Terrorism or not ?

[Context: The worst terrorist attacks over 2002-2011 was in #Nepal, where 518 people died, according to the Global Terrorism Index http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2012/12/daily-chart-0 #GTI]

Irony: What the world considers as a terrorist attack, the “great revolutionary people” of Nepal will probably identify as an “altruistic attack” on a legitimate state they identified with.

This is a question I get asked quite often on twitter:

“When Nepali Congress does it, it is a freedom struggle, but when UCPN Maoist does it, how is it a terrorist attack?”

For different reasons:

1. In the cave age, the humans killed fellow humans for food, and it was a perfectly acceptable way of living life at that point in time. Similarly, non-violent means of political change was something that was established by Gandhi in the world. Before that, violent struggles were pretty much the standard way of getting things done. Some of the pioneers of the Gandhian struggle were the Nepali leaders like Krishna Prasad Bhattarai, Dilli Raman Regmi and Bhim Bahadur Tamang. But until their time, violent struggles were still the standard way of getting things done.

2. Leaders like BP Koirala served very strenuous jail sentences for involving in violent activities. It can’t be compared with other leaders who took no responsibility whatsoever about the violent political campaigns they led. BP Koirala was in fact serving a life sentence. And even people inside their parties were against such violence at that time (e.g., KP Bhattarai). In fact, at later points in time, even BP Koirala regretted violent activities. But comparing them with Maoist violence where neither the wrong has been admitted nor have the wrongdoers been served the necessary sentences, is totally outrageous.

3. In 2010, violent struggles are usually purveyed by international community for war crimes and terrorism charges. It is not like in 1700s or 1960s where violent struggles where the only means to achieve political change. Today, they have to pass different standards to qualify as a legitimate freedom struggle as opposed to a humanitarian crime. In the past, non-violent means of achieving political change were uncommon, and even when they were, they were non compulsive. Evidences tell that in case of Nepal, violence was more of a luxury than a necessity at the hands of those who could afford them.

Terrorist attacks mapped around the world (via The Economist)

So, before you make non-standard arguments like: “The Congress or the UML did violent movements in the past, so why only ostracize the Maoists” please try to understand that people actually understand that you are making an unqualified statement. It will help you prepare with much stronger arguments against a series of horrendous terrorists attacks.

Until then,
Best Wishes,

• Ushaft

President’s coup or Maoist propaganda?

---

A republican order means that ordinary citizens can rise to the highest ranks of power. By asking the President not to “forget his roots of being a buffalo herder,” the Maoists have exposed that republicanism is just a smokescreen for their ulterior goals.

---

General Rukmangad Katwal (Picture: telegraphnepal.com)

I think everybody agrees now that a disastrous front-page story in Kantipur daily by its editor Sudheer Sharma (who I respect) accompanied by an english equivalent in The Kathmandu Post (by its editor Akhilesh Upadhyay, who again I respect very much) describing a failed coup d’état by the CoAS of the time, Rukmangad Katwal was largely a product of imagination (not necessarily the Editors’). It is not easy being in the media business- you get information of all sorts from people of all kinds. You then have to decide what to trust, what to publish, what to watch for a while or what to out-rightly reject. However, the imagination was successfully planted in two of the major daily newspapers in Nepal.

Accept it or not, we were all smitten by the Maoist bug once in our lives; the amount may vary. There was a time when the whole country was madly in love with the comrades despite all they had done, written and said many times over. We believed ourselves, our analysts, our media-men and many people in many guises when they said that the Maoists had signed the 12-point agreement in order to find a “safe landing,” a way for them to join peaceful democratic politics and pursue their beautiful goal of making Nepal a highly democratic, developed, and modern country. Today, many heartbreaks later, the only difference seems that some people got over this bug sooner than others. Some others never had this bug- as they would soon be comrades-in-arms, or had been so all along. They had a choice: to be the useful idiots, or to aid the war in different capacities (fighting with guns is always risky, you know, or ask DPM Narayankaji, or some writers and columnists).

“Strongman”: Akhilesh Upadhyay has written about Baburam Bhattarai’s tendencies (click on the picture for the story) (picture: nepaliblogger.com)

Another product of imagination seems to have found its way into the media lately. I can guess that the esteemed Editors mentioned above, among many others have survived the heartbreaks and learned a lesson or two. That explains why this imagination could not find its way into any mainstream news outlet, and had to be unceremoniously planted in a blog. Apart from that, the Maoist conviction that President Dr. Ram Baran Yadav planned a failed coup d’état recently against Baburam Bhattarai’s government was sneaked into an interview of the finance minister Barshaman Pun. A couple of other government ministers made similar allegations against the President in some press meetings. This got the President’s office miffed, and they have challenged the government to investigate the matter and bring out the truth to the people. They have further called for action against the ministers if the accusations are not substantiated. The President has also made it clear to leaders of major parties that “he will not, and cannot take any action without the consensus of political parties.” Not surprisingly though, a news story whose major portion sounded very much like a government distributed propaganda-material was published yesterday in The Hindu. The story contains no mention of the call by President’s office to investigate the matter or his refusal of the allegation. The writer, Prashant Jha, is known to be close to the ruling coalition, and also as a lobbyist for Prime Minister Bhattarai.

