Wednesday, November 8, 2006

Views

By Dhruba Adhikary, Senior Journalist, Nepal

The April uprising is still fresh in the minds of Nepalis, but transition to a democratic order is taking time. While political forces with leanings to both left and right successfully fought together to end a repressive monarchy, subsequent negotiations to harmonize and reconcile positions on issues between an alliance of seven parties with democratic credentials and the leaders of the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) are yet to come to a satisfactory conclusion. The Seven Party Alliance (SPA), for example, supports the idea of deciding the fate of monarchy by a constitutional assembly to be set up through a poll, but Maoists are skeptical about this idea. They want the monarchy to be put on suspended animation till the assembly polls are held, or else there could be a ploy to retain the discredited monarchy by assigning it a "ceremonial role". In any case, the alliance has a joint stand: that the monarchy must not have a role in the democratic Nepal .

Girija Prasad Koirala, who was appointed prime minister after King Gyanendra bowed to the people's movement for restoration of democracy, continues to head what looks like a pre-interim government. It would become a proper interim government only after the Maoists joined it, as per previous agreements. One striking hitch has been the weapons that Maoist combatants have been carrying. Efforts are being made to obtain United Nations assistance in arms management in the period leading to the elections, expected by next June.

In other words, Nepal 's political status is still in a state of flux. And the rest of the world knows about it: India and China , the two giants to the south and north, are no exception.

However, authorities in New Delhi , who do not always reflect the views of the people living across the vast landmass called India , are not bothered. Even before the Nepali people found time to institutionalize the democratic rights they won in April, enthusiastic officials in the Indian establishment thought it wise to persuade Nepal's fledgling "pre-interim" government to ink an extradition treaty (together with a legal instrument to implement it) that would replace a pact signed in 1953.

"It would be a major step in bilateral relations," the Himalayan Times, a pro-Indian newspaper, quoted unnamed Nepali officials as saying. The paper reported that Home Affairs Minister Krishna Sitaula would visit New Delhi on October 4 and sign the pact the following day, along with his Indian counterpart, Shivraj Patil.

The time chosen to conclude this controversial treaty was equally interesting, if not palpably disturbing. It was to be signed during the Dashain holidays, Nepal 's largest festival, when most of the people, including student activists, would have returned to villages for family reunions.

This is the time of the year when almost all the newspapers take an extended break. Radio and television networks too run their shows with a skeleton staff. To make the matter worse, no official announcement was made about that upcoming important event, neither were details of the proposed treaty made public. The whole exercise was being conducted as if it were a covert operation.

At least the secretive method adopted left room for public apprehension. "There is no shortage of people in our neighborhood who would always want to fish in the troubled waters," said Narayan Man Bijukchhe, head of the Nepal Workers and Peasants Party, a component of the SPA. Jhalanath Khanal, a senior leader of another constituent of the alliance, told a radio interviewer that he and his party had no information about the signing of the pact.

That indeed was an irony, because one of his party colleagues, Khadga Oli, the deputy prime minister and in charge of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, was away in New York to address the United Nations at that time, and he later told the media that he, too, did not know about the treaty. He said he was not consulted at all though the issue was under his ministry's jurisdiction.

Something happened in the interim, and Koirala directed his home minister to defer his trip to New Delhi , even if the decision had to be made at the eleventh hour. The reason given publicly for the postponement of the visit was a request by top Maoist leader Pushpa Kamal Dahal, aka Prachanda ("awesome"), to Koirala to accord priority to a crucial round of political negotiations at home, between rebel leaders and government representatives. It sounded logical, as Home Minister Sitaula has been the coordinator of the government team at peace talks with the Maoists.

But knowledgeable Maoist sources told Asia Times Online that the visit to New Delhi was canceled primarily because Prachanda expressed his party's reservations, contending that a treaty concluded with an unrepresentative government would not be binding to subsequent, elected, governments in Nepal . In other words, Prachanda played the role of opposition even though his party does not have representation in the present parliament that was restored at the end of April.

Officials in New Delhi were visibly upset when they learned about Kathmandu 's abrupt decision. Their unhappiness, as reported by the Times News Network on October 4, was directed at the Maoists for having misunderstood the intention of the treaty in question. They (Maoists) perceived that the agreements were aimed at breaking the "nexus" between Indian and Nepali Maoists.

