Lessons from Uttar Pradesh

Last week, the voters of Uttar Pradesh (UP) finally got rid of the chaos of Hindutva and dynasty based politics. The verdict is in, and the national parties such as Bharatiya Janta Party (BJP) and the Congress Party have been shown the door. Neither the slogan of "Hindu nationalism" of BJP, nor the Congress Party's "secularism" promoted by none other than the heir of the Congress party — Rahul Gandhi — could cut any ice with the highly discerning voters of Uttar Pradesh.

Former schoolteacher Mayawati's Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) won 206 constituencies out of 402 total seats in the state assembly. Although she has a narrow majority, she has achieved what Bhim Rao Ambedkar and her mentor Kanshi Ram could not in their lifetimes. She has made millions of Dalits who have been marginalized and powerless for decades, in Uttar Pradesh (and throughout India) hopeful for better days ahead.

Furthermore, she has brought an end to the politics of manipulation and maneuverings, fulfilling the electorates' desire for political stability. No party in UP had been able to secure a majority since BJP won 221 seats in the 1991 Assembly polls when the notion of "Hindu nationalism" was at its peak.

Maywati has crumbled established citadels and has upset all electoral calculations. Her victory has surprised both her rivals and exit-pollsters. She has emerged triumphant in the face of innumerable odds. She did not have a poster boy like the Congress did. Nor did she have hoards of actors and actresses — Amitabh Bachhan, Jaya Bachhan, Jaya Prada — campaigning for her party like Mulayam Singh's Samajwadi Party (SP) did. Out of many things, the recent election in UP also has proved that the likes of Amitabh Bachchan cannot sell everything.

Maywati has defied the notion that media can turn around elections. While other parties used actors, actresses, and business tycoons for campaigning, Maywati focused on the basics of politics —- go to people and seek their support. She asked her cadres to visit every village and every house to mobilize their support.

Mayawati has proven that her experience as a former teacher gives her an understanding of not only child psychology, but also psychology of the voters and the strategy that needs to be pursued to secure power. She realized very early on in her political career what Bhim Rao Ambedkar and her mentor Kanshi Ram failed to understand: without cohabitation with the upper caste Brahmins and Thakurs and forging alliance with Muslims, Dalits' quest for power would remain an unachievable goal. Thus, Mayawati did everything under the sun to woo previously adversarial social groups. She carried out a series of Bhaichara (caste amity) campaigns.

When it comes to how she changed her political course, her slogans say it all. She made a complete U-turn from "tilak, taraju aur talwar, maro unko jhoote char" (beat up Brahmins, Vaishyas and Kshatriyas) to "Haathi nahin Ganesh hain, Brahma Vishnu Mahesh hain" (it is not elephant but Lord Ganesh, symbolizing all gods and communities). She changed her party's image from an upper caste bashing party to an upper caste accommodating party. To ensure upper castes' loyalty towards BSP, of the total of 139 upper caste candidates, BSP fielded 86 Brahmins. In addition to the necessity of Brahmins' vote, Mayawati knew it very well that the road to power could not be constructed without Muslim votes. She fielded as many as 61 Muslim candidates in the polls.

Mayawati, thus, exhibited political ingenuity and tore apart BJP's grip on upper caste voters and SP's grip on Muslim voters. Clearly, the politics of inclusion have paid off for Mayawati.

Mayawati outsmarted the BJP, Congress, Samajwadi Party, and other regional political parties through the process of social engineering. The spectacular victory of Mayawati's BSP has potential lessons for both the major political and various ethnic groups that have been pushing for their empowerment in Nepal. Learn from the mistakes of others, or end up becoming a loser in future.

The Nepali Congress (NC) cannot achieve anything without reinventing itself. Although India's Congress party used charming prince Rahul Gandhi to lure voters, he had nothing new to offer. Like India's Congress Party, Nepali Congress (NC) has nothing new to offer. Rather than cozying itself with the political left, it should get nearer to the ethnic groups that believe in inclusive democracy.

