Stop coddling despots

Recently, during a training program for party cadres in Chitwan district, in a threat-laden statement, Prachanda assured his brainwashed cadres that the “State” after the Constituent Assembly (CA) election will come to the Maoist fold at any cost. He made it pretty clear to his cadre that if the Maoists failed to capture power through the CA poll, it would be done through a coup.

While the Maoists are tirelessly trumpeting the possibility of a "democratic coup" backed by the army like the one in Bangladesh, they have their own model --"nationalist coup" ready. Two years after the landmark victory against the despotic monarch, the Nepalis are once again nervous about the possibility of another despotic regime.

The revival of the Maoists' parallel administration across the country clearly shows how committed they are towards the forty plus agreement that they have signed with the government. While the mainstream political parties are having a hard time reaching their constituents -- Dilendra Badu's episode says it all -- the Maoists have kept both the option of bullets and ballots open.

Was it expected? Absolutely yes. The Maoists never gave up the idea of capturing the state altogether. It was political parties who thought that the moderation of the Maoists would take place after they come to power. However, what the leaders of the major political parties failed to realize is that providing political power only begets the desires of the radicals to perpetuate and aggrandize power and does not contribute towards “moderation.” Bringing the radicals to the helms of affairs has never resulted in moderation. It simply does not work. After coming to power, radicals like Hitler, Mussolini, Khomeini, Castro, Kim Jong Il, Mullah Mohammad Omar, got even more “strong headed” and rhetorical. And, yes, our own Prachanda is not getting any softer.

The only way to soften the radicals is to militarily weaken them first. Negotiation with them should happen only after their dream of capturing the state is completely aborted. Unless you abort their dreams of possible military victory over the state, they will never abide by the rules of the game.

Furthermore, when you join hands with radicals whose views are completely opposite to your's, you are bound to get betrayed. From the never-ending episode of the Maoists' betrayal, if nothing, the politicians of the mainstream political parties must have learnt one lesson -- ideological dilution never pays off. The mainstream political parties could have defeated King Gyanendra without the help of the Maoists. Despots like King Gyanendra cannot remain in power for long. Sooner or later people succeed in unseating them. It might have taken a little longer but it was certainly a doable job.

Musharaff's military regime in Pakistan would have been toppled long ago had Benazir and Nawaz Sharif joined hands with the armed radicals in Pakistan. But Benazir never tried to reach out to the radical Islamofascists. She must have known the cost associated with coddling the radicals.

For an alliance to work, it must have the involvement of like-minded parties. When you forge an alliance with a party that believes power comes from the barrel of guns rather than ballots, you run the risk of getting robbed at a gun point. This is what is precisely happening in Nepal. The Maoists are robbing off the political parties at gun point. The sheer threat of violence brings the major political parties to their knees and forces them to fulfill the Maoists' demands.

When we look back, it becomes quite evident that our politicians have once again failed to live up to the nation's expectation. The last two years were the years of wasted opportunities. We had never been so close to realizing the dreams of being a peaceful and democratic nation. Had the Maoists been committed to the peace process and the government sincere towards fulfilling the genuine demands raised by ethnic minorities, the country would have been pretty peaceful and stable by now. The nation would have taken a giant leap towards peace and democracy.

Nearly two years have passed by, but the people are yet to witness the dividends of democracy. The state has been unable to fulfill its basic duties towards citizens. Safety and security of civilians is still a major concern. Inflation has skyrocketed and smooth delivery of goods and services are far from being normal.

The April revolution of 2006 had provided a perfect platform for securing peace and democracy. Two years down the road and here we are again muddling through. What is it that brought us to this level of chaos, conflict, disunity, intrigue, and erosion of a sense of nationhood?

After the victory against King Gyanendra, what our politicians failed to understand is that, in order to establish a durable peace and stability, the violence and lawlessness that has existed thus far must give way to the security of citizens and the rule of law; social and political exclusion must give way to participatory institutions; animosity between the Maoists and the internally displaced persons (IDPs) must give way to national reconciliation and the economy that has been ravaged by the decade-long violent insurgency must be transformed into a well-functioning market economy. Reconciliation and reconstruction never took off.

While the Maoists always remained glued to their glib idea of capturing the state, the major political parties had no strategies whatsoever. They did not even bother to punish the culprits of King Gyanendra's regime. When the state fails to punish the culprits and reward honest citizens, thugs have no reason to stop thuggery.

The chances of holding CA election on April 10 are very slim. Every politician knows that in the current situation free and fair election cannot be conducted. It is just that they don't dare to cruise against the tide of populist politics and be the bearer of the unpleasant news. Instead of window-dressing, the political parties should be truthful about it.

What next? The prime minister should be tasked with forming a national unity government after consultation with the civil society organizations, religious leaders, and all political parties, even those that are outside the Seven Party Alliance (SPA). The new government should then hold CA election after fulfilling the legitimate demands of the regional parties. It is better to have legitimate election later than have forced election now. Only such practical steps can save Nepal from falling into the hands of power hungry despots like Prachanda and King Gyanendra who want to crush democratic rights of the people.

Betrayed Beyond Belief

With the suspension of the scheduled Constituent Assembly (CA) elections, political blame game is at its best. While the country is facing the worst form of chaos since its existence as a sovereign nation, the hunt for "scapegoat" is on. As usual, no politician or the political party wants to share the blame for dashing away people's desire to have CA elections.

The nation is so bitterly divided that the cadres of every political party see other parties as the culprit behind the current political fiasco forgetting its own party's role in the current mess. The NC rank and files shamelessly blame the Maoists for the suspension of the CA elections even though the current government is headed by non other than its own party president. As usual, the UML once again nodded to the Maoist demands but wanted to play safe by writing a "Note of Dissent." What an excellent way to fool Nepali citizens. Kudos to Madhav Kumar Nepal and other flip-floppers out there in the UML.