Sounds familiar? Why is this happening all over again? The truth of the matter, as put by another Editor who earns my great respect is that the “parties don’t feel any pressure from the President, they just pretend they do. Reason: the public.” The President of Nepal has largely been a conciliatory figurehead acting as per the court’s or the constitutional provisions. The Maoist-Madheshi Morcha government led by Baburam Bhattarai on the other hand, has repeatedly been an aggressor in the national politics, both before and after it successfully dissolved the Constituent Assembly that was also acting as a parliament.

PM Bhattarai is said to be one of the most intelligent and shrewd politicians Nepal has seen after 1990 (picture: Mercantile Communications)

The government, deemed “care-taker” by the President, has misappropriated the national treasury in a shameless manner (see recent press reports for the massive scale in which this is going on), and has been unable to hold elections it announced in a unilaterally. In the ensuing constitutional and political vacuum, the government’s supporters have openly announced that they’ll continue ruling like this for 25 years to come. They have taken actions to back up this claim too, for example: the Judiciary and all major constitutional bodies are going to be defunct because of the failure to man them by the government, and many arbitrary actions of the government in the absence of the parliament look like preparation for a new bout of authoritarian regime in Nepal, under the leadership of Dr. Bhattarai. In such a situation, the President’s office is now standing between the government and its will to get a free hand in running the country. Aware of this, the government even dared to ask the President to issue an ordinance which would in effect make ordinances unnecessary, making the cabinet’s decision equivalent to law. Naturally, the President’s office refused to budge to such an outrageous attempt. In the absence of a regular parliament, ordinances cannot be discussed within one month of being issued, as required by the interim constitution. The constitution further requires all major decisions to be taken by the parties in “consensus.” the President’s office is only trying to abide by the constitution and not invite any controversy for its actions.

Maoists protesting against the President in 2009, after resigning from power. They staged roadshows mimicking the President as a buffalo herder (picture: demotix.com, Edwin Koo)

Recently, the government has publicly threatened the President to issue an ordinance on the fiscal budget, and has warned of dire consequences if he fails to do so. The planted news stories seem to have come in this context. It seems like a last-ditch effort to destabilize the President’s office, having done so with almost all established institutions in the country. Of course, observers of the Maoists’ protest rallies in 2009 following their government’s resignation know pretty well that their advocacy of the republican order is just a smokescreen for their ulterior goals (it was during this very time that the Gen. Katwal led coup story made headlines) . After getting down from power, apart from the propaganda about Gen. Katwal’s coup d’état, the Maoists staged a very vulgar scene in the streets. I was first-hand witness to their mimicry of the President as a buffalo-herder and statements indicating that a buffalo herder has forgot where he belongs by not coming to the aid of their plans. Let me remind you that President Yadav has humble roots as he used to be a buffalo herder in his village during his childhood.

Of course, it was stupid of us all to be smitten by the Maoist bug in the first place. Here is a party that has never flinched one bit from its commitment from a totalitarian system of governance and violence as a political tool, here’s a party that advocates centralization of power into a group of elites called the “party politburo” (contrast this with their federalism gameplan), and that has in its official records, repeatedly denounced established democratic norms, and here’s a group of leaders who do not believe in economic freedom and individual liberties- still we chose to believe in the opposite. Of course, people who want to replace a monarchy with a republican order with the noble goal of making it possible for ordinary citizens to rise to the highest ranks of power cannot be challenging it’s very fundamentals- that the beauty of a republican order is just that a buffalo herder can become our President. It has neither apologized for such vulgarity, nor has shown any indication of changing that attitude. It was all along a love affair based on impossible dreams and lies. So when I say that the rumor spread by the Maoists on the Presidential coup is just another in a series of such propaganda they have mastered, I do not expect to be believed.

बजेट आउनु अघि

---

के हालका वर्षहरुमा नेपालको गरीबी बढाउन सबैभन्दा जिम्मेवार “गरीबमुखी” भनेर चिनिन चाहनेहरु नै हैनन् र ?

