One-sided CWC : Whim or necessity ?

By Chiranjibi Kafle

The latest induction of five loyals into the Central Working Committee by NC president Girija Prasad Koirala has almost completed the long-awaited fill up of the vacant seats in the party’s top executive body. However, criticism is mounting against him for not respecting the dissenting groups in the party.

The September 25 induction of five new figures (viz, Ram Krishna Tamrakar, Dil Bahadur Gharti, Sunil Bhandari, Farmulla Mansur and Purna Kumar Sherma), fills 36 out of the 37 CWC berths. The last fill up, which was done in May, just a few days before the unfortunate Narayanhity massacre of June 1, had also reflected Koirala’s ‘unilateral’ choices. Blessed with CWC berths at that time were Chakra Prasad Bastola, Dr Ram Sharan Mahat, Dr Ram Baran Yadav (all ministers in the erstwhile Koirala cabinet), Lila Koirala, KB Gurung, Laxman Ghimire, Gopal Pahadi and Binay Dhwaj Chand.

That Koirala had made such a move in order to consolidate his loosening grip over the party, even as he was head of the government, was obvious and understandable at the time. But that he did not think it necessary to give opponents in the party any care, even as he had already lost his seat in Singha Durbar, indicates that the NC ironman was more than merely disenchanted with the manoeuvring of those who managed to dislodge him from the office of prime minister.

Notwithstanding the criticisms and arguments that there could have been better choosing, Koirala in his capacity as party president has given ‘his CWC’ the shape he wanted. And although he risks the possibility of being branded self-righteous in matters of decision-making, there are some grounds on which one could justify his move.

First and foremost, there can be no doubt that the Nepali Congress has been rife with in-house dissidence for a long time now. Irrespective of whichever camp is in power, attempts have been made to topple the government whenever opportunity availed. This is in fact the most convincing of all arguments why people have to question the so called "healthy parliamentary practice" often touted by most Kangressi leaders. Never did Koirala receive genuine cooperation from dissidents in the party in matters of running the government. And the trend dates back to right after the first general elections (1991) following the restoration of democracy. And the same has been the case with other prime ministers from the Nepali Congress. The fate of Bhattarai and of Deuba in his earlier term as prime ministers is fresh in everyone’s memory.

Notably, with Kishunji’s unfortunate defeat in the 1991 election, there was none at the time to stake a reasonable claim vis-a-vis Koirala to the post of prime minister. Yet, Koirala was made to suffer through sheer dissidence. Subsequently, the party was defeated in the snap poll that followed barely three years later. And even after emerging victorious in the 1999 polls, the NC hardly seems to have achieved anything other than address the still unquenched thirst for revenge among its members against each other. This is no exaggeration.

The next point is that the so-called dissidence within the Nepali Congress is hardly ever based on any clearly defined intellectual agenda. Democratic socialism, the dream of the late B P Koirala, liberal market-based economy, rural development and a few other similar buzzwords are the party’s macro policies. And its micro programmes are anything but spectacular, although it must be stated that the recently announced land reform package had tried to crack some tough nuts. As such, the utility of, or the rationale behind, the prevailing ‘dissidence’ (irrespective of camps) can be best explained
by the dissidents themselves. But unfortunately, none seems to be aptly prepared for that.

Nevertheless, dissidence continues unabated in the party. Koirala’s camp is the dissident in the present government, and Deuba’s camp the dissident in the party. And there seems to be no truce between these two. Immediately after Koirala announced the names of his deputies on the CWC, Prime Minister Deuba is reportedly consulting seriously with his colleagues to expand the cabinet in a way that might counter Koirala’s move to unilaterally sweep virtually all the CWC berths. In case he does so, I think it would be wise for Koirala to cooperate with him, just as Deuba would do well to cooperate with Koirala in party affairs. For, when a person is chosen to undertake some responsibility, full fledged cooperation must be extended by all members of a party (setting aside all minor differences) to help him carry out his responsibilities in the way he would like.

