Mar 31, 2012

‘BRICS is the defender of the developing world'


In a written interview with BRICS media on the eve of the New Delhi summit, Chinese President Hu Jintao outlines his vision of the role the five-nation grouping can play at the global level.
The fourth BRICS Summit will be held in New Delhi on March 28-29. What is China's expectation for the summit?
The fourth BRICS Summit is being held against the backdrop of continued profound and complex changes in the international situation, uncertain prospects in world economic recovery and the steadily rising status and role of emerging markets and developing countries in international affairs. It is yet another major event in the ongoing BRICS cooperation. India, the host country, has worked effectively in preparing for the summit. China will work with other BRICS members to push for positive outcomes.
China hopes the summit will continue to display the BRICS spirit of unity and win-win partnership, continue to enhance coordination and cooperation on global economy, finance, development and other major issues of common interest, push forward practical cooperation in various fields, send a joint message of confidence for world economic stability and recovery, provide impetus for improved global economic governance and make a contribution to common development in the whole world. We also hope the summit will help strengthen institutional building of BRICS cooperation, map out plans for the future, and lay a solid foundation for the long-term growth of BRICS cooperation.
How does China think the growing weight of emerging markets and developing countries will impact on the international landscape?
Currently, a large number of emerging markets and developing countries have achieved rapid economic growth and become an important force in promoting world peace and common development. Firmly committing to the path of peaceful development, cooperative development and harmonious development, these countries form an important part of common development of the world, which is conducive to a more balanced world economy, more reasonable international relations, more effective global governance and more durable world peace.
Since the outbreak of the international financial crisis in 2008, these countries have spearheaded the global recovery through their own development. The steady increase of their representation and the greater say they acquired in global economic governance have moved the international order in the direction of greater fairness and rationality. What has happened testifies once again that without the rise of emerging markets and developing countries, there will be no universal prosperity in the world; and that without the stability of these countries, there will be no world peace and stability. The development of these countries has a constructive impact on the international landscape. The international community should look at these countries from a long-term and strategic perspective and actively support their development.
How does China see the momentum and future of BRICS cooperation and its role in global governance? How can BRICS countries uphold the interests of developing countries through closer coordination?
BRICS countries are the defender and promoter of the interests of developing countries. In their cooperation, BRICS countries have committed to promoting South-South cooperation and North-South dialogue, endeavoured to implement the U.N. Millennium Development Goals, worked for early realisation of the goals set out in the mandate for the Doha development round negotiations, strived to secure a greater say for developing countries in global economic governance and fought all forms of protectionism. Cooperation among BRICS countries is made necessary by the ongoing economic globalisation and democratisation in international relations. It is consistent with the trend of the times characterised by peace, development and cooperation, and fully conducive to building a harmonious world of durable peace and common prosperity.
From Yekaterinburg to Brasilia, and from Sanya to New Delhi, the BRICS summit mechanism has improved steadily, with a multi-level and wide-ranging cooperation framework having taken shape. Political mutual trust among BRICS members is strengthened, their practical cooperation in the economy, finance, trade, development and other fields deepened, and their communication and coordination in major international affairs enhanced. They have played a constructive role in global governance. It is fair to say that BRICS cooperation now stands on solid ground, enjoys a huge potential and holds out a broad prospect.
China has always made cooperation with emerging markets and developing countries, BRICS included, a foreign policy priority, and has firmly supported and actively participated in BRICS cooperation.
How does the Chinese side view the practical cooperation among BRICS countries? What major cooperation outcomes has BRICS achieved since its inception? What important proposals will be put forward in the near future?
Practical cooperation is an important pillar of BRICS cooperation. BRICS practical cooperation, which started from scratch, has in recent years grown steadily with enriched contents and diverse forms. Such cooperation serves the common interests of the BRICS members and enjoys a favourable response in their economic, social and public opinion circles.
In the past year, BRICS countries have vigorously implemented the Action Plan of the Sanya Declaration and expanded their cooperation in finance, industry, commerce, health, agriculture, statistics, science, technology and think tanks, thus bringing tangible benefits to their peoples and further reinforcing the momentum of BRICS cooperation.
As for BRICS practical cooperation in the near future, China wants to see efforts made in the following two areas: First, building a solid foundation. We should beef up the existing cooperation programmes in the spirit of practicality and efficiency and build a number of flagship projects. Second, being innovative. We should properly explore new areas of cooperation in light of the needs of economic and social development in BRICS countries, tap the cooperation potential and inject new vitality into the mechanism of BRICS cooperation.
I am confident that with sustained commitment to the principles of openness, solidarity and mutual assistance, BRICS members will keep making fresh progress in their practical cooperation.
How does China evaluate its relations with other BRICS members? With South Africa joining BRICS last year, how does China see South Africa's contribution as a new member?
The other BRICS members are all China's strategic partners. It is a foreign policy priority for China to develop relations with them.
Brazil is the first developing country to establish a strategic partnership with China. In recent years, the two countries have had frequent high-level exchanges, resulting in stronger political mutual trust and steady development of cooperation mechanisms. The two countries have also maintained close communication and coordination in major international and regional affairs.
China and Russia are each other's largest neighbour and comprehensive strategic partner of coordination. Bilateral relations have enjoyed the momentum of sound and steady growth. At present, the two countries are actively implementing the 10-year plan for the development of China-Russia relations, and the series of important consensus and agreements of cooperation reached by their leaders and their cooperation in various fields is moving forward vigorously.
The China-India strategic and cooperative partnership has made all-round progress in recent years. A sustained, sound and steady growth of relations between China and India, the two large developing countries sharing borders with each other, will serve not only the well-being of the two peoples but also peace, stability and prosperity in Asia and the world as a whole.
The people of China and South Africa enjoy a deeply-cherished traditional friendship. Since the establishment of diplomatic ties, the two countries have seen their relations growing in a comprehensive and rapid manner. China and South Africa have carried out fruitful cooperation in the political, economic, trade, cultural, people-to-people, international affairs and other fields, which benefits the two countries and gives a strong boost to China-Africa relations and solidarity and cooperation among developing countries. BRICS has become more representative with South Africa being a member.
I look forward to meeting other BRICS leaders in New Delhi to exchange views on bilateral relations and major international and regional issues of mutual interest.
(These answers were provided by President Hu in response to a number of questions submitted by The Hindu in India, Folha de Sao Paulo in Brazil, Russian News in Russia, People's Daily in China and BusinessDay in South Africa.)
Courtesy: The Hindu

