The Growing Crisis

The Maoist comrades have done it again. And, this time, the victim is a Swiss national Steve Jeannereet. It is a matter of national shame that we cannot ensure safety of tourists that enrich our public purse and enhance our national image.

The Maoists have killed teachers, journalists, and harassed doctors. But by physically assaulting a foreign national, they have not only ashamed themselves but also dented nation's image. When will the Maoists come to their senses? I guess it is not the right question to ask. Will they ever come to senses, unless they are forced to?

The government is trying to tighten the screw on rebels in the tarai while providing a free pass to the Maoists to engage in criminal activities. This strategy will eventually backfire. It will make easier for the rebel groups in the tarai to manipulate young unemployed youths in the name of ethnic discrimination. If the government cannot ruffle Puspa Kamal Dahal's feathers, it should not set a dangerous precedence of selective justice by targeting Madhesi rebels.

There is no difference whatsoever between Puspa Kamal Dahal and Nagendra Paswan's men. They are all engaged in criminal and anti-social activities. They have blood of innocent people stained in their hands.

The current government has completely failed to maintain law-and-order in the country. One thing that the current government is good at is -- provide compensation to the victims of Maoist crimes. If the prime minister or the home minister had to pay compensation from their pockets, then they would feel the heat. To give away taxpayers' hard-earned money does not seem to bother them a bit. This is height of irresponsibility and unaccountability.

If the Maoists are responsible for committing crimes, the current government is responsible for turning a blind eye on their criminal activities. Needles to say, both are at fault. In order to make the Maoists more responsible, the government should deduct the amount handed over to the victims' family from the money that the Maoists receive for their men confined in the camps. Let them feel the heat too. Hit them where it hurts most.

Of late, it has become evident that the Maoist leadership is not only power hungry but also hungry for money. Thousands of innocent civilians that were lured and registered as combatants have deserted the UN-administered camps, but the Maoist leadership is yet to report the cases to the government and reject payments made to support them. They blame the mainstream political parties for corruption and mismanagement but fail to see how mismanaged and corrupt their own party is. Collecting payments on behalf of non-existent combatants is a fraud in broad daylight.

It is understandable that the Maoists would not budge about it because they are financially benefiting from it. But why are UNMIN and the government silent on this issue? Neither UNMIN has shown any decency and reported the matter to the government nor has the government deemed it necessary to become fiscally responsible and stopped the payment even after media has reported it. When will the people in the corridors of power and those appeasing them to bury their own incompetence be held responsible for their screw ups?

With each passing day, things are becoming clearer: (1) The Seven Party Alliance (SPA) wants to remain in power forever in the name of peace process (2) India, after having burnt it fingers in its mission of buying unequivocal and everlasting Maoist support, now wants to teach them a lesson by strengthening rebels outfit in the tarai (3) the Maoists do not want peace and elections because of the plummeting public support. If there is peace, and free and fair elections are held, the Maoist leadership knows it very well that its bargaining power will take a nosedive. For the Maoists, chaos is profitable. It has both financial and political pay-offs.

Another thing that has become evident from the Maoists' never ending experiment is that they know what they want (capture the power and hang in there), but they don't know how to get there. That's the reason why they are engaged in never ending errant experimentation of all kinds.

The Nepalis are now in a far worse situation than they were during the Maoist insurgency. Then, we had one problem -- the Maoist insurgency. But we have uncountable groups with various motives and agendas. They are used and abused by various unseen forces to gain control. Caught in the middle is the unelected government that neither has the required mandate to force its will on people, nor has any strategy to solve the problems. What an ugly situation to be in.

India by forcing the SPA to join hands with the Maoists has created more problems than it actually had. While Nepal is failing, India wants to redefine its success. After the Maoists stopped dancing to the Indian tune, India now, wants to tighten its grip on Nepal and teach the Maoists a lesson by strengthening the rebel outfits in the tarai. India might have a last laugh by wiping out the Maoists in the tarai, but the Nepalis do not have anything to cheer about. It might be a good strategy from India's point of view, but when it comes to the people of Nepal, India will be simply replacing one devil with another. Creation of warlords has never brought peace and strengthened democracy anywhere.

With each passing day, not only our freedom and prosperity, but also our sovereignty is at stake. How much India values our sovereignty is crystal clear from its recent request to maintain a status-quo on encroachment of the Nepali soil at Susta.

