• The Republic and the World

• After deserting Nepal, Taj Group to check-in Bhutan

• `Systematic rights violations are occurring on both sides’

• A cartoonist is overwhelmed by the audience’ response  

• Amnesty calls for comprehensive action by int’l community

The Republic and the World

By C. Rajamohan

Why does India, despite its potential, continue to think small?

As the nation celebrates the 55th anniversary of the Republic, the external environment has never been as favourable to independent India as it is today. Yet the nation’s foreign policy discourse is troubled by tentativeness. While India has an increasingly confident younger generation that views the world with optimism, the political class and intelligentsia are gripped by an enduring Indo-pessimism. Barring the ’50s, when India under Nehru addressed the world with confidence, pessimism has been hallmark of national discourse on foreign relations. This pessimism was coupled with defensive posturing on major issues. Thinking small became an enduring intellectual fashion. While Rajiv Gandhi, P.V. Narasimha Rao and Atal Bihari Vajpayee occasionally broke away from this norm, ingrained risk aversion prevented India from persisting with new approaches to international relations. 

Today, five major trends on the world scene demand a confident national strategy built around internal reform and external initiative. The first trend is about India’s relative rise in the international system. Despite the impressive growth in the first four decades of the Republic, it was a period of relative decline for India; in that period the world grew much faster than India. The economic reforms launched in the early ’90s, however, helped arrest the relative decline for the first time since independence. 

Within a decade, India has emerged as the fourth largest economy of the world in purchasing power parity terms. In more absolute terms, as the National Intelligence Council (NIC) in the US underlined recently, India will begin to overtake all the Western nations except the US by 2020 in economic size. More fundamentally, the NIC report argued that the rise of China and India will begin to transform the nature of global politics and reorder international institutions. If India continues to grow at reasonably high growth rates, it will inevitably become a force to reckon with. Yet there is nothing to suggest that the establishment is preparing itself for this. Second, for the first time again since the founding of the Republic, India is simultaneously expanding relations with all the great powers. 

uring the first four decades of the Republic, India’s foreign policy options were constrained by Cold War rivalry between Washington and Moscow and that between Russia and China. Today all the great powers are at peace with each other. While they continue to play the game of balance of power, the prospect for a major confrontation among any of them has dimmed. When India’s ally the Soviet Union fell off the map in ’91, India’s ties with all the other powers including the US, Europe, and China, were underdeveloped. Over the last decade, it has managed to reinvigorate ties with Russia even while engaging with the others. India no longer has to look over its shoulder in engaging any one power. Yet Cold War inertia seems to hold it back. 

Third, traditionally, the problems within the subcontinent have constituted one of the biggest constraints. Today, thanks to globalisation and the pressure on countries in our neighbourhood to open up their economies, it has become possible to promote regional economic integration of the subcontinent under Indian leadership. On the ground, this would mean ending the economic consequences of the Partition in ’47. Yet, India remains niggardly in its approach to trade and opening its market to the neighbours. Instead of leading the charge towards a rapid reintegration of the South Asian economic space, India remains hesitant in its approach. Security arguments are drummed up to prevent closer economic cooperation, like on energy pipelines. 

Fourth, globalisation has also opened the prospects of reconnecting India’s frontier regions with the markets in Yunnan, Tibet, Xinjiang, Central Asia, Afghanistan and the Persian Gulf. The commercial opportunities in these regions are being squandered in the name of a narrow approach to security and the fear that others will come into India’s protected regions. The mindset in New Delhi remains defensive. It would rather protect its own territory from competition rather than seeking to re-establish national profile in frontiers beyond our borders. 

Finally, India has a huge opportunity to break out of its main security challenge: the persistence of a two-front problem since independence. The unwillingness to resolve the boundary dispute with China and the problem of J&K with Pakistan have sapped India’s military and strategic energies since the Republic’s founding. The nuclearisation of the subcontinent, however, has given us an extraordinary opportunity to rethink these disputes. The nuclear factor has meant that conventional wars will become less feasible. The experience of the ’90s and its military confrontations have revealed that the international community will move heaven and earth to prevent a recurrence of a conventional war in the region. 

While Pakistan’s low-intensity conflict against India has caused many problems, the effectiveness of that strategy in prising territory out of India are under a huge cloud. Yet our armed forces have been condemned to defend every square inch of territory rather than consciously adapt to the new military threats that face the nation. And on the diplomatic front, despite launching historic negotiations with both China and Pakistan on resolving the boundary dispute and the Kashmir question respectively, caution again appears to have overtaken the imperatives of political imagination. 