Mar 30, 2012

India an elephant which is slow, but when it moves, it’s unstoppable


Translated text of Prime Minister’s interview in Korean Daily, JoongAng Ilbo

Prime Minister of India, Dr. Manmohan Singh (80) described his own country as an elephant. The Indus civilization, continent-sized country with the population of 1.2 billion had been sleeping. With his long experience as an economist and his personal stature, it was Manmohan Singh who awakened the sleeping elephant. On 19 March 2012, at the official residence of the Prime Minister in New Delhi, Singh said “India is an elephant, which is slow to move. But when it moves, you cannot stop”.
India had adopted the socialist pattern of economy after getting independence. It finally opened the doors to its huge market in 1991 when Singh became the Finance Minister and by doing so strengthened the competitiveness of the nation. Since 2004, as the Prime Minister of India, Singh has been crafting the economic development policy of the country with a human face. India, in the last decade, has been one of the fastest-growing economies in the world after China, with average annual growth rates of 6%. Inspired by his leadership, the JoongAng Ilbo requested an interview with Manmohan Singh who is visiting Seoul on 24-27 March 2012 for the Nuclear Security Summit and bilateral Summit.
JoongAng Ilbo:You must have faced strong resistance when you tried to carry out economic reforms. How could you break through the resistance and what was the toughest?
Prime Minister: In human affairs, the status quo has a great appeal because it is rooted in reality. Therefore, whenever you want to change things, move away from status quo, there is resistance. But I have great faith in the people of our country. It is because of the support of the people that we were able to get the country out of a deep economic crisis that it was in 1991. And since 1991, there are several parties which have ruled our country and it is a tribute to our leadership that this change in political leadership has not affected the process of economic reform so that underlying there is a great national consensus in favour of the reform, in favour of the liberalization process.
(Congress is the ruling party in the parliamentary system of India with a coalition government of many parties. Manmohan Singh belongs to the Congress party. He has a Master’s degree and doctorate in economics from Cambridge and Oxford University respectively.)
JoongAng Ilbo: Sonia Gandhi (66) heads the Congress party. How do you maintain such cordial relations with the one from different religion and region and gender for 8 years?
Prime Minister: “Our historical experience has forged a national narrative that is marked by a respect for plurality and diversity. We regard these as strengths rather than limitations. The founding fathers of our nation laid down certain fundamental principles which made us seek our economic and social salvation within the framework of a pluralistic democracy wedded to the rule of law”.
JoongAng Ilbo: What is your image of the past, present and future of Korea?
Prime Minister: The Republic of Korea’s transformation and its emergence as a vibrant democracy, one of the fastest growing economies in the world and a powerhouse of innovation in just two generations is an inspiration for the whole of Asia. I am aware of the odds you fought against and the sacrifice you made in the early years of building your nation to gain your prestige and position you enjoy today. It is a reflection of your enlightened leadership and the resolve of the South Korean people. The Republic of Korea is a factor for peace, stability and prosperity in East Asia.
(The editor conveyed the message of President Lee Myung Bak to the Prime Minister before starting the interview. PM Singh said "I have great admiration for President Lee. We had the privilege of having the President as our Chief Guest on our Republic Day in 2010.)
JoongAng Ilbo: What would be the topic that you would like to bring up the most when you meet President Lee at the Nuclear Security Summit in Seoul?
Prime Minister: We will talk about giving depth and greater meaning to our Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement, strengthen people-to-people contacts between our two countries, strengthen cooperation in the field of science and technology, and also coordinate our thinking in matters relating to regional security, international events, and since this is an occasion which coincides with Nuclear Security Summit, we can work together to promote nuclear security and safety in this world that we live in.
JoongAng Ilbo: Do you think that USA is keeping China in check? Have you faced situations where you were forced to choose between China and USA?
Prime Minister: China is our largest neighbor with which we share a long border. It is also our biggest trading partner in goods. With USA, our relations have been transformed in 2005. Three million people of Indian origin live and work in the US. The country is also India's largest business partner. Our aim is to have cooperative ties with both China and USA. It is not zero-sum game. I do not think that large and dynamic countries like China can be contained.
JoongAng Ilbo: Recently, Wall Street Journal opined that India’s bureaucratic red tape and corruption have been discouraging foreign investment. Korean steel company POSCO’s project in Orissa is still pending.
Prime Minister: Outside observers often tend to take a narrow view of our economic policies. India is a far more open economy today than it was earlier. We are governed by the rule of law, and as a functioning democracy, we need to be mindful of the concerns and sensitivities of all sections and stakeholders and take their interests into account. It is my sincere hope that the issues pertaining to the POSCO project would be resolved soon to the satisfaction of all parties. Over 300 South Korean companies are present in India. We plan to invest one trillion dollars in infrastructure development in areas like highways, airports, power plants, mass transport systems and so on in next five years. We would like to see more South Korean companies come to India and take advantage of our youthful and skilled labor force. Opportunities in India are wide open.
(Indian government officials point out that the country has a 300 million middle class with excellent purchasing power in its 1.2 billion population. As such India is a big market though the rich-poor gap exists. 50-70% of home appliances market in India is dominated by Samsung and LG. Hyundai occupies 20% of small car market, after Suzuki which has 50% share.
Our editor found Dr. Singh a humble man, who described himself as an “extinguished economist”. He is a statesman who has gone through all kinds of ups and downs. His eyes, visible through the horn-rimmed glasses were gentle and the light of wisdom was shining.)
Editor in Chief – Chun
Seoul
March 23, 2012

India an elephant which is slow, but when it moves, it’s unstoppable


Translated text of Manmohan Singh's interview in Korean Daily, JoongAng Ilbo
 
Prime Minister of India, Dr. Manmohan Singh (80) described his own country as an elephant. The Indus civilization, continent-sized country with the population of 1.2 billion had been sleeping. With his long experience as an economist and his personal stature, it was Manmohan Singh who awakened the sleeping elephant. On 19 March 2012, at the official residence of the Prime Minister in New Delhi, Singh said “India is an elephant, which is slow to move. But when it moves, you cannot stop”.
India had adopted the socialist pattern of economy after getting independence. It finally opened the doors to its huge market in 1991 when Singh became the Finance Minister and by doing so strengthened the competitiveness of the nation. Since 2004, as the Prime Minister of India, Singh has been crafting the economic development policy of the country with a human face. India, in the last decade, has been one of the fastest-growing economies in the world after China, with average annual growth rates of 6%. Inspired by his leadership, the JoongAng Ilbo requested an interview with Manmohan Singh who is visiting Seoul on 24-27 March 2012 for the Nuclear Security Summit and bilateral Summit.
JoongAng Ilbo:You must have faced strong resistance when you tried to carry out economic reforms. How could you break through the resistance and what was the toughest?
Prime Minister: In human affairs, the status quo has a great appeal because it is rooted in reality. Therefore, whenever you want to change things, move away from status quo, there is resistance. But I have great faith in the people of our country. It is because of the support of the people that we were able to get the country out of a deep economic crisis that it was in 1991. And since 1991, there are several parties which have ruled our country and it is a tribute to our leadership that this change in political leadership has not affected the process of economic reform so that underlying there is a great national consensus in favour of the reform, in favour of the liberalization process.
(Congress is the ruling party in the parliamentary system of India with a coalition government of many parties. Manmohan Singh belongs to the Congress party. He has a Master’s degree and doctorate in economics from Cambridge and Oxford University respectively.)
JoongAng Ilbo: Sonia Gandhi (66) heads the Congress party. How do you maintain such cordial relations with the one from different religion and region and gender for 8 years?
Prime Minister: “Our historical experience has forged a national narrative that is marked by a respect for plurality and diversity. We regard these as strengths rather than limitations. The founding fathers of our nation laid down certain fundamental principles which made us seek our economic and social salvation within the framework of a pluralistic democracy wedded to the rule of law”.
JoongAng Ilbo: What is your image of the past, present and future of Korea?
Prime Minister: The Republic of Korea’s transformation and its emergence as a vibrant democracy, one of the fastest growing economies in the world and a powerhouse of innovation in just two generations is an inspiration for the whole of Asia. I am aware of the odds you fought against and the sacrifice you made in the early years of building your nation to gain your prestige and position you enjoy today. It is a reflection of your enlightened leadership and the resolve of the South Korean people. The Republic of Korea is a factor for peace, stability and prosperity in East Asia.
(The editor conveyed the message of President Lee Myung Bak to the Prime Minister before starting the interview. PM Singh said "I have great admiration for President Lee. We had the privilege of having the President as our Chief Guest on our Republic Day in 2010.)
JoongAng Ilbo: What would be the topic that you would like to bring up the most when you meet President Lee at the Nuclear Security Summit in Seoul?
Prime Minister: We will talk about giving depth and greater meaning to our Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement, strengthen people-to-people contacts between our two countries, strengthen cooperation in the field of science and technology, and also coordinate our thinking in matters relating to regional security, international events, and since this is an occasion which coincides with Nuclear Security Summit, we can work together to promote nuclear security and safety in this world that we live in.
JoongAng Ilbo: Do you think that USA is keeping China in check? Have you faced situations where you were forced to choose between China and USA?
Prime Minister: China is our largest neighbor with which we share a long border. It is also our biggest trading partner in goods. With USA, our relations have been transformed in 2005. Three million people of Indian origin live and work in the US. The country is also India's largest business partner. Our aim is to have cooperative ties with both China and USA. It is not zero-sum game. I do not think that large and dynamic countries like China can be contained.
JoongAng Ilbo: Recently, Wall Street Journal opined that India’s bureaucratic red tape and corruption have been discouraging foreign investment. Korean steel company POSCO’s project in Orissa is still pending.
Prime Minister: Outside observers often tend to take a narrow view of our economic policies. India is a far more open economy today than it was earlier. We are governed by the rule of law, and as a functioning democracy, we need to be mindful of the concerns and sensitivities of all sections and stakeholders and take their interests into account. It is my sincere hope that the issues pertaining to the POSCO project would be resolved soon to the satisfaction of all parties. Over 300 South Korean companies are present in India. We plan to invest one trillion dollars in infrastructure development in areas like highways, airports, power plants, mass transport systems and so on in next five years. We would like to see more South Korean companies come to India and take advantage of our youthful and skilled labor force. Opportunities in India are wide open.
(Indian government officials point out that the country has a 300 million middle class with excellent purchasing power in its 1.2 billion population. As such India is a big market though the rich-poor gap exists. 50-70% of home appliances market in India is dominated by Samsung and LG. Hyundai occupies 20% of small car market, after Suzuki which has 50% share.
Our editor found Dr. Singh a humble man, who described himself as an “extinguished economist”. He is a statesman who has gone through all kinds of ups and downs. His eyes, visible through the horn-rimmed glasses were gentle and the light of wisdom was shining.)
Editor in Chief – Chun
Seoul
March 23, 2012