Everyone seems to blaming the Maoists for the current fiasco. Why are we surprised at the Maoists' ways and means now? Those that are now blaming the Maoists for derailing the CA elections should first educate themselves on ways that radical communists pursue to capture power. They must educate themselves on how radical communists ruled other nations in the past and what they are doing now to consolidate power in the different parts of the globe.
First, read what Mao did in China, Castro did in Cuba and what Kim Jong-il and Hugo Chavez are doing in North Korea and Venezuela before expecting the Maoists in Nepal to act responsibly and democratically. All those wishful thinkers out there will then realize that in radical communists' red book, seeking people's mandate through free and fair democratic elections is a big No No. Threat and discouragement are the two main weapons that radical communists use to diminish the hold of their political rivals in the society and capture power.
Blaming the Maoists for insincerity is nothing but foolishness. When they have never been sincere and abided by the agreement they signed, why are we upset when they pulled out of the government and forced suspension of the CA elections? It is us, who chose to overlook Maoists' insincerity and kept silent when they flouted the agreements.

So, blaming the Maoists for not being sincere is ridiculous. They were never sincere towards securing peace and consolidation of democracy to begin with. All the Maoists wanted was to enjoy the privileges of being in the parliament and the cabinet. They never ever wanted to share the blame for failures.

This has been the Maoist strategy from the very beginning. They wanted to be in the cabinet in order to use all of the resources of the nation so that they could embolden their political footings, buy political legitimacy and seek support of the international community, and familiarize their guerillas with urban settings to wage urban centered revolution. The Maoists had made clear that their ultimate goal is to establish a proletarian communist state.

Under the current circumstances, the Maoists know it very well that they can neither win elections, nor capture the power by force. So, the only way for them to remain dominant in national politics, is through subversion of the democratic process by threatening and discouraging the Seven Party Alliance. They know it very well that the SPA does not have the required guts to challenge the Maoists' fiefdom and will go any length to appease them.
So, it is not the Maoists that are to be blamed but the spine-less politicians of the major political parties that do not have guts to energize the democratic base and challenge the Maoists' fiefdom and anti-democratic behavior. It is not the Maoists that have weakened democracy (they were never for it to begin with), but the SPA that joined hands with the radical Maoists that unlike them, believe power comes from the barrel of a gun not ballots.

In a mad rush for power, what the so-called politicians of the SPA foolishly ignored is that "radical communism," which the Maoists vouch for, and the freedom and democracy that Nepali citizens long for, are two significantly different and titanic ideas, two ways of life, and two totally irreconcilable beliefs.

The April revolution of 2006 had provided an excellent platform to secure peace and stability and consolidate democracy. It had paved the way for a new generation of pragmatists, highly invigorated, responsible, talented and energetic politicians to assume leadership, which unfortunately did not happen. Democracy has stalled in Nepal because the inept, diffident and inert politicians lack vision and a clear sense of direction. Even when the poor rise up against the despotic Monarch; granting opportunistic politicians a chance to make a difference, they squander it.

Trapped by the war lords such as Jay Krishna Goit and Narendra Paswan and betrayed the politicians of the SPA and the radical Maoists, Nepalis, here we are again at another critical juncture. We have had almost two years of opportunity to secure peace and consolidate democracy but the results are laughable: renewed autocracy, political violence, lawlessness and warlordism, and the usual blame games. Sadly, those with access and power have to a large extent enriched themselves and bled the nation out of its last vestiges of survival.
Seeing politicians undermine their constituents, it becomes evident that, politics means a money-making game in an impoverished Nepal. Serving the nation with politics proves to be a sham and pretension. All acts of political disloyalty and political betrayal have just one motivation: Honest illusions of genuine betrayal.

The tragedy is that most national political pugilists and players tend to pose themselves as the chosen savior of democracy and people's freedom. Whatever they do, no matter how myopically selfish, they see it as a vision of messianic responsibility. What they sell as democratic struggle can more accurately be described as perpetuation of feudal rule within an encompassing patron-client system.

In the present degenerative political culture, it will be extremely difficult, if not impossible, for someone with vision and leadership potential to emerge and navigate the nation towards peace, stability, and prosperity.

However, the only way to get out of this mess is through another revolution. A new revolution is needed that will wipe out radical elements that are shrewdly trying to trap freedom loving Nepali citizens into the "yoke of communism" along with those pseudo-democrats out there that act more like Maoist operatives than people's representatives.

Prachanda and his henchmen will come to their sense only when people will rise and pull the carpet beneath their feet like they did to King Gyanendra. When King Gyanendra with hundred thousand strong trained professional forces could be brought to his senses, bringing Prachanda to his senses is not an unachievable act. It is certainly doable.

As a matter of fact, that is the only viable option left to bring these radicals to their senses. Even if some of us were to die, it is better to be liberated by death than trapped by radicals. If trapped, we would be forced to witness painful death of life, liberty and prosperity like helpless citizens of Cuba, North Korean and Venezuela are doing now.

Divided nation & dwindling hope

Nepal has been turned into a killing field. Bomb blasts in Kathmandu and mayhem in Kapilvastu indicate two things: (1) Seven Party Alliance's (SPA) government is confined to the campus of Singha Durbar (2) ethnic tension that had been brewing for a while has reached each and every household in Nepal. Agree or not-depends upon your political inclination and the heaviness of political baggage you carry but with the mayhem in Kapilvastu, an all out ethnic war has begun in Nepal.

While the Maoist and Limbuan and Khambuan groups have gradually reduced the existence of the government presence in the hills, tarai has been under the control of agenda-less war lords like Jay Krishna Goit, Narendra Paswan, the goons of Madhesi Tigers and Cobra to name a few. Eventually, the seed of ethnic division sown by the Maoists have sucked out social and ethnic harmony and pushed the nation towards a full blown ethnic conflict. It is a classic example of short sighted politics and a convoluted means adopted by the politicians to grab power in poor countries with weak institutional structures.

Those who lost the lives in Kapilvastu were no different from the rest of us that are alive and lucky to be breathing. Like us, they too had dreams for themselves, their families, and their nation that has failed them. Needless to say, the only difference between those who are alive now and whose life was cut short is that, the former lot got simply lucky. The government failed to act swiftly and left them to die at the hands of deviants with ethnic agendas. The loss was completely avertable.

Tarai is so divided and filled with ethnic hatred that Kapilvastu sort of mayhem can occur anywhere, and anytime. In a country where the home minister wakes up and visits the carnage site after nearly three dozens are dead, the chance of anyone becoming a victim of mindless acts of ethnic animosity and violence is very high. With the rise in ethnic hatred-related slaughters and organized crime, the government's presence outside the walls of ministries has been reduced to rubbles. Chances of an ordinary citizen witnessing natural death have diminished significantly. As it has been proved that the government is unable to protect life and liberty of ordinary citizens, it is one's sheer luck that will determine the longevity and whether or not s/he will witness a natural death.

