The army's role

Media spotlight on the army's role during the Maoist attack on Dunai and after has brought to the fore the unfortunate uneasy relations between the government and the Royal Nepal Army (RNA). At the heart of the controversy is the question: who is in charge? Just before his resignation Friday last, Home Minister Gobinda Raj Joshi slammed the army for not cooperating. Apparently, the army was supposed to block the entry/exit points to Dolpa so that the police strike force could close in and prevent the Maoists from escaping. According to Joshi, the army had not done its bit. On the other hand, the Defence Ministry, which is under Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala, responded with a clarification that came as a slap on Joshi's face. According to the Defence Ministry, the government preferred to use alternatives other than mobilising the army to resolve the problem of insurgency.  Joshi's resignation was thus only an impulsive reaction. There was hardly any sense of moral responsibility for the Dunai and the Lamjung attacks which claimed 22 police lives within three days. More important than Joshi's resignation are the confusing signals the government has been sending about its relationship with RNA. It is high time this relationship was clearly defined. In this process, the government must be able to assert its authority over RNA because the country cannot afford to have a renegade army. If constitutional amendments are required for this then they should be effected forthwith.   

If indeed, as the Defence Ministry claims, RNA is really under the government's control, then the government is guilty of not using the army to rescue the besieged police officers, and of failing to protect the bank and district administrative office, the lives of people and property. The government cannot use the pretext of preference for other alternatives and allow the army to stand by as Maoists carry out attacks on the police and threaten life and property. This is not advocating that the army should be mobilised. In fact, we have always held that a military solution will not work and that a political solution is always preferable. This however does not mean that the army should stand by refusing to respond to situations like the Dunai attack. If the need arises the army may have to be mobilised but the orders must come from the government.

As things stand at present, it appears that the possibility of resolving the problem through political means has not yet been exhausted. The problem is that instead of trying to negotiate a settlement the government opted for creating a special force to combat the Maoists. This is the government's alternative means of resolving the Maoist problem. Obviously, this means additional expenditure of some billions of rupees. Equipping and training the said force is also going to be time consuming. By that time the damage would be incalculable if the army were to simply stand by. The government therefore has to come up with a decision regarding the army's role very soon otherwise it could end up giving the impression that it is not really in control of the situation.

Does foreign aid accelerate Nepal's development?

By Uttam Maharjan

Economic development is a prerequisite for raising the standard of living for a developing country like Nepal. But this is not so easy. It has many ramifications, which should act synergistically to produce coherent result. Such ramifications include infrastructure development, health, education, sanitation, communication, transportation and so on.

Nepal is poor in mobilizing internal resources for development programmes. So it is bound to depend on external aid and assistance contrary to the views of development planners that foreign aid is not to be heavily depended on.

The country has been receiving foreign aid since 1951 beginning with US aid. In the same year, the country also received foreign aid from India for the construction of roads and airports. Thereafter, the country reached similar agreements with China, the erstwhile USSR, Germany, Canada and Australia. The country also reached capital loan assistance agreement with India and the USA in 1952 and 1955 respectively.

Since 2013 BS when the first five-year plan was launched, the country has been receiving foreign aid on an institutional basis. After the establishment of the Nepal Development Forum in 2032 BS, the inflow of foreign aid has witnessed a constant rise. Now the network of foreign aid has grown to encompass over 24 donor countries, 19 bilateral and 23 multilateral agencies.

Foreign aid has a crucial role to play in economic development. In fact, some positive advances have been observed in industry, hydropower, communications, education, health and other fields.

It is an irony that despite the steady inflow of foreign aid for the last five decades, there have not been any significant changes in the country's economic status. At the present exchange rates, the country has received around 350 billion rupees in foreign aid. Yet, the Nepalese people are now among the poorest in the world as evidenced by a per capita income of just US$ 200, which is one of the lowest in the world.  This shows that foreign aid has not been used in a proper and transparent manner.

