Protect ya neck

The constituent assembly (CA) elections are just four and a half months away. Ideas for polarisation have been floated. Divided parties have made efforts at reunification, encouraged or pressured by friendly forces within and outside the country. The Nepal Sadbhavana Party (Anandidevi) and the Nepal Sadbhavana Party recently merged. After the NSP had supported regression and joined governments after the royal coup of October 4, 2002, a faction had broken away to form the NSP (Anandidevi), which joined the anti-regression Seven-Party Alliance. The leaders of the parent Nepali Congress (NC) and the NC (D) have intensified efforts at achieving reunification as they think it is necessary to improve the Congress poll prospects. Other suggested realignments include a pro-republican front, a Left front, a front of rightists and centrists, or a non-left front, including also one or more of the agitating Madhesi groups.

Amid all this medley, it seems, the popular view favours strengthening the unity of the eight-party alliance (EPA), at least until the CA elections. The case for this is strongest as it was these parties that clinched the historic 12-point agreement, spearheaded Jana Andolan-2, signed the eight-point agreement, the Comprehensive Peace Agreement, etc. and made the Interim Constitution and formed the interim legislature and government. The onus of translating these agreements and commitments into action in letter and spirit therefore falls squarely on the EPA. Unless the CA polls are successfully held and the understanding between the EPA constituents is retained, it will be difficult to carry out the pledges made to the people. Those who are outside the EPA might choose to strike out on their own as the CA polls get closer. However, the EPA owes it to the people who put it in power through the historic people’s movement that none of its constituents becomes a party to any new political combination at the cost of the alliance’s unity.

Some political leaders held the view during recent public debate or discussions between leaders of Left parties concerning Left unity that any such unity should not threaten the EPA unity. They may be right. However, the EPA leaders should also be careful to guard against any bid from any quarter to break the alliance apart, something that had been attempted soon after the historic 12-point agreement. To send a unified and encouraging message to the people ahead of the CA polls, the eight parties would do well to consider organising joint mass meetings and campaigns across the country, particularly in the face of designs to derail the CA polls and to cause disturbances or violence. The political leaders and workers should make no further delay in fanning out into the villages with their message for the people. For this, however, the leadership of each party has to be clear about what message it wants to convey. At the same time, the EPA constituents need to expand their area of agreement, particularly on vital issues such as the fate of the monarchy and the structure of federalism.

Source: The Himalayan Times, July 10, 2007

Ambassadorial confirmation : Challenges before parliamentary panel

Madhav Shrestha

Apparently under pressure of circumstantial politics, the government is now sending an agreed list of candidates to the Special Hearing Committee of the Interim Legislature- Parliament for their appointment as ambassadors. More than a dozen embassies have remained vacant for over a year now. The Hearings Committee has now been asked to confirm appointments as required by the amended Interim Constitution of Nepal. Indeed, the Committee is entrusted with a big responsibility of putting competent persons in the embassies, especially in the ones with high diplomatic importance.

People expect the Committee to test the abilities and suitability of government appointees keeping in mind the fact that the appointees will represent Nepal in foreign capitals. Indeed, the selected ones should be able to work to enhance national prestige and achieve national goals. However, a serious question arises whether appointees with divergent political leanings and ideologies and varied social and educational backgrounds can work in unison. Critics are quick to point out the inherent defects in the selection process. They allege that the norms adopted by the government are bound to create partisan feelings as the appointed diplomats will be more loyal to their parties than to the nation. Unfortunately, most appointees have neither diplomatic nor educational background required for the job; nor have they received good training and gained enough experience to carry on their duties and responsibilities satisfactorily.

Most politically stable countries (both developing and developed) appoint envoys from the well-established diplomatic service. At the moment, Nepal does not have a developed diplomatic service as political decision makers have never given a serious thought to institutionalising the diplomatic service in the last five decades. Such a trend persists to date with the current crop of political leaders sticking to the policies pursued by Rana despots and Panchayati oligarchs.

Among highly developed countries, the US government does continue the practice of assigning ambassadors and other envoys from among the people close to the president and his party. Such political appointments account for about one-third of total diplomatic appointees. This practice has worked in the US as even those left out have great opportunities to study and practice diplomacy outside the government circle in America. There is a pool of talent and appropriately educated people for various diplomatic jobs in the country, but Nepal has neither a well-placed structure, nor do the political parties have a proper mechanism to produce good diplomats to serve the country.

The leaders of the eight political parties should have weighed the pros and cons of appointing people of their own parties as ambassadors without considering the credentials and potentials of the proposed candidates. At present it is doubtful if the politicians are serving the nation or merely promoting their own men and women at a great loss to the country. As national leaders they should have formed a committee to find persons of integrity and relevant knowledge for ambassadorial appointments. By doing so, they would have contributed not only to the promotion of our national interest, but also enhanced their own popularity among common Nepalis. Unfortunately, they did not dare to venture on a new path, choosing to serve their own narrow interests.At this critical juncture in Nepal’s history, the Special Hearings Committee as an organ of the supreme Parliament must minutely examine the appropriateness of the governmental action in appointing the persons in question as ambassadors. The important question the Committee should ask itself is whether the ambassadors serve the country as national representatives or merely as party representatives promoting their narrow interests? The committee has to keep in mind that the image and standing of the eight parties has taken a nosedive among the people in the last year as no pro-people measures have been adopted despite the high sounding slogans of the eight political parties.