Mar 21, 2012

Called For Judging


By Yubaraj Ghimire

A few weeks ago, UN country representative Robert Piper invited leaders of ethnic groups for an exchange of views. The meeting discussed the place and rights of ethnic groups, among other issues, under the new constitution. There were angry outbursts against the 'non-ethnic groups', mainly the Bahuns and Chhetris. Some said ‘we are the actual aboriginals' and the Bahuns and Chhetris are outsiders.

It is not yet known whether Dr Piper had these claims verified through cultural and historical evidences, or if at all he invited anthropologists to give more authentic versions of the claims that his guests in that particular meeting raised. But the UN and diplomatic system, with some honorable exception, have miserably been linked with the political and constitutional failure looming large in the country.

Each and every community, ethnic group, territorial group and individual minority have their own grievances, real or perceived, and most of them tend to blame the state for that. But neither the government nor the research groups have done any independent work into these aspects. Maoists succeeded in fuelling these grievances by projecting the monarchy, the unitary system of governance and  the Hindu religion -- and Hindu groups like Bahun, Chhetris and Newars dominating the state affairs -- as the root of these grievances.

They took the help of the diplomatic community, church apart from some militant ethnic groups, to destroy what they thought were the strength of the ‘old regime'. After all, Maoists always believed that demolition of the old state was absolutely essential to build ' a New Nepal', a progressive Nepal. The reference to Church activities is necessary as aligning with certain militant political groups cannot be listed as religious or philanthropic activities. That may even trigger a conflict between various religious, communal or ethnic groups in the future. Besides, the UN, international donors as well as the diplomatic community have also been supporting the anti-state activities and forces.

Maoist leaders have miserably failed the country and the people. They have been able to inject social and communal hatred. Nepali society's legacy as a 'culturally, socially and religiously tolerant' practitioner is on the wane. That's where right thinking Nepalese expect UN and the diplomatic community not to fuel caste, ethnic and social divisions. UN can help promote and protect the right of socially, culturally and historically marginalized, but it cannot be the judge to decide who fall into such category based on one sided or lopsided  versions. The UN is expected to  foster expanded version of identity based on citizenship and human rights and promote a sense of belonging to the state.

The UN system in Nepal has come not only under criticism, but also under disrepute because of some of the major aberrations in discharge of its international obligations towards a member state. That largely begins with the arrival of Ian Martin as Special Representative of the United Nations Mission to Nepal (UNMIN) in 2007 and his subsequent activities. It was followed by open advocacy of ethnicity based federalism by CCD, a UNDP funded project. Constitutional expert like Prof Yash Ghai employed by the UN to advise on constitution making openly engaged in denouncing certain caste groups in Nepal, something that was not part of his job. The attitude of the people associated with the UN will eventually trigger a debate: Is UN a party, a  dictator or a facilitator? Loss of UN’s credibility or respect in a conflict stricken society or country will have larger and long term implications to all those who believe UN has a larger and respectable role to play  in the globe.

Having a credible international agency, preferably the United Nations, as a mediator was part of the 12-point agreement that brought UNMIN and Ian Martin in Nepal, although the role assigned to them was much smaller than planned earlier. Yet, Martin did not conceal his ambition to get involved in Madhes issue also when agitation began there for more rights and autonomy to the region. He took full advantage of the prevailing euphoria, and sided with the new actors, especially the Maoists, on many occasions. Civil society leaders like Devendraraj Pandey and Shyam Shrestha went on record saying if the 'People’s Liberation Army' was not there, the Nepal Army--in their words, the king's army--would have finished every political party and its leaders opposing the king. Martin picked up the thread from there.

Now, the Young Communist League (YCL) and disqualified Maoist combatants are up in arms against Maoist Chief Prachanda demanding that they be given similar treatment (including financial benefits) like the combatants 'voluntarily retiring' and getting into the army. It is also revealed now that at least three thousand combatants were loaned to the YCL. This could not have taken place without the knowledge of Ian Martin and G P Koirala, hero of the peace process and Prime Minister between 2006 April and August 2008, as well as Krishna Sitaula, the Home Minister and the most trusted aide of G P Koirala then. Some of the civil society leaders must have had the reason to feel happy about it, but Martin was not only wrongly briefed, he acted wrongly and objectionably. Moreover, both Koirala and Sitaula had been told by a person no less than Prachanda and Baburam Bhattarai that the number of combatants was less than 8,000, but neither G P Koirala or Sitaula, nor any one else, raised the issue when 32,000 plus appeared for verification and 19,000 plus were certified as 'qualified' combatants. It was clearly a well designed understanding to inflate the number of combatants to terrorize the --other army--the king's army.

There are many lessons that could be learnt from history that using terrorism as a means for political change may be possible, but it would always be difficult, if not impossible, to dismount from that horse without sustaining major injuries. Prachanda faces that predicament as YCL cadres accuse him of betraying them in pursuit of his political ambition. Maoists, especially the YCL, will no doubt have the mattter settled, as Prachanda has to be answerable, and there is no other escape route for him.

But the UN system in Nepal needs to respond to many of the allegations that are being directed against it. A failure to do so will only contribute to larger opinion, mainly in the third  as well as the conflict stricken countries, against the UN system.


