My Sojourn In The United States

By MADHAV KUMAR RIMAL

Morality and politics are like the two poles -- The North and the South. They can never coexist and go along together. Politicians do always profess morality in public but can seldom practise it. And they never feel embarrassed when caught in its breach. Whether in poor countries or rich, politicians are tarred with the same kind of brush. This dawned on me as a revelation during my recent sojourn in the great country – the United States of America . The greatness of the United States does not lie in its being big or wealthy or powerful. The wisdom and farsightedness shown by its Founding Fathers by enshrining in its constitution the moral and human values of life that not only try to ennoble its citizens but also guarantee equality and justice to all human beings are the real basis of its greatness. Even this great country cannot always produce men who do rise above themselves to lead their country by meticulously abiding by their constitution in letter and spirit. Since affluence and power beget arrogance, the statesmen and politicians of this great country also easily fall prey to a tendency to circumvent the laws of the land to further their personal or partisan interests.

Since my stay in that country became exceptionally long, I tried to utilize this opportunity to study American behavior and also to share mutual experiences with old American friends. All the American friends and well wishers of Nepal I met or contacted with seemed greatly concerned at the prevailing political turmoils in the Himalayan Kingdom . But, it was quite evident to me that they were blissfully ignorant of the reality regarding the Maoist insurgency in Nepal . Since they had to believe their own government’s version about what was happening in Nepal , their misconception had, indeed, a very sound basis. Their government’s erroneous policy of looking at Nepal ’s problems through Indian eyes has kept them in the dark about the throubles and aspirations of nearly twenty seven million poor Nepalis. India does have a stake in Nepal and they have been trying to pressurize the Nepalis to give in to them for the last six decades. The dogged resistance by the Nepalis have impelled the Indians to seek the aid of the Americans and the British. The Americans could not deny the Indians as they have much greater and more significant interests in winning their good will. And the British, despite hundred’s of year of strong bonds of friendship with Nepal , had to tow the American line due to reasons every body is aware of.

And, thus Nepal is made to face a very strong pressure from this powerful triumvirate. Nepal ’s inability to convincingly brief the American friends and their government has made it easier for their diplomats to openly interfere in Nepal ’s internal affairs and paint a misleading picture about Nepal ’s policy towards India . My detail briefing did contribute to clear the misconception of many Americans about the real reasons for Maoist insurgency, India ’s domineering behavior and the role of monarchy as the binding force for national unity in Nepal . They do think, as a smaller and weaker neighbor, Nepal has to learn to live with her situation. Even quite bigger and affluent countries too, they say, have to bear the unqualified domination of their mightier neighbors. Nepal can considerably lessen and minimize the scope and opportunities of the leverages India enjoys against her. Not that Nepal does not have any vantage point. If Nepal cannot put its own house to order and fritters away the powerful advantages she commands, she is only to blame. Some Americans very candidly charged Nepali statesmen for their failure to exploit the strategic situation Nepal occupies in the fragile politics of South Asia . Even though very small and not of great consequence in global context, Nepal can play an influential role in regional politics and should not be side-lined. They think she needs to overhaul her policies and mechanisms in order to command more credibility and respectability. This is one thing King Gyanendra cannot afford to defer to do for long.

The, long stay in the United States also provided me opportunities to study the behavior of the American politicians and statesmen from very close quarters. The U.S. is not only the Mecca of job seekers and fortune hunters but, as the richest and mightiest country, is also the leader of the world and champion of democracy, political morality and human rights. As such, it has taken upon itself the sole responsibility of policing the world, ridding it of poverty, disease, political turmoils and terrorism. Since the United States is committed to defend and support democracy all over the world, democratic governments get top priority to win their favor and friendship. And after what the terrorists did to their country on 9/11, they have pledged to root out terrorism from the face of the world. But, by virtue of being the number one country in the world, they themselves can avoid strict observance of these principles in order to meet other pressing exigencies. President Bush’s recent nuclear deal with India could be taken as an example. That Bush could sign a nuclear deal with India , a nation with nuclear weapons and a non-signatory of the N.P.T and a potential nuclear threat to regional peace, is sure to generate mistrust and misgivings in the commitments of the United States to safeguard non-proliferation of nuclear weapons. Many Americans think that the U.S. Congress would definitely like to probe into the deal before ratifying it. Bush’s supporters are confident that the favorable Congress would not deny the endorsement. But that it might set a bad precedent and squeeze the U.S. in subsequent deals besides overlooking the moral justification might also pose a big hurdle. That the biggest leader of the world should ignore all moral considerations to further its narrow interests and thus erode its image may induce the Congress to withhold the confirmation. As demonstrated by the Congress in the Dubai Ports World deal the Congress might refuse the confirmation of this nuclear deal.

