Madhesi Movement:Blessing in disguise?

The violent protests in terai, which started on January 19, claimed over one and a half dozens of innocent lives. Public property worth millions of rupees has been destroyed. The lives of the poor, who work daily to make their ends, have been seriously jeopardized. While the government is hesitatingly signaling its willingness to have a dialogue, the damage
might have already been done. The social harmony has been seriously disturbed.

The current violence shows the level of anger in Nepali society, which can vent at any time. The challenge ahead in addition to establishing peace, security, and democracy, is to reconcile ethnic and cultural diversity with the concept of a mature and cohesive nationhood. However, it is not an easy task to construct political and economic institutions that will enable the existing ethnic diversity to be readily compatible with the perception of belonging to a single country.

Bismarck famously noted politics as the art of the possible. Jean Monnet, a century later, updated this notion and made it even more appealing. According to Monnet, politics is the art of making possible what is necessary. At this point in time, it is necessary to address the grievances of Madhesis, Dalits, women and the people from the mountains. They do not have enough say in the process of nation-building, and the government should leave no stone unturned to change this.

Irrespective of who was raising the issue, the grievances of Madhesis to a large extent were valid to be addressed. The Madhesi youth, like youth of any other ethnicity that are largely unemployed, may get trapped into the game plan of Janatantrik Terai Mukti Morcha (JTMM) and get swayed with the idea of the armed separatist movement.

It is not possible to establish a new Nepal when approximately 40 percent of people from terai, women, Dalits, and marginalized people from hills and mountains, feel alienated and have grievances that need to be addressed.

So the grievances of Madhesis were genuine but the tone of Madhesi leaders and intellectuals show that they are more troubled by the ethnic slurs they encounter in their day-to-day lives than the real empowerment that has eluded them so far. The missing link in this debate is that it is not only Pahades that are discriminating Madhesis, but also the upper caste Madhesis, such as Jha, Mishra, and Bhumiyars that discriminate against Dalit Madhesis such as Dom and Chamars. A change of heart is necessary among upper caste Madhesis too.

Trying to bring down Pahades onto their knees by burning down their property will not result in a change of hearts and attitudes among Pahades. Old habits die hard. The malaise of discrimination and ill-treatment will die a natural death with an increase in the level of education both among Pahades and Madhesis and modernization of society. Eventually, it will be a thing of our past. It will not happen overnight; perhaps not even in our lifetime, but it will definitely happen if we construct an adequate political and economic institution that enables ethnic diversity now.

Although the 13th Amendment abolished slavery in the United States in 1865, blacks and other minorities are still discriminated against, and still have to encounter racial slurs. Nobody likes to talk about it or acknowledge it, but it is there.

Former Senator George Allen of Virginia used the term Macaca—a monkey native to Asia—to insult a volunteer of Indian descent working for his opponent. Although that very racial slur proved to be exceptionally expensive to his race for the United States senate, it shows how deep racial discrimination is ingrained in American society.

Recently, Senator Joseph Biden, the ranking democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee, called fellow Senator Barrack Obama, "a fellow democrat and presidential hopeful for 2008 as the only African-American who is articulate, bright, clean and nice-looking" in his article published in The New York Observer.

Such racial slurs which are neither politically nor socially correct are still not uncommon even in the Western democracies, and they often come from people who are supposed to push for ethnic and racial equity. Consequently, instead of laying too much emphasis on ethnic slurs that Pahades use and venting anger to settle vendetta, Madhesis should make sure that the government builds institutions that are necessary to ensure their empowerment.

The window of opportunity is now open, and the Madhesi leaders should do their best to grab it. They should push for a system that works on the basis of recognition of separate identities born out of ethnicity, and demonstrate the potential to accommodate, reconcile, and manage social diversities within an overarching polity. Institutional safeguards should be in place to ensure that no group feels privileged or discriminated in the process, or else the actual empowerment will never happen.

The ongoing violent protests have provided Madhesis with tremendous bargaining power, and opportunity to regain political landscape that has been lost to the Maoists. The ongoing protests have put Maoists on a back foot; they are scrambling hard to reorganize their agenda and devise their future strategy with regard to Madhes and Madhesis. It has made Maoists more politically insecure than ever, at least in terai. In order to maintain their political stature and fiefdom, they will covertly store more weapons than they had planned to. Thus, we will not have absolute peace any time soon.