While the nation is engulfed in a bloody ethnic conflict, Maoists have further complicated the prospect of peace and stability by pulling out of the government. It might have come as a surprise to ordinary citizens, but for those that have been following the Maoists' modus operandi, they knew, it would happen. It was just a matter of time. They knew it that the Maoists would not beg for votes when they can subvert the democratic process and get their demands fulfilled through sheer intimidation and threat of violence. The Maoists know it very well that, turning Nepal into a 21 century's Vietnam is not possible under the democratic set up. So, expecting the Maoists to act responsibly and democratically is nothing but naïve's optimism.

With their dwindling popularity, the Maoists will come up with another set of demands even if the current 22-point demand is fulfilled. Unless the Maoists are convinced that they can win elections, they will not let elections to take place. So, forget about them participating in democratic elections anytime soon.

The reason why the ongoing peace process will fail is because it is totally dependent upon Maoists' mercy. And, as it has become evident that, the Maoists will not mend their ways, never ending "appeasement" of the Maoists will not produce anything but more violence and bloodshed. So long as the political parties stick with the notion that, "appeasement" of the Maoists is the only way to secure peace, peace will always remain a mirage.

Like before, SPA is again on the verge of succumbing to Maoist demands. In order to please the Maoists, the political parties are trying to work out a deal that will subvert democratic process. Declaring the country republic through parliament is nothing but undermining of people's rights to carve their future and subversion of a democratic process. It is not only anti-democratic but also morally repugnant.

Out of many reasons why the country is in such a mess is that, the April revolution failed to produce new set of leaders. The same old lot that failed to deliver are once again in the forefront of national politics. If we look at the revolutions that occurred during the last century, every successful revolution gave birth to new set of leaders, who in turn navigated the nation and brought a new dawn. Had the last revolution given birth to half a dozen of the likes of Gagan Thapa, who can challenge the Maoist fiefdom and at the same time energize the democratic base, the country would definitely not be in such a mess.

The politicians should learn a lesson from Prashant Tamang, the winner of Indian Idol III. While the Nepali politicians are trying to reap political mileage by planting the seed of ethnic hatred and dividing the nation along the castes, Prashant made all of us proud becoming a "uniter." He successfully united millions of Nepalis irrespective of caste and ethnicity in South Asia and abroad. He has proved that unity in diversity is achievable.

Furthermore, by wearing a traditional Nepali cap after wining the Indian Idol -- from which our politicians and general public shy away -- he has proved that success and tradition can go hand-in-hand. He has proved that you can be traditional and still achieve big things in life.

In Nepal, we need a "uniter" like Prashant Tamang, not a "divider" like Prachanda, Goit, and Paswan that have divided the nation along the ethnicity and castes and made it worse than ever before.

However, will it end? In the long run, if history is a guide, the institutional damage that the likes of Prachanda, Goit, and Paswan are wreaking will make Nepal even more unstable and impoverished.

We need a leader who is proud to be Nepali like Prashant Tamang is, and values Nepali traditions. So long as we have leaders that, in the name of modernity and progression, prefer Kurtha Pajamas and suit over traditional Nepali dress, and do not hesitate to become a poodle of foreign powers, our dreams for peace and prosperity will remain deferred. We need leaders like Prashant, who can remain resolute when humiliated, determined and focused even when slandered, and traditional even when successful. We might need another revolution for such a leader to be born, but it is worth it.

Democracy in disarray

By Dr. Hari Bansha Dulal & Stefano Foa

While India marks two and a half years since the orderly transfer of power from BJP to a Congress-led alliance, elsewhere in the subcontinent democracy is in disarray. In Pakistan, President Pervez Musharraf is resorting to reckless political adventurism to save his quasi-dictatorial regime, and, according to newspaper reports, which began to surface in August, making tacit power-sharing deals with former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto. In Bangladesh, the military retains indefinite leave to supervise the political process, following years of insurmountable polarization between the centre-right Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and the centre-left Awami League (AWL). Meanwhile in Nepal, constituent assembly elections, scheduled for late November, are now threatened by a 22-point list of demands from the Maoists and criminal activities of groups such as Janatantrik Terai Mukti Morcha -Jwala Singh and Goit factions and Madhesi Mukti Tigers (MMT). Pahadis in the Tarai are repeatedly intimidated, extorted, and are pushed to a position whereby they have no options but to leave the Tarai.

So how has India managed to maintain the steady plod toward democratic consolidation, while regional neighbors have stumbled into anarchy and arbitrary rule? While a number of factors differentiate India from nearby countries, a key indicator of the health of democracy in India today is the emergence of a new civic culture, with a new wave of participation in voluntary associations, public debate, and social activism. Indeed, commentators such as Yogendra Yadav, co-director of the Programme for Comparative Democracy in New Delhi, have gone as far as to describe this as a 'second democratic upsurge'. Electoral participation in India, for example, now hovers at around 60 per cent, from only 45.7 per cent during the first elections in 1952. Second, participation in other forms of civic activism has also remained robust, with studies such as the World Values Surveys, conducted in the region since 1990, showing a consistent majority of Indians affirming their willingness to sign a petition or attend a peaceful demonstration for an issue about which they hold an opinion. Third, citizens in India are increasingly attuned to public affairs, as evinced from the fact that the number of radios per capita in India is roughly double the level in Bangladesh, Pakistan, or Nepal. Per capita newspaper circulation, meanwhile, stands at three times the rate of Sri Lanka - a country with a substantially higher literacy rate. Fourth, attitudes to democracy are also more favorable in India. According to a 2004 poll conducted by Centre for the Study of Developing Societies, a majority of Indians express satisfaction with the 'way democracy works', compared to less than a third of Nepalis or Pakistanis. Indians also attach far greater loyalty to their democratic institutions, with less than a third expressing a preference for 'a strong leader who does not have to bother with parliament or elections', in contrast to a majority of Sri Lankans, Bangladeshis, and Nepalis.