As the only person who has pledged himself to root out terrorism wherever it might be, Bush’s condoning of India ’s blatant encouragement to the Nepali Maoists to mount insurgencies against the small but friendly neighbor from their territory is another naked violation of his global commitment which is sure to impair his image and that of his country. Had Nepal been able to exploit this unabashed violation of global commitment to fight terrorism, perhaps, the Maoists would not have been able to establish themselves as a power to reckon with. This scribe did try to educate his American friends and associates about the reality of the Maoist rebellion in Nepal which has, cleared their misconception to some extent. The small number of Americans are, quite perturbed to know the duplicity of their government. They even suggested that this fact must be brought before not only the peoples of the United States , but also to the peoples of the world through the United Nations.

It was very disheartening to see politicians in this big country too behave the same way as in any other developing country. My whole concept of American integrity got a rude shock to find politicians and statesmen in high places succumbing to temptations and illegal gratifications. This has contributed to strengthen my belief that affluence cannot and will never be able to change human nature. That the greatest melting pot of the world – the United States – should still be plagued by racial discrimination was another unpleasant experience. And it was more galling to see students from poor developing countries being subjected to great harassment on account of higher tuition fees in comparison to American students. How can a country like the United States take recourse to such discouraging behavior against the poor students from the third world? Isn’t it denying them opportunities to higher technical and more specialized education which they need most urgently to improve the lot of their poor nation? It is very despairing to know the great country still practicing racism against non-whiles and minorities. It may not be very frequent but one does come across cases of racial discrimination. Many do believe that the official lethargy after the hurricane Katrina devastated New Orleans last year was because the city was overwhelmingly non-white with an overwhelming non-white poor living there. Since it is impossible to establish the veracity of the allegation, the readers have to make their own judgment.

The decision to invade and demolish Iraq ignoring most of the allies and the world even the United Nations has turned out to be a nightmare for George W. Bush. People are comparing it to Vietnam fiasco. The colossal amount of money being wasted in Iraq could have changed the face of many poor countries of the world. It could greatly improve the lot of many poorer sections of American society. And the uncalled for loss of nearly three thousand precious lives of American young men and women and the massacre of more than fifty thousand Iraqis have not contributed to enhance Bush’s image. Bush has antagonized most of the Muslim nations of the world and the hundreds of millions of Muslims living in friendly Muslim country where the governments have good relations with the United States . The popularity and job approval rating of president Bush has gone down to one of the lowest. On top of all these granting the operations of six major U.S. ports to Dubai based Arab company owned by United Arab Emirates , the Dubai Ports World, has only helped to create fissures in his own ruling party. Even the Republican members of the Congress criticized the government of compromising national security. The opposition to the move became so intense that Bush had no option but to request the Dubai Ports World to withdraw. And this proved to be another set back to the President.

President Bush’s first visit to South Asia must have been precipitately arranged as its repercussions would be far reaching and might also prove to be inflammable. The nuclear deal that he signed with India overlooking the important fact that India was not a signatory to the N.P.T has not only violated his country’s earlier commitments but placed the U.S. in an embarrassing situation. Bush has called it a “strategic Alliance ”. Indeed. But, perhaps Bush has not been able to visualize the possibility of a “counter strategic Alliance .” Moreover, he must also be oblivious of the fact that breaking the global understanding unilaterally for fostering strategic alliance is apt to strike at his already low credibility and also pose a potential nuclear threat not only to the region but to whole world as well.

That the Supreme Court of the great country can be swayed by partisan feelings and act contrary to its high moral standard is hard to believe. Since the justices of the Supreme Court too are appointed by the Chief Executive, it is but natural that the Judges hold some kind of soft corner for their benefactor. It should not be that way. But it often happens. When George W. Bush was elected President in 2000, many believed that it was not the verdict of the people but the verdict of the Supreme Court that gave him the Presidency. As such, many Americans believe that the authority to appoint Judges to the Supreme Court should rest on an independent commission whose structure must be most unambiguously defined in the constitution. Then only people can have unflinching faith in the Supreme Court.

As things are at present and if no miracle happens in the next twenty months, the Republicans are sure to give way to the Democrats in 2008. Since President Bush is known as the Richman’s president, his tax cuts have benefited the upper richer class at the cost of the poor. The cuts in Medicare and Medicaid and flip flop policy on social security has again hurt the poorer section. The violations of human rights in Abu Ghraib and Quanta namo Bay , sending detainees to European countries for obtaining confessions through torture and twisting of democratic behavior impinging on personal rights and liberties of the citizens have blemished the democratic image of the United States . Facing acute isolationism Bush has pushed the country towards a huge federal deficit from a comfortable surplus status. Mounting national debts coming to near nine trillion dollars and the Juggernautic problems of Iraq and Afghanistan which will keep on leeching billions on the federal budget, nobody knows for how long, are sure to pose, insurmountable problems for the next president. A large number of Americans complain that the leadership of the U.S. government was never so weak with subordinates dominating the scene. Bush, now a lame cluck president with colleagues, who, many think, have taken him for a ride, is now facing a dilemma whether he will be able to secure an honorable place in history.