May 29, 2018
May 25, 2018
The Irony of Secular Republic Nepal
By Maila Baje
You can’t help marveling at our Marxist-Leninist and Maoist
comrades. The odds were heavily stacked against unity – ideologically,
organizationally and, yes, personally.
The drawn-out process almost validated skeptics who considered that promise
little more than an electoral ploy. K.P. Sharma Oli and Pushpa Kamal Dahal
‘Prachanda’ were so tight-lipped about the succession of hours-long one-on-one
sessions that their efforts were apt to be dismissed as mere face-saving.
Disputes over power-sharing, organizational equality, process and form, real as
they were among the rank and file, were all deemed convenient covers to explain
that inevitable reality: Nepal’s communists just don’t have it in them to
coexist.
Then, presto, the comrades coalesced fully and formally. It really didn’t
matter that they couldn’t even christen their new entity right. Having
discovered that the appellation Nepal Communist Party had already been taken,
the Marxists-Leninists and the Maoists creatively underlined the name and
created something new.
If the main opposition Nepali Congress seemed most shocked by this development,
it had good reason. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi was widely seen to have
planted a kiss of death on Oli. Our prime minister, excepting the lampasarbad slur,
kind of went along with the narrative of political evisceration. We knew Oli
had quite a reputation for sharp humor. The head fake was a new one.
The Maoist ministers, too, turned kabuki masters for a while. They collectively
chided the prime minister for having marginalized their party during Modi’s
sojourn, a stance that led some on the sidelines to finally rule out the
prospect of unity.
The Nepali Congress is still acting as if the unification of our two biggest
communist parties poses a mortal danger infinitely greater than the one posed
by King Mahendra’s dismissal of B.P. Koirala’s government in December 1960.
Why, the communists were never worried by the Nepali Congress’ super majority
when the comrades had a paltry four seats in the first parliament, Oli reminded
the main opposition party the other day.
Confronted with Nepali Congress claims that the rejuvenated communists would
debase its opponents, Oli retorted that the comrades wouldn’t have time for
such pettiness. Stung by growing public perceptions of defeatism in their
reaction, some Nepali Congress leaders have begun putting on a brave face.
It is the smaller parties that have come up with sharpest questions. Why would
Oli and Dahal plant a tree (the Nepali Congress electoral symbol) to mark the
occasion instead of, say, improvise a version of ‘Here Comes the Sun’?
Wasn’t the decision to announce the unification on the 25th anniversary of the
deaths of Madan Bhandary and Jibaraj Ashrit tantamount to tarnishing the
‘people’s war’, Dr. Baburam Bhattarai asked in a tweet. Dahal doubled down by
recalling Bhandary’s immense contributions to Nepali communism. After all, when
the Maoists rose up against the state in 1996, they did so against the late
Marxist-Leninist general secretary’s people’s multiparty democracy ideology as
well. But Dahal seemed to want to remind the rest of us that he had forgotten
that reality.
Narayan Man Bijukchhe proclaimed that unity wouldn’t be durable. But, then,
we’ll never know how the brain of the Nepal Workers and Peasants Party leader
works, will we? After all, he’s the same guy who flew in to New Delhi to
co-sign the 12-Point Agreement in 2006 only to fly back home to criticize it as
being anti-national.
It’s okay to be skeptical – even cynical – about what led to this development
and how things might unfold in the weeks and months ahead. It would be
instructive here to consider the big picture.
We have a secular state where Christians say they face the worst persecution
ever, Muslims can’t really feel the difference and Hindus have become, if
anything, more faithful.
We have seven provinces that have neither names nor permanent capitals and
whose functionaries are already complaining about having to do a lot with
virtually nothing. Sure, we are a republic, but one where most are tuned to
what the ex-king says and does. Yet the sun continues to rise each morning.
Source: www.nepalinetbook.blogspot.com
May 17, 2018
मोदी किन आए ? रणनीतिक उद्देश्य यो हो ।
दीपक गजुरेल
त्रिभूवन विश्वविद्यालयका राजनीति शास्त्री, सहप्राध्यापक दीपक गजुरेलको रणनीतिक विश्लेषण
मेरो एफ एम ९३.३ मा मदन खाती सँग गरिएको कुराकानीको रेकर्ड ।
Sep 20, 2016
Sep 18, 2016
Sep 16, 2016
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)