Does Neutrality Prevent Intervention ?

Non Alignment Movement was created during cold war to safeguard its members from the intervention of USA or Russia, but it has failed to do so. 

The neutral status of Ukraine could not defend its sovereignty which forced it to join the western military pact—NATO. The Ukranian parliament voted to officially associate it with the stronger military force of the west, in a bid to save its sovereignty and territorial integrity from the invasion of stronger eastern neighbor. 

The middle-of-the-road position couldn't save Ukraine from the intervention of Russia. Non Alignment Movement (NAM) which was created at the height of the cold war in 1961, to counter the effect of western imperialism and Russian communism, is still campaign with 120 member states on board. But the alliance of almost two third of the world’s nations could not save Kiev from Kremlin’s unlawful intervention.

Now, the question arises. Is neutrality a threat to sovereignty, territorial integrity and peace of an independent nation?

Neutrality has fewer space in the current world order. The world is very much divided. When the world was divided into the aforementioned power blocs, some rich countries--Europeans and Baltic states were still their allies. Even after the fall of Russian empire, the world was almost unipolar with the US as the powerful polar star. However, the rise of China, India, Brazil and South Africa, and forming BRICS, including Russia, has made the world multi-polar. This signifies that countries are aligned towards their respective influential poles. Even the UN security council is deeply divided between cold war era power alliances, i.e. US (UK and France) and Russia (with China). 

At this juncture, especially the LDC and LLDCs are more vulnerable to encroachment from the old as well as new power blocs. India has still turbulent border dispute with its neighbors, especially Nepal, where SSB of India is often said to move border pillars. In addition, China's presence in the South China Sea is hostile for Vietnam, Indonesia, the Philippines, and Taiwan. 

Especially, after Ukraine joined NATO, the neutral path of two thirds of the countries of the world is in limbo. It has neither protected them from encroachment of the powerful, and the new powers are constantly emerging. As a result, neutrality has become the connotation of surrender.  

Consensus Blues of Nepali Politics

The ruling elites of Nepal who are invariably in the majority never want consensus to hear the voices of weaker sections of the masses. 

Photo: DECCAN Chronicle

When India PM Narendra Modi said, ‘Nepal should make a constitution on consensus taking confidence of dissident parties rather than majority voting’ sparked a political debate in Nepal. Mr Modi’s remarks in the course of his visit to Nepal during 18th SAARC summit in Nepal has provoked some leaders of Nepali Congress and Communist Party of Nepal, United Marxist and Leninist (CPNUML) who are pro-rightist. Whereas the Maoist leaders are more assured of it, and thought to aid in their stance of consensus for the constitution. 

Mr Modi’s suggestion is taken as intervention by pro-rightist leaders of Nepali Congress and CPNUML. Those leaders, mostly belonging to the traditional ruling elite of Nepal, are not convinced to address all the subdued voices of the weaker section of the ethnically diverse Nepali society. Since they’ve been in majority throughout the democratic history of Nepal, they’re less likely to accept the representation and inclusion of all the people left behind. Whereas, Maoist leaders who are regarded as pro-leftist and close to all the disadvantaged people of Nepal are in favor of consensus in constitution building. Their demand is to address the voice of the people belonging to the weaker section of Nepali society who barely has a majority in the Constituent Assembly.

Leaders of NC and UML have criticized Mr Modi’s remarks. Gagan Thapa, a young and popular leader of the NC has said that Modi doesn’t have right to intervene in Nepali politics. In addition, Mohan Bikram Singh, the leader of a fraction of CPNUML said that Modi’s remarks over Nepal’s process of constitution making is intervention in Nepal’s sovereignty. Both of them belong to the ruling elite of Nepal.

Nepal holds the story of dominance by ruling elite in executive, judicial system and the legislature. Those ruling elites are Bahun, Chhetri and Newar, or popularly known as people of the mid-hill. After Janga Bahadur Rana, the powerful and cunning prime minister promulgated the Civil Code 1910 based on caste hierarchy the people belonging to lower echelon remained oppressed. His Civil Code is just a continuation of Jaya Sthiti Malla’s division of Nepali society into four categories—Brahmana, Chhetria, Vaishya and Sudra—based on the very Hindu philosophy of Vedic saint Manu. Even after so called restoration of democracy in 1950 the same group got a chance to exercise power. After two decades of democracy, then the King Mahendra declared Nepal a Hindu state which further helped mid hill people to prosper. As a result, they got a chance to gain education, collect property, acquire most of the political and administrative positions and patronized their cronies to rule the country. The situation remained same until the second democracy in 1950.

