the interim government and is seen as having been sold out to the Pahadi political establishment. Madheshi Janjagaran ForumA civil society group brought to the fore after the violence earlier this year. Stops short of secession but seeks autonomy and is currently in talks with the interim government. Has brand-recognition across Madhesh but is still trying to build an organisational base.

Janatantrik Tarai Mukti Morcha (GOIT)

Led by former Maoist Jaikrishna Goit, the JTMM(G) is fighting an armed struggle for liberation. Stridently secessionist, cadre strength is difficult to estimate, but could run into a few thousands. Not well equipped, constantly looking for arms. Although not a stated aim, they are seeking a Pahadi exodus as a prelude to independence.

Janatantrik Tarai Mukti Morcha (JWALA)

A splinter faction of the JTMM(G), it has carried out most of the violence in Madhesh. Jwala, in his 40s, is more energetic than former mentor Goit, and is fast building a cadre-base in the eastern and mid-eastern Tarai. Is committed to independence, although not as ideologically grounded as Goit. Denies allegations of running a motley criminal outfit, sees himself as a serious claimant to Madheshi leadership.

Source: Tehelka, July 7, 2007

CA Polls: Definite Direction

FOR the first time since the formation of the interim government, Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala unveiled the annual policies and programmes of the government on Wednesday. It was expected as the budget is to be presented in a few days. Now the legislature parliament will hold discussions on it in the coming days.

FocusThe focus was basically on holding the constituent assembly (CA) election on November 22. It will be a landmark for the people and the country. Even Prime Minister Koirala has said that the day will herald a new era. Obviously, the expectations of the people are very high. But the preparations are yet to gather speed for the polls.There are many problems that have to be solved, though. A major issue is bolstering the law and order situation in the country. There are many agitating groups, some of which are involved in violence. On this score, the government has shown some seriousness, and attempts are being made to step up security measures. In this connection, the government is mulling over a new security policy, taking into consideration the situation in the country.Meanwhile, talks are being held with the various agitating groups, and it is hoped that an amicable solution will be reached as per their demands. This must be taken up seriously because without solving the simmering problems, the CA polls cannot be held in a peaceful atmosphere.

For this, the political parties, too, should extend their hands to the government. If they do so, the government will be facilitated in taking the necessary steps to maintain law and order. After a chill for some time, the eight political parties are working together, and there has been increased understanding among them. This solidarity and unity must be maintained till the polls. Though they may be contestants in the polls, the unity ought to be maintained so that the gains made so far does not go to waste.The appointment of envoys is still in a limbo as they were recommended by the earlier government. The main objection has come from the CPN (Maoist). They say that the recommendations were made without consulting them. On this matter, Maoist chief Prachanda had talked to Prime Minister Koirala, and it was agreed that the issue would be resolved soon.

As Premier Koirala mentioned in the government's policies and programmes, the culture of consensus and collaboration for resolving the differences through dialogue and negotiation has become a present day reality. And the country is going in this direction though at times stalemates have arisen.It is based on this that the country has come so far, starting with the agreement of the seven parties and the Maoists. The interim government and the legislature parliament are the result of the collaborative effort of the eight parties. This must not be allowed to break down on trivial pretexts.Whatever is taking place in the country is with the approval of the eight parties. Hence, blaming one or the other leader is not appropriate. Moreover, there are matters that have to be discussed behind closed doors. However, transparency must be maintained regarding the administration of the country. AwarenessNow all confusions regarding the CA polls are over with the announcement of the date. It is the duty of all the political parties to go to all parts of the country to make the people aware of the importance of the CA elections. This is important considering the fact that many people are still unaware as to why a constituent assembly election is necessary for the creation of a better Nepal. The rural parts are where the majority of the population lives and have a greater say in the political setting.