However, at this point in time if Madhesis are somehow able to unite and establish a democratic front, they can seriously challenge Maoists' fiefdom in terai, annulling Maoists' aspiration of establishing a proletarian communist state; this will be a great achievement in itself.
In addition to many things, the ongoing political protests have proved that it does not take a lot of time for people to unite and there is a potential for a serious political force to develop in Nepal. It also has proven that the fear psychosis that Maoists have been able to instill in Nepali society can be evaporated with a strong slogan and comprehensive mass mobilization. Thus, Madhesis should use the existing inertia to establish a meaningful democratic political force that can challenge Maoists' terror reign and bring them into a democratic framework so that they do not indulge in politics of violence and embrace modern politics based on human values.

The only way to bring Maoists into the mainstream is by mass mobilization, and challenging their fiefdom. Maoists will remain faithful to their commitment towards democracy only when they realize that they cannot rule Nepal by resorting to guns and terrorizing people. Other methods, including endlessly conceding to Maoist demands, are politically suicidal for Seven Party Alliance (SPA) and are doomed to fail in the long run.

The Madhesi movement should be seen as an opportunity by SPA to institutionalize democracy and ensure their survival. SPA and the international community should try helping Madhesis—even if it requires a covert operation—to establish a democratic front. As several senior Maoist leaders have already made it clear that they will not settle for anything less than a proletarian communist state, the only force that can checkmate them is Madhesi in terai. Maoists in terai are running for their lives now. The ongoing violent protests in terai have clearly demonstrated that Madhesis can reverse the trend of Maoist run over the democratic forces.

As far as Madhesis are concerned, the time is ripe for them to organize and establish themselves as a democratic force. All Madhesis need now is charismatic leaders that can see things beyond race, ethnicity, and political vendetta. Madhesis can seriously help establish inclusive democracy where different ethnic groups can coexist and realize their dreams.

New Nepal: Rhetoric versus reality

While the Terai is burning with the flames of sectarian violence, the government is busy hammering a power-sharing deal with the Maoists। The mistake of discrediting the Maoist insurgency as simply a law-and-order problem during the initial phase of insurgency is being repeated. The grievances of Madhesis are genuine and should be addressed before they are manipulated for political gains.

The dark side of the ongoing ethnic tension is that some politicians whose careers have been in the doldrums are attempting a fresh return by playing the ethnic card। The trend of armed rebellion set out by Prachanda and Baburam has been used as a blueprint by many whose political stature has been cut short, either due to the loss of public support or because of their clout within their own political parties. It has become a standard practice to follow an aggressive and violent means in the name of "social change" when the career of a politician reaches an absolute dead end.

Prachanda and Baburam Bhattarai resorted to using guns when they perceived that their party was a "sinking ship।" After the Election Commission officially recognized Nirmal Lama's less radical faction as legitimate United People's Front in 1994, Prachanda and Baburam's hope of seizing the limelight in Nepali politics was prematurely aborted. They knew early on that they would be unable to establish themselves as prominent figures through parliamentary politics. They had to resort to violence because that was the best --- perhaps the last --- option in hand for them to realize there dreams. Upendra Yadav and Jay Prakash Gupta became staunch advocates of the plight of Madhesis after they lost clout to the United Marxist Leninist and the Nepali Congress.

In addition, the latest entrants to the bandwagon of opportunistic politics are former Maoists Jaykrishna Goit and Jwala Singh, head of The Terai Jantantrik Liberation Front (TJLF) and the self-proclaimed leader of the renegade faction of TJLF respectively, who lost their ethnic dominance within the CPN (Maoist) to another Madhesi leader, Matrika Yadav.
The idea of social change is a noble one। Society should change with changing geopolitical situations and modern innovations. That is how human beings are able to utilize their maximum potential. But in the case of Nepal, the idea of "social change" has been widely abused for political gains.

Prachanda and others in his party believe the CPN (Maoist) to be the most inclusive party। They claim to be the agents of social change. The latest example cited to prove this claim is the composition of Maoist parliamentarians in the interim parliament, comprising mostly Dalits, women, and Madhesis.

However, the question often left out in this debate is what powers these Maoist parliamentarians will have and will be allowed to exercise, if any। The Maoist parliamentarians will vote as a unified block based on the directives they receive from Prachanda and his upper caste followers in the central committee.

