Alertness needed

The earthquake which struck western India on Friday (and was felt in Nepal also) has brought home to us, once again, that we too live under a serious seismic hazard. The quake which registered up to 7.9 on the Richter scale has left some 15,000 people dead, about 33,000 injured and hundreds of thousands homeless. The total damage in monetary terms will easily amount to tens of billions. Another notable thing about the quake and of all other quake disasters in this region is the way emergency services simply cannot cope. Every time a really big quake strikes, the story is the same. The geological basics that trigger these repeated devastations are now familiar to many. There is nothing that humans can do about it except take every precautionary measure possible and limit the damage. This is every bit as true for Nepal as it is for the rest of the sub-continent.

Kathmandu Valley is in a particularly vulnerable situation because of its geological past as a lake bottom. The soil in the valley bottom is still soft, especially towards the south. What this means is that earth tremor movements get amplified. Everyone knows what the great earthquake of l934 or Nabbesaal did to this country. Over 8,000 people were killed, about half of them in the valley, and it took months and years to get things back to normal. In the sixty odd years since then, the population of the valley has increased many folds, and so has the number of buildings. The way much of this construction has taken place is also a cause for concern. The government has yet to bring a building code into force although such a code does exist on paper. Experts, who extrapolate from the statistics of then and now and from other ground realities, estimate soberly that when an earthquake comparable to Nabbesaal strikes again (for it is only a matter of time) some 50 thousand lives can be expected to be lost. Apart from devastation of life and property, the days and weeks immediately after will be a mega-nightmare. Hospital resources will prove to be woefully inadequate, the utilities will break down, vital supplies that come in by road may get cut off. There may even be food riots. And there is the question of where to accommodate those rendered homeless. Old timers recall that in l934, Tundikhel turned into a tent city. Whatever open spaces we had have now mostly been gobbled up.

In view of this grim scenario, the authorities will be derelict in their duty if they do not promptly start going in for serious contingency planning with earthquakes specifically in mind. They could even come out with a white paper setting out just what steps are going to be taken when a disaster strikes.

They would also do well to introduce earthquake drills for the most vulnerable populations like school children. The authorities should also start working with NGOs and others concerned to line up the needed resources, financial and otherwise, in preparation for the big one.

Shukra Raj, an elderly martyr

By Ramesh C Arya

Every year, the nation observes Magh 16 (January 29 this year) as Shaheed Diwas ( Martyrs’ Day). It was exactly 60 years back that the four great sons of the nation achieved their martyrdom. These great souls are Shukra Raj (Shastri), Ganga Lal (Shrestha), Dharma Bhakta (Mathema) and Dashrath Chand (Thakuri) who fought against the autocratic rule of the Ranas.

Hetauda has the unique distinction of dedicating a park to the martyrs. The city has dedicated the park in the name of the four martyrs mentioned above and also senior armyman Bhakti Thapa. It may be quite interesting to note that the park has listed certain other names too, carved on the other side of a big rock. These are Bhim Dutta Pant, Biren Rajbansi, Captain Yagya Bahadur Thapa, Bhuvaneshwari Pathak, Durganand Jha and Prabhakar Poudel, Ratna Kumar Bantwa. They are the "younger martyrs" of post 1960 days.

Bhakti Thapa fought the forces of British India which attacked Nepal in the 1810's. That war finally ended with the Treaty of Sugauli. The four martyrs fought against autocratic Rana rule. The "younger martyrs" opposed King Mahendra and the regime that he started in 1960 and came to be known as the "dark days of the Panchayat system". Not much has been written about these younger ones. Neither is the list of martyrs exhaustive and acceptable to all political parties. So much so that one often wonders if this is not a right time for redefining the criteria for attaching the tag of martyr.

The cause for which martyrs struggle may vary with time. It may be for protecting the country from subjugation under foreign rule as Bhakti Thapa did. It may be for opposing an oppressive rule, as the four martyrs did. Or, it may be for taking over the power that brought down a government democratically elected. But should a person dying a natural or accidental death, whatever noble cause he or she has been committed to, be called a martyr also after death? This question should be examined in the context of the Shaheed Park at Hetauda which also features a statue larger than that of the martyrs mentioned in the foregoing paragraph. The person so depicted was, without doubt, the most dynamic leader of the immediate past.

