Living in interesting times

Recently, the Constituent Assembly (CA) Sub-Committee on State Restructuring and Distribution of State Powers came up with the anxiously-awaited state restructuring plan. They proposed two alternative models to choose from. While the first model had 14 provinces [Khaptad, Karnali, Tharuhat, West Madhes, Magarat, Tamuwan, Tamsaling, Newa, Sunkoshi, Kirat, Limbuwan, Madhes and Birat], the second one had six provinces [Karnali, Gandaki, Sagarmatha, Srijanga, Lumbini (Bhawar) and Simraungadh (Janakpur)]. The full committee forwarded the 14-province model to the CA with a few amendments. Although there is little chance, given the pace at which political agreements on issues of national importance are reached, that any agreement will be reached by May 28, 2010, the CA now has something to show off, no matter how inferior the models might be.Remaining insincere towards people’s need and the nation’s progress while drawing a paycheck can be at best called a morally-repugnant act. CA members should either stop draining the state’s coffer or get back to business.

One may argue that having to choose from models that creates unsustainable federal system is worse than having none. The argument rings true, but the problem with that kind of reasoning is that it does not take into consideration the context that we are in. Let’s not forget that we live in an ultra-progressive nation, where populist beliefs guide political strategies and ends justify the means. So searching logic and economic reasoning behind the proposed federal models is like pondering over Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s sanity. And, voicing for referendum over the various federal models proposed from within and outside the CA is like proposing Osama Bin Laden be baptized so that islamofascism can come to an end. It is simply not going to happen.

It is not going to happen for two simple reasons. First, it is not politically-profitable for the new entrants of Nepali politics. Second, in Nepal, issues of national importance have never been decided as per the wishes of people. They are decided based on whether or not the top echelons of the major political parties and the intelligentsia aligned with the political parties benefit from the major overhaul. Anxiety and pain of common men, which politicians claim to understand, is forgotten immediately after these little guys dip their finger in purple ink in voting booths. That is where their participation in democracy ends. What happens after that is ill-justification of political mandate and making that mandate profitable for the ruling elites and the so-called intellectuals that line up to justify the political crimes committed by their bosses.

Both politicians – most of whom are from the political parties of yesteryears – and intellectuals who claim to understand the negative repercussions of creating ethnic states have to understand that selective application of logic does not work. What is happening in Nepal defies all logic. While the real estate market has nosedived worldwide, there is a real estate boom in Nepal. In between the two fastest growing economies, economic indicators continue to worsen. I remember studying that if you keep an object in between two hot bodies, it also heats up but that logic, too, fails in the case of Nepal.

Much-needed social reforms, devolution of power, and empowerment of ethnic minorities never got into political radar in the last two decades. An alarm did not go off even when the Maoists promised for an ethnic federation. Forget that, the makers of 1990 constitution, most of whom are still in circulation in politics, instead of proposing to make it more inclusive, which would have saved both time and money, ran away from it as fast as their legs could carry them. When you run away from the child that you father, the chances that your future relationships being seen as promiscuous are almost 100 percent. Plus, the political change that we are now witnessing now in Nepal is largely ethnic-based.

All along the way, everyone, be it those arousing the ethnic masses that have been bypassed by the state or those that apply logic to negativities of ethnic federation, knew that social mobilization had outstripped the institutional capacity. But none confronted the truth. The former did not confront it because pushing social mobilization to a farthest possible point was politically expedient for them. In politics, it is political base that matters, not the truth. For the later, the truth did not matter as long as it did not shake up the political foundations of political parties, whose prominence determined the fulfillment of their personal ambitions.

The debate over the viability of ethnic federalism is redundant at this point in time. The expectations of ethnic masses have been aroused beyond the state’s capacity to mange it within the existing set-up. And, the new federal structure that is other than ethnicity-based will not do any good to those pushing for ethnic federalism. Ethnic federalism may not be able to bring about the changes that ethnic minorities are clamoring for but remaining backward under the leadership of those that they see as their own will be more consoling. When someone our own lets us down, it hurts but also heals soon. The feeling is far better than betrayal at the hands of group that never realized the agony of how it feels to remain marginalized generation after generation. It makes perfect sense from ethnic minorities’ point of view to have faith on someone of their own no matter how chequered his or her past might have, because it provides a point to begin. The hope that someone capable from within their own ethnic group will takeover down the road is more reassuring than pinning the hope on elites from the other ethnic group, especially when the ethnic group in question is the one that never understood the pain before they were forced to. And now, when they appear to have understood, it is hard to believe whether their appreciation of pain is genuine or a ploy.

Ethnic federalism might not work like most things in Nepal but will be a good learning experience. People may eventually realize that in a globalized world, sharing resources and knowledge is the only way to achieve collective prosperity. Hopefully, by then, our so-called intellectuals too will emerge out as more wise beings that understand the fact that for people to understand and have faith in your reasoning behind why things should be done in a certain way, you first have to have guts in pointing fingers at the politicians of your own ethnic group when they commit political crimes or fail to deliver. Until then, let’s experience the joy of living in a nation that defies all logic!

Lessons For Nepal

The decimation of Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) and the victory of the Congress party in the recently held parliamentary elections in India were the news that surprised many both in the Indian subcontinent and elsewhere. Mahinda Rajapaksa and Manmohan Singh have proved that the politics of ethnic chauvinism can be defeated, although the route these two men took was quite different. Rajapaksa resorted to military might whereas Singh adhered to greater economic reforms and pro-poor developmental policies. But again, the route they took also had to do with the level of threat ethnic chauvinism posed, in their respective countries. Rajapaksa faced violent ethnic fundamentalism whereas Singh was more exposed to bullying of coalition partners that flourished on ethnic and caste rhetoric.

Rajapaksa has proved that even the most sophisticated insurgency in the world can be decimated if there is a political will. There were countless occasions in the past 26 years of insurgency in Sri Lanka whereby Velupillai Prabhakaran could have gotten the state to fulfill genuine demands of minority Tamils. With time, more rights would have come Tamils’ way. It would have taken time but it would have eventually happened. But Prabhakaran’s hard-headedness and secessionist tendency has, in the end, left Tamils worse off. After 26 years of struggle and thousands of Tamils dead, LTTE got nothing, neither an independent state, nor the esteem of the civilized world.

While Sri Lanka has shown that appeasing the insurgents is not the only way to establish peace, India has shown to the world that the politics of ethnic chauvinism can be defeated through democratic means if the leadership in the country is visionary. Earnest and honest image does pay off in politics. Indian PM Singh is a living example. The recent election, in which, for the first time since 1962, a government that served its full five-year term has been re-elected under the same leadership, is a clear example of economic development taking over ethnic and identity politics in determining election outcomes. The recent election has also demonstrated, and demonstrated handsomely, that anti-incumbency can be beaten by delivering on the development front. Indian voters have rejected ethnic and caste politics. Finally, they have realized that identity-specific rhetoric, a process that they were told would empower them eventually had devolved into single-leader hegemony and blackmail politics, which neither empowered them, nor uplifted their socioeconomic status. India might have finally outgrown “Mandalism.”

Mahinda Rajapaksa, Manmohan Singh, Sheila Dikshit, Naveen Patnaik and Nitish Kumar have provided us with examples that both hardcore ethnic fundamentalism and ethnic- and caste-based politics can be defeated.

Regional leaders such as Naveen Patnaik of Orissa and Nitish Kumar of Bihar have shown that you can remain relevant in politics without riding ethnic agendas. Their effort to promote good governance, improve law and order and bring about overall development has paid off handsomely. Nitish’s Janata Dal (United) which had won six seats in 2004 Lok Sabha election won 20 seats this time around. And, Naveen Patnaik’s Biju Janata Dal won 14 seats, which is three seats more than 2004 Lok Sabha elections. Unlike in the past, Lalu Prasad Yadav and Ram Vilas Paswan were not able to fool Bihari voters with their caste-based rhetoric this time around.

