Wednesday, August 16, 2006

-Yubraj Ghimire, Chief Editor, The Samaya Weekly, Nepal

The general assumption is that media is not a single homogeneous group nor is it completely heterogeneous in terms of what it offers. But at the same time, media has both national as international agenda with impacts on those arenas. Therefore, they will naturally have their role in conflicts—in educating people about it, in preparing a ground or condition for their resolution or in the worse circumstances, to aggravate them. In short, media can act as genuine interpreter of the conflict in terms of its origin, causes and way to resolve it. It can act as a forum or platform for expression of conflicting opinion which can foster understanding and appreciation about the conflict, sometimes, leading to dialogue and solution. Media also can act as a monitor/observer of the role of the players or actors - both state and non state. Fourth, it can act as a mediator as well and last, it can also be a catalyst of violence or conflict and be a spoiler in the peace process. But none of these roles make media less important in the time and situation of conflict. Despite the negative attributes, getting them to play more constructive and positive roles is far more important in managing conflict. How can they be used for state building is one such challenge. This is quite relevant in the context of Nepal—a nation caught in conflict.

Why is Media Important?

For obvious reason. That’s its power of reach and influence. Every one including actors in the conflict would look to media as part of their strategic aims—be it promotion of terrorism, war, conflict as well as peace. It is perhaps Prof Simon Cottle of Cardiff University who is supervising research on ‘Mediatised conflict’ around the world. That only means conflicts have become part of the media.

Scores of universities across the world have set-up curriculum on conflict and role of media during the past decade as conflicts of various nature pose unforeseen kind of challenges across the globe in different forms and manifestations. Such curriculum certainly includes media’s responsibility in conflict reporting and contributing to their resolution as well. Conflict torn Uganda pioneered such an initiative by setting up Department of Mass Communication under University of Mekerere to support constructive reporting on conflict. Of course, constructive reporting of conflict is a difficult job. But its projected theme is —media can help in fostering human security.

While media’s primary responsibility of having to put across events (including conflict related ones) in a balanced, objective, accurate and credible way, its impact can not be dictated in the desired direction. But minimum precaution by the media that violence should not be glorified or endorsed, that norms of justice should be promoted and encouraged, and that violence can not be accepted as instrument of durable political and social change would at least discourage the actors of the conflict. Editorial and opinion on such themes matter a lot, as they have always mattered.

This perhaps explains why media is seen as villains by the actors of the conflict. Studies by many advocacy groups including article 19 study missions have often come to the conclusion that in conflict ridden countries, freedom of expression is among the first casualties. Objectivity and accuracy as well as balances falter. And quite often, social and political polarization takes place along political ethnic and religious lines there. Can media rise above such polarization? Obviously, the general expectation is yes, but that all depends on social, ethical and professional responsiveness of the media and nature of their ownership-something we will be dealing with little later.

As Leo Rose has put it, Nepal’s politics has two permanent and opposite traits. It’s either dictated by quest of revenge or aggrandizement. He's mostly right. Going by two very recent examples-formation of the Royal Commission on Corruption during the royal regime and that of the Rayamajhi commission by the democratic regime recently—Leo Rose stands vindicated. Both commissions appear more political in nature. Can media rise above these traits, especially in today’s context as conflict takes a back seat with the state and the rebels pledging that they are serious and sincere in finding a negotiated settlement to the decade long conflict.

Nepal ’s conflict, cause and effect:

A country largely governed and ruled by the Monarchy in its absolute form most of its 238 years, a society where poverty, illiteracy and diseases are widespread, a country where access to basic issues like education, health and drinking waters is not at all egalitarian, and a country where effective plans, policies and political will to defeat them in the required scale and intensity are lacking, may easily turn into a place for any radical ideology to shape in. Nepal, as past 11 years will indicate has turned into the laboratory for experiment of politics based on such an ideology. While there are serious doubts that this movement would lead to the desired destination or capture of state power, the recent peace process, no doubt raises hopes that people’s will and their expression through democratic electoral process will create a situation where not the supremacy of the guns, but that of the sovereign citizens will prevail while determining the future polity and governance of the country. Media’s role in the envisaged mission would be crucial.

The insurgency began with Maoists declaring objective to overthrow the monarchy and establish a communist republic in Nepal way back in February 1996. It is monarchy not only as the symbol of feudalism, but the root of all disparities and backwardness prevailing in the country. And we all know, in the armed conflict that ensued, more than 13,000 Nepalese lost their lives, physical infrastructures worth billions got destroyed and the society was badly polarized. Media has not got into assessing how difficult the healing process would be like in the post conflict Nepal. As we are back in the peace process, the natural question now will be — how effectively can the media contribute in Peace Building? with King’s direct rule over, the ruling seven party alliance and the Maoists have already come to an understanding to shape future politics together where democracy , peace and economic prosperity will be the common goal.

Legitimacy of Violence, Guaranteeing peace in Future:

The 12-point agreement reached between the seven political parties and the Maoists in Delhi in November 2005 and the 8-point understanding on June 16 between the two sides mean recognition of the fact that Maoists, with history of over a decade’s armed struggle against the state, have a role as crucial as the state in establishing peace. This also gives a larger degree of legitimacy to the use of violence as an instrument of politics in Nepal, although both India and United States have made it very clear in our own context that as and when Maoists join the interim government as an essential condition to conduct election to the constituent assembly, they should subject to the process of management of arms beyond use, possibly under UN supervision. However, the question that is still pertinent is will Maoists’ joining the interim government or even signing a peace accord with the government ensure durable peace?

The answer will be negative. There are many under currents of potential violence if the ongoing peace process does not take them into account. Disparity in the access to quality education, or the rural and urban disparity, or between those who avail education in private and boarding schools and those who study in government schools have already sown the seed of future conflict. A look into last year’s S.L.C Examination will illustrate the future scenario. Around 80 per cent of the students from Private and Boarding schools passed out qualifying for higher education, while 80 per cent from the government schools, mostly in rural areas, could not. How will this group-deprived and denied access to higher education and other possibilities in life react ten years down the line?

Two, possession of land resources—around 85 per cent by 15 per cent population—offers such a possibility. While re-distribution of land in the name of radical land-reforms might provide immediate solution, far more serious is required to ensure that the issue does not erupt in every five years. The challenge would be how to reduce dependence on land, and how to create more jobs so that those depending on land find an alternative.

Third: Let’s take into account the case of children affected through violence. At least 500 children have lost their lives, and about 1200 wounded in the conflict. There is quest for revenge. In addition, approximately 200,000 people have been internally displaced. The fire for revenge remains. How would the current peace process put water on that fire?

Fourth: Among various issues that the Maoists have raised, the question of Ethno nationalism has not only emotional, but also has a geographical and political appeal. The issue is already getting support across the party lines in certain areas. Maoists and the seven political parties have not yet broached the issue, nor have stated that they would seek ‘to empower the ethnic groups within the framework of ‘national integration’.

These are not the sole issues which if not addressed properly, would lead to some kind of violence in the society in future. The growth, spread and ‘success’ of the Maoists movement to this scale would be giving some kind of legitimacy for these groups and similar others to raise arms.

As I have stated right at the beginning that selling radical dream to the kind of society we are in is always easier than contributing to their solution. But the social economic, administrative, structural and developmental issues that Maoists have raised need to be addressed now with a clear message that let there be no space for violence as instrument of change and politics in future Nepal.

Excerpts from the author's paper on Role of Media in Conflict and Peace in Nepal presented at a seminar organized recently by CETS/FES, Nepal-ed.