A ray of hope

The announcement of a truce by the government and the Maoist insurgents is surely a ray of hope for the return of peace to a once peaceful country. The newly appointed prime minister and the Maoist leadership have rightly taken a statesman-like approach, and if this approach were taken a long time ago, it would have prevented the loss of innocent lives. When it comes to the crunch, neither the police nor the Maoists have, in fact, killed anyone that really matters. It is the innocent lives- be they of the police or the Maoists- that have been lost and for no fault of their own. The present mutually announced truce will end the virtually endless killings of Nepalese citizens that took place so frequently in the past several months. This is to be welcomed as a beginning of the restoration of peace in the country. But it must be realised by all that this is merely the beginning. There can be some delay on the two sides – the government and the Maoists – sitting around a negotiating table. The first point raised by the Maoists is the disclosure of the whereabouts of all missing Maoists. The government may or may not have information of all of them. Then there is the question of release of all imprisoned insurgents. The Maoists have promised to release all abducted persons, including policemen. In short, the modalities are yet to be worked out. Will it be government-Maoist talks or all-party-Maoist talks? Or, is there a chance among the mainstream political parties to come to a consensus on the talks with the Maoists? Should intermediaries be used? These have to be worked out. Then there are the basic questions to be tackled like the Maoists demand for a constituent assembly to draft a new constitution which might or might not mean the abolition of the present system that encompasses constitutional monarchy and parliamentary system of democracy. This will depend on who are elected to the constituent assembly, if ever such a situation should come to pass. What is important at this stage is that the Maoists seem to have shown a genuine desire for   talks notwithstanding their needless and senseless massacr   of 17 policemen in Bajura on Sunday and five more in Tehrathum aturday/Sunday.

The government, led by Sher Bahadur Deuba, has shown how resilient it can be, and had Monday afternoon directed all its security forces to cease operations against the Maoists. The two sides are, therefore, showing signs for genuine dialogue, and as in all dialogues, the Maoists must be prepared to give away something as indeed must the government and other political parties since the Maoists are talking of values quite alien to the present system. The Maoists have raised some really relevant points like better education in public schools and a proper scrutiny, not mere self-declaration of property amassed by political leaders and bureaucrats in the post-1990 period. These demands may not please the present band of political leaders no matter to which hue they belong, but this is something that the people will whole heartedly support if the Deuba government, without falling prey to vested interests, dares to do it. For if there is good governance and honest political leaders, who needs Maoists? It will, therefore, be a pity, if the ray of hope that emerged Monday as truce in violence was announced is allowed for any reason to  be eclipsed.

Agra summit and South Asia

By Mohan Lohani

The Indo-Pak summit which was held in the Agra town of India for two days (July 14-16) attracted world attention. Considering the long-drawn hostility between India and Pakistan since the Partition of 1947, the summit raised high expectations, but failed to produce a final declaration. Both sides, however, have described the talks as inconclusive and are determined to pursue the process of dialogue. Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee has accepted the invitation of Gen Pervez Musharraf, President of Pakistan, to pay a return visit to Pakistan on a mutually convenient date. The Indian opposition was reportedly critical of the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government of Mr Vajpayee for convening the summit without adequate preparation or homework, while Pakistan has taken the position that the Agra meeting, although inconclusive, did not fail.

The sticking point in a declaration that could not be adopted at the eleventh hour was Pakistan’s stand that the normalisation of ties between India and Pakistan be linked to progress on the question of Kashmir which remains divided and is claimed by both. While India insisted on the composite dialogue which implied discussion of all issues including Kashmir at the summit, Kashmir to Pakistan was the core issue which had to receive priority attention and had to be tackled ahead of other issues such as trade, peace and security, drugs and narcotics, nuclear safeguards and exchange of visits at different levels of both sides.

At a breakfast meeting with the Indian media during the summit which was telecast live in India and Pakistan, Gen Musharraf dismissed the Simla Agreement of 1972, the Lahore Declaration of 1999 and other confidence building measures (CMBs) as being irrelevant, since hundreds and thousands of Kashmiris were being killed in the Indian-controlled Kashmir. Indian authorities do not subscribe to this view, and have reiterated their stand that future Indo-Pak talks will continue to be governed by earlier agreements and not on the basis of understanding reached at the Agra summit. It may be recalled that the Simla Agreement calls for bilateral settlement of all disputes, while the February 1999 Lahore Declaration calls for negotiated settlement of all issues, including Kashmir, which has already caused two wars since the 1947 independence of   India and Pakistan.

During the last decade, shootouts between Islamic militants and security troops in different parts of the violence-torn northern Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir have become a common sight and a regular phenomenon. Innocent civilians have become victims of the cross fire between the security forces and militants seeking to separate Kashmir from India. India accuses Pakistan of arming, abetting and financing the activities of a host of Kashmiri separatist groups. Pakistan has denied this allegation while admitting that it has extended moral and political support to the separatist militants fighting for self-determination. 