While Lalu’s Rastriya Janata Dal had to contend with four seats compared to 22 in 2004 election, Paswan’s Lok Janshakti Party failed to register a win. By making development and law and order as the major poll issue in the caste-ridden state, Nitish has proved that these are other ways of claiming relevance in politics.

Not a very long, the military solution to LTTE problem in Sri Lanka and the defeat of Lalu and Paswan in India were conceived as impossible. But as it appears now, nothing is impossible if there is a political will.

In a country likes ours whereby the president, who refuses to join populist ethnic bandwagon, is chided by the members of his own community; where a journalist is not only a journalist but also a member of civil society and covertly involved in politics; where a human right defender runs for the chairmanship of one of the largest political parties, conflict of interest will always remain as a major obstacle in effectively dealing with the elements that pose threat to law and order and stability of the country.

Mahinda Rajapaksa of Sri Lanka and Manmohan Singh, Sheila Dikshit, Naveen Patnaik, and Nitish Kumar of India have provided us with examples that both hardcore ethnic fundamentalism and ethnic- and caste-based politics can be defeated. We may disagree with the approaches taken but it has been established that there are ways to deal if we really have to. The major question, however, is that, will Nepali politicians, who do not think beyond immediate political survival and who have mastered the art of operating outside the constitution with impunity, bother to learn from these examples? Had we learnt from the world history that appeasement of ideologically-indoctrinated demagogues does not establish peace and stability, we would not be where we are now.

For Nepal to come out of the current mess, which is partly self-created no matter how much political elite of the country try to escape from sharing the blame, there has to be a consensus on crucial but contentious issues such as designing the federal structure, land redistribution and ways to ensure ethnic empowerment. Plus, there has to be a sincere effort towards strengthening existing institutions and maintain law and order in the country, in the absence of which, politicians will keep on playing on either sides of the fence and mushroomed insurgent groups will keep on holding the communities across the country hostage.

But before all that can happen, a million-dollar question that arises now is: Will Madhav Kumar Nepal be able to bring a much stronger Dahal – whose party now is the largest in the parliament, has thousands of militiamen in UN-monitored cantonments and almost a 100 thousand strong paramilitary group (YCL) that can operate with impunity – under the framework aimed at strengthening multi-party democracy? It is a tall order. But again, anything is possible. Who had thought that LTTE could be decimated and Lalu and Paswan could be defeated?

Sponsored Coalition

Never-ending speculation about the fate of army chief Rookmangud Katawal came to an end following the Maoists’ unilateral decision to sack him (only to be reinstated by the president). The Maoists went ahead and did what they had decided to do anyways, despite stern warnings from all quarters – coalition partners, the main opposition party Nepali Congress, and most importantly, India that had provided the Maoists leaders safe haven during the decade-long insurgency.The NC, which not a very long ago, along with the Maoists chided the army for being a feudal institution, came out openly against the sacking of the army chief. All of a sudden, the NC, which had once agreed with the Maoists for the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) integration, is rooting for the man that is against the PLA merger. Why change of heart and why now?


With the Maoists’ increasing dominance in Nepali politics and their reluctance to abandon violence, the NC clearly saw doomsday coming. Unable to stand the Maoists’ wrath on its own, it found a perfect shield in Katawal. But the question that baffles many is: why did India decide to back the army to which it had once refused to supply arms? How does it look on the part of the world´s largest democracy when it has to covertly back an army general of a neighboring country to correct its foreign policy failures?India likes to blame the victims – Nepalis – for the current mess in Nepal and call it Nepal’s internal affair. But for Nepalis, who very well know where the top-rung Maoists leaders were during the decade-long insurgency (the Maoist leaders have themselves time and again acknowledged the Indian hospitality) and who catapulted insurgents from jungle to the corridors of Singha Durbar, sharing the burden of someone else’s faults has not been fun.


It is not the increasing dominance of the Maoist party in Nepali politics but its willingness to become the mentee of China that forced India to back Katawal. India had no option but to back Katawal because the political parties of yesteryears neither have the motivation, nor the muscle power to wrestle with the Maoists at this point in time. The backing of Katawal is another addition to the list of foreign policy failures of India but the cost of remaining a lame spectator would be even greater in terms of India’s national security interests.While the political parties of yesteryears are looking up to India to rescue them, for India, it is all about “safe landing” in Nepal. So, in the days ahead, the real confrontation will be between the Maoists and India, obviously through the Nepal Army and the coalition that India has put together. Will India be able to beat the Maoists on their home turf? It is an uphill battle.


How long will the Indian-sponsored coalition last? Not very long. The need for coalition has to come from within the parties for it to last. There has to be a shared goal.This is precisely why the SPAM alliance did not last long. The Maoists were clear about why they wanted to be a part of the current framework and what they wanted out of it, whereas the other political parties were clueless about what they would do if they failed to defeat the Maoists in the CA election. Basically, they had no clue about what they would do after the country was declared a republic. They were all convinced that the Maoist party will stick to the multi-party democratic framework and will not dare to act against India’s dictate. The coalition fell apart simply because there was disconnect between the end goal of the Maoists and other parties. For the Maoists, it was always about capturing the state, which should be clear to all those deniers out there. It was never about reintegration, because that simply means accepting the existing order against which the Maoists wedged the People’s War.


India, for its national security interest, will try to maintain political stability in Nepal through this coalition, but the costs of doing that will be several times higher than what it would have taken for Indians to contain the Maoists insurgency. What will it take for this coalition to work for a decent period? Basically, three things: (1) huge amount of money on the table that will produce visible changes in terms of both immediate needs (solving energy crisis – electricity and fuel shortages) and long-term development (this will act as the proverbial carrot and help change peoples’ perception about the dubious game that India plays in Nepal) (2) Logistical support to security forces and heavy security presence on the southern side of the border (will act as the proverbial stick and force Maoists to renegotiate terms and condition of the peace process) (3) Full-time mentoring to the politicians. A detailed short-term plan to contain the Maoists and long-term plan to weaken them should be crafted and handed over to the politicians and security forces.


In the meantime, another framework should be developed and force the Maoists to agree to it. The current peace process is not working. It is producing everything but peace and stability. Hence, salvaging the process is not the issue at hand. The process needs to be re-engineered from the word go. Why? Because it is now evident beyond any refute that the strategic end goals for the negotiating parties are diametrically opposite. One wants a single-party communist republic; the others want a vibrant democratic polity. We need to decide here what each of us wants Nepal to become. If we want a liberal multi-party set up, then there´s a huge problem. If we want a single party communist republic, then there´s the Maoist path.The twelve-point agreement has outlived its utility. It has been producing everything but peace and political stability. Now we need to formulate a completely new agreement where the vision, the strategic end-state, is common to all parties. This is the starting point – agreement on an end-goal – from which all tactical steps and processes must evolve.

From freefall to a basket case?

It's been four months since the Constituent Assembly (CA) election was held and we still don't have a legitimate government. Is it because the proportional representation system has started producing disproportionate results or because the self-portrayed progressives have resorted to the same old tricks played during the coalition era of the past decades?

If the government formation takes four months, how long will it take to undo the failures of the past governments and deliver the dividends of democracy? With this pace, when will the wholesale transformation of Nepal's political and social foundation and the apparent consensus be achieved between various ethnic groups in Nepal?

As usual, no political party is ready to take the responsibility for the current political impasse. Accountability has evaporated in countless networks, bargaining and search for compromises. Shouldn't someone somewhere be responsible for the current state of affairs?