Besides, there are a few dozen Nepali Maoists detained in Indian jails on various charges. Indian officials might also have found Maoist objection untenable because had it not been for New Delhi 's efforts, first discreetly and then overtly, no 12-point agreement between the Maoists and the SPA would have been possible last November. And without that, the Nepali Maoists would not have been in the position they are in now.

High-ranking officials in the Koirala administration concede that an imminent danger has been averted, giving Nepal some breathing space. In their opinion, prolonged complacency will inevitably give an opportunity to those who are bent on bending Nepal 's sovereignty.

Why are Nepalis so upset about these treaties? What makes them so apprehensive about India 's perceived "grand design"? Some of the reasons that appear plausible in this context are based on experience. New Delhi has often found it expedient to push through crucial pacts when Nepal is run by a weak, a divided or a coalition government.

The 1950 treaty of peace and friendship is a case in point. That treaty, signed by an autocratic ruler who was about to be overthrown within months, has been rightly described as an "unequal" pact since the day it was concluded.

In January 1965, India secretly concluded a defense agreement with Nepal 's embattled monarch, King Mahendra, who was getting unpopular in Nepal for having dismissed an elected government and dissolved parliament. When that agreement was made public in the late 1980s in the wake of Nepal 's defense purchases from China , New Delhi 's message to Kathmandu was that Mahendra had agreed to limit some of Nepal 's defense-related options through that pact.

In 1990, as in 1950, New Delhi accosted beleaguered King Birendra with a draft of an "agreement" on mutual cooperation through its foreign secretary, S K Singh. The palace, however, avoided jumping on the bait.

The draft, initially kept as a secret document, was later obtained by an Indian author, Avtar Singh Bhasin, who produced it in a book he published called Nepal's Relations with India and China (Documents 1947-92). A careful study of the draft makes it quite clear that the real intention behind the draft was to downgrade independent Nepal 's status to a "protectorate" like Bhutan .

"When the chips are down, India may find the going tough in Nepal , if she fails to modernize her feudal relationship with Nepal and put it on an equal footing of trust and confidence," Bhasin says in the book's introductory chapter. New Delhi 's repeated contentions that India 's relationship with Nepal is "unique" and age-old are not something acceptable to the Nepali intelligentsia as well. It is a recorded fact that political/diplomatic relations between the two countries began only in 1947, when an independent country called India was born.

Controversy over the extradition treaty began, in fact, in January 2005, when Nepal was under the indirect rule of King Gyanendra. Senior officials of home ministries on both sides had then met in New Delhi and "initialed" the treaty and the accompanying document. Media reports, then and now, indicate that the treaty contains provisions to permit extradition of even "third-country nationals" to and from India .

Theoretically, reciprocity requires India to hand over suspected criminals to Nepal as well, but in reality Kathmandu 's ability to retrieve third-country criminals from India would be severely restricted. In essence, it is only India that stands to gain, at Nepal 's cost. New Delhi , which remains obsessed by Pakistan and its intelligence service, would find it easy to invoke the treaty and pick up any Pakistani nationals legally residing in Nepal .

Indian officials might also be tempted to get Chinese nationals detained whenever New Delhi 's relations with Beijing become sour. There are a number of other countries with which India might not be comfortable at different times. If the nationals of these countries are also arrested on New Delhi 's "request", Kathmandu would find itself in a highly embarrassing situation. Not only that, some of the countries might take serious steps aimed at winding up their diplomatic presence in Nepal , gradually pushing it toward isolation.

Neither China nor Pakistan nor Britain nor the United States has openly reacted to these media reports (which incidentally have not officially been contradicted), but to think that nobody will react if the treaty is actually signed would be preposterous. China , for instance, is unlikely to remain silent if Indian moves turn provocative. If for no other reason, China has always been sensitive on the issue of Tibet , which shares a border with Nepal .

Apart from that, Chinese scholars on private missions to Nepal often drop hints of what Beijing thinks about South Asia . China continues to see only Pakistan as its ally. Simultaneously, China accepts India as a regional power, considers trade with India important and wants widen its market area. That is why it does not seek to antagonize India , either for developing closer relations with the US or projecting itself as a country demanding a greater role in international affairs.

