Prevent food crisis

The report that five districts in Karnali zone in the northwest part of the country are facing foodgrain shortage is indeed very alarming. But the government, as usual, appears to be indifferent towards the plight of remote areas of the country that are low in productivity. Some weeks back, we had drawn the government’s attention to the dire need to take urgent steps to tackle the impending food crisis
in some eleven districts of the northwest. Now we have reports that five of these districts could be in for a grave crisis.

According to local officials of Nepal Food Corporation, foodgrain meant for the whole year was exhausted within four months in Dolpa, Humla, Jumla, Kalikot and Mugu districts. Obviously, this calls for immediate dispatch of additional supply of foodgrain to these areas. It is indeed unfortunate that the government always tends to only give lukewarm response to the problem,  even though reports of the impending shortage of foodgrain in these remote areas had reached the concerned officials well in advance.

These districts suffer severe food crisis every year due to low self productivity and limited supply through the quota system. Therefore, the only measure to deal with these frequent food crises will be to take prompt steps either to raise productivity through various alternative farming or development works, or to ensure enough quota of supply to meet the local demand.

Meanwhile, it is also necessary to specify the recipients and monitor the supply system. Hoarding tendencies ought to be discouraged and criteria should be set up to ensure social justice in the distribution of foodgrain made available through the quota system. It is said that the major portion of foodgrain despatched under the quota system is used by police force. In fact, arrangement should
be made so that police forces, government officials as well as semi-government staff  get the necessary foodgrain under a different quota. At any cost, the people of these areas must not be deprived of food.

Another reason why food shortage has suddenly erupted in the region at present is said to be the increased transportation cost. Although, transportation and other costs might have risen, this cannot be an excuse for the government to shun the responsibility of making available the most required things like foodgrain to the people of less developed remote areas. For the moment, increasing the quota and supplying foodgrain to the area, at any cost without delay, is the only solution.

Five years ago
(From The Kathmandu Post of 11 December, 1994)

More cooperation called for in South Asia

KATHMANDU - The South Asia  Consultation on Trade, Economics  and Environment, a forum for consumer and environment groups in India, Pakistan, Nepal, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, appealed to the political leadership of the region to avail of the new opportunities offered by globalization and liberalisation in overcoming long standing obstacles to greater inter regional cooperation.

The consultation organised by the Consumer Unity and Trust Society (CUTS) and Friedrich Ebert Stiftung (FFS) which drew 20 participants from all over the sub-continent, concluded Saturday.

Pradeep S Mehta, general secretary, CUTS, said “For South Asia to emerge as a major power in the altered global scenario, socio-economic benefits must be perceived as more important than geo-political ambitions. Governments of the region must recognise this and rise above narrow political objectives that only yield short term and questionable results”.

Human rights versus inhuman wrongs

-By Mukunda Raj Kattel

In December 1948, the United Nations proclaimed that recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world. With the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), the world leaders, the victors as well as vanquished of the World Wars, promised in a collective voice that ‘never again’ would the horrors of  fascism, and genocide be allowed. The UDHR has stood as a unique document in the history of humanity.

The document is an assemblage of thoughts and visions from different eras and across different civilisations. Divided into 30 Articles, each asserting a certain aspect of rights, the UDHR is a compilation of a set of global values and principles owned and held by every human being residing anywhere in the world. By definition, these values, which are defined as universal human rights, are applicable as well as attainable for everyone, without exception, by virtue of their humanity.

Human rights are therefore not abstract ideals propounded by some scholars for consideration. They have rather evolved over time as part of the patrimony of human civilisation in a constant interaction with diverse cultures, traditions and philosophies. In the context of UDHR, human rights are the standards laid down by our forefathers, in the aftermath of devastating wars which put humanity at stake, to create a humane environment in which their children and grandchildren should not live under injustice and threat of barbaric warfare in future.  The application of human rights standards, however, requires an open, plural and tolerant society in which no one is isolated and alien.

In the test of time: The world has witnessed sweeping changes. Democracies have replaced autocracies in many countries, many colonies have achieved the status of independent states, the era of apartheid has ended, and with the fall of the Berlin Wall, it is said that the era of the cold wars has also come to an end. The globe has definitely become a better place to live in than what it was half a decade ago. Under the aegis or the United Nations, a number of documents and standards have been produced. They comprise pledges and commitments to address contemporary calls and crises affecting humanity.

However, all is not well under close scrutiny, specifically in the implementation of the pledges. Fifty one years after the near-unanimous proclamation, human rights, has still remained a contentious issue. While there is almost universal agreement with regard to upholding human rights, divergent opinions are emerging regarding its universal applicability. It is quite painful to see some Heads of States still sticking to relativism arguing that human rights are western constructs and therefore alien to non-western cultures. Similarly, there is a yet unresolved debate in terms of priority to be placed on certain set of rights -- a marked division prevailing between civil and political versus economic, social and cultural rights. This is against the ideal of the UDHR which links all these rights as indivisible and interdependent.