How has this broader, more participatory form of political life emerged from the wreckage of the Congress system? Academics such as Ashutosh Varshney, of the University of Michigan, attribute the reworking of India's civic fabric to the rise of caste-based politics among the 76.6 per cent of India's population estimated by the Mandal Commission to be members of the scheduled castes, tribes, and other backward classes. The first upshot of this new political development, for example, is that it has prevented religion from becoming the primary basis of electoral mobilization, with the popular appeal of the BJP restricted to predominantly middle-class groups from the North, who share their distaste for caste empowerment. India has therefore avoided the worst forms of the 'resacralization' of the public sphere that have occurred in neighboring states, where state religions have been declared in Pakistan in 1973, Bangladesh in 1988, and is still being debated in Sri Lanka. Due to its inability to cut across the caste divide, the Bharatiya Janta Party (BJP) has reached a ceiling at 20-25 per cent of the popular vote, which prevents it from achieving a parliamentary majority, and thereby replicating the bygone hegemony of the Indian National Congress. Meanwhile, by forcing Congress into a social coalition with the caste parties, Indian politics has been realigned along cross-cutting socioeconomic issues, rather than a strictly secular-religious dichotomy.

Avoiding the breakdown of secularism that has swept across South Asia in recent decades, India has averted the sectarian disorder of Bangladesh, the renewed insurgency of Sri Lanka, or putatively secular military interference, as in Pakistan. Incidents such as the 1984 Golden Temple invasion, or the Gujarat Violence of 2002 may have been destabilizing, but are less likely to funnel up into the political process once religion has become only one dimension of political competition, alongside caste and class.

The emergence of caste politics also offers a rationale for understanding why India's civic life has managed to flourish despite widespread poverty, illiteracy, and malnutrition. For as caste movements began to splinter away from Congress juggernaut, they have appealed to a new strata of economically mobile individuals among the scheduled castes and Other Backward Castes (OBCs), who in turn have benefited from stricter quota policies. The upward movement by members of these hitherto marginalized groups has generated a greater general sense of social mobility, and in turn the citizen interest in politics, electoral participation, and strengthened legitimacy of the political system. As economist Deepak Nayar remarks, in India those "who are excluded by the economics of markets are included by the politics of democracy". As a result, contemporary India is characterized by the curiosity of being one of the few democracies in which the poor vote in larger proportions than the rich, the less educated more than graduates, and the villages more than the cities.

Can India's democratic consolidation have lessons for other South Asian countries? Perhaps. The first would be that once political mobilization takes place along vertical lines - that is, between the elites and masses of one religion or ethnicity and against those of another - the potential for organized violence and civic disruption are greatly amplified. Measures to inhibit sectarian competition, such as the decision last year by the Nepali Parliament to rescind Hinduism as the country's state religion, are necessary steps in this direction. The second lesson would be that caste politics need not be a disruptive force in South Asian politics: a distinction must be made between the mobilization of the lower castes into political life (whose unsettling manifestations may include participation of OBCs or Dalits in anti-Muslim violence), and the emergence of caste-based politics and ideology, which may instead moderate the tendency of these groups toward sectarian identities. Third, and perhaps most importantly, India's remarkably civic transformation shows that it is possible for a pro-democratic, civic culture to develop in South Asia before the arrival of a broad urban middle class - so long as groups are mobilized into politics for the sake of issues of distribution and empowerment, rather than identity or culture. This finding has consequences well beyond the South Asia region, and can likewise inform political developments in fledgling new democracies such as South Africa, Kenya or Peru, where democratic competition also revolves around the struggle by socially excluded groups for representation and recognition.

After sixty years of democratic practice, and twenty years of contentious affirmative action policies, Indian democracy has survived in the face of guerrilla insurgencies, religious riots, and simmering international tensions, and in the process developed a deeper civic culture. The strangely enduring quality of India's political institutions has been summarized by leading historian Ramachandra Guha, who remarks that India's founding fathers 'planted a sapling of democracy that has grown into a tree', such that while 'later people who came after them can disturb the tree, can lop of a branch here and there' nonetheless 'the tree stays intact.' In other South Asian countries, on the other hand, this same seedling of democracy has been repeatedly uprooted by the military, trampled down by rioters, or scorched by the flames of guerrilla insurgency. Yet the Indian example shows that the sap can grow tall, even if planted in the soils of poverty and illiteracy, so long as it is hedged in by policies that promote the alignment of political competition around the distribution of goods, rather than priority of gods.

When clubs become trumps

By Dr Hari Bansha Dulal & Stefano Foa

Simmering ethnic dissent, the erratic and disruptive activities of Youth Communist League, and increasing uncertainty about the constituent assembly elections, are raising justified fears for the future of Nepal. Should November elections be postponed again, both the current government and the interim parliament will face a dangerous legitimacy crisis. The coalition may be able to muddle through for a while. After that, nothing should be excluded.

One scenario that is already being discussed is a resumption of the Maoist insurgency, led by dissident factions in the party leadership. The mandate of the 2006 April revolution was to establish peace through elections, by encouraging warring parties to lay down their arms, replace the exchange of bullets for ballots, and join their forces under a unified military command. Once the Maoist cadres realize the vote is cancelled for the second time, their dreams of joining the Nepali Army will be shattered. Several of their factions are ready to resume the fight.

A further possibility is that of direct military stewardship over the political process. Until now, the Nepali military has largely limited itself to its 'praetorian' role - that is, as protector of the monarch - but now the king is a mere ceremonial accessory. This makes the army itself the government of last resort. In this respect Nepal could very easily follow the example of modern Pakistan, Bangladesh and Thailand, where sporadic military guardianship has become the norm, and their experience suggests that once the army is politically engaged, it tends to retain an indefinite presence.

So under what circumstances do military interventions take place, and is Nepal a candidate?

Samuel Huntington, the Harvard political scientist, has distinguished between three types of military coup. The first is the 'breakthrough coup', when a revolutionary army displaces a traditional monarchy. This occurred in a number of decolonized countries during the 1950s, such as Egypt or Libya, but has since been comparatively rare.

The second kind is the 'veto coup', when the military takes power from a popular, democratically elected government. This has frequently been the case in Latin America - the most recent attempt being the failed putsch against Chavez in 2002 - but is less common in regions which lack a tradition of class politics, and unknown in South Asia.