A daughter of noted neurosurgeon was abducted in broad day light from the heart of the capital. Unable to rely on the professional ability of the security apparatus, the hapless father pays multi-million rupees in ransom for the safe release of his sibling. Dr Devkota's willingness to pay ransom to the abductors is an example of erosion of people's faith in government's ability to solve their problems. This is one among hundreds if not thousands of cases happening every month.

Our so-called intellectuals get baffled when high profile abduction cases like the one involving the daughter of Dr Upendra Devkota occur. Like an ignorant little child who suddenly wakes up after a bad dream, they start questioning the existence of the nation's security apparatus and the responsibility of the Home Ministry. Anyone keeping a close tab on Nepal can easily tell that the law and order situation in the country is in a shambles and it has been so for a long time now. It certainly did not happen overnight for anyone to miss it, did it? What appears as if the abduction of Dr Devkota's daughter was the first ripple in a perfectly calm lake? The lake has been muddied and unsettled for a long time now. It is just that in order to appear politically correct some of us chose not to question the abilities of the guards responsible to keep the lake clean and healthy.

We live in a country where the vice-president of the country flouts court order, home minister overlooks crimes (killers of Jitendra Sah and Ram Hari Shrestha are still at large) and the prime minister, instead of firing the incompetent home minister, uses him as his emissary. Lawlessness starts from the top and trickles down to the common man. Criminals at the bottom of this food chain of lawlessness are taking every opportunity to take the law into their hands because that is the example leaders are leading with.

The major political parties are intoxicated by foul poison of power and this is evidenced by their disgraceful attitude towards formation of the new government and writing a constitution. From old guards of Nepali politics to the new entrants like the Maoists, MPRF, and TMLP, political honesty is something that is seriously lacking. Moral nudity on part of the Maoists has become so apparent that it is hard to trust their words.

Needless to say, they were not trustworthy to begin with. When the chances of getting into the power brightens, they suggest the return of all seized properties and curbing illegal acts of their brigade of brigands (YCL), but as soon as their chances of clinching to the power fades, their threat-laden statements start flying in all directions. They get verbal diarrhea.

It is not only the Maoists that have mastered the art of deal making. Upendra Yadav has picked it in a relatively shorter period of time. He is ready to join hands with anyone and everyone so long as he gets his share. The Maoists' call for having a Madhesi president and a Pahadi vice-president was a logical one, but for Upendra Yadav, having his man as a vice-president was more important than ensuring ethnic balance in the top most posts of the land. For him, inclusion of other ethnic groups is irrelevant. So long as the process ensures the inclusion of the members of his vote bank, ethnic empowerment is on the roll!

In order to minimize the dissent that arises from the incompetence on the part of politicians, the political parties have divided the nation along political ideology and ethnicity. And with each passing day, the people are getting sucked into this game plan devised by our politicians to cover up their incompetence and enhance their own political agendas. If a Madhesi intellectual raises a red flag against functioning of Madhesi leaders, he is immediately branded as a traitor. He becomes an instant enemy of his community. Many Madhesis dislike the president simply because, in their eyes, he is not Madhesi enough. His clarion call for national unity is in collision course with agendas pursued by those that do not see anything wrong with vice-president taking oath in Hindi even though it is unconstitutional. If something is unconstitutional, it is unlawful. And, that is how it ought to be.

How we got here and where are we headed? Many of us decided not to raise our voice against the failures of our politicians because our beloved politicians have created an environment whereby anyone, who questions their ability to handle the situation well automatically falls into a least wanted category-status quoists. Is it finally time to realize that Bollywood-type happy ending is not something that happens in African-style drama?

Unless the people rise and make their voice heard, politicians are not going to mend their ways. If we continue to remain divided, we may lose any chances that we might have from this point onwards to emerge as a functional democracy and may end up as a basket case of Asia.

Nepal, in every sense, is a nation under construction. The depth and scale of the transformation taking place in every dimension of Nepal's social, economic, and political lives is very rapid and difficult for even experts to comprehend. The ongoing experiment of building a "New Nepal" if handled properly could be one of the most successful developments in the history of the nation. But if it fails, the consequences for Nepal could be tragic, and possibly catastrophic.

The ultimate betrayal

Finally, by nominating Ram Raja Prasad Singh for the post of president, the Maoists have officially ended an era of consensus politics. An eternal journey with the Maoists, which the Nepali Congress (NC) and the United Marxist Leninist (UML) told us was necessary to build a "New Nepal," is in lurch, after the Maoists have shut the door on the NC and the UML and have decided to build a "New Nepal" on their own.

Things are shaping up to be pretty odd. With the Maoists' latest act of betrayal, Nepali politics is, slowly but surely, getting confrontational. With the Maoists resorting to, my-way-or-the highway attitude, the settling of political vendetta will take the center-stage. Constitution making is the last thing in the minds of politicians. For the Maoists, it is all about how to consolidate the power, and for others, how to contain the Maoists and maximize political bargains.

The mainstream political parties of yesteryears are back to the square one. In 2005, an autocratic monarch had shut the door on them, and now, after three years, it is the very party that they helped spread base in the urban center repeating the act. Is it fate's cruel prank or inability on the part of UML and NC politicians to understand and tackle authoritarian tendencies?

Was it expected? Oh, yes, except a few greedy power-mongers within the NC and the UML, who thought that protracted ideological decay was worth it, everyone else were well aware of the Maoists' intent, and saw betrayal coming. Short term power mongering over long term political survival was almost certain to yield the consolidation of state power, but with the Maoists at the helm.

The NC and UML were bound to get betrayed. It was just a matter of time. It is not only because the Maoists' modus operandi is based on betrayal and lies, but also because the Maoists' strategic end goal: the establishment of a one-party communist republic directly conflicts with the end goal of the NC and UML. Anyone following the Maoist insurgency can easily tell that, at no point throughout the entire period of insurgency or the peace process has its leadership or the surrogates expressed anything but a full-fledged commitment to the establishment of a dictatorship of the proletariats. Any misrepresentation of the Maoists' strategic intent has come from outside the party -- mainly from the power-mongers within the NC, UML or the left-leaning civil society.

Had Girija Prasad Koirala not allowed the peace process to be reduced to an "appease process" by fulfilling each and every demand raised by the Maoists, the situation would have been quite different now. Had he taken time to dispassionately evaluate the Maoist machine, he would have understood long ago that the Maoists are in this to win -- not to compromise, or become mainstreamed or to play by anyone else's rules but their own.

The Maoists were successful in clouding his judgments by dangling "Presidential Lollypop" in front of him. Once the Maoists started doing that, their anti-social and undemocratic means were simply shrugged off as negativities associated with the transitional phase.

The NC and UML should learn a lesson from how the Maoists have done "business" to date. Their failure to put oneself inside the Maoist mind and see things as they see them, to understand their beliefs, strategy, and supporting tactics have put ordinary cadres in far flung villages in a very difficult position.

In the last two years, the fat cats within the NC and UML might have profited financially, but when it comes to grassroots cadres, they are worse off than they were three years ago. In the tarai, they have to face the wrath of the secessionists like Nagendra Paswan and Jay Krishna Goit, and in the hills, newly mushroomed ethnic militant groups have made their life miserable. It is not only the NC and UML cadres that are having a hard time in the changed political context, but there is another group called Internally Displaced People (IDPs) that did not benefit a bit from the grand coalition of the last three years. They are the forgotten heroes, whose woes both the NC and the UML chose to ignore.

What next? The Maoists will use different combinations of muscle power and ballots to eliminate all marginal threats to their expanding power base. Whether this process of elimination occurs figuratively or literally, whether through perversions of democratic process or through decrees will get clearer in the days ahead.