The Maoist parliamentarians are like birds whose wings have already been clipped before setting them free in the corridors of the parliament building. They cannot and will not be allowed to act according to their conscience. It is the central committee, which is heavily dominated by the upper castes, bahuns and chhetris, who devise future political strategies and set agendas. Thus, the bitter pill behind the Maoist propaganda of inclusive politics is that it is the upper castes in the CPN (Maoist) who are using the Dalits and women as their puppets and running the show themselves. True social change warrants for bringing Dalits, women, and other marginalized groups into the decision- making positions not using them as puppets.
The Maoists, who got 73 seats in the 330 member parliament because of smoking guns they possessed and brainwashed militiamen, seem to be in a mood to sit down and listen to the genuine grievances of the Madhesis, who have stepped into the Maoist shoes। Matrika Yadav, a Maoist ideologue and central committee member, while referring to Jaykrishna Goit, the leader of Terai Jantantrik Liberation Front (TJLF), noted "that everything cannot be achieved through violence". That is like the pot calling the kettle black.

One thing for sure is that the Maoists, whose hands are stained with the blood of innocent people, do not have the moral authority to preach nonviolence as a means for social change। It is they who set the precedence of violent politics and taught that the politics of intimidation and killing is the shortcut to power.

Brahmin and chhetris have held far too much clout and say in the governing of the nation since the existence of Nepal as a sovereign state। Madhesis, who account for approximately 40 percent of the population, have been largely marginalized and discriminated against for far too long. The current dissent, if not dealt with very carefully, may fuel recurrent communal conflicts and robust separatist movements.

Except for the rhetoric of need for an independent state, the demands put forward by the Madhesis for an inclusive political system are largely genuine and the need of the day। We do not need a separate state to guarantee the rights of Madhesis and other marginalized groups. Goit's TJLF and its renegade faction led by Jwala Singh are playing the separatist card to enhance their bargaining power.

However, the deepening fissure and polarization between Pahade and Madhise could precipitate a bigger crisis। The real challenge now is to wilt such polarization not by force or violence, but by legitimate sharing of the resources of the country, irrespective of the culture, race, or region of the people. The only way to prevent separatism is through the introduction of a federal structure for regional autonomy that would guarantee ethnic representation. The demand for equity and self-governance should not be viewed from an ethnic dimension. It is not about ethnicity, but equity and social justice.

In Nepal, where leaders prefer cruising with the popular opinion rather than sticking to the politically and socially correct agendas, safeguarding territorial and political integrity will be one of the biggest challenges। The political parties should not allow the Maoists to change the parameters of the relations between Nepal and India rooted in the concept of equidistance between India and China.

If the Maoists-influenced leaders try to show any tilt away from India, it is very much possible that India could instigate and support the Madhesis and thus could jeopardize the very integrity of Nepal।

Furthermore, we cannot ignore India's expertise in instigating separatist movements. If it were not for India's involvement, the Pakistani Army had enough teeth to foil the separatist movement that led to the establishment of Bangladesh. Thus, until we are able to inculcate the feeling of nationalism and a sense of belonging in the Madhesis via the introduction of federal structure, the looming danger of instigation of separatist movements fueled by India stays put. The only way to annul that danger is through the introduction of federal structure.
The biggest danger to peace and democracy is not from the Madhesis. The Maoist commitment to democracy is highly questionable. Prachanda's recent interview to British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) conveys a loud and clear message about the Maoist-long term plans. He has clearly said that the Maoists will not settle for anything less than a proletarian communist state. The writing is on the wall, if only the so-called intellectuals and punditry of Nepal could read it.

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.

Challenges for Civil Society in Nepal

More than dozens of innocent civilians have been killed by the Maoists after the revival of parliament in April. The Maoists hacked to death NC cadre Sushil Gyawali in broad daylight in Bardia. They attacked and injured over eighteen people, including lawyers, journalists and pedestrians while they were demonstrating against the Maoist atrocities in Bara. Raj Kumar Kusiyat was abducted from his house in Sunsari district.

These are some of the Maoist atrocities that surfaced in the media in the last couple of weeks. All these cases have one thing in common -- the perpetrators. The perpetrators in all these cases were the Maoists who believe in Mao Tse-tung's "power comes from the barrel of a gun".

While the Maoist atrocities continue unabated in post-April Nepal, the human right activists are nowhere to be seen as they were during King Gyanendra's heydays -- crisscrossing the globe attending talk programs and delivering lectures on human rights abuses taking place in Nepal.