Finally, there is the 'guardian coup', whereby the military steps in with the goal of restoring public order, reducing corruption, or fighting insurgents. This is by far the most common form of military intervention, and that familiar to the Indian subcontinent. And it is the prospect that faces Nepal, if the current transition process fails.

A number of factors expose Nepal to this possibility. First, whereas in veto coups the military steps in because citizens are 'excessively' involved in politics, guardian coups are preceded by civilian disillusionment and withdrawal from political life. In Pakistan, for example, the inter-party feuding, corruption, economic stagnation, and insecurity of Bhutto and Sharif years had already led to widespread political disengagement once Musharraf assumed power in 1999.

In 2001, according to data collected by the World Values Surveys, a global study of social attitudes and behavior, only 13 percent of Pakistanis said they had or would be willing to take part in a demonstration for a cause they believed in, compared to 52 percent of Indians.

In Bangladesh, the 'musical chair' politics of Begum Khaleda Zia and Sheikh Hasina Wajed have led to a similar sense of political disengagement, and most felt only weary fatigue when emergency law was declared earlier this year. After seventeen years of turmoil, the Nepalis too, are experiencing transition fatigue.

According to a survey conducted by the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies, almost two-thirds of Nepalis said they would most prefer a strong leader who did not have to bother with parliament or elections. The civic foundations for democratic transition have worn dangerously thin.

Second, guardian coups are far more likely when ethnic fragmentation and violence have made consensus impossible between electoral blocs, and the parties they support.

In both Pakistan and Bangladesh, inter-group relations deteriorated steadily in the period preceding military intervention, as elected politicians swam the tide of ethnic and religious factionalism. As evidence of this steady drift, in Bangladesh, the proportion of those polled would refuse to have neighbors 'of another race' grew from 17 percent in 1996 to 28 percent in 2002, while the proportion refusing to have those 'of another religion' jumped from 13 to 34 percent.

Sectarian violence was one of the main factors that the Bangladeshi military used to justify their recent takeover. Alas, Nepal may be on much the same trajectory. 18 percent of Nepalis now claim they would not accept a neighbor of another race, and a fifth would refuse a neighbor of another religion, according to data collected recently on behalf of Civicus, the international civil society network.

This combination of group-mobilized violence and civic withdrawal justify and make possible the guardian coup. Pakistan and Bangladesh are cases in point, and Nepal is indeed at risk of joining them. The long-term consequences of this would be grave. It is unlikely the military would extract itself from politics for a generation or more.

So what is to be done to avoid this outcome?

First, our representatives must learn to hang together, if they are not to hang separately. In South Asia politicians frequently talk about the need for democracy when they are out of power, yet once back in office 'play to the gallery' by indulging in partisan politics, thereby neglecting the process of consensus building.

As the Nepalis have seen only too clearly, this not only deepens social cleavages, but it erodes the legitimacy of the democratic process. India managed to avoid this fate by achieving democratic consolidation under a single dominant party, but Bangladesh, Pakistan and Nepal have now lost that possibility. So our parties must learn to govern together, if they are to govern at all.

Second, the rule of law must be restored. Nobody wishes to be governed militarily, but they do wish to be governed. The most basic function of the state is the protection of life and land, and when civilian leaders cannot ensure due process, the army becomes the de facto government of last resort.

Third, civilian power must be wielded legitimately. Above all, that means having free and fair elections, capable of producing viable governing coalitions. For that to occur in Nepal, the November elections for the constituent assembly must take place, and they must produce credible results. Should these elections be cancelled, or the polls become marred by violence and intimidation, then the transition risks derailing and no further possibility can be ruled out.

That includes some form of military intervention. For as English philosopher Thomas Hobbes wrote many centuries ago, in the game of politics, when nothing else is turned up, clubs are trumps.

Social capital, Law and Democracy

By Dr Hari Bansha Dulal and Stefano Foa

Violence breeds violence. In Nepal, the seeds of violence were sown in February 1996 when CPN (Maoist) carried out simultaneous raids on government offices, police posts, and private businesses. Since then, such violent behavior has become ingrained in the Nepali society. What was started by the Maoist insurgents has now sprouted across several groups, some with separatist agendas, and others simply taking advantage of the breakdown in the rule of law to make a fast buck.

Like leaders in many developing countries, the Nepali political elite has spent this time selling dreams of imminent prosperity to a largely illiterate Nepali populace, while ignoring the mounting security dilemma.

While lawlessness continues, politicians talk as if a peaceful democratic transition can be taken for granted. But it cannot. The fact is that most countries fail during their first attempt to establish democracy. This is just as true in Europe - where fledgling democracies collapsed in France, Italy, Germany and Spain - as it has been, since the 1950s, in wave after wave of decolonized nations in Africa and the Middle East. The few developing nations, such as India or Botswana, that have maintained some degree of democratic continuity from the start, are the exceptions and not the rule.

Why do some regimes undergo successful transition, while others collapse into anarchy and despotism - and what lessons can this yield for Nepal?

During periods of democratic transition, politicians tend to overstate their positive impact in the short-term, while underestimating or ignoring the longer-term negative consequences that their actions - or inactions - can have.

First among these is the effect that the failure to combat lawlessness and instability has in undermining a country's stock of 'social' capital - that is, the relations of inter-group solidarity and cohesion which allow negotiation, compromise, and agreement between opposing factions. In Nepal, the consequence of the failure to stem the vortex of violence and lawlessness is that the country is fragmenting into an archipelago of competing power factions, and unless these centrifugal forces are contained, the country will drift further and further from a social compact.
Second, violence and insecurity also erode other forms of social capital which are essential for making democracy work. Chief among these is the maintenance of a healthy civil society, in the form of the newspapers, professional associations, women's groups, and community forums. Such associations are essential in enabling citizens are able to formulate their interests, debate policy, and place pressure on local representatives to deliver better services and more accountable governance.

Robert Putnam's classic 1993 study on civic involvement in Italy showed that such networks are critical in ensuring effective local governance and economic development, and more recently, further studies by Ronald Inglehart and Christian Welzel have confirmed this view. Across the world, they find that countries which in the early 1990s began their democratization process with a civic culture of independence and citizen activism have had a greater success in maintaining effective and accountable institutions.

On the other hand, where civil society has been passive or cowed, the potential for regression toward despotic and unaccountable rule is strong. In Nepal, widespread violence and intimidation are producing exactly this result, as citizens retreat behind closed doors and the possibility of a public space is being eroded.