After all, Koirala is the elected head of the party. So he must be allowed to work as per his choice and, of course, within the given statutory norms. In the same way, Deuba was elected by the party to be the head of the government. So he must also receive full cooperation from the party to form this team and run governance, and this also within the statutory norms and provisions.

Only such a culture can root out evils like unending dissidence and lack of trust among members of the same family. And the tendency to sideline others will gradually disappear for good.

This, however, would not deprive one of a fair opportunity to canvass one’s own intra-party political agenda. And dissidence may also win a programme-based victory in the long run. But voting for someone to lead, and yet defying his leadership without even waiting to see the results he may bring about is surely no trait of a democratic culture. So now that Koirala has ascertained a firm grip over the party (and, mind you, it is a grip not over the entire party but only over the top executive body), it would be wiser for all to wait and see whether his one-minded CWC could really work effectively for the overall strength of the oldest party.

Musahar in the shadows

By Ramesh Thapa

Nepal is a multi-ethnic, multi-cultural and multi-religious country. After the dawn of democracy in Nepal, the multiplicity of languages began to come to notice at the national level. Some minor communities placed their introductions through the national communications media. In this golden time, some communities in eastern Nepal have neither projected their introductions nor attempted to do so. Among them are the Musahar.

The Musahars inhabit some parts of eastern Nepal, especially Sunsari. They do not inhabit the hilly districts. They are economically poor so they can’t afford gold ornaments. They wear brass or aluminium instead of gold. The women wear blouse and dhoti, and the men wear simple cotton.

They do not have their own language or script although they are proud of their original identity as Satar, Bantur, Jhangad, Rajbhot, Mahato and Yadav. They know well how to speak Nepali. They still live in Morang, Sunsari, Saptari, Siraha, Dhanusa and Mahottari districts.

All over Nepal they are comparatively the poorest of communities. They own not a single piece of land except for one or two families. They are not educated and they live together. The women work as coolies and the men dig the earth. When they can’t find earth digging work they work in the fields and as potters also. They are experts at earth cutting.

The Musahars are the poorest people, but their culture is not behind that of the Hindus. Their wedding system is different from other communities. They pray only to God. If both boy and girl have the same Kool Devata, they can’t marry each other. First of all if they would like to talk marriage, the boy’s side goes to see the girl. If the boy likes the girl, the other side goes to see the boy. The boy’s side gives the girl some presents, which are for eating. Similarly, the girl’s side offers the boy’s side something to eat as a present. In this way the marriage date is fixed. The boy’s side goes to girl to take her away. They do not have their own Pandit. So they regard the Maithali Brahmins as Pandits. They often put on yellow mufflers and the girls wear red saris on the wedding day.

When a baby is born in a Musahar family, an old woman of the same community cuts the sal nal, it is the custom of the Musahar. The old woman gets some gifts from the baby’s family. On the sixth day, they clean (chokhayaune) the baby’s house. The sister of the house must clean up the house, not others. They do not touch (chhuwachhut) for five days. On the sixth day, they do chhaiti. The same day they offer sugarcane and ginger to God. They also give these materials to the baby’s mother. Baby is often given goat milk, besides mother’s milk. The baby’s mother lives in a separate house for twelve days. Only then Musahar society accept the mother fully.

Musahars cremate their dead body according to Hindu culture. If they have no money, they bury their dead. But children, if they die are not cremated. After returning from the funeral, they can’t enter their houses until they fulfil some rites. They distribute some food on the leaves of bananas. On the thirteenth day, they distribute some food to relatives. At that time, Telly Brahmins read the Sradha.

In reality, Musahars are not Hindus, so they don’t celebrate the festivals of Dashain and Tihar. They celebrate other festivals. Besides the Seruwa Mela, they worship Durga, Surseth, Kali Kamala, Sankhar, and Masan. They have a special puja in the month of Magh. They worship both man and woman combined. But only men sing at weddings.

