Wiser course

The Melamchi drinking water project has hit a roadblock at the eleventh hour, when a foreign private company, Severn Trent Water International (ST), was on the verge of taking over the management of the distribution of drinking water in the Valley under a loan conditionality the Asian Development Bank (ADB) attached to its commitment of US$120 million, which accounts for less than one-third of the total project cost. The Nepali media splashed ST’s controversial records in several other countries, including Britain. Hisila Yami, the Maoist minister in charge of drinking water, has taken a firm stand against awarding the contract to such a company, all the more so because the pre-interim government had agreed to take it on without meeting the financial regulations on bidding for a contract. Amid the controversy, ST announced this week that it had withdrawn from the deal. However, ADB seems to insist that the ST conditionality should be honoured or it cannot keep its commitment. As much is reported to have been said by ADB officials in their meeting with Maoist chairman Prachanda on Wednesday.

Given the ST pullout and the adverse circumstances that have developed in the country for it, the issue should not be one of sticking to it, but of finding a way out to keep the Melamchi project alive. ADB was formed to assist in the development of poor countries and its partnership with Nepal is a long one. Sticking with ST sounds neither wise nor advisable in the emergent situation, as it would find a hostile environment in which to work and win public support after so much exposure of the negative kind. And it would impact adversely too on ADB in the eye of the Nepali public, as questions will be asked about its extraordinary interest in this company. Ideally, the concern of a development bank like ADB should be that the money it lends is spent in the project specified and that its principal and interest are paid in time. Extraneous conditionalities raise doubts about the motives of multilateral agencies, as ADB, the World Bank, and the IMF are not unaware of.Certainly, questions of Nepal going back on its earlier commitment may also be raised. But when it comes to perceived national interests, much should not be made of Nepal’s credibility among the donors. Now the only wiser course would be to look at the management of water distribution in the Valley from a new angle.

The question of why a foreign company, and not Nepalis themselves, should be favoured is yet to be convincingly answered. If the contract is to be awarded only to a foreign company or to Nepali ones alone, or to the best bidder in global competition, the matter should be settled first. But everything ought to be decided in a transparent manner in the interests of the poor Nepalis and that would entail steps aimed at cutting cost, plugging huge leakage of water, desisting from charging the consumers unfairly for water use, fighting corruption in water management, and exacting accountability. Everything is not lost yet. There still is time to make up.

Source: The Himalayan Times, May 25, 2007

Electoral Alliance and the Shifting Political Paradigm in Nepal

Siddhartha Thapa

It seems as though the political bickering is coming to an end, after the realization of the importance to preserve the eight party coalition government. However, the damage has already been done. The blame game after the postponement of elections and continuous Maoist intimidation (including the attack of a police post in Banke and the burning of state owned NEA in Bardiya), has most certainly strained the relationship amongst coalition partners. The Congress and the Maoists are poles apart; but, they cannot afford to remain rigid. Koirala has gambled his last card by inducting the Maoists into the government and, the Maoists know there are no other viable, legitimate alternatives to the present set up. The success and failure for both Koirala and Prachanda largely depends on their commitment to adhere to the Comprehensive Peace Agreement signed in November 2006.

Nonetheless, a coldness has already sunk into the eight party alliance. It might be realistic at this stage to conclude that the unity is superficial and perhaps just a façade. While it is imperative to keep the eight party alliance intact within the government (to conduct the polls in the near future), it is conceivable that the differences amongst the electoral alliances will eventually lead to a division amongst the coalition partners of the present government.
Observing the political sequences over the last month, there are four incidents that are likely to give shape to Nepali politics over the next few months. These incidents include: the call for a left unity during Lenin Day, the axing of Constitutional Monarchy in the party stature by RJP (and then RPP), and the Madeshi alliance initiated by NSP. These three incidents will compel the Janjatis to open a fourth front. The crucial dividing factor is that theoretically, the end result of the constituent assembly elections may not be "politically" acceptable to all.

The call for unity among leftist forces in the country should not come as a surprise. This was predictable from day one, and it was only a matter of time before this left unity call was initiated and materialized. Much of the leftist alliance hinges on how the UML demonstrates its flexibility to unite with the Maoists and other fringe leftist parties. In retrospect, the leftist unity poses some tough questions to the UML and the Maoists.
Even though the UML is seen as one of the most vociferous proponents of republicanism in the country after February 1st, technically speaking, it had never removed republicanism from its party statute. In fact, the UML had strategically accepted constitutional monarchy as a base to consolidate the cause for republicanism in the future. It may be possible that the social construct of the party leadership and its rank and file, will ultimately obstruct the desired goal of leftist unity.

Although the left might unite over the issue of republicanism, it will be intriguing to observe whether or not Madhav Nepal will commit a political hara-kiri by forging a long term alliance with the Maoists. An alliance with the Maoists most definitely will mark the downfall of the UML and moderate leftist politics. Can the UML afford to deviate from moderate left? Equally important, will the Maoists ink a compromise transient from their ideology of radical communism?
The Axing of Constitutional Monarchy from the party statures of the RJP and RPP are also symbolic. Following the RJP's move, journalists and poltical pundits were quick to call for the early abdication of King Gyanendra. However, the Royalists failed to grasp the political situation when RJP President SB Thapa axed Constitutional Monarchy from the party's statute. With the axing of constitutional monarchy from the party statute, both RJP and RPP are in a position to align with the Congress for elections.

Theoretically speaking, the strategic move initiated by Thapa, makes his party an ideological equal to the Congress. The survival of democratic parties will be determined by their inclination to forge political alliances, which oppose and challenge the left wing parties during elections. It is important that this democratic force, unanimously devises electoral alliances and stratagems which keep the Maoists as their focal point.
The survival of democratic discourse depends on the unity of democratic forces initiated by Koirala. Gopal Kranti, a Maoist leader in Dhankuta, voiced his party's opinion when he declared the ethnic movement in Nepal was "dollar funded". The notion of self-determination, based on ethnicity, as espoused by the Maoists, has become their biggest political nightmare. It must be noted that the Janjatis and Madeshis supported the idea of 'self determination' with the idea of promoting and preserving their religion, culture and an increased participation in the State.

However, communism as propagated by Karl Marx and Hegel, advances the philosophy of an 'end of history', which basically envisions a classless society, that directly contravenes with what the ethnic minorities actually want. The biggest threat to the ethnic minorities is not from centrist democratic forces. It is the communists that are aiming to destroy and cleanse the existing socio-cultural fabric of the country.The Madeshi and the Janjatis are both initiating dialogue to form an electoral alliance, as they fear such repercussions. However, they seem to be equally disappointed with the centrist forces.Nonetheless, the presence of Pradip Giri in Delhi as a facilitator and Upendra Yadav's revelation that his forum was ideologically closer to the centrist forces, must have comforted some of the nervous democrats in Kathmandu. The Janjati front is yet to emerge as an electoral option but it might be prudent to note, that with time, even their allegiance will be closer to the centrist forces.

Source: Nepali Perspective, May 24, 2007

Nepal: Maoists start singing blues

Maila Baje

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

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

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

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

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

Source: Newsblaze, May 22, 2007

Sounds like ever

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

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

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

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

Source: The Himalayan Times, May 23, 2007

Nation-building: Emerging challenges to peace process

Dhurba Rizal

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

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

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

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

Source: The Himalayan Times, May 23, 2007