Madesh In Turmoil : Still No Political Understanding

Vijaya Chalise

The Eastern Terai covering Mithila, the centre of ancient civilisation, has been facing constant turbulence since January this year. A number of armed groups claiming to fight for the rights of the Madheshi people have emerged, disturbing social cohesion. Despite a series of protests across the country against such violence, these armed rebel groups in the Terai continue to kill and abduct people, including government employees. With the emergence of various armed groups there, the security situation has deteriorated. The Goit and Jwala Singh factions of the Terai Janatantrik Terai Mukti Morcha (JTMM) have not only issued threats to the civil servants from the hills but even been involved in killing them. The local administration remains a mute spectator to all this.

Solution

The government has been trying to bring all the groups concerned to the negotiating table in a bid to find a peaceful solution to the problem. The eight-party coalition government even made changes in the interim statute-2063 constitution and agreed to increase the number of constituencies in the Terai region. Unfortunately, none of the groups, many of them splinter factions, has responded positively to the government's goodwill. Thus, questions are being raised as to whether the constituent assembly (CA) elections will be held as scheduled in November. Now that the CA elections are only 110 days away, it has become urgent to resolve the Terai problem to create a conducive environment for the CA polls. Political parties and parliamentarians have yet to forge a political understanding from the centre to the local level so that their presence can be felt in the troubled areas. Even the consensus reached on forming a unanimous voice regarding violence in the Terai has not yet translated into practice. The high-level Inter-party Co-ordination Committee (HLPCC) had recently reached a consensus to address the issue in one voice.

The government, too, has not been effective in initiating effective steps to bring the situation to normalcy by interacting with the locals in the region. Paradoxically, members of the council of ministers themselves have different views on how the problem should be tackled. While Home Minister Krishna Prasad Sitaula gave a 15-day ultimatum to the various agitating groups in the Terai to come to the negotiating table, Minister for Peace and Reconstruction Ram Chandra Poudel dubbed the Home Minister's ultimatum as something personal. Political observers say the Terai issue has two dimensions: first, it is political in nature; second, it is non-political, in that some of the activities are instigated by internal regressive forces and Hindu fundamentalists from across the border. If this observation is true, obviously, the first one should be settled through political negotiation. However, the second one will need to be dealt with from a different approach. In such a situation, where certain elements are also trying to fan communal violence by creating division between the Terai and the hills, the government and the eight-party political leadership should address the Madesh issue without bias or using it to secure votes during the election. Irrespective of the geographical region they represent, nobody would dispute the fact that all the people living inside Nepal are Nepalese. Therefore, there should be no hesitation in fulfilling the demand of the Madhesi people, who are still searching for their identity. Indeed, if their demands for an autonomous federal structure and an election based on proportional representation are addressed, one can hope to win the confidence of the Madhesi people. But noone would tolerate or compromise any act aimed at endangering national unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity.

At a time when the government is holding negotiations with the Terai Jana Adhikar Forum, Madhesi intellectuals during an interaction with the Gorkhapatra said that the Madhesi people's rights be guaranteed by addressing their genuine demand before the constituent assembly (CA) polls in November. Their demands, among others, include an election based on proportional representation, reorganisation of their identity as Madhesi Nepali and an autonomous federal structure for Nepal. Professor Dr. Mohammad Habibullah said that the monarchy was an obstacle to inclusive democracy, so a new system should address the social, political and economic problem of all ethnic, linguistic and regional communities. Likewise, Jeetendra Dev, General Secretary of Loktantrik Madhesi Sangathan, said that the root cause of the Madhesi problem lay in the eight-party alliance's failure to stick to their earlier commitment to establish the Madhesis' right to autonomy and proportionate representation in the national parliament. He suggests calling a round table conference of all the Madhesi and indigenous groups and asking them for a solution. Secondly, he says, the eight political parties should issue a joint statement with a political commitment to establish an autonomous federal system and agree to a proportionate election to ensure the Madhesi people's greater representation in the constituent assembly. If the agitating groups are fighting for the rights of the Madhesi people, then they should be ready to settle the dispute through dialogue and create an election-friendly environment for the November poll that alone would consolidate their rights. Obviously, the Madhesi people should be treated at par with the people of the hills. For this, the political leadership should be visionary and handle the situation with care to protect the Nepali culture of tolerance.

Reactionary forces

Since the election to the constituent assembly is the only option for fully empowering the Nepalis, including the Madhesi and indigenous people, all should actively participate in the election for securing their rights. The possibility of the reactionary forces impending the constituent assembly elections will continue to grow if national harmony is not restored. No one should ignore the fact that royalist feudalistic forces are actively working to derail the constituent assembly polls, and all should unite to defeat such regressive forces. The country must move towards declaring itself a republican state prior to the constituent assembly poll. Besides, removing the racial hatred seen in the Terai at present and cultivating goodwill and good understanding in its place is essential.

Source: The Rising Nepal, August 3, 2007

Terai rebels meet in Bihar to plan strategy: report

Kathmandu : An armed group of former Nepal Maoists, who are waging a battle in the Terai plains for statehood, are meeting in India's neighbouring state of Bihar to plan their future strategy, a report said. The Janatantrik Terai Mukti Morcha, led by former top Maoist leader from the plains, Jay Krishna Goit, has started a meeting of its central committee in an undisclosed venue in Bihar from Friday, a Nepali daily said Sunday.

The Goit faction, that broke away from the Maoists, accusing the communist rebels of having exploited the Terai belt to come to power, has begun intensifying its movement in the plains for a separate state for Madhesis, people from the plains, mostly of Indian origin. Since its revolt against the Maoists, the Morcha has been split into three splinters. Besides Goit, the other two groups are headed by his former aides, Jwala Singh and Bisphot Singh, both of whom are waging separate battles in the Terai, demanding a separate Madhes state.

The Naya Patrika daily said the government has sent a letter to Goit Saturday, asking him to open parleys. Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala's deputy, Peace and Reconstruction Minister Ram Chandra Poudel, who is heading the three-member ministerial team entrusted with negotiating with the different dissenting factions, sent the official letter to the chief administrative officer of a frontier district to convey the message to Goit, the daily said.

Following in the footsteps of his former comrades, the Maoists, who during their decade-old armed revolt had demanded UN mediation to open talks with the government, the Goit group last week made a similar demand. Goit reportedly sent a letter to the UN Mission in Nepal, that is facilitating Nepal's peace process and monitoring the arms and combatants of the Maoists, asking for help to start talks with the government.

However, with the government having had publicly ruled out UN mediation for talks with the Goit group, the UN agency told the Goit group that it would not be able to act without the government's consent, the daily said. But in his letter Saturday, the minister has agreed for UN mediation, the report said. The daily, considered close to the Maoists, also said the Goit faction would wind up its meeting Sunday, after which they are likely to send their answer to the government.