They don’t know even now that there is a democratic system in the country. Medium in height, thin of body and with attractive nature, the Musahars are really poor. They have no land. They build their huts on others’ land.

History of warfare

By Bikash Sangraula

The Hyksos invasion of Egypt in 2160 BC was carried out with a troop mounted on horses and armed with the most primitive form of warfare technology: bows, spears and sharp-edged stones and swords. This is the first human war recorded in the annals of history, and its philosophy was simple: the more agile and sizeable your troop, the higher your chances of thrashing the enemy. Much of the warfare described in the Hindu epics was carried out with a similar philosophy and technology. The ape-warriors led by Hanuman in the Ramayana and the imperial warriors of the Mahabharata have been depicted by the creators of these epics as using the same primitive warfare technology. While the use of elephants in warfare was in fashion during the times, when these epics were written,
this wisdom dawned on the West only in 280 BC.

With human insecurity as the focal motivation, humankind continued to search for means of immunity and more reliable weaponry. In the civilization of sporadic human settlements of wooden huts, setting fire on whole villages was a highly popular and effective way of wiping out the enemy population. Owing much to the fear of being burnt by sly outsiders and less to artistic instincts, the Egyptians made an important move in 926 AD by replacing wood with stones as building materials. However, this was only a small and insignificant achievement.

The search of physical security is probably the most palpable undercurrent that flows through human history. While in the earlier times, it was more obvious, the modern world is much ingenious in masking this legacy with human imagination. The application of any innovation has been most extensive in the field of warfare. It takes very little effort to realize that if we are to measure the advance of technology in this planet, the easiest scale is the degree to which our warfare has achieved sophistication.

This Chinese developed gunpowder in 850 AD. This discovery was to have major implications in human warfare. It was gradually realized that a mechanical instrument, that could cause a fusion in the gunpowder, would radically change the odds of war. While pistols and rifles became major weapons in wars that followed, a more revolutionary invention occurred much later. During the American civil war, Richard J Gattling invented the first hand driven machine gun in 1862 AD. And less than five years later, Sir Alfred Nobel invented dynamite. These inventions shifted the philosophy of warfare from having a bigger and fitter militant troops to having more weapons. The nineteenth century saw another important invention in the form of submarines that could extensively operate in open waters. Simon Lake designed this submarine called the Argonaut in 1897.

Thus the nineteenth century made people capable of engaging in warfare both in land and water. However, the azure sky continued to question our technological competence. The Wright Brothers replied to this challenge by conducting the first human flight in 1903. Similarly, the first parachute descent from aircraft happened in 1912. While all these technological advancements were taking place at a remarkable pace, the first Great War broke in 1914. This was a war of extensive use of automatic weapons, trench warfare and chemical weapons.

Nearly a decade before this war, Albert Einstein developed the special theory of relativity. In 1932, Cockroft and Walton split atoms, and nuclear fission was discovered in 1938. With growing aggression of Hitler-led Nazi extremism, the fears of Germans leading in the field of nuclear technology became only too strong. In response to this fear and to the letter from Einstein outlining the potential of nuclear energy, the then US President Roosevelt decided on the famous Manhattan project which was to produce the most destructive weapons humankind has ever developed.

In 1939, the second Great War broke. Air warfare became the most effective means of destroying enemy bases. In 1944, German V-2 rockets bombed cities in England. And in 1945 the first atom bombs were detonated first at Alamogordo, then over Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan. The effect of the atomic bombing stunned the world. It not only mocked at the fallacy of technological rat race, but also revolutionized the concept of warfare. Now, any renegade state can hope to terrorize the world by owing just a few weapons of mass destruction.

The late twentieth century saw the emergence of numerous nuclear states. More and more powerful atomic and biological weapons were manufactured. The twentieth century barely managed to escape the spectre of nuclear warfare.