अनागरिक नेपाली, ‘सीमापारि’का नागरिक


पर्शुराम काफ्ले

सन् १९७० ताका एउटा आमसभालाई सम्बोधन गर्नेक्रममा भारतीय प्रधानमन्त्री इन्दिरा गान्धीले भनेकी थिइन् नेपालको तराईमा बस्ने जनता भारतीय मूलका हुन् र तिनीहरु कुल नेपाली जनसंख्याको ४० प्रतिशत छन् । यदि आवश्यक प¥यो भने सबै ४० प्रतिशतको संख्यामा रहेका भारतीय मूलका जनतालाई भारत सरकारले परिचालन गर्नुपर्ने स्थिति आउने छ ।गान्धीले नेपालकै सन्दर्भमा यतिसम्म भनेकी थिइन् नेपाललाई हामी बन्दुकको गोलीबाट होइन, मतपत्रबाट लिनेछौँ ।

स्वर्गीय इन्दिरा गान्धीले त्यतिबेला जे बोलिन्, त्यो यतिबेला कामयाबी मात्र छैन, उनका तत्कालीन अभिव्यक्तिमाथि टिप्पणि गर्नु नै असान्दर्भिक छ । यद्यपि, नेपालको सार्वभौमसत्ता र अखण्डताको मामिलामा भारतीय पूर्व प्रधानमन्त्रीको बक्रदृष्टिको यो नमूना चाहिँ चाहेर पनि बिर्सिन सकिँदैन । उनका अभिव्यक्तिहरुको कुनै न कुनै परावर्तन भारतीय विदेश नीतिका निर्माता वा परिमार्जनकर्ताहरुमा अहिले पनि हुनसक्छ । 

हिमाली अधिराज्य सिक्कीम, भुटान र नेपाललाई ढिलो वा चाँडो भारतीय सीमानाभित्र गाभ्ने गान्धीको तत्कालीन इच्छा अनुसार स्वतन्त्र मुलुक सिक्कीम नाटकीयरुपमा भारतमा बिलय गराइएको झण्डै चालिस बर्ष पुग्न लागेको छ । संयुक्त राष्ट्रसंघको सदस्य रहेको भुटानको अस्तित्व प्राविधिकरुपमा मात्रै स्वतन्त्र मुलुकजस्तो छ भने नेपालमा पनि भारतीय प्रभाव राजनीतिक बृत्तमा चाहिँ निर्णायकस्तरमा हावी छ । खुल्ला सीमाना र समान सभ्यताको कारण सांस्कृतिक हिसाबले पनि नेपाली जनस्तरमा भारतीय प्रभाव अत्यधिक छ । तर, नेपालको रोचक विशेषता के छ भने तराईको एउटा तप्काबाहेक नेपाली जनमत चाहिँ भारत विरोधी (एन्टि इन्डियन)छ । भारत परस्त राजनीतिक वृत्त वा भारत विरोधी जनमत दुबै स्थायी हुन सक्दैनन् र यसले नेपालभारत दुबैको हितलाई फाइदा गर्दैन । यद्यपि यो नाटकीय विरोधाभासका पछाडि अनेकौँ आयाम छन् तर यसका लागि नेपाली जनमतको दृष्टिबाट हेर्दा भारतीय पक्ष  बढी जिम्मेबार छ । त्यसबारे यहाँ विस्तृतमा चर्चा गर्न खोजिएको होइन । तर, तराईमा नेपाली नागरिकता बितरणले विगतदेखि पारेका नकारात्मक प्रभाव र नागरिकताकै बिषयमा सत्तारुढ गठबन्धनले गरेको पछिल्लो सहमतिका सन्दर्भमा मात्रै उपरोक्त पृष्ठभूमि प्रस्तुत गरिएको हो ।

तराई÷मधेशलाई आधार बनाएर राजनीति गर्नेहरुले विगतदेखि केन्द्रिय राजनीतिमा नागरिकता बितरणलाई आफ्नो बार्गेनिङ कार्डका रुपमा प्रयोग गर्दै आएका छन् । तराईकेन्द्रित राजनीतिक समूहहरुको सदाबहार तर्क के छ, भने तराईका बासिन्दा नागरिकताबाट बञ्चित छन्, उनीहरुलाई नागरिकता बितरण खुकुलो बनाइनुपर्छ । २०६२÷०६३को जनआन्दोलनपछि एकपटक पौने दुई लाख व्यक्तिलाई नेपालमा जन्मेको आधाराम नागरिकता वितरण गरियो । र वितरणकर्ताहरु थिएमाओवादी, कांग्रेस, एमाले र सद्भावना पार्टी । बास्तबमा त्यतिबेलासम्म मधेशवादी दलको बेग्लै अस्तित्व नेपाली धर्तीमा विजारोपण भइसकेको थिएन, तराईका मुद्दा उठाउनेहरु राष्ट्रिय दलकै रुपमा थिए । तर, नेपालमा तोरीको गुन्द्रुकको मोलमा नागरिकता बितरण भइरहँदा मधेशवादनामक साम्प्रदायिक एजेन्डाको भ्रुण छिमेकको आशिर्वादमा बिहार÷युपीतिर हुर्किइरहेको थियो ।

संसारमा नागरिकता बितरण गर्ने प्रचलन चलेको पहिलो मुलुक नै नेपाल हुनसक्छ किनभने कुपन जसरी नागरिकता वितरणको प्रचलन अरु मुलुकमा छैन । नेपालमा जन्मेका आधारमा नेपाली नागरिकता कार्डमार्फत जजसलाई नेपाली बनाइयो, उनका सन्तति र आफन्तहरुको भीड तराईका जिल्ला प्रशासन कार्यालयहरुमा धेरै अघि देखि लाग्दै आएको थियो । तीन महिना अघि गृह मन्त्रालयका एक उच्च अधिकारीले पंक्तिकारसँग भनेका थिएजन्मका आधारमा नागरिकता बाँडियो, अहिले उनका छोराछोरीलाई नागरिकता दिनुप¥यो भनेर तराईका दलले सिडीओ सापहरुलाई दबाब दिन थालेका छन् । उनीहरुलाई के का आधारमा नागरिकता दिने भन्ने कुनै कानून पनि छैन, सरकारी निर्णय पनि छैन ।

जिल्ला प्रशासन कार्यालयमा देखा परेको भीडका आधारमा गृहमन्त्री विजय गच्छदारले सनकका भरमा जन्मका आधारमा नागरिकता पाउने व्यक्तिका सन्ततिलाई बंशजका आधारमा नागरिकता दिन प्रमुख जिल्ला अधिकारीहरुलाई फर्मान जारी गरे । बास्तबमा यो माओवादी नेता मोहन बैद्यको शब्दमा भन्दा राष्ट्रघात थियो । तर, प्रमुख जिल्ला अधिकारीहरुले गच्छदारको राष्ट्रघातलाई साथ दिएनन् । आदेश नमानेर झापाका सिडीओ गेहनाथ भण्डारीले सरुवाको सजाय भोगे, अरु सिडीओ सापहरु पनि सजाय भोग्न तयार भए । मूलधारका नेपाली दैनिक पत्रपत्रिकामा आएका समाचारमार्फत् भयोजन्मका आधारमा नेपाली नागरिकता पाउनेहरुको लिस्टमा भारतका मोस्ट वान्टेड अपराधीदेखि भारतकै पृथकतावादी गतिविधिमा संलग्न व्यक्तिहरु छन् ।