Although the NC preaches democracy and secularism, it is heavily dominated by the Koirala clan. This clan calls itself democratic and secular, but still promotes irrational practices. The likes of Sujata Koirala have gained prominence due to their relationship with Girija Prasad Koirala but lack leadership qualities and will end up meeting the fate of Ajit Singh, the son of former Prime Minister Chaudhary Charan Singh.

As a matter of fact, she might not even have the stature that Ajit Singh has in Indian politics. Unlike Ajit Singh, who does have backings of Jat community, Sujata is on her own. Sujata with her husband being a Christian and daughter married to a Muslim will not have any backing of the Brahmin community under which she falls by birth.

Thus, the days of the likes of Sujata Koirala in Nepali politics are numbered. With the demise of Girija Prasad Koirala, they too will become a history. The leaders of NC that have risen to prominence through hard work will soon have their heyday. For now, they should indulge themselves in introspection and work towards reinventing the party.

Slogans and rhetoric alone cannot win elections. Neither the campaign revolving around the idea of "India Shining," helped the BJP,

nor has UP mein dam hai kyon ki zulm yahan kam hai (UP has future because crime rate is low here) worked for Mulayam Singh's Samajwadi party. The voters are not foolish, they will no longer be mesmerized by slogans and rhetoric alone. They will now take a calculated look at the political leadership before casting their votes. So, the political left should shed its rhetorical politics and shy away from class-based politics. At the end of the day, like in UP, the party that is inclusive will have better prospects and will enjoy the support of the majority.

The former royalist party that functions like an elite's club will have no political future. The virtual wipe-out of Viswanath Pratap Singh, the descendent of former Maharaja of one of the many princely states in India, has clearly exhibited that money cannot buy votes; you will have to earn it. So, the parties like Rastriya Prajatantra Paty (RPP) and Rastriya Jansakti Party (RJP) have arduous road ahead. Do it right or perish.

Madhesi People's Rights Forum (MPRF) and NFIN should do what Mayawati did in UP. Instead of alienating the so-called upper castes Pahadis, get them onboard. It would definitely not hurt, it would help. The propagation of sectarian hatred will aid no one in the long run. The BJP strategy to raise the communal temperature did not augur well as planned by BJP in UP. Upper caste Hindus refused to swallow the bait this time around and rather sided with BSP.

The recent uprising in terai has clearly demonstrated that there exists a political space for a genuine political force to grow. There are millions of Pahadis residing in Madhes that do not have problem with Upendra Yadav becoming their democratically elected prime minister. So, Upendra Yadav, who also happens to be a former teacher like Mayawati, has a good prospect as an emerging leader that can address woes of ethnic communities that have been bypassed thus far and at the same time lead the nation. All he needs to do is ensure that the ongoing ethnic movement does not become narrowly focused and communal. The communal politics has no future. Learn it easy way just by seeing Mayawati's experience in UP. For Mayawati it took years to figure that out.

Secularism: A magic bullet or Pandora's box?

Once identified as citizens of the only Hindu state in the world, we now are citizens of a secular country. There seem to exist a mixed feeling among the Nepalis regarding this abrupt change. While Hindu fundamentalists affiliated with Shiv Sena Nepal are finding it hard to bite the bullet and gearing up for a show-down, minorities across the country have greeted it with a cheer.

The word 'secularism' all of a sudden has become a hallowed and sacred word in Nepal's पॉलिटिकल parlance. It has become the most popular product for aggressive political marketing in Nepal. However, amidst the euphoria of newly gained freedom the possible ramifications of going secular from a Hindu state have not been well debated.

The mainstream media might have overlooked the need for a debate assuming secularism to be the magic bullet for the empowerment of minorities in Nepal. Nobody knows how it is going to turn out in the future. The ramification of newly gained secularism will be known down the road in years to come. It is hard to predict whether going secular is a good thing for Nepal or not at this point in time. But for now, the creation of a pluralistic democratic state is an ideal that the Nepal as a sovereign nation is striving for.

The very concept of secularism arose from an urgent need to put an end the tyranny and interference of the Church in the state affairs. It was based on the Christian theological concept that the material world is separate from the spiritual world and correspondingly the state should have sole jurisdiction over one and the Church over the other. In the case of Nepal we have never had religious control, i.e., legislations, such as in Saudi Arabia and Iran or as in Europe for the last 1,500 years.

