| Username |
Post |
| Paschim |
Posted
on 28-Apr-02 01:38 AM
All right, enough of frivolity re. women. To make up for it, here are some of my serious Sunday morning thoughts on matters EQUALLY important. Please join.
---------
Politics and Silver Hopes
by Paschim.
Reading the New York Times of April 24, 2002, where Sher Bahadur Deuba is cited as implying that the King risks “losing his crown” should he choose to seek a more active role, it struck me that something very important is happening in Nepali politics as we speak. Let’s analyze history as it is being made. Some quick thoughts:
1. Politics is about power. Since the Unification in 1769, only two camps have competed overtly for it in our country: i) the palace-military-aristocracy nexus, and ii) literate civilians. Given the country’s literacy rate of 1% in 1950, the emphasis on “literate” civilians is paramount. Of the 233 years since unification, the first camp has ruled Nepal for 93% of the time, except: i) 1951 to 1955, ii) 1959-1960, and iii) 1990-2002. Civilian Nepal – crudely, the “Janata” – have thus only ruled for 17 of the 233 years. Since 1951, the perpetual competition for power between these two camps – Janata and Durbar - has been ironical and against an old wisdom from my birthplace Gorkha: “Praja moto bhaye durbar baliyo hunechha”. Failure to sort out the victor through legitimate means in the Raja-Praja tussle has been a great Nepali tragedy, most stark example of retrogression being the royal coup of 1960.
2. While these two camps in Nepal are dominated by distinct caste groups: the first by Rana-Shah Thakuris, and the second by Brahmin-Chhetris, power struggle in Nepal is fortunately not for ethnicity specific control of resources, but thank your respective gods, for political and economic well-being of the populace, however flawed the execution of will. People in power so far have not been representative of the population at large, although both have claimed so for legitimacy purposes. The first camp’s tacit policy has been to appease the ethnic groups through token patronage while the second camp’s claims are more benign and substantive with them having struggled for a democratic system that opens opportunities for all. Accepting the uproar against Bahun-Chhetri domination of the civil service and political parties now, I take a broader sweep of history as a guide to shape my hopes: these early anomalies are bound to be redressed in the very democratic system now seemingly dominated by the Bahun-Chhetri literates. Democracies, by definition, are the only representative regimes with built-in mechanisms for redresses of skewed power: there're elections, legal provisos, civic activism, media, literacy, lobbying, constructive dissent, etc. Believe in the collective wisdom of maturing citizens, not revolutionary quick fixes, or ethnic hatred.
3. While Nepal’s political irony has been the Palace-Janata tension for power, there are two successful precedents of their unity. The first is the Unification itself that began with Raja-Praja unity in Gorkha. The second is the overthrow of the Ranas. Not that these processes were flawless: Unification was scarred by the crushing suppression of ethnic autonomies, while in overthrowing the Ranas, King Tribhuwan’s cooperation wasn’t exactly ideal. He vacated the throne and just fled en-masse, engineering a crisis of legitimacy. And legitimacy – moral or mathematical - is the only thing that matters in politics. So it worked, but I have often wondered if the outcome would have been better for Nepal if Tribhuwan had not been so risk-averse and instead flown to Palpa according to Nepali Congress plans to declare a parallel government there. Going by just-released memoirs of Nara Shumsher, Nehru would have had no problem with this as long as he was shown that the “people” were behind the king. What Nehru asked for in Delhi was just a list of signatures of court officials saying they wanted the king and some change, which was duly furnished much to Mohan Shumsher’s chagrin. I posit that the Rana-Congress truce would have been of better form if negotiations were held within Nepal, in Palpa or Morang, with subtle diplomatic facilitation on the part of the Indians. This would have been possible if Tribhuwan thought a little bit more about the country than women. The so-called Delhi Compromise was not a compromise, and although a great achievement, was nevertheless flawed in sustaining civilian control of power. Period between 1950 and 196O proved so chaotic that a poet-king ended up becoming an emperor.
Continued.
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 28-Apr-02 01:40 AM
4. I have argued that the year 2001 shattered the myths of the palace and the military. We now know they are weaker than previously thought. The June 2001 massacre and the slow advance of the military against the Maoists indicate that contrary to ugly rumors, the King, backed by the military, is not in a position to take over the country to rule. So, there is zero possibility of a 1960-like coup. It can be done, but won’t last a month. The fact that even Deuba is saying the king risks “losing his crown” is illuminating. The best hope for the king’s longevity is for him to exercise influence only through his weekly audiences with the elected PM. He should reign, but never rule. The first camp has now been defeated for good. People’s power, a flawed but the only legitimate force in politics has won in Nepal too. Democracy is here to stay and thrive. I know it’s hard to believe this in the current climate of unease, but take a broader view of history, pray with respect for all Nepalis being killed now, drink some Jhapa tea with milk and no sugar, think about the lovely actress Sonali Bendre, and please smile.
5. Since 1996, a third force emerged in the form of the Maoists to vie for power complicating the 230 year old equation. The Maoists split the Janatas and what we have seen in the past 6 years is a triangular struggle between the palace (backed by the military and aristocracy), parliamentary camp (Congress, UML) and the Maoists. Until a year ago, all three tried to play one against the other for petty, minor, myopic interests. Only in the past 3 months has it dawned on them that stakes are more serious. Hence the emergence of the Janata-Raja coalition that, like in the past 2 instances, has the possibility of creating a sound outcome like the Unification and the overthrow of the Rana oligarchy. And unlike in the past, it’s the Janata who have an upper hand over the Raja, and for the first time in history, the Raja has nudged the Army to fight for democracy. Please note these without being cynical.
6. It would have been wonderful if we could have successfully mainstreamed Maoists into the parliamentary system. Thanks to Madan Bhandari and the accidental blessing of Congress incompetence, the manner in which the UML has now irreversibly become a parliamentary force is legendary. Even after the Maoists took up arms, I remained hopeful that they could be tempered of their misplaced revolutionary rhetoric. Like many observers, I also saw them as a “genuine political party with violent tactics”. But in the past 6 months, the Maoists have degenerated into an utterly terrorist organization, burning in the process all their political credentials. Their fate, in existing form, is thus doomed. Even with half-hearted military enthusiasm and some American help, they will be crushed; a faction will yield, but an armed splinter group will continue to become a nuisance. No doubt, the seeds of violence have now been sowed and our beloved Nepal will never be the same again. But I re-iterate, the end of the Maoists in their current form has begun. The tragedy is that this senseless mis-adventurism would have claimed a few thousand lives, cost millions, and pushed Nepal back by a generation, say 25 years, when it’s finally over in the next 2 years.
7. So, let’s start thinking about a Nepal following the post-mortem of the Maoists. That’s also a time when some from our generation (20-35 year olds) will, through incentives, motivation, or personal calling, work for a better Nepal through politics, philanthropy and charity, ideas and enterprise, etc. How will we handle post-death pangs of the splinter Maoists, how will we lock up the army back in the barracks, and tame both their ambition and that of its patron the King? How can we sustain the Raja-Janata alliance in the interest of a functioning constitutional democracy? How will we enhance channels of accountability and legal institutions to cleanse the wrongs of the past and bring to justice the current crop of crooks? How will we improve literacy rates, longevity, and GDP per capita? How will we make our governments more representative of all ethnic groups that inhabit Nepal? How will we seek, through potent diplomacy, to engage India – and less so, China, to leverage their growing global clout to advance our own interests regarding water, control of trafficking, markets for our products, immigration, and dignified jobs for our unemployed millions who have been migrating south for a season or two to escape hunger for the past 300 years?
Let’s begin the thought process. Let’s get to work. Let’s strengthen our collective resolve for our land. If you think I’m a mad man with misplaced optimism who is completely out of touch with reality, kindly wake me up. But in doing so, please use facts and informed opinions as your tools, not received wisdom of yesteryears. My request is humble: I’d rather dream than be woken up for false alarms.
|
| Naya Keta |
Posted
on 28-Apr-02 08:11 AM
I agree with Paschim on the matter that Nepal has been plagued, over the years, by the constant struggle for supremacy between the "Royal Faction" (RF) on one side and the (as he has put it) "The literate Janata" (LJ) on the other.....This perpetual fight simply for supremacy over the other, without clear goals for what is to be done for the development of the country after the the gaining of supremacy is in my opinion what has lead to the present state of backwardness in Nepal, if I am allowed a generalisation. This too, I believe might be an optimistic view of the situation with the reality being far more sinister...In the sense that althought power hasn't been the hands of the LR for long enough to judge what their intentions are, we can look back at history and see that the RF's primary intention for seeking and excersing power was simply of a personal, and selfish nature, to rule over the masses and impose their will, to have the multitudes as their personal servants. Simply put they wanted (and kept) power, for the most dangerous of reasons, only for powers sake....They had no intentions towards the betterment of our society, because real social development would end up as the basis for challenge to their personal power. Hence, they kept the masses illiterate, society drowning in superstition, supressed individual freedoms and denied even a modicum of dignity or respect to the average man (and woman). Paschim has asked, " How can we sustain the Raja-Janata alliance in the interest of a functioning constitutional democracy?",to which I say, that given the evidence of history we cannot, because it seems the RF has never wanted to prolong the alliance after their interests have been met...1960 is the prime example....after using the popular support to over throw the Ranas in '51, they dumped their alliance partners in the royal take over........So I belive that the LR on its own is the only way any meaningful change will ever be initiated in Nepal. Until the RF truely realise that history will never repeat itself, and that the days where they could legitmately (??)hold on to full and unchallengeable power are gone, they will never be true partners in the alliance, and will seek at every opportunity to regain supremacy. Looking at the present heiarchial structure of, and the general manner in which the strong treat the weak in, our society I do not see the relevant change in social attitudes required for the alliance to be sustained in the longrun. As I have said earlier I believe to the people affiliated with the RF, we (the satharan Nepali) are still the ones over which they ruled and not equal partners with an equal stake in the future of Nepal.........
Honestly speaking though, it really doen't matter because the days of the RF are numbered. As more and more "satharan" Nepalis get better educated, see more of the world, have wider and more varied experiences and become aware of the power that they hold individually and collectively in a democracy, the RF will be less and less able to exert pressure to influence policy which put forward their interests and clash with the public interest. In the short term they may use the physical force available to them (namely the army) to high-jack national interests but if they do, as maybe through a coup, they risk losing everything and the king his crown, as Deuba said, because,the next time the LJ have to mount a challenge to the power of the RF as they did in 1990, they will make sure that the RF is completely devastated and pose no future threat to the power of the people. It will be the end of the Shah dynasty and the stranglehold that the Rana-Shah-Thakuris have on the armed forces. As Paschim has so righly pointed out democracy is here to stay, POWER TO THE POEPLE isn't going away.
Paschim, really appreciate your above piece, u have so eloquently elaborrated precisely what I have been discussing with my circle of friends for some time now. Very happy to see our thoughts so well described in words. Thanks again and hope to read more thought provoking pieces from you in the future. In particular I would be interested in reading what you think the solutions are for the current quagmire Nepal seems to be embroiled in...excessive political infighting, corruption, lack of control of our natural resourses just to name a few but most importantly on how the current crisis resulting from the Maobadi problem can be resolved......
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 28-Apr-02 01:27 PM
Paschim:
The obvious weakness with our statecraft is the lack of institutionalized entities.
That has prevented us from implementing meritocracy in our country, and
that is the source of ethnic discontent of present day Nepal. We have to institutionalize these entities as soon as possible, and let them function without intervention from capricious politicians. Defeat of rebels in today's form is
inevitable. They are mismatched , and political in nature, eventhough they are
corrupted by terrorist minds lately. But eliminating any insurgency which will be of
racial/casteial in nature will be very difficult. In today's Nepal, disparity and
descrimination exist, and that needs to be addressed soon. To think that present
day Nepal's problem is only Maoist problem is wrong.We have other problems too,
and they need equal attention in post Maoist era.Remember that when Boxer
revolution was crushed in China, Peasant revolution (Mao's) reared its head.
There are two possible scenarios in post Maoist world: Nepali Congress leadership
will pursue a massive witchhunt, ala South America of 70s, and will penalise even
the members of UML, and thus engendering the strain in relationship between
parliamentary parties. Rather than reconcilation, the trend will be of retribution.
Some NC regional satraps (mainly Khum Bdr Now, and if Girija rises to power, Sher
Bdr will be another western Satrap, Gachchadar has similar ambition) will be difficult
to rein in, and they will be licentious, and more corrupt. The second possibility is of
the tossle between parliamentary forces, and military force. Leftists in parliament
are not very likely to approve all funds demanded by RNA in the aftermath of this
war with terrorists.They will try to divert funds to development project,while the
army will be demanding money for its own purpose.I,despite my support to military,
often see our military as an organization with myopic view,and less tolerant entity.
I don't see the chance of gobbling up of democratic institutes by royals. Paras is
not a confident person, and Gyanendra is not going to do it.
What can we do now? I think the best thing to do is to infuse civil intellectuals in
the Military acadmy. Let government establish more military institutes which will
work as think tank. Royal Nepalese Army rightnow works in the whim of some
majors and generals. One organization,which aims to recruit 2,00,000 draftee in
future, should not be left at the mercy of some generals. It should have more
intellectual backup. It should have more institutionalized decision making process.
The existence of such entities will lessen the influence of king on the body, and will
make RNA truly Nepalese Army.
I also think that we have infrastructure in place to check the increasing influence
of some castes. Government now needs to spend more money in creating
infrastructures in the places where less privileged caste/ethic groups live. The
participation of Madhesi/Setamagurali groups in national power needs to be
increased. Textbooks that encourage racial harmony between different
castes/groups should be imposed in schools. Any form of descrimination should be
made severely punishable.
I think the risk to democracy comes not from King, but from the behaviours of the
democrats (esp from Nepali Congress leadership). They are the ones who
weakened our democracy in the past decade. Civil society needs to push
relentlessly for reducing government's omnipotence.(A minister, among other
things, hires even a peon in a local school these days!) I think that should be the
way to go!
|
| Nepe |
Posted
on 28-Apr-02 05:48 PM
Another sincere, absorbingly interesting and therapeutic piece from Paschim. And who is this naya keta ? I feel threatened by him. Because I was in this illusion that I had the sole monopoly of being the spokesman of Ganatantrabadi bichaar in this board ! Anyway welcome board. I am spreading a red carpet for you. And Biswo's note provides inspiration and some directives to our immediate future. I think these three gentlemen together give us enough ore to smelt and recover the silver to mint our silver hope Paschim wants to instill on us.
When I agree one hundred percent with Naya Keta, should I say I disagree with Paschim by a fraction of a percent ? As it should be no news I don't believe in the concept of Raja-Janata alliance. As Naya Keta has sufficiently illustrated, their self-inetersts and stakes at present time puts them at opposite ends. At Prithvi Narayan ko paalaamaa, it was true that 'Praja mota bhaya raja baliya hunyachhan'. But at Gyanendra's time, 'Praja kamjor bhaya raja baliya hunyachhan' is true.
Paschim cites two historical events, the unification of Nepal (actually rajya-bistar of Gorkha) and 2007 as precedents/illustration of R-J alliance. I think (I know most of you will be surprised to hear this) Paschim is wrong in both counts. First the rajya-bistar. Two centuries ago, Raja was not an alternative entity of the state. The concept of a democratically elected government as an alternative did not exist. Therefore there is no point talking about an alliance. (On a lighter note, I have noted that Paschim often romanticize about Gorkhali rajya bistar and sometimes admits being proud to be from Gorkha. How to say his interpretation of history has not been influenced by this conflict of association ? On a serious note, what are we supposed to say about the alliance, had other pricipality or kingdom, say Maharaja of Punjab, 'united' Nepal that would go by the name of Punjab Kingdom today due to a different course of history ? ). About 2007 saal, although the establishment has dubbed it as a pure event of a R-J alliance to bring democracy in Nepal and although Nepali jana-maanas accepts it as their real hisory without any debate, I think 2007 has been misrepresented so far, though with a very good intention to protect the newly acquired 'democracy' and to reward the 'co-operative' monarchy together. In reality, 2007 is not a R-J alliance for democracy. Actually two different and unrelated things happened co-incidentally and with no apparent conflict between them. The conflict was there, but it was overlooked to allow the developments to take place. These two things were, 1. cultural/religious event to reinstate Shree 5, the real 'bishnu ko avatar', instead of Shree 3, to its culturally required status, and 2. aspiration of the few literate people for democracy. By virtue of the coincidence, these two events benefited from each other, but they were not complementary events. Tribhuvan was/became a liberal person and was apparently overwhelmed by people's loyalty and all mixed up developments, but he is mostly a hero who happened to be there. The rest of R-J alliance is history.
Nepe
|
| HahooGuru |
Posted
on 28-Apr-02 08:55 PM
I am not expert in this area, so, I will praise all the guys who
poured their ideas, by saying that you are positive, optimistic
and futuristic. Nepali leadership requires peoples like you.
Well, I am already outside the age range given Paschim,
I am not sure to what level I can support you. I will not claim
that RF should last as long as Nepal lasts, but, RF should
last at least a few decades before all Nepalis have strength
(literacy/educational and financial) to live as conglomerate.
Well, I am quite worried that the world will be divided into
three zones. One extremely rich where the national or
nationality boundaries are practically vanish, they will
appear only in the map, but, not in practice. It can be
already seen in the West Europe and America, where citizens
(usually white raced peoples) have free flow of immigrants. On
the third category, the countries where peoples will continue
to be financially poor, and this will be especially from Africa
and religously, Islamic countries will remain in this target,
where migration to first category will be hard to clear
he tough high voltaged and barbed wired boundary line..
The countries in 2nd category will be mostly east of Pakistan
where educated peoples with specialized professional capablity
will continue to get inside the borderless countries. Nepalis with
better education and financial options, has very good chances to
get a very limited share in the border less society. If our new
generation (I am reluctant to use word"WE", because I "age group 35-45"
am afraid whether I can be of any use) can work at least to
produce peoples equipped with POSITIVE THINKING, OPTIMISTIC
VIEWS and GOAL OREINTED (NOT CONFUSED: I will call the
35-45age group is confused, 45-55 age group as practically
retired), then, "YOU" can finally find "ROYAL(s)" only at Royal Palace.
As long as we do not have our population equipped with
financial and educational resources, we will find another "NEW Royals" who
will be there with new names and exploiting our future generations.
I am against "NEW richs replacing old richs (=communist regimes",
"NEW corrupts that emerged from 2046 movement, was successful in
replacing only the old corrupts" ............. The new generation of
actively working age Nepalis (25-35age group) should think of
making the thick zone of middle class peoples in Nepal
--equipped with F and E resources -- as in Japan so that
the rich feudal class and RF becomes irrelevant and
confined in Royal Palace and clubs. The percentage of middle
class peoples in our Pyramid should be thick enough to make
the RF and feudals irrelavant, and as lon as we don't have thick
middle class zone in the pyramid, we will be exploited either by
extreme rightists "Royal and feudals" or extreme leftists "Maoist
like communists".
Jai Nepal.
HG
|
| HahooGuru |
Posted
on 28-Apr-02 09:05 PM
Clarification:
There was jump (as usual ) between the border less
society within developed part of the world,...
I gave those examples to mean that if we can have
thick middle class in Nepali pyramid, the RF will be
as irrelevant as the national boundary is irrelevant
now a days in developed part of the world. Today
the national, race and religion are important boundaries
only when we have big gap in economic and education
yard sticks.
Jai Nepal.
HG
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 28-Apr-02 09:22 PM
What a delightful set of refreshing comments! Thank you Naya Keta, Biswo, Adaraniya Guru-ji, and of course the irrepressible Nepe. Brilliant. My work-day has just begun at this part of the world, so will have to respond to you all later when I've an hour of free time. Ke garnay, phuchhe jaagire, shrimati paalna napare pani, aafulai ta paalna paryo ni :)
Also received on email critical comments from Rabindra Mishra of the BBC. In the interest of a mature and balanced debate, I am taking the liberty of posting these here as well - without his permission, but I'm exercising my discretion here, i) he's a close friend, and ii) his views on this topic have just been made public in his column in the "Nepal Fortnightly", so I don't think I'm doing any service or damage by this cut-and-paste.
Anyway, friends, will synthesize all your comments and return with brief responses later in the day. Until then, let's roll with some more informed thoughts.
---------
To: Paschim
From: Rabindra
Two things that came to my mind after reading your piece. Firstly, there can
still be a coup in Nepal and can last for years, if the current politicians
continue to show total disregard to the people's wishes, as they have been
doing for the past 12 years. They have taken people like us for granted and
they believe we would never turn our back on democracy, whatever the
circumstances. I think they are wrong. So this time around if there will
ever be a coup, it will be a coup prompted and supported by the majority of
the people, probably like in Pakistan, who are fed up with the situation of
the country. Those who will come out on the street against it will only be
the active members of the student wings of different political parties and
not the 'janata' as such.
Secondly, when you talk about palace-janata tension, I think that is the
interpretation of history from people who presume that what trickles out of
the Kathmandu valley or the minds of the country's elite is the voice of
'janata'. If 'janata' means a majority of the people of a country, I still
think that Nepali janata would be less interested about the political system
and about who rules them, if they enjoy bare necessities of life. Hence, it
might be wrong to interpret the struggle by political parties to establish
democracy, as the wishes of the masses and call it a palace-janata tension.
Having said that, your piece was brilliantly presented, as always.
Rabindra.
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 29-Apr-02 05:05 AM
Okay, my quick reactions. I broadly agree with most comments. With my mitra Nepe (also my loyal deputy in another avatar!), I have a pleasant history of respectful disagreement. This time was no different, except that he was careless with the use of the word "wrong" in describing my examples, so I'll have to take him first.
That my views on the monarchy are dim is clear. Tribhuwan was no hero. He was a brothel-wandering debauch. But the Ranas freaked out when he fled, bcs. the issue was one of legitimacy. They didn't take the throne, but put a 3-yr. old boy called Gyanendra in it whose only qualification was that he had genes of the ruling family that founded the kingdom. NC knew what role a 'god-king' played in a superstitious country. Their goal was to dislodge the Ranas. Tribhuwan wanted them dislodged too, hence his very early contacts through his gym tutor Dharma Bhakta with Praja Parishad. Different motivations perhaps, but their marriage of convenience is an example of R-J alliance to secure a common goal. And it worked right till his death in 2011 BS. Mahendra resented this, and severed the tie in style five years later.
On PN Shah, kings and governments are not alternatives anywhere in the world. They should not be. They are both part of ONE state. But the fact that they have been seen as rivals in a country called Nepal is precisely the odd premise of my piece. Note thus the numerous use of the word 'irony'. Sure, unification was 'rajya bistaar', a successful drive on the part of the raja and praja of Gorkha. I don't glamorize the Gorkha conquest (pls. note that succinct line on suppression of ethnic autonomies in para 3), but I will not apologize for the creation of Nepal as a result of that drive. Are we not all happy that we can call ourselves Nepalis today, and not Punjabi, had Nepe's hypothetical example materialized? In both instances, Nepe is merely taking a slightly different view of the motivations, but not denying that a R-J alliance occurred to deliver an outcome. Hence, logically, he doesn't back up his provocative claim that I was "wrong". I thus humbly request Nepe to replace the loaded word "wrong" with a more cautious "different".
This brings me to Naya Keta whose strong points I share with pleasure. Yes, these guys have misbehaved and may not be deemed reliable. All the more important thus that we work towards consolidating the constitutional framework to discipline both the king and the parties by making use of the liberal provisions therein. R-J alliance today just means this: work together to preserve the 1990 constitution. It's not "haat samayera Tundikhel jaane" kind of solidarity. On my dim views of the royals, but not the institution of constitutional monarchy as a state organ, and my tooth-paste example on why it may not be wise to get rid of them right away pls. kindly refer to my another exchange with Nepe on that humor thread.
Thanks for Biswo's forceful inputs. I think the idea of orchestrated civilian infusion in the military is timely. Also if you recall my lengthy analogy of onion soup production, I agree that "less government is more". In visiting Delhi in 1982, Thatcher says she was shocked to see Mrs. Gandhi's cabinet spending most of the time approving petty thekkas and appointments - the classic License Raj that bred corruption and other allied vices in a closed, socialist statecraft. And yes, we now really need to scrutinize the army by first removing the constitutional ambiguity about its command. And I'm not saying Maoists are the only problem, but as a student of public policy, I believe in prioritization. It is the most urgent problem today. For some other urgent problems, pls. read my para 7.
GP-ji, umer ma 35+ bhaye pani, you are young at heart. I think your point about creating a middle class that's endowed is great. Free, open societies are sustained best by a sizeable middle class. Forget different countries, just compare how different the northern and southern provinces of Italy are (read the illuminating book on "Civic Traditions in Modern Italy" by Robert Putnam). A well-off middle class (defined nationally) is a necessary but an insufficient condition. Look at Pakistan where there's stark inequity. Mahbub ul-Haq caused a stir in the 80s when he said Pakistan is owned by 22 families and had no middle class. Meritocracy is another trait that should accompany the burgeoning of the middle class to prove feudals irrelevant. In Britain for example, the nobility is a joke. The reason is this: basis of power of feudals or extremists like Maoists is illegitimate in origin. It's either old money that they didn't earn, or violence. But democracies are kind enough to embrace people like these if they come with meritocratic credentials. Dynastic charisma and all that is actually helpful - from Scindia's in Gwalior to Manisha Koirala's thighs in Sunsari.
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 29-Apr-02 05:10 AM
On Rabindra's comments re. the coup, my point is, the army and the palace are both weak in terms of capacity and authority today. Of course people are fed up with the current crop of crooks, but the army is no holy cow, and will have no magic solution to our age-old problems. What will happen is this: there may be a sigh of relief for a month or two because Girija is not seen on TV, civil service will seem more disciplined, and because of press censoring we won't hear of blatant corruption cases, but other than that, ritto dhukuti ra ritto dimaag baata sena le pani ke dine ho ra? So mob enthusiasm will wane fast as parties organize themselves, and it'd be impossible to crush dissent. My broad view is: dictators and quick fixers who are impatient with maturing of democracies offer interim relief that have illusory short-term benefits, but their mis-adventurism will be 'ghaatak' in the long run re. institutionalization of state organs that live to deliver for generations. And I don't think the Pakistan analogy fits as our country is not as militarised (since birth) as them, gobbling up some 35% of the budget; and our military has been an aloof force with limited grassroots mingling.
On who's the "Janata", it's always the "representative" change-makers who speak on behalf of society. This reminds of Thatcher's often quoted but misunderstood claim that "there is no such thing as society". Anyway, not all farmers from Doti and Rukum need to come out on the streets of Kathmandu everyday to make their point. The average man may not be versed in the virtues of different regime types, but I'd never underestimate the collective wisdom of even the poorest and the most illiterate. Remember the post-emergency Indira debacle of 1977? The view "khaana-launa paye pugi halyo ni, freedom sreedom kina chahiyo" is myopic, dictatorial, seems very reasonable in the short term, but is retrogressive in the wider span of history. Amartya Sen is eloquent on the topic of poverty/democracy.
Mero agraha: democracy ko kura garda jhal-jhalti Khum Bahadur ra Bijaya Gacchedaar ko anuhaar dekhnu bhayena mitra ho!! A functioning democracy puts them in prison. Establishing the rule of law takes time, but little impatience and irritation in the short term that makes us sway in favor of dreams that tyrants sell us is what does real, chronic damage to young nation-states that are not a nation and not yet a functioning state. Kramik sudhar ma biswas garaun, kraanti ko raktim naatak ma hoina.
|
| anil bhattarai |
Posted
on 29-Apr-02 08:56 AM
hi folks,
this was interesting reading your views on what is happening in Nepal. Thanks Biswo for sending me the address to this site. well, I will try to write longer comments in a day or two, but just to reiterate--might be sounding a bit of a cliche with n number of repitions--that we are going through crisis and disaster unprecedented in our history. It is important that we discuss why things got into such a mess, but isn't it time to think creatively how we from our little spaces can work for changint this.
My idea is that there is urgent need to bring the suffering of the people at the centre of debates and one of the ways this could be done is by doing regular life historiies of peole who had to go through and has been going through this immense sufferings--in the name of revolution. would like to have further discussion on this, and more later with comments on the discussions.
anil
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 29-Apr-02 04:38 PM
Hi :
Anil is based on Delhi(Jawaharlal Nehru University), so I hope it will be interesting
to hear his perspective in this conflict. I am not supportive of his dovish approach
rightnow, but I am sure we will benefit from listening to his ideas, which I hope
will contribute to the diversity of our site too.
|
| Nepe |
Posted
on 29-Apr-02 05:38 PM
Paschim,
I apologize for the inappropriate use of the word ‘wrong’. It was indeed a careless use. I may be thinking what the heck, after all I am his deputy, alikati uttaaulopan shouldn’t be a big deal, or perhaps I wanted to have a CK Lal esque sensationalization.
Encouraged by your remainder that we have a pleasant history of respectful disagreement, I am standing by the ‘different’ interpretation of the events we are discussing. Regarding the monarchy, I am fully aware of your position of a cautious support, which you have explained in various threads including that great thread of Dilli-Gauthali saga. I want to repeat here, as I must have told or implied before, that you are possibly the best agreeable monarchist I have met (well we haven’t really met, but I hope to meet you some day, if you don’t mind to meet your republican deputy with suspected leftist youth !).
My conviction that monarchy is a ‘Nepal ko gardhan.maa adkiyeko ghaando’ has not changed. But I am very much encouraged to hear from Deuba the kind of words only Madan Bhandari could utter once (Rajniti garne bhaye shree-pech phukaalera aau). It was also interesting for me that few months ago (was in Deshantar) some of Congressi leaders publicly threatened the king by uttering the word republic. I interpret all these as our emboldening and strengthening of democracy. Monarchy is becoming less and less of a scary ghost. And this is very positive development for the democratic polity. I prefer a republic Nepal. But if I have to live with the monarchy, at least I don’t want to feel its presence in politics. Don’t interpret this as my inclination to accept monarchy. I simply don’t think that we can paint a rosy picture of monarchy in Nepal if history is any guide and if Gyanendra and Paras are human being like us. Your tooth-paste analogy to the monarchy is very tempting, but I’d rather use Listerine mouth wash and change whenever I like than to agree to use Brighter tooth paste all my life and that of my children and grand-children. Let’s agree to disagree on this.