While it is clear that resolving the political dispute on either of the two frontiers would dramatically alter India’s security condition, defensive arguments are mounted to avoid the exploration of innovative solutions. When India should be focusing like a laser beam on its great power potential and reforming its security sector to take on new regional and global challenges, strategic timidity dressed up in hardline rhetoric has begun to again cloud India’s prospects. While India is acquiring greater economic, diplomatic and military muscle, its mind has remained small. Default options are once again becoming more attractive than strategic experimentation. 

What India now needs is a bold vision on foreign and national security policies, whether in dealing with the great powers or its smaller neighbours. And that can only come from the prime minister. Fragmenting his authority and power over national security, in the name of strengthening other institutions, is the worst thing we could do to ourselves at this moment. 

(A columnist with The Indian Express, C. Rajamohan is a leading strategic analyst of India. We reproduce this article courtesy The Indian Express dated Jan. 25, 2005—Ed.)

After deserting Nepal, Taj Group to check-in Bhutan

Within a month of pulling out of its contract with a five-star hotel in Nepal, Indian Hotels Company Ltd (IHCL)-- owner of the Taj hotel chain—is all set to make its presence felt in the Himalayan kingdom of Bhutan.

A Taj group hotel. Photo source:telegraphindia.com

IHCL has signed a deal under which it will run a hotel in Thimphu under a management contract, The Telegraph, a leading Indian daily, reported Tuesday.

“We expect the plan to crystallise by the year-end. The facilities are now being upgraded to our standards,” the daily quoted senior vice-president (finance) Anil P. Goel as saying. 

Spread along the River Raidak at an altitude of 7,000 feet, Thimpu has a population of 48,300 but is yet to earn a star-spangled badge for its hotels. That will change once the Taj takes its insignia there, the news report said.

IHCL has recently opened a beach-head in Seychelles with a luxury resort that will be called Taj Denis. 

The group’s net profit surged by over 110 per cent to IRs 34.97 crore for the quarter ended December from IRs 16.60 crore in the same period of last year, according to the daily.

The group, however, pulled unceremoniously out of its contract with Hotel de l’Annapurna—a leading five start hotel—in Kathmandu last month.

The IHCL had signed a 25-year contract with the hotel in November 1988, but pulled mid-way citing “security reasons.” 

The decision from the group came close on the heels of five Indian employees at the hotel leaving Kathmandu all of a sudden. They included general manager Ravi Pillai and accounts manager Padmanabham.

The hotel, located at a stone's throw away from the royal palace, is mostly frequented by Indian tourists and businessmen. 

A private TV channel, Nepal One, reported that the Indian employees at the Hotel de l’Annapurna had left owing to an extortion threat by the Maoist insurgents.

The hotel authorities, however, denied the report and said the five had gone to India to attend an in-house conference. 

A week later, Nepali management of the hotel suspended its Indian staff for leaving hotel without any formal communication leading to break-up of its contract with the IHCL.

The Annapurna authorities also said the IHCL pulled out of the 25-year contract without any prior notice. Princess Helen, a royal family member, is chairperson of the board of directors of the hotel, according to reports.

The IHCL decision to pull out of a leading hotel came as a blow to the sagging tourism industry in the country. But the Nepali management of the Annapurna recently said that they would continue to serve their guests with added commitment without compromising their goodwill. nepalnews.com by Jan 25 05

`Systematic rights violations are occurring on both sides’

- Louise Arbour, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights

UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour

The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights has enjoyed a close association with the National Human Rights Commission since its establishment in 1999. This association acquires new and promising potential through the recent agreement - a Memorandum of Understanding - between my Office and His Majesty's Government aimed at providing technical assistance to Commission as it expands its presence into all five regions of Nepal.

In its relatively short life, the Commission has grown considerably in its unique role as the country’s statutory body for promoting and protecting human rights. It is vital that this support continues: from His Majesty's Government, which established the Commission; from civil society, which advocated for a strong and independent Commission and which has recognized the key role of the Commission in addressing the human right crisis arising from the continuing and deepening armed conflict here in Nepal.

I am aware that the Commissioners' current terms expire in May. I cannot stress enough how important it is that the Commission's work does not deteriorate after that date and that neither its independence nor its effectiveness be adversely impacted. This is particularly so in light of the conflict, which overshadows this country and which is characterized by grave and systematic human rights violations occurring on both sides.