---

November 2010: Maoist lawmakers roughing up Finance Minister Surendra Pandey as the latter prepares to present the budget for 2010/11 fiscal in the parliament. (Picture: THT ONLINE)

देशको वार्षिक बजेट आउनेवाला छ, तर राजनीतिक खिचातानीका बिच नआउन पनि सक्छ । वैधानिक सरकारले ल्याउन खोजेको बजेटकै दौरान संसदमै हानाहान गरेर अर्थमन्त्रिको हातबाट झोला खोस्ने चलन बसेको देशमा अधिकार विहीन बनिसकेको र वैधानिकता पनि गुमाउन लागिसकेको सरकारले ल्याएको बजेट उपर के कस्तो रडाँको मच्चिने हो, हेर्न त बाकिँ नै छ । यो लेखको विषय भने बजेटलाई कसरी हेर्ने भन्ने बारेको एक पक्षसँग मात्र सम्बन्धित छ । नेपालमा बजेट आएपछि सबैतिर हुने चर्चा प्राय राहतहरुका विषयमा हुन्छ: तलब कति बढ्यो, भत्ता कति थपियो, अनुदान बढ्यो कि बढेन, वितरण हुने रकम कति मोटो छ? तिनै विषयहरु उपर पत्रिकामा लेखहरु छापिएलान् र सो कै आधारमा कतिले बजेटको मुल्याङ्कन गर्लान् । त्यसमाथी गरीबमुखि भनेर चिनिन चाहने वर्तमान प्रधानमन्त्री, अर्थमन्त्रि, उनीहरुको पार्टि आदिको समूहले ल्याउने बजेट झनै रोचक हुनेछ । यस विषयमा हामीले कस्तो तयारी गर्ने, बजेटलाई के आधारमा मुल्याङ्कन गर्ने ? यो लेखको विषय यहि हो ।

सन्दर्भ : बिसुनी सदाको घरमा बाबुराम भट्टराईको रात्रिभोज

प्रधानमन्त्रि बाबुराम भट्टराई निजी सम्पत्तिमा विश्वास गर्दैनन्। उनले आफ्नो पार्टिको नीति पनि यहि बनाएका छन। सक्दा हुन् त त्यसैलाई देशको नीति पनि बनाउँथे- संविधानमा त्यस्तो व्यवस्था लेख्न खोजेका पनि हुन् र “माओवादि छापको संविधान नबने नस्विकार्ने” समेत बताएकै हुन् (त्यहि भएरै संविधान सभा विघठन गरेका हुन्)। यस्तो मा महोत्तरीका बिसुनी सदालाई प्रधानमन्त्रिको रात्रिभोज व्यवस्था गर्दा ऋण लागेको कुरालाई हामीहरु जसरी बुझ्छौँ, बाबुरामले त्यसरी बुझ्दैनन्। यस समस्याको बाबुरामीय समाधान हो: ऋण दिने मान्छेलाई जबरजस्ति सो ऋण मिनाह गर्न लगाउनु, नमाने आफ्ना पार्टिका लठैतहरु लगाएर बाध्य पार्नु। उनी सबै सम्पत्ति राज्यको हुने अर्थव्यवस्थामा विश्वास गर्छन्। त्यस्तोमा उनले सदाको घरमा गएर खाएको पनि राज्यकै श्रोत हो, नखाए पनि आखिर त्यो राज्यकै थियो। यसलाई उचालेर ठूलो कुरा बनाएको प्रधानमन्त्रिलाई पक्कै मनपर्ने छैन र मौका मिले उनी भन्नेछन्- “यो केहि सिमीत समूहको कुण्ठामात्र हो, यसको कुनै महत्व छैन। हामीलाई थाहा छ कि जनता हामीलाई खाना खुवाउन एकदम खुशि छन् र अरु खुवाउन चाहन्छन्”।

PM Bhattarai with his team at the dinner (Picture: ekantipur.com)

प्रधानमन्त्रिले दलितको घरमा गएर खाना खानु राम्रो कुरा हो, यसले जातीय भेदभावको प्रथालाई दुरुत्साहन गर्छ। अझ उनले सार्वजनिक यातायत चढेरै गए हुन्थ्यो, त्यसो गर्दा बाटोमा मानिसहरुले दैनिक रुपमा भोग्ने समस्या र भेदभाव पनि थाहा लाग्थ्यो होला र केहि समाधान पनि निकाल्थे होला। यद्दपी यस्ता समस्याहरु समाधान गर्ने अरु धेरै राम्रा बाटोहरु होलान्, तर प्रधानमन्त्रिले खाना खानुलाई नै म त्यति ठूलो विषय बनाउनेवाला छैन। समस्या गएर खाना खानुमा छैन। समस्या प्रधानमन्त्रि स्वयंले गर्ने शोषण र भेदभावमा छ।