Back to the original topic, I still think PN Shah’s conquest does not qualify to be taken as a R-J alliance. That was a normal business like all other state business at that time. King was ‘maalik’, people were ‘raiti’. Raiti always followed what their king wanted. How does that become an alliance ? I am not denying PN Shah’s unique role in that historical development, nor am I undermining the Gorkhali fauk ko hyaau. All I am saying is there is no point characterizing that particular event as an outcome of a R-J alliance. R & J were always allied anyway, during conquest or in peaceful time, in Gorkha or in Palpa, Tansen, Makawanpur, Nepal Khaldo, Baaise-Chaubise, Bhot, Punjab, Gorakhpur, wherever.
PN Shah expanded his kingdom which is more or less today’s Nepal. But I do not know what to make of this. I mean should we be proud of him ? Should we be thankful that he gave us today’s Nepal ? You wrote *Are we not all happy that we can call ourselves Nepalis today, and not Punjabi, had Nepe's hypothetical example materialized?* I find this question amusing. Because if we were a part of the hypothetical Punjab Kingdom today, we would be thinking us as a proud Punjabi and you would be asking ‘Are we not all happy that we can call ourselves Punjabi today, and not Pakistani or whatever that we would not be belonging to ? Paschim should know that beauty is skin deep and the national identity is one generation deep. People of Darjiling and Kanggadaa identify themselves as proud Indians, though they were parts of the great Nepal not very long ago. Even the people of Sikkim, an independent state annexed to India, are half way (in terms of generation depth) to that mental identity. And not to forget, people of Terai identify as proud Nepali. So pride of national identity is not a rigid and unchangable thing. All right, I guess I diverted quite much from the topic.
From what you wrote about 2007 in your reply, it seems we do not differ much in our opinions. Therefore I think it can rest.
On a related note, since BBC ka Rabindra Mishraji is here, I think it will not be inappropriate to comment on a point you made in a separate thread during your comment on Rabindra’s well-received peace ‘A letter to a Maobadi bhai’. I was particularly touched by your remark that what we need now is to fight against Maoists using our 1. Hands. 2. Minds, and 3. Hearts. I suppose Rabindra’s letter was a fight with heart. Because it was mostly a sentimental appeal. While it has its own contribution, I would like to see strong arguments (fight with mind) against Maoists from the people closely watching them. A few recent postings and this one from Paschim is very good to that end. I am benefiting much from them and have started to see much more light than I thought there is at the end of the tunnel. But I am still seeing this civil war as a war of two evils, misleading and misled mass against corrupt elite. I want to believe there is more than this in this war.
Nepe
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 29-Apr-02 09:00 PM
Nepe, a warm and mature response, as always. Thank you. That paragraph of yours on national identities is very, very thoughtful. I've often criticized ourselves - the Nepalis - for being jingoistic, but must say I really need to better my own understanding of issues of ethnic and national identity. Your comments have triggered a deeper probing. I love kicks of this kind, much appreciate it.
On other issues, let's maintain our pleasant tradition of respectful disagreement.
And of course, it'd be great to meet my republican deputy one day. Perhaps over some lal-chiya made by lal bahadur in lal durbar's lalupate restaurant!
HFC to baithak daknus hai chhitai, can't wait to hear GP-ji's awe-inspiring life story. Tyo meeting ma mero "khoj" ko pratibedan pani pesh garnechhu :)
|
| Naya Keta |
Posted
on 29-Apr-02 10:46 PM
Am learning a lot in this discusion....Just wanted to add my two cents worth..
First of all, Nepe, u have no need to feel threatened...I share a lot of ur views and can follow ur reasoning on almost all of them, however, I am not and suspect that I never will be advocating republicanism for Nepal. On this issue I share Paschim's opinion, there IS a need for the monarchy in Nepal but its role will have to be clearly defined and specifically one that involves NO politcal power. The fact their ancestors were instrumental in the creation of Nepal YESTERDAY does not entitle King G and/or CP Paras to have an influence on my(yours or our) life(lives) TODAY. I give that right to the leaders that I elect through the democratic process. They (King G and CP Paras) have my respect for their surnames but they have to earn my respect for their first names. The monarchy, however does have a role to play in unifying a diverse nation such as ours and one which today is on the brink(if it hasn't already) of collapsing into divisions defined by ethnic rivalries. The monarchy is the one (and only) institution to which almost all Nepalis identify with, except, maybe the Newari elite in KTM valley (for obvious historical reasons). The public out-pouring of affection last June for the tragic deaths of our late King and Queen, the same ones which the public rallied against just over 10 years ago, is the proof.....So u c I am not for abolition of the monarchy but instead for a reformed constitutional monarchy with largely ceremonial powers ONLY.
I agree with most of ur opinions, and especially liked the way u phrased "misleading and mislead mass against corrupt elite". My views exactly.....But I strongly disagree with ur view on and (it seems) casual dismissal of Nepali patrotism......I see it in a completely different light.....hypothetically i could be anything, but in reality, I AM a Nepali. Dwelling on the ifs and buts of history make little sense in the real world.....I am who I am today not what I could have been yesterday and I have a right, same as the Americans, the English, the Indians, the chinese etc...to be proud of my home land. Hypothetically they all could've ended up as something else, so does that mean their pride is misplaced...and I deny that beauty is skin deep and that national identity only one generation deep...I find ur examples incorrect (c I am not saying "wrong" :o) ) Most people from Darjeeling consider themselves Nepali and the Sikkimese consider themselves from Sikkim (well the ones i have come across anyway). In addition, why do the Tibetians still call themselves Tibetians and not chinese? Why did the Jews struggle for over two thousand years for their OWN homeland, why have the Kurds not given up hope for a Kurdistan? Look at eastern europe after the fall of the Soviet Union...So, no I don't believe national identity is skin deep and that it is important. In fact y r u participating in a discussion specifically on the problems of Nepal? Isn't it because u have some pride in being Nepali?
|
| Naya Keta |
Posted
on 29-Apr-02 10:49 PM
On what Mishraji said, a coup is possible and initially may have some support from the general mass but it will not be long lasting as he predicts. Firstly, what happens after the pseudo-legitamacy granted by the initial support of the public fades? What can they provide (more than what is avilable tody) that can keep the people from getting restless?????? Now supposing, they can provide the stability and security the public craves today, how long will it be before the masses again rise up to fight for their rights? Secondly, they will not have any support amongst the intellectual class in and outside of Nepal...Democratic forces have been PERMANENTLY released and WILL fight the military if it comes to that...Might take some time to get organised but with the help of modern technology, like the internet, and some leadership from dynamic and credible individuals, it will happen. Given the amount of technical knowledge and financial resourses that are available to the people who were at the bottom end of society in the panchayat era, but have prospered in free and democratic societies in the west today the old gaurd of the by-gone era have no chance....i think that those capable of pulling off the coup know this and thus will not do it. Whether the day after, a year after, or ten years after, they will lose.
I also disagree with him when he said ,
"Hence, it might be wrong to interpret the struggle by political parties to establish
democracy, as the wishes of the masses and call it a palace-janata tension".
If the public have adopted the democratic model of govt, where they themselves elect their representatives from a varity of political parties, then the actions (in our case) of MP's and the political parties ARE the wishes of the masses. That is the fundamental nature (and in my opinion, the beauty) of democracy. In Nepal's case today, there does seem to be opposition from the forces alligned with the palace to these democratc ideals. SO, what else do you call it if not Palace-Janata tension? Although his observation that the avearge Nepali man would not care about politics as long as his stomach is full is correct when taken in the context of the present time, if one were to extrapolate on his observation inter-temporally, is it not an unescapeable fact that at some point in the future he will look further than his stomach and demand greater freedoms and rights and democracy? So the Literate Janata, to use paschim's termonology, and presumably who Mishraji means when he says "......the Kathmandu valley or the minds of the country's elite..." ARE carrying out the wishes of the janata of today, AND tomorrow.
Finally, I come to the area that gives me the greatest concern for skepticism, to use Pashims words "consolidating the constitutional framework to discipline both the king and the parties" for misbehaviour and institutionalising democratic practices and principles so such misbehaviour becomes less and less frequent. My skeptism stems from the fact that I don't see the leadership, willingness, courage or wisdom in any of our present "Netajis" to push forward policies which can bring it about. The problem doesn't lie with our political system, we have democracy already, but more in the political CULTURE. The problem lies in;
1) The deep-rooted inertia of the Nepali mentality where political power is seen as a means to RULE the masses and not a means to SERVE the masses. As long as this doesn't change nothing will...and
2) The "bikriti" that has engulfed the core of Nepali society with the leadership role, in the form of corruption, being played by the Netajis themselves. With ministers and high ranking govt officials as role models, almost, and i say almost, everyone holdig public office is corrupt. "Money talks and bull shit walks". Our public officials need to be bribed to do the job that they are paid to do. Everyone from the lowest rank straight to the top, need their fingers oiled. Couple that with a general public who seem to expect things without wanting to put in the hard work. For an example, during (one of the many) elections I enquired of the taxi driver of the taxi i was going home in, of his vote in the coming elections. He said he was voting for the UML, when I asked him why, he said, today this taxi belongs to the "Saow" , tomorrow if UML win it will be mine. When I asked him what he had done to deserve the taxi, he had no answer. He wanted the taxi but without putting in the hard work to deserve. Stories like this are unfortunately abundant. As long as these expectations of something for nothing are running through our society, nothing will or can change because it is no one's interest to change it.
However, to not leave it on a pessimistic note, the hope of meaningful change is embodied in the free and frank discussions of ideas, in forums such as this, between concerned but proud Nepalis such as ourselves and the gradual awakening of the educated Nepali youth to the fact that our future in IN OUR OWN HANDS....and ( i agree with this a 100%) in Manisha's thighs too.
|
| Nepe |
Posted
on 30-Apr-02 01:49 PM
Paschim,
Thank you for your compliments. It also gives me immense pleasure to hear that my naïve thoughts on national identity could give a kick to a bright mind like yours.. :0)). Naya Keta sees this issue in a different light. But I understand him. I am going to exchange with him shortly.
I will save your invitation of a meeting over some lal-chiya made by lal bahadur in lal durbar's lalupate restaurant. Sounds romantic if the word is not inappropriate. Just make sure that Lal Maya serves the tea. I may amaze you by my sher-o-shayari triggered by such things. Here is a sample:
Pyaalaa bharthe timraa haat, ma piudai thiye
Kebal tyahi yek raat, ma jiudai thiye !
(from my unpublished collection of Nepali Gajals)
I have not forgotten about HFC’s next meeting. I am just waiting for the signal from Guru (GuruDev, if you are reading this and if you are ready to inaugurate the meeting with what our adhyakchhyajyu le sabhakti binti chadhairahanu.bhayeko chha, please hukum hos.)
************ ************** ************ ***************
Naya Keta,
Thank you for sharing some of my views and understanding my reasoning for the rest. I hope to have more exchange of views in future if you are going to stay here for longer. Therefore, here only quick response to your comments.
1. I will understand if you say it is not easy to abolish monarchy right now. But I do not agree if you say Nepal will not exist without Monarchy. You are undermining Nepali people and their collective wisdom. (Thanks Paschim for talking about collective wisdom). You don’t see expression of this collective wisdom everyday in every street and goreto. But when the moment comes, Nepali people show it. When they show, they have always, to everybody’s surprise, overtaken political elites. Trust them. They won’t let this nation disintegrate.
2. I believe you are misreading the outpouring of public sympathy to Birendra after his tragic death. (I was in Kathmandu at that time returned home after years of self-exile. I was shocked and saddened myself. There are several moments I found my eyes wet. I have seen everything and the pubic reaction with my own eyes. I have thought about that innumerable times with my heart and with my mind. And, let me tell you, I still believe Nepal can do without monarchy and it should do without monarchy.)
3. Regarding my remarks on the topic of national identity, I am not dismissing Nepali patriotism. I am myself a proud Nepali. I was just forwarding a scholarly debate on the topic of identity. I still think that national identity is one (ok roughly) generation deep. For example, America born children of American Nepali identify them selves as American and they don’t share their parents romanticism about Nepal. I think that’s natural.
You wrote:
>Most people from Darjeeling consider themselves Nepali and
>the Sikkimese consider themselves from Sikkim (well the ones
>i have come across anyway).
They are Nepali, that’s why they consider themselves Nepali. But it is their ethnical identity, not national identity. Don’t think that they aspire to be annexed to Nepal. They identify with and love their great country India, like our Teraibaasi do to their country Nepal.
>In addition, why do the Tibetians still call themselves Tibetians
>and not chinese? Why did the Jews struggle for over two thousand
>years for their OWN homeland, why have the Kurds not given up
>hope for a Kurdistan? Look at eastern europe after the fall of the
>Soviet Union...
Suppression is the reason. When one nationality (or ethnicity) or even an individual is suppressed or mistreated or just ruled by another, then the story is different. I was talking about successful integration, not about failed integration or the factors causing disintegration. For a nation to sustain, every group and individual should get fair share and respect. Otherwise it disintegrates by natural laws. The guarantee that Nepal sustains as a nation comes from whether every ethnicity, group or region get their fair share or not. It does not come from the news that at a palace called Narayanhity in Kathmandu Shahar lives a descendant of Prithvi Narayan Shah as a hindu dharmaabalambi Nepal ko raja. My 2 cents.
On your comments on Mishraji’s remarks, I agree with you. Royal/Military coup doesn’t stand a chance. Okey, they can do it. But then what ? They have the same logistics, resources, people and problems. They have nothing to deliver to the people. So, within months, they will be at the other ends of the shore. I also agree with you that the major problem of Nepal is spoilt mentality of Nepali. But I would like to hear your view on why it exists and how it can be gotten rid of. I think until now we have been a part of the problem, its time to be a part of the solution.
Cheers !
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 30-Apr-02 02:12 PM
Nepeji:
I have to agree with you. And yet I can't stop noticing the vigor in your
irrepressible agenda of ganatantra. Dhilo aaunu bhayo, yet ganatantra maathi
atal bishwaas ajhai kaayam chha bhanne proof liyera aaunu bhayo!
Monarchy may stay because it is (probably, that is what I think, and you don't)
beneficial to our current state. But to say it is indispensable is a little
overestimate.The institution is expendable. It is only that people and national
interest should guide the overthrow, not some insane, terrorist-minded group
of minority!
>1. I will understand if you say it is not easy to abolish monarchy right now. But I
>do not agree if you say Nepal will not exist without Monarchy. You are
>undermining Nepali people and their collective wisdom. (Thanks Paschim for
>talking about collective wisdom). You don’t see expression of this collective
>wisdom everyday in every street and goreto. But when the moment comes,
>Nepali people show it. When they show, they have always, to everybody’s
>surprise, overtaken political elites. Trust them. They won’t let this nation
>disintegrate.
|
| Dilasha |
Posted
on 30-Apr-02 02:55 PM
Well-said Naya Keta! I am deeply touched by what you wrote on the second last paragraph. You wrote "My skeptism stems from the fact that I don't see the leadership, willingness, courage or wisdom in any of our present "Netajis" to push forward policies which can bring it about. The problem doesn't lie with our political system, we have democracy already, but more in the political CULTURE. The problem lies in;
1) The deep-rooted inertia of the Nepali mentality where political power is seen as a means to RULE the masses and not a means to SERVE the masses. As long as this doesn't change nothing will...and
2) The "bikriti" that has engulfed the core of Nepali society with the leadership role, in the form of corruption, being played by the Netajis themselves. With ministers and high ranking govt officials as role models, almost, and i say almost, everyone holdig public office is corrupt."
This is indeed what I and I bet many Nepalese people are concerned about. It is high time that young people who are sincerely and genuinely concerned about the country's fate joined mainstream politics and led the country towards hope and betterment of our future. And it is high time those corrupt, old fashioned, conservative, politicians gave up politics and lived peaceful lives at the foothills of Mt. Everest. I really hope to see new stars, new leaders with full of passion and a vision to lead a tiny country such as ours into a great nation. And I bet it will not be hard if together people with the same goals and objectives unite and through a collective effort nothing is impossible. I'm still waiting!
|
| Nepe |
Posted
on 30-Apr-02 02:59 PM
Namaste Biswoji,
Ke garnu aru kohi nabhaekaale ma eklai yo ganatantra.ko dhyangro thokiraheko chhu. Kahile kaahi ta yo dhyangro faalera tapaaeeharukai majority.ma misiuki jasto laagchha. Tara Pachimji.le respectful difference maintain garne aashwaasan dinubhaekole esai dhyangro.ma kaayam chhu. Jharko namaannus hai, saathi ho.
As anti-globalists themselves do not provide alternative solution to the globalization, but point to the problems globalization fails to deal with, I too do not tell (do not know) how republic of Nepal can be established, but just point to the shortcomings of the monarchy. I hope monarchists can benefit from me.
Thank you for your words, Biswo.
Nepe
|
| Balbhadra |
Posted
on 30-Apr-02 05:16 PM
Finally this discussion is coming to where it is finally making sense. For information sake, I would also like to disclose that I am a stuanch monarchist not because I don't have a choice but I have found it better than anything that has come about. And about having a republic in Nepal, I personally feel, people give as much as an ant's behind to this sort of change at least for couple of decades.
The question would also arise. Is it possible to get rid of the monarchy right now? Well, the answer is easy, virtually impossible because there isn't a system that would better suit Nepal. Changes in Nepal have come about not because people have wanted it but due to the leaders (that includes the King). Very few have been sensitive to the real wants of the Nepalese people. Changes have been thrust in them and the effects are very visible today. We have not been able to evovle ourselves and there in lies the problem.
When you people talk crap s**t about diversity in our country we do not take into account the wants (chahana) of the all the people. You must make chages that will suit everybody and is sensitive to everybody. Therefore, republic may come to our society, but it should not come because a couple of bigwigs, think it is the fairest system in the world.
Change is invetible. Some have been violent as in China and Mao, others have been peaceful as in Singapore and Lee. Compare these two and tell me, which have come out as a winner. Inability of politicians, to understand our people has cost us a lot. Our country lags even behind some worst off African countries. Time is little, we cannot experiment with changes anymore but make healthy changes.
I cannot say Nepal will be a monarchy state or a republican state even ten years from now. But that is not for us to decide, but collectively as Nepalis to decide what is best for us instead of misleading westerners ( read Daniel Lak, India, US, etc ) to think what we should go about doing. Even you who write here have little imaginations when it comes to developing our country but keep on chanting or as in Nepe case "dhyangro thokiraheko" republics, monarchy, etc. Very few show creative ideas, and struggle physically (development) to take Nepal to greater heights.
As somebody mentioned, we have get our act together and take risks. Struggle to make a difference to our country and people. Throw away delinquent ideas and forger ahead full speed. Someday hopefully will be in the top most developed countries in the world. I know it can be done. I have seen enough Nepalese in the US working and stuggling to to better in life. I cannot wonder as why it can't be done in Nepal.
Conclusion: political system is not the problem in our country. It the total lack of vision and commitment of people who had the ablity to do so. It is our time now and lets hope we will succeed where all of them has failed.
|
| Naya Keta |
Posted
on 30-Apr-02 08:23 PM
Dilasha, thank you for those kind words...I have only recently decided to express my personal opinions about the tragic developments of the state of affairs of Nepal and was a little apprehensive about how others would react to my humble attempts to put on paper (well on the screen) my inner most thoughts. You see I too was waiting...waiting for the Netas and other so called leaders in Nepal to implement ideas that would bring about the positive changes needed. But having waited a long time and seeing none I decided to engage in dialoge with other similarly concerned Nepalis (and other well wishers of Nepal, of which there are many around the world) to develop and focus my ideas so that one day I may be of service to my country and to my fellow country men and women. I have a long long way to go but my journey has started and my days of waiting are over......my prayer is that others (u included) start the journey ( not neccesassairily with me , but their own) and wait no more. As an internal optimist, like paschim, I know that a difference can be made.
Balbhadra, we need debate first to help develop the creativity, the inspiration, that lead to those ideas that u and I and so many other nepalis so desperately want. Without listening to other people, one will never know what they don't know..if u see what i mean..so discussions are important, u c it is important to forge ahead full speed but, life has taught us all to also be in control . Welcome to the debate my brother, hope to hear more of your ideas now and in the future.
Nepe, Nepe, Nepe......how is it that our opinions are so similar but still so far apart.....there is obvious wisdom in ur words but for the life of me, i can't seem to bring myself to agree with some of them.
1) it is obvious that we will never agree on the issue of the monarchy......there is no doubting the theoretical suppositions underpinning the arguments for the abolition of the monarchy in general, but, the case of Nepal is different. Mostly, it hinges on (another one of our hotly debated topics) the question of the Nepalese national identity.... Identity today is ultimately defined by the political soverignity of individual states within geographical boundries and those living within those boundries must have faith in the institutions, political, economic, social etc... which govern the dynamic interactions of the nation. Today, I believe, all institutions in Nepal have lost all credibilty with the general public except the monarchy, although the massacre of last june did undermine that credibility. I believe it is the only thing that all Nepalis have a shared faith in....from the tharus of Nepalganj to the inhabitants of the ktm valley to the rais of the eastern hills...Answer me this, what does the tharu of the west and the rai of the east have in common....It is only the monarchy and I believe that is the only thing that is keeping under the roof of the same country...So in the immediate future Nepal needs the monarchy to dis-integrate into, once again small "principalities"...........So if we keep it in the short term why get rid of it later on....In fact I would be willing to wager that as time goes by and even if credible institutions develop in Nepal the monarchy will still be important for the Nepali pshyque....I agree with u on that it should have no political power....something similar to Thailand, Japan and some northern European nations......also wanted to ask u why the magnitude of the outpouring of public sympathy to Birendra after his tragic death should not be interpreted as support for general support for the monarchy? What else was it then?
2) On the question of identity, u and I could trade many examples back and forth supporting our own arguments and bore ourselves to death, plus, I suspect i am defining identity in a more stationary sense rather than in the case of a more continous one so we are bound to disagree (much like the difference between time series data and cross section data cannot be compared). I agree with you that viewed over a period of time it is subject to change, while at certain specific time it is clearly defined. The reason I brought it up previously was pragmatic in nature in that I just wanted to point out that however way it came about, today, there is a DISTINCT Nepali identity and I found it unfair and rather arrogant the way you dismissed paschim's comments, now ofcourse I realise the context in which u made ur comments, and that my reactions where unfair.
On how and why the present moral decay is prevalent in Nepali society and what can be done about it, well, frankly speaking, I have an idea of what I want to say based on general observations and vague intutions but have not had the time to do enough research and properly think about them. As of yet i have not been able to formulate concrete theories which I could offer up for debate and so any attempt on my part to elaborate would be wishy-washy at best. Would be delighted to hear what ur views on the matter are (or anyone elses) though. I am sure they could quite insightful.....I have a few pressing commitments for the next few months but once they are done with hopefully wil be able to devote some time to that particular issue....But until then will still be dreaming of those Sunsari maiya's thighs....
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 01-May-02 01:02 AM
RABINDRA MISHRA
Friends, there might have been some confusion regarding the quick comments made by Rabindra Mishra to my piece, and our responses to him. Please note his two clarifications that he sent:
1. What we are discussing is not about a SOLUTION but about a POSSIBILITY -
possibility of a coup. Therefore, I was just suggesting that there could be a coup and it could last for years, given people's frustration. I am in NO WAY trying to imply that the coup is a solution. I am no less a believer in democracy than you are.
2. We have to analyze the situation AS IT IS, rather than AS WE WANT IT TO
BE. That, I think, will be a more realistic approach, which might be helpful
to 'wake up' our leaders before it is too late.
----------
On a related note, Rabindra Mishra is one of the most confident, outspoken, and competent Nepali journalists I know whose full democratic credentials I admire in their entirety. Against this bedrock of political philosophy of free thought and reason, I find him more realistic than me in our mutually shared private assessments of situations.
To bring up the "brave and lonely" battle of hearts and minds that I highlighted earlier that the likes of him have been waging against Maoist criminals, I have recently heard of some very disturbing news, which I must share. Baburam Bhattarai, who you'd think, falsely, because of his higher education and exposure, is more receptive to dissenting views, has recently singled out three journalists and indirectly threatened them. These 3 journalists who are said to be targeted for just doing their job of reporting events as they saw them are: Rabindra Mishra of the BBC, Yubaraj Ghimire of Kantipur, and Rajendra Dahal of Himal Khabarpatrika.
In a recent article, written from where else but India, Baburam is said to have spit exclusive venom against Rabindra and clearly implied, "Rabindra Mishra bhanneko jhanko najhari bha chhaina". I will share a scanned copy of that writing with this audience when I receive it.
Until two months ago, I myself took these threats as a mere expression of mild anger by an intolerant bigot and hypocrite. But in light of the senseless carnage that's ongoing against civilians and physical infrastructure, I am finding these threats by the likes of Baburam increasingly credible. I worry that his madness is getting worse. I fear that he is aspiring to combine the brutalities of TWO tyrants (Stalin who largely targeted peasants and purged his rivals, and Mao who didn't even spare intellectuals). Of course, I worry for my friend Rabindra, and my acquaintances Yubaraj and Rajendra, and their families, not only because I know them personally, but also because of the larger implication of such attacks against free minds.
I kindly request all Sajha.com visitors to thus continue to keep the vigil, and show here by example that what civilized people do is promote a culture of "respectful disagreement" amongst a diverse lot, not engage in personal abuses and the worst forms of medieval barbarism.
|
| HahooGuru |
Posted
on 01-May-02 05:45 AM
The article by bhai K. Anish Pokharel appeared in
Suskera.com is quite relevant to this thread.
Anish-bhai is medical student in Karachi (?) in Pakistan
and I found his article in March issue of Suskera
also quite interesting.
http://www.suskera.com/current/revolt.html
Enjoy reading it.
hGxP
|
| Pahade keta |
Posted
on 01-May-02 02:00 PM
hi friends,
i am trying to figure out how to respond to some of the crucial questions being raised in the sajha.com/politics and hope. this piece is not a commentry on any one piece in particular. have been having discussions with biswo lately and one of the issues that he has raised which is making me respond is about the question of Nepali nation's independence. he argues that once Nepal can establish independent relations with the US--without any inteference from the Indian state--then that would be a great leap forward. this argument reminded me of a discussion an indian friend of mine had had with our famous economist Meena Acharya last year. She was arguing with him that we needed to bring Enron to beat the Indian capital!!
I see two level of irony in these kinds of statements. While respecting the aspirations for our independence and acknowledging that Indian nationstate has been acting high handedly in many issues, it also has to be recognized now that the nepali independence should not be 'wishing away the dependency we have with India. One would have to be completely myopic if one does not see what our open borders mean to each other,. what the thousands of people migrating across the borders, and the innumerable interactions that goes between and among people across the border--and that clearly have deeper ramifications for the way we imagine our nationhood vis-a-vis India. I think to harp on the kind of nationalism promoted by largely the pahade, middle class, upper caste--and they happen to be the ruling class in Nepal also--is to miss the deeper way our interactions across the border happens at the everyday level. I will have much more to write about that soon, but please let's have some discussions on this.
I am saying this after spending almost three years in Delhi and interacting with different groups of people here--the political leaders, the migrant labourers, intellectuals, and also the students. We need to have much more informed opinion about what India means to Nepal than what we generally have in Nepal.
lau ta, and more later
anil
|
| Nepe |
Posted
on 01-May-02 03:36 PM
The news Paschim shared with us about the threat those three reputed journalists of Nepal are receiving from Maoists, if true, is another disturbing sign of rapid evolution of Maoists into a destructive force in recent days. Even for a sympathizer of their cause, their recent campaign of destroying nation’s infrastructure of communication, transportation and power is simply beyond humanly act. It seems they are turning into a mass of wounded and revengeful people.
I think the integrity of Nepali press is seriously in question throughout the emergency. My own obesrvation is that Nepali press le sarakaar.ko laatho saamu ghundaa tekeko chha. But I am sure it will recover after the emergency is over. Ignore this brief dark period of Nepali journalism, you can see it has made marvellous progress both in quantity and quality during last 11 years. Thanks to the freedom, the free people and the hard work and professionalism of many journalists like Yubaraj, Rabindra and Rajendra. Its time to appreciate their contributions by standing by them against those who fear them and want to hurt them- sanaki Maoists and darchheruwa sarkar too.
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 01-May-02 05:52 PM
Anil:
I guess you took my argument out of context. My point was to criticize the leftists
who are criticizing the American help. I am not an anti-Indian, and I was careful
enough to remind that we need to be careful not to antagonize our immediate
neighbors China and India.
Why are leftists parties so against America? So against American help? Doesn't
our purchase of one Apache directly from USA would automatically invalidate
Indian claim that we are obligated to buy from/or show our purchase list for
ratification to India? Isn't that what leftists want? To come out of the Indian
security umbrella, or at least the illusory perception of this humiliating concept that
Indian journos and diplomats often try to throw upon us, should be as crucial to
these lefts as it is to the 'rights' who are willing to take the US military grants.
Am I proposing to confront India with western help? No. That is not possible. Am
I undermining the ground reality and becoming irrationally vitriolic against India?
No. All I am saying is we need to assert our free-ness whenever we can. If this
means sitting next to USA in UN, be it so. If it means chastising India in UN human
right comittee if someone brings Gujrat issue there, be it so.If it means accepting
M16A2 rifles from America for RNA dudes, be it so.
Don't some Swiss go to work to France and Italy? Don't Mexicans come to USA to
work? 1/7th of entire population of Dominican Republic lives in USA and Mongolians
are sorrounded by USSR and China just the way we are. But nobody tries to
microcontrol these dependent states the way India wants to do to Nepal. Also naturally, if you live in New Delhi, you will see more Nepali working in India, and if
you live in Chitwan, or Birgunj, you will see more Indians coming to Nepal. This
flow of people is mainly for mutual interest, and it shouldn't necessarily sway our
right to assert our freedom.
|
| Nepe |
Posted
on 01-May-02 11:17 PM
This thread now flows as multiple streams. I will continue my conversation with Naya Keta. Naya Keta, I enjoyed reading your response. Nice writing.
As you correctly sensed, ‘ it is obvious that we will never agree on the issue of the monarchy.’ So let’s keep a respectful disagreement on that, as Paschim would put it.
I feel there is a gradation in support for monarchy among friends like Gpji, Biswoji, Paschimji and you, and I belong to the other end of that spectrum. I have exchanged my view on this subject with other friends on various occasions and context. Repetition of ‘em must make them bored. So here is my quick and crude response to your one or two statements that I find well written but disagreeable.
You wrote:
>Today, I believe, all institutions in Nepal have lost all credibility with the general
>public except the monarchy, although the massacre of last june did undermine
>that credibility.