However, when it comes the matter of safeguarding its security interests, Beijing is least likely to remain a silent spectator. It "would be unrealistic to assume that they [Chinese] have no alternative strategy in case the present policy fails", Yadhunath Khanal, the grand old man of Nepali diplomacy, wrote in a book published shortly after India and Pakistan made their nuclear tests in 1998.
The late Khanal is the only Nepali diplomat thus far to get ambassadorial assignments in New Delhi , Washington and Beijing . "Nobody, however friendly, can think for us about our relations with India and China and the sensitive balance implied in it," he observed. Khanal was appointed ambassador to New Delhi around the time China and India fought a war in 1962.

Around that time, China 's vice premier, Marshal Chen Yi, made a statement that China would support Nepal if it were to be invaded by another country. But is that undertaking still valid, more than four decades later when there have been substantive changes in China 's world view and its policy toward smaller neighbors?

"Yes, it is still valid," was the answer Chen Hao-su gave a Nepali journalist who posed that question at a Kathmandu seminar Chen attended last December. Besides being the son of Chen Yi, Chen Hao-su is the head of the Chinese People's Association for Friendship with Foreign Countries. This association is not just an ordinary non-governmental agency. The jobs that Chen and his association do are highly significant in terms of policy input to the Chinese Foreign Office, Nepali diplomats admit.
Nepal 's geopolitical situation is different from Sri Lanka 's. While Sri Lanka does not have an immediate neighbor other than India , Nepal does have a neighbor in China , which has to safeguard its own security interests, mainly in Tibet . Those who have seen New Delhi sending troops to Sri Lanka in 1980s to rescue Tamils involved in a separatist movement do not believe that India would repeat that exercise in Nepal .

The other important catch is the presence of Gurkhas, soldiers drawn mostly from rural Nepal under a 1947 tripartite treaty signed by Britain , India and Nepal . How would the Gurkhas, who make up one-eighth of India 's infantry battalions, react or respond if New Delhi ever decided to send troops to control their homeland?

According to Maoist sources, while taking up the extradition treaty issue with Prime Minister Koirala, their top leader was thinking about the safety and security of Nepali Maoists in India . He was also made to realize the diplomatic implications of the treaty with Nepal 's other friends and neighbors. In addition to this, Koirala was briefed about the direct impact the treaty would have on Nepal 's domestic administration.

One of the worrying factors, for instance, is a provision that in effect lifts the reasonable restrictions on Indian police personnel entering Nepal without prior permission in their bid to arrest criminals and collect evidence against them. The porous and unregulated nature of the border makes it virtually impossible to monitor such movements. New Delhi , which used to offer apologies for "inadvertent action" of police teams in the past, would no longer be required to apologize.

This kind of arrangement is simply not acceptable to Nepalis. Sensing possible outbursts of anger, the Nepali official who initialed the treaty in January 2005 offered this clarification: "These [treaty] provisions do not mean that Indian police can do anything inside Nepal ." In fact, this "clarification" is a proof that the controversial treaty indeed contains provisions unacceptable to citizens of an independent country.

Politically sensitive Nepalis tend to assume that New Delhi 's meddlesome behavior is largely responsible for turning Nepal 's political process murkier day by day. What looks incredible but is true is reflected in a demand for a ceremonial monarchy. The April uprising was a clear message to end this feudal as well as expensive institution.

Koirala, who would have become the country's first president in a republican setup, suddenly changed his original stand for a republican Nepal , mainly because of pressures from Indians and Americans to retain the monarchy in ceremonial form.

Americans want it because of the Maoist threat, especially when Nepal 's non-communist political forces appear weak. Indians are also against the idea of abolishing the monarchy inasmuch as Hindu nationalists in the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) insist that the monarchy in Nepal is essential if "Hindutva" is to be given a chance for resurgence in South Asia . Sadly, very few of BJP fundamentalists realize the fact that Nepalis are not, and cannot afford to be, as orthodox as their followers in India are.

The main constituent of New Delhi 's governing coalition, the Congress party Sonia Gandhi heads, looks ambivalent. However, leaders of its left-leaning coalition partners, such as Sitaram Yechuri, are quite active, often offering their own prescriptions. Then there is the Indian bureaucracy, which has yet to change its colonial mindset inherited from British masters. The bureaucracy is adept at taking advantage of the lack of clarity at the level of political leadership. This has become more obvious since the time the Ministry of External Affairs was made bereft of a full-fledged minister, after the resignation of K Natwar Singh.