Actually speaking, foreign aid has both good and bad aspects. Good in the sense that it acts as a catalyst to accelerate development and bad in the sense that it gives rise to dependence at the cost of internal resource mobilization, thus leading to nonchalance and lethargy on the part of the people despite their ingenuity.

Donor countries and agencies that purvey foreign aid have a penchant for imposing their own conditionalities on recipient countries. They want the projects to run at their own discretion. On the other hand, recipient countries cannot help but sign on the dotted line. In our context, foreign aid has also been used for procuring sophisticated equipment and vehicles. As donor countries/agencies bring along with them their own consultants and technicians, a huge chunk of the aid money has to be paid as professional or consultancy fees. To add the last straw to the deplorable situation, corruption is always there to raise its ugly head, so much so that most  foreign aid goes down the drain.

Other factors responsible for   underutilization of foreign aid in the country are weak policy and implementation, inadequate attention to ownership, frequent change of project managers, lack of resource mobilization and so on.

Foreign aid has been in the form of either grants or loans. Till 1983/84 the portion of grants was heavier than that of loans. The trend has since been reversed. For example, the current budget (FY 2057/2058) is financed by 35 percent foreign aid, which bifurcates into 13 percent grants and 22 percent loans. Thus, the share of the loans is  twice as high as grants.

Heavy dependence on foreign aid, especially in the form of loans, may prove fatal in the long run. On the one hand, it gives rise to the dependence syndrome, while on the other, it detracts from making optimal use of internal resources, thus leaving them untapped.

The meeting of the Nepal Development Forum held in Paris in April this year proved substantial. At the meeting, donors were convinced of the country's reform package regarding institutional and policy reforms, foreign aid utilization, economic management improvement, revenue increase, effectiveness of civil service and so on. The donors also pledged to give more aid to the country provided there was progress in institutional and policy reforms and good use was made of aid money. This is a good lesson to be learnt with regard to utilization of aid money.

As foreign debt is growing year after year, the time  has come to gradually decrease foreign aid. Just receiving a huge chunk of foreign aid cannot always contribute to economic development to the desired extent. Foreign aid is not a panacea. A time will soon come when a huge chunk of the budget will have to be earmarked for debt servicing. And there will be less fund available for development projects.

The Ninth Plan has envisioned a gradual reduction in foreign aid. The plan has provided for development expenditures on the strength of 33.3 percent revenue, 58.8 percent foreign aid and 7.9 percent internal loans. Of these components,  foreign aid includes 17.2 percent grants and 41.6 loans.

Similarly, the current budget is supported by grants worth Rs 11,842 million and loans worth Rs 19,793 million. However, the budget has provided for foreign aid in a new perspective, perhaps with an eye to the formulation of a new foreign aid policy so as to streamline foreign aid.

The country has not had any clear-cut foreign aid policy, while donor countries have their own policies. After five decades of depending on foreign aid for development programmes, it has been finally realized by the government sector that all the aid money has not been fully utilized. So there is ample room to suspect that there could have been some aberrations and anomalies in the use of aid money.

To overcome these shortcomings, the government announced a new draft for foreign aid policy in July this year. The broad thrust of the policy should be to utilise foreign aid in producing native skilled manpower for optimally harnessing indigenous resources and gradually reducing foreign aid. However, the success of the upcoming foreign aid policy, or for that matter any other policy, lies in its implementation. So long as the implementation phase is not strong, nothing will come out of the policy, no matter how excellent it may be.

A different kind of festivity

By Hitesh Karki

The time was around 7 in the evening but still the heat wouldn't go away. Me and my friend were sweating like anything...maybe we had been sitting inside an air conditioned room all day long. We decided it was about time to make our way towards the hotel. No sooner had we said so to each other the guard came rushing into the room (where we were doing  our work) and asked us to leave. Leave?

That took us by surprise.

"Yes Sir...I know you are supposed to work till late hours but I'm afraid I can't let you do that today....please sir". "But why...?" was the  only obvious thing we could ask.

"Well don't you know sir...today is the Bhimsen jatra and haven't  you heard of the famous Bhimsen jatra of Birgunj".

