Maoists plan unity in diversity

 

If everything goes according to the agreed schedule, Nepal will have a new constitution by May 28, 2010. Under that statute, the country becomes a republic based on a federal setup. And the "achievements made through the revolutions and movements till now", says the interim statute enacted in early 2007, will be institutionalized. But the road towards that schedule has been marked by interruptions due to strikes and other unforeseen developments, raising doubts over whether the target can be achieved. The Constituent Assembly, which is tasked with writing the constitution and which acts as an interim legislature, could not sit on Sunday due to disruption caused by a strike called by the Maoists. The strike, Maoist leaders argued, was necessary to register protest over a police bid to evict squatters who had forcibly occupied a protected forest in the far-western district of Kailaali. The clash there resulted in the death of five people, including a policeman.
Maoist members in the Constituent Assembly have also disrupted the legislative process over the past few months by staging demonstrations within the assembly's premises. The Maoists are becoming increasingly restless, as seen in their unilateral plan to declare 13 "federal autonomous states" in the week beginning this Friday (December 11). Eleven of these "states" are to be named after the ethnic groups considered to be the original settlers.
The three administrative districts in the Kathmandu Valley, for instance, would be placed under the autonomous state of Newaar, where Newaars used to be the dominant community. It is the country's capital and has therefore attracted people from all corners. The demography has changed over decades and now only about 35% of the population is made up of Newaars. Narayanman Bijukchhe, a Newaar and a respected member of the Constituent Assembly, is among those who sees the proposition to give Newaars special privileges as highly unrealistic. How can a minority community rule over a majority in a democratic setup, wonders Bishwanath Upadhyaya, a former chief justice who chaired a panel that drafted the 1990 constitution. Upadhyaya was not alluding to the status of the Kathmandu Valley alone. Almost all villages and districts have mixed populations and there are over a hundred ethnic groups scattered all over the country.
The controversial Maoist scheme has other contradictions. Striking among them is their declared belief in not trusting in any religious faith, yet the simultaneous pledge to offer an autonomous state to various ethnic groups whose origins are based on religion, mainly Hindu and Buddhist.
This dichotomy is widely viewed as a prescription for communal strife. However, Maoist leaders often re-state that their policies thrive on chaos and disorder in society, despite the series of agreements and compromises made over the past few years since the Maoists entered the political arena. Had this not been the case, the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) would not have resorted to its disruptive activities; it would have actively participated in the process to draw up a constitution that could address the grievances of marginalized communities in a federal setup suitable for the 21st century.
But this is not happening. Although the largest party in the assembly, the Maoists do not appear to be working hard to utilize the precious time and resources remaining. Their indifferent, if not hostile, behavior has increased the anxieties of Nepal's friends and donors. When he met Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal on Friday, US envoy Randy Berry's expression of "deep concern" was directed to the planned declaration of autonomous states. Views of other Kathmandu-based diplomats on the ongoing political stalemate are similar.
What prompted the Maoist party, which is led by Pushpa Kamal Dahal (alias Prachanda), to announce the plan for autonomous states ahead of the completion of a new constitution which would have officially established provincial structures? An analysis of remarks of top Maoist leaders in recent weeks indicates that they are under considerable pressure from their cadres to swiftly implement the pledge they made during the insurgency years (1996-2006) for the creation of autonomous states bases on ethnicity.
Cadres are concerned that the constitution will set in stone something that it will become impossible to change. By acting now, Maoist leaders can take satisfaction from publicly fulfilling the promise they made at the time of enlisting young men and women for a long journey of liberation. Another important point revolves around the fear of the Maoists that imperialist (US-led West) and expansionist (India) forces will not allow Nepal to be a "people's democracy" through constitutional methods. It is hence necessary to empower the people immediately.
Maoists have from time to time expressed apprehension over a Sri Lanka-style military action against them by the present government, which they see as a puppet of India. New Delhi, as reported by the Indian media, is preparing a major offensive against Maoists in India, and Indian suspicion of a possible link between the two Maoist groups is an open secret. At its heart, the Maoists' decision on autonomous states is part of the ongoing political program to oust the present regime, to be replaced by a government of national unity headed by the Maoist party. They deny they are moving in the direction of establishing a parallel government.
The immediate objective, they argue, is to counter initiatives in the assembly - and outside - to pull back from the commitment made at the time of declaring Nepal a republic. It is essentially a publicity campaign, they contend. In their assessment, autonomous states under a federal structure would give indigenous community members opportunities to raise their political profile as well as economic status. However, there is the argument that the creation of autonomous states would compel indigenous people to stay at the local level, thus preventing them from reaching the central government level.
The Maoist demand for a government of national unity is, ostensibly, a precondition to their active participation in the assembly panel tasked with drafting the constitution. Since the rules require a two-thirds majority for the constitution to be passed, it is necessary to have the Maoists within the fold. That perhaps was the reason why the United Nations secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, wrote of the need for a national unity government in his latest report on Nepal, though he did not say that such a government had to be headed by the Maoists.
Ban was criticized by some ministers and leaders. But those who are keen to see a conclusion of the ongoing political/peace process through the promulgation of a new constitution have supported Ban's viewpoint. Daman Dhungana, a former parliament speaker who is also a constitutional lawyer, is one of them. "At least three major parties should be encouraged to promptly form a government that can facilitate the timely issuance of new constitution," he told Asia Times Online. He was alluding to the Maoists, Nepali Congress and the UML (Unified Marxist and Leninist) as the political parties who matter most.
Ban's concern, meanwhile, is also directed at the status of the UN Mission in Nepal as its current mandate runs out at the end of January, unless the UN Security Council decides otherwise. The immediate worry for most of the non-Maoist parties represented in the assembly is the Maoist determination to announce autonomous states. Civil society, too, looks at it as an ominous plan, fearing that once the inevitable conflict ensues, it might not be controllable, even by the Maoists.
Dhruba Adhikary is a Kathmandu-based journalist