The majority voting system was further restored in 1950 after falling partyless Panchayat regime of the monarch. Yet, the people of lower hierarchy remained away from exercising democratic values in the country. It was until the third peoples’ revolution in 2006 which introduced inclusive democracy. A coalition government was made based on consensus. Realizing the fact that the mere majority voting could not represent all the people, the coalition government held the Constitution Assembly election following first past the post and proportional representation voting system. The interim government was formed from the Constituent Assembly, which also drafted an interim constitution.

The interim constitution is a short term arrangement for restoring peace and addressing the voice of the people left behind by the mainstream development. Its mandate is to make a constitution that can address the suffering of all the weaker section of Nepali society who have never felt associated with the state. Thus, there was an agreement of listening to the voice of all the people who normally do not have representation (or enough representation) in government.

However, those ruling elites of mid hill are not happy with listening to the voice of all those left behind. Although consensus was the only mantra to write constitution first, then follow the norms of constitutionalism i.e. rule of the majority, periodic election, supremacy of the people, democracy, rule of law and judicial review.

Narendra Modi who is watching the political advancement of Nepal closely, just uttered few words to reinstate what Nepal has decided to go ahead with. Some leaders are simply commenting on him to defend their greater share of several decades of power usage.      

   

Ripe for Reform

Nepali society is battered by corruption and political patronage to the corrupt has further shattered people’s dreams living in a society where there is a rule of law. The Transparency International’s recent survey which declared political parties to be the most corrupt institution in Nepal, has further eroded hopes of a ‘new Nepal’. In addition, there are doubts regarding how these corrupt political parties will shape the fate of Nepalis by writing a constitution. But right now, there’s no escape from the political parties.

Is there any entity which can fight prevalent corruption impartially and without political patronage? Will the anti-corruption body, the Commission for Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA) be successful in restoring the shattered hopes of the people? These questions remain unanswered.

Needless to say, Nepal’s rank on the corruption index is not satisfactory. According to the global corruption watchdog, Transparency International, Nepal ranks 139 on the corruption index and shares the position with Pakistan, Azerbaijan, Nigeria and Kenya. Nepal slipped by 15 ranks in 2011 since 2008 which indicates an increase in corruption. This ranking is taken as an important indicator by international investors which tells them how secure their investment in Nepal will be. Corruption, along with other factors—labour union chaos, load shedding and red tape—have not encouraged Foreign Direct investment (FDI) in Nepal so far. According to South Asian Watch on Trade Economy and Environment, FDI in Nepal could not increase during the 2008-2011 period. Further, we have seen delayed mega hydroelectricity projects of national pride and appointment of party cadres in the top positions of state owned corporations and enterprises by sidelining the experienced and the qualified. It has become easier to obtain political patronage than to learn skills and expertise.

 Despite the CIAA enjoying constitutional authority to punish perpetrators, we have seen the anti-graft body fail on numerious occasions. Except for JP Gupta in 2002 and Chiranjibi Wagle in 2004, high-profile arrests and imprisonments have been rare. However, in 2012, in another breakthrough verdict—after the CIAA’s investigation in the Sudan scam—the Special Court convicted three former police chiefs. Despite this conviction, the CIAA couldn’t tighten its grip on ‘the then political and administrative leadership’. Former home ministers and home secretaries, who were heading the Home administration when around Rs 290 million was misused while purchasing logistics for the Nepali peacekeeping mission in Sudan, were given a clean chit. There are many other cases when people in high political and administrative positions were allowed to go unpunished. If properly investigated—without any political patronage—there are multiple issues and cases in which the CIAA could have done a much better job than turn a blind eye towards corrupt bureaucrats and politicians.

Amid heightened corruption and impunity, the CIAA provided some hope by nabbing civil servants—wildlife officials, land revenue officials, heads of government owned corporations and top officials of big hydro-electricity projects—who were suspected of illicit gain and misappropriation of public funds.

But this is only the tip of the iceberg. If the anti-graft body works in its true spirit, with full vigour and impartially, the list of corrupt suspects will become longer than we can imagine. However, some questions still remain unanswered. Are these only a popularity stunt by the CIAA after the new commissioner was sworn in? If not, does it have the sufficient infrastructure and will it continue working in the same spirit in the days to come? Can it avoid political intervention during its operation? It is only when we get answers to these questions that our dream of living in a society where the rule of law prevails come true.

This article was published in The Kathmandu Post, 17 July 2013
http://epaper.ekantipur.com/ktpost/showtext.aspx?boxid=13420109&parentid=24329&issuedate=1872013 

Silent Alarm

Silent voices usually go unheard. Cries of discrimination, screams of segregation and physical attack go unnoticed. Yelling in such situations only invites further discrimination and segregation. A large section of Nepali society—the Dalits—have been harbouring such pain for centuries, expressing only murmurs in their backyards, wiping away tears in solitude and cursing their destiny with no retaliation whatsoever against the perpetrators. Most of the cases of violence against marginalised people—Dalits, Kamlaris, ethnic minorities, women, Haruwa, Charuwa, bonded labourers and child workers—are either kept secret or only a few catch the attention of the media and the authorities. Second, only a few of the victims get justice. Most of them get delayed justice or none at all.