Source: The Rising Nepal, July 6, 2007

Unspoken Voices

Narayan Prasad Wagle

The silent majority does not come to the streets, does not chant slogans or take up arms to have their demands fulfilled. They just remain silent though they are in the majority. Political groups, hooligans and warlords claim to represent them, but the silent majority is usually unheard of, exploited and misrepresented. This is what is happening in the ever-complicated political scene of Nepal. There is a visible difference between what the people actually want and what the various political groups are demanding and the strategies they are applying to get their demands met.

FederalismAlmost all the political parties have projected federalism as the chief demand of the people, and this was the agenda that fuelled the aggressive protests in the terai. But if we look at the other side of the coin, the reality is completely different. A study carried out by the Asia Foundation some months ago demonstrated that only a small portion of the population had any knowledge about what the constituent assembly stood for. From this, we can infer that an even smaller portion of the population understands what federalism stands for. Then how are we to believe that the people have blindly supported the demand for federalism without understanding it? Even if they did, is it meaningful? Similarly, republicanism or the retention of monarchy has been projected as the major issue of the people in the CA polls and is placed atop all other agenda. However, the silent majority has little interest on the hackneyed issue since they see no direct link between the issue of retaining or abolishing the monarchy and the serious concerns of their daily lives. Their inability to see a link between the issue of monarchy and the their daily lives is sometimes described by clever political leaders as lack of political consciousness and ignorance and, hence, they emphasise the need for an awareness campaign. But the silent majority does not accept this notion that underestimates them. Though they do not know much about republicanism, they do understand that republicanism per se will not ensure that they will not have to die for lack of food, housing or health care facilities. Also that it will not ensure an education that is free for their sons and daughters.

They also understand that republicanism per se will not put a stop to the exodus of cheap Nepalese labour into the global market. For them, the right to life, education and basic health care facilities is more important than republicanism, federalism and the like. Probably, the silent majority will be happier with the inclusion of the right to life, right to education, right to attainable standards of health and right to work. Both armed groups and agitators are using strategies and tactics that go against the will of the silent majority while claiming that they represent the people. As we have seen in the past, general strikes and shutdowns of schools and transportation have been common weapons of both the agitators and terrorists. It is as clear as broad daylight that the public is spiteful about the general strikes and shutdowns of schools and transportation. In fact, these coercive methods in the name of pressing the government to fulfil their demands are attacks against the lives and liberties of the people. Then, why do they cling to such methods like a leech and shamelessly speak a sheer lie that their cause enjoys great public support? The motive is clear: their interest contradicts with that of the general public, and they want to fulfil it by taking undue advantage of the silent nature of the general public. Nobody has the right to misrepresent the silent majority, frequently referred to as the people. Only in a peaceful process of democracy can the silent majority have their say in national politics, especially through the exercise of their franchise. It is by the votes of this section of the population that unexpected outcomes beyond the arithmetic of renowned analysts are brought about. Otherwise, whether it is in so-called fake democracy of the elite or armed politics, the needs and demands of the silent majority will be ignored, and, as a result, the whole society becomes unstable.

Understanding the peopleAs it is the silent majority that strongly adheres to the norms and values of the society, disregard for this common lot results in lawlessness, and justice of the jungle. But will our political leaders, who turn a deaf ear to the loudest cries, listen and understand the minds of the silent majority? The date for the Constituent Assembly polls has just been set. It is time they went to the hinterlands to interact with the people rather than be bogged down by the demands of the elite.

Source: The Rising Nepal, July 5, 2007

Federal structure: Administrative units on ethnic basis

Shailendra Kumar Upadhyay

Jawaharlal Nehru University professor S D Muni needs no introduction for Nepali intellectuals and politicians because of his long association with political developments in Nepal. Muni is a well-wisher of Nepal and an ardent believer in people’s power and democracy. He believes in the special nature of ties between Nepal and India. For these reasons his observations on current Nepali politics merit serious attention.