Unlike what our forefathers had believed, the world has not been free of devastating wars. Just in the opening years of this decade, genocide reappeared in Bosnia and Rwanda where nearly a million people were reportedly murdered. Women suffered systematic rape and children were thrown to death. The right to life, as stipulated by UDHR (Article 3), was blatantly violated.

As reported by respected scholars, day after day, the gap between the rich and the poor, between states and within states, is widening. While a small section of population lives in luxury, it is estimated that more than a quarter of the world’s people do not get enough food to eat, and more than 1 billion people lack access to safe water and health services. In this backdrop, the principle of equality, dignity and social justice, the very essence of the UDHR, nearly loses its sense.

Back Home: With the restoration of multi-party democracy, human rights came into public discourse. The 1990 constitution guaranteed “basic human rights to every citizen.” Nepal has now been on the lead in South Asia in ratifying United Nations human rights instruments. However, as every where else, their implementation has been a great challenge.

Records in Nepal show that human rights violations have on the rise every year, particularly since the CPN (Maoist) “People’s War” started. In addition to killings, cases of disappearances, abductions and amputations are being reported almost on a weekly basis, if not daily. The government lack of commitment  to rectify the situation can be seen in its reluctance to establish a human rights commission, an institution meant to look into such allegations, despite an Act that has been pending for three years and renewed calls made by the NGO community. It is quite frustrating to see why the Prime Minister who gives so many assurances cannot  act. Political impotence of this kind cannot exist in a transparent society if human rights are to be protected by rule of law. 

To conclude: In this changing world, where old problems are replaced by new challenges, human rights are a barometer to measure the conduct of a State. No State can hide its face. If it is blotted by crimes and violations, it will have to face international condemnation.

The pace of progress is rather slow compared to promises. Challenges are looming large every passing day. Democracies are still not out of threat and the same can be said of human rights. Pakistan is a recent case in point with General Pervez Musharraf deposing democratically elected government and also human rights.

While celebrating the last Human Rights Day of this century, let us renew our commitments, both as the rulers and the ruled, to make humanity prosper in the next millennium. We should not let human ‘wrongs’ overrule human ‘rights’ anywhere in the world. All forms of fundamentalism, be they political, religious or intellectual, should be ruled out as human rights do not pose a choice between food and freedom; Christianity and Buddhism; black and white, Left and Right; and, flat-nosed and pointed-nosed, to speak in the context of a foolish debate the Nepalese intelligentsia time and again resort to.

We are after all campus students

-By Rajoo

Do you want to develop your country? Then invest more money on education. The more students enrolled, the more prosperous the country is. Let there be more campuses, more teachers, more examinations and more results. Activities of this type will make people feel that the educational statistics at Keshar Mahal has changed.

I repeat, we are very important. It’s because of us that the image of the country glistens. Imagine, if there were no students in Nepal, how would those hundreds of NGOs survive? How will bideshi teachers get citizenship? How will Nepal spend millions of dollars of loan for education development? How will thousands of government staff (either from Service Commission or from netaji’s favour) remain seated at the education ministry? Even the existence of the education minister’s quota was granted by our grace. Routine for examination is revised to help elections and ministers inaugurate students’ meetings so that they can be encouraged to be more political than the university charter allows. Just relax and count our other contributions to the country.

Our status has simply been superb. The university has a thick budget, so adding countless students without qualification is just a drop in the ocean. And some strong positions in this university can be a good launching pad for diplomatic appointments. You just need to be optimistic and have faith in the government.

By being enrolled in the virtually free campuses, we live what we want. There is our legal Student’s Union whose primary duty is to force the campus administration to enrol students even if it is beyond capacity. The union never takes the physical capacity of the campus, number of teachers and the student’s scores into account. We need a certain number of students for the coming students’ election and for that, importing students is our key to success. Don’t laugh at us. If the student population can suddenly increase ahead of election why can’t that happen
now?

You can enter the campus in any robe, and can bring anything you like —taking knives, batons and chilly powder which appears to be the latest fashion. Don’t ever take text books, your modern colleagues will laugh at you. Staying in any classroom is your basic human rights. When you choose a room to sit, think how many beautiful dolls or handsome boys are there; teacher and subject come later. Plus, you are too old to follow the bell so enter when you like and come out when you are bored with those silly lectures. You have the right to change a campus chief, if you wish to.

The idea of studying hard and passing the exam is outdated. There are as many student unions as political parties. Learn from the big people. The campus has given quite a few shooters, robbers, rapists, adulterers, liars, buffoons and scarecrows to the Nepali political arena. Look, being one among those is a basic criteria for entering Nepali politics. The choice is yours : Do you want to be a teacher earning two thousand rupees per month or a politician who builds a new house every next year in the capital?