"Jatra, well fine..." replied my colleague but neither of us could understand the logic behind having to close down the office so soon when it was the day of the festival. Upon asking he came out with loads of data as to what had happened last year but to our complete surprise all of them were completely about the number of people injured and to top it all about the amount of destruction that had taken place. Windows smashed, shops looted, vehicles burnt  etc. The festival seemed quite puzzling to us. Sensing the impatience in his face we decided to call it a day.

The picture outside reminded us of the events that took place about a decade ago. Though not officially announced by the local authorities, the street, mind you, at just about seven in the evening, wore a deserted look. All shops, every window closed down.

To be honest, for a moment, it really frightened us. Any how we had to rush to the hotel for the very reason that it was the only place we knew. Everything else...everyone else was a complete stranger.

Just when we had walked (it was a quick walk almost as if we were running) about few hundred meters, a big search light beaming across the road came heading towards us. We halted. We looked to our left and right in search of  shelter but  as mentioned above, everything was closed. A little later the picture got more clearer. There were thousands of armed policemen , the big search light , the one we had seen from a distance, was in fact mounted on the top of the truck with police aiming their guns, and in between the circle of the police force were the people who were supposedly celebrating the festival. The noise was  deafening.

No one in the crowd seemed to be in their senses and were shouting even political slogans like this one's a thug and that one's a thief. But then we had to pass that crowd. For minutes we stood like statues ignoring the dashes and pushes of every passerby. Thankfully we were left unharmed.

As soon as we reached the Hotel there were another group of policemen guarding the hotel. The doorman asked us to hurry in and we readily obeyed him.

It was only during dinner time that we got complete information about the kind of festival it was. There would be two groups (rather gangs)  of  people approaching from two different ends, all completely intoxicated and would meet at  a certain Temple from where the battle would begin for the possession of the rath. But that would only be a pretext to a battle.  Battles to hit at someone, burn and damage property have been listed in their books. It is to pour out all the hatred that has been closeted inside for whole year. Gaijatra is a way but this is not through satirical dialogue but direct revenge.

"Phew...was it like that from the beginning or was it influenced by the neighbouring border state...?" I asked the hotel manager who was strolling past me in the hotel restaurant.

The answer was what I expected.

Mamata may still miss the bus

By Kuldip Nayar

Imade it a point to be in Calcutta on September 7. This was the day on which the Centre was supposed to take action against the Communist-led West Bengal government for instigating terrorism in the state.

Trinamool Congress leader Mamata Banerjee had thrown down the gauntlet. No, I am the last person to pick it up. But I must say I did not find any sign of ferment or fear in the city during my five-day stay. True, Calcutta is not West Bengal. But if the state's five districts -- Midnapore, Bankura, Birbhum, Hooghly and Burdwan -- had been in the grip of terrorism, as the Trinamool Congress had claimed, some terrified people would have migrated to the city.

Accounts of extensive violence would have appeared in the local press, which is known for its detailed coverage of happenings in the districts. A few stories of rough force did appear in print. But they did not suggest any large-scale turmoil or a breakdown in the law and order machinery.

Newspapers have been carrying incidents of confrontation between the supporters of Trinamool Congress and the Marxists for many days. But this was nothing new. They have done so off and on. Strong-arm methods are part of West Bengal politics. All parties are in the habit of expressing themselves not only vocally but also physically.

I was amused to read the statement by Defence Minister George Fernandes from Mumbai, even before he visited the state, that "the situation in West Bengal is indeed grave." On the eve of his departure to the US, Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee had asked him to tour the state and study the situation on the spot. But his statement from Mumbai gave the impression of a person whose mind was already made up.

Having read his observations earlier, I was not surprised to see Fernandes remarking at Calcutta that "democracy has failed in West Bengal." He was in the state for a few hours and visited only three places in the Midnapore district. For him to compare the state with Bihar was merely politics. He was on a serious mission. But he spoke like a person who read out from the text which he had prepared beforehand.