During his recent Nepal visit, Muni suggested that the Tarai problem be given due priority to prevent the disintegration of Nepal. The people of Tarai have been raising their voice against their marginalisation since the advent of democracy in 1950. In spite of Tarai’s contribution to Nepali economy, the state has not treated them in a fair manner. Just as a token of gesture some people from Tarai have been picked for high-level posts but not as a matter of their rights. This has been resented by the people of Tarai and particularly after the success of Jana Andolan II, and consciousness of Tarai people has increased manifold.The commitment made by the eight party alliance to restructure the state on a federal basis has been widely welcomed but the question of the basis of the formation of the new administrative units under a federal structure is yet to be answered. At the same time, the question of representation in the Constituent Assembly and future parliament remains a sensitive issue.

While there is a consensus among civil society members that the country’s future administrative units have to be decided, as far as possible, on ethnic and linguistic basis, the political leaders are still creating confusion about the issue. Even the chief government negotiator has publicly denounced formation of future administrative units on the basis of ethnicity and language. This not only diminishes the credibility of the negotiator but also raises severe doubts about government’s intention.The Tarai belt has four prominent language groups — Maithili, Bhojpuri, Awadhi and Tharu, with Hindi as their lingua franca. Now, it has to be agreed that only the people of Tarai have the right to opt for either a single Tarai unit as a new administrative entity or four units based on language.

Similarly the question of administrative units in the hills and mountains has to be left to the wishes of the people inhabiting those regions. Although most of the mountainous districts have mixed populations, a particular ethnic community makes for the dominant part of a particular district. Naturally these ethnic communities would prefer creation of administrative units on the basis of the prominence of a particular ethnic community although the rights and privileges of other minority groups would have to be protected too. But to say that since there is no majority of any ethnic community in any district there is no need for units on ethnic basis is like trying to sweep the problem under the carpet.The fact that culture grows out of a particular language. For the protection of a culture the language has to be protected is a universal truth. It has to be accepted that new administrative units will use their own language and common link language to facilitate the participation of commonfolk in socio-political activities and promotion of their culture. The right to protect one’s identity must be recognised as a fundamental right of the people. Either those opposed to formation of new administrative units have to submit a viable alternative or they should accede to the demands of the Tarai people.

If the government adopts a policy of suppression of the Tarai agitation through force, such measures will boomerang by helping the extremists who want to see the country disintegrate. The same armed forces that assured the King they would be able to quell the Maoist rebellion in six months might try to persuade the present regime that the Tarai agitation could be thwarted by martial means as well. The politicians need to keep this in mind and must open up the vista for mutual understanding.As long as the government does not show its readiness to create new administrative units on the basis of ethnicity and language and discuss the merits of proportional representation, no meaningful discussions can take place with the dissenters and the question of free and fair CA polls will remain in limbo.

For their part, the ministers must learn to hold their tongue on controversial matters which can only be solved through dialogue. They also need to show their readiness to respond to the demands of the people of Tarai, indigenous groups and ethnic communities, dalits and women. The age of imposition of one’s idea on others has passed. The new awareness among people of their legitimate rights and privileges must be respected. There is no alternative to dialogue and discussion. Use of force is undemocratic and will create bigger problems. Recognition of the sovereign right of people is the only way out of the present crisis.Upadhyay is ex-foreign minister

Source: The Himalayan Times, July 5, 2007

Inclusive Policy

MINISTER for Peace and Reconstruction Ramchandra Poudel has said that the government would move ahead by satisfying the entire classes of the society including the ethnic groups, Madhesis and others to create a conducive atmosphere for holding the constituent assembly election. At a function organised by the Federation of Nepalese Journalists, Kaski in Pokhara Tuesday, Minister Poudel, who is also the general secretary of the Nepali Congress, has called upon all the political forces, civil society and general people to remain united and work collectively to complete the ongoing political and peace process.

The constituent assembly election is the only way to resolve all the problems in the country. In fact, the mandate of Jana Andolan II is to institutionalise the achievements of the movement and restructure the state and establish permanent peace in the country through the constituent assembly election. The constituent assembly would write a new constitution of the country, which is the best democratic practice in the world. Thus, the eight political parties and the government have vowed to hold the election in time. The government has already fixed the date for the constituent assembly election for November 22 this year.