While His Majesty’s Government carries the responsibility of maintaining the integrity of state institutions and while it bears the heavy burden of ensuring the safety and security of its people, it must do so in full compliance with international humanitarian and human rights law. The Maoist insurgents, for their part, do not operate in a legal vacuum: they are equally bound under international law.

Yet despite these obligations, the people of Nepal are now prey to disappearances, summary executions, abductions and torture. Its human rights defenders are subjected to harassment in the pursuit of their vital work. And the country’s children are at the mercy of being press-ganged by the insurgents. There are few crueler means of ending a childhood than through military conscription. Children, incapable of complex moral and political choices, should not be induced to utilize dubious means to pursue dubious ends, and risk, in so doing, being tainted for life- should they even survive-by their coerced association with a political agenda that they could not freely embrace or influence.

In short, the fabric of society is being grievously frayed by the conflict.

As we have seen in many countries around the world, injustice fuels violence and violence fuels only greater violence. One generation’s loss becomes the next generation’s rallying cry. This is particularly true in a country such as Nepal where half of the population is under 18 years of age.

It is this crisis that has brought us together today in the hope and the belief that we can and we must do something to halt the wave of violence and destruction that, over the past nine years, has swept away so many innocent lives. It is critical that ways be urgently sought to bring an end to the systematic and grave human rights abuses and the culture of impunity that pervade Nepal today.

Actively defending human rights, particularly during an armed conflict, is a far from easy task. Political and military leaders at times prefer not to confront the difficult question of how to deal with grave human rights violations, particularly those perpetrated in support of their own cause. It is always easier to point the finger at the transgressions of the other side than to take a sober, hard look at the failings of one’s own. Yet it is precisely these leaders who bear primary responsibility, under international humanitarian law, for the actions of those under their command. Increasingly they can expect to be held to account.

Throughout my career, I have often confronted situations, which are rich on the rhetoric of human rights- we all stand ready, after all, to affirm the need to ensure their respect- but which, in reality, demonstrate contempt for the values of human dignity and security.

My concern is that Nepal not enter into that category.

One important initiative to halt such a regression is the Human Rights Accord proposed by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC). At its heart, this Accord recognizes that the armed conflict in Nepal affects, above all, innocent civilians. It asserts further that this must end and that if war is inevitable then it must be carried out in accordance with certain basic rules, well articulated in international law.

It should not be difficult to conclude this Accord: after all, It is nothing more, in effect, than a reiteration of those legal obligations under human rights and international humanitarian law to which all parties to the conflict are already bound.

Those obligations are there for a reason. A conflict is waged without regard for fundamental human rights and international humanitarian law not only cause unimaginable misery to innocents but, in so doing, it has a corrosive, embittering effect for those members of the societies on which it impacts.

This not the first time that the NHRC has proposed a human rights accord. A similar initiative was ultimately rejected in March of last year. Since then, an estimated 1600 additional Nepalis have lost their lives in the fighting and the fighting has escalated with no tactical advantage acquired by either side. The only tangible result of the continuation of the conflict since last March has been to dim further the prospects for peace and to exacerbate the risks to the life and safety of everyone in the country.

This Human Rights Accord provides a genuine platform for peace: an opportunity that Nepal cannot afford to disregard. I say it again: the Accord should not be a difficult document for either party to sign. It simply affirms the legitimate statutory role of the National Human Rights Commission to monitor human rights violations, to undertake investigations and to report on its findings. But importantly, it entails a genuine commitment to recognize, respect and facilitate that role.

Yet until today, the NHRC has not been able to count on the cooperation necessary for it to carry out its work effectively. This is particularly true with regard to its need for unhindered access, without prior notice, to all places of detention.

I know from the experience of our offices around the world that human rights monitoring can prevent human rights abuses. If the commission’s monitors were to have unhindered access to all places of detention, I have no doubts that there would be a significant improvement in the human rights situation, particularly in regard to disappearances, arbitrary arrests, unlawful detention, torture and other serious abuses.

Preventing these abuses will help lay the foundations for a dialogue on peace. Human rights do not favour one side or another: they are neutral and universal entitlements. Their sole purpose is to protect the security and preserve the dignity of each on of us. Through their respect, space can be carved out in which a settlement for peace can be more vigorously pursued. Violations of human rights, committed by either side, achieve the twin, destructive goals of inflicting misery on those whose rights are denied, and fuelling grievances, which do nothing but push back the prospect for peace.

I therefore join the call of the NHRC and appeal to the people of Nepal to remove that obstruction from the peace table. And to do so now. 

