What Would A Maoist Nepali Economy Be Like?

John Child

Maoist leaders' speeches at the annual Chambers of Commerce meeting contained comforting commitments but plenty of radical rhetoric too.

The 41st annual meeting of the Federation of Nepalese Chambers of Commerce and Industries opened this week with speeches from the usual slate of ministers and business leaders, but the agenda also included time for Maoist supremo Prachanda and number-two Dr. Baburam Bhattarai. The Maoists sought to calm fears by repeating earlier assurances that they are not anti-capitalist, that they do not intend to confiscate private property, and that they will not prohibit foreign investment.

But the reassurances came with a hefty dose of rhetoric at odds with the promises. Prachanda said that economic progress depends on doing away with 'rents and commissions' to foreign 'compradors.' Rent is a term from classic economics: It is the difference between income generated and cost incurred - the profit - from putting an additional unit of capital or labor into use. To Communists though, rent is 'unearned profit': In both the Soviet Union and Mao's China, that meant all private profits.

The word comprador also predates Marx but took on new meaning in Communist economics. Originally a term for a Chinese agent working with foreign traders as a business intermediary, Marx and Mao used the word to describe those who serve and profit from imperialism. Imperialism in Lenin's definition is 'the highest form of capitalism,' that of multinational corporations and international capital movements. Prachanda and Bhattarai also railed against 'feudal and reactionary interests' and 'foreigners and their commission agents who waged jihad against us' and 'looted the nation's assets.' Perhaps the words rent and comprador are just more Communist jargon. But if the Maoists mean what they say, their vision of the Nepali economy is quite different from today's picture.

The Maoists want 'national capitalists' but not 'foreign agents.' Many of the country's major business houses are Indian-owned; most of the commercial banks are foreign-run joint partnerships. Many in the audience must have wondered if they would be considered compradors, benefiting from the global economy. The Maoists want foreign investment, but Bhattarai explicitly ruled out education, health, communications, and transportation. Maoist water minister Yami's blocking of the Melamchi deal suggests that foreign involvement in public works is out too.
The Maoists say they approve of private property, but they have also called for legal limits on how much of it anyone can own, in the name of land reform. Profit is OK, but not 'unfair' profit. Foreign money may be acceptable in some areas, but not foreigners or their agents. No commissions means no corruption around investments, say the Maoists.

In his speech, Prachanda said that foreigners waged 'media war' on his party after they refused to take the commission offered for letting the Melamchi deal go through. To dramatize a commitment to good government, Maoist ministers signed over all their personal property to the party and pledged to accumulate none during their tenure. Anti-smuggling efforts by the YCL too are part of the Maoists' stated clean-up campaign.

Reducing corruption and influence would certainly be good, but ongoing demands from the Maoists for 'donations' cost businesses as much as corruption does, and the lack of any accounting from the party for more than $15 million given to them by the government to support their troops in the cantonments doesn't bode well for transparency in a Maoist Nepal.
'We are still in the process of resolving political issues,' Prachanda told the business leaders. 'Therefore the country's modernization is a distant dream.' Those in his audience who took the rhetoric seriously may hope that Prachanda's dream remains far away, whether they consider themselves compradors or not.

Source: News Blaze, June 5, 2007

Security For Polls

PRIME Minister Girija Prasad Koirala has expressed the commitment to maintain perfect security to hold the constituent assembly election in a free, fair and peaceful manner. Speaking at a function in Kathmandu Monday, Prime Minister Koirala said that the government would take firm action against anyone who tries to take the law into his hand and create chaos in the country. There are institutions to enforce security, and it is the duty of all citizens to respect the law of the land. If something goes wrong, the law should be allowed to take its course, and the law enforcement agencies to take the necessary action. Democracy is a system of the rule of law, and there should be no attempts from any individual or groups to violate it. Prime Minister Koirala's remarks come in the light of attempts by certain groups to take the law in their hands. The rule of law and security must be strictly maintained so that people can feel safe and secure. Nepal is currently passing through a transitional stage. At times such as these, there are always unscrupulous people and groups trying to take advantage of the fluid situation. But the commitment of Prime Minister is strong, and, hopefully, lawbreakers will not be spared under any circumstances.