There is a demand from various quarters for inclusive democracy. The interim constitution has also incorporated the provision of inclusive democracy, which would ensure participation of all the people irrespective of their caste, ethnicity and faith. This is the spirit of genuine democracy. Although we had a democratic system in the past, we could not completely embrace inclusiveness. As a result, a few people belong to the elite communities and upper class groups took benefit in the name of democracy. Poor, backward communities and ethnic and indigenous people were left out of the political mainstream.

Those who were out of the mainstream did not feel any ownership of the political system and the government. When all people feel ownership of the political system and the government, then only can the political system succeed and command the faith of the people. Because a section of the society remained out of the political mainstream even after the change of 1990, when multi-party democracy was re-established, this gave rise to the Maoist insurgency. The nation has accepted this fact, and the government has vowed to ensure inclusive democracy in which all people would have equal participation and representation. This is the spirit of genuine democracy, which needs to be translated into action. And constituent assembly election will help put this principle into action.

Source: The Rising Nepal, June 30, 2007

State restructuring

Ananta Raj Poudyal

Ethnic tensions have surfaced in Nepal with the recognition of plural rights that had been denied by the discriminatory policies of the state. One foreign observer has labelled Nepal the “ethnic turntable of Asia”. But the state has heretofore failed to recognise its plural identity. Though some feudal practices were repealed in the 1950s, the concerned policies could not be implemented as the political parties lacked vision for an inclusive democratic process; the obscurantists and stay-putters did not like the progressive policies; and for 30 years, the partyless Panchayat polity denied even basic rights to the people. Surprisingly, the 1990 democratic constitution inherited some of the legacies of the feudal culture, only serving to perpetuate the underlying ethos of Hindu elites.

At long last, the parliamentary declaration last April declared Nepal a secular state. The latent ethnic tensions flared up. It is noteworthy that ethnic divisions are enduring, persistent and emotional, and show a high propensity to open violence. In this context, issues of heightened ethnic nationalism, regional autonomy, federal state, right to self-determination on the basis of race, language, culture and geography have appeared as the thorny issues in the restructuring process. The Maoists exploited the latent ethnonationalism and urged the ethnic groups to rise against the existing social order. It suggested federal structure on the basis of ethnicity.

The Tarai identity crisis is deep and divisive, tending to attract external predators and regressive forces that have exploited internal rifts, adding fuel to the fire. Nepal Sadbhawana Party along with the Madeshi Janadhikar Forum has claimed a union of 20 districts in the plain as a federal unit. The Chure Vhawar region too is clamouring for self-autonomy. Members of Parliament representing the political parties of the Tarai have collectively challenged the validity of the constituency delimitation commission report on the ground that it is biased and discriminatory with regard to the participation of the Tarai people in constituent assembly (CA) elections.

The National Federation of Indigenous Nationalities has been demanding full proportional representation system in the CA polls, based on ethnicity and modalities of restructuring on regional and ethnic basis. However, the government did not agree to proportional representation based on ethnicity and the proposal of electing at least one representative from each of the 59 ethnic nationalities in the upcoming Constituent Assembly polls. Rather, in response, the interim parliament passed a resolution for semi-proportional system under which 240 seats have been set aside for representation on the basis of first-past the-post system and 240 seats on the basis of the parallel system. The Hill-Tarai dichotomy has also appeared as a sensitive issue which has remained as a great psychological barrier to the emotional integration of Nepal over the years.

Those societies that have been successful in reducing ethno-political conflicts have allowed the ethnic groups to share power through democratic process and plural identity has been maintained on the basis of minimum value-consensus. When ethnic groups are provided equal opportunities for sharing the valued resources, they generally function according to the rules of the political game. At the other extreme, when the state responds to ethnic mobilisation with policies of exclusion and repression, ethno-political violence is bound to flare up into a bigger conflict. Provisions of consociational democracy (like in Belgium, Norway and Sweden), federalism (the USA, Switzerland and Canada), electoral reform in favour of minority groups, preferential programmes or quota system, and direct and representative democracy have proven effective in containing ethno-political unrest.