That Fernandes served the purpose of Mamata Banerjee is clear and understandably she is "pleased with him." It is another matter that his credibility on political matters has gone down still further. But how does his "assessment" help the Centre? It has only increased her pressure on New Delhi to take action against the state government -- a point which Mamata has been plugging for many months. The Centre will be damned both ways -- if it acts or doesn't.

Still the fact remains that New Delhi has gone about in a way which not only challenges the state's authority but also betrays some political game. First, the ruling National Democratic Alliance (NDA) sends a team, which says that the five districts be declared disturbed areas. (The Centre may have constitutional power but can it do so? And which machinery does it have to enforce its fiat in the state?) Then, New Delhi asks, of all persons, Fernandes to give a report. His bias against the communists, who consider him a renegade, is too well known. And he does not hide it. He indicts the West Bengal government even before entering the state.

Fernandes has reportedly said in a two-volume account that the CPI(M) has killed several people and that women are being raped and children tortured by its workers. Who will authenticate what comes from Fernandes? His is a one-sided verdict. This is evident from the absence of any criticism of Trinamool Congress in his report.

On September 7 itself, I met Chief Minister Jyoti Basu in the morning and Deputy Chief Minister Buddhdeb Bhattacharya in the evening. By then Fernandes had not arrived in Calcutta. Basu's comment was that it was a free country and Fernandes could go anywhere. The chief minister vehemently denied the allegations that Mamata had made. "She wants to dislodge the government and her supporters are indulging in every type of violence to destabilise the state," Basu said.

He, in fact, felt hurt over what was happening in the country. Talking in a philosophical mood, he wondered to which direction the country was heading. He had little hope of "a change in the government at Delhi" and was unhappy that no alternative was emerging.  He saw no challenge to the Vajpayee-led government.

Basu has not forgotten how New Delhi would have had a communist-led government in 1996 when he was offered the leadership of a coalition hammered out at that time. "We would have left something behind," he said.

"A few members who had opposed me at that time are now regretting. Things have changed for the worse." When I met him, he seemed determined to step down from chief ministership.

Perhaps CPI(M) Secretary-General Harkishan Singh Surjeet, who rushed to Calcutta on September 8 following Basu's SOS to fix the date for his exit, persuaded him to stay on until the Centre decided on the report by Fernandes. The "appraisal report" that the West Bengal government has sent to the Home Ministry to inform it about the "conditions" prevailing in the state is contrary to the thinking of the Vajpayee government. It is understandable because Mamata is a senior minister in the cabinet and her clout is immense. What is amazing is that some Central ministers, dictated by political considerations, are talking in terms of takeover of the state under Article 356 of the Constitution (the imposition of President's rule). But they do not seem to appreciate the repercussions. They may placate Mamata but any action against the Basu government will alienate the Bengalis for years to come.

"Let them dare," was the remark made by the Deputy Chief Minister when someone telephoned him from Delhi to inform him that the Centre might impose President's rule in the state. I was sitting with him at that time. He pooh-poohed the visit of Fernandes. But he very much wanted Basu at the helm of affairs. "I can carry the burden of his work," he said, "but I do not come anywhere near him. He must stay because he is a tall man in whom the Bengalis have faith."

The Congress is quietly working for a role. It wants to be seen against the CPI(M) government. But it would not like to be on the side which has BJP support. Mamata as a rabble-rouser is acceptable to the Congress but not as a person who may dictate terms. After all, Mamata left the party when it needed her most.

My assessment is that the Centre will not dare impose President's rule in the state, although it can get any type of report from State Governor Viren J. Shah. He is a BJP prodigy and a close friend of Fernandes from the days of the Baroda dynamite case.It looks as if the purpose of the Centre's exercise is to keep the pot boiling in the state and allow Mamata to create an atmosphere of uncertainty where she is recognised as a 'saviour.' It suits both Mamata and the NDA government because the state goes to the polls in April. But many people, including the editors, I have talked to believe that the CPI(M) under Basu would return to power, although not with an absolute majority. Mamata would still miss the bus.