A 'non-starter' visit

Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala's much hyped official visit to India, flattered only to deceive. There was nothing in the joint communique to elate the Nepalese people who had expected some breakthrough in the pressing issues like Kalapani, 1950 Treaty and regulation and monitoring of the open Nepal-India border. The need to  regulate the open border arose because of the recent parliament decision to amend the citizenship Act and fears of critics that there would be a drastic change in the demographic equation. The Prime Minister's visit came as a reminder of how far apart, though physically close, the two neighbours are in their thinking and perceptions. It is a pity that present day democratic India has not been able to shake off the British legacy of viewing their neighbours and drawing the security lines in the way they were done ages ago. For some, time seems to have been frozen.

The 1950 Treaty, for instance, enacted shortly after the British left India but with the British-imposed mentality,  is now to be discussed at the foreign secretary level. Similar provision for discussions by foreign secretaries had been made in the past but nothing had come of them. A question that is essentially political will have little or no chance of agreement at the bureaucratic level. RPP member of parliament, Kamal Thapa, then, in his capacity as Foreign Minister, had officially handed over the draft of what could have been a replacement of the 1950 treaty. But India has totally ignored the document. A bilateral discussion would have helped matters. The Kalapani issue remains unresolved and despite the time frame of 2003, the issue is likely to remain unresolved unless Nepal seriously pursues the matter with a sense of dedication. A neutral arbitration will clearly point that Kalapani is located east of the source of the Mahakali River. As far as the waiving of Special Additional Duty (SAD) is concerned, the imposition by India on imports from Nepal had always gone against the letter and spirit of the preferential trade regime established by the trade treaty between the two countries. Relevant protocol of the treaty clearly states that the "Government of India will extend parity in the levy of additional duty on such Nepalese exports equal to the treatment applied in the effective levy of excise duty on similar Indian products under the Indian Customs and Central Excise tariff." The main goal of the treaty was to make Nepalese and Indian goods compete with one another, but SAD sadly ended that healthy trend. In return for withdrawing what was in the first place an unjustly levied duty, Nepal has apparently agreed to give further concessions to import of Indian automobiles which already enjoys privilege in the form of substantially less custom and other duties than imports from other countries.

The visit also seems to have failed to elicit any positive response from India regarding the need for comprehensive understanding on water resources.

In the absence of understanding, many more Laxmanpur dams will continue to be built and Nepal's vast water and hydro-electric power potential will continue to go to waste. But despite the non-achievement of the visit, let us hope that Prime Minister Koirala has not in any way compromised Nepal's national interests.

Bhutanese refugees, what next?

By D  N S Dhakal

Your king, senior government officials, and your fellow citizens in  Bhutan are welcoming you home. All of you will go even those who filed the forms." These were the words of UNHCR Chief  Sadako Ogata, to Bhutanese refugees in Jhapa after the her three day official visit to the Kingdom of Bhutan.

This was a surprise message. It brought cheers on the face of refugees. It was expected that soon after her visit the two governments would finalize the modus operandi of refugee verification, and make arrangement for their much awaited repatriation during the 9th Joint Ministerial Committee (JMC) Meeting scheduled to take place in the 4th week of May 2000, in Thimphu.

As expected, the JMC led by the respective Foreign Ministers met in Thimphu. Soon after the meeting the Nepalese Foreign Minister, Chakra Prasad Bastola, expressed his reservation about the seriousness of the Royal government with regard to find a lasting solution to the decade old political problem. He said, "we have agreed to field verification within two months, but we have reasons to be less optimistic as the Royal Government is not ready to find a political solution."

The recent rhetoric of the National Assembly of Bhutan supports Bastola's  caution. The National Assembly demanded again in July 2000 that (1) the Royal Government should not own responsibility of those refugees who supposedly signed so called voluntary migration forms and (2) bring to court trial all those refugees who have written or spoken against the Royal Government. Clearly, this is an orchestrated move by the Royal Government to build an armament of the National Assembly for its negotiating team to absolve Bhutan's responsibility towards a large chunk of the refugee population. The same message is coming time and again. There has not been even the slightest change in its approach and attitude since the two governments met for the first time on the refugee issue in 1993. Clearly, the Royal Government does not take the dissident groups of HMG Nepal seriously. It is wholly convinced that there is little outside support for refugee groups either based on ethnic solidarity or on account of human rights and democracy movement.

The release of Tek Nath Rizal was a step towards this direction. The Royal Government has partially succeeded in proving its point as people inside the country are unable to muster courage to provide the necessary support and solidarity to Rizal, who has stationed himself in Thimphu since December 1999 after spending 10 years in prison. His image of a rallying political figure is likely to slide down over time if his presence does not spurt new waves of protest movement within the country in support of human rights and democracy in Bhutan.