The prolonged dispute over Kashmir which, according to Indian and Pakistani experts, has compounded the deep distrust and hostility between the two South Asian nations, has ominously loomed large on the horizon after both India and Pakistan conducted a series of nuclear tests in May 1998, raising fears of a nuclear war in South Asia. There was worldwide concern followed by tough economic sanctions against the emerging nuclear powers of South Asia. Both India and Pakistan which have sought to justify their tests on grounds of national security are under pressure to sign the CTBT. On the other hand, all five non-nuclear small states in South Asia, have implicitly or explicitly, deplored the testing of nuclear weapons by India and Pakistan followed by test launching of missiles with nuclear weapon carrying capacity as threatening the security of the region.

In a book recently published by Nepal’s Institute of Foreign Affairs on Security in South Asia, most of the writers have viewed over nuclearisation of South Asia with a sense of anxiety and critically analysed this development with ominous implications for regional security. George Cooray, an international relations expert of Sri Lanka, agrees with Hiranya Lal Shrestha, a Nepalese expert, that Nepal, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka as South Asia’s non-nuclear states must come forward with a collective approach to make it clear that they want to denuclearise this part of the world no matter what India and Pakistan think in their national interest.

According to press reports, nuclear safety will figure high on the agenda of the next India-Pakistan summit. Pakistan has informed the world community that although it possesses nuclear arms technology, it continues to respect its previous position of not deploying nuclear warheads on its missiles. Despite the commitment of both sides to avoid conflict and confrontation by building confidence in the nuclear and conventional fields, the enrolment by India and Pakistan of nuclear weapons into their arsenals has caused regional and international worries that another confrontation between the two countries could deteriorate into a nuclear war. In other words, their deep mistrust of each other could accidentally trigger a nuclear exchange.

The fact that the leaders of India and Pakistan met and discussed all outstanding issues with candour has raised renewed expectations that the SAARC process unfortunately stalled since October
1999 will be revitalised and the eleventh SAARC summit will be rescheduled as host country Nepal has completed necessary preparations for this summit.

Ibrahim Hussain Zaki, who is a former SAARC Secretary General and currently Minister of Planning and National Development in the Maldives, has deplored the suspension of the SAARC process with a terse statement: "If SAARC has been dispatched to wilderness the process that began at Dhaka has drifted into darkness." Zaki argues that deadlock in the SAARC process is a loss more to the smaller states than the big powers which will continue to dominate the region as economic giants. It is, therefore, in the long term security interest of small states that the SAARC process should be resuscitated vigorously and without further delay.

On the Agra summit once again, given the decades-old tense relations between the two countries, it would be unrealistic to expect a dramatic breakthrough at one go. Now that the two major issues, namely, Kashmir and cross-border terrorism, have been identified, it is up to the leaders to resume the process of dialogue and hammer out an agreement acceptable to both. The people of South Asia desire peace, cooperation and good neighbourly relations and believe that there is no alternative to dialogue which will be hopefully structured for the next meeting with adequate homework on both sides. The past must be buried, and as the world has already stepped into the new century the leaders of the region must develop a new mindset to overcome their differences. In brief, a good beginning has been made at Agra. The Agra summit, despite cynical comments of extremists on both sides, has laid the foundation for future negotiations between the two countries. These negotiations must produce results, as the future of regional cooperation in South Asia, as Prof YN Khanal, a seasoned diplomat of Nepal, has rightly observed, hinges on the willingness of India and Pakistan to accommodate each other on a give and take basis.

SLC : Not the end

By Ritesh Shrestha

As I was walking on the road of the Metropolitan city, my eyes got suddenly distracted a chaotic scene on the pavement. A boy appeared as if he was in a big trouble, like a fish in a net. Later on, I found out that he was one of the desperate students snatching the newspaper from a salesman
for his SLC results.

A chilling sensation gripped me as I sat in front of my radio to lend ear to the breaking news of the SLC toppers. My blood ran wild and my battling lungs could no longer sustain me in front of the radio. "Sorry son you couldn’t make it to the board!"; so came the answer. I ordered everybody to get out of my room, and took solace in solitude.

Suddenly, a second phase of chilling sensation began. Knowing the efficiency of the examination controlling board, I began to doubt whether I had crossed the Iron Gate. At the next moment, I was trying to grab the lone newspaper that was available around. After a difficult hustle-tussle as in the rugby, the paper in my hand was nearly snatched away. Kudos, I won, but not that easily. I hurriedly surfed through the pages, and finally the game was over. There were no surprises for me. I resigned myself to the will of my fate.