Shouldn't they be protesting against the Maoist atrocities and pressurizing them to denounce violence? However, it is not the silence of human rights groups that surprises me the most but the silence of the "official" civil society that vehemently opposed and helped bring down King Gyanendra's despotic rule.

Civil society can and has played a significant role in safeguarding human rights, peace building, and democratization in different parts of the globe.

In countries such as South Africa, Mozambique, Mali, the Philippines, Guatemala, Liberia, and Northern Ireland peace, reconciliation, and democratization became possible in part due to the relentless effort and neutral stance of civil societies.

During the April revolution, hundreds of thousand of citizens participated in mass rallies organized by the "official" civil society. Nepali citizens ignored and betrayed by politicians for decades had found a strong platform for citizen activism in the form of civil society.

However, the failure on part of "official" civil society to condemn the Maoist atrocities which is against the ceasefire code of conduct signed between the government and the Maoists has raised a question on the neutrality of the civil society.

The civil society of pre-April revolution era was the projection into the future of a vision that rested upon an emotional unity. However, the civil society of post-April revolution cannot and should not base itself on mere emotions. The leaders of civil society should strive hard on the building of carefully nurtured institutions, practical realization of ethical values, and involvement of the greatest possible numbers of people in public life.

The main task of civil society in post-April revolutionary era is to construct democratic mechanisms of stability that secure constitutional checks and balances, increase public awareness in the spirit of respect for law, and encourage citizen activism.

Civil society is a major component of democracy. It creates a much needed participatory space for the citizens. In Nepal where radical communist insurgency has taken a heavy toll, existence of an active and neutral civil society has an ideological function: as a component in a counter ideology to "authoritarianism".

The civil society has a greater responsibility towards safeguarding political freedom and legitimatization of a social space in which private property and economic institutions ought to develop independently without state's interference.

The obvious obstacle to democratization is the civil disorder, violation of human rights, and civil liberties. There has been an unprecedented upsurge in crimes, vandalism, and vigilantism in the last decade or so. Such social pathologies have tremendously eroded the levels of trust and social capital. The civil society now must work towards revival of the lost trust and societal capital that is necessary for democratic stability and societal well-being.

Both in the liberal and the socialist visions of civil society, the basic organizing principle is the same-human rights. The official civil society which once enjoyed tremendous public support and played an important role bringing down the autocratic regime may lose societal trust and support if it fails to voice concerns and protest against indiscriminate killings, tortures of innocent civilians, abductions, and extortions.

Indifference and passivity on part of citizens is the greatest threat to democracy. A democratic state cannot survive without active citizens.

Civil society does not act in opposition to the democratic state, but cooperates with it and helps achieve democratic stability. Instead of staying silent on the Maoist atrocities, the leaders of civil society should raise the concerns.

For the consolidation of democracy, we need a civil society whose members agree that we should all live together under a common system of rule making and enforcement. Human rights and democracy are inseparable and interdependent. Human rights standards underpin a meaningful conception of democracy and democracy offers the best hope for the promotion and protection of human rights and civil liberties.

The civil society should strive towards promoting truth, justice, and reconciliation. The parties involved in violation of human rights that took place in the last one and a half decades have not sought any kind of forgiveness. The victims of human rights abuses continue to suffer psychologically. These victims, most of which are internally displaced citizens do not even have a choice between either justice or peace because neither option explicitly or officially is offered to them yet.

Internally displaced citizens are still forced to live in subhuman living conditions. Their plight is still being undermined and ignored by both the government and the Maoists.

Like many post-revolutionary societies, political landscape in Nepal has evolved and changed tremendously in the past couple of months. Civil society should take a lead in promoting accountability and justice for past abuses.

It should assist in the long-term task of reconciliation. It would be extremely hard and in some case impossible for internally displaced people to forgive the Maoist cadres in their villages that forced them to flee their homes.

Nepal's future as a well functioning democratic state to a large extent rests on effectiveness of the civil society. The leaders of the civil society should not let public trust be eroded because when people are pessimistic and lose confidence, they withdraw from the effort to build a better life and community. Society begins to lose its talent and energy. The decade-long bloody insurgency has claimed thousands of innocent people and displaced millions of fellow citizens. We cannot and should not withdraw from the struggle of building our nation.