This is one of the most thought provoking article I have read in recent time. A very simple and unbiased in its approach. It is a little long but the language is plain and understandable. A must read article for all concerned Nepalsese.




Interim Period, Royalty Trap and the Silent Majority

If the CPN (M) cannot make their economic agenda clear, the public will definitely feel that their policies and programs are based on the principles of ‘mystery, miracle and conspiracy’ however false the charge may be.

By Dr. Raghab Dhoj Pant

The constant disturbances, sometime declared and sometime not quite so, daily in the streets, often in the parliament and occasionally in the cabinet have created a feeling of uncertainty in the country. It is, however, justified by the political leaders responsible for the events on the ground that the nation is in a state of transition. A new theory is born justifying the feeling of uncertainty and the associated financial and psychological cost to us, the Silent Majority, in the “Transition”. True, the basic question has yet remained unanswered: what is the ‘Transition”? And, what can we expect about its ending?

Transition, according to the Oxford Dictionary, is a change from one state or form to another. If this definition is acceptable to us, the transition phase, popularly known as the interim period, is just the time that is absolutely needed to move from one form to another. Given our past experiences, we have the right to know (i) who will rule in this period; (ii) in what form; (iii) how long and (iv) who will have authority to frame the new rules if the responsible parties can not perform the task. The answer to all four questions is “eight parties” in that they will rule in the name of people, in the form decided by them and up to the period also decided by them. If still some difficulties emerge or some new issues have to be incorporated or, say, some rules have to be changed, it will be the responsibility of eight parties. We have now entered into a sacrosanct world with new rules and regulations where one can not question the legitimacy of the eight parties. To be precise, it is a world where one rules by grace; and grace, by definition, is discretionary.

Before Jana Andolan II, King Gyanendra also tried to rule by grace believing that God created king in his own image who in turn created people. It was not acceptable to the people who believe that people created themselves before creating anything. This was the principle for which the people fought and won. The king, however, has still a respectable place in the country but as a common citizen, because power in the new system is no longer derived by grace or by some arbitrary procedure; it derives its existence from the general consent. The Parliament was revived. It declared itself “sovereign” with the power centralized on a few leaders of three parties, and occasionally four parties, with a new mantra: politics is a game played by “them” and not by us, the people, and they will rule us in our name. A new form of “Royalty” has emerged, to use the term recently popularized by The Economist, and the country has again fallen on the Royalty Trap with new kings. It will remain until the completion of the election to the Constituent Assembly followed by the installation of a government with people’s mandate obtained through general election.

Now, it is more difficult to answer when the interim period ends and what to expect when it ends. The election to the Constituent Assembly (CA) could not be held in time in accordance with the provision of the Interim Constitution prepared and approved by the eight parties and also to be implemented by the coalition government of the same eight parties. As they are treating themselves as heirs to the throne, they decided to amend the constitution to fix the new month- not the exact date - as it will be, they claim, the responsibility of the government, the finest division of labor comparable to Adam Smith’s revolution- and any other clauses that will help them again to rule by grace. It is decided to recognize the opposition party, a grace provided to other small parties. Now, as in the case of appointments of the Vice- Chancellors and other senior posts of the concerned universities, the senior four parties will be able to divide the posts of Ambassadors by grace. The senior three parties are slowly dividing the country in three and to be precise 3.5 as Nepali Congress (D) is also often included in the share allocation fixed arbitrarily. It appears that there is no rush for the eight parties to end the interim period, and why should it be ended if the future is full of uncertainty as there is no guarantee of how the people will vote. Comments The Himalayan Times “But the question is: Who can guarantee that the polls will not be postponed again? And who will be held responsible if the new date can not be kept? Indeed, the politicians had talked of holding the CA polls last Mangsir (November), then it was extended to mid June, then again pushed back by seven days, soon to be followed by an announcement that the polls on the stipulated date were simply not possible.” And perhaps no one was more frank than Former Prime Minister I. K. Gujral of the Republic of India when a delegation of the Nepal Communist Party (UML) led by Mr. Madhav Kumar Nepal met him recently in New Delhi. He is reported to have suggested political parties in power to break their preference for status quo and to conduct CA election as soon as possible.

True, the fixation of CA election date per se still will not answer the question raised by the Silent Majority discussed earlier: What type of economic and political system should we expect to emerge after the completion of CA election. In the economic area, the recent discussion sponsored on the occasion of the annual general meeting of the Federation of Nepal Chamber of Commerce and Industry (FNCCI) between the businessmen and the leaders of political parties has been helpful to clarify or not clarify the outstanding economic issues and the position of national political parties, specially of the CPN (M). The Ministers representing other parties did not present any new policy or program other than those that were tried in the first ten years after pro-democracy movement but failed. It, therefore, may not be acceptable to the public easily after CA polls. The press reports also indicate that the leadership of CPN (M) was not able to present a unified version of the economic policy package nor was it able to provide definite answer to important national issues including foreign investment, labor and management , employment policy and interest rate. Dr. Baburam Bhattarai even expressed his frustration at the behavior of the businessmen present at the discussion but, at the same breath, also indicated the role of government in economic management, which, surprisingly, is not different from the policy set by the Washington Consensus with government role confined to infrastructure development and other social areas, in particular, health and education.

The discussion thus provided an ample ground to question the political ideologies of the Maoists, if the repeated use of the word feudalism, national capitalists, capitalist industrial revolution itself is not accepted as the economic policy framework of a Communist Party that was involved in the Guerilla war until the recent past. Have they abandoned the Communist ideology? If not, their economic aim as a true communist, as suggested in The Communist Manifesto, is “to centralize all instruments of production in the hands of the State, that is, of the proletariats organized as the ruling class; and to increase the total of productive forces as rapidly as possible.” If yes, CPN (M) has no longer a mission for the proletariat, and the party itself is only a powerful means to grab the state power and is in the hands of a self declared revolutionary group.

Thus, the contradictions have emerged in the publicly announced political and economic programs of CPN (M). We recommend the responsible members of CPN(M) to prepare the unified approach in clear terms by separating what is truth from what is false. On the contrary, the statements that are coming from the senior members of CPN (M) appear simply as play of words and acrobatic of logic. An example from a recent interview of Dr. Bhattarai to an economic weekly: “The political system is in a transition phase and so is, as expected, the economic system. There is a dialectic interrelationship between the two systems. Or, to be precise, without the end of feudalism and imperialism totally, and the development of national industrial capitalism, we do feel that Nepal’s development process can not be accelerated”. If the CPN (M) can not clear the issues, the public will definitely feel that the policy and program of CPN (M) is based on the principles of ‘mystery, miracle and conspiracy’ however false the charge may be.

(The author is Executive Director of Institute for Development Studies (IfDS). The article is courtesy IfDS Bulletin. Comments can be sent to ifdsnepal@hotmail.com)

Courtesy: Nepalnews.com