The future of human settlement

By Sameer P Shrestha

World Habitat Day is an occasion to reflect on the state of the environment in which we live. It is an observance that draws attention to the plight of the nearly one billion people around the world who either are homeless or have inadequate shelter, without access to electricity, clean water or sanitation - a majority of whom live in the developing world.

At the second United Nations Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat), held in Istanbul, the world’s governments committed themselves to a detailed Plan of Action to realise economic and social development and environmental sustainability in the urbanised world of the twenty first century. This Plan of Action known as the Habitat Agenda, offers a positive vision of sustainable human settlements - where all have adequate shelter, a healthy and safe environment, basic services
and productive and freely chosen employment.

Habitat II focused not only on problems but on solutions. Hundreds of communities and cities, in developed and developing countries alike, demonstrated concrete solutions to social, economic and environmental problems. They showed that creating sustainable human settlements requires a cooperative effort on the part of all members of society. Governments cannot do it alone, cities cannot do it alone. The job requires a wide range of actors, including non governmental organisations and city residents.

There are efforts all over the world which promote housing for the poor. They are the beacon of hope that decent shelter is indeed possible for all. The Human Settlement Sector is as varied and complex as the physical places where people congregate in continuous social and economic interaction.

In Nepal, the Ministry of Housing and Physical Planning has formulated a National Shelter Policy covering housing units both in the urban as well as in rural areas over the next 15 years. According to the National Shelter Policy, 2.5 million additional housing units will be required over the next fifteen years of which 17 percent will be required for the urban areas. During the period, it is felt, 732 thousand houses will have to be renovated, out of which 60 thousand are located in urban areas.

The Shelter Policy has been formulated with a view to making proper arrangements and creating a favourable atmosphere, as mentioned in the Constitution of 1990, in order to fulfil the need of dwelling units in the form of a basic need of the entire people.

It has been mentioned in the Shelter Policy that at present there are three million dwelling units in Nepal. Out of these, 2.7 million dwelling units are in urban areas. The main criterion for designating a municipality is that it has at least 20,000 people. Some municipalities are made up of an extensive rural area, surrounding a small urban core of a few thousand. Thirteen new municipalities have been established since 1991. In Nepal, the municipality is governed by the Municipality Act, 1992. The government may describe any urban area within the Kingdom of Nepal which has a population of at least 20,000 and possesses electricity, road, water supply and communications arrangements, as a municipal area and prescribe the boundaries on four sides.

In Nepal, and in Kathmandu Municipality itself, a lot of commendable work is being done with the help of bilateral and multilateral donor countries and agencies. In order to reach the fruits of development and environmental conservation to the people, participation is needed at the grassroot level- particularly at the Village Development Council and District Development Council level.

Kathmandu was declared a metropolitan city, just seventy four years after becoming a municipality. Naturally, this adds new responsibilities to a city that is constrained for resources, has a booming population and also faces environmental and sanitation problems. At this stage, its residents are still unsure how the change in status will affect Kathmandu’s future, and if the metropolis is ready to take up the challenge.

There have been several urban planning studies. Despite the effort in planning, some authors commented that little has been implemented. This reflects the fundamental nature of problems that are not easily tackled, as well as the existence of other priorities. An extensive reform of urban infrastructure and institutions was recommended, but in preparation for actual implementation these recommendations were whittled down to core set objectives which can be more readily realised.

The urban centres of Kathmandu Valley have been economically and politically important for hundreds of years. The Kathmandu Metropolitan and Lalitpur Sub-metropolitan areas constitutes 45 percent of the total urban population. This remains the key economic and administrative centre of the country, and is expected to grow at about 4 percent per year in the coming 10 to 20 years.

Under the 1991 Municipality Act, the government placed the Municipalities of Lalitpur, Pokhara and Biratnagar in the category of Sub-Metropolitan Municipalities. The Act defined a sub-metropolitan municipality as one with a population of at least 100,000, an annual income of at least Rs 2 million, and amenities such as electricity, roads, drinking water and communication.