Let us get realistic for a second, shall we? Had King Gyanendra agreed to dance to Indian tune like Jigme in Bhutan, Gayyoom in the Maldives, and General Than Shwe in Burma, what would have been the fate of SPA politicians? Where would they be now?

India's selfless desire towards establishing peace and stable democracy in Nepal is not as selfless as India would like it. It cares more about its grips on Nepal than anything else. It wants to administer proxy rule in Nepal through the likes of Dasho Jigme Khesar Namgyal Wangchuck, Gayyoom in the Maldives. What will it take us to realize this fact?

Ram Raja Prasad Singh has already revealed India's role in fueling the ongoing crisis in the tarai. If India really wanted peace in Nepal and respected its sovereignty, it would not deploy its intelligence agency to bring together all the rebel groups operating in the tarai and have a meeting with them in Indian soil. It would not have engaged itself in encroachment of Nepali soil. It would rather help negotiate a settlement between the rebels and the Nepali government and returned encroached soil even before Nepal approached for it.

The problem with our political leaders is that they don't believe what they don't want to believe. Ignorance is bliss and this adage applies very well to beleaguered politicians who want to conveniently ignore ground realities as long as they can. The self-esteem of the political leadership has sunk so low that it is hard to believe that the current leadership will be able to navigate the nation towards stable liberal democracy.

So far both optimists and pessimists have been proved wrong. Neither peace nor complete political paralysis has resulted. Political crises are yet to be equated with disaster. However, if the current political deadlock and insincerity among the political leadership persists, the nation will plunge into a deep political and social crisis. Nepal will disintegrate internally if the inherent malaise is not removed.

Moving Beyond Sectarianism

As Nepal is trying to recover from the hemorrhages of a decade-long insurgency, it is taking fresh hits from another set of dream merchants - secessionists - Jay Krishna Goit and Jwala Singh and Messiahs of ethnic cause। However, the sad part is that they do it even when the country is bleeding and society is trying to come together after years of violence, mistrust, and blame games.

The country is being treated like old, poor, and helpless parents that do not have anything to pass along to their children। Like children who abandon poor and ailing parents that are unable to pass along any fortune, a growing number of groups are now exhibiting their disgruntlement and threatening to disassociate.

Instead of nurturing the nation to heal and deliver the things, we are bleeding it further, in order to succumb and surrender to our demands। We might be doing so while not understanding the situation; the things that united and prosperous democracies have to offer are completely different from those of an ethnically divided, highly unstable, and vulnerable nation. For example, the things that Ghana, a young but successful democracy, have to offer to its citizens are way better and higher in standards than what Sudan, an ethnically divided and unstable nation has to and can offer to its citizens.

While other countries around the world are modernizing their economies to compete in global markets, Nepal is getting bogged down by ethnic violence, lack of rule of law, accountability and good governance, and demand for secession। Every time it tries to get back on its feet, political insincerity and manipulation pulls out the carpet from beneath its feet. After 1950, when visionary leaders like B P Koirala tried giving the country a fresh life through an infusion of vision, King Mahendra pulled the plug. After 1990, when democracy was infusing changes, the Maoists bogged it down.

Now, when it is trying to heal again, ethnic groups have blown their own war horn। It's not about whether the demands are genuine or not, but the timing. The country is being hit when it hurts most; when it is weak.

Our politicians have grossly reduced the saying, "All's fair in love and war" to "All's fair in politics and the quest for power।" However, in the game of power politics, what our politicians tend to misunderstand is that immoral and undemocratic means inevitably lead to immoral and undemocratic ends. The spillover effects of immoral and undemocratic acts are always irrational, illogical, and anti-social. For example, the Maoists, in their quest for power, divided the nation along the lines of ethnicity. Now they are the ones that are having a tough time dealing with the evils of an ethnic divide which they inculcated and exacerbated among people of different ethnicities.

What the Maoists failed to understand during their heyday of people's war is that in a politically enlightened country like Nepal, they will not be able to stop people from adopting formulas that work, even if it is for a short period of time।

One of the reasons why acts of political manipulation and undemocratic means to grab power are getting deeper instead of ceasing is because the perpetrators of immoral and undemocratic acts have never been punished in the entire history of Nepal as a sovereign state। The culture of impunity has reduced the need for rule of law into an oxymoron.

The Nepali society has been the victim of a lack of accountability on the part of politicians and bureaucrats for a long time now। Wrongdoers and spoilers in politics and bureaucracy have never been punished for their past deeds and that has now jeopardized the citizens' right to peace, stability, and prosperity. The reward for wrongdoers and culture of impunity started with heinous crime that Janga Bahadur committed early on in the history. Furthermore, the last Rana ruler, Mohan Shamsher, was not punished and forced to forfeit his property that was amassed at the expense of development of the nation; instead, he was made prime minister even after the fall of the Rana regime.

Similarly, the crooks of the Panchayat era that strangled democratic rights from seeing the light of dawn for 29 long years never got punished for their involvement in the suppression of the peoples' right to freedom, and are still walking free. The Mallik Commission, appointed to investigate the loss of life and property during the people's movement in 1990 and disappearances during the Panchayat era, is still collecting the dust. The reluctance on the part of the Seven Party Alliance's (SPA) government to make the Rayamajhi Commission's report public signals that there is a large possibility that the wrongdoers of King Gyanendra's repressive regime will, as usual, not be punished. The Rayamajhi Commission's report may meet the same fate as the Mallik Commission's report did and may just end up collecting dust.
Wise people learn from history and to date we have not been so wise when it comes to learning both from our mistakes and the mistakes that people in situations similar to ours have committed around the world। What we, as a nation, have failed to grasp so far is that we cannot have the basis of democracy if we don't have the rule of law and accountability. How long should this violence in the name of equality and social justice be tolerated before it is deemed political manipulation?

"New Nepal" will not bear even a tinge of newness if the lawlessness is not controlled and the lack of accountability not checked। It will rather exacerbate the existing instability and open the door for fictionalizations, mafias, and all of the other problems that stem out in the absence of the rule of law and lack of accountability. Those who are burning down the private and public properties in the name of seeking justice and equality are keeping us behind and making us grossly unequal by diminishing our competitive strength in the world arena. Those who destroy scarce resources in the name of seeking equality are by no means any less guilty than those who failed to ensure their equality.

The road to peace, stability, and democracy should not be allowed to turn murky and subsequently hijacked by individuals that want to impose their form of democracy। Be it the king or Prachanda, if they try to quench their thirst for power by quelling the peoples' right to freedom and democracy, they are the perpetrators. They should be held accountable for souring our dreams and hindering our road to prosperity. Our collective destiny cannot and should not be allowed to become a victim of power-mongers that try to ill-define the stretch and bounds of democracy for personal gain.

When democracy can emerge and persist in an impoverished, landlocked, and predominantly Muslim nation like Mali (emerged in 1992), where the average life expectancy of only 49 years is lower than ours, then there is no reason, at least in principle, why democracy cannot institutionalize and sustain in Nepal. As far as the persistence and smooth functioning of democracy is concerned, Seymour Martin Lipset's argument, "the richer the country, the greater the chance that it would sustain democracy" cannot be discredited altogether. In the absence of our ability to combine democracy on the one hand, with freedom, the rule of law, accountability, and good governance - prerequisites for the overall development and prosperity of citizens - on the other hand, power-mongers will time and again try to raise their heads and attempt to defeat the existence and need of democracy. They will do so to impose their own version of democracy, which will be highly illiberal in nature but will bear the tag "for the suppressed, by the suppressed." Are we ready for more propaganda yet?

Nepal - Inclusion With Vision

Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala's commitment that “All marginalized groups would be included in all the organs of state machinery on a proportional basis.” However, translating a political speech into viable affirmative action programs that will ensure the actual empowerment of marginalized groups through proper representation may not be as easy as it seems.
The challenge ahead is to construct just affirmative action policies that can adequately and efficiently administer compensatory and distributive justice, but at the same time have very little room for abuse by free. One of the most important roles of a state that strives towards inclusive democracy is to reach out to marginalized groups that have been bypassed either by choice or by default. This will ensure that public service system is inclusive and representative. We, as a nation, will be better off by ensuring inclusion of marginalized groups rather than exclusion, which in itself is undemocratic. Thus, inclusion of all marginalized groups bypassed so far, in all of the organs of state machinery on a proportional basis, is necessary to inculcate a feeling of belonging and to make state machineries more responsive to the needs of everyone's need.


One of the ways adopted to correct past mistakes is through affirmative action policies to ensure empowerment of the marginalized groups. However, there is a fine line between effective administration of compensatory and distributive justice through affirmative action policies that ensures empowerment of marginalized groups and the reverse discrimination. In South Africa, after the African National Congress took power in the early 1990s, they tried correcting past indecencies by offering a severance package to white civil servants did not serve as a good omen as a majority of the experienced white civil servants left government service. This had a tremendous negative affect on bureaucracy and the overall development of the nation.

Thus, the burden lies on the government to ensure that the group that was privileged in the past does not become a victim of reverse discrimination and withdraw its contribution to the society। An abrupt withdrawal and flight of this section of society that is well-educated, relatively wealthy, and politically enlightened could prove to be disastrous for development of the nation. For empowerment of members of a marginalized group to take place, it is important to identify the individuals within the marginalized groups that are actually deprived and in need of the state’s intervention. Thus, preference should be given to only those castes within the officially declared marginalized groups for their upliftment, enhancement, and subsequently empowerment. For example, the members of backward caste Madhesis and Madhesi Dalits such as Lohar, Sonar, Dom, Chamars, Musahars and others who actually face discrimination on a daily basis, are at the bottom of the economic ladder and do not have access to social goods and opportunity should be the ones to benefit from the affirmative action policies, but not to the whole “Madhesi group” which they are part of. This is mainly so because some members of the “Madhesi group” such as those belonging to upper castes- Brahmins, Rajputs, and Bhumiyars- are actually more successful and financially well off than the lower caste Madhesis, Dalit Madhesis and even lower caste and Dalit Pahades. If they, along with lower caste and Dalit Madhesis, are made entitled to affirmative actions, the well-educated upper caste Madhesis that are better educated and financially well-off will quickly learn to hop opportunities and reduce affirmative action policies to “affirmative auction.”

So, instead of blindly allocating opportunities to the people within the certain group, a combination of factors like wealth, education level, income, occupation, and geographical disparities should be used to identify truly needy people among the officially classified marginalized groups. The resources and opportunities thus saved can be distributed among those who are that are needy but are born in the upper castes by default, not by choice.
The government should learn from the Indian experience। Despite having the public policy of affirmative action in India in some form or the other for more than five decades now, approximately 25 percent of total population is still languishing below the poverty line. The people that make up this 25 percent are mostly backward castes and Dalits. So, merely having policies in place does not ensure empowerment and emancipation. For real empowerment and emancipation to occur, policies should be able to deliver to those who need the most. In addition, affirmative action policies should be auditable. It should be audited from time to time to see if it is really addressing the issue that it is suppose to address or just enhancing dependency and the sense of entitlement among the recipients.

Our success lies in devising affirmative action policies that are unique, workable in the sociocultural context of Nepal and which reach those who deserve it the most। The policies should be time-bound rather than open ended. Failure to do so would result in a situation like in India, whereby the hope that reservation would be abolished after the catching-up by the marginalized groups, has not yet been realised. In the absence of a strict time frame, the very notion of catch-up will be defined to suit the political needs and will be subjected to political manipulation. As in India, there will be a consistent and concerted effort to extend reservation to cover more and more groups. It will be impossible to get rid of politically expedient policies of reservation in the absence of a time frame, even if it is a generation or two later. Thus, having a timeline in place is extremely important to prevent preference from turning out to be an entitlement. Failure to do so will eventually constrict opportunities for upper castes and ignite social tension. The formation of upper-class militia such as Ranvir Sena in Bihar in future cannot be ruled out altogether.

The overall goal of affirmative action policies that are to be implemented in Nepal should be to make discriminated and bypassed members of marginalized group become more competent and help them to emerge as natural competitors rather than enhance intergenerational dependency.

Peace under the gun?

The news about the government and the Maoists making a breakthrough on the issue of arms management took everyone by surprise. The Kathmandu Post (Oct 31) quoted an anonymous leader involved in the negotiation and reported that a breakthrough acceptable to the government, the Maoists and the international community had been reached.

However, the recent interview given by Maoist leader Ram Bahadur Thapa "Badal" to Nepal Magazine states otherwise. He flatly refuses any possibility of the Maoists agreeing to the disarmament, demobilization, reintegration (DDR) formula put forward by the United Nations (UN). His perception of DDR as a means to force the Maoists to surrender raises serious doubts about him toeing the line with the Maoist supreme leaders, Prachanda and Dr. Babu Ram Bhattarai, on the issue of arms management. The brewing suspicion of him leading a splinter Maoist rebel group holds ground more than ever now and should not be understated.

A flurry of statements from the Maoist and SPA leaders in recent days have led to waxing and waning of people's expectations for a durable peace and stability. The marriage of convenience between the SPA and Maoists during the April revolution had instilled a ray of hope for a lasting peace and stability among the conflict-ridden Nepali citizens. However, with each day's passing, both peace and democracy seem to be an elusive dream.

As long as the Maoists maintain their goals inflexible and provide conflicting signals, there is a strong possibility that talks may soon hit the wall. Their refusal to disarm may prove to be a stumbling block in the ongoing peace process. When a party involved in negotiation puts forward inflexible goals, overlapping bargaining ranges fail to emerge and negotiations can break down prematurely.

At this point in time, the Maoists are trying to prove that they can hold out longer than their opposition during both negotiations and war. They understand that the longer they can stall negotiations, the more likely they are to convince the SPA government to capitulate.

The Maoist leaders are reluctant to disarm militiamen because while divulging secret weapons depots might facilitate settlement, it will simultaneously leave them vulnerable to intimidations and attacks. They know that the people and security forces that they have intimidated during this decade-long insurgency will lash out at them at the first chance they get.

Thus, the Maoists are trapped in a Catch-22 situation when it comes to the issue of disarmament. If the Maoist leaders agree to complete decommissioning of weapons, they will be making their militiamen dangerously vulnerable to annihilation; if they refuse to do so, they would be triggering the very security dilemma they hope to avoid.

Insurgency resolution is always a complex matter, no matter how simple and straightforward it may look from outside. It is complex not because of conflicting objectives, but because of conflicting perceptions of the issues involved and the complicated relationships between adversaries.

Resolving the Maoist insurgency requires more than agreeing to a ceasefire. An extension of a ceasefire is not a guarantor of peace. Successful resolution of the Maoist conflict warrants complete disarmament and demobilization of Maoist militiamen, integration of militiamen into the mainstream of society, and building an interim government capable of accommodating insurgents' interests. However, the formation of an interim government including the Maoists should be based on the complete disarmament and demobilization of Maoist militiamen.

Disarmament and demobilization of Maoist militiamen is crucial because a free and fair Constituent Assembly (CA) election is not possible without complete disarmament of Maoist militiamen. If they are not disarmed, the Maoists will definitely try to capitalize on people's fears. It would be naive to think that the demagogues, with their pathetic human right records, would act like Boy Scouts during the CA election.

In addition, if the CA election is held without disarming the Maoist rbels, it will be dominated by concerns about peace and security. Furthermore, the voters will be forced to use the limited power of their franchise to appease armed insurgents with a hope that this will prevent rebels from heading back to the jungles.

Thus, successful disarmament and demobilization of the militiamen is extremely important in enhancing confidence in the electoral process and guaranteeing fair election results.

Peace and democracy cannot flourish under the gun. The mad rush towards the formation of an interim government without addressing the core issues--- disarmament and demobilization of armed rebels --- would be a futile attempt towards a lasting peace and stability. The solution based on power sharing without taking care of the core issues remains incomplete. Forcing unwilling and contentious factions together in any kind of power-sharing structure is not a lasting solution and is bound to fail in the long run.

If we look at the world's history, it becomes evident that settlements based on power sharing without taking care of disarmament, demobilization, reintegration (DDR) issues eventually fail and lead to renewed war. For instance, failure to disarm combatants led to renewed conflict in Angola.

According to Margaret Antsee, the UN special envoy to Angola, "Any lasting solution of a long-standing civil war depends on a satisfactory resolution of the military element." Thus, complete disarmament and demobilization of Maoist militiamen should be the central component of efforts towards re-establishing legitimate governance, lasting peace, and a well-functioning democracy.

If peace talks are on the verge of breakdown, the Maoist fear of annihilation can be subsided through a firm commitment from the third party. The UN can mobilize peace keeping forces in the field to actively punish violations and protect disarmed Maoist militiamen. This will ensure that the Maoist security concerns will not be negated and will promote their willingness towards disarmament.

The ongoing peace negotiations may fail, not because the Maoists do not want peace, but because they cannot solve certain tenacious bargaining problems. If the Maoists want to establish themselves as a political force, they should view disarmament and demobilization as an important step towards both confidence-building among the parties and the development of new institutions and procedures of decision-making that are necessary for sustaining peace and democracy.

The Maoists should move away from their current competitive-bargaining strategy and adopt a softer cooperative-bargaining strategy. This is mainly because competitive-bargaining strategy assumes a "win-lose" situation. As neither the Maoists nor the government want to be perceived as a loser, this strategy does not lend itself to the compromises necessary to bring an end to the conflict; no substantial progress can be made as such. Cooperative-bargaining is based more on a "win-win" mentality and is geared more towards focusing on benefits for the parties involved.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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