For a society to become secular in a true sense, it is extremely important to take both religion and secularism seriously. The minute we reject the former as superstition and the latter as mask for communalism and expediency, we are heading towards a religiously divided and politically unstable nation.

Secularism is urgently needed where there is an unwarranted interference of Church on the state and where religious leaders dictate legislative agenda. In the case of Nepal there was no interference of temple on the State. In Nepal, all religious groups lived in nearly a perfect harmony. Like Ayatollah in Iran, Nepal did not have a Hindu religious leader who dictated on the lives of general public and interfered into the legislative process proclaiming himself as a messenger of god.

There are numerous examples where religion and the secular society seem to collide. Secularism in India has failed to stem the rising tide of intolerance in recent years. While Hindu volunteers demolished the controversial Babri mosque and a huge crowd of more than hundred thousand frenzied Hindu fanatics chanted slogans and danced, the Congress party which considers itself a secular party and which was in power then did nothing, but watched helplessly the constitutional rights of minorities being crushed mercilessly. A religious site of Muslims that are a minority in India was reduced to debris by the Hindu fanatics. The ugly face of political fraud in the name of secularism have become evident in numerous occasions in India: ranging from Bhagalpur massacre to Babri Masjid demolition. Indian secularism was unable to stop the murderous carnage in Gujarat.

Approximately 140 million Muslims in India are still languishing at the bottom of the heap after nearly six decades of India's existence as a secular state. The economic and social plight of the minorities (specifically Muslims) in India continues unabated. Thus, secularism, if not practiced in a real sense, guarantees neither religious right of minorities nor secures their economic advancement. In the context of Nepal, where minorities and the Hindu majority had been living in perfect harmony for centuries now, the mad rush towards secularism is neither warranted nor the need of the hour. There are more pressing social and economic issues that need an immediate attention.

The declaration of secular state may prove to be bane than boon for Nepali minorities. It may serve as a much needed inertia for the religious Hindu fanatics and may give birth to less tolerant Hindu outfit such as Shiv Sena and Bajrang Dal in India. If that happens, it will make religious minorities vulnerable than ever. If secularism is for political gains rather than preserving religious harmony, securing peace, and economic prosperity of minorities, SPAM (seven party alliance plus Maoists) has played a big fraud on the nation in general and on minorities in particular. Providing a variety of silly sops to minorities is not enough to empower them.

Secularism means tolerance for all, by all. It is not just by one religious group whether it is majority or minority. Thus, secularism is an extremely beautiful idea "if practiced". If not, it is a double-edged sword that will continue to hang over the head of the minorities. The atrocities committed by majority Hindus will always be overlooked by the political parties because they may not want to displease the majority vote bank. It does not take long for a radical right wing Hindu outfit to grow and spread its tentacles in the name of religion like it did in India and physically and financially harm minorities. If that happens, communal and religious strife may become more prevalent than it used to be when Nepal was a sole Hindu state in the world.

The minorities will be worse off than they were in a Hindu state. Some of us may not accept that we live in a very controlled society. However, the bitter truth is that we inhabit in an extremely controlled society, strings of which are in alien hands and it is they who decide our political, socio-economic and to some extent religious actions. Thus importing a model that worked in foreign shores to please certain individual or the nation without examining the religious landscape of our own society may turn out to be counter productive over the long run.

Just declaring a state secular does not mean anything when it comes to securing religious and human rights, and economic advancement of minorities. One of the most reliable routes to peace and harmony is for us to share our sacred experiences without getting snarled in religious divisions. Secularism will only succeed in Nepal if Nepalese people understood secularism to mean inter-religious understanding and an equality of citizenship rights.

For a society to become secular in a true sense, it is extremely important to take both religion and secularism seriously. The minute we reject the former as superstition and the latter as mask for communalism and expediency, we are heading towards a religiously divided and politically unstable nation.