That India 's external relations, especially those with neighboring countries, are not being conducted under a coherent and visionary policy guideline has been a matter of intense debate in New Delhi itself for a while. The latest discourse, with stinging criticisms on the issue, took place on September 9 when the Indian Council of World Affairs invited Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran to give a talk the title of which was: "Does India Have a Neighborhood Policy?"

This implied that the organizers did not have a shred of doubt that New Delhi lacked a policy that could look after India 's long-term interests in the neighborhood. Saran, who was retiring from the post at the end of September, unwittingly admitted the lapse when he referred to the ongoing "effort" to construct an overarching vision for South Asia "so that we do not deal with neighbors in an ad hoc and reactive manner".

His presentation there contained several paradoxes and contradictions, later attracting a volley of questions from the audience. While responding to a question, Shyam Saran, who was his country's ambassador to Nepal before being appointed foreign secretary some two years ago, expressed a view that reveals New Delhi 's thought at least at the bureaucratic level: "What we have been able to do with Bhutan we would certainly like to do with Nepal as well." He referred to Nepal 's large potential, of about 87,000 megawatts, of hydropower - and India 's needs - on economical terms.

Too many cooks spoil the broth, so goes a saying. This appears to be Nepal 's case in New Delhi . Men and women handling defense-related matters see it prudent not to bother about democracy and assist the Nepalese army, preferably with the monarchy; politicians think it unwise to ignore the people's will and the democratic order; the bureaucracy finds it expedient to push through treaties and pacts even if these defy international norms and practices.

What emerges ultimately beyond dispute is that New Delhi 's interest and interference in Nepal is excessive. It would be unrealistic to assume that the United States and the rest of the international community are unaware of these trends based on events reports of which are available to those keen to read and discern them.

The fact is that Washington does not want to annoy or antagonize New Delhi for obvious reasons: the United States ' relationship with India is of a strategic nature, and the US administration cannot afford to introduce bold measures on Nepal , fearing that these could have negative effects on its relations with India . The case of the Bhutanese refugees is a burning example. Instead of persuading India to "advise" the Bhutanese king (a 1949 treaty has provision for advice on external matters) to take back his forcibly evicted subjects, Washington chose to obfuscate the matter further by offering to take up to 60,000 of nearly 100,000 refugees for settlement in the United States. Refugees in camps are unable to understand its implications and are not sure what would happen to the remaining 40,000-plus hapless men, women and children.

What does India want in Nepal ?

In the words of an American analyst studying Maoist movements worldwide, India first needs to give up its desire to remain the hegemonic power in South Asia . Said Thomas A Marks: " India 's interest in the current situation is in having a stable neighbor, especially one that does not contribute to India 's own growing Maoist problem." This is feasible only when New Delhi offers public support for a functioning democracy in Nepal . And this goal, in turn, can be achieved once Indians stop becoming omnipresent in each of Nepal 's major political parties. The policy of instigating one party against the other cannot be construed as a farsighted strategy. In fact, the best help India can extend to Nepal is to offer an atmosphere where Nepalis can help themselves. This is a view also shared by some of India 's well-meaning distinguished citizens. S Sudhakar Reddy, a member of the Indian parliament, is one of them. He was a member of an Indian delegation that visited Nepal a month after the April uprising. His following observations, made after the Nepal visit, were reported by the Press Trust of India: "Keeping in view ... experiences with Sri Lanka and Bangladesh , it is better that we keep away from the internal affairs of that country." Text courtesy: Asia Times online edition-ed.

Dossier:

Success/Failure of NTQ’s marketing

By Dr. Gyanendra Tuladhar, Nepal

Tourism marketing is so basic that it cannot be considered a separate function. It is the whole business seen from the point of view of its final result, that is, from the customer’s point of view.... Business success is not determined by the producer but by the customer (according to )Prof. Peter Druker, Michigan State University

The success of tourism, marketing means, overcoming four dimension of marketing mix by achieving targeted audience- segmentation-objectives- evaluation.

It is useless to tell a river to stop running; the best thing is to learn how to swim in the direction it is flowing.