There is a very little evidence to support that the Maoists will play by the democratic rule book. They will pretend to act democratic as long as it benefits them to do so, but that does not mean that the Maoists have embraced multi-party democracy. They have already started to interpret their victory in the CA election as unconditional support for the full execution of the 'Prachanda path." The chances for a radical party to continue carrying out radical policies in the changed political context should not be negated. It would be a mistake of Himalayan proportion to rely on liberal interpretations of what the Maoist leaders say.

Puspa Kamal Dahal is not that foolish to adopt North Korean-styled one party rule in the current geopolitical situation, but he will do everything to ensure that there is no threat to the Maoist regime from the political opponents that believe in Western-styled multi-party parliamentary democracy. With the brigade of brigands (YCL) at his disposal and the state's security forces under his control, it will not be very difficult for him to find other ways to subvert political competition and administer social control.

The future of the mainstream political parties of yesteryears such as the NC and the UML and the new entrants like MJF and TMLP will largely depend upon how quickly they can reinvent themselves and provide credible alternatives to the Maoist writ. They have a very difficult role to play: checkmate the Maoists and appear constructive to the general populace at the same time. Or else, they will be painted as obstructionists. With security apparatus under the Maoists' control and YCL in villages, the Maoists have more than they need to win elections. The last thing you want to do is give them a chance to vilify your personality.

Is it the geography, stupid?

Hari Bansha Dulal & Samyam Wagle

While the debate about the probability of miraculous economic success in Nepal under Maoists leadership is going on, they have not still come up with such strong convincing economic policies that would bring such dramatic turn allowing the three fold increase in GNP in a decade's time.

No doubt that if it is possible, it is possible only through capitalism. The much needed prosperity cannot be achieved by doing what ideologues of left-populist political trajectories in Latin America do-fault neo-liberal economic policies for slow growth, no improvement in poverty rates, and sparse investment in human capital through health and education. The failure of China under Mao and success under Deng is something that is out there for the Maoists in Nepal to ponder. Repeating failed polices of Mao in some form or the other to appear politically correct would be a blunder of Himalayan proportion. The famine that resulted from Mao's short-sighted policies is far greater than African famine or the number of people killed by hunger during the entire post-independence in India.

Approximately 25 to 30 million perished in China then. Hence, replicating Mao's "super-collectivism" of 1958 to 1960, the so-called Great Leap Forward, in some form or the other would be a blunder of Himalayan proportion. If history is of any use, it is quite clear from the past that only capitalist culture can ensure both the freedom and prosperity. Never ever in the history of mankind a famine occurred in any capitalist nation.

How the Maoists will transform an impoverished landlocked nation into a promised economic powerhouse without sound economic plans is in itself a big question. It will be interesting to see how they overcome the geographic constrains. The noted economist Jeffrey D. Sachs researched the effect of geography on economy and found that nearly all landlocked countries in the world are poor, except for a handful in Western and Central Europe like Austria, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovakia, and Switzerland which are deeply integrated into the regional European market, and connected by low - cost trade. Besides them all other land locked countries are poor because of geography that leads to high cost trade.

His famous research found that development surely seems to be favored among the temperate-zone economies, especially the subset that: (1) is in the Northern Hemisphere; (2) has avoided socialism; and (3) has avoided being ravaged by war. Tropical regions are hindered in development relative to temperate regions, probably because of higher disease burdens and limitations on agricultural productivity.

He further adds that coastal regions and regions linked to coasts by ocean-navigable waterways are strongly favored in development relative to the hinterlands. Landlocked economies may be particularly disadvantaged by their lack of access to the sea, even when they are no farther than the interior parts of coastal economies, for at least three reasons: (1) cross-border migration of labor is more difficult than internal migration; (2) infrastructure development across national borders is much more difficult to arrange that similar investments within a country; and (3) coastal economies may have military or economic incentives to impose costs on interior landlocked economies.

Leading thinkers have pointed out the four major areas in which geography will play a fundamental direct role in economic productivity. They are transport costs, human health, agricultural productivity and ownership of natural resources (including water, minerals, hydrocarbon deposits, etc).

Economists say it is the high transportation cost that inhibits the ability of landlocked countries to engage with the outside world to trade goods, exchange capital, and borrow ideas. Jeffrey Sachs also points out the burden of diseases on economic development. Tropical regions are more prone to diseases which have vital effect on economic growths. He even claims fertility decisions are affected by geography. Country like ours is still dependent on unscientific agricultural activities which again depend on monsoon rain.

Besides the fate of nations are shared by gift with valuable resources as Kuwait, Saudi Arab, Qatar, Arab are simply rich not because of their well governance but by natural gifs oil! Botswana is also the land-locked country but has diamond mines below them which make them better! Second is about the neighbors. Some might blame god for not keeping us next to Finland, Canada or Liechtenstein! Though our neighbors are the rising superpowers, our immediate neighbors are, Bihar in south and Tibet in north, both of which are the least developed states.

Even though geography plays significant role in the economic performance of a nation, it is not the only factor that determines the level of well being. Geography alone is not much of a help when it comes to evaluating the success of South Korea and backwardness of the North. If geography was the only factor determining economic prosperity, former east-Germans would not be risking their lives crossing the wall that separated starving proletariats of the east Germany from the highly prosperous Germans couple of yards west from the wall. Needless to say, the authority and policy play a major role in determining the fate of a nation. It does not take very long for a nation to go downhill and vice versa. Burma and Singapore are two nations that serve as classic examples.

While Burma, a nation with abundant resources and access to sea and once a better-off country, continues to lags behind under military Junta, continuous pursuit of Lee Kuan Yew's policies has helped Singapore surpass its east Asian neighbors. Does Puspa Kamal Dahal also have the spirit and determination to lead the impoverished Nepal and be the helmsman of 27 million Nepalese or he simply got lucky in cashing in the past failures of the major political parties and disgruntlement of the populace is yet to be seen.

The future Maoists' government should work around the geographical constraints by making shipping less relevant through lightweight manufactured and processed agricultural exports and can convert our perceived geographical liability into tourism and water wealth and other service-based industries. Maoist should create a sound atmosphere for foreign investments. Without foreign investments it would be virtually impossible to utilize the potential of the existing labor force put the existing natural resources into wealth generation. Without providing employment to the youth, it would be impossible to break the cycle of perpetual revolution and enhance the process wealth creation and multiplication. And, in the case of Nepal, both are equally important.

Apparent populism will not be of any help in achieving the required economic growth and slogans alone will not feed the proletariats. It is good to be optimistic but there should not be disconnect between what is being proposed and what can actually be achieved. Such disconnect, if any will cause an outburst of pent-up frustration. It would be wise to come up with deliverables that are really achievable. The current proposal put forward by the Maoists seems unrealistic with regards to geographic and resource constraints. Plus, with the existing stock of human and socal capital, it is virtually impossible to triple GNP in a decade's time. It is high time that the Maoists get off the populist bandwagon and pursue real achievable economic goals. No more gimmicks, please!

Hyperopic Maoists & Myopic Pundits

Not even 72 hours had passed since the raising of glasses to celebrate victory over the despised monarch, Puspa Kamal Dahal's gibe, "due to the foolishness of Gyanendra, republic has been established. If the NC and UML also continue demonstrating their foolishness, people's republic will be established" forced the left-leaning civil society pundits to drop to their knees and puke till they got sober.

Dahal's words forced our pundits to get into a sober mode even before they fully got kick out of their drinks. This is what happens when the greed to remain in the limelight at the cost of ideological dilution takes a front-seat and the desire to become politically correct all the time overrides objectivity.