Most of the armed groups in the Terai, including the three different Morcha factions, take advantage of the open border between India and Nepal and frequently cross over to India for safety and secrecy, just as the Maoists did in the past. There is growing suspicion in Nepal that Indian authorities are in touch with the Terai rebels and are helping the Madhes movement. During the Maoist insurgency, India had faced the same accusations but always denied them, saying it regarded the rebels as terrorists. However, after King Gyanendra seized power in 2005, various Indian agencies, including leaders of its political parties, were involved in bringing the Maoists and the opposition parties together, with meetings between the top brass of both held in India.

Source: IANS, July 29, 2007

Nepal: experiencing pangs of transition

S.D. Muni

The challenge to Nepal’s peace process comes from political vested interests, Maoist activities, and the gradually spreading turbulence in the Terai region.


Nepal’s peace process is passing through a delicate phase. The core objective of this process is to integrate the Maoists into an inclusive and fully democratic political order. This process of transiting a 238-year-old feudal state into a vibrant and responsive democratic order has been reasonably smooth and speedy so far. Since the success of the peoples’ movement in April 2006, led peacefully by the Maoists and the democratic forces, much progress has been a chieved. The Maoists have committed themselves to non-violent and democratic politics under a Comprehensive Peace Agreement signed with the government on November 2001. Following this, the Maoists have registered their arms and armed cadres under United Nations supervision. An interim Constitution, interim parliament, and interim coalition government of an eight-party alliance (of Maoists and seven mainstream political parties) have been put in place. The King has been stripped of all his powers raising the prospects of establishing a democratic Republic. The culmination of the peace process, and thereby the prospects of a stable and prosperous Nepal, now depends upon the sincere implementation of assurances and commitments by the Maoists and other political parties and the drafting of a Constitution by a Constituent Assembly scheduled to be elected in November 2007.

The challenge to the smooth advancement of the peace process and the holding of the Constituent Assembly elections comes from three sources: political vested interests, Maoist activities, and the gradually spreading violence in the Terai region. The royalists, both around the palace and within the political parties, have no interest in the elections as a Constituent Assembly in its very first sitting is expected to abolish monarchy and establish a Republic. There are sections of royalists who may settle for a ceremonial monarchy. However, King Gyanendra, unaware of the shift against him of the popular mood since 2005, has not accepted the option of ceremonial monarchy and continues to scheme to regain as much of his powers as possible. He wants to drive a wedge in the ruling coalition and disrupt the election process. His failed birthday bash on July 7, 2007, was a clear indication of this.


Some of the political parties too do not seem to be ready for elections, having lost political ground during the 10 years of Maoist insurgency. The Nepali Congress (NC) is awaiting the reunification of its breakaway group under Sher Bahadur Deuba. The royalists as well as smaller left parties are not too sure of their electoral prospects. There are assessments that even the Maoists may want to delay elections as they have lost much of their goodwill in the post-peoples’ movement (Jan Andolan) period, though their top leaders are of the view that the more the elections are delayed the more their political ground will be eroded. Uncertainty in the minds of these political stakeholders has seriously daunted their enthusiasm for elections. The Chief Election Commissioner has complained of the government’s delay in filling the vacancies in the poll panel.

All those who want to delay the elections are seeking shelter behind the prevailing violence and lawlessness in Nepal. The abductions, extortions, and use of force by the Youth Communist League (YCL) created by the Maoists from their erstwhile Peoples’ Liberation Army (PLA) cadres invite considerable flak from various sources, including the Prime Minister. The Maoists’ inability to return properties seized during the insurgency period are also cited as examples of their bad faith vis-À-vis joining the mainstream. The Maoists are partly using YCL strong-arm methods to pressure the other coalition partners but, on the other hand, there are differences in the Maoist leadership on this issue. There are clearly two lines on the degree and extent to which the group should integrate in the prevailing multi-party politics. Many in the Polit Bureau feel that they are walking in a trap to be gradually marginalised and eliminated, as their cadres are killed in the Terai and their image is tarnished in the rest of the country. Therefore, an organised YCL is required to deter their enemies, mobilise political support, and garner votes if and when elections take place. For them, YCL is their youth wing as in all other parties.

The Terai is in a state of virtual anarchy on account of the unrest in the Hindi-speaking Madheshi community. Long neglected and discriminated against, the Madheshis are demanding proper representation in the new Nepal. Royalists backed by Hindu extremists from across the borders in India fanned the initial sparks of violence, caused by Maoist blunders, to discredit the interim government. Initially, even some of the major political parties and sections of the international community tried to turn the Madheshis’ ire against the Maoists to erode the latter’s support base. The Madheshis have a genuine issue but in the absence of a credible leadership, a number of criminal, self-serving and narrow-based political groups are taking undue advantage of the situation. In the forefront of violence and disruption are three splinter Maoists factions of Jai Krishan Goit, Jwala Singh, and Bisfotak Singh, the Madheshi Janadhikar Forum of Upendra Yadav, the Sadbhawana Party, which is a part of the ruling alliance, and lastly, the Terai Cobra and the Terai Tigers led by unknown Robin Hoods. Some Terai political activists are still waiting to float new leadership platforms. The royalists continue to indirectly support and encourage some of these groups in the hope that a disordered Terai will mar the prospects of smooth elections. Slow and uncalibrated responses from the government as well as the eight-party alliance have worsened the situation. The Maoists’ proposal to raise an eight-party front to politically deal with the Terai violence has yet to take off. If the Terai situation has to be brought under control, the government must move fast to seriously engage with the genuine Madheshi groups.


Behind all this confusion and persisting conflict in Nepal is the fact that the old mindsets are finding it hard to come to terms with the new challenge thrown by the peoples’ movement. The political parties and the Maoists had perhaps forged only a tactical alliance to deal with the autocratic King. It is doubtful if this alliance is based on a shared grand strategic vision of building a new Nepal of popular aspirations. This is reflected in the divergence among the eight parties on the questions of the monarchy’s future status, inclusion of hitherto marginalised sections of Madheshis and ethnic minorities, restructuring of the Nepalese army, and of priorities of socio-economic transformation. Such divergences have worsened the trust deficit between not only the Maoists and the other political parties, but also among the non-Maoist parties in the ruling alliance. Maoists continue to grumble about being discriminated against, be it the question of ambassadorial appointments or allocation of funds for their registered cadres or resources for the ministries allocated to them. One wonders if India and the rest of the international community, which are deeply engaged with Nepal’s peace process, have also not been afflicted by the old mindset problem. The outspoken and outgoing American Ambassador, James F. Moriarty, made it amply clear in a number of his departing statements. All those who are engaged in restructuring a new Nepal need to understand clearly that the continuing alliance between the political parties and the Maoists, and election of a Constituent Assembly are the basic requirements for peace and stability in Nepal. There is no alternative except chaos and disorder.