However, Nepal’s tourism stakeholders hold a variety of misconceptions on tourism marketing. Most commonly the promoters are confused with product selling and advertising. Selling and advertising are actually the types of promotion, which are only components of marketing that is related to seller and buyer. Nepal’s tourism sector has noted over NRs125.6 million budgeted in NTB (2005/6) accounts and NRs2.8 billion recorded in the government expenditure (ES 2005/6).

Besides, a similar amount might be spent by the private tourism entrepreneurs on the actual tourism product selling and promoting. When the economist or a concerned interrogated the queries, the output of tourism industry is regarded 2.6% less than the previous arrivals, 17.5% less then earlier revenue, 1.7% less than earlier contribution in national economy. Surprisingly, the industry chair-holders could not realize the weakness of tourism marketing and its procedures.

While observing, NTB had allocated over NR5.59.8million for the promotional activities under the Tourism Marketing and Promotion Department and NRs l0million for PR and Publicity Unit, with 489,298 visitors expectancy in 2005. Despite, the figure is fifty percent less than the total visitors in 1999. Nepal received a total of 375,398 visitors in 2005, which are 30. 34% less than the anticipated figure of NTB. The result showed that NTB’s strategy was false and all the expenditure for marketing and promotion were drowned.

The thump rule of promotion is additional gain in any additional amount spent for marketing and is the success of marketing. These days a common guard for Nepal is the ‘absence of peace’. The stakeholders can recall the series of event in 1980s and 1990s such as 1980s political referendum, court marshal of Pakistani PM (Julfikar Ali Bhutto), assassination of Indian PM (Indira Gandhi) in 1984, non- renewed trade and transit treaties with India in 1989, 1990s mass demonstration for political reform, Gulf crisis (Iran and Iraq war), political unrest of 1993, midterm pole declared in 1993, 1994’s plague outbreak in Surat, avalanche in Japan, Maoist insurgency in Nepal from 1996, IC 814 highjack, etc. However, being in crises, all tourism industry stakeholders and the government realized the need of an aggregate strength to overcome this to achieve success in a short span of time. The outcomes of which was VNY’98 and establishment of NTB.

Similar cases continued after 2000 like increased Maoist violence, labor strike in hotel industry, Royal Massacre, 9/11, State of Emergency 2002, SARS/ bird flue outbreak in South-East Asia, Ashad 18 and Magh 19, 2061 together with negative publicity in international media. The tourism entrepreneurs argue that all above phenomenon halted tourism industry in the country. The tourism stakeholders should also realize that despite the uncertainty in the region (depending upon the degree of uncertainty, conflict, risk and insecurity), a significant number of visitors departs to the region. Some illustrations can be drawn from the countries like Sri Lanka, Maldives, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, Israel etc.

NTB’ has least considered that tourism marketing requires massive information about the people such as customer’s interest and nature, psychology and behavior and their buying capacity relevant to their economy. The agents are especially interested to know what Nepal has to offer for their targeted clients. Similarly, NTO’s marketing strategy has less recognition and less focus on market creation than market sharing.

The role of NTO marketing is to match the right product or service to the audience in the right situation. But in Nepal, tourism chair-holders ignore that tourism marketing is an art of promotion and a science of realization. Most of the tourism officials are from diverse background trying to meet the needs and learn and earn. According to the American Marketing Association, ‘Marketing is the process of planning and executing the conception, pricing, promotion, and distribution of ideas, goods, and services to create exchanges that satisfy individual and organizational objectives.’ It states that marketing is a creation of a dream and promoting a product (ideas, goods and services) that satisfies a consumer’s need. Marketing involves more functions, including product/service development, place and pricing, which are less prominent in Nepal’s Tourism Industry.

NTO Marketing is the image marketing. In context to this, Nepal is idolized as a fascinating, mystic and exotic venue. For the mountain lovers, it is a dreamland and for the culture seekers, it is an open museum. Turning visions into mere missions and its marketing are the prime keys to sheer success in tourism business which is unfaltering.

Further in the product/service development, the NTB Annual Operation Plan is to allocate over NRs8.5 million for the product development, NRs4.2 million for the resource development and NRs2.2 million for the However, without the .Sustainable Tourism Development under the product development and human resources department for the same year. However, without the measuring tool and M&E mechanism, all the results of the development are mere paper reports, which does not manifest in the tourism development. Besides, all above product and resource developments are executed on demand basis rather than research basis.

