Thought I would start a thread. And add articles to it here and then.

- http://nepal.motime.com

"We are a strong voice for social justice. But let there be no misunderstanding, my first priority will be rapid economic growth. There is no reason whey a country like Nepal can not achieve the ecomic status of a Singapore within two decades of hard work," Prasain said in an interview to Time magazine. "China and India are about to surpass the U.S. in terms of size of GDP. Guess where that puts the center of gravity for the world economy!"

The Sadbhavana Dilemma
Paramendra Bhagat
September 7, 2004

- http://www.geocities.com/paramendra/2004/nation1.html

Sadbhavana did not exist for the longest time, and then it stayed small, and got smaller, and then it split, and then reunited, and then it opened up its account in the eastern Terai, then it split again.

For someone who was in Kathmandu from 1983 to 1996, I am well aware of the need for a Sadbhavana for the Madhesi cause. If my generation and the generation before me will not fight the fight, the one after will have to. The struggle for equal rights can be postponed at best, it can not be wished away. The Madhesis in Nepal are like the Tamils in Sri Lanka, thought to be of Indian origin, and pushed to second class status, only luckier in that the Madhesis are almost half of Nepalýs population, whereas the Tamils are only close to 10% of Sri Lankaýs. And so the Madhesisý chances of righting the wrongs through the ballot box are very real. The Tamil tragedy of decades- long bloodshed is less likely to be replicated in Nepal for the Madhesi cause.

I was involved with the Sadbhavana break-away faction, the Nepal Samajwadi Janata Dal, in the 1994 to 1996 period, when I came to the U.S. for college, and Hridayesh Tripathyýs letters of recommendation detailing my political activity were a big help during my applications process. I have been based in the US since 1996, vocal on the Madhesi cause at various Nepali online destinations like The Nepal Digest and Sajha. When you are abroad relying on online news sources, the Kathmandu mediaýs bias against the Sadbhavana becomes even more apparent. I have made my fair share of phone calls to my former ýcolleagues.ý

When Tripathy and Mandal parted ways, it was a major blow to the cause. Tripathy was instrumental in launching the Sadbhavana in 1991. Five of the six M.P.s were from his part of the Terai. But then Mandal opened up the Sadbhavana account in Morang, a traditional bastion of the major Sadbhavana rival, the Congress, no small feat. It is worth noting that Gajendra Narayan Singh had sided with Girija Koirala in his turf tussle with Tripathy, and now Tripathy finds himself in alliance with Koirala in his tussle with Mandal.

Sarlahi is another up and coming turf for the Sadbhavana, thanks to the likes of Rajendra Mahato.

One thing that seems to work against Tripathy is the Bihar and UP style caste equations in the Terai that produced the likes of Laloo Yadav and Mulayam Singh Yadav. But Tripathy has always had the V. P. Singh option. And based on my personal dealings with him, I can vouch for his credentials on the issue.

In a national political climate where the extreme left of the Maoists and the extreme right of the palace groups have occupied center stage, and the mainstream of political parties have been sidelined, the breakup of the Sadbhavana can in large be attributed to a play of external factors. But ultimately both Tripathy and Mandal will have to bury their hatchets and reunite, if their allegiance is to the cause and not to themselves.

In a party that might have institutionalized internal democracy, many strong personalities can stay under the same umbrella. Who becomes party chairperson? Let the convention delegates decide through the secret ballot. Who becomes leader of the party in the parliament? Let the party M.P.s vote on the issue.

Instead of cashing on the split of the Congress, the Sadbhavana chose to follow its example. That is a tragedy. That is not a strategy that will take it from three to 30 members in parliament, when it finally convenes. That is not a strategy that will help it reach out to the Janajatis, the SeTaMaGuRaLi group, the ýMadhesisý of the hills, for only a political alliance between the Madhesis and the Janajatis will give Sadbhavana the winning combination for it to become a majority party in its own right.

One can only hope Mandal and Tripathy will come together. Perhaps a Mahato will play middleman.

Out Of The Impasse
Paramendra Bhagat
September 24, 2004

- http://www.geocities.com/paramendra/2004/nation2.html

I am on record espousing a republic. But perhaps the monarchy can reform itself. Crown Prince Paras' marriage to an Indian was a major step in the right direction. Ethnic purity is a primitive concept. And King Gyanendra should perhaps make use of his cunning, well exhibited in his maneuverings of the political parties, to seriously reform the institution he represents. The princes and princesses should be making individual decisions on their marriages, and if that practice takes hold, the net would be cast much wider beyond the Ranas of Nepal and the Rajputs of Rajasthan. Historically the throne has been a Nepali Speaking High Caste emblem. That has to change. And the first born, not the first born son, should ascend to the throne. So the institution is no longer sexist. Thus issues in ethnic representation and gender inequality could be addressed to see if the monarchy can continue to be relevant.

The next impediment stands in the form of huge royal expenses that the Nepali taxpayers put up with, unbecoming of a poor country. Here the Thai monarchy has set a wonderful example. It is possible to generate revenues by cashing on the royal clan's appeal for tourists, enough to offset all its expenses, perhaps more. The British royal family are also known for generating income for the country thorugh their appeal for tourists.

As for president or monarch, once the ethnic, gender and monetary grievances are taken care of, it makes little difference if the country becomes a republic or not. Because, in a functioning democracy, which Nepal is not at present, but one hopes it will be, it is only a matter of time, a president or monarch is at best a figurehead. The real power stays with the parliament and the prime minister.

It is hard to imagine the Maoists will take over the country militarily, but it is also hard to see how the army can quash them anytime soon. Their accomodation or defeat has to be political. And you do that by co-opting them. Those on both the left and the right who are bidding on a long war of attrition are doing wrong by the Nepali people.

The monarchy-Maoist dispute is almost like the Kashmir dispute between India and Pakistan. India can stay put with the status quo for as long as it wants, but it will only get genuine peace by making some compromises. The monarch is like India. Because of the army, he is a strong position, but it would be a disservice for him to not look for creative ways out of the current impasse.

The Maoists could not possibly be serious about establishing a communist republic in Nepal. But there are signs they could be looking for a face saving move. As in, hold elections for a constituent assembly, and if the voters choose to keep the monarchy, so be it.

It is in the Maoists' willingness to opt for the constituent assembly lies the possibility of disarming them the fastest. The only other option would be to dramatically capture the top Maoist leaders. Has that even been the focus? Or is the right end of the political spectrum simply enjoying its enhanced status, thanks to the Maoists? And so they are in no hurry to remedy the situation? Likewise, the Maoists are also set to fight a prolonged war. That keeps them relevant. The hardest hit are the political parties, sqeezed out by the extreme right and the extreme left, the "two guns."

GOOD job Parmendra dai. Well bhannu ta thupro mann lageko thiyo but here is some "NA JIYA SAKATI NA MARA SAKATI SIRF HUNKUR HUNKUR KAROTI" thats the situation of SADHBHAWANA.
peace and love