Time has proved that the campuses are matchless platforms to a become a leader and maintain sound relationship with political leaders. Chances are that you may become a parliamentarian or even a minister. To climb up the ladder, you must show your vigorous activities like hacking a student with a khukuri in the campus premises. Just do it.

Repercussion of Seattle WTO meeting

-By Aditya Baral

In three weeks time, we shall leave the 20th century behind. The first half of the century was a period of war and the second half saw unprecedent expansion of world trade with massive economic growth.

The WTO Seattle meet and the subsequent meetings to be held henceforth will be crucial in determining whether the 21st century will replicate the first half, or be like the second half better.

What we all have realized is that trade is better than aid and we should leave no stone unturned to formulate niche domestic trade policies keeping in view the today’s changing world order. Experience shows that trade and investment bring not only economic development, but often higher standards of human rights and environment protection as well. This is, in fact, the main trade doctrine of the 20th century concocted by the first world and imposed on the third world.

The powerful west has always used the WTO platform to fulfil their vested interest. The Seattle round has proved this. The developed nations have, time and again, been opposing the trade policies and practices of weaker nations to bring the global tide in their favour. It is absolutely unwise, unfair and even ironical to link non trade issues like labour standards and environment with the negotiating table. It seems as it goes, WTO negotiations are nothing but an attempt to control world trade by a select group of nations, especially the US. In an era where the possibility of political imperialism has diminished “economic imperialism” has emerged. It is indeed ironical that the nations which most ruthlessly exploited labour and caused the greatest damage to the environment, today are raising the same issue to limit and control the trade of developing nations. If broader future understanding is not possible, WTO will breed many blocs within blocs to check, balance and counter the dictation of the west, ruling out all possibility of any breakthrough.

Since the growth of a nation today depends on international trade, the concept of developed and developing disappears. All we need is for one to play by the rules of the game. And the rules are formed through mutual consent. The only advantage of WTO as a mechanism especially for the underdeveloped world is that it can expose the hollowness and rigid positions taken by powerful countries. In the absence of such a mechanism, the rule of  “might is right” prevails and the possibility of a fair judgement or resolution of conflict becomes more difficult. At this juncture, weaker nations are advised to take a firm stand an focus on their strengths in terms of trade and exploit them to the hilt.

Developing countries should learn certain things from China. China has proved that a developed nation needs Chinese consumers and labour, more than the Chinese need their state of art high-tech products. Time has come to force Americans to learn Chinese keeping in view the burgeoning trade expansion between the two partners. When, developed countries are saturated with products and high-tech machines, they over produce due to automation, and smart machines. The West is therefore in dire need of markets in the developing world. Large scale production has become the order of the day, hence the need for a big market is the crux of the problem faced by developed countries. It is particularly this trade related cobweb which has bred at least a last ray of hope for developing countries. Thus, survival of the giants as a consequence of globalization is also dependent on active participation of common needs and wants within the paradigm of strength and weakness.

According to Kofi A Annan, “Today’s world is very different. Networks of production and finance have become truly global. Economic life is no longer embedded in a broad framework of shared values and institutionalized practices. Economics has become global but politics remains largely local”. May be inspired by Annan’s statement , a number of developing countries are focusing on stating their national interest more than squandering their invaluable time forming blocs for heavyweight negotiations against trading powers. Developing countries were committed to a strengthened, rule based, non discriminatory multilateral trading system. Hence, their cohesive agenda and central theme of negotiation revolved around development and eradicating poverty. But, paying no heed to the developing countries’ concerns, President Bill Clinton did nothing other than  sympathize with the causes raised by demonstrator outside the venue of the meeting. He said, “the process should be opened up to make them part of the trade summit”. However, the genuine problems associated with the bread and butter of millions were evaded at the floor of the summit although aggrieved demonstrators raised a great hue and cry.

In business you do not get what you deserve, you get what you negotiate. With the great number of cheap labour and consumers, developing countries should be able to negotiate with the developed ones. There is no harm in linking environmental and labour issues with trade. Otherwise, sensitive issues as child labour and hazardous environmental conditions will never get addressed and countries like China, India, Thailand will continue to exploit cheap labour. Although the Seattle meeting concluded in fiasco, the chairman of WTO said the endeavours of 135 participating  nation’s representative would definitely not go in vain. Their efforts will be channelised for devising a process to develop WTO as a  transparent instrument for abridging the great gap of inequality inherent in major trade areas between the haves and have-nots. The new round of trade negotiation must be the development round. Now, the world needs a trade system that is fair more than free.

(The author is associated with Central Department of Management, TU, Kirtipur)