In order to become politically correct, the very same pundits that relentlessly advocated endless appeasement of the Maoists, are now sticking their heads out of line and saying the exact same thing that we have been saying (the end goal of the Maoists is to establish a totalitarian regime) for the last two and a half years.

With the Maoists' intention getting clearer, the left-leaning civil society members afflicted by myopia have finally started to see the rust in Maoists' sickle. They have woken up when the Maoists are actually preparing to strike their political opponents and the press in the head with their hammer.

A clarion call by a civil society pundit, who once thought that peace was not possible without the appeasement of the Maoists at this point in time when the Maoists have everything they need: popular mandate, international community's support, and their cadres willingness to fight till the finish -- might be too little and too late. The Maoists are on a march to deliver the exact same thing that the late King Mahendra delivered from the extreme right almost half a century ago. The only difference this time around is that, they will be delivering the exact same thing but from the extreme left. Does it make a difference if they declare Nepal a one-party communist state or not as long as they are successful in replicating King Mahendra's model?

With the Maoists' intention getting clearer and nervousness reigning in, in the ultra-liberal camp, the much talked about consensus politics has vanished into thin air. Politics is slowly but surely getting confrontational. The humiliating defeat in the CA elections and the constant flurry of gibes from the top-rung Maoist leaders have forced both the major political parties of yesteryears and pundits crushed with political baggage to confront an uncomfortable reality.

The NC and the UML happily traveled along "Prachanda path" when they were strong. Now, they want to deviate when they are weak. Will the Maoists let them off the hook without surrendering the power? The Maoists obviously did not fight the decade long bloody insurgency to put old guards of Nepali politics back into the power.

If we look realistically, with the Nepal Army in a silent mode and India on its side, the Maoists do not need an October revolution. The subtle threat is more than enough to bring Koirala's government to its knees. It is just a matter of time.

With the emergence of the Maoists as the largest party in the Constituent Assembly, India's betting reference has changed. It is more interested in geopolitical gain against China rather than help the democratic process in Nepal. In order to preempt China's influence over the Maoists, India is now fully backing the Maoist rule. Surprisingly, it is even ready to review the 1950 agreement.

With Lok Sabha elections round the corner in India, foreign minister of India Pranab Mukherjee will obviously not jeopardize his chances of winning election by displeasing the leftists in West Bengal, who want to see their fellow comrades rule in Nepal. Why would Pranab scuttle his own chances of wining upcoming Lok Sabha election by backing the losers in Nepal? Both politically and personally, it does not make any sense.

It might be an unpleasant thing for some populists in Nepal and abroad to hear that the only institution that has the required strength and the motivation to counter the Maoist threat is the Nepal Army. But like it or not, that's the truth.

However, a million dollar question is, Will the Nepal Army stand against India's will and support the very people that once asked the army to obliterate the Maoists but later on not only joined hands with the Maoists but also set up inquiry commissions to investigate human right abuses committed by them?

For the generals within the army, unless they have a bigger role to play, supporting anyone from the democratic camp doesn't make any sense at this point in time. If the Maoists are somehow able to convince the generals, saluting Puspa Kamal Dahal would not be as painful as expected by many.

The political parties of yesteryears are in a very difficult situation now. And, the worst thing is that, it is them, who invited this trouble. Left-leaning civil society pundits and the so-called intellectuals that gather in coffee houses in Kathmandu are only part of the problem. Why would they want to be in the bad books by asking politicians to stay away from joining hands with people whose views are diagonally opposite, when the game is all about sharing the pie?

The politicians with in the NC and UML are surrounded by sycophants that do not dare to ask their masters to stick to the party's basic ideology and principles. If you are a real democrat, you dare to stand up and say that the party is deviating from its basic principles, when dilution of principles takes place, not justify the riding of populist bandwagon.

By openly threatening the media and expressing his desire to establish a people's republic, Puspa Kamal Dahal has already shown his true color. The democratic forces should immediately form an alliance if they want to survive politically. That alliance should then work relentlessly towards smoothing its relationship with the Army. Before Puspa Kamal Dahal and India convinces the Nepali Army to work with the Maoists, democratic forces should try wining the trust of the army.

Unless the NC, UML, and other parties that believe in multiparty democracy get unequivocal support from the army and convince India that they can overrun the Maoists, India will not change its betting preferences. India loves to ride the winning horse. Than Swe of Myanmar and Maumoon Abdool Gayyom of the Maldives are living examples.

The game is almost over. Act before it is too late to do anything!

Political violence: A crime that pays?

The Maoist comrades did it again. The only difference this time around is that the man they killed belonged to their own party. By killing Ramhari Shrestha in cold blood, and that too under Ian Martin’s nose, the Maoists have made it crystal clear that, they can kill people anywhere they like.

Given the secretive nature of modus operandi of the Maoist cadres involved and the Maoist party’s reluctance to hand over the perpetrators to the law enforcement agencies, the motive behind the killing might never be fully revealed. However, from media reports it is quite clear that there was a financial motive behind the killing of Shrestha. If so, what are our revolutionaries up to? Interested in jumping to a petit-bourgeois class while proletariats that voted for them en masse are waiting for their masters to alter Nepali society, by overthrowing feudal structures?

While the Maoists’ “cold-blooded killing machine” periodically exterminates educators, journalists, and businessmen, the perpetrators of the crimes never get apprehended and punished. It has become a kind of policy of the CPN (Maoist) to seek forgiveness for the crimes committed by its ill-trained and irrational cadres and get away with it. Equally astonishing is the helplessness exhibited by the state.

Be it the murder of educator Mukti Nath Adhikari, journalists duo Dikendra Thapa and Jitendra Sah, or physical assault on noted physician Dr Gyanendra Giri, has any of the Maoist cadre involved in the crime been apprehended and punished? Living in a land, where the murderers of educators and journalists walk free must be, utterly unsatisfying and psychologically taxing.

Why are the Maoists still intimidating and killing people? Will they ever stop? The people are struggling to find answers to these questions. And, the answers you get now from the top-rung Maoist politicians may not match experiences that you might encounter in the future.

If you ask the Maoists about their revolution, the chances of telling us that the revolution will get over only after the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat is almost hundred percent. So, in the context of perpetual revolution, will the means adopted so far be abandoned? In a country like ours, where the end justifies the means, is it even necessary to abandon the radical violence and murderous path that the Maoists have been walking so far?

Mao, the great hero and icon of the Maoist ideologues in Nepal, shortly after taking control of Mainland China in 1949, ordered the killing of millions of his political enemies, including Christians. Tens of thousands were killed during the ‘Cultural Revolution’ and approximately fourteen to twenty million died from starvation during the “Great Leap Forward.”

Likewise, Josef Stalin is believed to have killed approximately thirteen million people in various purges.

Parade Magazine, in its “The world’s 10 worst dictators” list compiled in 2005, has Kim Jong Il as the worst dictator alive. While Kim, who has developed an extreme personality cult, ranked first, Chinese president Hu Jintao and former Cuban president Fiedel Castro ranked third and ninth worst dictators. The communist dictators by no means are the crusader of personal and political freedom.

Although there is no universal consensus, it is believed that more than one million people have been killed after the junior Kim took over North Korea in 1994. There are no exact numbers, but conservative estimates suggest that an estimated one hundred and fifty thousand North Koreans are performing forced labor in prison camps created to punish alleged political dissidents.

In China, the communist party still controls all media. Thousands of “Internet security agents” are employed by the state to monitor internet use. Hundreds of thousands of Chinese are serving “re-education” sentences in labor camps across China. The recipients of such “re-education” through labor sentence, according to Human Rights Watch, have no right to a hearing, no right to counselling, and no right to any kind of judicial determination of their case. The number of executions carried out in China every year is more than all other nations combined.