Nepal is in the process of holding the constituent assembly election to restructure the state, ensure inclusive democracy and complete the peace process. The eight political parties have agreed to hold the constituent assembly election by November this year. The election is a national priority. For holding a free, fair and fearless election, the law and order must be perfect so that people can cast their verdict without fear. It is the duty of all the political forces to create a conducive atmosphere for holding the constituent assembly election in time, which will chart out a new course of national politics and create a new Nepal. The acts of intimidation, kidnapping and threat are likely to destablise the ongoing political process in the country. There are some elements that are trying to sabotage the political process and the constituent assembly election. The acts of threat and intimidation not only violate law and order but are also against any democratic culture. Thus, the government must take stern action against such elements, and all democratic forces should work together for creating a conducive atmosphere for holding the constituent assembly polls.

Source: The Rising Nepal, June 6, 2007

Congress Unification Bid Gains Speed

Narayan Upadhyay

The bid to unite the Nepali Congress has been gaining unprecedented momentum. The Nepali Congress, which was reluctant to hold talks with the leaders of the Nepali Congress (Democratic) in the past, has now formed a three-member team to thrash out solutions to the much-expected party unification. Unlike in the past, both sides seem to be serious about party unification. The top party leaders of both the Congresses, who in the past had only given lip service to party integration, have been active in parleys to merge the parties.

Communist dominance

The current national political scenario in which the communist parties of different hues are declaring themselves as the dominant political force is the paramount reason that is bringing both the Congresses together after splitting five years ago. The fear of imminent unification among Nepal's left parties, including the Maoists and CPN-UML, might have impelled the Congress parties to come together in recent times.

Another reason why the leaders of both the Congresses and their ranks and files have been pushed towards unification is the upcoming Constituency Assembly (CA) elections. In the changed political context, the Constituent Assembly holds the key to charting out the kind of political, economic, social and cultural course the nation would follow in the future. After the success of the People's Movement in April last year, there has been a demand to replace the monarchy with republicanism. The communists, mainly the Maoists and the UML, are leading the republican agenda. Some sections within both the Congresses are, too, in favor of a republic, but the top brasses from both the Congresses have not made their intention clear about the fate of the monarchy. The communist parties are making a clarion call for declaring Nepal a republic from the Legislature Parliament, but leaders of both the Congresses do not support the communists. They want the issue of monarchy to be decided by the very first meeting of the upcoming constituent assembly.

There are other pressing issues that make the CA an important entity for the Nepali Congress. Apart from deciding on the future role for the monarch, the CA will help prepare a new constitution and decide on the model and style of how the government should function. The demands of an all-inclusive governing system, where people of different castes, sex, race and regions would have fair representation are also to be tackled. By now, it has become obvious that a political party, which can elect a majority of their members to the CA, can have their say when the CA takes up its epochal decisions on the various important political matters and socio-economic issues. Unification is, thus, necessary for the Congress parties to safeguard their interests when the historic CA takes place. If both these groups go to the CA elections separately, they are unlikely to win enough places, which would be suicidal for them.

As a party that has been waging a struggle to establish democracy in the nation for the past six decades, the Nepali Congress thinks that the onus of safeguarding democracy in the nation lies mainly on its shoulders. Amidst mounting fear that the Nepalese Left would form an alliance to dictate terms by taking advantage of the fluid political situation and capture the maximum number of positions in the CA, both the Congresses have no choice other than to hasten their unification attempt. Several other significant matters have also speeded up the Congress unification bid. Leaders of both the sides have realised that the democratisation of Nepal's politics has received a hammering following the split in the Nepali Congress five years ago. The forces harbouring a wish to play against democracy and supporting a dictatorial regime had the best of their times when former Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba and his supporters divided the Nepali Congress vertically. The break-up of the then ruling party gave enough leverage to the King to usurp power.