Back to Martyrs week again! The occasion has its roots in the bloody week of Magh 1997 Bikram Sambat (January 1941) when the Rana rulers executed the four great sons of the soil. Shukra Raj Joshi "Shastry" was the first one to be executed, on Magh 10. He was 48. His 82-year old father Madhav Raj came up and saluted the hanging body of his martyr son and spoke out in Hindi, "Thank you, my son. You have added glory not only to the name of your parents but also to that of the country. A son should be like you". Prior to this incidence, Madhav Raj had been active in the mission of awakening the people, during the rule of Prime Minister Chandra Shamsher. He was known as the Sabaka Guru (‘Everybody’s Teacher).

After the execution the family of Shukra Raj asked the authorities for his dead body for carrying out the customary rituals. But the police refused. "Let the one who killed him do the rituals". With these strong words, the family then shunned the body. It was only in the evening that the police came searching for them and forced Shukra Raj's nephew Prayag Raj to perform the rites. Madhav Raj himself was spared as he had adopted Sanyas a few months earlier and hence could not be considered a part of the family. The historic tree where the martyr was hanged still stands at Pachali, by the Tripureshwor-Pachali Road

Shukra Raj had been imprisoned for 26 months. Within a week of his imprisonment, his wife Menaka gave birth to a girl child, but she fell ill and died four days later. The Ranas had denied Menaka her wish to see her husband for the last time. The girl child died the same day.

On Magh 7, a special court was convened in Singh Durbar in the presence of His Majesty King Tribhuvan and the British Resident. Among several charges brought against Shukra Raj, one was the misuse of Rs 1,500 he had received as an award from the Ranas for printing the second half of a philosophical book, Brahma Sutrankar Bhashya, that had just been released.

While he was being charged in the presence of Prime Minister Juddha Shamsher, Shukra Raj Shastri quoted from the Manu Smriti asking about the penalty it prescribed for an administration that was irresponsible towards its duty. Before he could utter another verse, the Prime Minister order his beating. Hari Krishna Shrestha, a senior Praja Parishad politician who was among the prisoners, recalls King Tribhuvan commenting that the "punishment" should be moderate.

The court adjourned for some time. King Tribhuvan left for Narayanhity and the Prime Minister for his residence at Balaju. Shukra Raj was taken to the Central Jail. The court resumed under the chairmanship of Commander-in-chief Padma Shamsher. The verdict was announced in the absence of the prisoner. The martyr was executed only three days after the verdict was announced in absentia.

In an earlier judgement, Shukra Raj was jailed for six years. Under that verdict, he would have been released in 2001 Bikram Sambat. The death sentence was given on another charge. For a prisoner already indicted under one charge, such a judgement, by itself, was contradictory.

The same tribunal also pronounced death sentences for "Kharidar Dharma Bhakta Mathema of Jorganesh, Dashrath Chand Thakuri of Baitadi and Ganga Lal Shrestha of Pyafal". They achieved their martyrdom in that order within the week.

Congress jamboree

By Anuj Mishra

The Lake City of Pokhara was in a festive mood this past week. Congress party men flocked to this tourist destination in full force for yet another political jamboree. The political parties in Nepal try to prove themselves more democratic and more people-oriented whenever so-called national conventions come around. They compete in publicity and propaganda to show that they are the ultimate champions of democracy and are truly committed to Nepal’s development. No other political party uses rhetoric that it is the most democratic so gaudily than does the Nepali Congress. Yet, this is the very party which revolves around an acute personality cult and is effectively run as a consanguineous affair of the Koirala clan. And it is very clear from our experience with the Congress during these ten years of democracy that this party wants to be in power for the sake of being in power. The substance of democratic governance is not there. There is no vision and agenda for development. There’s no vision for the future. Very simply they are corrupt and incompetent job-holders.

