Left hand knows not what right does!

Binod P Bista

Nepal possesses a unique character personifying extremes of everything. The Kingdom of Nepal was governed by a communist government in the middle of 1990s under a democratic set up. The Nepali civil society, among others, glorified this event and even saw it as a solution to many problems faced by poor developing countries which are trying to find a suitable compromise between monarchy (or any authoritarian regime) and democracy. The latter events proved that the model was never meant to succeed. Even more amazing is the fact that in spite of successful holding of constituent assembly elections over six months back and institution of a coalition government in about half that time, Nepal presents a weird image of a nation governed and led by a legally elected civilian government which also retains its own militia. Two of the three coalition partners in government have been openly supporting their special groups (young communist league of Maoists and youth force of United Marxist Leninist) who have been taking law in their own hands in the so called anti-corruption drive, among others. The objective of April revolution, a peaceful one at that, is to build a new Nepal that would be all-inclusive, united and forward looking. A faction of Maoists (the main protagonist which spearheaded the revolution), supported by some others, is insisting on creation of federal states (provinces) on the basis of ethnicity and language. In fact, the government in transition (prior to the CA elections) as well as the present one has been fully supporting the federal system by sending government officials to India, Switzerland and other countries for training in federalism even before the constitution is drafted. Would the constituent assembly follow similar approach that it adopted during removal of monarchy and declaration of republic for approving federal states based on ethnicity and language despite serious opposition by many including the elected members pursuing communist ideology? Or, would the assembly simply borrow a draft from a foreign country, as alleged by senior leaders and simply push it through the assembly? How would the present leaders bring about the inclusiveness character of the Nepali nation and restore harmony and peace among hundreds of ethnic groups if the action is to create pockets of ethnically entrenched communities? The problems faced by Kathmandu municipality in trying to dispose garbage or likely difficulty in channeling drinking water from Melamchi provide ample signs of trouble in the management of resources in a poor country living on subsistence agriculture. These instances do not even take into consideration the aspects of ethnic or language primacy. Knowingly or unknowingly present leaders seem to be creating a ‘loya jirga’ like communities of Afghanistan in a new Nepal. The recent cabinet decision of the government to proclaim ‘Nepal Sambat’ as the national era, though satisfying the legacy and pride of Newari community could result in newer problems of ethnicity and language. Such an action might be regarded by others as if placing the rest of Nepal under Kathmandu hegemony. How could the Maoist-led government support action towards cultural hegemony and colonialism and yet preserve ethnic and cultural identities of groups spread from Himal to Terai in hundreds? Although the Asians do not tire of singing praises of Asia’s so called success in ‘unity in diversity,’ the countries that have truly succeeded are found to have homogeneous population such as the United States, China. Even the countries of Europe, despite distinct languages, are bonded together by religion, business ethics and development mode. Can Nepal create a new miracle out of the blue? A popular quote in English - the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing - depicts the current state of republic Nepal. Any nation emerging from a revolution like stage with a clear goal of transformational change and supported by all political parties is mostly united until at the time of instilling the desired change. That change in the Nepali context is the drafting of a new constitution suitable to the country as a whole. In order to come up with an all-agreeable constitution and execute it in the best interest of the nation, there must be a common understanding of all parties involved, concerned and affected. There seems to be little understanding among the coalition partners, and the party which chose to remain in opposition is questioning various aspects of the peace process, some agreed earlier. Where it will end is anybody’s guess.