I would like to end this statement with a direct call to each of the parties to the armed conflict. Firstly, I call upon both sides to make an unequivocal and formal commitment to uphold fundamental human rights and to fully respect international humanitarian law. 

Secondly, I call upon the CPN-Maoists to end, immediately, the recruitment of child soldiers and to desist from using children in any way to further their military goals. I also call upon them to demonstrate their good faith by singing the Human Rights Accord and by allowing full access by monitors of the National Human Rights Commission to all areas under their control.

Thirdly, I call upon His Majesty’s Government also to sign the Human Rights Accord and fully implement the human rights commitments made on 26 March 2004.

(Excerpts of the speech delivered by Arbour at the inaugural session of the Conference on Human Rights and Peace organised by National Human Rights Commission in Kathmandu on Jan. 24, 05. )

A cartoonist is overwhelmed by the audience’ response 
(News Feature)

Baral (left) with one of his works of art. Photo courtesy: Bikas Rauniyar/Kantipur

Ace cartoonist, Durga Baral, popularly known as ‘Batsyayan,’ says he is overwhelmed by the response of one of his audience to award him a cash prize of Rs. 5,000 for his cartoon published in Kantipur—the largest circulating daily.

“Perhaps this is the first such incident when a reader has awarded cash prize to a cartoonist. But more than money, it is the admiration that has left me overwhelmed,” Baral, who lives in the scenic western town of Pokhara, told Nepalnews over phone. 

On Sunday (Jan. 16), the leading Nepali language daily published a cartoon by Batsyayan (Durga Baral), in which ruling coalition leader and general secretary of the CPN (UML), Madhav Nepal could be seen congratulating himself for protesting the price hike as well as for announcing steep hike in the prices of petroleum products. In the background was the portrait of former prime minister and late UML leader, Manmohan Adhikary (see: picture) 

Cartoon by Batsyayan published in Kantipur daily.

The same day, a reader of Kantipur daily was so overwhelmed by the cartoon that he announced a cash award of Rs five thousand to Baral. In a letter to the daily, managing director of Kanjirowa Overseas Pvt. Ltd., Sher Bahadur Shahi, said he had decided to offer the award as the cartoon had “reflected the ‘dual character’ of the UML leader towards the impact of price hike in petroleum products upon common people.” 

Interestingly, Shahi said he was a UML supporter and had contested for the House of Representatives from the mid-western district of Jajarkot in 1999 on behalf of the CPN (ML) after the vertical split in the CPN (UML).

The CPN (ML) later merged in the parent party while one of its leaders, C. P. Mainali, still leads what was once the breakaway faction.

So, what makes Baral’s cartoons so distinct from rest of the crowd? “It is because he has a rare capacity of depicting burning political and social issues of the day in a way that can be comprehended even by a layman,” says Narayan Wagle, editor of Kantipur daily. He, however, said Baral’s political cartoons were more popular among the readers than his other creations. 

Baral, too, says that there is abundance of political issues for him to work on while he often faces dearth of socio-economic issues. He, however, said it was because of continuous love and encouragement from the readers that he has been able to continue for so long in the area of creating cartoons. 

A cartoon by `Batsyayan’ published in The Kathmandu Post on Sunday, Jan. 23 05.

Baral started drawing cartoons way back in 1965 for ‘Naya Sandesh’ weekly—a popular tabloid edited by Ramesh Nath Pandey. Pandey later switched over to politics and was a cabinet minister in the royal-appointed Lokendra Bahadur Chand government. 

In the eighties, Baral started contributing to a weekly paper, Prangan, published from Pokhara. As people started showing increasing interests towards political cartoons in the latter days of the partyless Panchayat regime, Baral started contributing to a series of weeklies published from Kathmandu including Interestingly, it was the government’s mouthpiece, Gorkhapatra—the oldest newspaper in the country—that made history by publishing cartoon on the first page of a broadsheet newspaper that too in a bigger space. 

It was only after Baral started working for Kantipur daily in the mid-nineties that his works started getting popular response. “Thanks to the readers’ continuous encouragement, I am still in this profession,” he said. 

Away from the hustle and bustle of Kathmandu, the 65–year-old artist enjoys creating his works of art at his house at Pokhara sub-metropolis ward no. 3 at Nadipur near the Mahendra bridge. “Of course, I could have kept myself more up-to-date had I lived in Kathmandu. But, there is no disturbance here and I feel at peace while engaged in my works (in Pokhara). And, it certainly helps in the quality of my creation,” he added. Besides producing cartoons, Baral also draws paintings—the subject of his passion. He organised a solo painting exhibition at the Siddhartha Art Gallery in Kathmandu last year. His subjects obviously were aberrations in the society and quest for peace, among others. 