It has become almost useless to urge or even expect the NC to grow out of the stranglehold of the Koirala clan and cronies. The late BP Koirala was indeed a great political personality of Nepal and deserves due credit for his role in acquainting the then feudal Nepal with democratic ideals. But it’s a pity that his own family has made a mockery of democratic norms and institutions. And worst still, for some undemocratic motives they have held hostage an entire political organization. The name Congress has become hostage to the family called Koirala. Cousins, in-laws, nieces, nephews and new additions, daughters and sons hold the Congress party in an iron fist. One need not go further than have a look at newspaper pictures showing the CWC (Central Working Committee) meeting of the Congress. There’s party president Girija Prasad Koirala presiding over the meeting, being facilitated by cousin and party General Secretary Sushil Koirala and attended to by sister-in-law Nona Koirala, niece Shailaja Acharya, and half a dozen close relatives. Is this party the most democratic as it claims to be in electing only five of its 37 central members from the convention? (Until this convention, the party president nominated the rest. The party recently changed its statute to elect 18 members from the convention). The Congress convention is a mere drama to give yet another formality to the continuous consolidation of Congress leadership by the Koirala family. We cannot entirely blame all the Congress folks for this dismal state of their party. There are still many dedicated and committed personalities of high intellect within the Congress party. But the party has been wrenched from them through the deliberate and cryptic design of the Koirala cousins. And their overpowering hold in the party is such that nobody, not even the likes of Krishna Prasad Bhattarai or Sher Bahadur Deuba, could ever be able to wrest it away from them and develop an independent course for the party. Their feeble support within the party organization makes it virtually impossible for them to ever claim the party leadership. The other alternative, to split away from the party and start a "baby congress", is equally futile. The general resentment at our failed political stability and development has made us apprehensive about any group claiming political power. We are afraid that they would just add to the continuity of the present state of apathy and chaos. What people really want is a respite from this appalling state of the nation, where governance has been a total failure. It has failed to deliver and has remained highly regressive. People are looking for a fresh start, clear vision and a plausible agenda from any group which wishes to be in power.

The NC is steadily loosing its relevance in terms of real governance and politics. It has been widely felt that there is a dire need for intellectuals and more academicians who understand the real meaning of governance, to face the challenge and the expectations of frustrated masses and form a formidable alternative to this archaic and fast degenerating party. The real majority of people who would not like to ascribe to either the CPN (UML)’s confusion-laden politics or the crypto fascists ex-Panchas are stuck with the Congress by default.

Politics is a matter of choice, calling and ambition. The sad note of Nepali politics is, it’s been abused by people who are in politics out of mere ambition to gain power and remain in power at the cost be national degradation. Those who are in politics should know that in a democracy, it's ultimately the people who hold the ultimate card for seating and unseating politicians from power. Despite the fact that those in power may have all the state machinery at their disposal to guard their fortresses, it becomes a sand castle when people withdraw their support. The mighty Soviet Union collapsed when the masses thwarted the very reason for which it was instituted. And recently, the Philippines President was forced to resign even when he had the Senate virtually acquitting him on corruption charges. And how could we forget the collapse of the Panchayat system on our own soil? The ten-year-long experiment with our democracy has not been totally futile either, it has at least unmasked the incompetence of the first generation of so-called democrats. Maybe they were themselves experimenting too! But from this grand experiment we certainly know of the eminent irrelevance of many of them and most of them.

Religiously unreligious

By Kuldip Nayar

Pakistan’s reaction to India’s unilateral ceasefire is churlish. Once again there is an undue haste for a tripartite conference. This is an exercise which Islamabad has gone over before. It still has not understood its futility.

India cannot solve the Kashmir problem without Pakistan. If it could, it would have. This is the reason why Jawaharlal Nehru sent Sheikh Abdullah to meet General Ayub in 1964. And this is the reason why both the Shimla Agreement (1972) and the Lahore Declaration (1999) said that the two countries will find "a joint settlement of Jammu and Kashmir."

Pakistan’s reiteration of its demand for a tripartite conference is nothing sort of putting the cart before the horse. There has to be cessation of violence.

Only a peaceful atmosphere can prepare the ground. How is a meaningful dialogue possible after the Laskar-e-Toiba’s threat to the life of India’s Prime Minister? The outfit is operating from Pakistan. Jihad, presently less mentioned by General Pervez Musharraf, is the Laskar’s war cry. Such a frenzy by fundamentalists can destroy any effort at peace.

By extending the ceasefire _ third in a row _ Atal Behari Vajpayee has once again indicated his resolve to solve the problems between the two countries through peace, not war. I wish Musharraf had also reciprocated the gesture by stopping the supply of arms and giving of refuge to militants. He should realise that patience in India is wearing thin.

The ceasefire does not mean that one country has to accept the viewpoint of the other. It only means that both want to give peace a chance. There is no other option. Pakistan has to rein in the jihadis on its soil. If Musharraf can declare a ceasefire on the Line of Control (LoC), what stops him from having it all over? He had agreed to such a proposition six months ago during a conversation with me. If that were to happen, I can visualise a meeting between India and Pakistan at the highest level. What I cannot visualise is how the two will sort out the Kashmir problem unless one of them or both change their outlook.