भट्टराई एकदमै पूर्वाग्रहि व्यक्ति भएको तथ्य अब कसैबाट लुकेको छैन। उनी लडाईँमा मरेका आफ्ना पार्टिका मानिस बाहेकलाई शहिद पनि मान्दैनन्। यो भन्दा अघि उनी खाना खान गएको पश्चिमको एउटा घरकी छोरीलाई सेनाले लगेर मारेको रहेछ। उनले माओवादीले लगेर मारेका मानिसहरुलाई साहनुभुती दिन कहिल्यै चाहेका छैनन्, बरु तीनका घाऊमा नुन छर्किन उनलाई मनपर्छ। त्यस्तै बीबीसी नेपाली सेवाको हिजोको रिपोर्टमा पनि “भट्टराई निकट मानिने भरत साहको फुलकहा गाउँमा राती बसेका प्रधानमन्त्रि” भनिएको छ। यसरी हेर्दा आफ्नो पार्टिका खड्गबहादुर विश्वकर्मा मोहन वैद्य खेमामा गएपछि त्यसको राजनीतिक क्षति न्युनिकरण गर्न यि भ्रमणहरुको प्रयोग गरेजस्तै देखिन्छ। त्यसलाई अनेक नाम दिएर “लोकप्रिय” बनाउन खोज्नु उनको चारित्रिक विशेषता नै हो, तर तीनलाई हामीले जस्ताको त्यस्तै पत्याउनु पर्छ भन्ने पनि छैन।

अर्को भेदभाव उनले श्रमको सम्मान नगरेर गरेका छन्। होटेल-रेस्टुराँमा खाएको पैसा माओवादी बाहेक अरुले त तिर्नैपर्छ। अरुको घरमा खाँदा पैसा तिर्न नपरे पनि अरु शिष्टाचारीय नियमहरु हाम्रो संस्कारले स्थापना गरेका छन्। मैले देखेको नेपाली संस्कार अनुसार पनि कसैकोमा पाहुना लाग्दा केहि खानेकुरा कोशेली लिएर गइन्छ र आफुले पनि निम्तो दिएर फर्किइन्छ। चिनेजानेकालाई खानेकुराको पैसा दिँदा अपमान हुने हाम्रो चलन भएकोले यस्तो अप्रत्यक्ष रुपले तिर्ने व्यवस्था बसेको हुनुपर्छ। त्यसमाथी ५०-५० वटा गाडिका लस्कर लिएर खान गएपछि त “दु:ख भयो होला” भनेर काममा सघाइदिनु त अनिवार्य नै हो। हुन त हाम्रा प्रधानमन्त्रि सबै नेपाली संस्कारहरु फ्याँकेर नयाँ संस्कार बसाउने अभियानमा लागेका मान्छे, उनलाई यीनको मतलब नहुँदो हो। तर किसानहरुको श्रमको पुरै अवमूल्यन गरेर प्रधानमन्त्रिले आफ्ना उपलब्धिहरुको सुचीमा “श्रमशोषक”को परिचय पनि थपेका छन्। यसरी कुनै निम्न आय भएको किसानको घरमा अबुझले झैँ दर्जनौँ मानिस बोकेर पाहुना लाग्नु, उनको समय र श्रमको कुनै महत्व नभएजस्तो गरी र आफैँले आर्जेको जस्तो गरी मजासँग खाना खाएपछि आफ्नो बाटो लाग्नु लज्जाविहिनताको राम्रो उधाहरण हो। उनले प्रचार-प्रसार लगायत आफ्ना व्यक्तिगत स्वार्थहरुका निम्ति यसरी निम्न आय भएका मानिसहरुको उपयोग र शोषण गरेर ती मानिसहरु र आफूले प्रतिनिधित्व गर्ने भनेको वर्गकै मजाक उडाँएका छन् ।

बाबुराम भट्टराईले यस्तो गर्नु नयाँ वा आश्चर्यजनक भने पक्कै होइन। उनले चलाएको युद्धको समयमा पनि उनका कार्यकर्ताहरुले गाउँमा जनतालाई दिनुसम्म दु:ख दिएको कुरा जगजाहेरै छ। मानिसहरुका भकारी लुटेको, खानामा “मासु-भात नै चाहिने” उर्दि दिएको र भनेजस्तो नभए खाना फ्याँकेर हिँडेका कुरा लेखक स्यंयले भरपर्दा भुक्तभोगीहरु र कहिलेकाँहि आफन्तैहरुबाट सुनेको हो। भट्टराईबाट ती भन्दा उपल्लो स्तरको व्यवहारको अपेक्षा गर्नेहरुको common sense मा प्रश्न गर्नु बरु बढि उचित हुनेछ ।

The United Nations could offer a few answers to its well-wishers in Nepal

Without convincing answers from the United Nations on the recent controversy to its well-wishers like me and other people of Nepal, the presumption of innocence accorded to the global body cannot hold for very long.

---

I appreciate the goodwill of foreign missions in Nepal, including the UN and would like to whole hardheartedly thank them for the good work they are doing. It is with the hope of making them aware of the public perception they are engendering that I sat down to spend some of my time in writing this post. I hope this is received as a positive criticism of some of their works, and not a grossly generalized attack on all of their activities.