"The ideal salesperson in the company meetings segment isn’t a salesperson in the traditional sense, but rather the problem- solver". Robert C. Mackey

In the sphere of private sector, modern marketing is a way of doing business, heavily based on the ‘marketing concept’ which holds that businesses and organizations should design their tourism products/services to meet customer needs; focus on those people most likely to buy their product rather than the entire mass market; and develop marketing efforts that fit into their overall business objectives. By adopting this concept, one can not only provide their customers with better products but can avoid wasting valuable time and money by developing and promoting undesired products or services.

‘Know your enemy and know yourself, and in a hundred battles you will never be in peril said Prof. Sun-Tzu in entrepreneurs’ tourism markets.

In the dream industry, tourism product can be ‘ideas, goods, or services’. Since tourism is primarily a service based industry, the principal products provided by recreating tourism businesses are creative experiences and hospitality. These are intangible products and more difficult to market than tangible products such as manufacturing goods. The intangible nature of services makes quality control much difficult but crucial. It also creates difficulties for potential customers to evaluate and compare the services. Since in travel marketing, the satisfaction of consumption is not by using, but feeling and experiencing, a significant portion of the time and money spent. The recreational i and tourism experiences depend on people’s decisions to visit their business or community again.

If you don’t have a competitive advantage, don’t compete. Prof. Jack Welch

Tourism as an industry has components comprising the overall ‘travel experience’. Along with transportation, it includes accommodations, food and beverage, services, shops, entertainment, aesthetics and special events. It is rare for one business house to provide all the activities or facilities to the tourist. To overcome these hurdles, tourism related business houses, government, local authorities and tourism organizations need to work together to package and promote tourism opportunities in the areas involving local eco culture and economy and align their efforts to assure product consistency. This shares profit among business holders, ownership to the locals, and satisfaction to the visitors and mastering to the government. This is a four-dimensional flow of tourism sector and threshold of sustainable tourism.

Text courtesy: The NTTR October-November 2006 issue-ed.

Document:

Regionalism in South Asia : cooperation versus conflict

Chandra D Bhatta, PhD Scholar, LondonSchool of Economics

South Asia has been frequently receiving international attention in recent years. The reasons are obvious. Because the sub-continent poses both internal threat (that is, instability within the region due to all time high political and religious tensions) and external threat (that is, perceived threat it poses to the international order for occult reasons). This has been accompanied by a vigorously renewed interest in studies pertaining to patterns of cooperation and conflict among major South Asian countries. That South Asia is still in the process of evolving as a region due to two basic factors, is the main contention, however. Adequate degree of complementarity of interests has not yet been achieved among South Asian states and almost perpetual preoccupation with inter and intra—state conflicts and crises leaves individual states with scarce time or resources to work toward regional solutions. Therefore, it would be useful to elaborate upon these two points and outline the broad parameters of this study.

Basically, a region can be defined on the basis of certain specific indicators that confirm its existence. A set of countries in close geographical proximity with each others can be categorized as a ‘region’ when, first and foremost, they share a certain commonality of (national) interests. These interests could incorporate a whole gamut of’ social, economic, political, cultural, historical, and other factors; and secondly, this set of countries should he sufficiently enlightened so as to understand the significance of placing cooperation above conflict in the conduct of inter—state relations. This should also be bolstered by a collective desire to come together on a common plank to create some lasting mechanism to regional cooperation. But these sentiments, more or less are lacking among South Asian states. Such a lack of ‘region—ness’ in South Asia can also be understood in terms of another related phenomenon, that is, the persistence of myriad of social, economic and political problems practically in each and every South Asian state. And such intra—slate problems are often either the cause or consequence of inter-slate disputes and misperceptions as well. Thus, there emerges an inextricable connection between the internal and external relations of South Asian states with patterns that are further complicated by what has been succinctly explained as the pursuit of order, welfare and legitimacy. These are the reasons, among others, why the pace of integration among South Asian nations has not been satisfactory for such a long time.