People are now eagerly waiting to see how the committee will go about the confirmation process. This will demand great acumen as the ambassadors’ job demands different abilities according to the countries they are appointed to.The confirmation process in case of high Election Commission officials and Supreme Court judges appeared only perfunctory. The process was neither transparent nor adequate. Such a perfunctory act can hardly serve the intended purpose. Such token gestures will be meaningless and futile. Seen in such a context, can the committee exercise enough caution and sensitivity and equip itself with necessary tools and mechanism to make its hearing process praiseworthy?


Source: The Himalayan Times, July 10, 2007

That’s why

The three-day celebration of King Gyanendra’s birthday that concluded yesterday was hardly a smooth affair. It was not unnatural for the palace to want to celebrate the diamond jubilee, even though the King has no constitutional status or authority. Everybody has a right to celebrate his or her birthday, so the King’s right to observe his birthday is beyond dispute. If the three-day gala had been made a private and quiet affair within the palace, it would hardly have given any provocation to the political parties. It was less the dinners and teas the palace hosted than the attempt to turn the occasion into a public event in some sort of a ‘show of strength’ that riled the political parties. The programme included a procession of royalists to the palace and presentation of a letter of felicitation to the King. The contents of the scroll went against the spirit of Jana Andolan-2 and the Interim Constitution and seemed to support the King’s controversial Democracy Day message.

Both the circumstances and timing helped bring both event and intention into sharp focus. At a time when the eight parties and the general public hold deep doubts about royal attitude towards the constituent assembly (CA) elections, the manner of celebration was ill advised. Obviously, the wide perception, including that of the political parties that the palace was engaged or likely to be engaged in conspiracy against the CA polls, led to the incorporation into the Interim Constitution an amendment that empowers the Interim Legislature-Parliament to abolish the monarchy even before the polls if the palace were deemed to be involved in any ‘serious’ conspiracy against the CA elections. The diamond jubilee controversy may strengthen the contention of those who want a republic right away.

It is too late for anybody, even the palace, now to try to reverse the political course the country has taken. While every move of the palace is under public glare, it would only prove to be counterproductive for the monarchy if it were seen to be going against popular will. The best thing would be to be resigned to the upcoming verdict of the CA. The birthday celebration also brought one thing to the fore — the government, the political parties, and the diplomats based in the capital stayed away from the functions at the palace, declining invitations. In yet another significant move, the King has been relieved of his age-old cultural role of gracing the bhoto at Bhotojatra. These speak volumes. The royalists could not take out the procession amid protests, and they had to enter the palace gate individually. Low turnout marked both the functions and the parties at the palace. Sadly, clashes erupted between YCL activists and royalists at some places, and several of the royalists were beaten up. It was an overreaction on the YCL’s part and it was wrong. Physical violence must be checked. But the mindset that betrays great difficulty in accepting the changed situation and the people’s verdict poses a greater danger to the political and peace process that has been set in motion.

Source: The Himalayan Times, July 9, 2007

Separatism in South Asia: Lessons for Nepal

Mahendra Lawoti

As Nepal debates the model of federalism it should adopt, it will be fruitful to review experiences from elsewhere. Not only should we study the various forms of federalism but also we should analyse violent conflicts associated with autonomy and separatist movements, breakup of countries as well as management of autonomy and separatist movements. South Asia is an excellent region to study for this purpose, not only because other countries are similar to Nepal socio-economically and culturally, but also because the region has seen all the abovementioned cases played out.

The Sri Lankan Tamils demanded an autonomous region after the Sinhalese majoritarian governments formulated policies that discriminated against them right after independence. The minority Tamils could not influence policy-making process. In the 60s and 70s, the government signed autonomy accords with the Tamils but did not implement them. Rejection of federalism alienated Tamils further, fuelling the separatist movement. The Tamils began to support the radical ‘boys,’ the Tamil Tigers, after the growth in perception that moderate Tamil parties were unable to deliver autonomy. The irony about the Sri Lankan conflict is that the rejection of federalism fuelled it but today federalism may not be sufficient to settle it.

The concept of Pakistan emerged with the rejection of demand for federalism. During the Indian independence movement, the Muslim League demanded religious federalism. They perceived that without autonomy to Muslims, Hindu values and norms would be imposed on them. The Indian National Congress rejected the demand. In response, the ML proposed a separate State of Pakistan. When the Congress finally agreed to federalism along religious line, it was too little too late.