यद्यपि, नेपाली नागरिकताको कार्ड भिराएर मधेशी दलको भोट बैँक बनेका सबै जनता अपराधकर्ममा सामेल छन् भनेर आरोप लगाउन खोजिएको होइन । विदेशीलाई नागरिकता दिएर तराईका आदिवासी नेपालीलाई अल्पमतमा पार्ने यस्ता दुस्प्रयास तत्कालका लागि फाइदाजनक देखिए पनि स्वयम् मधेश केन्द्रित भनिएका दलहरुलाई भविश्यमा अभिषाप बन्नेछ । यस सन्दर्भमा, अर्को महत्वपूर्ण बिषयलाई पनि नजरअन्दाज गर्न मिल्दैन कि अहिलेसम नेपालीलाई अल्पमतमा पार्नेगरि नागरिकता वितरण गर्ने अपराधका लागि मधेशवादी भनिनेहरु हैनन्, आफूलाई देशभक्त, क्रान्तिकारी र प्रजातन्त्रवादी भनिने दलका शीर्ष नेता बढी जिम्मेबार छन् । मधेश केन्द्रित दलहरुले त राष्ट्रिय दल र तिनका नेताले गरेका त्यही अपराध फरक सन्दर्भमा दोहो¥याउन मात्र खोजेका हुन् ।

नेपालको अस्वभाविक नागरिकता वितरणसम्बन्धि हरेक निर्णयमा भारतीय नागरिक जोडिएका छन् । तथ्यहरुले स्पष्ट गर्दै आएको छ कि नेपालमा बसाईँसराई गर्नेहरुमध्ये तीनतिर खुल्ला सिमाना रहेको भारतका नागरिक नै अत्यधिक छन । भारतीय विदेश मन्त्रालयकै पुरानो तथ्यांक अनुसार विश्वका १०५ मुलुकमा रहेका एक करोड १२ लाख भारतीय मध्ये ३३ प्रतिशत नागरिक नेपालमा छन् । र, नेपालमा रहेकामध्ये ६२ प्रतिशतले नागरिकता लिइसकेका छन् । भारतीय विदेश मन्त्रालयकै अर्कोे पुरानो तथ्यांक अनुसार सन् १९८० सम्म नेपालमा बसोबास गर्ने ३० लाख भारतीय मध्ये २३ लाख ८७ हजार ९७३ जनाले नागरिकता लिइसकेका थिए । ३२ बर्ष यताको एकीकृत तथ्यांक आइसकेको छैन, तर यो नेपाली राष्ट्रियताका निम्ति भविश्यको डरलाग्दो खतरा हो ।

 भारतीय अप्रबासनका बिषयमा स्वर्गीय हर्क गुरुङको टोलीले गरेको अनुसन्धान अनुसार तराईमा भारतीय आप्रबासीहरुको संख्या सन् १९६१ मा ३ लाख आठ हजार ५८३ थियो । सन् १९७१ मा साच हजार ४४० जना घटेर तीन लाख एक हजार १४३ जना पुगेका थिए । त्यही बर्षको जनगणना अनुसार तराईका आप्रबासीमध्ये ९७ प्रतिशत जति भारतमै जन्मेका थिए । सन् १९६७६८मा तराईका पाँच जिल्लाका ९९ गाउँमा गुरुङ्हरुकै टोलीले गरेको सर्भेक्षण अनुसार ती जिल्लामा बसाई आउनेमध्ये ६० प्रतिशत भारतीय थिए ।

विसं १९६८को पहिलो जनगणनामा नेपालको कुल जनसंख्या ५५ लाख ७३ हजार ७८८ थियो भने दश बर्षपछि भएको जनगणनामा जनसंख्या दुई लाखले घटेको थियो । विसं १९९८को चौथो जनगणनामा जनसंख्या १० लाख ७५ हजार घटेको थियो । २०१८, २०२८सालको जनगणना अनुसार कुल जनसंख्या क्रमशः ८५ लाख १५ हजार र १ करोड १५ लाख थियो । तर, तीस बर्षपछि २०५८ सालको जनगणना अनुसार नेपालको जनसंख्या दोब्बर भन्दा पनि बढी भयो । जानकारहरुका अनुसार यो अस्वभाविक बृद्धि हो ।

छिमेकी भारतकै कुरा गर्ने हो भने उसले सन् १९६१ ३१ मार्चलाई आधार मानेर त्यतिबेलासम्म जन्मेकाहरुलाई नागरिकता दिएको छ, त्यसपछि जन्मेकालाई दिएको छैन । पश्चिम बंगालमा आप्रबासनको समस्या देखिएको भए पनि त्यहाँका नेपालीभाषीलाई अल्पमतमा पार्ने हुनाले त्यहाँ बंगलादेशी नागरिकको बढ्दो आगमनलाई अस्वभाविकरुपमा लिइएको छैन । तर, नेपालले १८ डिसेम्बर १९६२लाई मात्र हैन, २०४६ साल चैत्र मसान्तलाई आधार बर्ष मानेर नागरिकता दिएको छ । अहिले उत्पन्न समस्या यही गैरजिम्मेबारपनको उपज हो । यसको अनुसन्धान अपरिहार्य छ । 

सर्वोच्च अदालतले समेत नागरिकता नदिन सरकारका नाममा आदेश जारी गरिसकेको छ । तर, सर्बोच्चको आदेश बिपरित नागरिकता ऐनमा संशोधन गरेर जन्मका आधारमा नागरिकता पाउने व्यक्तिका सन्तानलाई बंशजका आधारमा नागरिकता दिन मधेशवादीहरु हावी भएको वर्तमान गठबन्धन सरकार सहमत भएको सार्वजनिक भएको छ । तराईमा मात्र नभएर नागरिकताको महत्वबोध नबुझेका पिछडिएका नेपाली नागरिकले नागरिकता पाउने हक रँख्छन् र तिनको कार्यान्वयन अपरिहार्य छ । तर, वर्तमान कानूनी व्यवस्था त्यसका लागि पर्याप्त छ । तर, नागरिकता राजनीतिक आग्रहका आधारमा वितरण गर्ने अबधारणाको चौतफी विरोध जरुरी छ । २६ फागुनमा विज्ञप्ति मार्फत् नेकपा मसालका महामन्त्री मोहन विक्रम सिंहले सरकारी निर्णयको विरोध गरेका छन्, तर यस मामिलामा अरु दलहरुको संस्थागत धारणा आएको छैन । भलै, छटपुटरुपमा मात्रै केही नेताको प्रतिक्रिया सार्वजनिक त भएका छन् छ । त्यस्ता प्रतिक्रिया र विरोधका स्वर अहिले मात्र हैन, विगतदेखि नै निस्प्रभावी बन्दै आएका छन् ।

Courtesy:  हिमालय टाइम्स दैनिक , ३ चैत्र, २०६८

दाताहरूसित सावधान


ध्रुवहरि अधिकारी

समयको सङ्केत। नेपालको तिब्बती शरणार्थी समुदाय हरेक वर्ष फागुनचैतका केही साता बाक्लो चर्चामा रहने गर्छ। किनभने यस अवधिमै १० मार्च र १४ मार्च पर्दछन्। १० मार्चको संझना सन् १९५९ को तिब्बत विद्रोहको संझनामा गरिन्छ भने १४ मार्चको चर्चा सन् २००८ को ल्हासा दङ्गाको सन्दर्भमा हुने गर्छ। यसबाहेक, असारमा (जुलाई) दलाई लामाको जन्मदिन मनाउने चलन छ। जगजाहेर कुरो हो, यी कामहरू शान्तिपूर्वक गरुञ्जेल नेपाल सरकारका प्रहरी निकाय संयमित रहन्छन्, चीन विरोधी जुलुस प्रदर्शन र नाराबाजी हुन थालेपछि भने प्रहरीले चूप्प लागेर बस्न मिल्दैन। किनभने नेपाल सरकारले चीनसितको सम्बन्धलाई बेवास्ता गर्न सक्दैन। 'एक चीन नीति' अर्थात् तिब्बत, ताइवान समेतका भूभाग चीनमै पर्छन् भन्ने मान्यतालाई त्याग्न सक्दैन। सबैलाई थाहा छ, प्रभावशाली भारत र शक्तिशाली अमेरिकाले समेत 'एक चीन नीति' छोड्न सकेका छैनन्। भारतमा त तिब्बतबाट भागेर हिँडेका दलाई लामा सहित एकलाख तिब्बतीहरू निर्वासनमा बसेका छन्। यसरी एक हदभन्दा बढी गएर चीनलाई चिढ्याउने सामर्थ्य अमेरिका र भारतले समेत सक्दैनन् भने 'सानो' नेपालबाट साँध जोडिएको चीनसित कुन स्तरको प्रतिवाद, प्रतिरोधको अपेक्षा गर्ने? यतिञ्जेल शरणको मरण गरेको छैन, त्यही ठूलो कुरो हो। यस तथ्यलाई शरणार्थी समुदायले बुझिदिनै पर्छ। 