From the economic point of view, the World Bank’s South Asia regional unit has commenced a study on the subject and identified four conditions that significantly bring success in integrating a region particularly to become FTAs among a group of nations. First, the World Bank identifies that the pre—FTA tariffs should be high: second, the members of the FTA should he important trading partners before entering into an arrangement. Third, there should be complementarity in demand. Fourth, the difference in economic structure should he based on the true’ competitiveness of the countries involved. This means that arrangements with countries that have substantially different factor endowments are superior to those with similar endowments. By contrast. South Asia hardly satisfies any of the above conditions except the first, in the case of formation of a possible South Asian Free Trade Area. South Asian countries trade little with each other but trade much with other nations of the world including, particularly with North America, Europe and Group of Eight (G8) countries. The composition of each country exports to these regions is almost similar, with the overwhelming share accounted for by readymade garments. The trade between South Asian countries is more competitive than complementary. India’s trade (import plus export) with NAFTA and the EU comprises more than 42 percent of the total in 1994 and by contrast with the countries of the South Asian region is no more than 10 percent of the total Under these circumstances it is unlikely to maximize gain out of South Asian PTAs.

The dynamics of conflicts

South Asia provides a disappointing picture in every social, economic and political context. This is due to the fact that South Asia is continuously plagued by various inter and intra—state conflicts and crisis stemming from the lackadaisical approach of the ruling elite toward resolution of such problems. Practically every South Asian state is almost perpetually plagued by internal conflicts and crises based on narrow considerations of caste, religion, ethnicity, language, community, and alike. This distorts the national integrity/unity and the overall order situation of the affected states. In other words, the persistence of multifarious problems, both within and between the South Asian states hampers the sustenance of an environment wherein basic essential needs of the common man are fulfilled.

Moreover, democracies in all countries are on the verge of collapse or already collapsed. This could perhaps be the reason, among others, why the Foreign Policy magazine has recorded (May 2006) majority of South Asian states heading towards the grey area of state failure. Democracy in many South Asian states is fast turning into an empty ritual of arm chair political leaders who do not attempt to address problems of downtrodden and excluded groups of society as a result people continually feel subjugated in the larger political process that directly affect their livelihoods. Countries like Bangladesh and Pakistan are suffering from political Islam whereas Nepal, Bhutan, Sri Lanka are suffering from the brunt of internal conflicts. India one of the most celebrated democracies in the world is slowly but steadily feeling the heat of Maoist insurgency in its heartland and several other unresolved issues that stem from internal as well as external sources. These include ethnicity, border disputes, separatist demands, terrorism and subversive activities, communalism, religious fundamentalism and so on. India is preoccupied with quelling separatists and religious conflicts such as in the state of Punjab and Kashmir for separatist, Mizoram, Assam, and Nagaland (Eastern India) for autonomy and in Gujrat, Mumbai and other parts have certain religious, ethnic, psychological and economic underpinnings.

Nepal stands at the crossroad. It has been reeling under the cycle of political instability for more than half a century. Recent political development does show some positive sign but it is yet to be seen how the mainstream political parties and Maoists will take on the nation from here. In the past series of democratically elected governments failed to produce any better result than the old royal regime (Panchayat) due to widespread corruption and crisis of governance which ultimate drove nation towards a decade long insurgency.

Sri Lanka has also had its own set of problems. Democracy iii this tiny island-nation remains overshadowed by civil war emanating from Tamil—Singhalese ethnic conflicts. These conflicts in Sri Lanka have pushed successive governments on the brink of collapse. In Pakistan, the society faces sporadic bursts of violence derived from ethnic, sectarian and religious differences in its diverse community. For instance, conflict in the Sindh province between ethnic Sindhis and those residents who migrated to India following partition has made the province, especially its capital Karachi, ungovernable. Conservative religious elements arc also very powerful in Pakistan leading tensions and conflicts over religious fundamentalism, which has also played a major role in sustaining the Indo-Pakistan altercations over Kashmir. Religious orthodoxy is evident in Bangladeshi society manifesting itself in attacks on women’s groups, prominent non governmental organizations (Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee and the Grameen Bank), and the intellectuals (like Taslima Nasrin).

Similarly Bhutan and Maldives - the two smallest members of the SAARC also have their own sets of internal problems. The emerging internal political problems in Bhutan and the fallout of attempted coup in Maldives in 1987 have varying affects in uniting the country for the cause of development.