Now with Rizal out from prison, the Royal Government is lobbying hard to dismantle refugee camps. Therefore, the message of  Madame Sadako Ogata must be  read in the light of Bhutan's effort to mislead the international community into believing that Bhutan is serious and Nepal is not, for the resolution of the refugee problem.

In Bhutan's calculation, if it could succeed in bringing Nepal to agree  to harmonization of respective positions on each of the categories prior to undertaking field verification, it would be able to manipulate information in its favour and show that the refugee families migrated from Bhutan on their own, and there was  no coercion involved. To prove its point, it has maintained video records, signed documents and even royal edicts exempting the people of South Bhutan from tax payments.

As the eviction process was selective, the present agreement on categorization of refugees has enabled the  Royal Government to put in place an automatic filtering mechanism to leave behind the conscious and literate people, who would fall either in category "emigrated" or category "with criminal records". If at all any, the Royal Government wants to take back only a small fraction of meek and powerless refugees, leaving the majority for assimilation either within Nepal or within the Nepali Diaspora outside.

The concept of natural assimilation, and the delay in bringing a peaceful resolution, is exposing Nepal to diplomatic pressure particularly from donor agencies supporting the upkeep of refugee camps. The international community tends to believe that since the people in the camps are of Nepali ethnicity, it will not be painful for Nepal to absorb these refugees who do not qualify to return  to Bhutan and provide  financial support for their rehabilitation. For them, diverting a portion of the resources flowing at present into Bhutan for the refugees won't be a major problem, and the Royal Government in fact would gladly support such a proposition.

Reportedly,  Ogata hinted this to HMG officials, and this idea had been in the air for some time with active support of West European Countries, particularly those helping Bhutan in its socioeconomic development programmes. Time and again, the implementing agencies in the camps are hinting at this trend.

Two months have past since the 9th JMC meeting and the euphoria over  Ogata's visit has subsided in the camps. Bhutan is adamant in its position, it seems determined to keep the majority of refugees out of  Bhutan.

In our mind, we the Nepali speaking Bhutanese are as ' true" citizens of that country as any other ethnic groups. We are one of the largest ethnic minorities in Bhutan, and our migration to South Bhutan has its own history and time reference. We the Nepali Bhutanese have become part and parcel of the Bhutanese environment, and it will be a mistake on the part of the international community or HMG Nepal to pass judgment on who should, or who should not return to Bhutan.

We will accept only one criterion for the categorization that is his/her Citizenship rights in Bhutan before the start of the pro- democracy movement. It would be a mistake of Himalayan scale to push the Bhutanese refugees against the wall denying them their inherent rights to make a normal living in the land they created, owned and lived on for generations.

Time has come for Bhutanese refugees to take a decisive course of action. We must decide for ourselves either to live forever as refugees without respect and identity, or organize ourselves into a credible, united force to build a new Bhutan. Let us not be divided whatever may be our programme.

The voice in the National Assembly is not of the people, but of those individuals who are cultivated to parrot the rhetoric of the Royal Government. There are sensible people hiding somewhere in the country, and it will not be a surprise if there are differences of opinions among the Cabinet Ministers on the issue of Bhutanese refugees.

Nor is external support to the regime a permanent feature. People are more important than individuals. If we as refugees are determined to come together with one voice, we are bound to garner support and solidarity of the people cutting across nations. This will bring considerable change even in the attitude of New  Delhi, which is critical for finding a lasting solution even though precious little has been done by India to resolve this ten year old  problem.

Nepali citizenship for sale

By Razen

In response to the stereotyped criticism often propagated by the Nepali intelligentsia that Nepal has been a total failure in the international market, the democratic government has recently made a landmark decision. From that day onwards, Nepali citizenship will be sold throughout the kingdom on all working days from nine to five, excluding public holidays.

Gone are the days when Nepali manufacturers had to fight against unnecessary obstacles of taxes and transportation. Since the government itself has propagated this policy with comfortable majority, chances of its termination are little.

Don't be misguided by session boycotts, street protests, strikes, and bundhs by opposition parties. These are regular features in our decade-old democracy. There were protests against Tanakpur, Mahakali, Police atrocity, Jhapa border, 1950-Treaty, plane-hijack and Laxmanpur barrage. Has anything changed?

When 108 lawmakers decide something in the interest of the country and its people, a modest citizen should not oppose the decision. Rather he or she must do his or her best to make the new system a success. And, if we can sell our mothers, sisters, daughters and nieces, what's wrong in signing a piece of paper ? This will eventually promote the Nepali paper industry, printing press and some lekhandases.

Citizenship cards are going to be hot-cakes in the Nepali markets. It will be more popular than Archies, Hallmark or other brand cards.