I don’t know why you made such a sweeping, irresponsible and imprecise statement. I am not going to argue about it until I am sure you really mean it.
>Answer me this, what does the tharu of the west and the rai of the east have in
>common....It is only the monarchy and I believe that is the only thing that is
>keeping under the roof of the same country.
At this point it is being very difficult to control myself. But once again I humbly ask you if you would like to reconsider this statement.
>also wanted to ask u why the magnitude of the outpouring of public sympathy
>to Birendra after his tragic death should not be interpreted as support for general
>support for the monarchy? What else was it then?
Okey, this one is a good argument. I am not denying that a part of that reaction was a genuine respect and sympathy for Birendra. But a huge part of it was a natural reaction of any human to that kind of surreal tragedy. Still other part of it was people’s reaction to their belief that it was a shadayantra of somebody that lingered for days and even the aayog’s pratibedan could not remove it completely. All these elements fueled and enhanced each other and we know how big it was. And that was why. Another important distinction I want you to make is between the popularity of Birendra and the support for monarchy. Please don’t mix them up. Also don’t drag Birendra’s personal popularity to other members of royal family. I don’t want to disgrace them here by giving illustration of ‘public love’ for them. May dead souls rest in peace in heaven and living souls with grace on earth.
I am particularly troubled to see how badly you failed to see exactly what happened to this nation in last may after the people recovered from the mourning. People’s eyes, for the first time in entire history of Nepal, could see behind that centuries old mystical parkhal. Again Paschim eloquently phrases it, ‘Royals got demystified’. And he recognizes that as the third most significant development in Nepal’s history after PN Shah’s unification of Nepal and 2007 ko kranti. Here I would like to add a personal note. With due respect to all, I don’t trust that monarchists have any vision except wishful thinking about Nepal. Their thoughts do not go beyond ‘Nepal laai kasari BACHAAUNE’. They don’t have vision about ‘Nepal laai kasari BADHAUNE’. When they say janataa, they don’t see anybody except those anapadh gawar who can not breathe without being sure he has his king with him.
But but but, when I read paschim saying that, I said to myself, this is the man. He is damn good. He is so damn good at gauzing the pulse of the nation, to listen to the heart-beat of history, and bold enough to say that. I don’t know Paschim. I don’t know what future holds for him. I don’t know what are his plan/interests. But I trust, at least at this moment, that future of this deceived nation is safe and bright in hands of people who think like Paschim does. For the first time in my life, I have genuinely respected a professed monarchist for his political views. But that does not mean I am giving up my monarchist agenda. I will continue. And I will continue to fight with Paschim, you and all other friends until I wake up if I am sleeping.
Good night !
|
| HahooGuru |
Posted
on 01-May-02 11:44 PM
Nepe ji,
At least, I am not bored in reading your postings. You have already
established your own identity here, and we all know your are
republicanists, and to make our arguments strong, we have to read your
one, otherwise, we will finally end up like emperor's cloth or
Girija ko Nepali Congress Party ko Central Working committee.
We are agreeing to disagree, I mean, in MONARCHY related
issue. As you already wrote that you "republican supporters",
do not have immediate substitute at hand, and they surely
have many valid arguments to justify that Monarchy does have
weaknesses. Our talk hinges between, "Should we throw a
system that has weakness by another system for which we
don't have immedaite substitute, or should we rectify its existing
problems and think of replacing it when it becomes irrelevant".
The following statement is really a great summary on Monarchy of Nepal.
This (the first sentence) needs to be noted.
Nepe ji wrote:
Their thoughts do not go beyond ‘Nepal laai kasari BACHAAUNE’. They don’t have vision about ‘Nepal laai kasari BADHAUNE’. When they say janataa, they don’t see anybody except those anapadh gawar who can not breathe without being sure he has his king with him.
---- hGxP
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 02-May-02 08:36 AM
Nepe, it is with delight that I note your kind remarks. It is actually very cumbersome to carry such levels of trust around, and besides, I have a tendency to disappoint people as time moves on...but for a flawed man, making an honest effort to become a genuinely better person each day, those words mean an immense lot. Thank you.
Liked your ghazal. Tyesto ghazal “ooni-lai” pahilai sunauna payeko bhaye aaja mero yo durgati hune thiyena hola. I tried Raja Mahendra's “lolayeka ti thula timra dui najar le, heridiye malai chahinna aru kehi” and it did seem to work for a while...Khair...Ganatantrabadi haru ko geet sunauna parne rahechha...tyo khola ko leu laagya dhunga ma NK ko naam lekheko katha was also maarmik. Do you have any geet against the monarchy?! My “lal” reference was a tribute to your “red” youth!
Have also benefited from the exchange between Naya Keta and Nepe – passionate and (almost) convincing! Biswo’s response to Pahade also conforms to his trademark posture - fresh and forceful! And of course much admire our Gurudev’s honest self...I’m so thrilled that this thread has been this rich.
|
| Nepe |
Posted
on 02-May-02 03:45 PM
Paschim
Thanks for liking my ghazal. I can not say what could have happened with you, but a decade ago I happened to recite it to a wrong person, my professor. I mean he was so impressed he employed me and my job was test tube majhne kaam for the rest of my life. I lost my ghazals for good. Irony.
Interestingly I did not write geet against the monarchy. Oh yes, there was one. I composed it when I was in a police custody for 5 days- in Mangshir mahina, Baggi khana ko chiso chhidi ma, kasoor- na bhani halau ahile. I do not remember the words now. But several unacquainted co- prisoners (?) used to surprise me later by greeting, ‘do you remember me ? we were there.’
And thank you for your sympathy to my khola ko leu lageko dhunga ma lekhiyeka ghau ka khataharu. You can relate to it, don’t you ?
Sapana bhulai sara ashu d/piyera jau
Mandir ma chha timrai tasbir liyera jau
This guy sings for us. Doesn’t he ?
OK, enough about that. It better be stopped before it goes back to ‘frivolity re woman’, the very realm you wanted to get away from when you started this thread. Let's talk about some serious business now. How about the ‘war cabinet’ ? That’s damn serious.
|
| mit_guy |
Posted
on 02-May-02 09:41 PM
Nepe wrote:
>But but but, when I read paschim saying that,
> I said to myself, this is the man. He is
>damn good. He is so damn good at gauzing the
>pulse of the nation, to listen to the heart-
>beat of history, and bold enough to say that.
> I don’t know Paschim. I don’t
>know what future holds for him. I don’
>t know what are his plan/interests. But I
>trust, at least at this moment, that future
>of this deceived nation is safe and bright
>in hands of people who think like Paschim
>does. For the first time in my life, I have
>genuinely respected a professed monarchist
>for his political views. But that does not
>mean I am giving up my monarchist agenda. I
>will continue. And I will continue to fight
>with Paschim, you and all other friends
>until I wake up if I am sleeping.
>
Ironically, Nepe, it was through meeting and getting to know Paschim in person that I actually started to think of a Nepali republic as a viable alternative to the current situations. I won't go as far as saying Paschim made me into a republican (he did not, I am not one either, but neither am I necessarily a monarchist) ... but I have to say, ... whenever I listened to Paschim talk about Nepali and world politics I would think that it is sad that someone of his talents will never have the opportunity to run for president...
|
| Nepe |
Posted
on 02-May-02 11:10 PM
Mit_guy wrote:
>but I have to say, ... whenever I listened to Paschim talk about Nepali and
>world politics I would think that it is sad that someone of his talents will never
>have the opportunity to run for president...
I could not agree more. That brings me to an argument I used to do with my friends in the first few weeks of our recovered democracy about what history Ganeshman can and should make, if he has the slightest insight to see what this country was so badly needing at that time. All right he made a history, but I was talking about a different history. It was the time Palace was disgraced and there was a big void to be filled by a person the whole nation can place it’s faith in, whole people can look up to, can identify with, can call the father of the nation. At that bishal rally in kula manch after the declaration of democracy, when Lilamani Pokharel introduced Ganesh Man at the top of his spellbounding voice as ‘.. sampurna Nepali ka aastha ka sarbochcha shikhar...’ (exact words ?), I said to myself, here is the father of the nation in making. He is going to fill that void. From now on he must free himself from party politics and be a truely Sarbamanya father. History needs him that way. We all know what course history took. We all know how a person booed by the hundreds of thousands of people at the same rally, Girija, succeeded to sideline GM to die powerless, frustrated and pitied. A great chapter escaped from being written in Nepali history. I don’t have a single strand of doubt in my mind that Nepal ko aaja ko yo durgati is a result of that. We have a lesson to learn from the history that is still waiting to be written.
|
| HahooGuru |
Posted
on 03-May-02 12:26 AM
Nepe ji,
May I just make a modification (XP version)
Sapana bhulai sara ashu d/piyera jau
Mandir ma chha timrai tasbir liyera jau
lai yasari,( at try)
Sapana bhulai sara ashu d/piyera jau
Ridaya ma chha timrai tasbir (yo ridaya) liyera jau.
Paschim ji, cool man. When you get another tarbir
and as time permits, a new tasbir will emerge in your
ridaya. Ridaya ma nai sculpture banako bhe ta aba ke
garne ta bhanne problem chai chha. . . . . . . .
kahile kahi jhilikka pani parnu aghi akas jhilikka chamke jasto
ridayama jhilikka pulse haru pass hunu ta swabhabik nai
ho. Tara narunus yaar, usle chhodera po tapai ma yatro
jagar, pholosophy, ..... develop bhako po ho ki?. Positive
thinking, re kya.
|
| HahooGur |
Posted
on 03-May-02 12:26 AM
Nepe ji,
May I just make a modification (XP version)
Sapana bhulai sara ashu d/piyera jau
Mandir ma chha timrai tasbir liyera jau
lai yasari,( at try)
Sapana bhulai sara ashu d/piyera jau
Ridaya ma chha timrai tasbir (yo ridaya) liyera jau.
Paschim ji, cool man. When you get another tarbir
and as time permits, a new tasbir will emerge in your
ridaya. Ridaya ma nai sculpture banako bhe ta aba ke
garne ta bhanne problem chai chha. . . . . . . .
kahile kahi jhilikka pani parnu aghi akas jhilikka chamke jasto
ridayama jhilikka pulse haru pass hunu ta swabhabik nai
ho. Tara narunus yaar, usle chhodera po tapai ma yatro
jagar, pholosophy, ..... develop bhako po ho ki?. Positive
thinking, re kya.
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 03-May-02 05:27 AM
Arnico, MIT guys of all people should not endorse objects out of vacuity. You are, thus, erring, Sir. Congratulations nonetheless for having your handsome statue erected in Beijing's White Pagoda Complex the other day. Not many mortals have that luxury :)
HG-ji, asafal premi ma, bhabuk chhu. Herdai jaun kata puginchha. Ahile lai kunai stri ko saath hoina, Aruna Lama, Deep Shrestha ra Narayan Gopal ka birahi dhoon haru ko maya payeku chhu. "Cool man" bhandi haalnu bho, la mero euta pidit verse suni halnus na ta :)
Chhoto joban ko eklo jiunu sarhai khallo bho
Khusi saatna napaidida sabthok baanjho bho
---------
Okay, onto serious stuff...Mitra Nepe brings forth yet another pleasantly provocative assessment of history. Because his subject du jour is my respected Ganeshman-ji, I can't let him rest by NOT differing. Nepe-ji's wishful thinking is that perhaps GM could have done something about dislodging the Shahs in 2046 and become the first President of The Republic of Nepal.
I have to unambiguously state up front that I believe that Ganeshman Singh is one of the 3 greatest Nepalis of the 20th century. Was he a paragon of virtue? Not exactly. An extremely modest man, incompletely educated, inarticulate, born into an elite Newar family, he had his share of human flaws. But assessing his life in its ENTIRETY, I have concluded that he was great, one of our greatest. It will take me two full days to tell you why and how I have reached this conclusion, so won't get into it now. But in assessing Ganeshman-ji, one has to cover the whole gamut of the grand life he led, especially the 60 plus years of his active politics: from birth into nobility, Praja Parishad years, jump to the cabinet from death row, 16 years of imprisonment and exile, Commanding of the 2046 Jana Andolan, and his (pitiable?) life most of us know about after 2046. His assessment should span all these years, not just the last 9 years or so. Anything else will be inaccurate and unfair.
With this background, and taking a complete sweep of Ganeshman-ji's life, one theme is striking: an uncompromising life of CONSISTENCY. He fought all his life for a multi-party democratic regime with a constitutional monarch. Nothing more, nothing less. He delivered. He was always sure of his goals. He never misled. Whether he could have gone further? He very well could have. That's what communists hoped for, but would he have, and did he? Of course not. It would just have been an unprincipled INCONSISTENCY for him. To not know this is not to have known Ganeshman-ji and his preceding 50 years of active politics.
There's an irony here. Some, like Nepe-ji, would have wanted to see him become a President-like father of the nation, but the man even went on to turn down the prime ministership that was offered to him on a silver platter. In today's petty power politics, that act is being recognized as saintly. But for people who have come to know Ganeshman-ji through exhaustive informal research, that act on his part wasn't too unsurprising. I'm not. Because he was just being CONSISTENT with his values. He fought for defined norms and systems, not positions and greedy personal gratification. Ever. What a simple life, but what a grand one. I fully understand Nepe's (partial) assessment that GM died "pitied, powerless, frustrated". Perhaps; but so did Mohandas Gandhi.
Great lives deserve a complete assessment, we can't pick and choose episodes from their lives. Period after 2046 wasn't a particularly pleasant phase for him, but in its entirety, he led an awe-inspiring life of unique courage, resolve, warmth, and generosity. For an elaborated explanation, I'll need 2 more days!!
Nepe's bringing up this topic is so timely. It's exactly 12 years since that 27 Chaitra 2046 Aam Sabha of Tundikhel. So, my spontaneous foray into GM-ji above is a partial answer to Nepe's hypothesis, but also a fitting tribute to one of very, very few Nepali men who have truly inspired me. Not for high-sounding intellectual pedigree, but for the most beautiful human virtues that any man can hope to acquire, and I repeat them: "courage, resolve, warmth, and generosity". As an aside, Nepe also mentions Girija Koirala's booing that day. Another irony: he was booed for saying probably the ONLY intelligent thing in his entire career that, "democracy is a system of all and thus its advent is a victory of all, including the vanquished Panchas". Bad timing for not recognizing the "justified but irrational exuberance" of the mob, but how very true.
I WAS there too that day, a teenager lost in the mob, absorbing in my veins that great occasion of high hopes and grand ideals. 12 years on, much has been lost, but not all. We're on a detour and a little low in our morale, but I am confident that we - Nepe, I, and everyone else who shares the dream of a better Nepal, with or without the (hopefully irrelevant) monarch, will get on the right track soon and resurrect our hopes. This thread is after all about Politics and Hope.
Have a good weekend.
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 03-May-02 07:44 AM
I share Paschim's optimism for the future.
My only realistic worry is that with so many of the best and the brightest and highly-educated/trained Nepalis (25-40 age group) abroad working for either corporate America or corporate Europe/Australia, or international donor organizations and so on and on, who among them -- or which group among them -- is ever going to
spend enough time,
make enough networks,
create enough personal and professional credibility in Nepal
and bell the cat, so to speak,
by assuming small, small acts of public leadership in Nepal?
Even in Nepal, international donor organizations and others like that
are very good at hiring smart, young Nepalis at enormous salaries (for Nepal, anyway!) and throwing great perks at them, and then, gradually, defanging
them by turning them into boring, dull bureaucrats with zaftig wives who
watch Zee TV all day and night, and kids who are way too pampered :-)
OK, OK, not that there is anything wrong with that 'family'
characterization!!
Anil Bhattarai -- I am glad to see you on sajha.com, my dear friend.
How goes life in New Delhi?
oohi
ashu
ktm,nepal
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 03-May-02 07:47 AM
I share Paschim's optimism for the future.
My only realistic worry is that with so many of the best and the brightest and highly-educated/trained Nepalis (25-40 age group) abroad working for either corporate America or corporate Europe/Australia, or international donor organizations and so on and on, who among them -- or which group among them -- is ever going to
spend enough time,
make enough networks,
create enough personal and professional credibility in Nepal
and bell the cat, so to speak,
by assuming small, small acts of public leadership in Nepal?
Even in Nepal, international donor organizations and others like that
are very good at hiring smart, young Nepalis at enormous salaries (for Nepal, anyway!) and throwing great perks at them, and then, gradually, defanging
them by turning them into boring, dull bureaucrats with zaftig wives who
watch Zee TV all day and night, and kids who are way too pampered :-)
OK, OK, not that there is anything wrong with that 'family'
characterization!!
Anil Bhattarai -- I am glad to see you on sajha.com, my dear friend.
How goes life in New Delhi?
oohi
ashu
ktm,nepal
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 03-May-02 08:12 AM
I saw two major developments here today.
One our republican friends tried to use the weapon of temptation to woo Paschimji
in their camp. (Why don't you become republican? See, you are the one who gotto
be president!) Well, I don't disagree that Paschim has that ability, and vision. But
it has been used here as temptation, which Paschim seems to recognize to some
extent.
Another is, the sweeping judgement of 2046. Was Ganeshman in the position to
overthrow Shah dynasty in 2046? First of all, 2046 movement was directed against
perceived tyranny of Panchayat and its supreme commander, the king, but it was
not against the king himself. To say that 2046 was a missed opportunity, that
Ganesh Man could have easily pushed a little further to fetch the prime trophy of
republicanism is to a callow rush to a conclusion. Royals tend to have deeper root,
more appeal to mass than a lot of us think.
And Ashu, I don't think it is harmful if a Nepali works for international organization
for a decade or so, and garner considerable experience, and goes back to work.
I am tired of seeing politicians who have no other skills ( in Nepal). So they are
always afraid of retiring, because they can do nothing. A skilled person as a
politician will always have more options and won't be afraid to retire. See, even
in China, putatively an authoritarian regime, they have started to step down.
Why not? The communist leaders are all graduates of their prestigious universities,
and were engineers/economists etc. Contrast that to Nepal, what is there in the
market for dudes like Prakash Man Singh or (to go locally) my MP Sabitri Bogati
who is now asst minister? She was a teacher in a local primary school long ago,
and all she knew was to teach kids how to recognize ABCD.. Power of MP is
definitely a more enjoyable option for her!
My thoughts only!
|
| arnico |
Posted
on 03-May-02 02:56 PM
I was in the process of writing a lot longer a contribution to this thread last night when my laptop battery died, and I did not have the power cord with me...
So... now I have a lot more to reply to.
First of all, I am not a republican (although I do think a republic could possibly be a viable alternative to the current situation... I do not think it is the best alternative), and I am not trying to lure Paschim into the republican camp. He can make his own choices. I also did not mean to single him out. Paschim just happens to be one of the few people on this board whom I know personally, beyond his writing... I don't think I can make any judgement about future leadership potential of people with whom I have only corresponded in writing, as highly as I respect the contributions here from all of you. My comment was also just about future potential...not a prediction. What he does with the potential is partly in his hands.
Anyway, within my very limited knowledge about political systems, I have been thinking a bit about what has been wrong with the political system in Nepal in the last 10 years, and what would make it better. Within my limited experience, a lot of local administrations have been quite effective... city governments of Hetauda, Butwal, Dharan, and perhaps even Kathmandu have shown some vision, some plans for improving the quality of life in their cities, and have implemented them. A lot of VDCs have taken the money received from the central government and mobilized local labor worth many times more, to do real development work with the money (often infrastructural projects). The kuhieko (rotten) parts of the government seem to me to be the cabinet, the parliament, and many parts of the central administration (ministries, departments, state corporations, and their branch offices). They are where most of the corruption takes place, and where the work does not get done. Especially the elected governments, instead of keeping the administration under control, have set new low standards... but why and how? How could that have been different?
There have been numerous cases of moral idealistic individuals joining one of those institutions, and ending up very corrupt, or at least lazy and ineffective...
Why is it that:
* most MPs cannot or do not deliver to their constituents what they promised during elections?
* most MPs spend most of the time in parliament in bitter power struggles to attain cabinet positions or in conspiracies to bring down the cabinet...instead of working on legislations?
* most prime ministers spend most of their time making deals trying to remain prime minister, instead of getting real work done?
* we get ministers in charge of industry or health or science and technology who have no background in the subject?
The problem seems to me to be less one of morals and integrity of individuals than of the system of incentives within which our politicians operate... a system where 205 individuals elected to the lower house have to compete with eachother for the right to lead or join the cabinet... which is the only way to attain the wealth which motivated many to run for office in the first place...
Let's think for a moment how it would be if we had an alternative system: one where the prime minister is directly elected by the population... and the elected prime minister handpicks his cabinet from among all the citizens of the country. Then we could have a cabinet composed of experts in their field.
And the parliament would be there to legislate, and to keep the cabinet in check. But without the ability for promotion into the cabinet, parliament would be filled with people who ran for election because they care about representing their constituencies and because they care about writing legislations.
The prime minister could rule for the entire duration of the elected term (unless impeached for gross negligence) without constantly having to win a power struggle with 204 others. The ministries would be headed by the same experts for several years who keep the administration working hard... and the cabinet could not get away with corruption because the parliament would be watching their every step and would not be making corrupt powerstruggle compromises...
Meanwhile, the king, if he wants to continue to exist, can continue to play the role of constitutional monarch, a symbol of national unity or whatever, and a greeter of foreign ambassadors (not very different from today), and perhaps even... play a larger role inaugurating workshops and functions so that the cabinet can get on with its work...
What I am describing, is of course not something unique and I am not the first person to think about this for Nepal either...I am just brainstorming about it today... The US president, although not directly elected, plays a similar role to what I imagine for the Nepali prime minister. Isreal has a system with a directly elected prime minister, and a ceremonial president playing a role similar to that imagined for the monarch...
Would such a system be better suited to Nepal's development needs than what we have now? I am sure (see above). Would it function better than what we had during the Panchayat? Yes. Because a cabinet of experts would have to be accountable to elected representatives of the people. Would it function better than a royal or army or Maoist dictatorship? Yes, again because who ever rules the country is elected and accountable to the people and their representatives.
Would it be an acceptable alternative to the Maoists' goal of a communist republic? Perhaps worth considering, discussing. Baburam, if you read this: once cleared of criminal charges, even you would be eligible to run for prime minister... and if you win, you can appoint all your cronies to the cabinet without fear that they would overthrow you... but of course to win you would have to convince more than half of Nepal's population that you are the most suitable canditate to lead Nepal to a brigther future... and we'd still have a parliament elected by the people making sure you do what the people want...
|
| Sangam |
Posted
on 03-May-02 03:57 PM
I have been following this thread since it first appeared on the board. Very interesting and enlightening thoughts posted by all the contributors. I support what Arnico has suggested regarding election of the prime minister. The biggest benefit of this is a stable government if nothing more. It will also sideline CWC and Politburos and its impact on the government.
To add to what Arnico has suggested, it will help in development process if we had regional governments with autonomy to rule and raise revenues for its projects. In the current system, elected MPs’ voices get lost just because they come from a remote constituency and don’t have power (support of MPs) to make an impact on government’s decision making. Furthermore, it will initiate a process of decentralization. There have been talks of decentralization for more than a decade but nothing has been achieved other than issuing passports from district headquarters. As for district level government, history has shown its inability to be effective in development process. Five regional governments will be more effective and efficient than 75 district governments. Maoist knows that they won’t be able to get to the central government through current system due to the lack of popular support in public. It just might give them a window of opportunity to participate in democratic process and show us all what difference, if any, they can make if elected.
|
| Naya Keta |
Posted
on 03-May-02 04:06 PM
Nepe, pls tel me what you find disagreeable about my (i accept it is generalisation) statement regarding what I percieve as the loss of credibility by the national institutions in the eyes of the public. This is how I see it...1990 was an opportunity for Nepal to reshape itself in any image that it wanted. The people had high hopes, some say unrealistic and inflated by the parties themselves to garner public support ( but that is not the issue here), the political parties had the public support they wanted and riding wave of momentum, could have enacted any policy they deemed appropriate. As u r a stauch repulicanist, let me just say that, if Nepal was/is ever going to get rid of the Monarchy that was the time. But instead of paving the path of development for the country the politicians
1)made too many compromises with the old regime and let off too many of the corrupt old gaurd with out any punishment.
2) Began lining their own pockets and continued the practices of panchayat era. What I truely find amazing is that people who were on the run for 10 -15 years, thus holding no real job, over night had 2-3 houses in KTM, a few of the latest cars etc..and still nobody does anything. Corruption has become the norm in our country and the one who is straight is looked down as weak.
anyway back to the argument, and let me just outline points so that it doesn't get too boring
could have done any thing...did nothing....culprits went scott free....
they themselves began a frenzy of corruption.......easy to decipher from this that the parties possessed no strength...were of weak moral nature.....they were not fighting for democracy but a because they were not allowed achance to enrich themselves by the old system.....no percievable change to the public....if there was change then it was for the worst......govt changes every 6 months or so...nepal bandh and chakka jam god knows how many times every month.....economy ruined and nepal becomes even more of a "beggar" state....inflation sky rockets but wages don't follow the movements of the prices..people become poorer then before in real terms......nepotism is all pervasive...corruption becomes rampant and in your face..it is not even hidden any more.......are held hostage by indian self interest in relation to tapping our own natural resourses......Bhutan has upstaged us diplomatically...the refugee problem is a disgrace to our national self esteem and the govt seems IMPOTENT to do anything.....and then to top it all off.....the maobadi problem, in the last 5-6 years has become such a problem the people fear for their safety and there is definately a lack of security in the country.
All I am saying is that the cumulative effect of the last 12 years has been a loss of confidence in our institutions by the public......the govt has failed in it primary duty to provide security and stabilty in the country.....people are asking themselves what democracy has brought for them....I don't mean the educated ( though have heard that quite a few of them too have started demanding a greater role for the king, the same ones that were shouting at the top of their voices against the panchayat...how dangerous is that) but the average everyday nepali who is finding it a struggle (more so than before) to just survive......can you not see that our institutions have failed us and that people do not identify themselves with the govt anymore....Do you honestly think that the people of Nepal,today, think that the govt and other institutions are acting for their benefit.......and in this tme of despair and desperation facing the nepali janata have you not heard the growing calls for the King to have a greater role in affairs...even here on this forum have you not noticed that the number of people upporting the king and some kind of army take over is growing...If the Monarchy too had lost credibilty then why would people be shouting out for the King's intervention. Their actions or should I say lack of action after 1990 has help build the credibilty of the monarchy.......and that is all I am saying, not saying I agree with it but only that such is my perception of reality
If I am reading this wrong pls do enlighten me.....
which brings me to another point...... I believe that the monarchy is the one institution that all, well almost all less one :o), Nepalis identify with, the tharus and rais included....that may be the only shared belief of the two...if you think they share more than just that then pls tell me.....actually,tell me what you think is keeping the rais and tharus as part of one country....as I don't see anything else I could benefit from your point of view.......
Heard more than 90 maobadis were killed....am troubled by the shedding of nepali blood at the hands of other Nepalis...I fear the situation will turn, i s turning, deperate for the maobadis. Before they are neutralised, which i belive they will be,
apprehensive of what their actions will be.......their threat to the journalist, Mishraji included is indicative of their intolerance of differing views and the threat they pose to Nepali society if they allowed to participate in politics in their present structure.......Hopefully the govt.know how to deal with them....but doubt it really..
On what Ashu wrote...i am inclined to be in agreement...I think we all know what he meant....staying abroad gaining experience is one thing but without capable people inside nepal, well, I don't see much hope.....we can raise awareness of nepal in the west, also raise more funds for development projects, big or small, there are many things which we can do which compliment efforts inside nepal but there is no substitute for hands on involvement within Nepal by nepalis who care enough to sacrifice a part of their personal ambitions and use their time for national benefit.....It has been shown that a generation of people working together with good direction, making personal sacrifices and working cohesively can make a difference ina few decades....The question that I ask myself and one which keeps me awake at night sometimes is how strong am i, how much am i willing to sacrifice, can I put my money where my mouth ( or more accurately, my heart) is....don't know the answer and I guess only time will tell....only pray that there are others asking themselves the same question for even if I choose the cowards path someone else may not and show the strength which i lacked.....
|
| Naya Keta |
Posted
on 03-May-02 04:08 PM
Nepe, pls tel me what you find disagreeable about my (i accept it is generalisation) statement regarding what I percieve as the loss of credibility by the national institutions in the eyes of the public. This is how I see it...1990 was an opportunity for Nepal to reshape itself in any image that it wanted. The people had high hopes, some say unrealistic and inflated by the parties themselves to garner public support ( but that is not the issue here), the political parties had the public support they wanted and riding wave of momentum, could have enacted any policy they deemed appropriate. As u r a stauch repulicanist, let me just say that, if Nepal was/is ever going to get rid of the Monarchy that was the time. But instead of paving the path of development for the country the politicians
1)made too many compromises with the old regime and let off too many of the corrupt old gaurd with out any punishment.
2) Began lining their own pockets and continued the practices of panchayat era. What I truely find amazing is that people who were on the run for 10 -15 years, thus holding no real job, over night had 2-3 houses in KTM, a few of the latest cars etc..and still nobody does anything. Corruption has become the norm in our country and the one who is straight is looked down as weak.
anyway back to the argument, and let me just outline points so that it doesn't get too boring
could have done any thing...did nothing....culprits went scott free....
they themselves began a frenzy of corruption.......easy to decipher from this that the parties possessed no strength...were of weak moral nature.....they were not fighting for democracy but a because they were not allowed achance to enrich themselves by the old system.....no percievable change to the public....if there was change then it was for the worst......govt changes every 6 months or so...nepal bandh and chakka jam god knows how many times every month.....economy ruined and nepal becomes even more of a "beggar" state....inflation sky rockets but wages don't follow the movements of the prices..people become poorer then before in real terms......nepotism is all pervasive...corruption becomes rampant and in your face..it is not even hidden any more.......are held hostage by indian self interest in relation to tapping our own natural resourses......Bhutan has upstaged us diplomatically...the refugee problem is a disgrace to our national self esteem and the govt seems IMPOTENT to do anything.....and then to top it all off.....the maobadi problem, in the last 5-6 years has become such a problem the people fear for their safety and there is definately a lack of security in the country.
All I am saying is that the cumulative effect of the last 12 years has been a loss of confidence in our institutions by the public......the govt has failed in it primary duty to provide security and stabilty in the country.....people are asking themselves what democracy has brought for them....I don't mean the educated ( though have heard that quite a few of them too have started demanding a greater role for the king, the same ones that were shouting at the top of their voices against the panchayat...how dangerous is that) but the average everyday nepali who is finding it a struggle (more so than before) to just survive......can you not see that our institutions have failed us and that people do not identify themselves with the govt anymore....Do you honestly think that the people of Nepal,today, think that the govt and other institutions are acting for their benefit.......and in this tme of despair and desperation facing the nepali janata have you not heard the growing calls for the King to have a greater role in affairs...even here on this forum have you not noticed that the number of people upporting the king and some kind of army take over is growing...If the Monarchy too had lost credibilty then why would people be shouting out for the King's intervention. Their actions or should I say lack of action after 1990 has help build the credibilty of the monarchy.......and that is all I am saying, not saying I agree with it but only that such is my perception of reality
If I am reading this wrong pls do enlighten me.....
which brings me to another point...... I believe that the monarchy is the one institution that all, well almost all less one :o), Nepalis identify with, the tharus and rais included....that may be the only shared belief of the two...if you think they share more than just that then pls tell me.....actually,tell me what you think is keeping the rais and tharus as part of one country....as I don't see anything else I could benefit from your point of view.......
Heard more than 90 maobadis were killed....am troubled by the shedding of nepali blood at the hands of other Nepalis...I fear the situation will turn, i s turning, deperate for the maobadis. Before they are neutralised, which i belive they will be,
apprehensive of what their actions will be.......their threat to the journalist, Mishraji included is indicative of their intolerance of differing views and the threat they pose to Nepali society if they allowed to participate in politics in their present structure.......Hopefully the govt.know how to deal with them....but doubt it really..
On what Ashu wrote...i am inclined to be in agreement...I think we all know what he meant....staying abroad gaining experience is one thing but without capable people inside nepal, well, I don't see much hope.....we can raise awareness of nepal in the west, also raise more funds for development projects, big or small, there are many things which we can do which compliment efforts inside nepal but there is no substitute for hands on involvement within Nepal by nepalis who care enough to sacrifice a part of their personal ambitions and use their time for national benefit.....It has been shown that a generation of people working together with good direction, making personal sacrifices and working cohesively can make a difference ina few decades....The question that I ask myself and one which keeps me awake at night sometimes is how strong am i, how much am i willing to sacrifice, can I put my money where my mouth ( or more accurately, my heart) is....don't know the answer and I guess only time will tell....only pray that there are others asking themselves the same question for even if I choose the cowards path someone else may not and show the strength which i lacked.....
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 03-May-02 08:58 PM
Just quick thoughts on some new points before I go away for the weekend:
I like Arnico’s suggestion of a system of directly electing the Prime Minister, and have no disagreement with the convincing arguments that he has put forth on why this makes sense. Narahari Acharya floated a similar idea in 1998 with the case example of Israel. He was scoffed. Why? As a “tuppo bata palayeko neta” – how dare he suggest changing the beautiful Westminster model so soon? Isn’t the British parliamentary system what Madhuri Dixit was to the world of Indian cinema – simply the best? Well, well, well, perils of engaging in a healthy debate in Nepal – people are more comfortable attacking the person than her ideas. I have been attracted to this proposal, but I haven’t heard much on the negatives of such a system for a country like ours. Since Arnico has given this topic some scrutiny, I’d be interested in hearing from him and others what they think the potential downsides are.
Let me just posit one scenario to get this aspect of the discussion kick-started: countries like Israel and the US or even France are more homogenous than Nepal. Will this system require charismatic leaders who are in a position to transgress the rigid ethnic, caste, and regional divides to become a “representative” leader? In the parliamentary system, Deuba, a Thakuri, could be elected the PM but he has a broad-based pool of MPs (imperfectly representative of the populace) supporting him from Ram Janam Chaudhari of Kailali, Sarbadhan Rai of Khotang, Gangadhar Lamsal of Chitwan, Sushila Swaar of Kanchanpur, Tirtha Ram Dangol of Kathmandu, etc. What happens if the directly elected PM does his arithmetic carefully and seeks to dig into vote-banks in inflammatory, divisive ways? This problem seems neutered in the parliamentary system because of the “indirect” nature of elections. Arnico et al. please join in. It’d be good to draw up a balance sheet of sorts and really offer a thought-through, credible alternative. Could be one of the best gifts our generation can give to the nation.
And before some people jump in to say “it’s not the system yaar, it’s the people in it who got to change”, allow me to nip, if I may, that sort of skepticism in the bud by saying the following: Yes, people got to change, but changes in people’s behavior are shaped by the built-in incentives that a regime presents. I DON’T believe in making people holy and righteous overnight. It’s hypocritical and impossible, but we can restrain and shape their actions through systemic provisions. Rule of law is that tool, not religion (theocracy, Iran) or coercion (communism, North Korea). What will be the incentive “architecture” of the “Arnico” model? Let me state my bias a priori: I think it will be better than what we have now.
Naya Keta and Ashu point out a question that has been bothering me for the last 8 years. Decisions have to be shaped by personal choices. And I wrote above that these choices will be influenced by 3 things: i) incentives, ii) motivation, iii) personal calling. And pick your area of work: i) politics, ii) philanthropy, iii) enterprise, iv) ideas. There are multiple avenues of contribution. Naya Keta’s and Ashu’s worry focus on one of them: the domain of active politics, which I agree is probably the most important. But not widening the net of possible contributions breeds unwarranted pessimism. And this thread is about Hope!
Further, we should not only look at the glamorous arena of “national” level activism. Like Arnico illustrated, “local” successes have pretty much been guided by change-driven individuals. And Nepal is a fairly easy country to replicate successes if only we have one or two tried and tested models. We are after all a pretty unoriginal bunch. An inspiring regional player has been the Budhanilkantha graduate Jiban Bahadur Shahi in Humla where he's the district chairman. I’m really hoping that my dear friend Hemendra Bohra will be replicating the Shahi model in his equally remote Darchula within the next 5 years.
Naya Keta, don’t give up on Nepe! It’d be our collective coup to soften him a bit. But this dear friend of ours isn't softening anytime soon. And I'm not defecting to the republican camp either. I’ve already given Nepe the flattering accolade of “irrepressible”, but let’s keep pushing :)
Sangam’s point is also great. It’s one where there’s been much talk but not enough substantive action. What do people think of Harka Gurung’s idea of reducing the number of districts from 75 to 25? I’ve been seduced, but want to hear all sides of the argument before I lend my full support. The crux is that small administrative divisions fragment and scatter scarce resources. I also love the names he’s suggesting - Saipal, Manaslu, etc. Very feminine, don't you think?
|
| arnico |
Posted
on 03-May-02 11:00 PM
okay... here are a few quick responses:
* Several thoughts come to mind regarding the need for prime ministerial candidates who can transcend ethnic divisions:
1) Isn't that what the monarchy has successfully done in the last 200 years? Isn't that also what MP candidates already have to do in lots of ethnically heterogeneous districts? The Tharu MP from, say, Banke, is not going to represent the Tharu resident of, say, Siraha, where a Yadav is MP... but is going to represent the Thapa from Nepalganj...
2) If we have system where the candidate who gets the most votes among 10 or 100 different candidates becomes prime minister without needing to attain a majority, then I can imagine candidates from demographically dominant ethnic groups having a better chance, and smaller ethnic groups feeling marginalized. BUT, if we have a system where run-off elections are required between the top two candidates, then I cannot see ethnicity dominating the election agenda, as thankfully, no ethnic group in Nepal comes close to a majority of the population. The situation would be quite different if our population's ethnic distribution were more like that of Fiji, Guyana, or Malaysia.
...but let's discuss this point out in much more detail, imagining many more scenarios before concluding anything. Nepal's history of the last 12 years has made amply clear that the constitution writers of 1990 did NOT think through clearly the implications of choosing the "best" British model for the context of Nepal.
* Regarding Nepe's strong views: Paschim, I don't think anyone should make attempts to soften him... I think his presence adds much needed alternative views to the discussion. In fact, we should celebrate our ability to maintain a free and open discussion where all views are respected.
* Regarding re-dividing the country's administrative units. I guess we should divide the conversation into two parts: 1) Would it have made more sense to have done the divisions in a different way a few decades ago?... and 2) does it makes sense to re-divide them now? I think the answer to (1) is definitely yes. Lots of mistakes were made in drawing district boundaries... above all... many districts span from river to river, with a tall mountain range in between. Rivers can be bridged or crossed by ferry... crossing mountains to go to court, to malpot and napi, or to the bank in the district headquarter is hard work, and wastes lots of time for people. I also think that in the early 1960s more thought should have been given to moving Nepal's capital to either Pokhara or Chitwan... to somewhere with more water and more space, better access to the rest of the country, AND less isolation from the rest of the country than that experienced by the residents of the Kathmandu Valley. But, whether it makes sense to re-divide the administrative units now... given the levels of investment that have gone into district headquarters... we'd have to evaluate whether the benefits outweigh the opportunity costs...(and not just the costs).
What is gained by increasing the district size? A smaller number of district HQs to post representatives of the central government... so perhaps some cost savings to the government... but at how much cost to the janata... how much increased travel time to get to the DHQ... how much lost productivity?
One administrative level that I do think makes little sense retaining is the zone (anchal)... especially the ones that are narrow slivers running from India to the Himal...the ones on the western and eastern ends of the country... Yes, trade routes run north-south, and yes, lots of hill people have settled in the Tarai districts due south from their hill district... but are they efficient for governance? It takes less time to walk from Solukhumbu in Sagarmatha zone, across Ramechhap and Dolakha of Janakpur zone into Sindhupalchowk of Bagmati zone than it does to go down to Rajbiraj or whatever is the Sadarmukam of Sagarmatha zone... even if you catch the bus from Katari... or, if you wanted to go from Charikot, the HQ of Dolakha district in Janakpur zone to Janakpur, the HQ of Janakpur zone BY ROAD... you'd have to cross over into Bagmati and then Narayani zone... drive through Kathmandu, Mugling, Narayanghat, Hetauda, Pathlaya... 450+ kilometers driving distance... or do what I did a few years ago: WALK along the Tamakoshi for four days, cross the pass into Sindhuli, and catch a bus from there (although I guess nowadays you could drive part of the distance along the Tamakoshi on the Ramechhap side of the river, on the road going to Khimti hydropower...).
Anyway... it is getting close to being bedtime... I hope to wake up and find lots of interesting contributions to the discussion.
Arnico.
|
| Nepe |
Posted
on 03-May-02 11:59 PM
Thank you Paschim for rescuing me, otherwise Naya Keta le tyasta baliya baliya tarka haru aghi saarera malaai ryakh ryakh paari raheka thiye. Paschim, I promise my vote, and of all those I have influence over, for you if you ever run for the presidency of our future republic, if and when that becomes possible.
Biswoji, tapaai le bicha ma bhajo halera Paschim laai raaj tantra kai khema ma chhu bhanera bhannai paarne banaunu bhayo. Lau yas pali tapaai kai jit bhayo. Tara ma pani haresh khane wala chhuina. Aakhir tapai, Paschim ra GuruDev baata ‘irrepressible’ ko pagari paayekai chhu kyare.
Naya Ketaji, I think you think about me exactly what I think about you, that we think so similar yet we are so far apart. I am sure we will both benefit a lot from each other if , let’s say, we could have a ‘shaashtraartha’ of the type that used to happen at the royal court of raja Janak in Mithila Nagar. I can not afford it at this moment. However, I look forward to have many friendly exchanges with you in coming days. As Paschim suggested, please don’t give up on me yet, and so will I.
Arnico has very interesting ideas. I too think the system of a direct election of prime-minister may be better for us. Paschim, that of Israel is not a homogeneous society. As a matter of fact, I would claim their diversity is far more stretched than that of us. Ethiopian, Indian, Russian, European, North and South American, Haredim jews, secular jews, rightist Sharon, leftist Perez, socialist kibbuzim, you name it. It is truly an international country. Few years ago, a transsexual named ‘Dana International’ represented Israel in European Song contest and s/he won. She chose her name very aptly. Anyway, we can surely learn from their experience of the direct election which was introduced recently, Netanyahu ko palama. I think we can learn something from Israeli experience.
Thank you arnico for your moral support for me.
And thank you GuruDev for your understanding. It is a pleasure that I can respectfully disagree with GuruDev without compromising my loyalty as the deputy of HFC.
I have not gone seriously through arnico’s last posting. Will comment later.
|
| Brook |
Posted
on 04-May-02 04:44 AM
Dear Arnico,
Having done a fair bit of traveling outside Kathmandu myself, I am impressed with your command of our national geography; specifically your familiarity with the popular regional trade routes. We should talk about some of these places at a later, more appropriate occasion.
As for your suggestion of considering having an elected PM, I have to say that although it appears seductive on the face of it, it is a little premature for us, as citizens of a nation unsure of how to handle our "infant democracy", to be selling this as an antidote for our developmental woes. I share your vexation on the profligacy, myopic infighting, hernia and an unabashed display of large scale disregard for greater national goals by our leaders, and so do a thousand others who have started wishing for the King to take over! Can you imagine? How strong are the roots of our democracy? If they were only wishing wishing, it would be fine but given the fact they actually BELIEVE things would be better if HRH took over and imposed a Panchayat like structure is unfortunate. Therefore, to concur that our incipient democracy has been victimized by petty short-termism of our self-interested leaders and to prescribe an elected Prime Minister as the remedy is inanely retrogressive. Here's why:
Paschim put his finger right on the sore spot. "Will this system require charismatic leaders who are in a position to transgress the rigid ethnic, caste, and regional divides to become a “representative” leader?" But Arnico quickly dismissed this by likening today's elected PM to the Bishnu-incarnates that have been "successfully" ruling us for the last 200 years and further asserting (falsely, I shall argue later) that allowing a system of "run-off elections between the top two candidates" would preclude ethnic forces from influencing the results. Nepe, much to my dismay, ratifies this proposal by going as far as producing a list of ethnicities represented by the state of Israel.
First of all, Arnico, I don't want to sound like an alarmist and least of all a pessimist, but in my opinion you are underestimating the diversity of Nepal and the volatile fault lines it rests on. The archaic monarchs you refer to were fortunate to be easily apotheosized by by their "loved" (and suppressed!) subjects and epitomized as symbols of unity. But will our hypothetical PM, elected through a democratic process to represent an increasingly literate citizenry be able to redress the age old imbalances of ethnicity and the nefarious caste system given democracy that's still a generation away from germination? You claim that the absence of a majority ethnic group ensures proper representation and "inclusion" of all splinters , but quite interestingly you forget to consider what despicable tactics representative candidates from these very groups might resort to in order to end up standing when the smoke clears. And moreover, I was surprised to find no mention of religion. Muslims might comprise only 4% of our total population but given the current religious climate in South Asia, they are bound to feel insecure about an imminent Hindu leadership, especially after, say, an array of inflammatory remarks that would predictably and almost invariably emanate from say, Pharmullah Mansoor's failed campaign.
And my worthy friend Nepe, Israel's diversity is nothing compared to ours. The principle reason being the differences in the respective ages of our democracies. Although a relatively young state, Israel has a mature, and a very well functioning democratic institution. Similar to the United States in many ways, it is a meritocracy where dissent is respected and the rule of the law strictly in place. For those who understand girls better, it is a place where you can win over somebody else's girlfriend with your looks and your charms without fearing a black eye and a broken limb. [Personally, always been a communist when it came to girls.]
How about Nepal? How well are these ideals established in the hearts and minds of
our populace?
How many of us have noticed the manner in which water spreads when we are irrigating our plants? Gardeners, anyone? Ever given much mind to how those tiny vein-like channels gradually swell with increasing water volume until the whole area is soaked? Intro Geology: water flows in the direction of lower altitude or in the direction that provides the least resistance, or in other words, along fault lines or ridges. Now, all the gurus of politics reading this, excuse this insufficiently read ignorant's lame attempt at a theory(pretty sure it has been said by somebody else before but just in case :) ---
Given,
Democracy injected into a previously repressive political system at t=0;
ethnic, religious, geographical, tribal (etc etc..) fault lines start becoming VISIBLE at some t=T. Under the condition that democracy is allowed to properly flourish, at a certain t=nT (where n = 1, 2, 3, 4,..i, depending on various other factors) the fault lines, and the friction begin disappearing and society progresses towards homogenization. The United States is pretty far deep in this timeline of democractic evolution and therefore, although we see a lot of diversity on the surface, like Paschim said, it is a relatively homogeneous society.
Therefore, in my opinion Nepal is currently barely approaching time, t=T. The true colours of the chaar jaat chattis barna le bhariyeko Nepal are yet to come out. (I'll elaborate on this later). Suffice it to say, for now, that Arnico and Nepe ji are seriously underestimating the seismic tension stored in our bellies.
In sum, I believe that the elected PM idea is an excellent one for increased efficiency and accountability but it shouldn't be implemented for another 30 years unless we want to see a mini-Gujrat played out in Nepalgunj. For now, it should be shelved and preserved for when "times are more favorable".
Feel free to tear me apart. Sajah.com is where I learnt politics and democracy :)
|
| Pahade keta |
Posted
on 04-May-02 08:31 AM
hi ashu,
great to see you in the sajha. com. i think i remember you saying something about this, but i got to know about this from Biswo.
share your concern about building a vibrant nepali networks--and share your concern regarding what all this internationalwallah have been doing since last fifty years--and will continue to do.
biswo, do not know how much it is a matter of working with international organizations and how much it is a matter ofour own personal committment when it comes to gaining experiences. Moreover, i don't think our politicians are bad just because they did not hae much of international exposure--not that they should not get it--but the way we began to know ourselves through the lens manufactured in the hey day of cold war--which always showed us on the lesser light compared to the west--and thereby totally being alienated from the large section of the population.
I am not against all these modern sensibilities of progress, reason, machine, etc. but that has kind of become fetish in our imagination of what kind of Nepal we would like to work on building--i see that in some of the discussion regarding the formal institutional arrangements of democracy in nepal.
Did you guys hear the heavy casualties--who is losing--am not sermonizing here, and trying to express serious concern regarding where we are heading. my humble prediction is that folks living at the center of power--globally, regionally, and nationaly--for them it may be only the numbers that we got to read in the kantipuronline.com or hear through the radio, etc.--but here lies the fractured nation called Nepal--do you guys know that 78% of Nepal's wealth is concentrated in 36 wards of kathmandu municipal corporation? should I add more? what kind of democracy are we talking about in a situation like this, without really discussing the issues as to how to address this?
anil
|
| makuro |
Posted
on 04-May-02 09:28 AM
Hey I am learning. Thanks so much for educating people like me who has very little knowledge of politics. I know there are many peoples like me who don't contribute but are very happy to see if someone puts their thoughts in here.
Eventhough politics is not my forte, here is what I think:
Population distribution of Nepal will cause problem if we have a system of directly electing Prime Minister with popular vote. Unless there is an alternate system like electorial college vote like in United States, prime ministerial candidates won't even bother to go and campaign in sparsely poplated place like Humla, Jumla. They will focus on places where population density is high.
Other thing comes into my mind is cost. Cost of campaining across the whole nation is costly deal. Since direct election is more personality based than party based, prime minister's candidates have to have mucho money.
Other thing is how do we select prime minister candidates from each party? If party chooses the prime ministerial candidate, then the whole idea of directly electing Prime minister candidate is compromised. I think the idea behind the direct election of PM we want people to elect their PM, not party cronies.
Relegating lots of power to single person is always risky business even if it is from election. Even with ample check and balance of three form of goverments in US, I fear what if one crazy guy get elected as a president or become crazy later! Well so far, haven't happened yet but you cannot rule out it's possibility.
|
| makuro |
Posted
on 04-May-02 09:28 AM
Hey I am learning. Thanks so much for educating people like me who has very little knowledge of politics. I know there are many peoples like me who don't contribute but are very happy to see if someone puts their thoughts in here.
Eventhough politics is not my forte, here is what I think:
Population distribution of Nepal will cause problem if we have a system of directly electing Prime Minister with popular vote. Unless there is an alternate system like electorial college vote like in United States, prime ministerial candidates won't even bother to go and campaign in sparsely poplated place like Humla, Jumla. They will focus on places where population density is high.
Other thing comes into my mind is cost. Cost of campaining across the whole nation is costly deal. Since direct election is more personality based than party based, prime minister's candidates have to have mucho money.
Other thing is how do we select prime minister candidates from each party? If party chooses the prime ministerial candidate, then the whole idea of directly electing Prime minister candidate is compromised. I think the idea behind the direct election of PM we want people to elect their PM, not party cronies.
Relegating lots of power to single person is always risky business even if it is from election. Even with ample check and balance of three form of goverments in US, I fear what if one crazy guy get elected as a president or become crazy later! Well so far, haven't happened yet but you cannot rule out it's possibility.
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 04-May-02 12:30 PM
Nepeji and Arnicoji: Please rest assured my comment was intended to be sarcastic.
I don't impeach your integrity.(But again, that won't provide you license for luring
other intellectuals and doing horse-trading ala Nepal's parliament in future!
ganatantra baadi haroo nikai shrewd hunchhan, thaahaa nabhayeko haina. Tesai
pani siyo khasda tarsanu parne jamaanaa chha aajkal!)
Arnico's observation regarding Nepal's local bodies is impressive. In fact, if you look
at the parliament, another interesting observation can be made: the extreme left
who went to do 'bhandafor' to parliament were perhaps the least corrupt MPs. Pari
Thapa, Chitra KC, Barman Budha etc. Pari Thapa's work in Account Comittee was
praised, so was the report he submitted re corruption/smuggling.
My point is this: decentralisation can be more useful rightnow, rather than going
for sweeping change in electorate system. Friends suggested the system change
of Israel. I am not sure if I am wrong, but Israel changed its system, because its
parliament was not like ours. In former Israeli parliament, if someone tried to
change PM, the whole parliament would be dissolved. The fall of one PM meant
election of whole parliamentary body. If that were to be Nepal's case, MP's, most
of whom are often reluctant to go to public, would be restrained in their open
pursuit to remove PM. Who has that integrity and courage to confront their
constituents and go to election in our parliament?
I have another precedence to submit. Italy. In 90s, disgusted by the revealtion
by Dirty Hand (mani pulite) operation that most of the parties were involved in
corruption, Italians sought to end their proportional representative system, which
allowed representation of parties in proportion of votes they receive. The result
was not good. The regional, racist, separatist parties emerged. They never got
that two party system that they wanted. Even now, Italy lacks a single party ,
and corruption remains there.(If my observation are wrong, I seek relevant
suggestion !)
So, to abruptly change today's system is not necessarily good. Imagine a realistic
scenario: in a direct election(in 2055 etc) for PM, Girija Koirala could have been
made PM. With out the check and balance, he would definitely overestimate his
power and spend whole day bickering with military and Communists, and
repressing his intraparty opponents, while Koirala clan would be on rampage to
plunder national coffer. (Not that they are not doing that now!)
People, it seems, failed to see one remarkable change in our nation after the fall
of Panchayt: the strong municipalities were less suffering from corruption, and
popular participation was increased. After the demise of Panchayat, for example,
my own village, Ratna Nagar VDC and subsequently Municipality, shed its opaque working style of the past. Roads were built with very high public participation and
contribution, and the municipality waged a drive to make cent percent literacy rate.
(Successfully,I guess). Telephone stopped to be a luxury, and Tandi attracted
some more industries. I didn't see people really complaining against municipality or
Mayor.For every corrupt MP like Jagrit Bhetwal, there are fortunately a lot of
good village chiefs/mayors in Chitwan. Our hope rests on the incremental
development they bring. The nation is in rotten state, but changing election
system doesn't automatically makes it better. I failed to see the so called 'obvious
superiority' of direct election of PM to the current system without testing the
ability of our present system.May be I am just too ignorant.
|
| ananta |
Posted
on 04-May-02 04:43 PM
If we look back to 12 years of our country, it can be found that we got the democracy but the political parties which are most important organs of democracy were not enough democratic,transparent and responsible to the country and party. political leaders who struggled for democracy for several years did not have democratic characters enough. if we observe the speeches,behaviour and political decisions taken by our leaders, it will be clear that their decisions are guided mainly by the politcal and personnel benefits what they could get from it, not by the long interest of people and our country. It is really regrettable that we could not get the leaders like Nelson Mandela whose real purpose was to instuitionalize the democracy in the country and to share it for the interest of common people. Although we have also leaders who spent many years of their life in jail for the restoration of democracy, but now it is being felt that it was only for their fulfillment of their personnel profit and ambition. Look at from girija to surya b. thapa and from madhav nepal to lokendra, it seems that they are only in race of the PM POST. They can say and do anything to get it. they can change their personnel stand everyday if it is necessary for it. now. NO educated nepali is unware of this fact. And look at our political parties, which are, in fact , still in 'samanti parmpara'. giraija, surya b. thapa,......., prachanda(?),.... are like GOD in their parties even though they claim in their speeches that they are true follower of democracy. OUR political parties are still running by 'samnti parmpara' and its workers are also like blind followers. they have to accept anything what their leaders decide. it was mainly seen in the personnel fued between GIRIJA and KP BHATTARAI for which our country lost decade. Their political decisions were motivated mainly by anger, envy, 'pratishodh' and for the interest of small political groups and our country have to pay a heavy price for it. In 2046 VS. these maobadis were only like in SEEDS who were against 'simit upalabdhi" of 2046 movement. In 2052, It got suitable condition( declare of mid term election, hung parliament, horse trade for power play in parliament etc.)for its embryoment. Then corrupted behaviour and myopic power play of our leaders became good ferilizer became good fertilizer for it. not to say, maobadi leaders were successful to utilize poverty, unempoyment and frustration of people. So in my view, for the smooth function of democracy, political parties should be more transparent and responsible to the people. There should be enough provisions for it so that our leaders must be more responsible to people and future of our country. Our country can not again bear the the load such as mid term election decision taken by girija or political (personnel interest?) fight between our so called leaders. our political parties do not have enough democratic culture which might be one of the key reason for these 'brikitis'.oUR LEADERS think that what they speak is the ultimate truth and everybody(their workers)must follow their path although it may be wrong (and what is laughable is that they change their words everyday according to their interests). Look at the nepali congress party (with history of longest struggle for democracy). how much it is democratic by itself? In fact, It is running running by handful of peoples who are near to its powerful president.FOR example( here I am talking not for ramchandra paudel), but person who got more than 1000 votes in 1400 have no responsible post in the party but persons like govinda raj joshi and so on who got merely 500 more votes have excess authority to do anything in the party. OUr parties are seriously infected by disease of so much narrow minded groupism and how can such parties promote healthy democracy in our country? Nepali people only have to become victims of unnecessary political fight between their leaders and political parties and it is not different in character from fight between RANAS at that period, only in new version. so nepali people have to wait still for practice of real democracy here. Why our constitution can not manage persons to be prime minister only for limited times. In USA, after the three time win of presidential post by F.D. Roosevelt(who is regarded as one of the greatest american president), no american can become president for more than two times although how much they would be popular ? But, Look in our country, it seems that many leaders are competting to write their name in guinese book as PM for how many times. girija, surya b. have become PM for many times and if they become prime minister again what new vision they can give to our country? They are spending so much time for political fight which is not in the benefit ofgood future of our country, even to compare them with Nelson Mandela is a matter of very laughable thing although many of OUR leaders were also considered as a sacrificed leaders. SO, THERE MUST BE PROVISION OF LIMITED CHANCE FOR BECOMING PRIMEMINISTER) which may result less power play and less corruption and more opportunity for growth of new leadership. Only when Our parties become more democratic, more transparent and more responsible to the people and the country,every party workers should have right and wisdom of their own(not blind followers of their leaders like nowadays), then our democracy can become more healtheir and can grow more smoothly.
|
| arnico |
Posted
on 04-May-02 09:44 PM
Unfortunately I don't have much time to write today... but I do want to say that I am learning tremendous amounts in these discussions. Definitely my understanding of Nepal based on my limited experiences there does not give me a full picture such that I alone could come up with a system that works for the country... Thank you to everyone who pointed out weaknesses in the idea I put forward (but, let me repeat, not MY unique idea...). Yes, I am probably not adequately aware of ethnic or religious faultlines. In fact, I have to admit I have not kept upto date on janjati movements or on the fluctuating electoral successes or the Sadbhawana party; and I have only spent a short time in Nepalganj...far too little to understand anything about hte needs and views of the Tarai moslem community. I also did not think adequately about the consequences of direct elections without an electoral college: that candidates would skip Manang, Mugu, and other low population districts and focus their campaigns on places like Morang, Chitwan, Kaski, and Kathmandu... so, a system that I thought, and still think, is better than the current one in some aspects has its own weaknesses... overall is it better? Are there conditions, yet unmet, that would make it better? What works best? When?
The challenge for our generation is to design a democratic system for Nepal that is well-suited to the country's unique conditions, yet allows growth and changes within Nepal... a system that leaves noone disenfranchised, yet focuses on unity instead of division, a system that takes into account the gradual increase in literacy and media reach across the country... The challenge is also partly to find an effective way of putting together our heads collectively to figure out what works best for a Nepal that our individual heads do not fully grasp... hope fully what is starting here on kurakani is just the seeds for more, larger such collective thinking exercises...
|
| Nepe |
Posted
on 05-May-02 12:56 AM
Now we have a new topic of electoral system introduced by mitra arnico and brought to a new level of educated discussion by Brook. Since my training is not in this field, I do not have any illuminating information or expert opinion. Here is just my 2 cents worth in favor of Direct election of prime minister.
For some time to come, we need (don’t have one yet !) a charismatic prime minister who is directly in touch with greater mass, against some dumb ass chosen by an undemocratic, unconstitutional, unaccountable and corruption breeding body called Central Working Committee (CWC) or politbureau (PB) of the party in power (Ashu, where are you ? ). The most this dumb ass has to do, in order to be certified as been made in the factory of democracy, is to make sure a few dozens or hundreds allare keta haru from his griha-jilla (chunao-chhetra to be precise) get some jaagir or his chettra gets bijuli ka lattha or mutar jaane bato. CWC/PB has in-built sterility or abortive womb not to produce charismatic leader. Clashes of jealousy and ambitions and dirty game of power inside this unaccountable institution is the reason for that. Direct election is a solution.
Brook’s theory on diversity dependent fault lines of democracy is elegant, at least to see it in form of a mathematical model. However, the alarm of a mini-Gujarat is an over projection and is, therefore, in my optimistic view, a falls alarm. Everything in life has fault lines, what does not have ? But everything does not explode. I recognize the seismic tension stored in our bellies, but the question should be how can we neutralize it rather than how can we tighten our belly skin to contain it. Delivery of social justice and equal opportunities is neutralization of that volcano. The rest is illusion. An increased efficiency and accountability of elected PM, that Brook himself recognizes, has more power and likelihood to deliver to the people. Haina ra?
|
| Brook |
Posted
on 05-May-02 12:58 PM
Very true Nepe ji. It's a Sunday afternoon and I am strapped for time as well, so I will keep this one short.
My position on this is: Every major revolution in history has been quickly followed by a counter-revolution. Primarily due to a largely perceived INABILITY of the first revolution to deliver (amid huge expectations). Nepal is no different. The post-1990 popular mood of disappointment, betrayal and hopelessness succeeded in adding fuel to the Maoist insurgency(at least in the early stages). And the "bastard-Mao"s themselves have stolen the sanctity, peace and harmony of our countryside by presenting themselves as pseudo champions of the class cause. What our friends are proposing here, an elected PM is an excellent idea, but while not close to being as diabolic and despicably communist as the diseased vision of Baburam, it still reflects our impatience and our unwillingness to give it a chance. Constant meddling is not always a good idea.
One simple personal anecdote: When I first learnt how to cook chicken, I would't let go of the panyuu the whole time. Chalayeko-chalai chalayeko chalai. I'd add turmeric and delight at the color change. Still, chalayeko chalai chalayeko chalai. Add BMC (meat masala) and feel pleased at the aroma. More, chalayeko chalai chalyeko chalai. I wouldn't even stop to let the tomatoes added later simmer. My panyoo weilding self derived so much 'sense of power' and accomplishment from the whole thing that I wouldn't let go until convinced( after sampling for taste several times) that the chicken was ready and the stove could be turned off.
Only recently have I realized the truth in my mother's statement: "harrey! tyasari pakaune hoina ni ta chicken! sabai kura chatta pugne gari halisake pachhi kahile kahin ta aago thikka intensity ma rakhera, tyaslai chopera, aafai paakna dinu parchha ni!"
That's exactly my suggestion here. Let's stick to the basics for now. Do our fundamentals right. Check if there's enough noon, besaar, jeera, dhaniya and the likes. Find out if it needs more water or anything else. Make sure if the level of heat we are giving it is proper. Cover it and let it do its job. Good things WILL happen.
I would like to share Nepe jis optimism regarding the ethnic volatility in Nepal but my own experiences urge me to exercise caution. I maintain that as long as the "prajatantra ka thekedaar"s remain a select few in the upper administration, these issues will not be addressed. Therefore, until someone convinces me on how the process of having an elected PM, or the elected PM himself/herself would instil or promulgate the fundamental tenets of democracy(respect for the rule of law, respect for not only his own but his neighbors to exist etc etc..) into the aam janata, I shall hold on to my view that we wait at least another decade or two
before seriously considering this move.
|
| rebelious sevendust |
Posted
on 05-May-02 02:27 PM
There is no hope for nepal or any other countries as long as there is politics and politicians in this world. Iradicate politics and politicains from this world.
RS
|
| Pahade keta |
Posted
on 05-May-02 08:15 PM
Stop Politics Bashing,
this is not strange--the business of politics bashing. This is what almost all of the so called 'clean civil society'n or a few of 'enlightened' individuals have done all along at least since last twelve years.
There is a sense of frustration of those of us who seem to believe that once the politicians are eliminated then all the ills in Nepal would be over. Itn't it time to debunk this and try to be a bit more sensible. You can go on giving examples of how the politicians are bad. But I can also give examples of how everybody else--I mean in terms of categories--the so called NGO wallahs, the researchers, the international agency workers (are they anything more than that), the students, the wakils, the doctors, the so called gender experts, add more if you like, but you will find thousands of them who have been equally corrupt, irresponsible and damaging to the politics and democracy in Nepal. In fact, you will find that a lot more politicians are still more accountable than most of the members of what we may like to call the civil society. This is just stating the facts.
Secondly, when it comes to accepting sad affairs of the country right now and thinking of changing it, I am beginning to believe that the primary role of politics cannot be dismissed--otherwise we should be imagining politics the way Hitlar did or the King Mahendra did--it ends up becomming Goebbelian affair in which the benevolence of the technocrats, bureaucrats and the father-figure (so far) would be the defining figure--what did we do during the thirty years of Panchayat rule? Was it any different.
Thirdly, when democratic politics is discredited and when the issues become highly depoliticized (well does it happen any way?), then inadvertent shift to the right occurs--where the empty jingoism begins to dominate the public agenda--isn't this what is happening when the so called elites of our country begin to blame the politics for our ills but still hope that therewill be a nation-state without any politics!!! isn't this happening in India where the Hindu-right RSS exhorts its cadres to do politician bashing and instead concentrate on discipline, and dedication to the motherland. Isn't this what is happening in France when the National Front is claiming that the democracy and openness is what is plagying the nation. We also have our version of these kinds of right wing assertions--in the form of murmur arguing for King's takeover so that all the ills would go away? wasn't that the way the King Mahendra argued? How do we look at the ascendence of the army in the national political discourse? Behind the apparently right-sounding statements of Prajwal, I would still see an attempt to discredit the politicians? But What were they doing in the thirty years of Panchayat Days? What are they doing when they have the lowar jawans as their public servants working at their homes? when they still practice untouchability within the Army--well, heard that it has changed a bit, following the Maoist insurgency--reason not hard to guess?
The rule in politics is that it can not change unless the actors change. Are anyone of us, who claim to know the world, ready to take up the responsibility? Well, we can go on telling these 'ignorant politicians' where things have gone wrong--but we can do that only sitting at the citadel of perks and powerful bureaucracy--or boardrooms. This simply does not work. I don't think it is lack of understanding on the parts of the politicians--not that they know all the things, but we also do not know all the things for that matter--that is keeping politics in a situation of this mess. The irony of democratic politics is that it is the janata--in the plural here, in all their diversity, including me myself, of course--who has to claim the role of active citizenry--demand, get organized, raise the voice, etc. There are talks of decentralization, redemarcation of the territories, etc.--for me, honestly, they are only technical matters and they do not help in themselves. I think we pretty much have enough institutional infrastructure--in the sens of democratic institutions--in the form of the VDCs, the Municipal corporations, DDCs, etc.--what we lack is not another set of technical details about institutions--I think no point in wasting our brain in designing institutions in the l'lab'--what we need is how to generate momentum in our political life so that more and more number of people feel that they are the owner of the affairs of these institutions--that they begin to see these institutions as the genuine vehicle of changing their lives for better.
Saying all this, I am not trying to discredit all those who are sincerelty trying to think through the current muddle--but I just want to repeat : don't minus politics please--because you will not be eliminating politics in that way, but only eliminating 'certain kind of politics' and arguing for certain other.
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 05-May-02 10:41 PM
This thread is becoming a treasure. It is a tribute to a thread like this if Brook meant what he said that Sajha is where he learnt politics and democracy! Allow me to respond to a few central questions. And since I sense both Arnico and Nepe receding with modesty on their enthusiasm for a directly elected PM, let me step in to become a more vigorous (devil's) advocate.
First, I welcome warmly Brook to this thread, and appreciate his humorous, intelligent remarks. A communist in romance, eh? Well, as your big brother, it's incumbent upon me to warn you that a "communal" sharing of assets, a Draupadi-like arrangement was all right in the days of the Mahabharata but not in today's world - it's inconvenient and illegal. I want to see you evolve into a gentleman and a monogamist who charms, not coerces, his way into one female heart at a time, okay? :)
Brook elaborates with eloquence how this new system may exacerbate ethnic tensions. That fear is deserved but misplaced. A system of directly electing PM will not be a radical departure from the existing apparatus. Currently we have four tiers of democratic representation: i) village, ii) municipal, iii) district, and iv) national. With an elected PM, we'll extend the tier of representation to five with *two* national level representations. So it's a proposal to refine and deepen democracy with two nationally elected entities serving as each other's watch-dogs. I think two thirds of the "bikriti" or anomaly that we've seen in the past 12 years have originated because the Executive has been a hostage to the Legislature. The Legislature has been, to borrow an American humorist's book title, "A Parliament of Whores". We need to sever the perverse incentives that govern the Executive-Legislature relationship today. The legislature should merely be a law-making body, not a whore house where sluts get picked up for breast size. And you are in trouble when the likes of Khum Bahadur, Govinda Raj Joshi, and Palten Gurung have the biggest breasts.
The Executive - the cabinet - will need to be given sweeping powers for effective governance. A directly elected PM will choose his own cabinet, but not from the parliament. We will need to expand the scope of the PM's office - make it Presidential. This system will also offer that elusive "stability" in politics, another cause of intense irritation in our democracy so far. But this doesn't mean the PM is invincible. Makuro said, what happens if s/he goes crazy? Well, for major flaws of the PM and his inability to govern, s/he can be impeached and removed by the legislature (say two-thirds majority). For minor flaws, people and the parliament have the right to protest, oppose, block legislation, and put pressure by mobilizing all channels for expressing dissent in a democracy. But more generally, we need to give the directly elected PM sweeping executive authorities to implement her manifesto, and not make her beholden to unaccountable CWCs or law-making bodies that are not making laws.
Thus, i) stability, ii) severing of tie between E and L (hence end of a perverse incentive regime), and iii) rise of the PM Office as a potent entity that rivals the Durbar to reduce the monarch's role into being ceremonial are my three strongest points in favor of such a system. Brook's worry about exploding tensions ignores the fact that rest of the democratic tiers of representation will stay intact, and smaller religious or ethnic interests will have their representatives at one or more of the 5 tiers we're offering. We are in fact extending the 4 tiers of representation to 5, hence deepening democracy. Phasmullah Mansur can rule his Muslim pocket in Parsa or Bara. Our democracy gives him that space. On timing, yes we're talking about a post-Maoist Nepal, and I am willing to take a look at one more parliamentary term before pushing for this idea, so this is a proposal that may or may not take effect in about 10 years time, but we need to start thinking on ways to *refine* democracy, not *change* it. I'd say going for an elected PM is just a minor fine-tuning. Brook is thus right to caution us if such a step would be "premature", but to say it's "inanely retrogressive" is exaggerated.
Makuro raises humbly some great, practical points. On representation, now that I've thought about it, it's OK for the PM to ignore the Manangs and the Dolpos come election-time!! Remember our system will have 5 tiers of representation, and the institution of the PM Office is just one of them. So under-populated regions will actually be adequately represented by other tiers. They will have their MPs too. But democracy is one-person-one-vote, and it's fine for the PM to focus more on the Morangs and the Chitwans and the Kaskis and the Kathmandus where more people live.
On Campaign costs, yes, much of today's corruption is to finance party expenditures in addition to personal greed. We should give some thought to an idea of state subsidy for campaigning with a simultaneous move to make sources of party financing more transparent.
On concentration of power, and this point Biswo raises too, that's precisely the idea. I want to make the prime-ministerial system much stronger and give him/her more powers. We don't want lame-duck PMs who worry more about support of individual MPs - who should be making laws not eyeing ministerial posts - than implement their manifestos. Of course he will be restrained by the legislature, and can even be removed for gross violations and abuse, but I think we should really give the PM much more powers than we have given him now, and judge his/her record in 5 years. See, the poor guy doesn't even have the power to dissolve the House now. But with a directly elected PM, this contentious issue is also removed. The government will be stable for a full 5 year term. Also, party candidates will stand, but even independent candidates can run and win. Right now, if you want to become a PM, you got to join one of the lousy mainstream parties. We can have a presidential prime minister who is just independent. S/he can be like an elected monarch for 5 years actually - and we can busy the real monarch with the opening of football tournaments or hosting of parties to visiting head of states. Make the Shahs constitutional and ceremonial without doing away with them for sentimental and touristic purposes. That's what I meant when I wrote earlier to make the royals "irrelvant". If we focus on the real issues of enriching our democracy, the republican issue just pales. There was a reason why I said the monarchy is like second-grade toothpaste, and we need not worry about dental hygiene right now. So this revision could go a long way in pacifying our republican friends too. Nepe, my friend?
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 05-May-02 10:50 PM
On decentralization, etc., that Biswo notes, yes, that's merely activating the 3 lowers tiers of representation that I illustrated earlier. No problem with that, and it's the way to go. I've been a big fan of local level successes and their replicable models. I also endorse Pahade Keta's rebuke of people wanting to do away with politics. Why don't people realize that in a nation's life "politics is ALMOST everything"? It is part of good citizenship to participate in it. And participation ranges fromplain awareness of issue sto active engagement. But complete indifference? That's not being a good citizen, in my opinion. There is a need to make it better, and cleanse it of the bad elements. But we do that by engagingin it not running away and letting it worsen. All aspects of national life eventually merge with politics. It's like the spinal cord. And I like Ananta's idea of fixing term limits. It was included in both the UML and NC's menu of constitutional amendments, and I have no doubt it will happen soon. Good way to get rid of the old folks and constantly rejuvenate politics. Jeffrey Sachs suggested the other day in the Singaporean Straits Times to fix international term limits even for dictators. He had some good ideas on how to do this.
Boy, this is getting long, but allow me to remind that we are talking about a post-Maoist Nepal. On why and when they will be doomed, please read my paragraph 6 of the piece I started the thread with. Call me supremely confident, or even arrogant, but I want our generation to start thinking about issues of the future (some highlighted in para 7). I know we are all moved by the recent deaths. Some 450 people are said to have been killed the other day. This will continue. The scale will worsen. It's tragic but inevitable. I am an immensely warm and sensitive person, but even I don't want to stretch my sympathies to the wrong people. Those who got killed were training to kill thousands more, including unarmed civilians, young boys and girls. Here's what I said on the terrorists in another thread.
1. I don't believe in formal talks with the Maoists now. Perhaps after 3 months, but first their back has to be broken so cleanly and utterly that it can’t be fixed again. We can’t afford to allow them to resurrect. The top leadership, including Baburam and Prachanda, has to be found. Peru’s Fujimori, in crushing the Sendero Luminoso, had a two-pronged strategy: devastate the cadres and go for a massive man-hunt of leadership, especially Gonzalo. The food chain linking the cadres with their leaders has to be severed at any cost. This is no time for pot-bellied political correctness.
2. Terrorists must be captured and tried in special courts; those who engage in armed encounters must be killed. Those killed should be buried decently. A decent burial after death is a human right. We should not forget that even terrorists have human rights in a democracy.
If Arnico and I manage that proposed trip to Cambodia this summer, we will tell you all at Sajha.com what a gross misadventure we would have avoided by not allowing a Pol Pot and a Khmer Rouge to emerge in Nepal in the form of the Maoists. I extend my full support to our boys in the Army who are trying to prevent terrorists from taking our democracy hostage.
I invite further comments on all my rambling and thoughts. Let's make this thread a futuristic beacon of hope, not another strand of what Arnico calls, "helpless mourning".
|
| bidwan_barga_fan |
Posted
on 05-May-02 11:12 PM
To all bidwan barga:
Could this be continued on a new thread... as my (+ many others, too) snail paced internet connection takes forever to download the whole thing... thanks...
bidwan_barga_fan
|
| ananta |
Posted
on 06-May-02 01:24 AM
Pahade ketaji, I want to repeat one quotation which was also appeared in some message board before that "if good people do not take part in politics, they should be ready to be governed by bad people".
|
| HahooGuru |
Posted
on 06-May-02 01:58 AM
Paschim wrote:
I also love the names he’s suggesting - Saipal, Manaslu, etc. Very feminine, don't you think? (naming of the districts).
--
Hera hai mitra ho, Paschim ko weakness can be smelled very
faintly, but, not yet to the level of drawing useful conclusion.
Like Tulasi Giri, BP Koirala (BP was also quite straight and fan
of issues related to woman), and our mitra Paschim pani
"FEMALE" bhan pachi HURUKKA hune Jaaaaaasto chha hai.
Republican harule Monarchist URVASI ko avatar ma ayera
Paschim lai Tapakka tipi laijalan hai. Bijay Kumar le KPB kura
lai sachai sachai lekhe jasto bhabisya sachyaunu naparos
hai hami Paschim ka fan haru lai. Peoples get changed by
three things very easily: Moooooney, Juuuuuwa-Raushi and
Woooman. Paschim ji, afulai control garnu parla hai yo third
factor factor bata.
(Feminist harule mero naak ta paye ma sure katne nai chhan.
Woooman le logne manche bigarne hoina ki, aimai sanaga
maya jaal garda logne manche le sansar birshidine chai ho hoi.
Aimai le logne manche bigareko hoina, logne manche le
aimai paye pachi afulai nai birsi afule afailai bigarne gareka hun.
ra yo kura nabujhne le aimai lai dos dinchan).
La maile ta Politics ko bhasa use gareko hun, bujhne lai sunako
mala nabujhne baikuntha gai hala (????).
I liked this thread very much. I had faxed the first in the thread
but, Iam not sure whether it reached to NCP head office or
to Nepalicongress.org webmaster's office. Anyway, I fulfilled
my promise and will mail this whole thread one day by air mail.
http://www.nepalicongress.org.np/ should be informed.
http://www.cpn-uml.org/
http//www.n-c-p.org/
should have some party related issue discussion forum, but,
the peoples in those parties do't have time and knowledge
to have internet connection, all quota misused by their
siblings.
If anyone has email address of these party leaders including
Maoists, they can invite peoples to discuss here at Sajha.com.
Well, by faxing these postings (by air mail/ s-mail or e-mial)
we can SEDUCE them to join SAJHA.com
hGxP
Bye bye.
|
| Brook |
Posted
on 06-May-02 02:08 AM
Paschim bro, your elucidation is very informative, and like always, convincing. I am satisfied to rest my case for now. In light of the knowledge you have imparted, my fears do appear, I must admit, a bit exaggerated.
As for the communist romance, you missed my point entirely. If I thought I had the tiniest fraction of charisma, might, wit, looks (and whatever else it takes..) any of the Pandavs had during my FOSLA years, I'd have rallied for more tax cuts!(I wouldn't have had anything to do with the organization in the first place!) Since I didn't, I used to wish for my neighbor to share, well, not really share, but just toss me one of the many balls he'd be juggling =)
[Even tried cajoling that bastard into reading the Manifesto once!]
Anyway, times have changed and all I am going to tell you is, I am not going to disappoint you :)
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 06-May-02 04:05 AM
GP-ji, kasto daraunu bhayeko?! I thought by now the following things were clear about me.
1. I like women, music, politics, travelling, among other finer things in life. But I talk openly and candidly and with humor about them. I think this is a healthy and non-hypocritical way to go about life.
2. I believe in monogamy and unconditional love to one woman. After marriage, I intend to become the greatest of husbands, with 100% loyalty and faithfulness to my wife. All temptations to err will be suppressed with might.
3. I can't be compared with BP and Tulsi Giri, who were far more intelligent than me, and far more successful in their pursuits of consented sex with adult women. I don't intend to embark on that path, and neither do I intend to join active politics like them. I will be seeking to contribute to Nepal's progress most actively through other channels like i) philanthropy, ii) enterprise, and iii) ideas.
4. Until now, my only political and Presidential aspirations are confined to serving as the President of your fan club, the HFC!
And Brook, glad you've rested your case, and keep me informed about all your pursuits, romantic or otherwise. We're all voyeurs here!
|
| ananta |
Posted
on 06-May-02 08:53 AM
hahoo guruji and paschimji, how these names "saipal, manasalu" seems feminine ? (again district names?) these are names of mountain peaks in nepal. I don't think these names are feminine. one thing to say here; 'manashalu' is now being used by as email address of me:)
|
| Nepe |
Posted
on 06-May-02 10:59 PM
>We can have a presidential prime minister who is just independent. S/he can
>be like an elected monarch for 5 years actually - and we can busy the real
>monarch with the opening of football tournaments or hosting of parties to
>visiting head of states. Make the Shahs constitutional and ceremonial without
>doing away with them for sentimental and touristic purposes. That's what I
>meant when I wrote earlier to make the royals "irrelvant". .. .this revision could
>go a long way in pacifying our republican friends too. Nepe, my friend?
Mane Paschimji tapai laai. It sure goes a long way to pacify republicans. An “irrelevant” monarchy is practically a republicanism. Granted it is truely so, this is the most agreeable proposal for republicans.
But I can not help doing a sum of how many liters of blood of misguided young boys and girls, innocent civilians, police and army, how many millions of rupaiya that should otherwise have been spent in bikas, how many legitimate questions of why not, how many innocent questions of what if, will be sacrificed to keep saving the thing we aspire to make irrelevant !
A moral dilemma of my immature mind is this: If we ignore the complexity of the problem, this war is as simple as ‘to save the monarchy or not’. If you sacrifice monarchy, there is no reason why Baburam, Prachanda and Badal will not agree to join the mainstream polity. The cost is ridiculously negligible. A family of 5 people will have to become common citizens. If you want to save a family of 5 people from being forced to become common citizens (and that is in 21st century !), you already know how much it cost and how much more it might cost.
I know Maoists have a wrong ideology. But so had UML. Today, UML is a reliable champion and defender of democracy. I know Maoists have are doing ‘crime against humanity’. But I also see Monarchy and its savior democracy are doing ‘crime for humanity’ (monarchy by not doing what it could have done, and ‘democracy’ by doing what it had no way to avoid). I feel something unholy going on out there. Somehow I am unable to celebrate the news of death of 548 boys and girls, the latest news about the most successful operation conducted by our Jawans. May be I will regret my inability to celebrate this news some day. But today, I am just sorry friends !
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 07-May-02 08:46 PM
Nepe, dear friend, I found your posting above so unlike you, uncharacteristically naive. Do you seriously believe that their fight is *only* against the monarchy? Of course not. They are against a multi-party polity and constitutional democracy. Against open minds, unrestrained press, diversity, tolerance. They are against freedom. They are against an open, liberal society. They want a Stalinist regime. They are Mao, Pol Pot, and Josef Stalin rolled into one. You have led a life of an activist on the Left. You know all this. Please don't let your *partially* justified zeal for republicanism blind you from seeing the larger evil that these Maoists represent. You of course unequivocally condemn their crimes. But I found your tone troubling.
I don't believe that the king quitting the throne will solve this problem. We can't forget their early stated goals. True they have never been consistent and now that they are being hammered, they may say and do anything for survival. But we can't afford to give them the benefit of the doubt. At one point didn't they say they are okay "suspending" their demand for a republic? And didn't they also declare with pride their "aghosit karyagat ekata" with the late king? Who was that "ekata" between the king and the Maoists directed against?
There are one hundred things wrong in the existing system. But nothing justifies what Maoists are doing. Even this pitiable, this imperfect democracy of ours gave them all the space they needed to express dissent, win people's hearts, come to power, and implement their Maoist socio-economic plans peacefully for 5 years, and then let us decide at the end of it whether we liked them to send them back to power for 5 another years or remove them. The grand irony is that they don't believe in the very People in whose name that they have wrought this carnage. But if we see that at the root of their fatal drama lies the despicable greed and ambition of a few extremely ugly leaders and their misled cadres, the irony vanishes.
I read Baburam's recent article under his column "Bela-bakhat ka kura" published in India yesterday. It was disgusting. He calls people who disagree with him "arrogant frogs", singles out the likes of Rabindra Mishra, and unsurprisingly attacks the person, not his ideas. It is so sad that a mad man is managing this show. Imagine a bigot like that running our country. And I looked at that photograph of the murdered Inspector Bharat Dhakal's son here on Sajha yesterday. My heart broke.
Nobody is celebrating the deaths in Rolpa. It's tragic. Very, very tragic. But now, it is too late for all this not to be inevitable. Should we just let them go on and mount a series of further attacks and kill thousands more? All wars are sad. But they have to be brought to a logical conclusion. And a logical conclusion of this war in today's context is the following:
1. Complete crushing of the Maoist terrorist outfit.
2. Complete surrender of arms.
3. An apology by the Maoists to the nation.
4. Possible re-incarnation of CPN (Maobadi) as a political party with no violent tactics.
In return, the state can consider:
1. Mass pardoning and withdrawal of charges.
2. Apology and compensation to victims of Police brutality, Army mistreatment, and Maoist attacks.
3. Agreement in principle to hold a national referendum on the issue of Constituent Assembly at an appropriate time within the next 3 years which may or may not include a question on the sustenance of the monarchy as a constitutional organ.
The way I see it, there is no looking back. We should pray that this intensely painful phase of our history is over in the next 2 years, so that we can start the healing process and reconciliation. We can't let this great state of ours collapse, and the rebuilding can only begin after this tragic phase is over soon.
Let's hope.
|
| A Nepali |
Posted
on 08-May-02 01:56 PM
The people who are discussing developing Nepalin this thread are bunch of action-less, good for nothings talkers, just like out corrupted politicians back in Nepal.
TALK, TALK, TALK that's all you guys can do?
|
| Naya keta |
Posted
on 08-May-02 07:19 PM
In the midst of all the positive and informative ideas being discussed here , it pains me to see a comment from someone like "A Nepali". It must be understood that the people expressing their ideas freely and engaging in dialogue as is being done here is the back bone of democratic culture. Nowhere in any of the above pieces have I read anyone say that they have the answers to the problems in Nepal... Nowhere has anyone openly proclaimed that they are the ones who will change Nepal..... What is happening here is an open dialogue between concerned individuals who are 1) not afraid to express themselves 2) willing to listen to others and are open to all ideas with merit based on rational assupmtions....... No one in the above discussion has been arrogant enough to pressume they are the ones holding all the answers. I persaonally got involved in the debate to some extent to LEARN.....reading the posting above has inspired in me a positiivity when all there was before was negativity. It is with optimism that I now look to the future whereas before pessimism was my best friend. It has been a welcome surprise to know that democratically minded Nepalis, young and old , exist, wherever they may be in the world, with obvious wisdom in their words and tolerance in their hearts. This discussion is not the end but the begining......there will hopefully be many more discussions to come......discussions lead to learning of new ideas....the more one learns the more kowledge one has...the more knowledgeable one becomes the wiser one becomes....the wiser one is the more focused will be ones actions ......and actions undertaken on the foundations of wisdom are the potent forces of change that has the potential to shape societies....So my friend "A Nepali" it may be true we can do nothing today but ( as you put it) TALK TALK TALK...But who knows of tomorrow....who might do what...what might develop from the discussions....be positive my friend....join in and help us all see things from a different perspective...the more people involved in the discussions the greater is the potential to learn....to change...to be changed...so please do not poison the spirit of optimism which is being developed here by your negativity......Nepal has to many of those ....we need new people and new approaches......where do you stand, my friend?
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 08-May-02 08:31 PM
Very well said, Naya Keta. I really don't mind healthy skepticism. It makes optimism more realistic. But when false and malicious remarks come flying it's not pleasant. But I suppose life is a package, and learning to tackle helplessness with amusement is useful! Let's continue the tradition of this very rich thread and keep pouring constructive thoughts.
|
| arnico |
Posted
on 09-May-02 01:14 AM
I think what we are doing here is learning, learning, learning... by sharing, sharing, sharing... our thoughts and reactions...
... and, well, typing, typing, typing :-)
|
| SIWALIK |
Posted
on 09-May-02 01:29 AM
I totally disagree with these soultions by Paschim as teh logical conclusion to the war:
1. Complete crushing of the Maoist terrorist outfit.
2. Complete surrender of arms.
3. An apology by the Maoists to the nation.
4. Possible re-incarnation of CPN (Maobadi) as a political party with no violent tactics.
My contention lies with the first point. Here is my argument. The leadership will not be able to achieve anything wihtout the cadres of illeterate, unemployed jantas who are dying in dozens. Crushing of the bottom cadres can be achieved by providing them alternative. The resources that are being used for arms purchase and military solutions could be poured into employment and developmental programs in the affected areas. The government has to be sincere in its intentions. Once you draw away the sojha jantas who are willing to die in a fruitless cause born out of false hope, Baburams and Prachandas would have no one to fight their ideological war.
|
| HahooGuru |
Posted
on 09-May-02 02:08 AM
Siwalik, you missed a main sentence that Paschim wrote,
that was "it is already too late" to confine on your
"Once you draw away the sojha jantas who are willing to die in a fruitless cause born out of false hope, Baburams and Prachandas would have no one to fight their ideological war."
--
Because now maoists are in PURE VANDALISM of infrastructures
phase, and in this phase with brain washed minds, your proposal
(Siwalik's proposal) does not work. As you have already seen
Maoists want to linger "TALK" things to make India foolish and use
Indian soil.
Did you read the so called message in reference to Deoba's visit to
Bush, the Maoists who were so against India (in June article
written by BRB) in the past, and they are now completely blind
and kept silence. It shows how they change their policies. Once
they vowed fight with Indian army in Kalapani, but, all these things
gone. Now, if USA tries to help Nepal against Maoists, Maoists
will compromise with India to be Indian Agent in Nepal. Its not very
far from possibilities. You just keep on watcching the developments.
Don't trust Maoists, they do not have anything fixed, they are more
power hungry and they were there in war just because they could
not get any position from their illusionary election campaigns. They
are not getting anythign even from arms. I fully support Paschim's
and I have become a great obdient fan of Deoba. I want Deoba
to sacrifice the Khume and other corrupts when time comes. But,
today, with his Girija idiot holding full power at CWC and Maoists
trying to kidnapp democracy, Deoba is having trouble with his
limited resource (i.e. number of real honest MPs in his camp).
As time comes, he will be able to fire them and hire better guys.
In Democracy its possible, but, no where else.
hGxP
|
| SIWALIK |
Posted
on 09-May-02 02:19 AM
No, I do not think it is impossible to break up Maoist cadres from its leadership. If you have noticed, there are news of friction in their leadership. A clever strategy from Nepalese government would be to divide leaders and the lower cadres by giving them different options. Not everyone has the same sort of resolutions. Without giving options to those who are willing to give their life, how can you weaken them? Does anyone so easily want to give his/her life? Has government given them anything to believe in? At the absence of an alternative, what choice do they have but to fight who they consider enemies? It is upto the government to demonstrate that they have a future in a democratic nepal. It is up to the government to counter maoist propoganda with its own counter propoganda. Has that been done? NO, instead indiscriminate retaliation by the police and the army has further alienated and created more Maoists. It is a short-sighted policy to believe that you can kill them all. NEVER!
|
| HahooGuru |
Posted
on 09-May-02 02:34 AM
Nepali Keta,
In Democracy, debate TALK TALK TALK is the only way to destination
just before implementation of any plans. So that, you have least errors
and very few changes once you finalize your plans and head for implementation.
Example: Nepali citizenship Bill last year passed without dfiscussion, finally,
don't know wehere it is now.
Lok Sewa Ayog ka niyam haru change more frequently than the govt.
employees change or move or get transferred. Its all because they did not
enough discussions.
The armed police ... bill changed within a week in last summer.
The women property right bills changed so frequently up and down.
Similarly, the current TALK with Maoists and its failure .... its all came
and gone because there was no enough TALK discussions, i.e. in
Nepal people call it ENOUGH HOME WORK.
If you don't do enough home work before you embark your plan,
you will have more chances to switch your plan very fast. Its a worst
Nepali style, . . . . it shoudl be rectified, and plans needs to be
discussed in public and come to work only after enough discussions.
For example, Japanese spent 10years to decrease ministeries
from 20+ to 12, and why its so? They are not whimsical like our
leaders who change plan looking at immediate benefit. Only those
who have vision, they have capacity to throw things in public
and get public feedback and implement only the best out of
discussions. Discussion = Policiing your plans (trimming unwanted
stuffs + trimming useless stuffs, reinforcing the weak parts
+ minimizing the overall cost + increasing the stability + usefulness
for long time ). Only in dictatorship, dictators last long, but, their
plans and projects are very costly and worth less, and do not
have timely and longterm usuability, because they lack BUDDHI+JIBI.
BUDDHI JIBI are the peoples who spend time on TALK AND TALK
and they give ideas and they are not labours to carry GHAN
and HASIYA, and thats why communism failed. In communism,
peoples of labour hold the power and BUDDHI JIBI are told
to be labour. They have LABOUR TANTRA, thats the missing
points and thats the reason communism failed, because they never
think TALK TALK TALK (discussion) are useless. Only Buddhi-jibi
knows TALK is the ultimate method to make most efficient system.
Only in dictatorship, we can not find discussions open to public,
and we Nepalis came out of long term supresssion, and we don't know
the value of discussion. Thats why you don't know the meaning of
TALK TALK TALK and you yourself use TALK to dennounce others TALK.
TALK is the only lasting weapon that can safe guard democracy.
We know our fore fathers proverb: Bade Bade jayate tatwo bodha.
Let me tell you there are threee reaons for discussion:
1. We have a new topic or new idea.
2. Our idea is on progress. Its progress evaluation and to asses whether
it needs modifications, what was original plan and how we moved or
changed.
3. We are going to close the topic or end the project or work. We have
to make final evaluation and draw conclusions. If it was beneficial,
what were plus points, and if it failed where, how and why it failed,
and how it could have been modified to avoid its failures, and what
should we do to avoid the same mistake in future, or what we need
to do if we want to repeat similar projects in future.
I will call this step as documentation, like writing history book. We can
not modify what happened in history, but, our purpose of documentatioin
is to let others know what happened in the past and what should we
learn from past.
Thanks for reading it.
hGxP
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 09-May-02 03:01 AM
Siwalik, this war is not as "innocent" as you think. You are incorrect in assuming a homogenous group of "sojho janata" who are fighting as Maoists. We need to structure the problem to analyze it dispassionately. There are 4 distinct groups of cadres: i) hard-core guerrillas, ii) jana-militia, iii) active activists in civil uniform, and iv) sympathizers. Category one numbers around 5,000 and similar estimates are put for category 2. The number falling in category 3 could exceed 10,000, while category 4 is indeterminate. Note that CPN (Maobadi) and its earlier avatars have not partaken in electoral politics since 1991.
I believe that category 1 is totally committed to the cause and stated goal of toppling the existing regime through violence, and violence alone, as scripted by Mao and as practiced by Pol Pot. They are convinced that "thousands, if not millions" have to die to put in place a "revolutionary people's govt." Leaders from Baburam downwards justify violence that way - that it is inevitable in order to get rid of the "reactionary regime". They really believe that there is no other way. Killings doesn't bother them. For them, it's like you and me going to a booth and voting. They have become numb. Read the chilling May 13 Time article on "it takes time to skin a man", and past interviews of BRB. These guerrillas are the fiercest, boldest, and the cruelest core that you will NEVER be able to woo away now. It's too late. They are there to either kill or die. Jana-militia are also equally fierce, but they differ from the guerrillas in one count: they are a stationary and a local concept, while the guerrillas are mobile.
Category 3 and 4, who are not armed and are not engaged in active combat, is a possible group that can be tempted away if the government is sincere. But these are the least dangerous now, and thus not a priority.
Once you deconstruct the problem like this, it is clear that as long as groups 1 and 2 - those carrying arms, sophistically trained, and completely motivated - are not crushed, you cannot begin the softer, more benign, politically correct measures to tempt category 3 and 4. To attempt to do so when groups 1 and 2 are posing a formidable challenge is farcical.
There was a time when the problem hadn't become this serious, and these softer measures were an attractive option. The governments, circa 1996 - 1998, blew the chance and worsened it by random brutality under Operations Romeo and Kilo Sera II. That was a fatal error on the government's part. It was a classic combination of 3 things: i) no long-term vision, ii) arrogance of power, and iii) lack of basic understanding of ideology-driven civic movements.
But 8 years into the "war", peace in Nepal is elusive unless these very young, brainwashed guerrillas are stripped of their arms. There are two ways this can happen: i) they get killed in encounters, and ii) they surrender. These were exactly what I referred to in my steps 1 and 2. The other 5 suggestions logically follow and, after a lag, accompany these.
We can 'wish' we could opt a different route, but the reality is otherwise. A distant relative of mine - one of the most gentle men I have ever known - got hacked to death in Phujel VDC of Gorkha three weeks ago because he voted for the Nepali Congress in the past. In 1998, I engaged in a 6 hour long argument with a Maoist Platoon Commander, then active in the Gorkha-Lamjung border, and with immense difficulty convinced him to surrender at the Gorkha CDO Office. I gave him a loan of 15,000 rupees to start a small business in Kathmandu. Fearing a reprisal from his fellow cadres after defecting, he has gone incognito, and I don't know where he is now. I met and talked with an active civilian Maoist activist this February, another distant relative. It is mind-boggling how unflinchingly indoctrinated they are.
Please be assured I have studied this issue very closely. Once a crisis of this magnitude hits your own home, and you try to make sense of the problem, and then you try to get into the ideological underpinnings of all this, and read Mao, Ho Chi Minh, Pol Pot, Che Guevara - it forces you to quit living in a cloud-cuckoo-land. The worst thing to do at a time like this beyond being confused about options is to harbor illusions. God bless all.
|
| Why Revolution Required |
Posted
on 09-May-02 11:35 AM
Why people's war need indeed?
In the named of democracy, people (who think they are political leaders, who are in government employees) missed use or act of "Democracy", and they destroy Nepal in Nemours way. People stand up and start "Revolution", and they say it "Terrorism". Nepal's corrupted people (specially government employee) created and offered Revolution. Nepalese do not have hope without Revolution. There is the great reason for Revolution……
Corruption in many sectors:
(1) Preserve Slavery
(2) Corruption in Citizenship distribution
(3) Corruption in Land and Forest
(4) Corruption in Tourism and Transportation (RNAC)
(5) Corruption in Nepal Oil - Blackmail
(6) Corruption in Nepal Telecommunication
(7) Corruption in Banking and Trade
(8) Root problem of corruption hits for devaluation of Nepalese currency
(9) Corruption in Development Program – all nationwide projects
(10) Corruption in Water Resource and Development program
(11) Corruption in Electricity development and distribution
(12) Girls Trafficking, increase in prostitution and HIV
(13) Fake illegal Nepali note printing and sell in market
(14) Child abuse
(15) Serious problem in Race instead of equality (people, culture, job )
(16) Corruption in human right, Legal and Justice
(17) Support in Drug trade instead of persecute crimes
(18) Corruption in Tax collection in Airport and Borders
(19) Corruption in Water Resource and Development
(20) Corruption in Police Force
(21) Corruption in Army
(22) Corruption in Industrial and business
(23) Corruption in Hospital and Health Sector
(24) Corruption in Engineering and Development (Road, Bridge, construction)
(25) Corruption in Business and Trade
(26) Corruption in Law, constitution
(27) Neglate in quality and standardization of education (copy and modification of Rana Regime)
(28) Discriminate in equality with man and woman
(29) Class division, people division (Poor, Rich )
(30) Support in political Division instead of Unity in Political
(31) Corruption Environment and wild life
(32) Free, support and encourage to Black mail, illegal commission
(33) Insulting and neglect to Rule, Regulation, Law
(34) Increased multiply in Social problems, and danger
(35) Increased unexpectedly destruction in culture, religion, and Nepali Identity
(36) Corruption in city water, Sinitory
(37) Rapidly increase in jobless, dark future
(38) No security of Life from Law (If you have power and money, you can do anything.)
(39) Great culture, support and practice in Bribery
(40) Humiliation of Nepal in international scope
(41) Collapse system of Law, Services, Social and Culture
(42) Nobody care about constitution
(43) No single one person has strength for Leadership from any political parties (all corrupted ethically and politically, they want only money, position, house, land, enjoyment)
(44) Root of the problem very seriously push Nepal toward poverty and backward
(45) Nepal in the greatest danger if people do not clean this mess or solve country problems by themselves.
(46) Nepal is our country we must take care or nobody will do for you.
|
| Pahade keta |
Posted
on 09-May-02 02:35 PM
I thing there is fundamental differences regarding our political positions--and I like it at the Politics of Hope. It was a bit of a relief that the Maoists have declared a unilateral ceasefire and I really hope their intention is to stick to it. I am not sure what the government is going to do next--not ready to give it a clean chit, though I support it's right to defend when attaced. But in the bloody euphoria following the Rolpa debacle (for the Maoists I mean, the state can go on putting its men (so far) on death row ad nauseum), there must be a serious realization on the part of the Maoists. I am not sure if they take their ceasefire yet another tikdam to conspire against the state and people in Nepal--left politics, sadly, is a politics based on tikdam, conspiracy--or to use the acceptable terms, 'tactics.'
I really hope that they realize the futility of all this n ow and seriously think of disarming and coming to the overground politics. and I see a clear need for that. Let me make my political position clear here : I believe that radical social transformation is a must for Nepal, as for other places of the world and I uphold the imagination of future without exploitation, oppression and subordination. But the methodology of the politics to realize those goals should be essentially democratic--in the sens of accepting dissent, accepting election, creating more plural spaces of interactive citizenry--requires decentralized institutions, of course, but is not limited by this--respect for ecological limitations, and construction of more human, non-violent revolution. One of senior political leaders in India--Surendra Mohan, an obscure name perhaps for most of the Nepalis, but one of the few true politicians in Indian history--recently wrote why we need to synthesize the revolutionary fervour of Marxism with non-violent, inclusive and democratic methodology of Gandhi.
I see threat to democracy both from the organized violence of the Maoists as well as the militarized state--if not de jure, at least de facto. I am not sure how the Military in Nepal would respond if Maoists truly wanted to leave the violent politics, but i see that the only hope.
The so called democrats in the country has to work on truly democratizing their own institutions. Otherwise they wield no moral in claiming that what they are doing is democracy. In fact, when democratic system is devoid of radical politics, the democracy has the clear tendency of turning into a farce--as is happening in Nepal. That is another reason why a radical force has to emerge for whom radical committment does not go against the committment to democratic politics--in our case the multiparty system. I would see a prosperous future for Nepal only if we have radical politics within democracy. That is the only way we can check the technocentric imagination of politics which emphasizes on things like 'governance' in place of 'democracy'; decentralization in place of active citizenship; formal modern institutions in place of more inclusive, flexible and human institutions at the grassroots; the aggressive individualism in place of relational collectivities; meritocracy in place of collective co-existence.
|
| SIWALIK |
Posted
on 09-May-02 03:06 PM
I have no dispute with Paschim's categorization or his causal explanations. I expounded similar opinion a while back. I do question the numbers associated with each category. And of course, I totally disagree with the solution of killing them all. I believe in usin gplys to weakening their moral and breaking up their unity. Of course, the measures used shoud be carrot and stick. One factor I see that was not mentioned was India's role. It is entirely logical to me to believe that it is playing both sides. It would be naive to think that India does not know the whereabouts of the Maoist leaders, or that they are being funded for arms.
|
| dasein |
Posted
on 09-May-02 03:26 PM
It would all be so simple if people in this board stopped sympathising with the grievances of people who have to look up to Maobad to survive. Then we can come out freely and declare death to all. Its not the maobadi's fault, (everybody says the conflict's cause is bad governance, poverty etc. ) We have to kill them anyway.
But we can't kill all. Not in a year or two anyway. There will be pockets remaining on the remotest hills of rukum, for example.
If we think Kilo Sierra (anyboyd know why it was called that?) was mistake we should not support the present RNA operations, as it is being run. Shouldn't the aspiring politicians give a little attention to transparency on the Army's part, especially since the attack is against Nepalese? I would feel much better if a reporter verified that the massacre that took place last week was indeed in an training camp and the dead were indeed the Maoists.
Questions:
Where is the demand for observers in the war zone? Why is nobody protesting the hijacking of press freedom? How do we know that RNA operation is not being run in an worse manner than the Kilo Sierra operation?
|
| ThapaJi |
Posted
on 09-May-02 04:46 PM
"..look up to Maobad to survive" ?? you should think about the people that are devastated after the movement started. Look to the people whose loved ones are killed, bread earner is killed, friend or family is killed...
|
| Naya Keta |
Posted
on 09-May-02 06:55 PM
Just a few questions....
1) if the maobadi leadership realise the futility of their struggle and decide to end their violent confrontation with the state, dis-arm and join the over-ground mainstream politics, what should happen to the leaders of the movement, prachanda, baburam and the other top leaders? Should they be allowed to freely join politics or have they instigated too many atrocities and as such need to be individually punished, even if the maobadis are allowed to function as a political party?
2) What is to be done about the control of the RNA in the post maobadi world? Transparency, accountability.......Dasaien raises an interesting point and I too have been wondering why we have not had any independent verification of the events of the past few week. In our desperation to hear news of the crushing of the maobadis have we have been suckered into believing what they say in the state media, knowing all too well the question marks over their reliability? It is easy to fool people into what they want to believe and could this be happening now?
3) Does Nepal really have democracy.....what is to be in the post maobadi era in Nepal? Lets face it, the violence that the maobadis are engaged in today are also being perpetrated by political parties during election time. May not be in the same degree but threats of violence have been used by a number (could that be a majority) of candidates to gain an advantage in the ballot box....vote buying, booth capturing, co-ersion are prevalent in most areas outside of the major urban centres. How is one to exercise ones democratic right to a free vote staring down the barrel of a gun?
4) Although the title of this thread is "Politics and Hope"...are we giving too much priority and emphasis on the politics of Nepal in regards to it being a catalyst for development? If democrcy is a reflection of the desires of the people of a society, isn't the political instability at the top just a reaction of the great upheavals taking place at the grass-roots of Nepali society? Is the political situation a cause or a symptom? Maybe we need to focus and channelise our individual energies into other sectors of our society, social, cultural, economic etc...and come up with specific ideas targetting theses individual sectors and let the politics work itself out......Soothing ethnic tensions, disbanding the abhorant caste system, providing mass education and health care, safe gaurding promoting our unique cultural heritage and (learned from the Christian societies) promoting domestic charity and charitable organisations just to name a few seem like noble causes worth getting involved in. Maybe these areas are more important than politics and need more exploring? Are we Nepalese just too political for our own good?
Whatever the answers may be, still am dreaming of our Sunsari maiya's thighs....(sigh)
|
| arnico |
Posted
on 10-May-02 07:51 PM
I was busy for a few days, and have yet to read everything that got posted since... but in the spirit of the informal personal side-conversations happening within this thread, I just wanted to welcome Siwalik aboard. Great that you joined the conversation...
Arnico.
|
| Nepe |
Posted
on 12-May-02 10:44 PM
It’s been a while since my last posting and many interesting and thought provoking postings from some new as well as old posters have piled up on top of mine. But I think I owe a reply to Paschim’s response to my last rumblings. So, here it is.
Paschim, I was primarily clearing my conscience. When you are engaged in an important action, you are supposed to use your full attention and energy to carry out that action, so you are excused not to pay attention to your conscience regime or protect yourself through denial, if necessary. I see Deuba as in this situation. However, I, enjoying the safety of living in a safe place and luxury of doing unrestricted chintan-manan, didn't have that excuse. So I had to be confronted by my conscience. What I said had to be told. When I die and be questioned in the divine court tomorrow, I don't want to be embarrassed. (actually I am a nastik, but I can relate to that, consider me as a nastik aastik, similar to how you sometimes identify yourself as a monarchist republican).
>Please don't let your *partially* justified zeal for republicanism
>blind you from seeing the larger evil that these Maoists represent.
>You of course unequivocally condemn their crimes. But I found
>your tone troubling.
Is my tone troubling ?
Yes and No.
No because I know Maoists are committing unforgivable crimes. I am not talking about their silly Jana-karbahi, chilling punishments and revenge or victimization of innocent people, unlike many posters that I find in this board using such points as their major argument against Maoists, not realizing that Maoists too can produce a long list of atrocities committed against them and innocent people by the police and, wait until the post Maoist era to know the full account of, by the royal army (forgive me for a wrong time to say things that might not help to boost the morale of the RNA at such a critical time). I think the bulk of Maoists’ crime is much more and serious than this. They have robbed thousands of young mind of their critical thinking, they have hijacked the frustration of millions of people and abused them, they have forced a legitimate question of removal of monarchy to marry an abusive husband named communism. They have deprived a gentleman and an eligible bachelor named peaceful pathway of a deserving chance. They have played a ‘khelbaad’ with the future of a nation. I do not have any confusion about this. If you are wondering about my political background, let me tell you that I have been consistently a pro-democratic (anti-communist and anti-monarchist) since the time I started to think independently, almost two decades ago, before communism started to collapse, before people in Nepal dreamed of a viable democratic future ! And I have never allowed the sentiment of my earlier years romance with the leftwing mix up with my logical thinking.
Yes, my tone is troubling, because I know Maoists are not the only criminals in the country. The very people who have sent the RNA to crush the criminal Maoists are themselves criminals engaged collectively in crime of abusing their power and molesting the country for last 10 years. They have sent the RNA out primarily to defend their crimes. That’s what troubles my tone. Although I have no doubt that Maoists must be defeated to defend the institution of democracy in Nepal.
Maoists must be defeated. And they must be defeated completely. But you can not do so if you fail to understand their power, both physical and mental. Maoists’ physical power comes from their mental power and their mental power comes from the moral powerlessness of the establishment. Look at the people running the show of democracy, all of them are corrupt clowns. Monarchy- symbolism of our primitiveness. I will be not surprised to find Maoists guerilla unflinching. They know they are fighting AGAINST bad people and outdated institution. Unfortunately they don’t know they are fighting FOR bad people too. So, shouldn’t we wonder whether these crappy politicians and monarchy are our best commander in a historical war against whatever evil Maoists represent ? Shouldn’t we wonder if we are missing a war that can be fought to defeat all three evils of our country together ? Shouldn’t we wonder if defeating corruption and primitiveness is itself a war against Maoists ? Because that way we will be blocking the biggest source of their moral strength.
>I don't believe that the king quitting the throne will solve this problem.
I will be surprised to death if the king ever agreed to do so. But I believe this is the most permanent, most powerful, most peaceful, least expensive and miraculous way of solving the Maoist problem for good.
>Do you seriously believe that their fight is *only* against the monarchy?
>Of course not. They are against a multi-party polity and constitutional
>democracy. Against open minds, unrestrained press, diversity, tolerance.
>They are against freedom. They are against an open, liberal society. They
>want a Stalinist regime. They are Mao, Pol Pot, and Josef Stalin rolled into
>one.
Yes, I know Maoists are Mao, Pol Pot, and Josef Stalin rolled into one. I have no doubt about that. I have closely studied them. But I believe these three characters that constitute them can be killed one by one without firing a single shot if we wish so and if we have courage, vision and wisdom. Let me elaborate my thoughts. Naya Keta and Dilasha in some of earlier postings have argued that we probably have a proper political system in place, but we lack a political culture. Agreeing largely on this, I would put it in this way. Apart from a small flaw, we have an almost proper political system in place. But that small flaw is significantly preventing a good political culture to emerge. Because the system encourage us to ignore the flaw as harmless or even worse forces us to misrepresent that flaw as necessary and good, we have inherited a corrupted political culture which is liberal to accept some overlap of truth and falsehood. Every politician and political party in Nepal think when they say one right thing, they have earned a concession of telling three lies. And everybody have practiced that concession without a second thought and without shame. Maoists are the best user of that. Their thought system goes like this- since they oppose monarchy, they have concession to be Stalin. Since they are against casteism, sexism and social injustices, they have right to be a Pol Pot. Since the other politicians and royals are crook, they have obligation to be a Maoist. If we rectify our flaws and weaknesses, we will disarm Maoists from this concession. It is equivalent of breaking their back for good.
I will comment on other postings later. I am specially impressed by the posting of Pahade Keta.
|
| Satya |
Posted
on 13-May-02 12:13 PM
It is too late, local time 01:12AM. I coud not read all the postings. I see you guys' English prose capability is great, could you please use a fraction of this ability to write "summary" instead of writing Mahabharat. I will be back. Thanks.
-Satay
This is not any reply to anybody. I could not find anyway to insert my opinion without hitting reply!
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 13-May-02 09:33 PM
Nepe, my basic contention is this: I fully *understand* what are said to be the causes of Maoist actions, but to me these actions can never be *justified*. But by saying this, I am not defending any of the 'samsad-badi' actors who we all know have been utter disappointments after 1991. I have consistently voiced my anger against them. I've called them crooks, and said in my humorous guise that "these bastards need to be castrated". But this position of mine cannot be equated with my unflinching loyalty to the current democratic dispensation. I believe in cleansing the wrongs of the past by using this very system. It can be done. My belief is in the invincibility of the system, not in its petty actors. Actors come and go.
But now, at this exact hour as we speak, our prime challenge is different. We simply can't engage in the peaceful socio-legal process of purifying our democracy when terrorists - Nepal's largest evil ever - are trying to take the system hostage. It's just a simple question of prioritized practicality. We need to defeat the Maoists first to move on to take on the second grade of evil. Let me call this second group of evil: "graft and vice in public life". It'll be important not to forget this second task following the euphoria over the crushing of terrorists. Please read my point number 7 in my first posting of this thread to witness this foresight.
Something that I commented way back in 1999, when Maoists still retained their political credentials, echoes what Pahade Keta is talking about. I wrote then for a need of a "krantikari samsad-badi" party in Nepal. UML and NC have lost their fervor for a socio-economic revolution. And Maoists could have filled that void by abandoning violence, but maintaining their progressive social agenda against corruption and injustice. I totally disagree with their political and economic programs of course. But to maintain a revolutionary zeal in party politics, i) while being responsible and ii) without being exposed as hypocrites, is a very, very tough task. "Krantikari samsadbadi" parties who uphold a *realistically* radical agenda in a peaceful manner while welcoming dissent would be a boon to today's struggling democracy. But note the emphasis on the word "realistic". Charko naara ta jasle pani dina sakchha, and left-wing politics that has universally excelled in propounding a radical agenda when out of power have also been the most stunning failures when in power. Recall how Tony Blair dragged the loony Labor Party out of "18 years of wilderness" by finally realizing this fact. I am a Leftist, realistically radical, when it comes to tackling social ills - the inequities and the injustices. But in economics, the Left has consistently got one thing wrong. They don't want to accept that the state never creates wealth. They don't accept this because this is against their received wisdom.
In Nepal, existing parties can rejuvenate with fresh leadership; or new parties should emerge to fill the void of realistic radicalism. Maoists had that chance until 1999 when they could have traded their popular base for a formidable "krantikari samsadbadi" agenda. Too bad they were and are blinded by their useless dogma to make daring, modern compromises of this kind. They may, of course, not have opted to join the mainstream quite consciously because they know it's much easier maintaining an exterior of radicalism in a totalitarian regime (while permitting internal rot and decay) than preserving a progressive agenda that's constantly tested and tried by democracy's rigorous, prying eyes. They gambled for an easier loot and are set to loose spectacularly.
|
| SIWALIK |
Posted
on 13-May-02 10:35 PM
I do not understand what Paschim meams by "invincibility of the system." There is no such thing. If you mean democratic system, there have been plenty of reversals to authoritarianism even after democratic transition. I do not support Maoists and never will, but it is naive to think their action is never "justified". They can easily justify their actions. The history of the world is full of revolution beginning with the French Revolution. Maoists have lessons from many such movements. After all they can never lose, and that is their strength. As you know, it is understood in elite circles, "Government loses by not winning, and guerillas win by not losing." This kind of warfare has no end. The only solution is political one, not war, or crushign defeat.
When the dust settles, we the Nepalese would have been the biggest losers. The futility of Maoists war is evident. Their dream of ruling Nepal is unattainable. But what are the prospects of them holding strong in certain area? That is a terrifying scenario. 40-50 thousand army cannot sustain this magnitude and nature ofconflict. Increasing personnels spells doom for future politics of Nepal since it will politicize the army, which is never a good prospect.
And all is said and done, we are in a "no win" situation, no matter how you look at it. Every clous is suposed to have a silver lining. I am trying to find one in this Maoist cloud.
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 14-May-02 12:03 AM
Siwalik, I said *my belief* is in the invincibility of the democratic system (not its actors). And that Maoist actions *to me* can never be justified. It'd have been polite of you if you had noted those crucial qualifiers. Of course, tyrants have justified all sorts of crimes through history, and of course regimes have seesawed across the globe. But I was stating an informed *personal* belief, not making a scientific claim.
I also believe in a political solution though talks, but I believe in seeking that solution strategically. And this is as follows: i) break their back physically so that they can't resurrect violently again, ii) negotiate on their political agenda in good faith, iii) facilitate the re-incarnation of CPN (Maobadi) as a political party with no violent tactics. There are other accompanying steps, which I have outlined as my personal beliefs many times on this board, and I won't repeat all that. But *I also believe* that to extend to them an olive branch NOW when their military position is quite strong to wreak havoc anytime gain (popularly labelled by other communists as Sainya Unmad) and when the *political* command of their *military* wing is seriously uncertain (witness the ceasefire drama), is plain stupidity.
|
| SIWALIK |
Posted
on 14-May-02 01:18 AM
I am encouraged by your shift in the strategy to deal with the Maoists. From crushing and killing each of them, you now seem to favor political settlement. Kautilya's "sam, daam, danda, bhed" should be an appropriate strategy, although all Deuba seems to believe in is "danda" as USA seems on the verge of allocating $20 million. He seems comfortable enough to be fighting an "unwinnable war" on someone else's back, i.e. US military assistance. Maoist will have no dearth of arms. That is the repurcussion from the war in Afghanistan since the Soviet invasion. Afghans are now the most armed people in the world and Afghan Pakistan border areas are the haven for arms merchants. And these merchat of death will have no qualms about supplying arms to Maoists when there are leftist movement and parties in India, Bangladesh, Philippines etc. Nepal India border is porous enough for movement of men and material, even though Nepalese government might want to think otherwise. Taliban hijaking Indian Airline jet from Kathmandu testifies to this fact. Even India struggles to check Arab and Afghan fighers infiltrating into Kashmir. Even though I favor political solution, I do not see it in our context. This is the case of reality on the ground not meeting the pragmatism of politics. Same can be said of personal belief and scientific validity. Beliefs that are not based on historical and political reality will be hard to sustain. And everyone understands that opinions expressed on this forum are all personal. Some are more informed than others.
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 14-May-02 03:53 AM
Unintended encouragements are amusing. For your information, my position on this issue has not shifted one inch. NEVER have I said "each of them should be crushed and killed". I challenge you to find such a claim that I have made. I have said two things on this and they are as follows: i) their *terrorist outfit* must be crushed, and ii) those who engage in *armed encounters* must be killed, and buried decently.
Now, if what you said I said and what I said I have said are the same thing, then I can only pity your understanding of the English language. And I hope you know the distinction between a "terrorist outfit" and a political party with membership of "each of them" and their various divisions.
Alongside these exact remarks, I have also consistently suggested *political* steps such as: i) facilitation of re-incarnation of CPN (Maobadi) as a political party with no violent tactics, ii) surrender of arms, iii) compensation of victims of Police, Army and Maoist brutality, iv) withdrawal of charges and mass-pardoning, v) consideration of plebiscite on the issue of constituent assembly. These five steps are *political* outcomes which can only be negotiated *politically*. To now be reminded that I have shifted to a "political solution" is thus highly amusing. I have always believed in *sequencing* of both military and political strategies which I am repeating above for the umpteenth time. Please do justice to my postings by reading them in their entirety and not lifting selected sections to suit your attempts to put words into my mouth.
On the rest of your highly "informed" assertions, well, what can I say? I sense that you have grasped the Maoist problem so completely and utterly that I stand enlightened by your sophisticated insight. I remain indebted.
|
| manashalu |
Posted
on 14-May-02 07:49 AM
Siwalik,
As you said that.......The history of the world is full of revolution beginning with the French Revolution. Maoists have lessons from many such movements. After all they can never lose, and that is their strength.....
Then I want to know your opinion about maoist insurgency of Malaysia, Indonesia in 60's, Shining path of peru late 80's, armed rebellion of communist party in filippines. can you gie me any ideas about these insurgency ???? How is their fate now ??
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 14-May-02 01:30 PM
Siwalikji:
Let me barge in. Your posting has to some extent glorified the rebels, and their
intention, which is completely unjustified. No, they have to lose a lot, they have
lost a lot. They lose their political base, which is their main assets. They lose their
credibility. So,to say Maoists have nothing to lose and government has everything
to lose is oversimplification.
I read this posting of Salman Rushdie in Washington Post in one of post 9/11 days.
"Don't be terrorized", he wrote there, "The fundamentalist believes that we believe
in nothing. In his world view, he has his absolute certainties, while we are sunk in indulgences..."(not necessarily verbatim) And that is the case with Maoists. They
think that they have their certainty, "the world to win and the shackles to lose",
while the democrats are bunch of cowards. "The rebels fight for freedom" while
the military fights for "Rs 2,000.00 per month". That is how they view the current
situation. They think the democrats are timorous creatures, the democrats are
afraid of them, the democrats are afraid of losing lives while they are irrepressible,
their principles irrefutable, and their fortress of beliefs impregnable. They utterly
underestimate the resolve of people, and the desire of people to live in democratic
system. There is this adamant attitude so prevalent in their organization, that
political solution in today's situation remains a merely wishful possibility. I don't
understand how can those people who abduct and enlist teenagers from schools
can claim any moral standard or any public support or any loftiness of their ideas?
|
| SIWALIK |
Posted
on 14-May-02 01:55 PM
I am sorry my responses to Paschimjee and Manashalujee got rejected since there was a banned word or so. I could not go back and lost the screen when I tried. What are the banned words?
Anyway, to sum up my response:
To Paschimjee:
1. I wondered what it implies when we want to completely "crush" the Maoist "Terrorist outfits?"
2. What does "political solution" mean? Is it a political solution if both sides cannot agree to it?
3. I believe you have an intimate knowledge of this problem, not me, hence you demonstrate informed opinion better than I do, or ever will. I differ in solution. I see no political solution for immediate forseeable future. I believe the Maoists are just playing with the government usinf different ploys of cease fire, lure of dialogue etc. I believe they started this desructive path after they rejected political path... Hope I am wrong!
To Manashalujee:
I admitted I had no idea to offer about the revolutions he mentioned. I felt that with 80 percent of the world population living in poverty, leftist movements have pockets of fertile grounds they can use for their movements. Foreign leftist groups involvement in Nepal has fueled the present situation.
I then tried to imagine the sociopathic malaise as evidenced by the Maoist acts from two excerpts from the TIME magazine article:
|
| SIWALIK |
Posted
on 14-May-02 01:57 PM
Let me try again if the excerpts will be accepted:
Even with knives as sharp as razors, it takes time to skin a man. After 35 minutes, flesh was hanging from Ram Mani Jnawali's shoulders and cuts crisscrossed his legs, ribs, arms, hands, ears and chin. His legs were shattered at the shins, broken stumps marking where the bones had been smashed across the steps of his house. But he was still breathing. And yet his teenage tormentors kept questioning him. "Why don't you leave the Congress party?" screamed one interrogator. "How much do you earn? Where are your daughters?" But the 54-year-old, whose only offense was that he belonged to the ruling Nepali Congress Party, was beyond speech. Eventually his torturers—a crowd of 60 girls and boys in Maoist uniforms and rebel-red bandannas—grew tired. Selecting a sharpened kukri (a small machete), one of them stepped forward and sliced halfway through Jnawali's neck in a single blow. And that's how his wife and son found him, cut to pieces, head partly severed, when they dared to venture out into the yard the next morning. No one knew whether he had died of shock or bled to death, but the pool of blood around his body suggested the end had been slow.
|
| SIWALIK |
Posted
on 14-May-02 02:05 PM
The second excerpt I wanted to share contains some "censored" words. Where can I find the list of such words. It is a surprise to me to have come across "censoring" in this forum. For the benefit of all who might not have read the article, I post the link here:
http://www.time.com/time/asia/magazine/article/0,13673,501020513-235504,00.htm
|
| NepaliChora |
Posted
on 14-May-02 03:13 PM
Siwalk,
Thankyou for posting the link. It is a chilling story. I cannot wait to see Nepal free from the devils grip.
|
| Bad Day |
Posted
on 14-May-02 06:19 PM
The range of emotions a person goes through as a consequence of reading an article such as the one in Time
shock...horror...disgust...fear....terror...anger...frustration.....and finally...helplessness and impotence.
What can anyone, who refuses to take give in to (using an expression from an upcoming mega-film) to the dark side and take up arms against their fellow brothers and sisters , do in the face of such savage butchery and naked hatred? Is the situation on the ground as dire as descibed in the article?
I sometimes wonder....politics... and ...hope...do they belong in the same sentence? Having a bad day...a really bad day....but there are those that have it far worse, most likely beyond the scope of my ability to imagine....
|
| Naya Keta |
Posted
on 14-May-02 06:36 PM
In light of the article and many more like it..I again ask the question...
what can be the nature of the political "settlement" with the maoists, and especially their leadership?
I for one would be dissapointed with the "settlement " that lets any one of the top leadership and many of the middle level leadership of the maoists walk free. If and when the present "situation" is brought under control, there must be an avenue for the peole who have been "wronged" (definately too tame a word) to bring those who wronged them to justice......Otherwise the concept of JUSTICE has no meaning. Something in line with the war crimes tribunal in Nuremberg after WWII. There should also be a seperate body set up similar to that of the "Nazi hunters" of the Isereali Mossad to track down every single one of the Maoists who have committed attrocities innocents.
|
| huh |
Posted
on 14-May-02 06:59 PM
Let's assume that after five year, every situation will be in favour of maobadi and they win the war, if so, what will happen ?
1. Society without social injustice.
2. Poverty eradication.
3.No corruption.
4.High reputaion of nepal and nepalis across the world.
5.Respect of people's fundamental right.
6. ......
If maobadi rule nepal, How much time they need to obtain above purposes ? within 5 year? 10 year ? or .. ?
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 14-May-02 09:34 PM
Always a pleasure to read Biswo's strong and no-nonsense responses which I agree with so completely.
Siwalik, thousands of very young and indoctrinated boys and girls are going around the hills and plains of Nepal today carrying arms, spreading terror and violence in the name of "revolution". The military wing of the Maoist party has degenerated into a "terrorist outfit". I have no problem with people who believe in "Maoism" as long as they are not carrying unlicensed arms and killing people, including unarmed civilians. I am not a student of political science, but if you have read Thomas Hobbes, circa 1650, one of his key arguments for the need of a state is that a society with multiple origins of violence is anarchic. You need to "monopolize" violence in a society and that monopoly must be the state. There is no room for *unlicensed* gun wielding citizens in a democracy, and the only "legitimate" monopolist of violence is the state. But citizens constrain the terms of the use of that power of coercion. For example, the state can not also go around killing people abusing its monopoly rights. So when I say a "terrorist outfit" must be crushed, I mean all those Maoists carrying arms and spreading terror must be: i) captured and tried in special courts, ii) those coming to fight must be killed and buried decently, iii) if they surrender at the time of the encounter or another time, they should not be killed, but stripped of their arms and processed for legal action as per the laws of the land. As part of the political negotiations, those captured under these circumstances may be tried, pardoned, or freed later. Either through capture, killing, or surrender, the "terrorist outfit" must be crushed. This has been my consistent position since I started writing here. Rest of their party outfits and organs including thousands of unarmed civilian activists and sympathizers who think Communism is the best thing since the invention of Samosa are most welcome to exist in our democracy.
Political solution is feasible. Maoists are set to lose, and they will have no option, except extinction, but to negotiate a "graceful" exit from their flawed way of operation after their "Sainya Unmad" is exhausted. That's why I believe a major offensive (to capture, kill, or force surrender) that breaks their back making it impossible for them to resurrect again is most necessary before we start negotiating with them on the finer details of political terms. They shouldn't be under the illusion that their bargaining position comes from the barrel of the gun. In an open society, one's strength is directly proportional to the support base among the people. And Maoists should know that the initial popular support they had in some pockets of the country has now almost vanished. You can't buy support through terror.
After this painful phase is over, we as a nation must go through a period of healing. Like Naya Keta said, it could be a Nuremberg, could be the Desmond Tutu model of Truth and Reconciliation. These details will have to be hammered out in our Parliament and in negotiations with Maoists during the political talks after some military accounting is taken care of.
Okay, I really feel that I have now said enough on this depressing topic. And if I may, I'd like to move on. Thanks for hearing me.
|
| Democracy for Devil |
Posted
on 14-May-02 10:16 PM
Why Democracy does not work with current corrupted politician, leaders and people?
Let me explain: The Law of the nature written by God and Goddess.
(1) Donkey eats a bunch of grass.
(2) Snake eats a frog.
(3) Human eats a chocolate cake.
Do you think that if we change requirement, will it works or not?
Lets give,
(1) A frog to Donkey.
(2) A bunch of grass to Human.
(3) A chocolate to Snake.
Now, It is universal truth by nature, this experiment and a system does not work.
Let’s do real:
(1) A bad politician needs undemocratic corrupted bad political environment or systems.
(2) A good politician needs strong democratic political environment or systems.
Do you think that if we change requirements, will it work or not?
Lets give:
(1) Undemocratic corrupted bad political environment or systems To a Good politician or people.
(2) Strong democratic political environment or systems To a Bad politician or people.
Give me a Final answer? Do you think “The Law of nature” will work?
My Dear Folks… I believe that we must agree that the final answer “No, it does not work”.
My Conclusion: Democracy only work only with Good people, it does not work with Bad people. That’s way we had many times democracy, but it is still fail……..
We cannot beat to “The Law of nature”. If people do not follow “The Law of nature”, they will choose their own destruction.
That’s way we are obviously facing its “cause and effect.”
I hope that we understand something about Nepal, Democracy and Revolution.
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 15-May-02 03:20 AM
I know you don't deserve a serious response but here are my few lines anyway: "bad people" in a democracy are not a "constant". They are "variables". By exploiting the legal-political options of a free society, we can vary - or improve -the variable of "badness" peacefully. In the least, we can tame the degree of "badness" of the "bad" variables through the numerous channels that an open society affords. We try, make errors, punish, learn, improve, repeat, and move on. In the entire process, basic dignity of man and woman is *sought* to be honored. Now, tell me, how do you deal with people who you arbitrarily define as "bad" in your planet? Do you hack them to death, incarcerate them randomly without trial, or just worship them as the Dear Leader?
|
| SIWALIK |
Posted
on 15-May-02 10:15 AM
Final thoughts:
Directly or indirectly, each state "indoctrinates" its people. This programming will depend on the fear and motives of the ruling elite. In Nepal, the ruling elite chose keep the people illeterate and poor. But what they did not forsee or expect was that times change, and there is a limit to everything. In the abject poverty and illitercy, democarcy was introduced, not as a natural outcome, but as a worldwide trend. Obviouosly, we were not ready. Even democracy needs certain preconditions to consolidate and bring desired changes to our lives. What democracy did was to disseminate an explosion of hope to people. Somehow it would create a miracle and change all the past "wrongs". It gave freedom to believe, if nothing more. And this new freedom turned out to be deadly when anti-social and opportunitist political entrepreneurs consciously decided to take advantage of growing dissatisfaction and marginalized population. There was a FAO report today about poverty in Nepal; I quote:
"The number and proportion of hungry people in Nepal increased from 3.5 million to 5 million during the period recording an increment of 23 per cent from 19 per cent of the population, the latest report of the Food and Agriculture Organisation said." (TKP, May 14)
These 5 million hungry people are an easy fodder for Maoist cause. Most of us who have been "educated" will see the futility of their effort, but that is a perspective from the top. Some people believe they are not justified to rebel. I choose to believe that they have reason to believe in what they are doing. It is another matter that in their poverty and illerate or semi-literate ways, their views and rationale will not be the same as ours. But that does not mean they have to function according to our wisdom. It is their hungry stomach, and tattred body that will determine what "rational" action they will take. It is not for me to judge. And I know I will look like a Maiost sympathizer or even "brainwahsed" by Maoists, as lebelled in other threads. But I see these people missing the point. Trying to find the cause, as all political scientists do, is not being one with the perpetrators of such gory deeds.
I have worked in these infected areas and I can see how these people could have been misled. Being able to see the cause is not the same as beng them, as some discussants in this forum seem to suggest.
|
| Pahade keta |
Posted
on 16-May-02 07:09 AM
hi all,
it's really hard to keep pace with the intensity of discussions going on here. Honestly, at times i was feeling that i was reading stuffs from CIA officials when they were talking about the Latin American left, especially the che-inspired outfits who were resisting ( i have no hesitating calling it that way) the american multinational domination and virtual slavery for large number of people. I am not sure how many of you follow events in latin america now, but my impression is that it is becoming amazingly vibrant place for democratic and radical experiments and which is showing the way for emergence of radical left rooted in the belief of plurality, respect, diversity, social justice and inclusiveness.
i was reading the other day about why gujrat went the right way--it was precisely because of the erosion of left politics--Nepal can still claim to have a large left sensibility, but it has to cultivate democratic sensibility. it could be that i am imagining something that is not viable. But i am always reminded of jesse jackson--keep hope alive.
I agree with paschim that the terrorist tactics of the maoists have to be defeated completely and unequivocally, but unless we are cautious at the same time, what may happen in the course of their defeat is the usurpation of power by the right--I do not want to beleive that i am becoming paranoid here. I see no danger to the formal political institutions in the country, and at least nepal's dependence (sad) on the foreign money (to actually sustain the middle class chunk--through all sorts of development contracts, by the way) ensures that the army cannot think of taking over without green signal from the west. but i am not worried on that front.
what i am worried about is the way society becomes stripped of any radical imagination. Have you been following how the hindu fundamentalists are making slow but sure stride into Nepali public life--i read a news of how a mob incited by a hindu outfit in Janakpur killed one imama. well these things do not solicit response from largely kathmandu centered intelligentsia, but the way right wing politics in India is emerging, i see it spreading in Nepal also. I have no illusion that nepal is different, tolerant--so was india for a long time until the fundamentalists really worked hard. Unless we create a radical politics within democratic framework, the right wing shift is bound to happen--it is already happening and it is gotta get entrenched.
that was a bit pessimistic note, but the way things are moving, that seems to be the way we are heading. friends, i have no illusion about the so called 'invincibility of the system'--no system is invincible by itself--it has to be constantly made so--the constitution can turn into kagaj ko khosta in no time.
|
| Dilasha |
Posted
on 16-May-02 04:15 PM
A sixty plus grandmother of mine once replied to an election candidate when he asked her to vote for him, "babu, joooon jogi aaye pani, kaanai chireko, tesaile ma ta bhot pani dinna baru TV ma dekhaune pahalmaan (she was a huge fan of WWF) ladeko herdai baschu." And this has been a proven fact in our country's situation. By providing false hopes, dreams and assurance that they will do their best for their town and its people, every single leader, the minute they get the so called "towel le bereko kursi", their words and actions take a different toll. They forget their promises to the very same people who put them in power and what more; they tend to forget where they came from!! I think what our leaders lack is a sense of duty that arise from their understanding the responsibilities and obligation that their positions entail towards the society. It is utterly disgusting how things get rotten right from the top. How can we expect the lower level people to act properly when the top level itself is so ruined and corrupted. I bet there are politicians who really have good motives and ideas for the welfare of the country but, the majority of ill minds have sucked those good minds so bad that they have no choice but to join the crowd. Why can’t the leaders learn from other countries and benchmark their ideas and strategies into their own? Are they blind? Are they deaf? Are they dumb? Why can’t they be proactive instead of being reactive? When are they going to build a nation of trust, love and hope?
Having said this, I feel that we as citizens of the country also need to realize our individual responsibilities and bring positive changes in ourselves first. Let us not blame the government every time something goes wrong or something doesn’t work out the way want it to be which is what we tend to do very often. We go overboard most of the time and instead of appreciating what others do, we have the habit of bringing them down through backbiting, criticizing, blaming and what not. This is what prevails in our society. Therefore, instead of pointing fingers at others, let us from now on, take a deeper look into ourselves and find out where we as individuals need to change and thus bring forth the change that we need. Then we shall be able to see the light!
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 16-May-02 05:28 PM
PK (Pahadeketa):
Amazing how beautiful it looks when I write your name in abbreviated form:-)
When the system fails, alternatives start to emerge. But it is interesting
that you single out rightists as potential threat to our system. I agree
that they do exist in our society. I also agree that they will try to rear
their ugly head whenever they can.
In fact, visitors from Hongkong would concur that there used to be
some kind of racial uneasiness among different castes of Nepalese
living in Hongkong. The fact that SETAMAGURALI separatists like
Gore Bdr Khapangi considered Hongkong Nepalese their targetted
constituency is not hidden from a lot of people. There are some
people, right here in Sajha.com, who hate other castes and have
no hesitation in posting their hatred filled messages is known to
all. But, those people are like the posters here: they are afraid
to disclose their identity, they know they are minority, they
know they are wrong, and that is good for today's Nepal.
But to say that the disapperance of extreme lefts would result in the
appearance of right is a characterization of ongoing conflict as
cul-de-sac, and that doesn't provide any solution , any hope of
future. See, nobody is saying that Gyanendra, Prajwal, Sher
Bdr etc are the best thing available to Nepali people. Worse, they
may not even be the least evil among available choices. But they
have promised to uphold something that most of the Nepalese
hold dear. That's why they need to be supported, while their excesses
if any be constantly monitored. It is because any rightwinger,
or extreme left is not going to take Nepal anywhere toward modernity
and prosperity.
I am not a supporter of Yassir Arafat, but the best hope for us is what
he did yesterday, start radical reform to curb corruption. Araft's corrupt
system failed to galvanize people against occupation, mostly because
Palestine Authority was just too corrupt, and cliquish. People don't believe
them anymore, even in adversity, just like in today's Nepal. We have to
ensure that election is the way to govern Nepal, and that it will be
held on time. I am sure that Nepalese people will eventually elect good
people to power if given chance. That is where our best hope for future
lies. It won't lie in the hands of an absolute monarch or an insane
extremist. We gotto believe in the judgement power of our people.
Those who think democracy came to Nepal before prerequiste conditions
were existing failed to mention :then when should it have come? in 2070?
We were not going anywhere in Panchayat. Democracy is the best system
even for the crowds of ignoramuses.We have it rightnow, and we will
keep it until eternity for the sake of ourselves and our progeny.
|
| Bagmati |
Posted
on 16-May-02 06:46 PM
To prosper our democracy, we should have:
1. High literacy rate
2. Fair election
3. No interfere of politics in Beaurocracy, educational institution and other non political organization.
4.Independant(not biased) media and strong civil society.
5.Democratization of our political parties.
6. Reform in our traditional monarchy(constitutional) system(we have already seen last year how it functions), police and military organization
7 . Economic Prosperity(we have good scope of agro-forest based industry, tourism, commercialization of our traditional agricultural system, establish more and more export oriented industry, ....)
8. Effective rules and regulations to control corruption(strong CIAA)
9. ..........CONTINUE(expect more discussions)
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 16-May-02 09:05 PM
Don't want to add too much and overstretch this thread, but I keep hearing these irritating (to me) points about the "right preconditions" for democracy here and there. To me, it's quite absurd if you really think hard about it. Dictators have long used this claim to quench their own lust for uncontested power. Reminds me of our own good old Raja Mahendra, who on the second night of dissolving the first elected parliament of Nepal in 1960 and locking up virtually all elected leaders with the help of the Army, sent a letter to BP Koirala, the ousted PM, asking these exact questions, "BP-babu, don't you think a democratic system requires preconditions, and what are they?"
Ignore the bizarre nature of this communication. You just locked up the guy - no charge, no trial (BP, GM and others ended up spending 8 years in jail, and no trial was ever held), and the king now wants to engage in an academic conversation!
BP Koirala is said to have replied, "democracy needs no preconditions. The only precondition it requires is a faith in democracy itself on the part of those who are in a position to deny democracy to others like Your Majesty."
I rest my case.
|
| bagmati1 |
Posted
on 16-May-02 10:31 PM
Some of the points which I mentioned above are for strengthening the democracy. These are not the preconditions.There is no alternatives for democracy. Problems created by democracy can be only resolved by democracy, not by autocracy or some dictatorship. Above mentioned points should be implemented to properly institutionalize democracy in country such as nepal, but our governemnt and party leaders are not paying enough to these things and peoples do not have enough patience towards democracy so many of them are disappointed. These should be the second phase program of the democracy.
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 16-May-02 11:35 PM
Bagmati, I agree with ALL your points. In addressing the "precondition" conundrum, just wanted to endorse Biswo's last few lines with a powerful anecdote.
I fully agree with Pahade Keta's concern for a need for radicalism in democracy. I voiced a similar need for a "krantikari samsadbadi" party years ago that has a "realistically" radical agenda. Especially on the social front. When democracts let go of the radical social agenda, the wrong people like the Maoists hijack it. No one has a monopoly over progressive issues and democrats should never let go of that grip.
I didn't think Pahade keta's other examples were compelling though. As a matter of fact, I have been following with interest the Brazilian cases of municipal level social activism especially after what has been going on following the election of the Worker's Party to mayoralty in Porto Alegre in 1989. Their model of participatory budgeting to address pro-poor concerns most directly has been a success that has been replicated in over 90 Brazilian cities. Impressed, I ended up writing a case on it once. It's a celebration of radical activism and civic engagement within the liberal space that democracy provides. And while the Centre may very well be following the dictates from Washington (not always inappropriate), as the staunch former Lefty Cardoso was doing, we do need nodes at lower tiers that temper and balance different forces. Democracy as a system is beautiful, and unlike women, it just keeps on getting prettier and more healthy with age and maturity. Of course complacency kills, and we do need to enliven it constantly through citizen input and scrutiny. Tara, kina kina, Miss D. has always been my first love.
|
| Naya keta |
Posted
on 17-May-02 04:48 AM
Pashcim,
u have just opened yourself for a lynching with your following comment,
"Democracy as a system is beautiful, and unlike women, it just keeps on getting prettier and more healthy with age and maturity."
I wonder how many women will be after you for saying this.....Good luck my friend, from the wrath of the opposite sex. :o)
On a another note, I detect vehement opposition on your part and by many others toards the maoists and their activities and rightly so. Does the strength of feeling extend towards those who under the guise of democracy abuse their publicly held position for selfish needs, especially from the main ruling party and the main opposition. The strength of your sentiments regarding the Maoists can be infered by "....the terrorists srtucture of the maoists must be crushed". Is it fair to extrapolate from this that you and others here would also vehemently back a proposal to break the back of corruption within the congress party by publicly punishing (jail time) some of the stalwarths of the Nepali Congress (and the UML) who are known to have amassed multiple fortunes while being in power. The public know who they are, from virtually being on the run from the panchayat to becoming ministers, within the course of a few years some politicians have an incredile amount of wealth, like I said the public know who they are......Would you (and the question is for others too) support a wide scale non-partisan investigation into the corruption of our politicians with a mandate to investigate everyone and i mean everyone, from the PM down and with the minimum punishment of some jail time if guilt can be proved?
Although resorting to (senseless) violence as the maoists are presently engaged in is something that cannot be condoned in any way....the conduct of our esteemed netajis has played its part in their ability to drum up support within the public, at least in the initial stages.....So even if these terrorists are presently defeated, without tackling some of the causes (and the corruption being a major one) they will return in another form and one possilbly more potent.
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 17-May-02 07:06 AM
Naya Keta, I'm surprised that you are even asking such a question! Oh, absolutely, categorically, and most resolutely, the current crop of "bastards will need to be castrated". I've made my position on this very, very clear and have been most consistent. Please read almost all my postings, especially my response to Mitra Nepe on 13 May, where I've called "graft and vice in today's public life" the second class of evil.
We, however, have to rid the country of the first evil - Maoist barbarism - to move on to tackle the second evil more peacefully by activating the civil-legal processes. The behavior of politicians post-1990 has disgraced the 50-year long democratic movement. That's why it's up to a younger generation of democrats like us to rid the shame brought by most NC and UML politicians. I have been defending like a mad man the *system*, not the *actors*, and my position on this has been crystal clear. So, I was quite taken aback by your question.
The bottom line is: Ram Krishna Dhakal le "Hira kaatne hira mai rakhera" bhanya jastai, we'll have to clean up democracy by using democracy itself. There is no room and no justification for any other means.
I would have been happy if the Maoists had joined mainstream politics, maintained their laudable zeal against corruption and injustice, led by example, and lynched through legal means all these NC/UML rascals. I repeat, we really need a "krantikaari samsadbadi" party in Nepal that believes in democracy and realistic radicalism, especially on the social front, and Maoists could have played that role. I actually sympathize with some Maoist calls for radical change *on the social front*. There are many reforms long over due. But it is their political and economic views that I disagree with; and it is their tactics that I find unpardonable and unjustifiable, disgusting and deplorable.
You know why Maoists have not opted for peaceful means? It’s a lot *harder* to operate peacefully in a democracy. Violence is a lot, lot easier. It’s for cowards who can’t use their brain, their faculty of reason. You don’t need to follow due legal process, try, produce evidence, rally public support, convict, and punish while seeking to honor even the criminal’s dignity. If you opt for violence, you just randomly hack to death a person because you don’t like the color of his eyes, her views, her profession, or the length of his nose. No need for due process. No respect for human life.
Democracy forbids you from doing all this. Being a peaceful revolutionary in a democracy is very tough. Revolution is radical social change. It's not violence. And the greatest are those who achieve radical social change in a democracy by consensus and popular support, not by fear, terror and coercion. Maoists don’t believe in the very people in whose name they are doing all this destruction, and are opting for a very easy tactic, that of violence, and are gambling for an easy route to power. This can’t happen and in the odd places where it has happened it has not lasted. Why? This path is fundamentally flawed from start to finish.
Democrats will need to take back the progressive social agenda that they fought for, patronized, and even partially delivered on once (1960 government), so that the wrong people like the Maoists or Royalists don't get to rear their ugly heads. I’ve said this before, it’s when the legitimate forces don’t deliver, when democrats err, that illegitimate people capitalize on the mistakes. This is what has happened in Nepal after 1996. This is what I meant above when I said, democrats should never let go of the progressive grip. Because if they do, the wrong people hijack it. Need I elaborate?
-------
On how women will react to my statement you cited, well, I have a long and distinguished history of being bullied, molested, and harassed by the other sex. When they slap me in one cheek, I show them my other cheek and say: maja aayo priye. arko pani, please :)
|
| bagmati1 |
Posted
on 17-May-02 06:05 PM
To have faith in democracy could not be the support of corruption or corrupted politicians. I never understand why some persons always think that to have faith in democracy just means to back our corrupted politicians ??? Only democratic and transparent political system possess 'check and balance' mechanism over corrupted politicians. In dictatorship(comminst or army) rule, although rulers themselves become corrupted, Poeple can not remove him. We are the lucky that we can remove those corrupted and irresponsible politician after five year. It is the our weakness not to select honest and capable politicians.
nidayeko manislai bunjhaun sajilo hunchha, nidayeko bhan garne manislai bunjhaun garho hunchha!
nabujhne manislai bujhaun sajilo hunchha, bujhi bujhi bujh pachaune manislai bujhaun garho hunchha !!
|
| sage |
Posted
on 17-May-02 09:02 PM
I wish to venture some comments, though I fear of being lynched because of dissenting views. However, I want to make it clear I am posing questions for my own edification through dialogue, not stating "truth" of some kind.
I have read this thread with great respect for Paschim's insights and logic of thought. I have learned a lot about the terrain of power in Nepali politics. And like Paschim, I also believe (or want to believe) in the power to bring about justice through nonviolent democratic means. However, I think I am more of a cynic. I think that what is missing in the analysis is the class dimension -- in other words, the synergy between money and power in controlling state policy.
Saying this doesn't mean I am supporting or excusing the Maoists' torture, killings, and other crimes against humanity. I am just trying to be realistic about possibility of real change in other ways.
I just opened up a book (Class, State, and Struggle in Nepal, by Stephen Lawrence Mikesell) and I was confronted with this quote by Noam Chomsky, just before I came on this board:
>> 'Democracy' refers to a system of governance in which the elite elements based in the business community control the state by virtue of their dominance of the private society, while the population observes quietly. So understood, democracy is a system of elite decision and public ratification. Correspondingly, popular involvement in the formation of public policy is considered a serious threat. It is not a step towards democracy; rather, it constitutes a 'crisis of democracy' that must be overcome. <<
Of course, Chomsky is a professional cynic. I believe this quote with some reservations (exceptions where democracy DOES work for the people, against the interests of business). But by and large I see that this is the way it goes in the USA, as in Nepal. I see it clearly in the USA, in the way that business lobbies congresspeople and the administration so constantly and with so much money that it takes a huge coalition to stop something like the FTAA, which is clearly against the interests of the average people of the USA. And the whole alignment of the system, the workings of power, are so against the interests of the people in a fundamental way, that I find it hard to believe that democracy works when it comes to economic justice and honest represenation. However, I would love to believe in it. I want to see justice without bloodshed. I somewhat believe in the possibility of great souls who can cause change through ahimsa and dharna, such as Gandhiji, but they are few and far between and the system nowadays has more ways to "neutralize" them.
Hence, the 1990 jana andolan was stopped short and co-opted by elite interests. It went far enough to wrest a good deal of power from the palace, and put it in a more controllable site -- the parliamentary democracy. In the same book, I read this yesterday (in a section called "Necessity for Honest Representation", fittingly):
>> In the 1991 general elections in Nepal such forces [business and international capital] donated large amounts of money and other kinds of support to certain reactionary political figures (in addition to the usual foreign aid).
So, the class dimension is important. There can be a revolution (and the 1990 andolan was bloody, though not as bloody as the current conflict) -- and then it can be co-opted and bought by those who have money, and those who will play ball with the international agencies who have even more money.
The class dimension also plays a part in shaping the understanding of the people, I think. Money can pay for a lot of media slant, and can change the minds of a lot of people.
Education is another part of the problem. I taught in a government school for a while, and the education was not the kind of critical education that is needed to raise a population that can think critically about the current state of affairs and work to improve it. It is rote education, and highly indoctrinated and preaching the mantra of 'development', as I saw it. And why is this? Maybe because it was designed (with US and Australian help of course) by the ministers of the monarchy and then by the ministers of the joint state, who are still in the pockets of international capital.
You wrote, >> I have been defending like a mad man the *system*, not the *actors* << but I must ask, doesn't the structure of the system determine who becomes a part of it and who is excluded from it? Doesn't the structure of the system cause it to automatically populate with people whose desire for power and wealth is stronger than their desire for social justice?
You know what they say, "If voting could change anything, it would be illegal." I don't fully believe that, but I believe it as a rule of thumb.
I don't know what the answer is. I don't want to see bloodshed. I hate violence. I want a solution through dialogue and through human love for each other. I am looking forward to your thoughts. And please don't take this as any kind of attack, nor support for Maobadi -- only dialogue in seeking answers.
Sage
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 19-May-02 03:51 AM
Sage, it’s intolerant communists who burn you alive for dissenting. Democrats welcome dissenters like they are newly wed son-in-laws. So, a warm welcome to you.
For every deficiency that you point out, I can myself give you five. Nobody is saying democracy is a panacea. It’s not. But on balance, it is a good regime that stands out especially when alternatives range from one party dictatorship to party-less fascism. I don’t care what you name a political system. Call it Ted Kennedy’s Yellow Tie or Madhuri Dixit’s Revlon Lipstick, but in return, give me just 2 things: i) allow me as a citizen to evaluate the performance of politicians and choose them at predictable, periodic intervals, and ii) give me the freedom to organize, write, dissent, go about my life as I please within the legal limits set by representatives who we citizens mandate to set those limits. Propose to me just ONE alternative where you satisfy these 2 basic requirements that rest on the premise that each human life has a worth. These outweigh all shortcomings, which by the way, can be rectified peacefully by using these very two provisions.
Your borrowed claim that the 1990 movement was stopped “short” and "co-opted" is scandalously ignorant. That movement was led by people who spent 50 years in active oppositional politics, prisons, exile, to achieve just one thing: restore multi-party democracy and reduce the monarch to a constitutional status. That was achieved. Contrary to the whimsical fancies of the loony left, the movement ended logically to achieve a stated goal of a 30-year long struggle. Neither was it stopped short, nor the people who spent all their life fighting for democracy were “co-opting” the movement. They owned it. Their record, post-90, has been disappointing but this doesn’t alter the landmark achievement of 2046. Please never attempt to belittle a movement that toppled a monarchist authoritarianism, almost entirely non-violently on the protesters' part.
About 1991, and “international” capital assisting “reactionaries”, it just hurts not to be able to take someone like you, who cares about Nepal, seriously. But with claims like these that you and your communist guru Mikesell concoct, I have little choice. I mean, just juxtapose the role of “international capital” in a country with the following facts: Nepal’s GDP is a pitiable $ 4.8 billion shared among 24 million people. 40% of the GDP comes from subsistence agriculture that employs 80% of the labor force. The government’s annual budget is a little over 1 billion (one private US university like Harvard alone has an annual budget almost double that amount, at 1.7 billion, with additional endowment of 18 billion; public universities like SUNY have bigger budgets). Despite glaring inequities – at an absolute level - within the country, in the larger scheme of things on a relative global scale, we are a “uniformly” poor country, where business and “international” capital has almost no influence in politics. Literacy, ethnicity, and gender play a bigger role. There are 4 or 5 big business houses that finance party expenditures of all parties, including Maoists, but those poor chaps are so vulnerable over tax evasion, etc., that they are more like running "away" from the system than running it. Nepal is not the Americas. Foreign aid finances half our budget, but it doesn’t come in the form of corporate evil, it’s more like a taxed sterling that citizens from the West throw in our begging bowl. Quite ineffective, but quite harmless too. So think twice before namedropping Mikesell or even Chomsky and their imaginative Leftist assessments that are better known for their content of entertainment. We are not discussing humor here. We do have fundamental constraints. We are a resource-starved country that’s the poorest in the continent of Asia. Well, until today. We will be second-to-poorest after East Timor gets born today.
On who is in and out, you know one thing? Regime after 1990, however flawed in other respects, has been the most inclusive since our nation’s birth 233 years ago. The only folks who are out of it are Maoist criminals. The moment they give up arms, they can re-join. Sure there’s a lot, lot more to do with better ethnic and gender representation in government, but democracy is the only regime that accommodates all non-violent interests with time. And I hope your alternative isn’t a regime where every walking mammal – from a human to a dog – that thinks out of his head is likely to be beheaded and purged. Ask Kim in Pyongyang.
Listen, unlike you or many here, I have village roots and experienced poverty first-hand. On the need to revamp our social structures, I am as radical as any Maobadi. But I am also realistic, and clear on how real change can be achieved within a peaceful environment without killing a single person. I also worship capital, but as a nationalist I will never allow the origin of capital to interfere with our sovereign processes. Of course, it’s tough. Nobody said democratic politics is a neat algebraic equation with happy solutions. But I’d rather live in a democratic mess, improve it with time, than seek despotic alternatives. If I thought all this would be easy, and could be done by killing and destroying, I too would have joined the Maoists to capitalize on the short-term disillusionments, sell the wildest dream of a quick fix, and satisfy my greed and ambition which is what is really motivating this gory gamble of imagined short-cut to power.
Sage, I’ve taken one full hour from my precious schedule to respond to you politely. But I will NOT have the time to respond to your propagandist assertions again. You are free to post whatever you want. Democrats don’t lynch. We welcome dissent, but also reserve our right to remain silently amused if what you post is amusing ultra-left nonsense. I do, however, admire your love for my country. I just wish that your sympathy is not extended to the wrong people.
------
Other friends, I won't be posting actively for the next 2 weeks because of professional commitments, but I will be happy to respond to brief queries that are sent to kautilya100@yahoo.com. Thanks.
|
| sage |
Posted
on 20-May-02 12:35 PM
Dear Paschim,
You are under no obligation to respond to this. I won't take it as agreement. I understand not having time. I thank you for taking the time to reply to my previous post, in such lucid detail and clear writing as always.
When I asked what are other options (besides armed insurgency) for real social change, this is what I really meant. You took this as trying to justify the Maoists, but I was not doing so. I am in an indeterminate state, trying to understand the conflict and look for other options for real change. You also said you won't have time to reply to further 'propagandist assertions'. There you have cauterized my arguments into being 'propagandist' -- well, isn't all dialogue 'propagandist' in the literal sense of the word? But I sense a dismissal there as well, as in the term 'ultra-left nonsense'. Anyway, as I said, you are under no obligation to respond to this, but what I was aiming for was actual dialogue on these issues, and if I am wrong about the influence of money (i.e. capital) in the current political system, then a response on those terms, not a dismissal on grounds of labels. Anyway, I am still seeking true dialogue.
You classify me as "left" -- which I infer is because I include class as a dimension of analysis, and raise questions about the intersection of class and the system of parliamentary democracy. Like you, I am seeking peace and justice. I also think including power and it's liquid form of representation, money, in an analysis of a social system is very important. Does this make me "left"? If so, then so be it, but please don't let the label defuse what I actually say, or discount it without consideration. A similar discounting occurred in calling Mikesell my 'communist guru'. The word 'guru' in this context has negative connotations of blind following, as I understood it. I know him as an academic who includes class analysis in his work, and I used quotes from his book which I thought were relevant. I don't know if he is 'communist' or 'socialist' or a 'cellist', but whether or not he identifies as such shouldn't be grounds to dismiss the legitimacy of his work.
On the 1990-91 Democracy Movement, I am sorry that I discounted the dedication of many people who struggled for its achievement. I apologize for this omission. I have a friend who was tortured for 72 hours by the king's regime in jana andolan. He was caught painting pro-democracy slogans in Pokhara, and he was caned and electrocuted by the king's forces to try to get names out of him. Two other prisoners were also being tortured in the same chambers. He remained silent, so they kept torturing him, and a huge crowd assembled around the jail, about 5,000 people he told me. Finally, they released him. Anyway, he is one who today is seeing very little in terms of economic improvement from the democracy movement, and he is not the worst off in Nepal. His wife is a schoolteacher in a government school, so they get a few thousand Rs a month. It is people like this, and people even further in rural areas, people with zero voice in national politics, who I am concerned are not being represented by representative democracy in Nepal.
However, it is also, again, from a class analysis of the matter, meaning looking at the interests of different people and parties in relation to their place in society. From a more class-oriented perspective, the jana andolan did not represent all the janata, and it is in this sense that I call it "co-opted" or "incomplete". This is a matter of opinion, and I respect your opinion greatly based on reading your posts. But I will quote a more conservative source than Mikesell, and many such sources could be quoted (sources who are not Maobadi, by the way):
<< "It is still appropriate to ask whether the changes that took place around 1990 in fact constituted a 'radical transformation' of the political system and of the nature of the state. While many were understandably concerned at the time to stress the decisive nature of the 'break', others -- even then -- saw a fundamental continuity of essentially conservative 'elite politics' (old wine in new bottles) and spoke of a betrayal of the 'people's movement', in so far as it had been a movement for radical change." [Nepal in Crisis, 2001 edition, Blaikie, Cameron, & Seddon, p. 307] >>
I realize that any number of quotes does not make a truth. It is a matter for more careful investigation, which I plan to continue.
|
| sage |
Posted
on 20-May-02 12:43 PM
(This is part 2 of 2)
You say you would like to achieve real change without killing a single person. So would I, ideally, but movements against vested interest can result in some deaths. I don't take this lightly. In the US civil rights movement, there were scores of deaths. There were lynchings, and Martin Luther King, Jr, the most proud proclaimer of nonviolence, was murdered. Members of the Black Panther Party were murdered by the FBI. In Chile, the CIA helped to overthrow a democratically elected moderate socialist president, and the ensuing regime proceeded to kill thousands and thousands of dissenters. Of course you know these extreme examples. In these cases, it was the white supremacists in the US, and the interests of U.S. capital implemented by the CIA who caused deaths.
In the case of Nepal, the difference is that the Maoists believe in the dictum that power grows from the barrel of a gun, and they follow this dictum. The government responds to their violence, of course, with violence. In the past, however, the Nepali government, like most governments, has responded to nonviolent dissent with violence too. The democracy movement, as you know, is one example. As I understand it, the current Maoist movement went militant when a peasant movement in Rolpa district for land reform was crushed ruthlessly by the government. According to Dr Chitra K Tiwari, former lecturer in Tribhuvan University, this was the catalyst of the current insurgency:
<< A small peasant movement that began in 1995 in Rolpa district was soon to develop into a full fledged armed rebellion. The government, instead of understanding the genuine problems of the peasants and addressing them politically, resorted to massive armed police operations code named "Romeo Operation" beating, torturing, and killing several hundred poor peasants. As a result, thousands of villagers in Rapti Zone fled to the jungles to save themselves from police atrocities. No political parties, either from the left, right or the center, took any initiative to stop the police violence. The concept of the 'rule of law' simply did not exist in Rolpa. >> [from "Maoist Insurgency In Nepal", 14 April 2002]
I don't know the veracity of this assessment. What was this 'peasant movement' -- what were their demands and their tactics? What was the government's reponse? I obviously have a lot of learning and double-checking to do. I don't want to accept any one person's version of the story.
But another parallel can be illuminating. To eliminate slavery in the United States cost one of the bloodiest wars in the history of the world. But who would say that it was right to continue a system of human bondage, simply because the economy of the South (and hence the whole nation) depended on it? Who is to say that armed insurrection of the slaves themselves was wrong? Who is to say John Brown was criminal, or Nat Turner, or Sojourner Truth? Before you get defensive about this parallel, I want to emphasize that I mean it as a thought-experiment, not a parallel for the situation in Nepal. Obviously the oppressions the Maobadi are fighting against are not as simple and clearly wrong as chattel slavery. But my point is that sometimes, given the pure injustice of a system, those who are subjected to it will rise up against it. I have little faith that without John Brown and slaves themselves who risked life and limb in armed insurrection, that the U.S. would have ended slavery in the mid-1800s. Who knows how much longer it would have gone on, and how many more humans would have lived and died as slaves, and how many more times an 'owner' would have raped a slave woman, and how many times a family would have been separated by sale to different owners, etc. The U.S. also had parliamentary democracy at that time, and for 75 years it had not addressed the issue. 75 years is several generations of people living under slavery. Remember, I am not drawing a clear parallel to the Maobadi, but saying that sometimes force may be justified when the existing social structure doesn't address serious issues, and instead violently represses direct action when people try to solve their own problems. I am also not supporting the Maobadi by writing this. I am trying to think about the situation more realistically.
The current system may be the best so far in Nepal. It may offer the best chance for different interests to be represented. But does this make it the best that it could be? You wrote that there is more improvement to be made in gender and ethnic representation. I agree with this, but what about class representation as well? Of course, the CPN-UML are represented, and they are based on class, but do they *truly* represent class reform that will benefit the poor in a significant way, and even if they do, can they really get it through in the current power structure?
I am not writing against democracy, but against 'democracy' -- that which appears to be democracy but isn't. My main question is, how can we disengage the overwhelming influence of oligarchy from the apparatus of the state, and have true democracy? Can this be done nonviolently? It is my sincere hope that it can, but then how?
Please don't feel obligated to reply to this -- I will interpret absence of reply as only lack of time. I understand this too.
Sincerely, and with respect,
Sage
supplemental quote:
<< "The state remains not only profoundly un-democratic -- despite important moves toward decentralisation and 'democratization' -- it also remains anything but a developmentalist state, either in theory or in practice. Despite the rhetorical commitment to 'poverty alleviation' in successive Five Year Plans, the policies being pursued show little sign of being effective in this regard. Macro-economic policy -- dominated by the ideas of economic liberalisation -- so popular among the foreign agencies during the 1980s and 1990s -- has hardly strengthened the capacity of the state to guide the process of development." [ibid, p 308]
|
| Naya keta |
Posted
on 20-May-02 06:01 PM
Thoroughly enjoying the exchange between Sage and Paschim, both have put forward powerful arguments which leaves the reader in no doubt of the wisdom and sinecerity in both of their words. If I may be allowed to put foward my humble opinions, it seems that this in fact is a debate between two people on the same side of the argument. While Paschim seems to base his argument on the theoretical superiority of democracy over any other system to right the wrongs and enforce a more equitable distribution power to the ordinary man/woman to have control of his/her destiny, Sage seems to base his argument on the practical failings of the democratic system as it is practiced in the world today. Both have valid points.
To deny what Sage says is to be blind to the happenings of the world. Is their any doubt that powerful self interest groups with the financial resourses have been able to subvert the political process to suit their goals? The head of a powerful multinational can gain access to the corridors of power so much easier than the average layman, Enron being a prime case......"Kenny boy" and his barbeques. However, this is only one side of the argument. Name me another system where the average individual enjoys more rights and has a greater control over what is happening in his community or society. There isn't one, is there?
After a long long think about the nature of govt. etc....I have come to the conclusion ( and I could be wrong as I usually am) that most political theories have some merit. But, their defect is that they assume too many things as given, and in the real world this just isn't a realistic assumption. Add to the political equation the HUMAN element and everything changes. Human behaviour, under the control of emotions (which in many cases are irrational) lead to a complete break down of the theory. Democracy also suffers from this, to blindly support it and dismiss arguments that challenge the link (or the lack of) between democracy in the classroom and the real world can be characterised as a fatalism that is associated usually with religious belief. In the latter your faith is in a "Superior being" while in the former your faith is in a system and anything that anyone says against them both will be "blasphemous" to the blind believer. That is a fundamentalist view of the world. BUT, all other systems suffer from the aliments brought about by the inclusion of the human element, equally if not more so, and, it has been proven, that a democratic system is superior at "righting the wrongs" and causing the least harm to the least number of people during the process. It has the best mechanisms to correct its own failings and evlove into a more equitable one. In democracies change can be brought about through non violent means, if you have a valid argument, you are free to express it to the world (regardless of your "position" and "class") and if enough people agree with you then the majority can bring about change. The emphasis is on the majority here because, democracy's strength isn't in it being right for the most number of people but actually on its being NOT WRONG for the most number of people.
Thus although I agree with sage in principle, I think maybe he/she needs to look at democracy in a different light; think of it not as the best alternative but as the least worst one. Call me a cynic if you want but if you understand that... "hope begins on the other side of dispair" you will know that I not. If I have misunderstood you I apologise.
|
| @^ _ ^@ |
Posted
on 20-May-02 06:05 PM
Some questions:
1.Why this sage always repeats in his writing that I am not maoist.
2.He says he wants peace, but why wants to justify voilent action in the name of some kind of oppression.
3.social injustice can not be eliminitaed in one day. Our constitution has given full right of expression of freedom etc. Of course, our government has not pay enough attention to address social problems, There is widespread poverty but you should remember that the way maoist are following in now nepal could not be the only one indisputable way to eradicate all of the poverty and social injustice.
4. You are always talking about class struggle, class representation. If you have follower of communism, it will be better for you not to hide your true face, we as a believer in democracy, respect your political opinion and express of freedom.
5. Please we want to know more about 'true democracy'. we expect your explanation about your 'true democracy'
6.After reading your opinions, it seems that your opinions are close to RIM movement, if you have some knowledge or connection with it, you can tell us directly without hesitation.
7. what we need in nepal is better leadership, better education,better government policies to address social problems and effective and transparent government, not any violent movement like maobadis are doing nowdays.
"
sage lai chetana bhaya"
@^ _ ^@
|
| sage |
Posted
on 21-May-02 06:52 AM
Thank you for your comments, Naya Keta. I don't want to dominate this thread, and it is already very long. I appreciate your offering. I just want to re-emphasize that, as I stated in the last or 2nd to last paragraph, I think the current system may be the best Nepal has seen yet, in many senses. At least there is a pretension that the people have a degree of sovereignty, not the monarchy. At least there is the pretension to democracy, and a small degree of real representation going on. However, the world-system has also changed, and since 1985 Nepal has been chained by debt to a Structural Adjustment Program, determining its policy of privatization and low social spending. So that's a factor too.
You spoke of hope (in the promise of democracy), and I think hope is very important... but to many idealist Nepali youths, Maobadi are their first ource of hope, and from many reports the areas where the Maobadi have become the de facto government have given peasants hope in the present and the future. I think that this is key to their longevity and strength, and why they threaten the government so seriously. They have come into a "hope vacuum" -- into a landscape of despair in the government ever doing anything for the people, and have started to fulfill it through a basic land reform that the government has talked about repeatedly but never enacted in a way that really benefits the poorest (as far as I know). (Yes, I also know the reports of harsh "justice" and executions, and once again I am not 'justifying' the Maobadi.)
My hope, personally, is that this will be resolved through dialogue. But it will have to be a different sort of dialoague than previously, in which those who hold power in the government get scared into a change of heart and realize that some of the fault lies with their own greed. But I am cynical of this because I think that as they say, power corrupts. Those who gravitate to power, and hold it for a long time, get it into their system like a heroine addiction. They come to think they cannot live without it, and any threat to their power throws them into a state of madness. Like the slaveowners in the USA, though it is not the same thing, they may not let go of their greed. But does this justify killing? I cannot say this, and I think it depends on perspective. Obviously to some people it does justify taking human lives, because it is happening. I would like to see a third way, if it is possible, beyond either (1) the government killing all Maobadi or (2) Maobadi killing all their opposition. (1) and (2) are bloodbaths. (3) could be achieved only through dialogue based in love and concern for all humans. That is my hope.
To the other reply:
1. I repeat that I am not inherently supporting the Maobadi so often because when I don't, people just say "he's a Maobadi" as an automatic response to someone asking questions.
2. I don't call myself a communist or any other "-ist" because I think that clouds clear thinking about the actual world, and tends to make a person ideologically dogmatic. However, I think it is essential to include class (to see social dynamics as involving money and power) because it is a big part of how the world works, and I want to see a fairer world where all people can live in dignity.
3. Maybe some of what I say sounds like the RIM or Maobadi rhetoric because it involves an analysis of the same situation, and what they say has a basis in the actual world as well. Where they go with this analysis is another thing, and how dogmatically they pursue it, eliminating complexity is another.
4. As for 'true democracy', that's not my responsibility just because I criticise the current system. I can criticise slavery without offering an alternative -- the alternative is "everything but slavery". But basically, when people come together and talk as equals and decide their collective fates, that is true democracy. This works much better on a smaller scale, such as a village. Also, attention must be paid to power differentials on the local level, especially gender in Nepal, and caste, and very-local elites who tend to dominate village decision-making. I think it's got to be a very organic process motivated by a consciousness of power, making sure everyone's voice counts, and preventing the influence of money in politics. On all levels, local to national, (this holds also for the US) we need election reform, a total divorce of money's influence on elections, if the electoral system is going to represent the people. I think represenation works best when it's based on a basically bottom-up, not top-down, paradigm, and decision-making is kept as local as possible, not vested mainly in the nation-state (as in Nepal's Five Year Plans). I have seen plenty successful development in Nepal, but it has been locally generated and run, not even by NGOs but by local people with connections to first-world donors for funding, in this unequal world-system. Beyond this, there's plenty more to say, but... others have much to say also.
|
| Nepe |
Posted
on 21-May-02 02:00 PM
I want to reiterate Naya Keta’s view that Sage and Paschim are in fact on the same side of the argument. I do not see conflict between them. Paschim is defending the fundamentals of democracy, let’s say he is talking about the *skeleton* of democracy, while Sage is questioning the functioning of democracy, let’s say he is talking about the *flesh and blood* of democracy. Therefore their difference is in the focus, not in the stand.
I think Sage has very important things to say about functioning of our democracy. As Naya Keta acknowledges he has valid points and to deny them is to be blind to the happenings of the world. Sage’s arguments are enriching this thread. I don’t give much importance to @^ _ ^@’s (ID: 79290184) interrogation. As long as a descent and thoughtful debate goes on, I don’t care even if Sage works for Maoists. I would welcome even Baburam and Prachanda for debate at Sajha.com. As a matter of fact, I think, because of the absence of defense from Maoists point of view in Sajha discussion, a lot of Maoist related discussions look like a court trial without a representation of defense. You may give a good verdict, but it will always lack credibility by definition.
Those who do not want to hear even the name of Maoists, let me tell you this. If you do not understand (even if there is nothing to understand you will at least understand that there is nothing to understand) the phenomenon of Maoists, you understand nothing about contemporary Nepal. Positively or negatively, they define us. In the brave new world of post-maoist era we are talking about, everything will be measured from the reference point of Maoist phenomenon. How much *brave and new* this era will indeed be will depend upon how much Maoist will succeed (again by positive or negative mathematics) to make us realize how *coward and old* era we were living in. And you know what, for every bold reform we will make and for every backwardness we will overcome, we will look back amusingly at our corrupt, stagnant and lately terrorized decade and say ‘Maoist were Satan sent by God to wake us up’
|
| Mandrek |
Posted
on 21-May-02 06:38 PM
This is just my personal view:
In reference to this ongoing dicussion, the difference between *Others* and Sage is that *Others* are talking based on their book knowledge of Democracy, in other hand, it seems that Sage was born with Democracy, played with Democracy, and matured with Democracy. So, he knows, in practical sense, Democracy better than any of the *Others*, and he focuses on BETTER DEMOCRACY than "DEMOCRACY
for DUMMIES".
Some people here are just showing their GORKHALIi attitude by saying him "Propogandist", "Maoist",""Bullshit discussion" and what not. In fact, it sounds
that these people does not have SUFFICIENT knowledge, arguments and facts
to continue discussion.
Sage is EXCEPTIONAL debator as far as this discussion is concerned, and by respecting others views, he also holds democratic characters.
Sage, please keep it on, and pls do not take weeks off at least in this summer!!
|
| @^ _ ^@ |
Posted
on 21-May-02 08:13 PM
I don't know to ask more questions about the clarification of sage's political opinions could be intolerant behaviour ? I never used abusive words against him. In fact sage started his own thread "nepal solidarity network", there he could realized that there is also another true part of maoist war which he thought just as a propoganda of CNN/BBC. After a long discussion in 'nepal solidarity network' and 'people's war' thread, He had to come up with a more pragmatic view as he appears in this thread. Now he has no interest to discuss further in his own thread.
Of course, Everybody has right to participate in discussion and everybody has freedom to have maoist kind political thinkings also. I respect everyone's right to have his own personnel thinkings, but to support violent actions of maoists is another thing. Only not you guys, I also equally welcome sage to participate in discussion to find out the right solution.
|
| paramendra |
Posted
on 03-Aug-02 10:31 PM
A Vision For Nepal
http://www.geocities.com/paramendra/2002/nepal.html
A Vision For Nepal (II)
http://www.geocities.com/paramendra/2002/nepal2.html
Tackling Ethnic Issues In Nepal
http://www.geocities.com/paramendra/2002/eth.html
Defending the Sadbhavana
http://www.geocities.com/paramendra/2002/sadbhavana.html
The Nepali Congress Split: A Positive Development
http://www.geocities.com/paramendra/2002/congress.html
Social Segregation: A Necessary Phrase To Understand Contemporary Race Relations
http://www.geocities.com/paramendra/2002/socsegre.html
Budhanilkantha School: To Forge Ahead
http://www.geocities.com/paramendra/2002/bnks.html
DC: Summer 2002
http://www.geocities.com/paramendra/2002/dc.html
Paramendra Bhagat's Epinions
http://www.geocities.com/paramendra/2002/epinions.html
|
| paramendra |
Posted
on 03-Aug-02 10:38 PM
A Vision For Nepal
http://www.geocities.com/paramendra/2002/nepal.html
A Vision For Nepal (II)
http://www.geocities.com/paramendra/2002/nepal2.html
Tackling Ethnic Issues In Nepal
http://www.geocities.com/paramendra/2002/eth.html
Defending the Sadbhavana
http://www.geocities.com/paramendra/2002/sadbhavana.html
The Nepali Congress Split: A Positive Development
http://www.geocities.com/paramendra/2002/congress.html
Social Segregation: A Necessary Phrase To Understand Contemporary Race Relations
http://www.geocities.com/paramendra/2002/socsegre.html
Budhanilkantha School: To Forge Ahead
http://www.geocities.com/paramendra/2002/bnks.html
DC: Summer 2002
http://www.geocities.com/paramendra/2002/dc.html
Paramendra Bhagat's Epinions
http://www.geocities.com/paramendra/2002/epinions.html
|
| Nepe |
Posted
on 03-Aug-02 11:37 PM
I was so excited when I saw this thread floating atop. As I was hoping Paschim must have revived (he was saying he is thinking to do so, wasn’t he ?) it, I was a kinda disappointed to find only a long list of links by somebody else. It’s not that I don’t like Paramendra Bhagat. In fact I know him from TND era and I generally find his views thought-provoking and exciting. Since he started to give the links to his writings here in Sajha, I have managed to read one or two of his pieces. (I had to wait for hours for his articles to appear in geocities site when I visited !). Here I am not going to write my comments on them, rather I would like to make a humble request to Paramendraji that is purely related to my personal taste which others might share as well. I don’t know why when I see only links, my stimulation for reading them goes down. I wish to see at least some brief summary/comment about it before I copy and paste the link and enter (I usually open the light.sajha and it does not allow linking by just clicking ! Complaint to San.). I think it will be a small effort but a great contribution if Paramendraji could post an introductory note or better abridged version of his really good but sometimes quite long articles for busy Sajha readers. I hope I am not asking too much. If you think I am one lazy ass, you are right about me.
|
| paramendra |
Posted
on 03-Aug-02 11:58 PM
Sorry to disappoint NePe, it is not Paschim -- I have a strong feeling that name is someone I know since 1983, but can't be sure since I have been at this site only two days now -- but me, Paramendra. Sajha is much better than TND. Immediately interactive, with a much better technology, and so far I have not had personal epithets hurled at me. And the participation is broader too, which is the number one thing for me.
I tried to act on your request, but with many of my articles, that will not work. They are numerated. Not carefully cultivated pedantic pieces. Usually first drafts. Clicking for me seems to work perfectly. I am sorry that is not true for you. But I will keep that in mind for future.
|
| paramendra |
Posted
on 04-Aug-02 12:02 AM
"..... (I had to wait for hours for his articles to appear in geocities site when I visited !). ..."
I am flattered that happened. As you know my site is is the free space provided by Yahoo Geocities. I posted my articles Friday morning. Within 30 minutes, the traffic was so high -- people clicking on links to my articles --- that my personal website went down! First time such a thing happened.
Frankly, I was flattered, excited. And I was happy the Yahoo Geocities administrators set things back in order in less than an hour.
Thank you readers.
|
| paramendra |
Posted
on 04-Aug-02 12:03 AM
"..... (I had to wait for hours for his articles to appear in geocities site when I visited !). ..."
I am flattered that happened. As you know my site is in the free space provided by Yahoo Geocities. I posted my articles Friday morning. Within 30 minutes, the traffic was so high -- people clicking on links to my articles --- that my personal website went down! First time such a thing happened.
Frankly, I was flattered, excited. And I was happy the Yahoo Geocities administrators set things back in order in less than an hour.
Thank you readers.
|
| nil kanthe |
Posted
on 04-Aug-02 12:48 AM
I agree with Nepe. Paramendra ji, it would be better if you could post a brief summary with the links.
I like your style of using your photo as a signature at the end of your postings.
|
| GeoGods |
Posted
on 04-Aug-02 02:30 AM
Frankly, I was flattered, excited. And I was happy the Yahoo Geocities administrators set things back in order in less than an hour.--Pramendra
Pramendra ji,
Yahoo Geocities has monthly data transfer limits. Daily Data transfer limits
and Hourly Data Transfer limits. Your visitors including you can not
exceed the limits (Mr. A 's total hourly transfer + Mr. B's Total hourly
transfer .... <= your quota). This is the reason you visitors like NePe
could not get any data downloaded from your site. This is the Biz. trick
Geocities had introduced. Therefore, you should have your own
paid website with unlimited data transfer capability. BTW, would you
kindly stop publishing your photograph in each posting.
GeoGods
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 04-Aug-02 03:48 AM
Indeed, I have known Paramendra-ji for the past 20 years. With *four* identical photos in 5 postings, I surely couldn't have been mistaken.
Good to see him enter a calm Sajha with a bang (angry young man, Amitabh-ishtile). As a regular here, my humble suggestion to him is that perhaps he would do better justice to his views and his enthusiastic effort to propagate them, if he posted one "story" at a time, or created new threads for new topics. That way he won't overwhelm simple readers like me who come here for quick, short viewing of many postings by many people. Avoiding 9 links in one posting, unusually adorned with a Kodak color photograph, may also prevent his detractors from branding his style of posting an attempt at performance, not sambaad. Just a friendly suggestion.
On the substance, I have just gone through a few of his pieces. While I may not have the time or interest to respond to him, I hope to continue reading his views if presented in readable chunks here on Sajha. Agree with him or not, in provoking thoughts, Paramendra Bhagat seldom disappoints.
|
| paramendra |
Posted
on 04-Aug-02 11:30 AM
nil kanthe, thanks for not being critical of my photo!
GeoGods, thanks for the technical info, but I will skip the suggestion. It is about the pocketbook! I am happy having a website for free! Paschim and you seem to have issues with my photo!
A few participants are trying to suggest I am being an exhibitionist: NK actually made the effort to compose a poem. No, I am not. I am just trying to use the web as a medium for a conversation, and am trying to make it as "real" as possible. My real name, with a face. You have the option to visit my personal website and get to know me better, if you want to. A chiya pasal environment. I wish more people did what I am doing, that way we will get to know the participants better, and we would miss less our geographical distances.
If you were to meet me in person, would it bother you that you are actually looking at my person!
Paschim, hello. I gather you are in Hong Kong, but will refrain from more personal talk, guff-suff here. Please feel free to e-mail anytime. When I was in DC for the past two months, I got told you had also stayed in the DuPont Circle area before leaving off for the Pacific domain.
|