Whither Nepal's Future

April revolution in Nepal has pumped up unmatched enthusiasm among Nepali citizens. Enthusiasm is most potent among those championing domestic political reform –constituent assembly. The April 2006 popular revolt ended King Gyanendra's increasingly authoritarian fourteen-month rule. However, the leaders of Seven Party Alliance and Maoists (SPAM) face significant obstacles.

If the situation is mishandled, and Nepali people conclude nothing has changed except the names at the top, Nepal could become seriously unstable and politically vulnerable to the external interference. In order to become successful, it is extremely important to know your potential. Thus, political leaders of SPAM should shed negativities, vengeance, and explore new opportunities.

It was easy to point mistakes of the royalist government, but to maintain a clean image and fulfill citizens' aspiration is not an easy task. Like in the past, Maoists have once again started exhibiting their dual character by not sticking to spirit of the ceasefire. Recruitment of cadres, killing of innocent people, and extortion have not stopped yet. An unprecedented rise in criminal activities and extortion has forced Dabur Nepal to shut down its factory in southern Nepal.

Industrial climate has deteriorated to such a level that industrialist have been seeking the government's intervention. While the country's economic backbone is suffering, the leaders seem to be busy bursting out anti monarchy venom rather than trying to address pressing domestic and security issues. When it is all said and done, people will start demanding for jobs and security.

With the closure of factories, not only the already high unemployment rate will spike further, but also the tax base will dwindle. Already poor and foreign aid dependent impoverished nation may become further unstable and malnourished. As far as Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala is concerned, he may be enjoying an unequivocal support from radical communists for now, but time is something that is certainly not on his side. His poor health may ultimately force him to exit politics. Thus, he has a responsibility of unifying divided congress party and strengthening his party's already weakened base.

Koirala's exit or absence may be the end of an era for social and liberal democrats in Nepal. No second generation leaders seem to have same stature and hold among the party cadres as Koirala does. So, what next? We may be heading towards a long haul of communist rule in Nepal which may turn out to be an authoritarian in nature.

When communism is seeing its slow but steady demise throughout the world, rise of communism in Nepal is in part because communists have been so far successful in selling dreams of equality, prosperity and ownership, and political bickering among the social and liberal democrats. Despite the fact that every communist economy in the world has failed, communists in Nepal have been so far successful in selling dreams.

Communist economy has not only failed, but miserably failed to support the country that tried it. The USSR is a history now, and Cuba is struggling hard to keep its populace happy with slow paced prosperity and high dose of ant-capitalist rhetoric. When it comes to red North Korea, it can not even produce enough food to feed its citizens. China is long past the communist economy stage, even if the rest of the government is as commie as can be. Forget about current level of development, it could not be able to feed its gigantic population with a communist economy.

When it comes to the right to differing opinion and personal freedom, communism has a belief system keeping the people in line. Killing non-believers is certainly an effective way to maintain control of those who don't accept the party line. For example, fate of journalist Dekendra Thapa and expulsion of Rabindra Shrestha and Anukul shows dictatorial face of a communist outfit. The minute you dissent, you are a traitor.

"Intra party feud and failure to deliver developmental benefits to oppressed, poor, and unemployed citizens by the social and liberal democrats created a political vacuum which socialist propaganda promptly filled. It was not hard to brain wash already disenchanted populace with socialist propaganda of equality and freedom from feudalism."

Freedom of expression tends also to be mediated by the state to maintain the 'integrity' of a communist regime. You can find a Marxist book in a US bookstore but it is impossible to find a Ludwig von Mises in a North Korean or Cuban library. After the reinstatement of democracy in 1990, social democrats dominated Nepal's politics with 114 members in parliament. None had thought that things would change so soon in favor of communists. After barely 16 years, country has gone all red. You agree it or not (depends on your political inclination), rural areas are completely controlled by radical communists (the Maoists) and urban areas by comparatively liberal communists (UML).

Intra party feud and failure to deliver developmental benefits to oppressed, poor, and unemployed citizens by the social and liberal democrats created a political vacuum which socialist propaganda promptly filled. It was not hard to brain wash already disenchanted populace with socialist propaganda of equality and freedom from feudalism.