Conflict is a natural phenomenon in any society and violence erupts when state proves unable to establish distributive justice with regard to allocation of goods and services, honours, status and opportunities of various kinds. Conflict is a means for different ethnic groups toobtain the best position in the society. The theory of conflict management recommends developing democratic institutions and formation of civil society and citizens’ participation in the policy-making process as effective strategies for containing ethno-political violence.If political parties fail to understand the gravity of ethnic problems while restructuring the society, the already strained harmony could break apart. A horizontal model ensures reduction of inter-ethnic and inter-regional conflicts and antagonism and keeps the level of positive interaction and solidarity high. The model provides equal space and opportunity to all discrete groups in the collective process of nation-building.

Source: The Himalayan Times, June 25, 2007

On The Move For CA Polls

Prem N. Kakkar

THE country is going through one of its crucial phases. The unity of the eight parties and the constituent assembly elections are as important as ever. Herein, it may be remembered that the date of the CA polls slated for mid-June could not happen because the Election Commission (EC) had made it plain that it could not prepare at such short notice. Moreover, the electoral laws that were necessary could not be discussed and approved by the legislature parliament because the proceedings could not take place for almost a month and a half.

Cabinet meetings

Even the council of ministers could not meet, but more recently things have gotten better with the cabinet making some very important decisions. This is necessary as keeping the whole democratic process in a limbo becomes more harmful than good. That seriousness has dawned among the eight parties is evident now that some important amendments to be made in the interim constitution have been registered at the legislature parliament. It can be hoped that the amendments will be effected after discussion in the parliament.The war of words and the blame game, however, continue. This is rather sad for the parties' unity that had played a vital role in bringing the country to the present state. The optimism that that been generated with the eight-party agreement still reverberates today. So blaming one or the other leader will not prove fruitful. The first person to be condemned was no other than the prime minister himself. In fact, Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala had been doing everything possible to keep the eight-party unity intact together with doing the needful for holding the CA polls as agreed upon earlier. But the stalling of the House proceedings was unprecedented. That created all the delay, and then there was the need to defer the polls to a later date.

Prime Minister Koirala has all along expressed his commitment to hold the CA polls, but events have gone in such a way that the date had to be postponed. Some said that the postponement of the polls to a later date was a blow to eight-party unity. So, what has emerged is the need for a new basis of unity. That is also slowly emerging. That the polls will be held in November has been agreed upon by the eight parties. Now the need is for the registered amendments to the interim statute to go through the rounds at the legislature parliament.Herein, it is worth noting that the amendments proposed include the provision for abolishing the monarchy. It is still not understandable why the focus is on the monarchy when it has already been agreed upon that the constituent assembly will take the decision on it at its first meeting. The focus, in fact, should all along have been on eight-party unity and holding the CA polls on a date agreed upon by them. It is high time that the eight-party leaders sat down together regularly and sorted out the issues instead of making comments and remarks that indicate that the concerned leaders do not see eye to eye. What goes on behind the scenes is hard for the people to understand. The leaders instead of making contradictory remarks ought to be united on holding the CA polls within the period agreed upon.Meanwhile, the necessary electoral laws, too, should be discussed and approved by the parliament so that the preparatory works of the Election Commission could be facilitated.Among the issues that the amendment seeks is the review of the report of the Electoral Constituencies Delineation Commission but only on technical matters. This has fulfilled a demand of the Madhesi legislators.

Law and order

Talks with the other agitating groups, too, are continuing. It can be hoped that the situation will now become more conducive for the polls to be held in a free, fair and impartial manner. It is also necessary that the law and order situation improve. Anarchy and chaos will be harmful. This is necessary as there are elements that want to disrupt the whole peace process. The eight parties must show greater vigilance and responsibility, and they must respect and fulfil the aspirations of the people expressed through the April uprising.

Source: The Rising Nepal, June 8, 2007