Unfortunately, the Maoists do not want a healthy civil society, as they know that independent groups based upon horizontal association would be a threat to the kind of authoritarian regime they envisage. Were farmers, minorities, tradesmen, and professionals able independently to articulate their interests and engage through the democratic process, the chances of garnering support for a universal proletarian state would become slim.

Yet, the longer the lawlessness persists, the more difficult will it become to restore a culture of fairness and respect for the law. Not long ago, Nepal was known as a peaceful land, widely touted as Switzerland of Asia. Today, this no longer rings true. According to data from the World Health Organization, by 2002 the homicide rate in Nepal had already reached 15 per 100,000 - twice the rate in Bangladesh, three times the rate in India, and five times that of China. If deaths from conflict were also included, the figure would rise to almost 20 per 100,000. This not only makes Nepal among the most violent societies in Asia, but among the most dangerous in the entire world.

Were order restored now, the country could return somewhat to the safety and security of bygone years, but the longer the anarchy continues, the more difficult will such a recovery become. An alarming precedent in this regard has already been set by Cambodia, a country whose social fabric has since the 1970s been torn asunder by insurgency and political stagnation. Their conflict has left families estranged, villages uprooted, and orphans on the streets. In Cambodia today, the Maoists may be gone and a veneer of political stability may have been restored. Yet violence and criminality have become engrained within the culture. Weapons and explosives are widely available, and at 17 per 100,000 this once peaceful land has among the highest homicide rates in Asia.

Nepal is a country once rich in bonds of trust, solidarity, and mutual support. These are now being eroded. If the land is to achieve both development and democracy, it cannot wait for solutions to arrive. Just like economic capital, 'social capital' is a resource that takes centuries to accumulate, but only a decade to destroy. The loss can be stopped now, but critical toward doing so is the restoration of the rule of law. Once protection is provided to all groups in society, demands for separatism will wane. Once violations of life and liberty are reprimanded, the culture of impunity will disappear. Once citizens are able to associate freely and without fear of intimidation, the prospect of a healthy civic life will be restored. But action must be taken now. The longer the social fabric is worn away, the more difficult will it be to sew together again.

Peace or Appease Process?

One year has passed since the April revolution, but the country is going nowhere. Some might like to call the ongoing process a “peace process” but there is hardly any peace being restored through the continuous process; it would not be an exaggeration to call the ongoing process an appease-process. The Maoists have skillfully reduced the entire peace process into an appease-process whereby the mainstream political parties have been somehow convinced by the Maoists that the peace in Nepal is contingent upon the appeasement of the Maoists and the government's ability to appall and antagonize other forces that have dared to challenge the Maoists' fiefdom, in blunt words, the Maoists' existence in the terai.

Actually, the chance to establish peace was strangled the very day the mainstream political parties bought the idea that to appease the Maoists was the only way to achieve peace. One of the many reasons why the so-called ongoing peace process is failing is that the Maoists have never taken the mainstream political parties seriously and treated them as an equal partner. It's not the Maoists' fault but the fault of the politicians of the mainstream political parties, because they are the ones that are unable to portray themselves as an equal partner. The negotiations that took place prior to the Maoist joining the government were hardly negotiations. It was a complete submission by the mainstream political parties. They have nodded in agreement to everything that the Maoists have asked for so far. When you are submissive to such an extent, there is no need to take you seriously. So, the mainstream political parties should not be grumbling now about the Maoists' unruly conducts; it is they who have been providing the Maoists with a free ride on their backs.

Whether you agree or not, it depends on your political affiliation and biases. If you put down the ideological baggage and biases you carry and think as a neutral citizen, you will agree that the nation is undergoing a deep and continuous crisis. Despite all the efforts of the Eight Party Alliance (EPA) to defend the accomplishments of the past year, there is a colossal failure of EPA's effectiveness to navigate the nation and to provide solutions for economic, social, and political problems. There are no practical dividends of democracy in sight. The general public does not have the will to wait indefinitely, for the practical changes to occur; they will eventually get fed up with their ruling elites, who had promised heaven but delivered dust so far. What will happen after that is for the people to decide and the politicians to speculate.

It is one thing to remain optimistic but it is foolish to believe that the product is going to be beautiful even if the process is flawed. Just as the morning shows the day, the process shows the product. If the lawlessness, chaos, and lack of political accountability could translate into peace and meaningful democracy, most of the African nations that are now engulfed in civil war-like situations would have been thriving democracy long ago.

If you are among those who get pleasure from comparing post-revolution French or any other Western society to that of today's Nepali society, and think like France, we too are going to become a viable democracy sooner or the later, you are comparing apple to oranges. Today's Nepal is not even remotely comparable to the then French society. The political culture, societal norms, and the desire and ability to translate unstable and bitterly divided society into a meaningful democracy among the then French politicians and today's Nepali politicians is beyond comparison. In addition, the level of political accountability was way higher even then, in France, than what it is in today's Nepal. So this false solace and wishful thinking is not going to get us anywhere.

Let's get real for once. Nepal today does not need to define democracy, since the basics of democracy have been there for the good part of the last two decades. Nepalis first need peace and stability (which is not going to come through the mere appeasement of the Maoist), a safe environment to send children to schools so that they may grow up to change the face of the Nation, and the time to grow food. A free and fearless environment to progress and develop.
The current home minister, who has miserably failed to maintain law and order situation is among many that are not further pushing the nation to the edge. Sitaula, who is known for doing the Maoists' dirty laundry, is all set to execute Prachanda's new game plan now: use the army against the rebelling Madhesis in the Terai. The latest two weeks' deadline for the talks and Sitaula's threat of stringent action is nothing but a preparatory step towards the future operation of the security forces, primarily against the agitating Madhesi Janadhikar Forum (MJF), which is the main competitor of the CPN (Maoist) in the terai.

Sitaula for one is for sure digging the grave for Nepali Congress (NC) and dashing away the dreams of Nepali citizens. He is in the advent of annihilating those very people that helped NC remain in power during the post 1990 democratic era. While United Marxist Leninist (UML) maintained strong hold in the remote hills of Nepal, it was the terai that gave NC the seats it needed to remain at the helm of state affairs. Strangely, now, the NC is silent when its home minister Sitaula is all set to deploy the security forces at the Maoists' wink. What an example of gratitude the NC is exhibiting!