True, Jammu and Kashmir is a Muslim majority state. But that does not give Pakistan the legitimacy to demand it. Had the state gone to Pakistan when India was partitioned on the basis of the two-nation theory, the latter would have taken it in its stride. Now, after 53 years of independence, how can it negate the ethos of the freedom struggle _ a secular polity? What does it do to the Hindutva forces which will be emboldened in efforts to convert India into a Hindu Rashtra?

Leave aside Hari Singh, the Hindu ruler, who signed the state’s instrument of accession to India. Sheikh Abdullah, the state’s most popular leader at that time, too, chose to align himself with New Delhi. A staunch follower of Islam as the Sheikh was, he saw the reflection of Kashmiryat in India’s pluralism. The ties between New Delhi and Srinagar are that of secularism.

I am amazed to read in an interview by Syed Ali Shah Gillani, a prominent leader of the All Party Hurriyat Conference that there is "no place for secular parties in Kashmir." He says that "the present struggle (in the Valley) is part of Islam and cannot be separated from religion." Gillani has, in fact, maligned the 12-year-old movement, which is meant to register Kashmir’s entity and its demand for autonomy. He is also a wrong person to represent the Kashmiris. But if the Hurriyat has selected him to go to Pakistan, New Delhi should not come in the way. The purpose of the Hurriyat delegation is to persuade the militants to stop firing, not to negotiate any settlement between India and Pakistan.

Since Islamabad likes Gillani, one wonders whether it shares his views as well. If so, it is living in a make-belief world. India will never accept the two-nation theory. Most Indians did not even contribute to it when the subcontinent was divided on that basis. The 130 million Muslims in India are part and parcel of the same nation. In any case, New Delhi cannot afford to settle the Kashmir issue on such a theory because its own unity and integrity will become a question mark. There has to be another formula.

The demand by Hindu fundamentalists is precisely the reverse of what Gillani and the like-minded in Pakistan cherish. They are far more powerful today than they were a decade ago. If religion were to determine the future of Kashmir, it would be disastrous for us. How do we stop Hindu fanatics from going to town with the argument that, even after 53 years of independence, the Muslim majority areas in Jammu and Kashmir want to join Pakistan because it is an Islamic country? I can visualise the horrors of partition repeating themselves. Once again the wounds would be reopened.

Whatever India has been able to do, probably not much, to inculcate the spirit of secularism among people will come to nought. We are already weak and exposed. We cannot jeopardise our composite culture by accepting the principle of separateness.

Gillani’s interview has made it clear to me why he was opposed to the return of Kashmiri pandits to their homes until there was an overall settlement of Kashmir. Gillani believes in a theocratic state, Kashmir without the Kashmiriyat. He is no different from the RSS which too believes in a state based on religion.

In fact, when the RSS talks about trifurcation of the state into the Muslim majority valley, the Hindu majority Jammu and the Buddhist majority Ladakh, it traslates the sentiments of Gillani. Why have the two not made a joint front remains a mystery to me because there is hardly any difference in their thinking.

Many in Pakistan have reminded me of Jawaharlal Nehru’s promise to hold a plebiscite in the state after things had settled down. So many new factors have come into play since. For example, the induction of US arms in Pakistan in 1954 when it became America’s ally during the cold war, changed the balance in the sub-continent. In any case, a plebiscite is bound to take a religious turn. It would be the Quran versus the Gita, as happened during the referendum held in the North West Frontier Province to decide after partition whether it should go to India or Pakistan. New Delhi cannot risk a proposition which has religious overtones.

It is a pity that Pakistan has gone away from the principles which its founder had enunciated after its creation. I was still in my home town, Sialkot, when Mohammad Ali Jinnah said on August 13, 1947: You ceased to be Muslims and Hindus, not in the religious sense but otherwise. You were now either Pakistanis or Indians. This was indeed a secular thinking. Had he lived, he would have established in Pakistan a secular, democratic society. Maybe, the migrants would have returned to their homes as they had imagined they would do after the disturbances had subsided. Maybe, fundamentalists on both sides would have had no opportunity to exploit the religious sentiments.

Still the fact is that neither Jinnah in Pakistan, nor Gandhi in India could stop parts of the subcontinent from going up in flames. Killing and looting in the name of religion went on for days without any check. Nearly one million were killed and 20 million were uprooted from their homes in the two countries. Whatever the solution to Jammu and Kashmir and the most democratic however long it might take, India, for one, can never agree to divide the state on the basis of religion.

The sooner the likes of Gillani in Kashmir and in Pakistan realise this, the better it will be for them. Religion strengthens faith in the principle of accommodation, not separation. In the moment of prayer, every man is at his best.