“I Cannot Justify Surrendering National Interest In The Name Of Mother’s Right”
-- MADAN REGMI
Chairman of China Study Center MADAN REGMI is known for his frank statements. Son of senior politician late Dr. Dilli Raman Regmi, 65-year-old Regmi was imprisoned for joining then outlawed wing of Nepal Communist Party when his father was foreign minister of Nepal . Regmi, who closely monitors all the on-going political events, raises issues of national interest whenever he feels there is a need to do so. Regmi spoke to KESHAB POUDEL on contemporary issues. Excerpts:
How do you see the recent resolution of parliament to give citizenship certificate to the children on the basis of mother’s citizenship?
Nobody can challenge the right of our mothers because we were born out of our mothers’ wombs. But I cannot justify surrendering national interest in the name of mother’s right. Nation and national interest is the supreme interest for all of us. In Panchayat’s constitution, there was this kind of provision but it was widely misused. According to the book ‘Nepal’s Social Demography and Expression’ written by Dr. Harka Gurung, it was the worse period for Nepal in terms of demographic invasion by India - between 1960 to 1980. Out of 3.7 million Indians who illegally migrated to Nepal , 67 percent acquired citizenship certificates. In case of Sri Lanka , out of 1.7 million, 27 percent got the citizenship. In case of Bangladesh , Maldives and Bhutan , it was zero. It makes Nepal more vulnerable. I don’t know how Nepalese government will prevent the demographic invasion of India allowing children to acquire citizenship certificate from mother’s name. In a country where there is a high prevalence of cross-border marriages, there is every possibility of misuse of this system. If foreigners get citizenship certificate misusing the provisions in the name of mother, the members of this parliament should be responsible.
Women activists claim that this kind of arrangement is necessary to provide the citizenship certificate to a large number of children who are without citizenship? Is not your opinion biased?
One cannot justify unequal treatment and discrimination between men and women under the basis of law. What I am saying is not a discrimination against the women. My concern is why was there a need for such a parliamentary declaration to address the problem of handful of cases, which could have been settled through existing constitution and laws. According to article 9.2 of the constitution of Kingdom of Nepal 1990, ‘every child who is found within the Kingdom of Nepal and the whereabouts of whose parents are not known, shall, until the father of the child is traced, be deemed to be a citizen of Nepal by descent.’ It is unfortunate to say that women are, knowingly and unknowingly, committing a blunder for the country in the name of mothers’ rights.
The resolution was introduced by CPN-UML which claims to be a nationalist party? How do you say that it will sacrifice Nepal ’s interest?
CPN-UML has a long history of betraying Nepal ’s national interest in the past. Whether it is Mahakali Integrated Treaty or other, CPN-UML always sacrificed Nepal ’s interest. So far as the controversial Mahakali Treaty is concerned, CPN-UML was the architect of that. To justify the treaty, it claimed that it would be accruing benefits amounting to US$ 1.3 billion annually for Nepal – but after nearly 10 years since the treaty was ratified, Nepal has gotten nothing. During the period of CPN-UML, they also agreed to shift Nepal ’s border in Mechi from one side to another.
How do you see the political situation following the reinstatement of the House of Representatives and the announcement of ceasefire by the Maoists?
Well, the country has undergone a big political change. Following the reinstatement of the parliament and its proclamation, the authority of monarchy has been reduced and the size of the King has been largely cut. When King Gyanendra embarked upon the article 127 three years ago he was virtually exercising all the power showing that he was above the law and the constitution. The popular uprising of April forced King Gyanendra to surrender power to the people who are now more powerful than ever before. Some external forces, particularly India , will take all the advantages if we are not vigilant over our political leaders. In 1950’s and 1990’s change, we just got a meager benefit while India got away with major portion of benefits.
Do you believe that curtailing the authority of monarchy is sufficient to bring the change?
Actually, any institution whether monarchy, presidential or prime ministerial system, their relevance is virtually shelved if it does not act in accordance to the rule of law. If they impose and hold all the powers themselves and exercise the power arbitrarily, there is always vulnerability for misuse. Finally, it will invite their own end. In case of King Gyanendra, he committed similar mistake portraying himself as supreme and exercising the power as a medieval monarch. However, stripping the power of King Gyanendra and making him ceremonial King does not mean everything will be alright in future.
How do you see the possibility of restoring a long-term peace through the government- Maoist dialogue?
After Seven Party Alliance and Maoists signed 12 point agreement, reportedly in Delhi , new scenario has developed. This brought the change in the political scenario. Maoists had announced unilateral ceasefire earlier but the King’s government did not reciprocate. After ending the ceasefire in four months, Maoists were compelled to start the war. SPA and Maoists agreed to hold elections for Constituent Assembly as a common meeting point. Although some of their leaders have been living in foreign countries, particularly India , the orientation of Maoist cadre is anti-imperialistic. Maoists have already said that they will join political process like other parties. Other parties, too, have agreed to compete with them in mainstream politics. It seems that there is solidarity between them now. Differences, however, will persist since they are not the stock of the same kind as they are influenced by different external forces.
Many argue that Nepal is in a very vulnerable geo-strategic position. How do you look at it?