Political cadres and occupational organisations closely associated with the major political parties have a tight grasp over media houses, journalists, diplomatic missions and international human rights agencies. They usually use those channels to amplify their voices to make reckless demands, regardless of the importance of the issues for the rest of the people. Except for a few, most of their issues are related to the political establishment, de-establishment or fringe benefits. Some political cadres call Nepal bandas, or major blockades demanding the release of their criminal cadres.  

They blow their trumpets loudly by using amplifying instruments such as the media, NGOs and civil society. Here, I usually get stuck on these questions: Does a loud voice signify its great importance to society? Does the most talked-about issue mean a pertinent agenda for the nation? Most of them are like recurrent posts on Facebook

that say, “Please like it within three seconds. Please write 2 in the comment box and see the result. Please share the page and you’ll get a benefit within five minutes.” Such posts collect hoards of likes, comments and shares that make them popular overnight. Are those posts really likeable, shareable or worth commenting on? Do they really bring you benefits? I’ve seen some genuine posts with ideas, conscience, wisdom and advocacy—unnoticed and ignored.

The advocacy movement of marginalised groups including Dalits has suffered a similar fate. Most of the time, their voices are either unnoticed or unheard. Even if they do get heard, the government forms a committee, investigates the cases and makes some recommendations. The reports then pile up in offices like rugs for years waiting to be implemented. While in real life, these people keep on suffering as they are molested, discriminated, tortured, raped, exiled and even killed. If they come to cry in the open after an incidence of human rights violation , only a few local FM stations and newspapers cover their stories. However, after a few days, their voices slowly diminish, the cases grow cold, the culprits who had fled return to the village and those poor peoples have to once again live in fear of discrimination, torture and humiliation. The cycle continues and their voices are rarely heard.

The saga of discrimination against the Dalits began after Nepal was declared a Hindu state and the 1854 Muluki Ain was implemented, which put Dalits at the bottom of the

social hierarchy, leaving them to suffer discrimination, untouchability, deprivation and poverty. Several generations of Dalits suffered the fate of second class citizens. On June 4, 2006, a ray of hope appeared for Dalits when Nepal was declared an untouchability-free country. Later, the Caste Based Discrimination and Untouchability (Offence and Punishment) Act 2011 was introduced, which made any act of discrimination punishable by law. However, a lack of strict implementation has left Dalits vulnerable to discrimination and brutal attacks. Even after the Act was enforced, a number of Dalits have been jailed for inter-caste marriage or prevented from drawing water from public wells. Recently, a Dalit from Dailekh district was exiled. More recently, on June 7, an entire Dalit village in Rautahat district was attacked and badly beaten by the so-called upper caste people when the villagers refused to withdraw a petition to allow them to worship at a local temple.

After the Rautahat case received national attention, the Dalits demanded immediate action while local political leaders have tried to pressure the Rautahat district chief to pardon the attackers. Those poor Dalit families of Rautahat don’t belong to any political party, civil society, occupational organisation or trade union; otherwise, those local political leaders wouldn’t have put pressure on the district administration to dismiss the case. If those victims were not Dalits and had been cadres of political parties, they would have launched blockades, Nepal bandas or vandalised public or private property. The Dalit movement, uninvolved in vandalism, blockades and bandas, organised peaceful protest programmes with a few NGOs in some places of the country, including Kathmandu. After the peaceful demonstration, the government agreed to compensate the victims of the Dalit community in Rautahat, formed an investigation committee and pledged to punish those involved in the incident.

If the government delays justice again and does not punish the perpetrators, those silent voices—which have been suppressed for long—may one day burst out violently and distort the current social order of Nepal and create a new order. These silent voices, if they continuously go unheard, may arouse hatred, revenge and possible ethnic wars like between the Hutus and Tutsis in Rwanda, Tamils and Singhalese in Sri Lanka, Hindus and Muslims in Jammu-Kashmir and Shias and Sunnis in the Arab world. The voice for democracy against Rana rule before 1951 was also silent at first. Similarly, the voice for multiparty democracy before 1990 and the voice of the Maoists before the decade-long People’s War in Nepal were also silent. These genuine voices were once ignored by the state and later ended in a complete paradigm shift of power. If the country listens to the silent voices of the marginalised communities—Dalits, Kamlaris and ethnic minorities—it will prevent another possible ethnic conflict for which we are not prepared. 

This article was published in The Kathmandu Post on 13 June 2013

http://epaper.ekantipur.com/ktpost/showtext.aspx?boxid=1432531&parentid=23777&issuedate=1462013 

http://jagaranmediacenter.wordpress.com/2013/06/14/silent-alarm/