After receiving the shock of popular disenchantment with King Gyanendra’s April 21, 2006, proclamation on the peoples’ movement, India has tried to push Nepal’s peace process in a positive direction, both through diplomatic persuasion and the allocation of generous financial resources. There are, however, elements in the Indian political and policy establishments that would still like to see a ceremonial monarchy and the marginalisation of the Maoists. They want India to be prepared to pick up the pieces and deal with the debris if Nepal were to fall apart due to the Madheshi issue and the ethnic tensions. One hopes Indian policy steers clear of such elements. While continuing to support the peace process, India must throw its weight behind a constructive engagement between Kathmandu and the Madheshi people. Many of the Madheshi groups have in the past thrived and prospered on Indian doles. They must be prevailed on by New Delhi to desist from the path of violence and seek a just but negotiated resolution of their grievances with Kathmandu. If the Terai violence is allowed to delay or disrupt the election process in Nepal and its peace process collapses, India will be the worst affected by its extensive negative spillover.


Source: The Hindu, July 27, 2007

INTERVIEW WITH UPENDRA YADAVc

Excerpts of an interview with Upendra Yadav, chairman of the Madhesi People's Rights Forum (MPRF) from Nepal magazine.

Q. You secretly went to the US and returned at a time when the Forum is suspected to have American support. Why?

Yadav: I was not invited by the American government. I went there on the invitation of an organization of Nepalis residing there. I could only arrive there a week behind the scheduled date as the (US) Embassy did not issue the visa on time. As far as the Madhes agitation is concerned, it is an agitation launched by the Nepali people, and not by America or India.

Q. Who did you meet in America?

Yadav: I met with the local leaders of the Democratic Party, that too, on the initiation of the Nepali diaspora.

Q. You used to meet US ambassador James F Moriarty here. What issues were discussed?

Yadav: What he used to say publicly, I also said the same thing. He had said he wanted to see the Constituent Assembly elections held in a peaceful manner, and the Loktantric/ democratic process move ahead, successfully.

Q. Why does America perceive Maoist advancement in Madhes as a threat?
Yadav: To state that America senses a threat from the Maoists is like saying a rabbit poses a threat to a tiger. Is there any reason for America, which is bracing for Star Wars, to get intimidated by the Maoists wielding a few weapons?

Q Don’t you think that the Forum is being used against the Maoists by someone?
Yadav: When there is an agitation, different types of people try to take advantage of it. Those elements tried to instigate the Maoists. We have to learn from such incidents. The Maoists, we and all other democratic forces must try to protect ourselves from that, lest the country suffers a negative fallout.

Q. What is your take on the Maoists’ argument that the plot was hatched, considering the threats a Maoist advancement in Madhes poses to India?

Yadav: Nepal poses no threat to India.

Q. It is even suspected that the Madhes agitation was launched at India’s behest to destabilize Nepal. What is the link between the Forum and India?

Yadav: Had the Madhes agitation been staged on India’s behalf, Nepal’s geographical structure itself would have changed by now. Secondly, the people of Madhes were ready to lay down their lives for their rights in the course of that agitation. Could they have been ready to die in that way had the agitation been prompted by America, India or China? Leaders ranging from the Nepali Congress to the Maoists had lived or taken shelter in India due to adverse situations. Then, why are our intentions being questioned just because we stay in India?

Q. Don’t you feel that the Jantantric Terai Mukti Morcha, which is conducting armed activities, is getting shelter in India?

Yadav: One’s policy, what one is up to, is more important than where one lives. A lot of criminals in Nepal have settled in India and a lot of Indian criminals have settled in Nepal.

Q. Prior to your US visit, you convened a joint meeting with the JTMMs in Patna and discussed the agenda about separating the country. Are you involved in politics of disintegration?

Yadav: Someone could have a policy of dividing the country. But, it is our belief that the problems dogging the country need to be addressed without hurting national sovereignty and integrity. We have sought federal governance and autonomy within Nepal, and not by separating from Nepal. We can’t even imagine a division of the country. We also do not accept the policy of the organization waging an armed struggle in Madhes, including the JTMMs. The discrimination in Madhes needs to be address peacefully. It is futile to look for the answer outside the country.

Q. At the Patna meeting, Jwala Singh even said ‘Now we can't expect (anything) from Upendra, hence Ramraja Prasad Singh needs to assume the leadership’, right?

Yadav: Much like the way the JTMM does not expect anything from us, we also cannot expect anything from the JTMM. We don’t think the JTMM can lead the Madhes agitation, positively. Our paths are separate.

Q. Then, how do you define the relationship between the Forum and the JTMM?

Yadav: The relationship does not exist. Many organizations in Madhes were formed after dissociating from the Maoists. It is unknown where the other organizations came from. We also do not know the purposes behind the formation of such organizations.

Q If the relationship does not exist then on what basis do both the factions of JTMM take the responsibility for the attack on the Maoists using the Forum activists as their “cover”?
Yadav: We do not want such organizations to attend our programme. Even if they have to organize a programme, let them do it separately. Let there be no infiltration. However, accidents do occur despite our wishes. Many organizations take responsibility for them for cheap popularity. A trend to release press statements owning up to such incidents to garner publicity is on rise in Madhes.

Q. What can you say about the Gaur carnage?

Yadav: Since Jwala Singh has taken up the responsibility for the incident, one can see that the MPRF was not responsible. To summarize, the Gaur incident was a conspiracy against us by those who wanted to defame the MPRF as a group committed to violence, like JTMM prohibiting us from coming to the mainstream.

Q. You were scheduled to address the Gaur mass meeting. But you didn't attend it despite the fact that you were present in a nearby area. Later, the killings of the Maoist cadres took place. Doesn't it give the impression of the picture being preplanned by the MPRF itself?

Yadav: When the incident took place, I was not there- I was here in Kathmandu. At the time of the Gaur incident, there was a gathering of thousands of people. How could we know what kind of people were hiding in the crowd? If the Maoists had not made the decision of attacking the MPRF, the incident would never have taken place. Second, the administration is also responsible. Because, the administration already knew that such an incident was going to take place.

Q. What do you say then about the MPRF activists from a royalist background?

Yadav: There is no place for royalists in the MPRF. Our andolan is for a federal democratic republic.

Q. Talks with the prime minister's daughter Sujata have become frequent these days?

Yadav: She is a Nepali Congress leader. I know her personally. She also knows me. We used to meet occasionally in the past.