All these can largely be attributed to the fact that political and governing institutions in South Asian countries are weak while the political parties themselves lack vigor, organization, discipline, and commitments. Taken individually, each of the South Asian states suffer from some kind of instability and consequently projects varying intensities of human deprivation. It seems that South Asia is at war with itself where the problem of civil violence in recent years has emerged as a more serious security concern than the problem of inter-state warfare. South Asia, by and large, stands at the juncture of ‘unbecoming region’. The dominance of a narrow hand of elite reflects the concentrated nature of political power in South Asia that has resulted in the bewildering maze of battles between competing interests, pitting caste against caste, Muslim against Hindu, Tarnil against Sinhalese, Mohajir against Sindhi, and ultimately, the rise of insurgency and criminality. So even in terms of forming a sustainable and productive association South Asia lacks basic amenities and haunted by both political problems and economic disparity’, let alone contributing towards peace-building or conflict resolution. Therefore the complete integration of South Asian economies is overshadowed by underlying problems of inter and intrastate conflicts and occasional domino effects they produce.

Text courtesy: Excerpts from author's paper presented at a Kathmandu seminar on Regional Conference held in June, 2006 this year-ed.

Donation demand in Khumbu

- Rajeev Dangol, Kathmandu

Violating the 25 points code of conduct, Maoists have started collecting donations from the tourists entering Khumbu region. Maoists are charging NRs 100 per person per day as an entrance fee from every tourist and in turn a permit is being issued for them to enter Khumbu region. Not only with the tourists, but donations are being collected from the local guides in the same manner. They have set a post to collect donations at the Dudhkoshi Bridge in Phakding. Concerning the rise on Maoist donations in various tourist destinations, Minister for Culture, Tourism and Civil Aviation (MoCTCA), Pradeep Gyanwali in an award distribution program held at Nepal Tourism Board (NTB) had urged the Maoists not to ask for donations from the tourists and treat them as guests.

“On one hand we are saying ‘Atithi Devo Bhava’ and on the other we are making them pay forcefully while they are in our country. The Maoists should spare the tourists as per their commitment towards the code of conduct,” the tourism minister said.

After the prevailing peace in the country the tourist arrival to Khumbu has comparatively increased. The Khumbu region alone is receiving some 400 tourists every day. However, the rise in Maoist activities in terms of donation demands has saddened the entrepreneurs. This has raised concern among the trekking agencies, which according to them is illegal and should be stopped immediately. “It is very unfortunate that Maoists have once again targeted tourists for their vested interests. Now when there is peace talk going on, Maoists have accelerated their donation scams everywhere in the country including in Khumbu which is unfortunate for the tourism industry. The international media has already covered the news and we are afraid that it would negatively affect the next year’s business. We strongly condemn all such activities of any political parties which would put the tourism industry in stake,” asserts Zimba Jangmu Sherpa, First Vice President of Nepal Mountaineering Association (NMA).

Similarly, Trekking Agents Association of Nepal (TAAN) has also condemned the activities of Maoists to collect donations from tourists in Khumbu saying that it would peril the trekking sector as a whole by disrupting the image of the region, which once was believed to be the safest of all the tourist destinations in the country.

“The latest trend of Maoists to collect tax from tourists in Khumbu region has saddened the entire trekking industry. And no pre information was given about it to the entrepreneurs, otherwise we could have informed our clients, before they are out for Khumbu. This would leave a long- term impact on the tourism industry and should be withdrawn immediately. The country’s image has already been damaged and it is time for every political party to bring change in their behavior, if they consider tourism an important contributor to the country’s economy,” opines Sita Ram Sapkota, General Secretary of TAAN. He also informed that those tourists who have returned from Khumbu region are not satisfied with the security situation there. “We had talked to some of our clients who had recently returned from Lukla. The only complaint they made was about the Maoists donation and inconveniences that they had gone through due to a long queue at Maoist set post in Phakding. Although, it is being said that NR5 100 per person per day is being charged, our clients paid NR5 2500 each at the post for seventeen days,” informs Sapkota.

It is very true that Nepal can do a lot in tourism, by tourism. But such unprecedented taxations and extortions would only harm the image of the Nepalese people who are pest known for hospitality and ever smiling people. With forceful donations tourists will have a feeling of being cheated every time they go out of Kathmandu and we also fail to give them a sense of security.

Text courtesy: The NTTR-Ed