Political Inclusiveness- The Path to Stability
Siddhartha Sharma
Nepal has been amidst political violence for over a decade, which now has subsided in some proportion. Political ideologies have been at the heart of it, but are ideologies such as Maoism, Capitalism or Liberalism the only causes for it? Deeper issues might be out there that make various groups take up arms and participate in this seemingly perpetual violence. The boundaries that determine friends and enemies need to be investigated.
The ideologies of the Maoists (communism) and the Madhesis (proportional representation) are not altogether the same yet they fought together in the same alliance till a few months back, and now they have declared each other enemies. What have changed in political dimensions within 10 months of People's movement that the equations changed so drastically? The Malthusian theory on population and resources relationship was what came to my mind. The Malthusian theory states that population expands in geometrical progression while food resources increase in arithmetic progression and the two are bound to be disproportionate in relation to each other. Taking this onto a larger scenario, any resource (monetary /food) is limited whereas demand for it can be unlimited, which can ultimately create social, economic and political paradigm shifts. Till a century back countries invaded other countries to get access to more resources. But now, countries have a fixed geographical boundary and to try to extend it might prove to be disastrous as was the case of Iraq's invasion of Kuwait.
Now, countries have to make do with whatever resources that they have inside the boundary of the country. But even within a fixed boundary certain political power centers have access to more resources then the rest of the populace. Those who are close to the power centers derive some benefits from the centers and hence they have little or no grievances, but the same cannot be said about the rest of the populace. When these marginalised segments increase in number and start making their demands, changes in the political spectrum are bound to take place. This is what happened in Nepal also.
Nepal's history is ripe with examples of politically marginalised segments revolting against the state authority. The revolutions against the Rana oligarchy, the Monarchy and even against the institution of elected Legislatives and Executives, by the Maoists are few of the examples that come to the mind. Now that the Maoists have been accepted in the political mainstream, other marginalised communities have claimed that their issues have been sidelined, amongst whom the Madhesis and residents of the Bhaber/ Chure range have started revolting. Till they had revolted, Nepal had only seen revolutions for causes such as democracy or for Maoist communism, which can be categorized as political uprisings. The Terai conflict can be seen as a blatant example of rebellion which has socio-economic issues at the heart of it. Albeit their demand of federalism is political in nature it has nothing to do with either Communism or Liberalism. Its core issue is socio-economic marginalisation and political exclusion. Madhesis talked about proportionate representation, and state autonomy which till now had been unheard of concept in Kathmandu. There are some who fear federal state system probably means Nepal's disintegration into many smaller countries as was the case before the unification of Nepal and some who argue that federalism could be disastrous taking the sensitive geo-political dimension of Nepal which is situated between countries with histories of annexations.
In a country like Nepal which comprise of more than 100 linguistic groups, at-least 61 castes, sub-castes, ethnic and sub-ethnic groups, federal division of Nepal in terms of the above mentioned lines could prove to be disastrous. The Maoists opened the proverbial Pandora's Box, and had formed 9 autonomous republics on the basis of ethnicity, geo-political and linguistics dimensions, on the basis of which the Madhesis have started their rebellion. There is no doubt that marginalisation and political exclusion needs to be addressed but a detailed analysis of a probable federal model needs to be carried out before jumping into action and taking Nepal into a new form of political turmoil.
The general belief is that the exclusion of political and social groupings other than the Seven Parties Alliance (SPA) and CPN (Maoist) in the interim constitution-making process led to the Madhesi revolt in the Terai. It will not be a surprise if other marginalised communities or regions start taking up arms to make their demands heard. Marginalisation and Political exclusion must be addressed urgently by equipping marginalised people with necessary knowledge, incentives and tools to navigate within a democracy and to create the necessary space for them to participate within the established framework. At this point of time, it is imperative to ensure that enough actions are taken by political actors and policy-makers to provide due space and opportunity for marginalised groups for their pro-active participation in the political processes.
Talking about concrete actions, the policy makers need to intervene in the geographically marginalised parts of the country and conduct awareness campaigns regarding their political rights, accountability and responsibility of their elected representatives, and the power of their votes with regards to determining their better future. The policy makers also need to keep their ears open regarding what the traditionally marginalised communities such as women, dalits, and janajatis have to say, and make their policies as politically inclusive as possible for the upcoming democratization and constitution-making processes. After all, true leaders are the ones who can understand what the masses have to say and make everyone feel that they achieved their goals collectively.
(Sharma is Democratic and Governance Specialist, MIREST/ Nepal )
