Maoists plan unity in diversity
By Dhruba Adhikary
KATHMANDU - If everything goes according to the agreed schedule, Nepal will
have a new constitution by May 28, 2010. Under that statute, the country
becomes a republic based on a federal setup. And the "achievements made through
the revolutions and movements till now", says the interim statute enacted in
early 2007, will be institutionalized.
But the road towards that schedule has been marked by interruptions due to
strikes and other unforeseen developments, raising doubts over whether the
target can be achieved.
The Constituent Assembly, which is tasked with writing the constitution and
which acts as an interim legislature, could not sit on Sunday due to disruption
caused by a strike called by the Maoists. The strike, Maoist leaders argued,
was necessary to
register protest over a police bid to evict squatters who had forcibly occupied
a protected forest in the far-western district of Kailaali. The clash there
resulted in the death of five people, including a policeman.
Maoist members in the Constituent Assembly have also disrupted the legislative
process over the past few months by staging demonstrations within the
assembly's premises.
The Maoists are becoming increasingly restless, as seen in their unilateral
plan to declare 13 "federal autonomous states" in the week beginning this
Friday (December 11). Eleven of these "states" are to be named after the ethnic
groups considered to be the original settlers.
The three administrative districts in the Kathmandu Valley, for instance, would
be placed under the autonomous state of Newaa, where Newaars used to be the
dominant community. It is the country's capital and has therefore attracted
people from all corners. The demography has changed over decades and now only
about 35% of the population is made up of Newaars.
Narayanman Bijukchhe, a Newaar and a respected member of the Constituent
Assembly, is among those who sees the proposition to give Newaars special
privileges as highly unrealistic.
How can a minority community rule over a majority in a democratic setup,
wonders Bishwanath Upadhyaya, a former chief justice who chaired a panel that
drafted the 1990 constitution. Upadhyaya was not alluding to the status of the
Kathmandu Valley alone. Almost all villages and districts have mixed
populations and there are over a hundred ethnic groups scattered all over the
country.
The controversial Maoist scheme has other contradictions. Striking among them
is their declared belief in not trusting in any religious faith, yet the
simultaneous pledge to offer an autonomous state to various ethnic groups whose
origins are based on religion, mainly Hindu and Buddhist.
This dichotomy is widely viewed as a prescription for communal strife. However,
Maoist leaders often re-state that their policies thrive on chaos and disorder
in society, despite the series of agreements and compromises made over the past
few years since the Maoists entered the political arena.
Had this not been the case, the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) would
not have resorted to its disruptive activities; it would have actively
participated in the process to draw up a constitution that could address the
grievances of marginalized communities in a federal setup suitable for the 21st
century.
But this is not happening. Although the largest party in the assembly, the
Maoists do not appear to be working hard to utilize the precious time and
resources remaining. Their indifferent, if not hostile, behavior has increased
the anxieties of Nepal's friends and donors.
When he met Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal on Friday, US envoy Randy Berry's
expression of "deep concern" was directed to the planned declaration of
autonomous states. Views of other Kathmandu-based diplomats on the ongoing
political stalemate are similar.
What prompted the Maoist party, which is led by Pushpa Kamal Dahal (alias
Prachanda), to announce the plan for autonomous states ahead of the completion
of a new constitution which would have officially established provincial
structures?
An analysis of remarks of top Maoist leaders in recent weeks indicates that
they are under considerable pressure from their cadres to swiftly implement the
pledge they made during the insurgency years (1996-2006) for the creation of
autonomous states bases on ethnicity.
Cadres are concerned that the constitution will set in stone something that it
will become impossible to change. By acting now, Maoist leaders can take
satisfaction from publicly fulfilling the promise they made at the time of
enlisting young men and women for a long journey of liberation.
Another important point revolves around the fear of the Maoists that
imperialist (US-led West) and expansionist (India) forces will not allow Nepal
to be a "people's democracy" through constitutional methods. It is hence
necessary to empower the people immediately.
Maoists have from time to time expressed apprehension over a Sri Lanka-style
military action against them by the present government, which they see as a
puppet of India. New Delhi, as reported by the Indian media, is preparing a
major offensive against Maoists in India, and Indian suspicion of a possible
link between the two Maoist groups is an open secret.
At its heart, the Maoists' decision on autonomous states is part of the ongoing
political program to oust the present regime, to be replaced by a government of
national unity headed by the Maoist party. They deny they are moving in the
direction of establishing a parallel government.
The immediate objective, they argue, is to counter initiatives in the assembly
- and outside - to pull back from the commitment made at the time of declaring
Nepal a republic. It is essentially a publicity campaign, they contend.
In their assessment, autonomous states under a federal structure would give
indigenous community members opportunities to raise their political profile as
well as economic status.
However, there is the argument that the creation of autonomous states would
compel indigenous people to stay at the local level, thus preventing them from
reaching the central government level.
The Maoist demand for a government of national unity is, ostensibly, a
precondition to their active participation in the assembly panel tasked with
drafting the constitution. Since the rules require a two-thirds majority for
the constitution to be passed, it is necessary to have the Maoists within the
fold.
That perhaps was the reason why the United Nations secretary general, Ban
Ki-moon, wrote of the need for a national unity government in his latest report
on Nepal, though he did not say that such a government had to be headed by the
Maoists.
Ban was criticized by some ministers and leaders. But those who are keen to see
a conclusion of the ongoing political/peace process through the promulgation of
a new constitution have supported Ban's viewpoint.
Daman Dhungana, a former parliament speaker who is also a constitutional
lawyer, is one of them. "At least three major parties should be encouraged to
promptly form a government that can facilitate the timely issuance of new
constitution," he told Asia Times Online. He was alluding to the Maoists,
Nepali Congress and the UML (Unified Marxist and Leninist) as the political
parties who matter most.
Ban's concern, meanwhile, is also directed at the status of the UN Mission in
Nepal as its current mandate runs out at the end of January, unless the UN
Security Council decides otherwise.
The immediate worry for most of the non-Maoist parties represented in the
assembly is the Maoist determination to announce autonomous states. Civil
society, too, looks at it as an ominous plan, fearing that once the inevitable
conflict ensues, it might not be controllable, even by the Maoists.
Dhruba Adhikary is a Kathmandu-based journalist.
(Copyright 2009 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please
contact us about
sales, syndication and
republishing.)
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