---

We are used to seeing China or Russia doing all they can to prevent discussion in the UN about their human rights records. This applies to many other countries like the USA and Israel, and involving different other issues too. Despite not having a veto power in the UNSC, India also frequently lobbies to stop similar discussion in international forums like the UN, especially about caste-issues, Dalit rights and Kashmir. It terms them as “internal issues” and fears that internationalizing them would invite players of all sorts to meddle in the social, cultural and political sphere.

Unlike many other countries, because of remaining free, we could not learn the harsh realities of colonization. On a psychological level, it left us wanting of the few benefits of such a possibility, like railways, administration, English education or a greater exchange and mobility with the Europeans. While the formation and independence of this country can be attributed to the prudence of its past rulers about regional realities and the tricks/skills of colonizers, some of our wanting is being fulfilled today precisely because of our disregard to those very principles that helped build our nation. Some such wanting are coming true in the form of a molotov cocktail bottled in inflammable policy recommendations and sealed with aid. The failure to learn even from our immediate neighbors on why our social problems are best kept away from hands known to break whatever unfamiliar societies they lay on has left us in a situation where trying to do what Kul Chandra Gautam, a former senior UN official, terms as the most predictable and likely course of action, has been made an excuse to attack different tenets of our society.

The UN involvement in Nepal’s peace process (especially the management of arms and cantonments of Maoist army) was controversial (picture: franceonu.org). Ian Martin and Karen Lundgren led the UN Mission to Nepal.

The subject of this discussion is a policy document (UNDAF) drafted by the UN and revised by the Government of Nepal (GoN). Not happy with the various phrases used by the UN, the GoN suggested some changes. The UN chose to express its dissatisfaction and leak the details of the document through a commenter, who is known as an active promoter of Nepal’s ruling ultra-left political force. The easiest and surest method of demonizing anyone who disagrees with this ruling coalition in Nepal these days is a highly generalized and racist accusation (Hill-people, Hindu elites, elites, Brahmin-Chhetris, Khas oppressors, etc.) repeated so often that it is on the way of becoming a part of normal discourse. On the internet and the press, it was done again, this time to blame some “bureaucrats” who allegedly suggested changes to the UN document.

Despite the elimination of effective criticism and diversity in opinion by demonizing any disagreeing individual has succeeded in creating an obstruction-free path for the ones who designed it, some people indeed tried to point out the flaw in their arguments, albeit in a tone that is clearly pursuant of avoiding being seen as discomforting.

I want to bring to attention three points that have not been covered elsewhere:

1. First, as this interview of the National Planning Commission (NPC) Vice Chairman Deependra Bahadur Chhetri (on BBC Nepali service, 22nd Aug 2012) reveals, the changes were fully endorsed by the government. Mr. Chhetri is a known leftist and he was politically appointed to the post by the Prime Minister. This not only renders the blame on “Bahuns (aka Brahmins)” or even “bureaucrats” useless, but also raises a question of whether the blame was done in purpose so as to support the series of hate-campaign on certain communities and cultures (Hill Brahmin, Khas) that has been launched in recent years.

   As Mr. Chhetri states, the GoN has done quite a lot towards addressing the concerns of minorities in Nepal. I do not understand how the same number of people can be without citizenship every 5 years (election?) because just before the previous election, a lot of people were provided citizenship certificate under a special clause, and a few years before that too. Nepal’s electoral process and parliament is one of the most diverse in the world in terms of the represented minorities. The government has also enacted several laws since more than a decade ago to reserve seats in government positions for people from different communities. Some of these measures were taken before the issues were hijacked by the ultra-leftist forces.

2. Second, the UN Resident Coordinator, while tweeting from an official UN twitter handle (@UN_Nepal), actively promotes views and newspaper articles from the radical leftist writers. Whether it is just co-incidence or if is also a participant of this smear campaign and one-sided propaganda is beyond the knowledge of this meek blogger. I also do not know if my attempt to bring to his notice an article from a different viewpoint and opposing the ongoing campaign was well received. The Kul Chandra Gautam article linked above certainly represents a different opinion on the subject, but the official twitter handle of UN’s Nepal mission seems not to be interested in it.
   
   

   H.E. Robert Piper, UN Resident in Nepal (picture: youtube.com)

   
   The UN has in the past received a benefit of doubt during what many term as it’s espousing of the Nepal’s radical left in the form of being a silent spectator during the latter’s infamous inflating of their fighting force, violation of the terms and conditions of weapons-management and peace agreement and the use of violence for different political goals. The UN has also supported the ultras’ agendas in social-political issues by both choosing to ignore the excesses and toeing them.
3. Third, is it time for Nepal to initiate a critical discussion on whether our psychological need for friendly mixing with interventionist forces and organizations is bearing its intended fruits? Without convincing answers from the United Nations on the recent controversy to its well-wishers like me and other people of Nepal, the presumption of innocence accorded to the global body cannot hold for very long. Is it time for us to analyze why our neighbors and other countries who have learned it the hard way have been doing what they’ve been doing? By belonging to comparable social-geological environment, can theirs’ be a model we could take some inspiration from?