Our vulnerability is that our country is badly pressed in between China and India . We have not been able to make our people strong enough to overcome such pressures. We are unable to assert our sovereignty and independence. India still treats us as a colony as similar to during the British Raj. We still have open border- which is imposed upon us by Indians. Indians do not allow any other investors to come to Nepal . Indians do not like to see China in Nepal as if China does not share border with Nepal . We are still unable to change our culture. From the King to the parties, they still consider India ’s blessing is necessary for their political survival. They still continue to allow recruitment of Nepalese in Indian and British Army. Our vulnerabilities are coming from our own weaknesses as we have never made any effort to assert our sovereignty, which we have lost since 1814. What I am stressing is that there is a need to close our border with India .
As a chairman of China Study Center you have frequent contact with Chinese leaders and scholars. How do Chinese look at the issues including open border?
China has its own interest in Nepal –which they often express through various ways. Primarily, this country belongs to us. To guard, to maintain its independence and to develop Nepal should be our primary duty. So far as protecting our independence is concerned, we should not depend on anybody. China has never harmed us and respected our sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence. China has been providing economic assistance to our development activities like building infrastructures, roads, hospitals and so on. I often say that Chinese response towards Nepal is not like a neighbor but a donor. If we don’t reciprocate to their friendly gesture, they will take their own course.
What do you mean by reciprocate?
China has offered generous support to Nepal at the time of crisis but Nepalese have been hesitant to accept all of them. In some cases, Nepalese even declined to accept Chinese support. Even in 1990’s so called blockade by India , China had sent oil tankers in border areas. China also sent an oil tanker in Calcutta from Singapore but the then government requested to return it. Recently, King Gyanendra harped nationalist slogans but he appointed many ministers sympathetic to India . The King played a double game. For instance, it took 39 years for Nepal to open second highway linking Nepal with Tibet Autonomous Region of China. Rasuwagadhi-Syaphrubeshi road agreement was signed in 2001 when Girija Prasad Koirala was Prime minister. In 1962, though the issue was discussed by B.P. Koirala, King Mahendra signed agreement to construct Kodari highway.
Some Chinese scholars have expressed concerns about the open border with India and strong presence of Tibetan refugees saying they are security threat to China . How do you look at it?
These things have been there for long. After the exile of Dalai Lama to India, open border between Nepal and India is a point of serious worry to Chinese as it makes easier for Dalai Lama’s followers to enter Nepal and launch anti-China activities. In 1960s, late King Mahendra, who claimed to be a nationalist, allowed Americans to drop illegal arms to Khampas in northern Tibet . Chinese have been frequently raising the issue of growing anti-Chinese forces operating in Nepal . Although Nepalese governments have often expressed their verbal commitment that they would not allow their soil to be used against neighbor, in fact, so called Tibetan immigrants have been misusing our hospitality. Even Karmapa escaped from Nepal using our land. The so-called representatives of Dalai Lama have been illegally operating in Nepal for a long period of time.
Was it not closed a few years ago?
Whenever Chinese protest, the government issues order to close the office of so-called representative. The moment Chinese side relaxes, these activities resume. I was told by a higher Chinese authority that Tibetan immigrant activities in Nepal are direct threat to their sovereignty. Chinese are not over-enthusiastic about Nepal because we are not sincere to them. Despite that, Chinese have respected our territorial integrity. Compared to India , Chinese are very careful on our sensitivity and independence. One must not forget that the office of Tibetan representatives was closed during the time of coalition government led by prime minister Sher Bahadur Deuba. I hope that this government will respect the earlier decision and will not commit a mistake by opening the illegal office.
How do you see Chinese State Councilor Tang Jiaxuan’s recent visit to Nepal ?
It was definitely a very important visit. He delivered the message to the King and the political leaders, the need for unity and reconciliation between them. When Tang visited Nepal his clear message was the need of reconciliation between parliamentary forces. I came to know that Chinese vice premier Tang suggested the King in front of Crown Prince to take the initiative for reconciliation immediately and initiate dialogue with the political parties. China has always been stressing for reconciliation among the political forces in Nepal to safeguard Nepal ’s sovereignty.
How could King Gyanendra have ignored the good suggestion of China when some elements were accusing him of playing China card? How do you look at it?
My impression is that he was neither good friend of China nor an enemy of China . He was beneficiary of royal carnage of 2001. After King Gyanendra took over, he publicly revealed that he would maintain a unique relation with India . This was what neither his father nor his brother said before. In his last tenure as a prime minister when Dr. Tulsi Giri said that Nepal has a special relation with India during his visit to India , he was dismissed a few days after this remark. King Gyanendra is the first King who publicly said that Nepal has special relations with India . He has been promoting Indian products in Nepal . Frankly speaking King Gyanendra dismissed democratically elected government under the blessing of India .
It is said that your father Dr. Dilli Raman Regmi has been influenced by Indian freedom movement but you are standing against his ideals. How do you look at it?
So far as my father is concerned, he studied in India and he was influenced by Indian friends. I don’t think it was proper for them to be pro-Indian just because they had studied in India . I have never accepted my father’s thinking about India . I firmly believe that India is hegemonic and imperialist.
How can you charge India is a hegemonic?
Look, Indian ambassador is distributing directly money to Village Development Committees, District Development Committees, educational institutions, and party-established institutions. This is a hegemonic role of India and it is also contrary to Nepal ’s law. Even Indian central government cannot distribute money to its own states like that. According to Indian constitution, the money which comes through central government has to go through state governments. What the King’s government was doing in the last three years is still being followed by this government, which was formed after the people’s movement. If it continues to allow such things, what is the difference between the King’s government and this government which claims to be people’s government?