When asked how has been the response to his political cartoons from the politicians themselves, Baral says sometimes political workers express some dissatisfaction to the way he depicts their leaders. “But, politicians more or less seem restrained. In fact, people in the public spheres must be ready to face criticisms,” he added. 

If not from the politicos, Baral can expect to get similar response—that he got last week—from his own audience as long as his cartoons hit the front pages of Kantipur daily.  Nepalnews.com Bhagirath Yogi Jan 23 05 

Top

Amnesty calls for comprehensive action by int’l community (Nepalnews special)

On the eve of the visit of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Ms Louise Arbour, to Nepal next week, the Amnesty International has called for what it called comprehensive and coordinated action by the international community to improve the rights situation in the country.

In its 30-page report entitled “Nepal: Killing with Impunity” made public on Thursday, the London-based rights watchdog said given the scale of the human rights crisis and the level of impunity in Nepal, more comprehensive and coordinated action by the international community is urgently needed.

Lit candles in memory of civilians killed extra judicially during..... (More)

The number of people who are being illegally killed in Nepal is increasing and those responsible are using more sophisticated tactics to hide their crimes, the report said.

"Both the security forces and the Maoists are deliberately executing civilians and unarmed fighters" said Ingrid Massage, Asia Director at Amnesty International (AI). "What is most chilling is that these killings are going completely unpunished, despite numerous promises by the government and Maoist leaders to uphold human rights," she said.

The AI further said international community has a vital role to play in bringing both parties (in the conflict) to a shared human rights commitment, monitoring and reporting on human rights violations, supporting the rule of law, insisting on investigations and prosecutions for past abuses, and protecting Nepali human rights defenders.

The 61st session of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR), starting in March 2005, will be a critical opportunity for the international community to acknowledge the growing human rights crisis and the failure of existing “commitments” to curb impunity, as well as to put in place strong international initiatives that can have an immediate impact on the human rights situation in Nepal, the report said.

Amnesty noted that there had been some welcome efforts by the international community to address the growing human rights crisis in Nepal. This includes a visit of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions to Nepal in 2000. In the report following her mission, the Special Rapporteur raised concerns about unlawful killings carried out by the Nepal police and CPN (Maoist) during the first few years of the conflict and made particular mention of the killing of children. She also identified “an urgent need to put in place strong, independent and credible mechanisms to investigate and prosecute alleged human rights abuses, including extrajudicial executions.” Most of her recommendations have not been implemented and are still relevant today, the organisation said.

The international community has demonstrated increasing concern at the human rights situation in Nepal since the breakdown of the cease-fire in August 2003. In April 2004 the United Nations Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR) issued a Chairperson’s Statement on “Human Rights Assistance to Nepal”, expressing concern at the human rights situation, condemning abuses by the CPN (Maoist) and calling on the government to ensure the fundamental rights of people in Nepal.

In July 2004, eight independent experts of the UNCHR issued a joint statement expressing concern at the human rights situation and calling on the government to implement its 26 March Commitment. The diplomatic community has also spoken out on a number of occasions, including at the Nepal Development Forum, in May 2004, where a group of 10 donors issued a statement calling on both parties to allow unhindered human rights monitoring. In September 2004, 15 diplomatic missions and donor agencies issued a strongly worded statement condemning the “gruesome” human rights violations committed by both sides and calling for the signing of the Human Rights Accord.

In a demonstration of the deepening international concern at the situation in Nepal, on 23 December 2004, the UN issued a statement expressing the Secretary General’s concern at “reports of an escalation of fighting in Nepal and of continued grave human rights violations”. The statement particularly highlighted the threat to human rights defenders and the NHRC and called for their safety to be guaranteed, the organisation said.

As concern has mounted there have been a number of visits to Nepal by UN bodies and diplomatic delegations focusing on human rights. In December 2004 the UN Working Group on Enforced and Involuntary Disappearances (WGEID) visited Nepal, while the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Louise Arbour, will visit in January 2005.

This international attention is very welcome and has encouraged the government to make some important changes, most notably in the area of detention and “disappearances,” Amnesty International said in its latest report. nepalnews.com by Jan 22 05

Full text of the Amnesty Report “Nepal: Killing with Impunity” is available at:

Top

Feature Archive >>