Sitaula might have been convinced by the Maoists that the ongoing rebellion in terai is a law and order situation. The truth that the Maoists do not want to acknowledge is that the ongoing rebellion in the terai is the result of the apathy of the elite in Kathmandu, and their failure to acknowledge the need of inclusion of the Madhesis into the process of building the nation. Leave alone the need of inclusion, for the most part, the elites in Kathmandu have chosen to ignore the existence of the Madhesis and silently questioned their nationalism. Thus, the ongoing rebellion is the result of pent-up frustration that has been brewing for a while. This is definitely not a law and order problem.

Sitaula is all set to dig a grave for himself and for the NC too. Stop him. The idea of using security forces against unarmed Madhesis will prove a disaster for the nation and suicidal for the NC. The retaliation in kind, and the mass voting against NC in the terai, is inevitable if the security forces are used against the Madhesi people that have suffered a lot, and for too long. The killing of one Madhesi in Lahan brought down the government to its knees a couple of months ago and forced the Eight Party Alliance (EPA) to amend the constitution. Think about what might happen if the security forces in its attempt to please Sitaula indulge in indiscriminate killings of Madhesis in the terai? The Madhesis will be forced to see fellow countrymen that are pahadis as insensitive and vindictive. And what might follow after that is simply unthinkable, but probable.

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.

Nation on the brink

While the Eight Party Alliance's (EPA) government is trying hard to maintain its composure and portray things as normal, the situation in the country is obviously far from being normal. It has been more than a year since the despotic regime of King Gyanendra crumbled, but with each passing day the future of this largely hungry nation appears bleaker than ever.

People have started asking: What have we, as citizens, achieved since the fall of King Gyanendra's despotic regime?

The nation's democracy is becoming a casualty in the "crossfire" of partisanship. Peace, which the Nepali people longed for so dearly, appears no-where in sight. The outrages against the defenseless populations: the senseless robbing and murder continue unabated. Incidents of marauding raids are increasing at an unprecedented rate.

Our combined desire to have Constituent Assembly (CA) elections is in limbo due to the intra and inter-party power struggle amongst the political parties representing the EPA. Because of inability of the EPA government to secure peace, hold CA elections on time, and bring other positive changes that are long over due, people have started referring the past one year as a "lost year."

The Maoist leaders that once ran for life have become parliamentarians and ministers and are enjoying their heyday. While the Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) are forced to live under sub-human conditions away from their home, the Maoists that chased them away from their homes are riding imported cars — be it state owned or forcibly seized from private citizens.

The NC and UML stalwarts seem to have forgotten the promises made to ordinary Nepalis during the April uprising and are once again busy enjoying their field day in the corridor of Singha Durbar.

The Youth Communist League's (YCL) mayhem continues unchecked in the capital and elsewhere in the country. The two rival factions-the Maoists and the Madhesi People's Rights Forum — are locked in a deadly duel for power in terai. The society that once exemplified harmony is now inching towards anarchy.

To some extent, the ongoing political violence is influenced by opportunities arising from state's weakness to ensure inclusion of ethnic communities and control political nudity of the Maoists.

The government offices in terai have been shut down for months now. The Pahadis have started leaving terai, fearing their lives. The government's power and the administrative structures vital to securing the law and order are shrinking.

Clearly, the political order is being founded on and sustained by violence. In the present day Nepal, violence, not public virtue, seems to be the basis of authority. The ordinary citizens have started suspecting the ability of the government to secure peace, and the Maoist commitment towards democracy.

Unfortunately, they are forced to keep their heads down in the face of the guns that the Maoists have covertly stored and the absence of viable options.

How do these symptoms of a dying political and social order play out? The signs of morbidity are very much evident in the present political, economic, and social life. With the ongoing decay of political and social order, politics is no longer the instrument through which contending interests are conciliated in a structured framework. Investors are shying away and moving towards greener and safer pastures and people have started suspecting those that do not belong to their own ethnic community.

The only things that will be born of this condition is a regime of rapine, despotism, poverty, and powerlessness. The current situation, if not corrected, would lead to an accelerating loss of state sovereignty, concomitant decay of state institutions, and worsen communal violence that is already reshaping social relations.

Furthermore, it will slow down the democratization process, which is essential for pulling Nepal out of poverty and placing it more firmly on the path of stability and sustainable development. It is necessary to stop political violence and lawlessness, because it impedes the necessary economic development. It does so by destroying human lives, economic assets, and through penalizing the accumulation of capital and wealth.

Every society that witnesses political upheaval confronts political violence and lawlessness for a while, but if not controlled, it can spread faster than wild fire and destabilize the essential democratic foundations in long term. Thus, political violence and lawlessness syndrome should be controlled effectively, because if allowed to persist, they could destroy people's right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.

Organized criminal groups, having nexus with the corrupt officials and politicians, will start mushrooming. Organized crimes as a result of such nexus will be extremely hard to control. A country, if infested by the twin problems or crime and underdevelopment, would have little prospects of developing into a stable and prosperous democracy.

A country like Nepal which has weak institutions is an idle breeding ground for an organized crime and corruption. Crime and corruption thrive best in unstable situations, such as the one Nepal is facing. Thus, before organized crime syndicates and warlords root into our society, the current EPA government should contain political violence and lawlessness.

Nepal is already confronted with high incidence of poverty and backwardness, and therefore, it cannot afford to get locked in a double bind of political violence and poverty. There are no easy ways out of this vicious circle. Thus, political leaders should not commit the same mistakes that they committed during the 1990s. This time around, they should do it and do it right. The Nepalis, who fought hard for democracy, do not deserve anarchy, poverty, and powerlessness.

Establishing a state's authority both in and out of the capital is an essential condition for any political order, including democracy. Building a decentralized system, through devolution of power, may ultimately be the best deterrent against future guerrilla resurgence and sudden outburst of political violence. A well functioning democracy is in everyone's best interest. Hence, the EPA government should work towards strengthening the capacity of the state in traditionally "stateless" areas in order to rein in violence and create space for an unbiased civil society to take root. It is crucial for the consolidation of peace, stability, and democracy in Nepal.