यो वास्तविकता नेपालमा निर्वासित जीवन बिताइरहेका तिब्बतीहरू र तिनका युरोपेली, अमेरिकी समर्थकहरूले नबुझेका पनि छैनन्। मानव अधिकारवादी संगठन र तिनका सदस्यहरू पनि अनभिज्ञ छैनन्। शरणार्थीले शरणाथीको थान्कोमा बस्नुपर्छ, नेपालमा बसेर चीनको विरोध गर्ने राजनीतिमा लाग्न पाउनुपर्छ भन्ने सरासर अनुचित माग राख्नु हुँदैन। यस्तो यथार्थप्रति आँखा चिम्लेर अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय मञ्चहरूमा नेपालको निन्दा, आलोचना गर्नेगराउने कार्य आफैंमा निन्दनीय छ। बुझ पचाउने प्रवृत्ति र दोहोरो मापदण्ड अपनाउने नीति दुबैथोक आलोच्य छन्। 

निर्वासित तिब्बतीहरूको सञ्चार माध्यम 'फायुल' वेबसाइटमा देखिएका र 'टिबेटन रिभ्यु' मा दोहोर्‍याइएका विवरणले मार्च ५ मा जारी भएको त्यस संयुक्त वक्तव्यको उल्लेख गरेका छन् जसको स्रोत इन्टरनेसनल कमिसन अफ् जुरिस्ट र ह्युमन राइटस् वाच हुन्। तिनले जेनेभास्थित् राष्ट्रसंघीय मानव अधिकार परिषद्लाई ध्यानाकर्षण गराएका रहेछन्। यसैबीच, अस्ति शनिबारको अङ्कमा बेलायती पत्रिका 'दि इकोनोमिस्ट' मा नेपालमा चीनको प्रभाव बढ्दो छ भन्ने सन्देश दिन तिनै तिब्बतीका गतिविधि नियन्त्रण गर्न खोजेको भनिएका घटनाको चर्चा गरिएको रहेछ। चीनको राजदूतावासले नेपालको परराष्ट्र मन्त्रालयलाई फ्याक्समार्फत् बाक्लो पत्राचारद्वारा तिब्बतीका गतिविधि नियन्त्रण गर्न दबाब दिनेगर्छ भनिएको रहेछ। 

पश्चिमी देशहरू र तिनको आडमा सञ्चालित गैरसरकारी संस्थाहरूको चाहिनेभन्दा बढी चासो चीनको दबाब बढाउने मुख्य कारकतत्व हो। नेपालमा बसेका तिब्बती शरणार्थीलाई उक्साउने काम पनि आफैं गर्ने र त्यसरी उक्साइएका तिब्बतीहरूले उपद्रो गर्दा निगरानी राख्न खोज्ने नेपाली अधिकारीहरू चिनियाँ दबाबसामु लत्रिए भनेर नेपाललाई नै व्यङ्ग्य गर्न पनि अघिसर्ने? नेपाललाई मद्दत गर्ने निहुँमा नेपाललाई नै अप्ठेरो पार्ने, अर्घेलो देखाउने पश्चिमा देश र नानाथरी नामका संस्था र निकायहरू तिब्बती मामिलामा उदांग भएका छन्। नेपालको धार्मिक सहिष्णुता, जातिजाति बीचको सद्भाव र यस मुलुकको भौगोलिक अखण्डतालाई कमजोर तुल्याइदिने काम पनि दाता कहलिने कतिपय देश र तिनबाट सञ्चालित समूहहरूबाट भैरहेको छ। नर्वे, स्वीडेन, फिनल्याण्ड जस्ता मुलुक किन विवादास्पद भैरहेका छन् तिनका कूटनीतिक नियोगले आत्मसमीक्षा गर्नु आवश्यक भैसकेको छ। र, यस प्रसङ्गमा बेलायतजस्तो सहयोगी मित्रराष्ट्र समेत विवादमुक्त रहन सकेन किन होला त?
'एकचीन नीति' कायम राख्दाराख्दै पनि भारतले तिब्बतको मामिलामा पश्चिमीजगत्को अवधारणालाई बल दिने काम गर्दैआएको मानिन्छ, बेलाबेलामा देखिन्छ पनि। भारतले त्यसो गरेको भारतप्रशासित काश्मीरको विषयमा चीनले राख्ने गरेको आग्रहको प्रत्युत्तर हुनसक्छ भन्ने एकथरीको सोच छ, जुन आधारहीन कुरो होइन। किनभने दिल्लीस्थित् चिनियाँ दूतावासले चीन जाने प्रवेशाज्ञा (भीसा) खोज्ने जम्मुकाश्मीरका बासिन्दालाई राहदानी (पासपोर्ट) मा छाप लगाइदिनुको साटो छुट्टै कागजमा लेखेर दिएको अनुमति राहदानीमा गाँसिदिने गर्दछ। यस्तो प्रक्रिया अपनाउनुको अर्थ काश्मीरलाई भारतमा गाभेको कुरालाई चीनले मान्यता नदिएको लाग्दैआएको छ। अभिलेखमा भएको विषय पनि हो, सन् १९४७ मा भारत र पाकिस्तानको जन्म भएपछि भारतले सैनिक बल समेतको प्रयोगद्वारा काश्मीरका राजा हरि सिंहलाई कागज गराई काश्मीरको नियन्त्रण आफ्नो हातमा लिएको हो। पछि, राष्ट्रसंघमा त्यो मामिला पुग्यो र तत्कालीन प्रधानमन्त्री नेहरूले काश्मीरका जनताको राय बुझ्न जनमतसंग्रह गराउने बाचा गरे। तर यो काम आजसम्म भएको छैन। परिणामतः काश्मीर अशान्त रहिआएको छ, पाकिस्तानप्रशासित काश्मीर र भारतप्रशासित काश्मीरको बीचमा राष्ट्रसंघीय शान्ति नियोग कार्यरत छ। भारतको विदेश राज्यमन्त्री रहिसेकका शशी थरूरले हालै प्रकाशित एउटा आलेख (द काठमाडौं पोस्ट, २७ फेब्रुअरी) मा काश्मीरबारे चर्चा गर्दै सन् १९४७ मा अरु ५६२ वटा रजौटाहरूसरह भारतमा विलय हुन नचाहने काश्मीरका महाराजा हरि सिंहले आफ्नो राज्यलाई भारत र पाकिस्तान दुबैबाट अलग 'स्वतन्त्र काश्मीर' बनाउन चाहेको कुरा स्वीकार गरेका छन्। जनमतसंग्रह गरिएन र विवादको स्थिति अद्यपि कायम रहन गयो भन्ने थरूरको निष्कर्ष छ। 