Q. So the MPRF's demand that the Home Minister should quit is the result of those meetings?
Yadav: It is also the demand of two-thirds of the people within the NC. Girija (Prasad Koirala) has himself confessed during our meetings that there isn't any purpose of carrying (Home Minister Sitaula) while walking forward. Personally, he would be a good and honest person, and he may have played a good role in the peace process too. However, as a Home Minister he tried to suppress the Madhesi agitation and failed to maintain law and order. So that's why, we have asked for his resignation.

Q. Do you think that the demand to put a ban on the YCL (Young Communist League) is logical?

Yadav: They have also demanded that the MPRF should be banned. Under these circumstances, if we also make a similar demand then it's not such an unusual demand. Today, even the head of the state has christened the YCL as the Young Criminal League. The "Criminal League" should either reform itself or stop its activities. If the Maoists continue to move forward in this way, then the Constituent Assembly elections won't take place- even democracy can’t be sustained. That's why the Maoists must truly democratize themselves.

Q. Why don't you make a similar demand regarding the JTMM as well?

Yadav: The JTMM should also reform itself. The manner and the way of their struggle haven’t had a positive impact on the Madhesi andoaln. However, their activities have defamed the agitation. The Madhesi people are tired of armed groups like the JTMM. Every group should enter the political mainstream.Q. Do you think the MPRF is itself in the political mainstream?
Yadav: We are in the political mainstream. The proof is that we've already registered the MPRF as a political party to take part in the upcoming CA polls.

Q. Why do you think many old MPRF activists have left?

Yadav: Earlier, there were people of various political parties in the MPRF. However, the MPRF has become a separate party today. If those friends want to do politics for the parties they belong to, then there is no point in continuing with the MPRF.

Q. How many of your demands have been fulfilled by the government?

Yadav: We've reached consensus on a few demands, but they are yet to be implemented. Like- providing compensation to the families of the martyrs, medical treatment to the injured, a dismissal of all legal complaints, and proportional representation of Madhesi, indigenous, and ethnic people.

Q. From the MPRF perspective, do you think that the CA elections are possible on November 22?

Yadav: Today, neither has the government shown any real activity to hold the CA polls, nor have the necessary preparations been made. A sense of peace and security is crucial for the CA polls. Besides, the government should hold talks with various agitating groups to create an amiable environment for the CA polls. However, these things are yet to be done.

Source: The Kathmandu Post, July 17, 2007

Finding A Peaceful Solution

The eastern Terai covering Mithila, the centre of ancient civilisation and the land of King Janak, has been facing constant turbulence since the past few months. A number of armed groups have emerged one after another and have been resorting to violent activities, creating anarchy in the areas stretching from the Bagmati in the west to Koshi in the east. The government, right after violence erupted in January this year, has been trying to bring all the groups concerned to the negotiating table. The government, in a bid to find a peaceful solution to the problem there, even made changes in the interim statute 2063 and agreed to increase the number of electoral constituencies in the Terai. Unfortunately, none of the groups has responded to the government. Consequently, the problem has been dragging on, and the situation has gone from bad to worse in some parts of the Terai, raising fears about whether the Constituent Assembly elections will be held within the stipulated timeframe. Although many of the armed groups active in the Terai have broken up into splinter factions, the efforts of the government have failed so far as it has been giving more emphasis to a peaceful solution. Now that the CA elections are just four months away, it has become urgent to resolve the Terai problem to create a peaceful environment. The government has initiated some serious steps to bring the situation back to normalcy by interacting with the locals of the region.

In this context, Minister for Peace and Reconstruction and convenor of the government talks team Ram Chandra Poudel has arrived in Janakpur and invited all the agitating groups to sit for dialogue to settle the problems. Addressing a number of programmes organised there on Monday, Minister Poudel reiterated the government's commitment to meet the relevant demands of the Terai people through talks and hold the CA elections within the stipulated time. The present eight-party government truly represents the people who supported and fought for the April uprising in 2006 to usher in a new era of democracy in Nepal, and what it says represents the people's voice. The agitating groups of the Terai should realise this and sit for dialogue to sort out all prevalent differences so as to realise the dreams of the Nepali people who want to see a peaceful, prosperous and democratic Nepal. We have already witnessed that violence causes only destruction and finds no solution to any problem. Let us hope Minister Poudel's visit to Janakpur will bring in the desired optimism.

Source: The Rising Nepal, July 26, 2007

Nepal's Troubled Tarai Region

Unrest in the Tarai plains has exposed the weaknesses of Nepal’s peace process, could derail elections for a constituent assembly in November and, if not properly addressed, could start a new form of conflict. Madhesis – plainspeople who are some one third of the country’s population – have protested, sometimes violently, against the discrimination that has in effect excluded them from public life. Weeks of demonstrations and clashes between political rivals recently left several dozen dead. The government has offered to address issues such as increased electoral representation, affirmative action for marginalised groups and federalism but has dragged its feet over implementing dialogue. Tension had been building for several years but was largely ignored by the political elites and international observers, and the scale of the protest shocked even its own leaders. The problems will only be resolved by strengthening the national political process and making it both inclusive and responsive – starting with free and fair elections to a constituent assembly later this year.

The Tarai plains stretch the length of the southern border and are home to half the total population, including many non-Madhesis (both indigenous ethnic groups and recent migrants from the hills). With comparatively good infrastructure, agriculture, industrial development and access to India across the open border, the Tarai is crucial to the economy. It is also an area of great political importance, both as a traditional base for the mainstream parties and as the only road link between otherwise inaccessible hill and mountain districts.
The leaders of the Madhesi movement face difficult choices: they have mobilised public support but have also angered powerful constituencies. They now need to decide between a strategy of accommodation or continued confrontation. The Madhesi Janadhikar Forum (MJF) has emerged as a powerful umbrella group but lacks an organisational base and clear agenda. It is entering the electoral fray but if it is to challenge the established parties, it must first deal with rival Madhesi politicians competing for the same votes. There has also been a proliferation of Madhesi armed groups; some have expanded significantly in numbers, and their strategy and attitudes will affect the political process.


The mood among Tarai residents is increasingly confrontational, with collapse of trust between most Madhesis and the government. Most believe that further violence is likely. Unresolved grievances and the hangover from the Maoist insurgency, especially the lack of reconciliation and the greater tolerance for violence, make a volatile mix. The unrest has given a glimmer of hope to diehard royalists and Hindu fundamentalists, including some from across the border, who see it as a chance to disrupt the peace process.
The mainstream parties have changed their rhetoric but are as reluctant as ever to take action that would make for a more inclusive system. Strikes in the Tarai squeezed Kathmandu but not enough to force immediate concessions. Mainstream parties, particularly the Nepali Congress, rely on their Tarai electoral base but are unsure how to deal with the new state of flux. Unable to compete with Madhesi groups in radicalism, they have also been ineffective at communicating the positive steps they have taken, such as reforming citizenship laws. Competition within the governing coalition is hindering any bold moves. For the Maoists, the Tarai violence was a wake-up call: much of it was directed against their cadres, whose appearance of dominance was shattered. Nevertheless, they remain well organised, politically coherent and determined to reassert themselves.