Honest Illusion and Dishonest Betrayal

Recently, the Maoist cadres called for a transport strike in the Hetauda, Kalaiya and Nijgadh areas to affect the mass meeting organized by Nepali Congress in Birgunj. While the toprung Maoist leaders and other leftleaning politicians demand an immediatedeclaration of a republic and threaten taking to the streets if not done so, the second man in the present cabinet, Ram Chandra Poudel, gets “booed” and showered with filthy materials. A seniorjournalist, Kanak Mani Dixit, who led the April uprising from the front narrowly escaped from getting roughed up. Are these isolated incidents or is there a pattern that needs to be analyzedand understood?

Who are these people that don't think even for a second before attacking people that have spent their entire life fighting for democracy and the freedom of the Nepali citizens? Are these people average Nepali citizens that are working hard to make bothends meet, or are they brainwashed, radical leftists that are shrewdly being used against the people that do not share their radical leftist ideology? Is itan outburst of pent-up frustrations or a calculated move to silence the democratic forces by the radical left?

Nepal as a nation is passing through a tumultuous time of both honest illusion and dishonest betrayal.The Maoist radicals, who posed themselves as supporters of democracy and lured democratic forces to team up against the despotic monarch, are nowcovertly operating to silence democratic voices. Are we becoming the prisoners of our own mistakes (teaming up with the Maoists)?

Looking back, it begs for a question: Was it a good idea on part of democratic forces in Nepal to team up with the Maoists who are drastically different in thoughts, ideology, and aspirations, to overthrow the ruleof an utterly unpopular monarch with no popular backing? Was it a good idea to ignore that “radical communism,” which the Maoists vouch for, and thefreedom and democracy that Nepali citizens long for, were two significantly different and titanic ideas, two ways of life, and two totally irreconcilablebeliefs? Is it a case of “marry in haste and repent in leisure”?

In the aftermath of the derailment of the Constituent Assembly (CA) elections, the leftist political parties, in an effort to close in on social and liberal democrats, are forging an alliance, which according to them is needed stepto declare the state a republic. UML's general secretary, whose desperateness to become the Prime Minister has been evident for a long time, now wants to fulfill his long cherished dream by bringing all political shops run by the leftists under a single umbrella. Nepal's dubious character and hidden motives became clear when he said that there was now no utility of opening up small shops in the name of communist parties. If all the communist parties areunited, we can easily defeat the rightists, he said during the event organized by the Maoists to mark the anniversary of Lenin's birth coinciding with the57th anniversary of the establishment of Communist Party of Nepal (CPN), on April 22. His statement has made it crystal clear that the UML's previoustie-ups with the social and liberal democrats in Nepal were a mere compulsion and political compromise in the absence of the ability of the political left to defeat social and liberal democrats rather than a logical step tostrengthen democracy in Nepal.

Maoist leader Mohan Baidya, speaking at a press meet in Charikot, Dolakha, without mincing a word madeit ample clear that the Communist Party of Nepal-(Maoist) and CPN-UML had reached an accord to put forward a commitment paper and declare Nepal arepublic even if Nepali Congress was not ready. Furthermore, he exhibited a classic example of what is called dual character of the leftists by putting all the blame on the prime minister for not being able to conduct CA elections. Isn't the Maoists' insincerity towards the peace agreements to some extent responsible for the delay in CA elections?The Maoists want to enjoy all the privileges of being in the parliament and the Cabinet, but do not want to share the blame for failures. What a classic example of hypocrisy and double standard?

However, it is not surprising to see the Maoists not sharing the blames for failures. This has been the strategy of the Maoists from the very beginning.The Maoists wanted to be in the cabinet in order to use all of the resources of the nation so that they could embolden their political footings and buy political legitimacy and support of the international community. The need to paint centrist political forces as a “good for nothing” group by blaming them for not being able to conduct CA elections is their strategic ploy to achieve their longterm goal, the establishment of a proletariancommunist state. The leftists know very well that without downgrading and discrediting democratic forces in Nepal, the virtues of communism cannot be spoon-fed to the innocent and largely illiterate Nepali populace.But the sad part of the story is, while the political left is all set to forge an alliance and bring all leftist shops under a single umbrella and trap freedom-loving Nepali citizens under the "yoke of communism," the democratic forces in Nepal seem to be clueless about the strategies to secure its political space and freedom of Nepali people in modern day Nepal. Is it a case of tacticalblunder or an act of thoughtless minds?

If the “red menace” is not fought against both now and effectively, the democracy in Nepal will be in peril. It is time to fight back against sophisticated lies and leftist propagandas which, ifnot acted upon now, will poison coming decades of our national life. The days ahead appear bleak for the social and liberal democrats in the country.The political left will take maximum advantage of their majority in the parliament and the cabinet. In the days ahead, while the top rung leaders of thepolitical left will keep themselves busy unleashing politically charged propaganda against democratic forces, the brainwashed radicals who belong togroups such as the Youth Communist League (YCL) that lack logical reasoning and have zero tolerance towards others that do not share their view point of an idyllic communist utopia will be used to silence the voices of freedom-loving people in Nepal.

Time is running out for democratic forces in Nepal. They need to act now and act rapidly to forge an alliance amongst the democratic forces. If needed, seek help from the international community that better understands the “red menace” and is more knowledgeable about ways to defeat it.Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala, during the recent South Asian Association of Regional Cooperation (SAARC), said that he gambled his sixdecade long political career to secure peace in Nepal and he is right about it. But the recent activities of the Maoists show that he betted on an “unreliable horse.” Despite his all good intentions,his partner for peace – the Maoists – are proving themselves untrustworthy. They are abusing his trust to achieve their goal.

In the current situation, whereby peace and stability seem to be a distantdream due to the Maoists' insincerity and the UML's dubious character, Koirala's lumping of all Male (then UML), Masale (radical leftist party)and Mandale (regressive elements) into the same category seems real than ever. History will judge if Koirala's instinct to join hands with the Maoiststo defeat a cornered despot--King Gyanendra--was a good thing or not. It will also judge if it was entirely impossible to defeat King Gyanendra withoutseeking any help from the Maoists, which many people think was not the case. It might have taken a little bit longer, but couple of months or years is not a long time when it comes to the history of a nation. The dilution of ideology has a price attached to it. Maybe we are destined to pay that price!