कतै चीनभारत शीतयुद्धको यसै चेपुवामा त नेपाल पर्न लागेको होइन? यस्तो बखतमा नेपालमा सबल र दूरदर्शी नेतृत्व हुनुपर्थ्यो। तर बहाल छ अस्थिर र कमजोर नेताहरूको सरकार।  

Courtesy: Tarun Weekly

Mar 7, 2012

दिल्ली र बेइजिङको ‘साझा’ रोडम्याप


पर्शुराम काफ्ले

घटनाक्रमले क्रमशः पुष्टि गरिरहेका छन्एक सय चार बर्षको राणा शासन, तीस बर्षे पञ्चायती शासन वा निरंकुशराजतन्त्रको अन्त्यका लागि नेपालको घरेलु राजनीतिक शक्तिसंघर्ष हैन, दक्षिण छिमेकी भारतको भूमिका निर्णायक थियो प्राविधिकरुपमा मात्रै २००७ २०४६को दुईवटा परिवर्तनका लागि भएका आन्दोलनको अगुवाई कांग्रेसले अनि गणतन्त्र ल्याउने पछिल्लो आन्दोलनको अगुवाई माओवादीले ¥यो

तर, पहिलेका दुईवटा परिवर्तन कांग्रेससहितका दलहरुको मात्रै योजना हैसियतमा भएको थियो गणतन्त्र नै माओवादीले उठाएको हतियारको बलमा आएको थियो नेपाली राजनीतिका यी तीन उल्लेख्य परिवर्तनका प्राविधिक अगुवा मात्रै कांग्रेस माओवादी भइदिए त्यसकारण नेपालका हरेक राजनीतिक परिवर्तनहरु किन स्थायी कामयाबी बन्न सकेनन् हरेक पटक जनअपेक्षा किन पूरा हुन सकेनन् भन्ने प्रश्नको उत्तर खोज्दै जाँदा अन्तमा पुगिने नयाँदिल्ली नै हो अप्रिय लागेपनि स्पष्ट कि नेपाली राजनीतिक दलहरु २००७ साल यता परिवर्तनका नाममा आफैँले खोजेको प्रायोजित योजनाको सामान्य कारिन्दा भन्दा माथि उठ्न सकेनन् त्यसकारण आफूलाई परिवर्तनको हिमायती ठान्ने दलहरुले अहिलेसम्मका परिवर्तन संस्थागत गर्न नसक्नुका पछाडि आफ्नो भूमिका हैसियतको सही ढंगले समीक्षा आत्ममूल्यांकन नगर्ने हो भने अब घोषणा हुने जे सुकै नामको राजनीतिक व्यवस्था तासको घर मात्रै हुनेछ

गणतन्त्र स्थापनाको पृष्ठभूमि त्यसयताका घटनाक्रम हेरौँ २०६२ साल मंशीर गते नयाँदिल्लीको नोयडामा भएको नयाँ १२ बुँदे दिल्ली सम्झौताले गणतन्त्रको बिजारोपण गरे पनि त्यसको योजनाकार देखावटीरुपमा मात्रै नेपाली दलहरु थिए गणतन्त्र नभनिएको उक्त सम्झौता कार्यान्वयनकै लागि २०६२÷०६३को जनआन्दोलन भयोे काठमाडौँसहित देशभरका सडक आन्दोलनकारीहरुले ढाकिए तर, राजा ज्ञानेन्द्र शाहको शाही घोषणाले व्युँताइएको प्रतिनिधिसभाको दैलोबाट कांग्रेस, एमालेमात्र हैन, बन्दुकबाट सत्तापलट गर्न हिँडेका माओवादीसमेत शान्तिपूर्ण राजनीतिक मूलधारमा प्रवेश गरेका थिए यदि आफ्नै बलबुता योजनामा निरंकुश राजतन्त्रको अन्त्य पूर्ण प्रजातन्त्रका लागि आन्दोलन भएको थियो भने राजाले पुनस्र्थापित गरिदिएको प्रतिनिधिसभाको दैलाबाट माओवादी, कांग्रेस एमालेहरु लुरुलुरु सत्तामा पुग्नुपर्ने थिएन त्यसकारण स्पष्ट कि करणसिंह, श्यामशरणहरुको योजना अनुसार कोरिएको १२ बुँदे दिल्ली समझदारीको अदृष्य मार्गचित्र अनुसार नेपालमा गणतन्त्र आएको हो तर, मजबूत आधार विना स्थापना गरिएको गणतन्त्रले मुलुकमा साम्प्रदायिक सद्भाव, जातीय एकतालाई मजबुत बनाउनुको सट्टा भत्काउने मात्रै काम गरेन, बिखण्डनबादलाई केन्द्रमा राखेर राजनीतिको व्यापार गर्न हिँडेकाहरुलाई तथाकथित समावेशीकरणका नाममा राज्यसंयन्त्रमा स्थापित गरिदियो राज्यसंयन्त्रलाई पंगु बनाउँदै राज्यको आधिकारिकतालाई समाप्त गर्ने अबधिका रुपमा गणतन्त्रको पाँच बर्ष स्थापित भएको अझ सबैभन्दा डरलाग्दो पक्ष के हो भने गणतन्त्रपछि नेपालको अन्तराष्ट्रिय प्रतिष्ठा साख विश्वसनीयता डरलाग्दोरुपमा गिरेको एउटा राजाको बहिर्गमनपछि राजाका नयाँ अवतारका रुपमा देखापरेका दलहरुले अन्तराष्ट्रियरुपमा नेपाललाई अविश्वसनीय कमजोर कुटनीति सञ्चालन गर्ने मुलुकका रुपमा स्थापित गराइदिएका छन् नेपालको कमजोर कुटनीतिक सामथ्र्य गणतन्त्रको पछिल्लो उपहार हो