Fiedel Castro executed and imprisoned thousands of Christians in his early years. Even though he allowed gospel crusades to be televised on the national television network after the worldwide collapse of communism between 1989 and 1991, the political dissidents and Christians jailed prior to 1991 are yet to receive amnesty.

If we look at one-party communist states that are revered by the Nepali Maoists, radical violence and extermination of the political opponents is the most common and successful method of political and social control. It is a method adopted by the communist dictators to preempt dissident activities that could pose a threat to the survival of their regime. By asking the Maoists to renounce radical violence and killings, Nepali people are asking the Maoists to toss away the most trusted method of political and social control. When would the Maoists give up the most trusted and tested method of political and social control? Politically, it does not make any sense.

In the last week’s BBC Nepali Sewa’s “Sajha Sawal,” Gagan Thapa argued about the ethical and psychological issues associated with the housing of YCL cadres in camps. From an ethical point of view, his arguments were strong and valid. However, what upcoming charismatic leaders like Thapa should understand is that, the YCL is created with a political purpose to weaken the political opponents and administer social control. And, as long as that motive is served, the Maoists would never dismantle the YCL.

CPN (Maoist) leader Ram Bahadur Thapa while addressing an interaction program at Reporter’s club on May 24, without mincing words made is ample clear that his party was bent on expanding the YCL as they want to win all 240 seats in the next election. Instead of arguing on psychological issues associated with the housing of youth in camps, it is time to develop a strategy that would make the existence of the YCL politically unprofitable for the Maoists. Only then, they would be forced to downsize or dissolve the YCL altogether. Till then it shall stay put. The youth leaders like Gagan Thapa should gear his energy towards oiling the youth machine for counter mobilization. Counter mobilization is the best bet and the only game in town.

The Maoists should be allowed to form the government but only after amending the existing constitution. It is true that, given the horse-trading culture of legislatures we have, replacing the two-thirds majority required for forming or changing a government with a simple majority will lead to the frequent change of the government. But it is only through the replacement of the two-thirds majority required for forming or changing a government with a simple majority, the democratic forces in Nepal can stop the Maoists from seizing the state’s instrument of force and coercion and their immediate use to destroy or control all independent sources of power, such as the social and religious institutions, the professions, private businesses, schools and of course, the family.

It may not be ethically correct to ask for it now, especially not when you are a loser. But when you have ideologues like Ram Bahadur Thapa who want to strengthen the YCL to win all 240 seats in the upcoming elections, you got to do what you got to do to survive politically and save the nation from becoming a one-party communist state.

Late Awakening

The Maoists are slowly closing in on the democratic forces in Nepal. They have started to mount pressure on Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala to resign and have made it crystal clear that the Young Communist League (YCL), which in their view is, an equivalent of youth wings of the NC and the UML is not going to be disbanded anytime soon. Instead of facing dissolution, the YCL is rather getting active. It has decided to launch a month-long nationwide campaign.

By asking Prime Minister Koirala to submit his resignation to the speaker of parliament and facilitate a peaceful handover of power in public, Dr Baburam Bhattarai has delivered the masterstroke! The Maoists are all set to disown the very person, who helped them reach where they are now. Is this a sign of an end of utility of "useful idiots" for the Maoists?

After tirelessly honeymooning for more than two years, the politicians within the NC and the UML have finally started realizing working with the Maoists is difficult. The likes of Ram Chandra Poudel have started to talk what people like me have been telling for the past two and a half years. We wrote countless articles trying to explain the dangers associated with the continued appeasement and political cohabitation. But so long as the prospects of remaining in the power were bright, power hungry people like Poudel never bothered to listen to sane voices that would have given a reason for a logical pause.

The lust for power and the risk of being branded "reactionaries" undoubtedly subdued otherwise a logical caution. Now, when Poudel sees power slipping out of his grip, he is all of a sudden perturbed by the Maoists' dictatorial bent. What an awakening! If the democrats around the world started grasping the threat posed by the radicals this late, within no time, the majority of the democratic state will be bogged down by radical communists and insane Islamofacists.

Can someone actually ask ideologically bankrupt and unprincipled democrats like Poudel, who see the dictatorial bent of the Maoists only now? When did the Maoists actually abandon the idea of establishing a one-party communist state, if they ever did? The Maoists, at no point throughout the peace process or the entire period of insurgency, have expressed anything but a full-fledged commitment to the Maoists' strategic end-goal: the establishment of a one-party communist republic. Any misrepresentation of the Maoists' strategic intent has come from outside the party -- mainly from the left-leaning civil society pundits and the likes of Ram Chandra Poudel.

So for Ram Chandra Poudel to realize the dictatorial bent of the Maoists, at this point in time, after they have threatened to forcefully kick Prime Minister Koirala out of office is a crude awakening. The so-called democrats that are squirming now wrote their political obituaries the very day they ventured out on a political cohabitation with the Maoists. Instead of squirming now, when it is too late to do anything about the Maoists' motives, it is time to put up a brave face and prepare oneself to become proud prisoners of the past mistakes. It's impossible to break the golden rule of cause and effect; no matter what, you reap what you sow.
In Nepal, for those who never had a choice between bread and freedom, it was quite obvious to side with the Maoists. But for those, who had both bread and freedom, the inability on part of important few like Poudel to see the imminent danger that unholy alliance with the Maoists posed is going to cost dearly.

Both internal and external actors are to be blamed for the current state of affairs. There was a political stagnation when King Gyanendra embarked on his idiotic venture of absolute monarchy. While this man, who became king by default (design component cannot be discredited altogether) was desperate to walk along the path that his shrewd father walked finely nearly half a century ago, two things were happening concurrently. First, the NC and the UML were trying hard to remain indefinitely in the power without facing the electorate. Second, the Maoists that were getting routinely eliminated by the Bhairavnath battalion in the Kathmandu valley were looking for ways to safely root themselves in the valley for the urban centered revolution.

It was King Gyanendra's foolishness that forced democratic forces to go defensive. Instead of working with the democratic forces, which would have made the fight against radical communism much easier, King Gyanendra preferred to ride pompous egoist—Tusli Giri.

For India, this was the best opportunity to get rid of monarchy, whose diehard nationalist course unlike that of King Jigme's in Bhutan always collided with India's security and economic interests in Nepal. As far as the Maoists were concerned, it was once in a lifetime opportunity to utilize rank and files of the NC and the UML that King Gyanendra was trying to obliterate as "useful idiots" in order to leapfrog to a higher level of their revolution pyramid. In other words, King Gyanendra's idiotic move basically provided an opportunity to everyone that had been waiting for the window of opportunity to open to push through their own little agendas. While all the parties involved tried to outsmart each other, only the Maoists had both the strategy and the end goal handy.

What next? The Maoists have won the elections—fair and square and hence deserve a chance to govern. King Gyanendra should exit and the political parties of yesteryears should do what losers do in politics --- come up with vision and goals that resonate with constituents. The people are mentally prepared to get rid of monarchy and give the Maoists a chance to govern. So be it.

The easiest way for the NC and UML politicians that put bounty on the heads of the Maoist ideologues and deployed military to fight insurgency would be to instigate Nepal Army to commit coup d'etat. But this is not going to benefit the poor Nepali citizens who have been longing for peace for more than a decade. Nor are they ready for another decade long bloodshed. By voting overwhelming for the Maoists, the people have made it clear that they are ready to bow in front of the butcher and get pardoned rather than side with the losers and get hacked.