Teenagers usually feel their life is a heavenly journey as any nursery rhyme goes, and they feel sure that the final outlook will be very pleasing and promising . But guys and gals, reality speaks a different language! You’re repeatedly told that SLC is an Iron gate; the biggest hurdle in one’s life. As far as my know-how tells me, it’s a gate but not the iron one; which actually holds mere significance in one’s later life. So don’t let your emotion run wild. "No more suicidal cases please!!"

SLC is just one of the innumerable barricades you have to come across in your life. You will be constantly meeting challenges, achievements and failure. Our country is such that even if you have the potential to succeed in a mission, you will not be allowed to do so, in one way or another. But failure should make one more mature and wiser. You cannot run away from reality, but you can take reality as you wish. And much depends on how graceful you are in defeat.

In our country anything can happen. A white chalk may write black. An illiterate person can become literate and millionaire overnight. It’s all because we still have faith in "second nation builders, 2046".

School education and community participation

By Dr Hridaya Bajracharya

What is gaining momentum in the current circumstances is the development of private schools. More and more private schools have come up with better physical outlook and rigours to make the students pass in the annual examinations with high scores. Most of the public schools are reeling under the influence of various groups, including politicians, teacher unions and bureaucracy, making them extremely difficult to keep up their earlier status. Because of this situation, parents who can afford are sending their children to private schools, and the trend is increasing. Although all private schools cannot be put under the same category, some of them are involved in commercialisation. There is still no effective provision for bringing private schools under standard regulations.

Through all these developments, the aspiration of the majority of people as well as the need identified by many commission reports since 1956 is the development of community based schools.

Given the historical trend and the current reality, there are many challenges for fulfilling national commitments. The commitments to free school education, equity in school access and quality education are needed.

In the current situation, if the government were to commit itself to adding even one teacher per school and provide a peon and some additional administrative expenditure over and above the current financial commitment, the cost would increase by Rs 6,128 million. On top of this, the government is liable for the recent increase in salary which amounts to about Rs 9,300 million. The question is how to cope with the extra financial need and sustain it for years to come? If the central management of the government is to take on this responsibility there will be need to raise more revenue which means more taxes in the public system. Given the current reality of lack of good monitoring and supervision, will not centralize financial management bring more inefficiency?

In terms of a more democratic perception of decentralized management and local self governance, there is a higher scope for resource mobilization and management at the local level. However, in the present context what could be the motivation for seriousness and commitment in community participation? The question remains difficult to answer in the present situation where people are free and responsible for their own good but without adequate resources and support to achieve on their own. The difficulty gets compounded by the fact that the majority of the people live in rural communities, that most of the adults in the rural areas are illiterate and that they do not have experience of other modern development activities. Besides, there is a lack of a monetized economy in the rural areas to support a modern schooling system. The challenge is therefore to energize the local bodies and communities and mobilize them to achieve better school education, to operationalize education as a community effort rather than an individualized effort like private initiatives or centralized government effort.

Recently, an analysis by BPEP was prepared to generate a future direction for basic and primary education development. A perspective plan for secondary level education has already been developed and higher level education is being restructured and developed with long-term future perspectives. The future development plans have laid emphasis on quality education by improving the mode of programme implementation, supervision, monitoring and evaluation. The concept of community participation and contribution to education are emphasised in order to foster people’s responsible participation to improve the quality of and finance in education. These developments show the commitment of the government to changing at the conceptual level. But how to turn these concepts into reality remains a major challenge.

The most important prerequisites for meeting such challenges are changes in the perspectives and attitude of the people, to overcome the inertia of the past and to move to a new direction. The government system and mechanism should be more transparent, simple and people friendly. Communities and individuals should come forward to take ownership of the schools and use them judiciously.

Already, several community based organizations and NGOs are now coming forward in various fields, including education, to mobilise people and help them in the development process. This includes making people aware of their rights and responsibilities. There are now organisations such as the Mothers' Groups, Human Rights Groups, Organisations for Oppressed Communities and local youth clubs. These organisations are taking new initiatives in awareness building programmes, as well as in other life related skill training and services in areas like health, family planning and fund raising. In some areas, mother groups have taken initiative in undertaking simple monitoring activities such as checking teacher regularities, with a very encouraging impact on the school environment. These emerging groups have the potential for taking collective ownership of the schools along with the other concerned bodies. In view of these new possibilities and provisions, the following proposition is presented here to seek an answer to this question:

From a structural point of view, there are now several organisations such as the Village Development Committees, NGOs and Community Based Organisation (CBOs) and these should be collectively brought to represent the local community and given responsibility and authority for education development and management. New efforts are needed for making school a community centre, owned and managed by the community not only for the education of children but also to use it as a reading centre, a forum for community discussion, a resource centre for development activities and a centre for health and physical fitness. To some extent, the potential of a school as a community centre had been demonstrated in the early periods of educational development. (Concluded)