गणतन्त्रको अभिषाप
दशकभन्दा अघिको परिदृष्यमा हेरफेर भए पनि नेपाली राजनीतिक रंगमञ्चमा नफेरिएको पाटो एउटै दक्षिण छिमेकीपरस्त मानसिकता दशकयता भौतिकरुपमा क्रमशः कमजोर देखिँदै गए पनि दक्षिणपरस्त मानसिकता नयाँ नेपाल निर्माण गर्ने राजनीतिक पुस्तामा अझ चुलिँदै गएको तत्कालीन आन्तरिक बाह्य शक्तिसन्तुलनलाई आफ्नो रणनीतिक स्वार्थमा उपयोग गर्न भारतीय नेताहरुले २००७ सालमा सत्तारुढ राणा, खोपिमा थन्काइएका राजा कांग्रेसबीच सहमति गराइदिए त्यसपछि मुलुकभित्र उत्पन्न आन्तरिक किचलो भारतकै मध्यस्थतामा समाधान गरियो परिणामस्वरुप बर्गका राणाहरु एक सय चारबर्षे लामो सत्ताबाट हात धुनुप¥यो त्यसपछि शासनसत्ता सम्हालेका राजा त्रिभुवन कांग्रेस नेताले आप्mनो स्वतन्त्र इच्छाशक्तिबाट हैन स्वतन्त्र भारतको सल्लाह योजना अनुसार मुलुक सञ्चालन गर्दैआए प्रजातन्त्र स्थापना हुनु अघि राणाहरुलाई छलेर भारतीय दूताबासमा पुगेका राजा त्रिभुवनलाई तत्कालीन राणा सरकारले गद्दीच्यूत गरेर ज्ञानेन्द्र शाहलाई राजाका रुपमा गद्दिआरोहण गरायो पछि नयाँदिल्लीबाट त्रिभुवनलाई नै पुनस्थापित गरेर राणाले भित्र्याउनु परेको थियो दिल्ली सेटलमेन्टपछि मुलुकमा प्रजातन्त्र मात्रै भित्रिएन, दरबारदेखि सरकारसम्म भारतीयहरुकै योजना मुताबिक सञ्चालन गरियो   त्यसपछिको प्रजातान्त्रिक व्यवस्था सञ्चालन २०१५ सालसम्म भारत सरकारका काठमाडौँस्थित प्रतिनिधिले गरिदिएका थिए राजा महेन्द्रले पनि २०१७ सालमा भारत सरकारको विश्वासका आधारमा पञ्चायती व्यवस्थाको आरम्भ गरेको कुनै नयाँ बिषय होइन भारतसँग विश्वासकै आधारमा गण्डक सम्झौतामा हस्ताक्षर भएको थियो भने दार्चुलाको कालापानीमा नेपालीहरुको स्वाभिमान बिझ्ने गरी अहिलेसम्म राखिएका भारतीय फौज पञ्चायती सरकारले भारतलाई तिरेको गुनको उदाहरण थियो भलै पञ्चायती व्यवस्थाको राजनीतिक चरित्र जे सुकै भए पनि भारतीयहरुको पहुँच प्रभाव एकहदसम्म सीमित गरिएको थियो नयाँदिल्लीकै योजना बलका आधारमा २०४६ सालमा आन्दोलन भयो राजा एवं दलहरुबीच सम्झौता भएको थियो जनआन्दोलनपछि बनेका कांग्रेस, एमाले राप्रपाका सरकार निर्माणदेखि सञ्चालनसम्म भारतीयहरु सक्रियता उल्लेख्य थियो २०४६ सालको राजनीतिक परिवर्तन संस्थागत नहुँदै नेपालमा भारतीय भूमिकाको चर्को आलोचना गरेका माओवादीहरुले भारतीय भूमिका बसेर नेपालमा जनयुद्ध सञ्चालन गर्दै १२ बुँदे नयाँदिल्ली समझदारी अनुसार जनआन्दोलनहुँदै यहाँसम्म आइपुगेका हुन् दशकयता राजा राजनीतिक दलहरुसत्ता सञ्चालनमा असफल सावित हुँदै आएका छन् तराईमा एक मधेश एक प्रदेशको आवरणमा उत्पन्न भएको विखण्डनवादी राजनीति, साम्प्रदायिक सद्भाव भड्काएर उत्तरी छिमेकी चीन विरुद्ध गतिविधि फैलाउने अन्तराष्ट्रिय डिजाइन अनुसार  तीब्र बनाइएको जातीय संघीयता÷स्वायत्तताको अभियान, राज्यसंयन्त्रहरुको साम्प्रदायिकीकरण राजनीतिकरण अहिले गणतन्त्रको अभिषापका रुपमा देखिएका छन् यी सबै मुद्दाको वस्तुवादी समाधानसहित आगामी १४ जेठमा संविधान घोषणा नहुँदाको परिस्थिति निकै विकराल बन्नेछ

अर्को दिल्ली सम्झौता ?
नेपालको घरेलु राजनीतिक परिस्थिति आफ्नो सुरक्षा एवम राजनीतिक स्वार्थका हिसाबले दक्षिण छिमेकले यतिबेला अनुकुल देखिरहेको छैन तिब्बतको सुरक्षा संवेदनशीलतालाई हेर्दा उत्तरी छिमेकी चिनले पनि नेपालको पछिल्लो असहज परिस्थितिप्रति चिन्ता व्यक्त गरिरहेको विगतमा जस्तो नेपालको अस्थिरतालाई नेपालको आन्तरिक मामिला हो भनेर चुपलाग्ने अवस्थामा चीन छैन स्थिर नेपालले मात्रै आफ्नो सुरक्षा चासो सम्बोधन गर्ने हैसियत राख्छ भन्ने मान्यतामा भारत चीन दुबै सहमत छन् राजतन्त्रको अन्त्यपछि दुबै मुलुकको सुरक्षा चासो सम्बोधन गर्ने हैसियत राख्ने भरपर्दो संस्थाका रुपमा कुनै दल स्थापित हुन सकेनन् यो परिस्थितिमा पूर्व राजा ज्ञानेन्द्र शाहको नयाँदिल्ली भ्रमण त्यहाँ भएका उच्चस्तरीय भेटघाट काठमाडौँका लागि चर्चाको बिषय बन्नु कुनै अस्वभाविक होइन संयोगबस पहिलो पटक २००७ सालमा पछिल्लोपटक २०६५ सालमा ज्ञानेन्द्रलाई राजगद्दिबाट हटाउने शक्ति पनि भारत नै थियो जसको विशेष अतिथिका रुपमा नयाँ दिल्ली बसेर उनी भखरै मात्र स्वदेश फर्किएका छन् तरुण साप्ताहिकमै प्रकाशित समाचारलाई आधार मान्ने हो भने ज्ञानेन्द्रको यसपटकको दिल्ली भ्रमणलाई कमरुपमा आँकलन गर्न मिल्दैन नेपाल भ्रमणमा आएका चिनियाँ प्रधानमन्त्रीले भारतसँग सम्बन्ध सुधारका लागि प्रधानमन्त्री डा बाबुरामलाई सुझाब दिएको एक हप्ता नबित्दै भारतीय प्रधानमन्त्री मनमोहन सिंहले उपप्रधानमन्त्री विजय गच्छदारलाई चीनसँग सम्बन्ध सुमधुर बनाउन सुझाब दिएका बेला संयोगबस ज्ञानेन्द्र पनि भारतकै मेजमानी खाइरहेका थिए तर राजसंस्था फर्काइदिने आश्वासन भारतीयहरुले दिए वा दिएनन् ? सायद हल्कारुपमा यो बिषय सार्बजनिक हुँनेछैन तर, जनआन्दोलन को समापनका बेला भारतीय निर्णायक मध्यस्थतामा राजनीतिक दल राजाबीच के सहमति भएको थियो ? नयाँदिल्लीले त्यतिबेला के आश्वासन दिएको थियो ? अहिलेसम्म खुलेको छैन तर, १४ जेठपछि उत्पन्न हुने राजनीतिक संवैधानिक संकटलाई मध्यनजर गरी कुनै पनि हैसियतमा राजसंस्था पुनस्र्थापन गर्ने कसरत नयाँ दिल्लीले गर्न थालेको भन्ने अनुमानलाई यतिबेला अन्यथा भन्न मिल्ने अवस्था छैन यस्तै अनुमानबीच राष्ट्रियताका सन्दर्भमा राष्ट्रपति डा रामवरण यादबले पछिल्लो समयमा बढाएको सक्रियतासमेत कम अर्थपूर्ण छैन नयाँदिल्ली बेइजिङबीचको साझा रोडम्याप मध्यस्थतामा हुने अर्को दिल्ली वा बेइजिङ समझदारीबाट मात्रै राजसंस्थाको पुनस्र्थापन हुने सम्भावना रहन्छ तर, नयाँ दिल्ली बेइजिङ्बीच साझा रोडम्याप नबनेको अवस्थामा प्रमुख राजनीतिक खेलाडीहरु उक्त रोडम्यापमा सहमत नभएको अवस्थामा राजसंस्थाको पुनरागमन असम्भव

तरुण साप्ताहिक, फागुन