The independence of Bangladesh too is associated with rejection of demands for autonomy. Pakistan flirted with federalism by granting Bangladesh federal powers, nonetheless power remained centralised in West Pakistan. The Bengalis of East Pakistan demanded greater autonomy. Led by the Awami League leader Mujib, they came up with the famous six-point demands. West Pakistan rejected the demands and imprisoned Mujib. It sparked the independence movement, which Pakistan attempted to suppress. Bangladesh became independent after India intervened on behalf of East Pakistan. The lesson from Bangladesh is that centralised federalism and suppression of autonomy movements can backfire.

Post-independence India managed many of its conflicts by adopting linguistic and ethnic federalism. Nehru divided India along administrative federal units. Linguistic groups opposed it and launched a movement for linguistic federalism. With the bitter memory of partition still afresh, Nehru conceded to the demands and re-divided India on linguistic lines in the 50s. It not only settled the conflict but also eroded the base for the separatist movement in Tamil Nadu. People see no reason to engage in separatist movements, which are costly, if they are granted autonomy and right to self-government. Separatist movements get support when autonomy is denied.

India addressed the separatist Punjab movement by granting more autonomy. Likewise, many separatist and autonomy movements in the North East were addressed by granting autonomy along ethnic lines. Of course all problems of the North East are not settled and some critics in Nepal point this as an inadequacy of ethnic federalism. They are off the mark. Could the violent separatist movements of the Mizos, Manipuris have been managed without regional autonomy? The shortcoming in India, if any, was that the centre used the power of the Upper House to create new regions only after long violent movements. A peaceful way to grant autonomy would have settled the problems, at a lesser cost.Though India has successfully managed many conflicts, the Kashmir problem has grown. While India granted more autonomy in other parts of the country, the centre took back substantive autonomy granted to J&K. This also supports the thesis that autonomy can mitigate conflicts while taking it away can create big problems.The lessons for Nepal are clear. When ethnic and linguistic federalism were denied, it led to violent conflicts, separatist movements, and even formation of new states. When demands for autonomy were met, on the other hand, many violent conflicts were settled and separatist movement died down. It is also clear that ethnic/linguistic autonomy, if granted in early phase of the movements, can help douse separatist movements. However, settlement is much harder once the movements gain momentum. And repression only fuels the movements. Autonomy movements are gaining momentum in Nepal. Their trajectories will depend on the response of the state still controlled by a dominant group.

Source: The Himalayan Times, July 9, 2007

Maoists Transfer Nepalese Money from India to Switzerland

Halshi Bash

I am a Swiss national and practice Buddhism. I have been to Lumbini, Nepal, the birth place of Siddharta Gautama and other places like Kathmandu, Pokhara, Lukla, Gorkha and several Himalayan regions, many times. I love Nepal the way Nepalese do.
The reason I have so much affection towards Nepal may be because my professor and mentor, the late Tony Hagen, renowned economist and very popular with Nepalese people, loveed Nepal more than his own country, Switzerland. He never tired of talking about Nepal.

Though I am a native of Zurich, the German speaking city of Switzerland, I am currently residing in Rue de Rhone (Rhone lane or avenue) of Geneva, the French speaking part of the Swiss confederation. I have been here three years because of my employment contract with the Swiss Bank, "Credit Suisse". All of Switzerland's major banks are located within walking distance.
It is the reason most of the employees of different banks come to a very popular eatery, "cafe de Geneve" to have their breakfast and lunch. At these times, we always try to outsmart our colleagues and friends of different banks by initiating a very hot or new item of talk. Swiss tradition is that whoever has a new or very hot topic is considered to be a smarter than the others. But the topic should be genuine and authentic. Anyone can lose his or her image for a whole lifetime if he or she tells an unreliable story. So, the Swiss people have a habit of speaking based on authenticity.

Very recently, we were all outsmarted by our friends at another bank. I was particularly shocked because the topic was related to Nepal, my dream country and by faith my mother country because Buddhism was born in Nepal.
The very hot item of talk was so shocking that if the people of Nepal listened to it, they would have a million watt electric shock. The leaders of the Maoist Party including ministers of the present Nepal Government, namely, Prachanda (Pushpa K. Dahal), Dr. Baburam Bhattarai, Krishna Mahara, Hishila Yami and others were here to transfer a huge amount of money from Indian Banks to major Swiss Banks. The amount of that money is even more shocking because it is in the hundreds of million Euros. If the people of Nepal ask the Swiss Government, it can influence the Swiss Banks for the disclosure of the amounts and the account holders.

For my part, as a person having deep affection towards Nepal, I will do my best to find things in details but the Nepali people should understand my limitations as an Assistant Manager. The Nepali people should ask the Swiss Government to freeze the money as soon as possible otherwise the Swiss politicians could be bribed by the Banks to keep the Bank's secrecy.
It has also been said that some European Union members are helping the Maoists to transfer money to Swiss Banks. Why are the capitalist western countries helping extremist radical Maoists is beyond my understanding which could be a good subject of research for the people of Nepal.

Halshi BashGeneve, Switzerland (CH)

Source: News Blaze, July 7, 2007