   It could be for these very reasons that India and China were warning us against our more-than-eager invitation of international mediation of the peace process. Not many countries have survived such a decision.

---

Please hold on a second before using your flawed reasoning to label me as enemy of Dalit rights- I am a strong supporter of freedom for all people, including the marginalized ones, minorities, and dissidents.

---

नेपालमा बलियो दक्षिणपन्थको खाँचो

प्रष्ट र बलिया दक्षीणपन्थी अडानहरु बेगर हाम्रो आर्थिक विकास र उद्दमशीलतामा प्रगती हुने सम्भावना छैन ।

पाठकहरु, शीर्षक पढेर केहि बिचार बनाइसक्नुभएको भए कृपया एकछिनलाई सो त्याग्ने प्रयास गर्नुहोला। “दक्षिणपन्थ” भन्ने शब्दले प्राय नेपालीहरुको मनमा नकारात्मकता जगाउँदछ। हामीलाई दक्षिणपन्थी भन्नेबित्तिकै दलाल, सामन्ती, प्रतिगामी, विदेशीका गोटि र अझ दक्षिण भन्ने शब्दले गर्दा भारतपरस्त भनेर सोच्ने बानी परेको छ। हामीलाई सिकाइएकै यस्तै छ। नेपाल एक बामपन्थी मुलुक हो- पहिले के थियो थाहा छैन, तर हिजोआज दिनप्रतिदिन यसको बामपन्थीकरण बढ्दैछ। मैले मुलुकलाई नै बामपन्थी भन्दैछु- यसको मतलब हाम्रो समाज, राष्ट्रिय चिन्तन, मूल संचार माध्यमहरु, सामाजिक बहस र मुद्दाहरुमा पुरै वामपन्थ हावि छ (यसको कारण र इतिहासको बारे म छिट्टै अर्को लेखमा विश्लेषण गर्नेछु)। त्यसैले यस्तो वातावरणमा हुर्केर, बढेर, सिकेर दक्षिणपन्थको बारे नकारात्कम सोच बन्नु अचम्म होईन।

(Picture: mikeldunham.blogs.com)

• दक्षिणपन्थको भारतसँग कुनै सम्बन्ध छैन

  राजनीतिका दुई मुख्य ध्रुब वामपन्थ र दक्षिणपन्थलाई अङ्ग्रेजीमा “left-wing” र “right-wing” भनिन्छ। दक्षिण एसियाली भाषाहरुमा “rightists” लाई दायाँपन्थी वा दाहिनेपन्थी नभनेर दक्षिणपन्थी किन भनियो मलाई थाहा छैन।

• दक्षिणपन्थ भनेको खराब होईन

  दक्षिणपन्थ दुँनियाभर नै प्रचलित छ, प्राय समाजहरुमा करिब करिब आधा-आधा बामपन्थी र दक्षिणपन्थी प्रभाव हुनेगर्दछ। अमेरीकी सरकार र सदनमा प्रायजसो यी दुई सिद्दान्तले चिनिने दलहरुको बराबरी उपस्थिति हुनेगर्दछ- यद्दपी मेरो बिचारमा अमेरीका मूलत दक्षिणपन्थी देश हो किनकी बायाँपन्थी भनेर चिनिने डेमोक्राटिक दलको झुकाव विस्तारै दक्षिणपन्थतिर ढल्किन थालेको धेरै भइसक्यो। बेलायतमा त बिसौँ शताब्दिको अधिकांश समय दक्षिणपन्थीहरुले नै शाषण गरे। भारतमा गान्धिको युगपछि वामपन्थ मृतप्राय छ- त्यहाँ “द हिन्दु” जस्ता केहि पत्रिका बाहेक मिडियामा पनि दक्षिणपन्थ नै हावि छ, मूल राजनीतिक चिन्तन पनि त्यस्तै छ।