And you don't have to wait for Valentine's Day to send it to your foreign girlfriend. You can send it to your honey and her mother on the same day. This will be a fantastic present from a poor citizen.

A few Nepali citizens may know that once upon a time, an Indian had to obtain a passport while entering the Kathmandu Valley. Even Shivaratri pilgrims had to leave the valley after a certain number of days. The dice is cast now. Nobody is unaware of the changes this poor Kathmandu is witnessing in the last several decades. The capital is not safe, let alone the safety of southern districts. Now, we have to see how many new Nepalis will help increase the number of "Nepali" population.

It is made out that any vagabond, runaway, or criminal can take unwritten asylum in this sacred country and can acquire citizenship on the basis of descent.

 Any Tom, Dick or Harry can seek permanent asylum here after committing any crime in any corner of the globe. If a visitor loses his passport, turns bankrupt, or falls in love with cheap living in this third world, he or she can buy that card.

To be a Nepali now, one's father need not be a Nepali. In this way, all orphans and deserted offspring will ultimately come to Nepal at least for a citizenship card.

Forget the fuss and just imagine how lovely the days and how romantic the nights will be when you will have a larger variety to spend with. Nations, communities, castes and language groups are dated barriers. Break them down and see your country giving shelter to 60 million ghar-jwanins living authentically as our next-door neighbours.

Foreign experts will be hired to boost the market of citizenship cards. There will be hundreds of agents selling the cards and needless to say, there will be cheap competition among agents resulting in steep decline in commission. Moreover, the Citizenship Market Development Board, to be presided by the Patriot Minister himself will launch its own website. It will be like www. citizenshipsale.com.

Kamaiya emancipation: Propaganda or reality ?

By Ram Bahadur KC

On July 17, 2000, the government made a sort of revolutionary declaration liberating all the Kamaiyas of five Districts Dang, Banke, Bardia, Kailali and Kanchanpur irrespective of their bond, pledges and liabilities to their landlords or jamindars. Defined precisely, Kamaiyas are bonded labourers, mostly agricultural labour, desperately selling their labour at minimum cost borne by owners, or for a meagre amount of loan for ceremonial purposes or even for simply providing minimum subsistence and shelter. At some

 places all the family members worked as Kamaiyas and at some places a limited number only, and again, at other places,  Kamaiyas owned petty pieces of land and at places they were landless.

Anyway, they were treated as slaves not even as bonded labour, and were made to toil simply for the sake of their masters. The government measure was applauded on all fronts for ending the relic of bondage which was first banned in 1925 by the Rana Prime Minister  Chandrra  Shumsher, though this was actually initiated by  Bhimsen Thapa in 1824. Following the declaration, various statements were made  regarding the issue, some called it historic, revolutionary and a very bold step towards attainment of social justice and called for economic measures that would free bonded labour from all debts and slavery practices imposed on them.  Others discredited the declaration as mere propaganda, a type of land reform campaign, belated and unconvincing. To some political parties it was a step forward in facilitating socialism, to others it meant a distortion of the harmonious coexistence of jamindars and Kamaiyas. Some viewed it as an important socioeconomic measure, while some others viewed it as a pressure relief, temporary pill, not taking the issue in its proper perspective and totality.

The Kamaiya system is really evil and a very sensitive issue that has been long pending for proper solution. It was a social evil in the system of democratic polity and an unjust exploitation in terms of economic independence. It has to be properly remedied. But the declaration came suddenly and unexpectedly. It came as an unplanned and ad hoc step without working out the necessary strategy and infrastructure. The government has announced that it will make arrangements for work programmes for the liberated kamaiyas, pass a bill in the ongoing Parliament session, mobilise national and international organisations form central as well as district level coordinating and monitoring committees, set up Kamaiya emancipation fund, make the landless and land squatters' rehabilitation committees more effective. The forceful and bold tone of Declaration was soon softened and made mild to appeal to both the landlords and the Kamaiyas to work in a conciliatory manner to help cultivation and reaping during the harvesting season.

New programmes of any type, social and economic, have had to be chalked out very carefully and with due consultation with all concerned. The central committee is advising the district committee (still in the formative state) for fresh identification of Kamaiyas and their problems. So far as I know, such identification in detail in five districts were already made in 1995 ( B S 2052) in detail including number, their income and debt level, land holding etc. Further identification may not disclose further useful information rather, it would delay the implementation and even complicate matters. Some organisations like INSEF Sector Service Centre have been working for the welfare of the Kamaiyas and they have to be properly consulted and mobilised. The committee concept and formation have had to be thought twice and well, because there is often duplication and that delays work and complicates it further. Committee making is a fashion and also a good excuse for procrastinating.

Further, we hope the programme will not be conceived in a hasty way. Now, what has already been declared must be collectively implemented and the anomalies must corrected in an amicable way.