Engaging in serious negotiations will be a delicate process, with no party wanting to lose face. But the key issues are clear and still offer room for a reasonable compromise:



fair representation: the critical issue is ensuring the electoral system gives Madhesis a serious stake in the constituent assembly;
federalism and autonomy: the government’s commitment to federalism has yet to translate into action; without pre-empting the constituent assembly, steps are needed to demonstrate more serious intent, such as formation of a technical research commission that could develop a knowledge base for future discussions;
rebuilding trust: confidence in national and local government will only come if there is decent governance, public security based on local community consent and improved delivery of services;
redress for heavy-handed suppression of protests: demands for compensation, honouring of dead protestors and follow-through on a commission of enquiry need to be met; and
steps towards affirmative action: some immediate moves to increase Madhesi representation in parties and state bodies could pave the way for longer-term measures to remove inequalities.

Fixing the Tarai means first fixing some issues in Kathmandu and then dealing not only with Madhesis but all excluded groups. Cross-party unity in listening to grievances and pushing for their resolution through a legitimate, elected constituent assembly is the only way to a lasting solution. This requires a change in outlook and a delicate political balancing act: the Kathmandu government must do some things immediately in order to earn Madhesi trust but deciding any major issues before the elections to the constituent assembly could compromise the constitutional process. Despite the instability, elections are still possible and essential. But reshaping state identity and institutions to make all Nepali citizens feel part of the nation is a long-term task that will present challenges in the constituent assembly and beyond.

RECOMMENDATIONS
To the Government of Nepal:

1. Address the reasonable demands for political participation of all excluded groups (not just those whose protests have forced attention) by:
(a) undertaking to discuss and resolve grievances not only with protest leaders but also with concerned parliamentarians, local community representatives and civil society representatives;
(b) starting back-channel communications to draw armed factions into peaceful dialogue, while emphasising that they must sign up to the political process; and
(c) using all available leverage to control armed groups and other organisations founded in reaction to the Madhesi movement, draw them into negotiations and prevent the communalisation of Tarai issues.

2. Show willingness to make concessions on the basis of equal rights for all citizens by:
(a) revising the electoral system to ensure fair representation of Madhesis and all other marginalised groups, including a fresh delineation of constituency boundaries if the mixed electoral system is retained;
(b) improving communication, ensuring the government’s approach is clearly explained and that there are means to invite and pay attention to citizens’ concerns;
(c) sending senior party leaders to the Tarai – as eight parties together not individually – to explain what the government has done and is doing to improve representation and make the constituent assembly a meaningful, inclusive exercise;
(d) implementing some immediate affirmative action measures to boost Madhesi presence in the civil service;
(e) initiating discussion on options for federalism, their implications and how to implement them; and
(f) honouring Madhesis killed in protests, compensating their families and those injured, supporting the commission of enquiry into the state’s handling of the movement and guaranteeing its recommendations will not be ignored.

3. Demonstrate firm commitment to constituent assembly elections by:
(a) agreeing promptly on an acceptable electoral system, preferably by ensuring the Electoral Constituency Delimitation Commission delivers a revised proposal within its extended deadline that addresses Madhesi fears of gerrymandering;
(b) announcing a realistic election timetable;
(c) developing election security plans with support of all political constituencies and communities; and
(d) insisting that other issues should not be addressed by further interim constitutional amendments but instead be left to the constituent assembly as the sole legitimate forum for resolving them.

4. Restore law and order and rebuild trust in local administration and security forces by:
(a) improving community relations through meetings between chief district officers (CDOs) and Madhesi political actors and intellectuals; holding meetings to listen and respond to the public’s concerns; and ensuring that local government offices are well staffed, performing basic duties and more accessible;
(b) balancing deployment of armed police with a greater emphasis on civil and community policing;
(c) starting discussion on using affirmative action to redress ethnic and regional imbalances in the security forces through recruitment, training and promotion; and
(d) considering the transfer of district administrators and police chiefs responsible for excessive security action and the appointment of more Madhesi officials in sensitive districts.

To Madhesi Political Leaders and Opinion-makers:

5. Continue pressing for fair electoral representation and inclusion within the framework of the constituent assembly by:
(a) rejecting violence, devising forms of protest that do not adversely affect the economic and social life of people in the Tarai and bringing armed groups into the political process;
(b) taking part in the elections to the constituent assembly;
(c) showing flexibility on the new electoral system if the government commits itself to fair representation; and
(d) cooperating in the commission of enquiry and seeking to redress grievances by judicial means.

6. Avoid replicating exclusive models at the regional level and work to reduce communal tensions by:
(a) making space for women’s voices in the movement and on negotiating delegations;
(b) ensuring representation of Muslims, Tarai janajati communities and all Hindu castes including Dalits; and
(c) not insisting on a unitary Madhesi identity if it is unacceptable to some communities.

To the National Political Parties:

7. Consult excluded groups within and beyond parties and start to explore detailed policies of concern to them such as federalism and affirmative action.
8. Wherever possible build eight-party consensus and also involve parties not represented in government, including the legislature’s official opposition.
9. Implement Comprehensive Peace Agreement commitments on representation of marginalised communities within parties, explore ways to make party leaderships more representative and pay greater attention to the concerns of Madhesi and other activists within parties.

To the United Nations Mission in Nepal (UNMIN):

10. Extend technical support to inter-party discussions on development of revised electoral models.

To the International Community:

11. Continue to support the peace process, stressing respect for the principles enshrined in peace agreements and urging full implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement and the interim constitution.
12. Maintain momentum for elections with both positive political pressure and practical assistance, welcome the announcement of a realistic election timetable and maintain strong public support for the process.
13. Support resolving the demands of Madhesis and other groups within the framework of the peace agreement and following its principles.
14. Donors offering development and peace process assistance should consider additional help for building Madhesi civil society capacity and supporting serious, independent academic research into issues affecting all marginalised communities.

Source: International Crisis Group, Brussels, July 9, 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

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

Poll preparations: The question of electoral model

Shailendra Kumar Upadhyay

The eight-party alliance (EPA) has finally declared the month for the CA polls. However, this does not ensure the quality of the polls, which ought to be free and fair. The very day the decision was announced, the country faced another ‘bandh’ called by the aboriginals and ethnic people.

The agreement between the government and the Madhesi Janadhikar Forum (MJF) has raised certain basic questions on the modality of the election as well as the restructuring of the state apparatus. Although the announcement of an election month has given a sense of relief to all those who have been demanding it for quite sometime, the question of modality has been left undecided or it lacks consensus.

The working committee meeting of the Nepali Congress (NC) was right in reiterating that any question on which a unanimous decision has already been taken should not be raised over and over again. But as a democratic party, the NC leadership should have accepted that on issues where there was no unanimity and where a note of dissent had been formally recorded the dissenting party has the right to raise the issue whenever an occasion to do so arises.The EPA had unanimously adopted the Interim Constitution (IC) but reservations had been expressed by the CPN-UML and later by Sadbhawana (Anandidevi) on the modality of election. This time other leftist parties have also joined hands with the CPN-UML. So on this issue serious consideration has to be given to national consensus. It is clearly mentioned in the agreement between the MJF and the government that the MJF favours proportional representation. The Janajatis too have been in favour of proportional representation.

The NC and its president and prime minister Girija Prasad Koirala have a great responsibility to promote national consensus on issues that may divide the nation. It is, therefore, necessary for the NC either to convince others on the merits of the mixed electoral system or give up its adamant stand and accept proportional representation. A national consensus cannot be arrived at only by talking separately with the stakeholders. This process is long and difficult. The EPA must be ready to sit together and listen to various agitating groups. It must no longer ignore the newly emerged organisations and show readiness to work together with them.

While the accord between the MJF and the government has to be welcomed, a grave question cannot be left unattended. The MJF has insisted on the right of self-determination. It seems the government negotiator (a minister and a senior NC leader) has accepted it. But what is the right of self-determination? So far we have been talking of a federal system in which all the component states/provinces/ regions will have full authority and control over their own destiny. However, the right of self-determination means “determination of one’s own fate or course of action without compulsion”. In a federal system there is a compulsion to remain a part of the nation but with full authority and control in administering the area. But the right of self-determination can go as far as breaking away from the nation, declaring an independent nation or merging with other nations. Either the negotiator did not understand the meaning of the right of self-determination or he took it lightly without considering its implications.

After the success of the Jana Andolan II a consensus seems to have emerged on the need for restructuring the state and a federal system. A federal system is a system of government in which the central government enjoys limited authority. Matters relating to local development and administration will be the domain of the local governments. In Nepal’s case, the formation of new provinces should be on the basis of language and ethnicity. Once such provinces are created the people of that area would have full control and authority over that part of the country. However, full control and authority does not amount to the right of cession. We are for a new Nepal where people of all castes, creeds, cultures and ethnicities would have full right to decide their destiny. But this should leave no room for disintegration.

The issue of electoral model is a vital question as it involves representation of the ethnics, Dalits, Madhesis, etc. So there is need for consensus on this issue. If there is a consensus on the model as stipulated in the Interim Constitution then the question of constituency delineation has to be revised. But if the consensus is in favour of proportional representation the nation becomes one constituency and so the question of delineation becomes irrelevant.The questions of the nature of restructuring of the state and the electoral process have to be taken up seriously and all problems should be resolved quickly, otherwise the EC cannot make adequate preparation to hold elections in time. Any delay or further postponement of the election on any grounds would open the way for disastrous consequences.

Source: The Himalayan Times, June 6, 2007

Maoist Terai wing for Madhesis' rights

KATHMANDU, June 3: The Madhesi National Liberation Front Nepal has made public various decisions passed in the context of the rights and interests of the Madhesis and the contemporary political developments.The extended meeting recently of the Front's Central Office, chaired by Matrika Prasad Yadav, convenor of the Front's second national convention organising committee, decided to consolidate the organisation and extensively expand it, distribute and renew membership, constitute a five-member action committee under the leadership of Mahendra Paswan and carry out a month-long peaceful programme for securing the rights and interests of the Madhesh and the Madheshi peoples in a phase-wise manner.

The Front has also taken the decision to organise peaceful protest programme from June 7 to July 9 with the objective of exerting pressure for proclamation of the date of Constituent Assembly election by declaring republic from the Legislature-Parliament itself, of immediately proclaiming the Madhesh autonomous provincial republic, of taking action against the criminals involved in the Gaur massacre and of making public the status of the people said to have been disappeared.Chairman of the CPN-Maoist Prachanda, in-charge of the East Command of the party Badal, deputy commander and joint in-charge of the Mithila Bhojpuri Bureau Baldev were also present in the meeting, the Front stated in a press release issued Sunday.

Source: The Gorkhapatra, June 5, 2007

The rise of a party

MALLIKA ARYAL

In 1997, a group of madhesi intellectuals and students banded together to discuss their concerns and issues. There was no formal membership in this Biratnagar-based group and participants included leftists and members of other mainstream parties. The common denominator was their disenchantment with the big parties and the sense that their debates were largely ignored. The Madhesi Janadhikar Forum soon emerged as the most-respected, representative platform for madhesi issues. In the same year, the Maoists celebrated their first anniversary underground by intensifying their struggle in the mid-west, Nepal had three unstable coalition governments, and the human rights situation deteriorated as scores were detained by the state.

Ten years later, the Maoists have entered into the peace process, and the MJF has turned relatively violent. Both, however, are now registered as parties with the Election Commission and much of the fight for influence in the madhes is between these two fronts.
Insiders tell us that the Maoist leadership was sympathetic to the Forum at the start, and even instrumental in organising it. Around 1999 Upendra Yadav, then a regular member of UML, started becoming closer to the Maoists.

In February 2004, Upendra Yadav, Maoist leaders Matrika Yadav and Mohan Baidya were arrested in Delhi. Upendra Yadav was let go after a couple of months, while Matrika Yadav and Mohan Baidya were handed over to Nepali authorities and were released in 2006. Those close to Upendra Yadav say that during the time of his arrest he was already trying to distance himself from the Maoists because of discrimination he felt in the ranks within the Maoist hierarchy and because he did not agree with the Maoist plan to divide madhes into ‘Madhes Autonomous Region’ and ‘Tharuwan Autonomous Region’. Vijay Kant Karna, chairperson of Jaghrit Nepal says, “No one was happy in the tarai with the Maoists because they called it Madhes Government but high ranks in their party were given to pahadis.”

After the 1 February 2005 royal takeover Upendra Yadav and Jaya Prakash Gupta, former general secretary of the MJF and present Nepali Congress MP started travelling back and forth between India and Nepal to prepare for a movement in Nepal. After last year’s April Uprising Upendra Yadav returned to Nepal and in the eight months after Jana Andolan II, the MJF had successfully held meetings in almost all the districts of Nepal.

Since then, the forum and Yadav have been accused of both flip-flopping and forming alliances with Hindu fundamentalist groups in India, such as the Rastiya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). In December Yadav attended a meeting of rightwing Hindu groups in Gorakhpur and spoke out publicly about making Nepal a Hindu nation again. A month later he was leading the movement for a secular federal republic.

“He can be highly influenced by others,” says Nepali Congress MP Amresh Kumar Singh, adding, “If you try to play with all the powers, you forget the cause you were fighting for.” Like most madhesi leaders who do not actively profess membership in the MJF, Singh too is said to have had a falling out with Yadav.

Jaya Prakash Gupta, who is close to Yadav, says the accusations of alliances with the palace and Indian fundamentalist groups are misguided. “If mainstream political parties meet with big Indian leaders, no one calls that an ‘unholy alliance’,” Gupta told us from Biratnagar. Gupta said that since Gaur, Yadav has not been allowed to move freely or explain “his side of the story”.

That Gupta and other moderate madhesi leaders took a careful line on Gaur while speaking to us is an indication of the pan-madhesi appeal that the forum still has. On the one hand, they argued, Gaur was ‘retaliation’ for months of harassment and disruption of MJF meetings by the Maoists Tarai Mukti Morcha. On the other, most admit it was a tactical mistake.

“If the MFJ had been willing to sit for talks right after the Madhes Uprising, they could have bargained their way into more madhesi representation and investigations of Lahan and Nepalganj, and pressured the prime minister to implement the promises made during his second address,” says Chandra Kishore, editor of Terai News Magazine in Birganj. “Now, after Gaur, everyone fears the forum as a criminal organisation.”

Sarita Giri of the Nepal Sadbhawana Party-Anandi Devi, says the MJF is not in the least militant. “They are not armed, Gaur was retaliation against the Maoists because they had disrupted their activities in Bhairahawa and Nepalganj,” she argues.

Meantime, there is said to be a few faultlines showing in the forum, one between the more left-wing members and Yadav, and the other between Yadav’s supporters who believe this was the right time to register a party and Gupta’s group, which argues that fundamental issues need to be settled before deciding to contest elections. There are signs of a split in the ranks—an insider tells us that of the 25 members in the working committee, only 13 members’ names were on the list given to the Election Commission during registration. Gupta pooh-poohs this and says that though his proposal lost out, he will support the MJF as a party.

Yadav gets the most publicity, but there are other prominent figures in the forum, such as veteran leftist leader Sitananda Raya, and MJF secretary general Ram Kumar Sharma. There are two vice chairmen Bhagyanath Gupta, a professor at Birganj’s Thakur Ram Bahumukhi Campus, and Kishore Biswas Tharu, a former member of Nepal Sadbhawana Party.

“As a political party our agenda is pretty clear—we want democratic system of governance, autonomous federal structure, proportional elections, and we want Nepal to be a republic” says Jitendra Sonal, MJF’s secretariat member.

Analysts say that given the lack of commitment seen on the part of the government to resolving madhesi issues, the MJF as a political party could take off stronger than those who call the forum irresponsible might imagine.

Source: Madhesi United, Blog, June 5, 2007

Positive Talks

THE long-awaited talks between the Madhesi Janadhikar Forum (MJF) and a government talks team have finally materialised, and there has been genuine appreciation from all quarters as they were held in a cordial atmosphere. The talks that were held the other day in Janakpur are learnt to have been positive, laying the foundation for reaching a compromise in resolving several contentious issues.

During the talks, the MJF has put forth a 26-point demand that include, among other things, the federal system of governance and also the inclusion of Madhesis in all the organs of the state. The government, for its part, was also asked to withdraw the charges against the MJF leaders.

Demands were also made to provide compensation to all those who were injured during the Madhesi movement. Some issues raised came close to an understanding during the talks, and at the same time other demands were also discussed. As the country is headed towards the constituent assembly polls, it is highly essential to create an environment where such polls can be held in a free and fair manner and in an atmosphere without fear.

The country belongs to all the communities that inhabit it, and it is only fitting that all their grievances should be addressed. The talks should be seen in this light and the achievements made by the two sides to categorise the demands into those which could be met immediately and others that need further preparation and discussion should lead to an amicable solution agreeable to all.

The talks had been stalled for a long time, and as a result, the people suffered. There was much apprehension about these developments, particularly as the country is a transition phase, and untoward incidents could take place, playing into the hands of the regressive elements that have ulterior motives in their mind. The talks focussed on such burning issues as providing compensation to the families of those who died in the agitation and providing relief and treatment facilities to the injured. These are humanitarian demands and should be treated as such.

Furthermore, agreement to hold further discussions on seeking technical assistance from the United Nations to facilitate the talks also figured. The talks are a good beginning and bodes well for the peace process that the country envisages for the resolution of all the problems of the various communities so that all are accommodated in the New Nepal that has been envisaged where there would be no discrimination.

Source: The Rising Nepal, June 4, 2007

Agree On Date For CA Polls

The political parties are trying to tackle issues relating to the election to the constituent assembly. As several conflicting interpretations and positions are involved in the declaration of the date for the polls, the political stakeholders are determinedly seeking to sort them out quickly and reach an understanding with a sense of unanimity. The meeting of the eight-party leaders that is taking place should be seen as a case of seriousness demonstrated by the leaders to reach an understanding and consensus in addressing the relevant issues. As political interests vary among each other, it is natural that discussions are prolonged, and some delays are incurred for arriving at a settlement. However, the political leaders should not seek to construct new excuses to circumvent and derail the process. As insisted by Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala, the leaders should zero in on finalising the date for the constituent assembly polls. The decision on the polls for the constituent assembly would indeed rivet the attention of all the political stakeholders to building a strategy for demonstrating popular support in one's favour.

The task that lies ahead of the political parties is, therefore, to create a healthy framework for all shades of opinions and take the process forward so that the polls to the election assembly is not delayed. The Maoists had fought for the cause of the CA polls, and it is they who made the agenda very popular among the political and social stakeholders. Any lessening of the commitment or diminishing of interests on their part cannot be excused. As called by the prime minister, they should join hands with the other forces to finalise the date for the polls so that all confusions and concerns are allayed. It is natural for the political parties to seek a larger share in the power enhancing arrangements, but they cannot go in for creating issues out of non-issues. Since the Maoists are yet to face the test of popularity, it is incumbent upon the party to ensure fuller integration in the mainstream democratic process. They should help to accelerate the process for normalisation of the political situation in the country through election to the constituent assembly. Posts and positions are less significant when it comes to joining hands to lend a hand in the process of nation building.

Source: The Rising Nepal, May 30, 2007

Nepal's Terai MPs not happy with new commission

Though Nepal's coalition government announced the formation of a probe panel to investigate the violence in the Terai plains this year, MPs from the area said they were still not satisfied.The dissenting MPs have paralysed the parliament for over a month over the issue.At a cabinet meeting held Friday to discuss the various crises gripping the country, the council of ministers announced a five-member commission to probe the mounting violence in the Terai plains in which nearly 80 people have died.Headed by Supreme Court judge Khilraj Regmi, the commission also includes a lower court judge Janardan Bahadur Khadka, a senior police officer, deputy inspector general of Nepal Police Rabindra Pratap Shah, an official of the state intelligence department, Sukha Chandra Jha of the National Investigation Centre, and joint attorney general Raj Narayan Pathak.