  युरोपीय देशहरुको स्थिती अलि भिन्न छ। अमेरिकामा भन्दा फरक, त्यहाँ हरित (green), अराजक (anarchist) जस्ता विभिन्न राजनीतिक धारका दलहरु प्रभावशाली भुमिकामा छन्। त्यहाँ दक्षिणपन्थी र बामपन्थीहरु मिलेर सरकार बनाउने वा चुनाव अनुसार आ-आफ्नो गठबन्धन बनाएर सरकार बनाउने प्रचलन छ। त्यसकारण त्यहाँ पुरै दक्षिणपन्थ वा पुरै वामपन्थ भन्दा पनि मिसिएको प्रणाली र सामाजिक बनोट छ। सोभियत संघको बढ्दो प्रभाव घेरा र पुँजीवादि प्रजातन्त्रको बिच सामन्जस्य अपनाउने क्रममा यस्तो भएको हुनसक्छ। त्यसकारण, युरोपी देशहरुमा सामाजिक न्याय र कल्याणकारी प्रावधानहरु, बलियो सरकार, उच्च कर, निजी पुँजीको रक्षा, व्यक्तिगत स्वतन्त्रता, खुला समाजजस्ता दक्षिणपन्थ र वामपन्थ दुबैथरीका व्यस्थाहरु छन्।

• दक्षिणपन्थ के हो त?

  दक्षिणपन्थ र वामपन्थको बिचमा छुट्याउनको निम्ती विभिन्न मुद्दाहरुमा लिइने अडानको बारे जानकारी हुनुपर्दछ। मुख्य दक्षिणपन्थी सिद्दान्तहरु यसप्रकार छन्: व्यक्तिगत स्वतन्त्रतालाई उच्च महत्व, नागरिक जीवनमा सरकारको न्यून भुमिका र हस्तक्षेप, समान कर व्यवस्था, खुला बजार अर्थतन्त्र, आदि। बामपन्थीहरु भने यसका विपरित सिद्दान्तहरुमा विश्वास गर्छन। प्राय समाजहरुमा उग्र दक्षिणपन्थी (ultra-right) र उग्र बामपन्थी (ultra-left) वा कम्युनिष्ट (communist) बिचार बाहेक मध्यमार्गी दक्षिणपन्थी (right-of-center) र मध्यमार्गी (centrist) र मध्यमाग्री बामपन्थी (left-of-center) राजनीतिक धारहरु प्रचलिन हुन्छन् र दुबैथरी धारहरुमा उदार र कट्टर खेमाहरुको उपस्थिती हुन्छ।

  यी दुईका बाहेक अरुपनि धारहरु छन् र कतिपय अवस्थामा मानिसहरु कुनै एक धारमा मात्र पुरै नढल्कि दुबैथरीका केहि-केहि मान्यताहरुको समर्थन गर्दछन्। जस्तै: “समाजका कमजोर वर्गलाई राज्यले बलिया वर्गसँग उठाएको करले राहत र सहयोग गर्नुपर्छ तर बलिया वर्गहरुको प्रगतीमा पनि राज्यले सहयोग गर्नुपर्दछ वा कम्तीमा अवरोध गर्नुहुँदैन- त्यसकारण उनीहरुलाई चर्को कर लगाउनु हुँदैन” भन्ने मान्यतामा दुबै धारका सिद्दान्तहरु अङ्गालिएको छ। आफ्ना मान्यताहरु कुन धारप्रति ढल्किएका छन् भनेर पाठकहरुले आफैँ छुट्टयाउने प्रयास गर्नुभए धेरै प्रश्नहरुको जवाफ पाउनुहुनेछ।

Why would you pay 7000 for daily paper subscription? (Guest Blog)

This is a guest post. The writer wants to start blogging on economic matters and wanted this post published to know if readers would be interested in similar posts. Please help the writer with your feedback.

The writer wants to remain anonymous for this post.

---

The annual subscription of Republica Daily (with IHT) in Nepal costs NRs 7000. With the exchange rate of USD 1 = NRs 82, that amounts to USD 85.4, almost 16% of the country’s GDP per capita (7% when adjusted by purchasing power parity) and 14% of the per capita income. Few days ago, some Nepali daily papers jointly hiked their price by 100% to about USD 45, roughly 9% of the country’s GDP per capita (4% when adjusted by purchasing power parity) and 8% of the per capita income.

The only question I have is how fair that price is? In a country where many can’t buy basics of survival with their little money, isn’t the price of this annual subscription totally outrageous? This almost equivalents the price of luxury item given the fact that University level education at many Government owned Universities comes comfortably at that price. However, the quality of both University education and the news on the paper is arguable.

In a totally different context I remember this concept of political economy of “Guns versus Butter”- money spent by Government on military versus money spent on non-military matters/goods. One comes at the expense of other. I couldn’t find this exact data for Nepal. Maybe, I need to try harder and push some buttons on my own calculator. Lets save that for some other time. What we all agree is that this balance is increasingly tilted towards the former. The balance is disturbed more in these days when there are a lot of post-war adjustments going on. Some money goes on damage repair and some on damage prevention. We all know by now, war costs whooping lots and it keeps on draining the national budget for years. That is how this spending is justified. But it is high time now there be some substantial spending on “butter”, or else this “damage repair” loop will bind us forever.

Lesson: learning to prioritize is vital.

P.S. How many of you already subscribed to Republica Daily?