So, this may be the last chance for social democrats that are at the helm of affairs in seven party alliance's government. Few things they may consider doing is (a) get Maoists on board and persuade them to submit there arms to credible institution (b) address unemployment problem (c) provide security to threatened industrial sector (d) establish rule of law, and (e) ensure economic development of rural areas. Do it, and do it right this time or else we may have a new authoritarian communist nation in the globe.

Back to the square one: Does SPA have governance strategy?

It did not take very long for the gain of mass movement of 1990 to dissipate. Fifteen years and we are back to the square one once again chanting anti monarchy slogans, burning tyres, vandalizing public properties, and behaving more like goons than civilized human beings.

Our politicians seem to have learnt everything but Gandhian philosophy of non-violence from Indian leaders. Mahatma Gandhi hoped to win people over by changing their hearts and minds, and advocated non violence in all things. Gandhian philosophy which crumbled British Empire seems to have no buyers in the next door neighbor. Have we become more pessimistic over time and think a peaceful struggle for democracy against the tide? Or as a society, have we have become more egoistic? If we start valuing vendetta over morality, vendetta becomes our morality. We will start viewing things more and more from a teleological perspective: that as long as we are better off in the end; we have not committed an immoral act.

We can win hearts and minds of people through non-violent struggle. No guns or brick pieces are needed to bring the repressive, autocratic regime to its knees. Its foundation shall eventually crack due to its own misdeeds and repressive practices. Democracy in Nepal can and should be achieved through peaceful struggle and processes without destroying public properties. The era of nations achieving their independence through armed struggles and terrorist activities has passed. Thus it is not a matter of if but when.

Sooner or later we shall prevail as a democratic nation. However, our ability to strengthen democracy and keep it functional remains highly questionable. Moral bankruptcy among the political leaders was the major source of our failure in the past. Hopefully our leaders have learned a lesson this time. If not, Feb 1 shall repeat in some form or the other. It does not have to be royal take over. Thus, a million dollar question right now is: What would our leaders do differently than they did after the fall of Panchayat regime in 1990 that would strengthen democracy and make Nepal prosperous? Our ability to thrive as a prosperous and democratic nation solely depends on that. After 50 years of independence, Pakistan is still unable to solidify its democratic structure mainly because its leaders did not bother to take care of peoples’ aspirations.

Democracy in Nepal can and should be achieved through peaceful struggle and processes without destroying public properties. The era of nations achieving their independence through armed struggles and terrorist activities has passed.

If our leaders continued with their old habits, coming generations will have to fight for democracy again in future. This is mainly because failure to deliver development benefits and control corruption shall invite February 1st again and again in some form or the other. Insurgencies will easily flourish as impoverished societies are hot beds for insurgent movements. Thus, our leaders instead of engaging themselves in tongue lashing should come up with clear vision and plan about as and what they would do differently this time. Hard earned democracy did not last long because the rent-seeking coalition between business and politics served to fuel corruption and violence in the body politic of Nepal.

Easy money earned through illegal means was used to sustain a new class of political elites who remained immune from the forces of law enforcement because of their political status and connection. Nepal as a state was not driven by a clearly articulated vision of its leadership. Democratic structures started to tremble mainly because none of the prime ministers and their junior colleagues who held office in Nepal over the last decade appeared to be driven by a sense of mission to transform the society in a particular direction. The lack of developmental vision amongst the leadership in Nepal was compounded by their weak commitment to realize the importance of such a vision. Popular disillusionment occurred mainly due to the failure of the state to deliver expected democratization of local social relations and political authority, continuing poverty and a widening gap between have and have-nots, and widespread frustration with corruption at all levels of government.

Political parties should realize there mistakes and pledge non confrontational style of politics in a new democratic Nepal. This would help promote political dialogue to build a consensus behind a development agenda. Parliament should not be abused as an arena for rhetorical exchanges rather than a vehicle for political consensus building. Politicians should make a pledge in public that they will abandon their ill practices of the past and work for peace, prosperity, and stability in Nepal. Indulging in immoral acts of burning and destroying public property that we built through the tax payers’ money over the last 15 years is mockery of our own achievement.