The commission has been asked to submit its report within a month.Despite the formation of a commission, Terai MPs Saturday said they were not satisfied with the gesture and would decide if they should allow the house to proceed.The stalled house was scheduled to convene Saturday afternoon.Bijay Gachchedar, a powerful MP from the plains and former minister from deposed prime minister Sher Bahadur Deuba's Nepali Congress (Democratic) party, said the plains legislators would hold an emergency meeting to decide on their next move.'The formation of the commission doesn't address all our demands,' Gachchedar told IANS. 'Though meant to probe violence targeting the Madhesi community (people mostly of Indian origin living in the southern plains), it doesn't include a single Madhesi.'

Different Terai groups had been demanding the setting up of the commission for a long time. Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala's government was finally forced to announce the commission as MPs from the southern plains, cutting across party lines, have obstructed parliament proceeding since last month, vowing they would not allow it to function till their demands were met.With the house remaining paralysed for over five weeks, the international community began pressuring the eight-party alliance to resolve the impasse. This week, ambassadors from the European Union countries based in Nepal, one of the kingdom's biggest donors, met both Koirala and Maoist chief Prachanda to express their growing concern at the 'deteriorating internal political situation'.Besides the commission, the dissenting MPs are demanding that the government scrap an earlier commission formed to delineate fresh election constituencies, especially in the Terai belt.'We want a fresh census in Terai,' Gachchedar said. 'New constituencies should be formed only after that.'

Thousands of Terai residents have been living without citizenship for decades, owing to neglect of the belt by a succession of governments. As a result, they can't vote or hold government jobs.Though the Maoist guerrillas signed a peace pact last year, signifying an end to their decade-old armed uprising demanding a republic, a fresh movement began in the Terai plains with the Diaspora demanding higher representation in the government and greater rights.Although the new government began issuing fresh citizenship certificates, Terai residents say thousands still lack them.After weeks of stalling, Koirala has finally called a meeting of top leaders of the eight parties Saturday. Leaders of the alliance are expected to come up with a fresh date for the much-awaited election.They have to also decide how to end a strike that has closed down Nepal's schools for nine days now. Another task at hand is to find fresh donors to continue with an ambitious drinking water supply project that runs the risk of being grounded once the Asian Development Bank's financial commitment ends June 30.Last but not the least, they also have to find a way of combating an imminent fuel crisis as supplies from India dry out because the main fuel transit point at Birgunj-Raxaul will close down due to elections in Bihar.

Source: Malaysia Sun, May 29, 2007

Nepal conundrum

Paul Soren
It has been over a year since the People's Movement (Jana Aandolan) of April 2006 forced King Gyanendra to abdicate royal throne and hand over the power to the loosely formed Seven-Party Alliance (SPA). That paved the way for the restoration of the dissolved House of Representatives. After that Nepal's peace process advanced rapidly with signing of agreements by the government and Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist). The government had also promised to hold Constituent Assembly (CA) polls by mid-June 2007, which has been deferred to November. However, people still nurse expectations that the nation would have permanent peace and they dream of a life of security. They harbour the hope that democracy would prevail by holding free and fair CA polls, and, subsequently, there would be a new, inclusive and democratic Constitution.

Currently, the situation in Nepal is fragile and there has been serious interruption in the peace process. The parties have developed dissimilar and contesting views on the whole process of state restructuring, monarchy, domestic policies, foreign policy, economy and power sharing. In addition, the Maoist-affiliated Young Communist League (YCL) cadre are engaged in looting and violence; there is continuation of unrest in Terai, demonstration by ethnic groups, Dalits, women and minority groups demanding for genuine space; and, most importantly, Madhesi parliamentarians and Maoists are constantly disrupting House proceedings. These developments carry the potential of derailing the peace process and delaying the election. In fact, Nepal's political transition is in a difficult phase as the government stands like a mute spectator and the parties show rank unwillingness to learn from their past mistakes.

The SPA and Maoists seem to be more concerned about power sharing and less about consolidation peace process in the country. The SPA is unable to resolve the issue of the monarchy and seems willing to give it space in a future arrangement. However, the first sitting of the CA is supposed to decide the fate of the monarchy, but some political parties' inclination as well as external pressure are obstructing the entire peace process. The NC and some rightist groups still harbour a soft corner for royalty. Moreover, the constituents of the SPA are not cooperating with the government to function smoothly. Rather, the parties are accusing each other for the government's failure to hold elections. The Left parties and rights are accusing Nepali Congress (NC) president Girija Prasad Koirala for dilly delaying things. Similarly, the NC, NSP and other rightist forces are blaming the Maoists and the UML for obstructing things.

Though the Maoists have joined mainstream politics, they are making tactical moves to move ahead with their political programme. They are making continuous efforts to make the interim parliament declare a Republic. Gauging the present political environment, Chairman Prachanda's announcement to form a possible Left Front to contest Assembly elections has also received wider acceptance from all other Left parties. The UML has come out openly supporting the Maoists demand for republicanism. This indicates that a new political polarisation is shaping up, and this equation will make differences in days ahead. Presently, the Left parties dominate the interim parliament and if they contest the polls jointly there is a likelihood of them sweeping the polls.

At the moment, the Maoists should not act like other political parties and understand the situation and cooperate. Of late, their acts and moves have raised suspicion of their real motives. The YCL cadres are creating havoc and terrorising people all over the country. The Maoist leadership should know that YCL cadres are getting out of control and they need to be controlled. It is also true that the Maoist combatants and cadres are now getting restless after giving up arms. Therefore, Maoist leaders should know whatever advantage they achieved should percolate down to their cadre at the ground level.

Apparently, the government has not been able to respond positively and cohesively to the demands made by the agitating groups. The demand for proportional representation, autonomy within a federal system and fair deal to the Terai problem demanded by the Teria population and strongly backed by the Terai parliamentarians, the Maoists, Madhesi Janaaadhikar Forum (MJF), JTMM, indigenous groups and other stakeholders is not being addressed properly. The decision-making process within the parties is also not holistic and their opinions seems to be divided.

There is an urgent need for the government to evolve understanding with the parties and other stakeholders for peace to prevail. The government has to act fast, taking into account genuine demands of the people. Moreover, unity among eight parties is a must and they should remain united till the CA election. The bigger parties, especially the NC, NC(D), UML and Maoists need to be extra cautious. In order to consolidate the peace process, the parties should put all their efforts and commitments to establish genuine democracy. Further delay could certainly threaten Nepal's new-found peace.

Source: The Pioneer, May 26, 2007