The new and the old

Be careful when you hear of the new vs old distinction.

Nepal: 2006 (picture: thefirecollective.org)

The mass demonstrations in Egypt earlier this year now famous by the name of “the Arab Spring” overthrew Hosni Mubarak and apparently heralded Egypt into a “new age” of democracy, freedom and prosperity. While the revolution was being tweeted, I was not sure whether to feel happy or sad for the Egyptians as they were going through what we in Nepal have already been through. We were told that the “old” was ugly, bad and evil and had to be uprooted at any cost and replaced with the “new”- a dream that was not only successfully sold, but also nicely executed. This dream was so dear and hypnotic, it led to a decade long bloody war and even years after its formal end, continues to have many ardent supporters.

Egypt

During the previous years, Egypt had maintained its identity as a fast progressing economy in the middle of a very difficult region. Although the whole region was plagued by religious extremism, Egypt’s secular regime still provided educated women the opportunity to wear the dresses they liked. Like all countries following the 80-90s path of economic liberalization and capitalism, inequality was on the rise in Egypt, but it’s economy was growing substantially. Egypt had good relations with Europe and America and the collaboration provided great opportunities for Egyptians in science, research, education and trade. Outside their country, the Egyptians also enjoyed the positive image of their country- contrast that with the kind of treatment the people of many other countries in the Arab region receive.

On History, Present and the Mahendra Nationalism

Time is very important. It is a dimension in itself to everything. In history- time is the only dimension.

The 1940s

Let’s look at the 1940s. In 1939, the Chinese people gained control of their country after driving out the Japanese. Japan and Germany were the two most important forces of the second world war the coming decade was to see. In India, freedom fighters were in negotiations with both German and Japanese rulers in order to form an alliance to defeat the occupying British forces. The British and Germans were enemies. After the second world war ended, a big dent was formed in the economies of countries like Britain, Germany and Japan. The British left the subcontinent.

In Nepal, we tried our own things too. Although we were not being ruled by foreign occupying forces, the Rana rulers would have never been able to rule the way they did without the support and recognition of the British. The Ranas supplied Nepalese soldiers to fight from the British side during the world war and they also helped defend the British colony in events like the Lucknow Sepoy Mutiny. So, when the British left, the Ranas too had to go. We must thank our democratic and communist leaders of that time, who had participated in the Indian Independence movement and made friends with India’s leaders- it’s because of them that we continued to exist as independent country and enjoy a change of scheme no later than it was enjoyed by people in neighboring countries.

The 1990s

Let’s look at 1990s now. The year 1990 was a year after the Berlin wall was brought down- described as one of the most important events in modern world history. At around the same time, the collapse of the superpower Soviet Union ended the bitter cold-war and constant threats of two world-powers destroying the world in their tussle that included an arms and nuclear showdown. That was also the time when the World Wide Web (the internet as we know it) was developed- this technology would go on to change the world in the next twenty years

In Nepal, after 1990 we curtailed the powers of our monarch and decided we’d also feel the winds of change in our faces. A few years ago, we decided we needed more and got what we wanted too.

What Taslima Nasreen thinks does not matter

Disclaimer: If your age is not suitable to consume adult jokes and abuses, please do not read this post. Do not recommend this post to those people.

Yesterday, Taslima Nasreen was scheduled to address a literary program in Kathmandu, Nepal. That’s when she tweeted,”My nepali friends, I missed my flight to go to Kathmandu today. I forgot to bring my passport as I didn’t consider Nepal a foreign country.”

It is the hallmark of South Asian population to be hypocritical. We are not comfortable with critical thinking. As long as somebody criticizes Islam, Hindus appreciate the “intellect” of that person, and start throwing stones as soon as the same “open-minded” person says something slightly unconventional about Hinduism. In Nepal, we also love people who criticize what we don’t like and start calling names as soon as somebody drops hints of being critical of our own prejudices. People of small countries have big egos. People of poor regions have rich prejudices. What Taslima Nasreen has faced for almost two-decades is a representative of this psychological trait we South Asians share.

This has been showed many times by the people of Nepal, India, Bangladesh and so on. Yesterday, after Nasreen’s tweet, there was a flurry of replies saying “how dare she not know about Nepal being an independent country.” But there were some tweets like this (by Editor Gunaraj Luitel) that showed agreement and sympathy to what Nasreen had said. I sent a few tweets too (more on that later) and moved on to other issues. Today morning, I found out that one twitter user (link might contain profanity) with no follower and no tweet used some foul words against Nasreen, citing which the writer decided to cancel her trip to Nepal (contains profanity). There were also some stupid reactions by news outlets like this which displayed their inferiority complex by writing what they wanted to hear: “she did not carry her passport thinking Nepal was part of India.”

In all this, I have a few thoughts I would like us to ponder about: