Student unions have played important roles in ushering in political changes in Nepal. The end of the Rana regime was brought about through the leadership of progressive Nepali youth like BP Koirala, who while was motivated to turn to politics during his student days in India. During the Panchayat days when political parties were banned, it was student unions that played a crucial part making the people aware and mobilizing its members.

When the Maoists launched their rebellion, they made use of not only university level students but also primary school students. And had it not been for the mass mobilization of student unions, the autocratic rule of the last king would not have come to a close.

Political parties know that student unions are one of their most important and effective instruments, which is why trouble in universities and campuses from affiliated unions, is probably an indicator of the mother party of that union planning to create further trouble on the streets.

The youth form the majority of the population and are the agents of change, but the questions remains as to what sort of changes have been ushered in, and whether those who have pushed for the changes are really aware or have they been double crossed?

The problem with Nepali student unions is that they are not independent entities. They might have enigmatic orators able to captivate their audiences with exhilarating speeches, but at the end of the day, if student unions were to be summarized, they merely serve as the puppets of their masters, the mother party to which they affiliate to.

As students, those who are supposed to be involved in the act of learning in order to serve for the greater good, the unions should be involved in intellectual discussions on matter of public interest and policy. Instead we find Nepali student unions, divided amongst themselves, as their political masters are. Not only are they divided,they are also divide the Nepali youth. Thus instead of having a united Nepali youth working towards a common goal of a peaceful and progressive Nepal, the division of Nepalis into this party or that party begins the day when a teenager arrives to pursue higher education in the universities and campuses, and is asked to become members of this union or that union.

There is nothing wrong in aligning oneself  to any particular organization provided one conforms to the beliefs and ideologies of that particular organization. But what one sees here is that students are already made leftist or rightist before even understanding what they are getting into. If an intellectual discussion were held among  members of various unions,one shouldn’t be surprised if the participants have relatively same views when it comes to matters of policy. So what differences are they constantly fighting about, except over which union under which banner gets to control what resources in that particular college or university?

At a talk program held during the Kathmandu Literary Jatra in Patan recently, some prominent present day student unions leaders, and a past one who has now risen up the party ladder and climbed to the comfortable post of a CA member, all seemed to agree that their alma mater organizations needed to rethink their strategy but couldn’t quite figure out how. In fact going by their words, it seemed all of them were confused about their role in Nepali public space, and how they could best contribute for the progress of Nepali students.

Ramkumari Jhankri of the UML affiliated ANNFSU and Manashi Yami Bhattarai of the UCPN-Maoist FSU, seemed to seriously still believe in violence. While the former sounded more militant than the latter, the latter seemed have confused herself with her own rhetoric when she stated that any organization that uses violence will never last enough, forgetting that her own mother party the UCPN-Maoists, used violence as a means to put their message across.

Gagan Thapa, former student union leader from the Nepali Congress affiliated Nepal Students Unions, for that matter seemed to have come out of his student days and was distancing himself from past weaknesses when he himself was in that position and now sounded to be propagating a change.

The question one has to ask is what exactly is the role of student unions in present day Nepal? No organization can play a limited role,but does that also mean that they should or have the moral right to interfere in any and every matter? If student unions were focusing on discussing how the quality of education can be improved in Nepal it would have been commendable, or if the unions could be united in pressuring their party leaders to work unitedly in bringing the peace process to a logical conclusion, in writing a a just and suitable constitution for Nepal, in ensuring that justice, equality and liberty is guaranteed by the new constitution, but no.

How will they? After all they are not as free or as independent as they claim to be. As long as Nepal’s student unions do not break free from the bondage of their political masters, Nepal is not going to change. Change can only come from the youth, unfortunately for Nepal, our youth are not only divided politically  through various unions, but now are also being encouraged to divide along ethnic, cultural, religious lines.

Kaziba is a Nepali who dreams of conquering the world every night, but ends up waking every morning in the same prison.

www.parakhi.com/blogs