On the other hand, the split in the Congress not only made the voice of both the Nepali Congress and Nepali Congress (Democratic) weak, it also discredited the nation's entire democratic movement.At this hour of political turmoil, unification of the two strong political parties that pursue democratic principles and values is anticipated by a lager section of the Congress ranks and files.The recent meeting between Nepali Congress President Girija Prasad Koirala and Krishna Prasad Bhattarai is an indication that the unification process is moving in the right direction. The process has received further backing with the envoys of the world's largest democracies such as India, the USA, Great Britain and other European Nations pressing the top leaders of both the sides to merge their parties. The envoys are concerned that chaos may reign supreme should a party like the Nepali Congress remain divided for long.

Future course

The lingering political crisis, the rise of communist domination and a need to win a majority in the upcoming CA elections are reasons for the Congress parties to move firmly towards unification. The talk teams from both the sides must now act positively to bring the unification process to a logical end. The Congress leaders cannot afford to be indifferent to the much-awaited unification. Otherwise, the leaders and the Congress as a party will fail to become the main players in deciding the future course of Nepali politics. A united and consolidated Congress is necessary not only for its survival in the wake of the communists' rising dominance but also to steer the nation towards full-fledged democracy. In short, united the Congress would stand, divided it would fall.

Source: The Rising Nepal, June 6, 2007

Curtain up or down

The row over Sitaram Prasain, a former chairman of a development bank accused of committing financial irregularities amounting to 280 million rupees, threatens to affect the relationship between Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala and the CPN-Maoist. The Young Communist League (YCL), the youth wing of the Maoists, had taken Prasain into custody on Sunday and made him public at the Open Air Theatre the next day, before handing him over to the Metropolitan Police at Hanuman Dhoka. The PM, responding to a complaint by an FNCCI delegation at Baluwatar on Monday, got into an angry mood and branded the YCL as “Young Criminal League” for its handling of Prasain, and declared, “I’ll spare nobody. Nobody is allowed to make a mockery of law and order”. But Krishna Bahadur Mahara, a Maoist minister and government spokesperson, yesterday replied by terming Koirala’s statements the result of a “criminal mindset”, and Sagar, chief of the YCL’s Valley Bureau, labelled Koirala as the PM of “a handful of corrupt and criminal people”, threatening to stage nationwide protests until he withdrew his comment.

But Prasain is not a person for Koirala and the Maoists to fight over. There is no doubt that Prasain’s case needs to be taken to its logical conclusion. But for that, the proceedings must be initiated. The Nepal Rastra Bank (NRB) was reported to have sent a letter nine months ago (on Bhadra 26, 2063 BS) to the police headquarters asking the latter to arrest Prasain. But the authorities did not act on it, and he was rather seen to be hobnobbing with senior police officials and political leaders. That led to public doubts that he enjoyed political and official protection. The extent of his offence can be determined only after the due process of law is completed, but his public image is far from glorious. That is why Koirala’s remarks might prove a liability to him, besides the fact that he has proved helpless in dealing with financial crimes.

Nobody except a competent authority has the right to sit in judgement and pronounce verdicts. But any member of the public can help the authorities by getting hold of the accused and handing him or her to the police, as such instances abound in the country. Besides, governments have promoted the slogan that every citizen is a policeman or policewoman without uniform. The PM’s charge against YCL puts him under an obligation either to withdraw his charge or to act against the YCL. In addition, it is the duty of the government to provide justice to the shareholders who had invested 700 million rupees in the ill-fated bank. Of course, the accused should receive a fair trial. Koirala would improve the government’s and his own reputation by seizing the initiative to crack down on financial corruption, an evil that has eaten so much into the body politic that the general people seem to despair of any good coming of any commitments of the political leaders. No government can create a new Nepal by showing helplessness in the face of financial scandals and irregularities.

Source: The Himalayan Times, June 6, 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