As keen observers, we all know that the Maoists have neither scored suicide goals in the past, nor will they score in the future. We also know that given the desire of Puspa Kamal Dahal to rule for decades, the days ahead are not going to be easy for the democrats. But we have no choice but to fight it out democratically. It might take years to dislodge the radicals out of power but the good thing about it is that, during the course of democratic struggle, true and principled democrats will get a chance to come to the forefront.

The bewilderness

With the successful conclusion of CA polls, all eyes are on India and the United States now. The extent to which India and the US will recalibrate their policy vis-à-vis the Maoist victory in Nepal will determine whether or not the Maoist government will have a smooth sailing.

Puspa Kamal Dahal's assertion that the Maoists are in for a long haul might prove true unless international players like India and the US tighten the screw on the Maoists and provide support to the democratic forces, which at this point in time appears highly unlikely. For India, a nation that has a substantial security and economic interests in Nepal, it simply does not make any sense to overrun a party, which has both: A private militia and people's mandate to govern. And, why should India stick to the old guards if the new kids on the block are willing to render similar services? As far as the United States is concerned, it has already outsourced its Nepal policy to India. Due to the lack of any major interest in Nepal, the US is expected to continue toeing India's policy towards Nepal.

Those in the NC and the UML who think India will not abandon the horse that served their interests faithfully for almost two decades should rethink why India should stick with a horse that lost badly in a high stake derby. They should reconcile with the fact that India loves to bet on a wining horse. If we look around, it becomes evident that, for India, its security and economic interest is far more important than democratic rights of citizens of foreign nations. Indian government's cordial relations with Myanmar's repressive junta and Banngladesh's military rule speak volume about how India hoodwinks international community when it comes to its stand on democracy.

When India can roll-out the red carpet for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran, it can definitely do so to keep Puspa Kamal Dahal at its arm's length. It is just a matter of time. The very minute India extract promises from the Maoist comrades on issues related to India's security, democrats in Nepal will be on their own. With time and change in political stature, international actors' betting preferences do change.

For the NC and the UML to beat the Maoists, they have to completely overhaul their current strategy of trying to appear more progressive than the Maoists. Nobody is going to buy that. If the NC and the UML really want to succeed, let the Maoists do what they do best, and you do what you do best — resonate with the people that are at the center of the political spectrum. It is virtually impossible to defeat a party whose very basis of existence is grounded on proletarian agendas by trying to appear more progressive than them. One of the reasons why the NC and the UML had to face humiliating defeat might have to do with this unwarranted political shift. When you, as a centrist political force completely abandon what you traditionally stood for, loyal supporters that are attached to the party on the basis of ideology have no inclination or incentive to remain wedded to the party.

Surprisingly, even after the humiliating defeat, the NC and the UML have not abandoned the Maoist-style of doing business. In a rat race of proving itself more inclusive, visionless and petty-minded politicians at the NC's helm of affairs have chosen to sacrifice people like Radheshyam Adhikari, Harihar Birahi, and Manmohan Bhattarai that make up the NC's intellectual backbone. Instead of nominating these individuals that could have made a significant contribution in drafting a liberal constitution, bewildered NC's leadership decided to nominate semi-illiterates en masse. Does this act of wholesale nomination of semi-illiterates for a responsible job of drafting a constitution, which requires a great deal of technical expertise, really serve the purpose? If the answer is no, then how justified it is to pay bench-warmers as constitution makers? Where is the fiscal responsibility?

Establishing a herd of semi-illiterates to warm benches rather than nominating experts like Radheshyam Adhikari, who have been practicing law for decades, is neither fiscally responsible thing to do, nor a good strategy to counter the Maoists' desire to mould the constitution to their liking. When will the air headed idiots within the NC realize the gravity of the situation?

In a way, the recent CA election results might prove to be blessings for those who really want to practice principle-based politics within the NC and the UML. As it will take considerable time and effort to dislodge the Maoists from the power and defeat them in the upcoming parliamentary and local elections, the fat cats within the NC and the UML that have made a fortune by remaining in power for the last two decades might not have the required patience and the desire to stay put. However, there is no guarantee. If they still decide to hang around, the dedicated cadres that really want to see their party come back to power should revolt. Now is the time for some purification.

Shashank Koirala of the NC and Shankar Pokharel of the UML have the potential to bring back the lost glory. They are neither populist nor tainted. They can actually unite the party and put up a good fight against the Maoists. In order to defeat the Maoists, you got to prove that you are different. So far, by trying to hijack their political agendas, the NC and the UML have been blurring the difference between their party and the Maoists. In the absence of visible difference, people will continue to support the Maoists.

After forming the government in the next couple of weeks, the Maoists will do their best to negate the exiting threats. The threat of takeover by the army will be negated by merging the PLA with the national army and promoting the likes of Kul Bahadur Khadka within the Nepal Army. So the only way left to bring down the Maoist government to its knees, if needed, is through revolution in the tarai. At this point in time, only Madhesi regional parties such as the MPRF and TMDP have the power to unleash enough violence to choke the power structures in Kathmandu. It is, thus, crucial for the NC and the UML to remain in good terms with these regional parties.

At this point in time, the NC and theUML neither have an agenda for counter mobilization nor have the required strength to fight back. So the days ahead are not going to be easy for them. But the game is not over yet. There is one more chance and that is the upcoming elections. In order for the NC and the UML to win the upcoming elections, they need to restructure their party and come up with a sound counter-mobilization strategy. Try to do it right this time around.

Lost in populist rhetoric

The major political parties of yesteryears: the Nepali Congress (NC) and the United Marxist Leninist (UML) may regret not having paid greater attention to the words of the late poet Gopal Prasad Rimal: “One day in an era…” - words which the NC and UML parroted relentlessly during the run up to CA elections. As is often the case when the ideas of others are regurgitated, the NC and UML appear to have lost sight of the holistic implications ensconced in the late poet’s words.

For in the same poem that contains the phrase mentioned above, Rimal also alludes to the arrival of such a day that fundamentally alters the very assumptions upon which an existing paradigm is based. Self-absorbed in the victory of past elections and reassured with erroneous data from the South, Nepal’s former democratic title-holders appear to have severely misinterpreted the meaning and spirit of poet Rimal’s words.

The single day in our era has come and gone and instead of reinstating the NC and UML to their former pedestals, this day has all but eradicated the UML as a credible political contender and as many argue, may unwind a life’s worth of work, started by the late B.P. Koirala.
The verdict of CA elections is in, and there is no turning back. As humbling the former titans’ experience has been, they are the victims of their own inability to understand and counter Maoists’ strategies. The NC and the UML thought that the YCL’s irrational activities were enough to turn off the voters. So instead of trying to defeat the Maoists by scoring a goal, they foolishly wished YCL’s high-handedness to prove as a suicide goal, which at the end of the day did not happen.

Although it is unclear at this time how the Maoists will move ahead in days to come, a few speculative ideas may be generated based on observations from the Maoists’ landslide victory and lessons from history.

In turbulent times, voters tend to choose candidates who promise radical changes. During the early 1930s, the voters in Germany were so frustrated with the inability of their government to address the country’s basic problems that they opted for a candidate from the extreme right to bring about a desired change in the status quo - that candidate happened to be none other than Adolf Hitler.

Although premature to predict whether Nepal’s Maoist party will abide by its commitment to democracy or interpret its victory as unconditional support for the full execution of the ‘Prachanda path,’ the tendency for a radical party to continue carrying out radical policies should not be negated. A clear majority in a body that is tasked to write Nepal’s future constitution is not a position that should be treated lightly; Nepal simply cannot afford to rely on liberal interpretations of what Maoists leaders say from this day onwards.

To the Maoists’ credit, at no point throughout the peace process or the entire period of insurgency has its leadership expressed anything but a full-fledged commitment to the Maoists’ strategic end-goal: the establishment of a one-party communist republic. Any misrepresentation of the Maoists’ strategic intent has come from outside the party - mainly from individuals and organisations that have chosen to retrofit Maoist utterances to their own world-views, regardless of the Frankenstein prescriptions that have often resulted.

For two agonising years, the mainstream parties engaged the Maoists through appeasement. The Maoists in turn, engaged the mainstream through an ultra-realist paradigm. At the end of Nepal’s peace process, realism has triumphed and the Maoist strategy of hard-ball negotiations has prevailed.

A stunned Indian government, bent on showing its own Naxalites that violence doesn’t pay off, is now forced to shake hands with a group that it had once, unilaterally declared as ‘terrorists.’ Having outsourced its Nepal policy to India, the United States of America also faces an unsettling prospect of a China-friendly government in Nepal, thanks to Indian miscalculation.

Such considerations however, are now moot points. Much more relevant is how quickly the unseated parties can reinvent themselves and provide credible alternatives to the Maoist writ. With a gigantic representation in the CA, the Maoists find themselves in a commandeering position from which they have virtually unlimited powers to remake the Nepali polity in their own image. This is all the more reason the presence of competing ideologies and thoughts are a must to resuscitating Nepal’s democracy.

The lesson here is two-fold: the politicians of the NC and UML must practice what they preach; and these parties must engage in introspection to fully comprehend the disastrous consequences of compromising their parties’ distinguishing principles, in favor of their political rivals’ electoral platforms.

Constituent Assembly Election Post-mortem

Everyone is contemplating the factors that carried Nepal's Maoists to an impressive victory in the country's CA elections. The scale of the Maoists’ victory in the CA elections has surprised Western observers and the Maoists alike. Had the Maoists sensed their landslide victory in advance, their quest to form an electoral alliance with the UML would have ended long before the election date. And had the West (or India) anticipated a red curtain falling over Nepal, they may have thought twice before pushing elections at all costs, despite the overwhelming state of lawlessness immediately before elections.

History in this sense hasn't just been made within Nepal; rather, the Maoists' ascendancy to power has set a precedent for the entire South Asian region and the world to "marvel" at. No matter how the Maoist victory is ultimately spun, the cold, hard and uneasy facts stare us squarely in our faces - one permutation of the idea that "power comes from the barrel of a gun" is alive and well and Nepal's Maoists are living proof of this concept.

Having witnessed the Maoists' rise to power, the Nepali people are now in the process of figuring out what a Maoist-majority government means for Nepal's democratic future. Unraveling this mystery requires working-knowledge of the factors that benefited the Maoists as well as elements that amplified the incumbent parties' humiliating defeat.

The debate over whether people who voted for the Maoists actually subscribe to Maoist fundamentalism will continue to play out over the months ahead. However, the symbolic emphasis that voters' placed on the need for radical change requires no further deliberation. The Maoist party swept CA elections primarily because it conducted an excellent electoral campaign but equally because the campaigns of their political adversaries were so hollow. The Maoists had fresh candidates, clear messages and an unwavering strategic objective upon which to pontificate. To the contrary, never mind a winning strategy, the major parties of the yesteryears had neither clean candidates to forward, nor distinctive messages to convey.

To the ordinary observer, the similarities between the candidate list forwarded by Gyanendra less than 26 months earlier, which included the likes of Kamal Thapa and those forwarded by the Nepali Congress (NC) that included the likes of Khum Bahadur Khadka for the CA elections, are hard to miss. Surely, dynamic reactions that reflect public sentiment (instead of a fixated reliance on status quo candidates) would have positioned the NC and UML for less humiliating defeats?

The NC and the UML also appear to have failed miserably at anticipating the Nepali public's intelligence. These parties' attempt at defeating the Maoists by re-packaging agendas for which the Maoists fought a decade-long civil war - establishing a federal democratic republic, building an inclusive society, administering equality and justice, etc. - grossly underestimated the Nepali public's prowess. After all, like informed consumers anywhere in the world, voters in Nepal decided to "purchase" the republican agenda from its original architects - the Maoists.

Once again, the credit goes to the Maoists for their superb "republican bait" – a bait that the NC and UML consumed, hook, line and sinker! By framing the debate exclusively in terms of the republican agenda, the Maoists tactfully engineered a situation where NC and UML candidates unknowingly campaigned on the Maoists' behalf.

The Maoist leaders' continued campaigning while the YCL effectively denied competitors access to large sections of Nepal that have not had any State presence for over a decade. Persistent aggression in the pre-poll environment should have given advocates of liberal democracy reason for logical pause. But the risk of being branded "anti-election reactionaries" undoubtedly subdued (otherwise logical caution) from the liberal democratic camp.

The populist fervor architected by Nepal's Maoists forced Nepal's liberal democrats to continually walk a tightrope between conviction and credibility. Which of these competing agendas was ultimately served, will become uneasily clear in the near future. Already, the process of rationalizing the CA results in terms that praise the democratic process but pin hopes for a functional democracy on a known utilitarian strategy, has begun in earnest. Whether one agrees or not with the Maoists' tactics, the brilliance in the political maneuvering is hard to ignore.

Like the NC that failed to realize the importance of fielding clean candidates and distinctive messages, the UML never got beyond the politics of "fence-sitting". Madhav Nepal held repeated parlays with his Indian and American interlocutors, frequently educated Puspa Kamal Dahal on the meaning of CA elections and invested much in efforts aimed at portraying the UML as responsible for "mainstreaming the Maoists."

Somewhere in this fray however, Madhav Nepal forgot how close Marxism, Leninism and Maoism truly are. The challenge in distinguishing the UML from the Maoists along ideological lines was an enormously important task that Madhav Nepal simply neglected to act on. The UML's strongman busied himself maintaining political correctness and in the process, buried the UML's identity.

It is now clear beyond any credible doubt, that the UML's claim to having mainstreamed the Maoists was in fact, inverted - it is the Maoists who have defined the mainstream to which the NC and UML have migrated, not the other way around. Also, since the current polity is a mainstream that the Maoists have defined, there is little by way of logic to suggest that the constitution that is a product of this polity, will be anything but a Maoist interpretation of democracy.

The CA elections have transformed Nepal's political landscape whereby moderates are now replaced by radical ideologues. While the Maoist leaders have said that they will be “pragmatic,” it would be naive to imagine that this group will abandon its basic ideology.

The Maoists are demonstrably inconsistent when it comes to what they say versus what they actually do. Not even seventy two hours had passed from the time Puspa Kamal Dahal delivered his victory speech (in which he reaffirmed his commitment to multiparty democracy and continued coordination amongst other political parties) and the current Finance Minister Ram Saran Mahat had already been attacked by Maoist cadres, in Nuwakot. The message such actions send to the NC's rank and file is clear - the Maoists do not like losing and they're willing to get violent to prove their point.

Both Hitler and Mussolini took power in more or less a democratic fashion and what they did with democracy is forever engraved in the annals of tragic history. Although the German and Italian examples are not one hundred percent analogous to Nepal, the larger point to take away is that extreme caution is necessary to prevent any group that is borne of radical ideology, from running away with their radical, undemocratic ideas.

Many may posit that Nepal’s excessive dependence on India and its aid dependent economy will serve as natural restraints to Maoist excesses. But the reality is that given the nature of the Maoist victory in Nepal and the nationalist platform the Maoists and Royalists share, India is the one that will be treading lightly on Nepal, not the other way around. This is all the reason why Nepal's liberal democrats have to exercise even more precaution and care over the immediate future. If this group fails to leverage its credentials and act on convictions over credentials, democracy as we know it will undoubtedly come under siege in Nepal.