Time To Go For
Multi-Track Diplomacy

By Krishna Chandra Chalisey

THOUGH many people consider diplomacy as a luxury business, it is a in reality a tough and arduous job. Generally speaking, diplomacy is conduction of bilateral and multilateral relationship between the states. A diplomat represents a country for a particular country or international forum and organisations. His/her primary role is to project the country’s image and position and advocate for the national interest. Of course, mutual and collective interest of the states also come under the purview of diplomacy.

Influence

In the present narrowed and globalised world village, promotion of individual interest alone is impossible as the states are so closely interrelated. The diplomatic representatives of rich, prosperous and industrialised countries influence the cosmopolitan gatherings to promote their own strategic interests. For a smaller and weaker country like Nepal, lobbying and advocacy for broader and common interest is limited only in paper. The influence is very marginal. Everywhere the influence of money and power is strongly felt while adopting the policies, designing the programmes and charting out the courses of actions. Key and leading posts of the global organisations are also captured by the rich and developed countries. No one global organisation is free from dominating influence of the powerful and rich countries. These days Japan as an economic power is trying to make global influence and attaining the key posts. The same trend is seen in the humanitarian organisations like the International Red Cross Society.

The focus of global diplomacy, it seems has shifted from region to region. We are witnessing armed conflicts within the country in the name of political system, regionalism, ethnicity, religion and autonomy. Also there is manifest or hideen war between countries. The focal lens of global diplomacy or the exercise of regional and global powers come to be directed towards these flash points.

It was thought that after the end of cold war between two superpowers, the USA and the then USSR, peace would come. But reality is quite different. More trouble spots are emerging especially in the form of internal conflicts. The trend of disintegration in the various forms is haunting many nations. Mutual harmony and peaceful coexistence seem to have lost its place. We established global organisation, the UNO common to all, as a catalyst to promote global peace and prevent coming generations from the scourge of catastrophic war that was faced during the First and Second World Wars. Of course, the UN is successful in discharging its noble goal albeit partially. But we could not create the world as expected and enshrined in the charter of the UN. What went wrong with the global order? It is a matter of serious deliberation especially for those who are at the helm of global powers.

Conflicts that have been resolved with the help of UN or the superpowers and sometimes regional powers have not proved sustainable. Most of the disputes of conflicts have been managed by resorting to force, coercion and sanction. As we adopted unsustainable tools and means, we did not get durable solution. The root cause is rarely looked into. The feudal and imperial mentality is seen among the global actors many times in the name of diplomacy. Politics and lust for power is at the origin of many conflicts. We see the conflicts at surface only. The background, motive and the hidden agenda might be entirely different. So we become unable to sort out them permanently.

These days we are talking about involving the marginalised, disadvantaged and exploited segments of the society in the mainstream politics.

Marginalisation and deprivation comes not only in national but also in international context. The attention of the affluent countries has not gone towards this adequately.

The role of the non-state actors is growing to resolve many conflicts. The diplomacy at state level operates in a mechanistic and very ritual way. Another thing is that the people in charge of managing the diplomacy are outdated and bias. Certainly, state sponsored diplomacy has many limitations. So multi-track diplomacy instead of classical diplomacy is being pursued from non-governmental and non-state sectors to hammer out the pressing issues and conflicts.The role of the states is seen confined only in serving their interests but not others’. Cannot we serve the interests of all parties? Cannot we make our goal compatible to all parties?

Unless we think and move in this way and make sincere efforts to deliberate and chart out a practical and amicable solution, conflicts cannot be resolved in a durable way. We have witnessed that conflict management with the help of suppression or manipulation no longer acts. It surfaces, again. The process of retaliation and revenge starts when the weaker party gains strengths. We all have to understand this natural law verified at home, organisation, village and the globe. The focus should be on permanent resolution where all can be winners without humiliation.

New Diplomacy

Perhaps, this is not possible from classical and outdated diplomacy alone. What we need is multi-track diplomacy. The major actor in multi-track diplomacy is non-state actor i.e. the civil society. Economic diplomacy is the outcome and need of the present globalised world. The global situation is changing day by day. We have not been able to grasp the dynamics of volatile global scenario in terms of economic and strategic interest. There is a need to overhaul our classical diplomacy and at the same time to promote multi-track diplomacy to resolve the conflicts.

Verna System In Modern Society

By Mrigendra Bahadur Karki

CASTE, in a general sense is a hereditary social division of any society into classes on the basis of occupation, colour, wealth, or religion of its people. Caste is a word derived from the Portuguese language that means family, strain, or race. When the Aryan conquered highly cultured people of the Indus Valley they introduced the ideal hierarchical caste model so that they can control the society.

It is believed that Hindus arrived in Kathmandu around the first century of the Christian era. Later during the 12th and the 14th they spread to the western region and Karnali basin and introduced the caste system there.

Now after the emergence of evolutionary model or process of globalisation, the people are examining this system. However, ethnocentrism has been the main subject of concern within the caste/ethnic groups of Nepal.

Constitutionally Nepal is defined as a Hindu Kingdom where over 86 per cent of the people are Hindus. They are minutely stratified in terms of caste category amongst the communities, particularly in the Terai where the caste structure is very complex as well as vague to deal with.

The process of social interchange, especially caste segmentation is taking place particularly after the reinstallation of multiparty democracy in 1990. The trend of absorption is too in practice. The communities themselves are working for the socio-politico-economic upliftment of the concerned communities.

The state has accepted a vast complex Varna system, which is being inapplicable to include the existing ethnic/caste/cultural groups of even Hindu communities within the four-fold Varna system namely Brahmana, Kshyatriya, Baishya and Sudra these days. For example, the ethnic communities like Limbu, Rai, Magar, Newar in the hills now seem to be in dilemma as to whether they belong to Baishya verna or not. Traditionally, they were given Baishya status. However, some people claim that they are not Hindus. As such how could these ethnic groups be included in Hindu Varna model? This question is strongly propping up especially in the sociological/Anthropological floor.

The report submitted by the taskforce formed by His Majesty’s Government has declared the definition of nationalities in 1996 as "Nepal’s nationalities are those who have their own mother languages and traditional culture but who do not fall under the traditional four-fold Varna classifications of Hindu Varna system".

Thus, the above mentioned communities obviously, do not fall in the Baishya Varna.

In the Tarai, Kayastha, a leading forward caste group seems in the Varnaless stage because the orthodox Hindu priests placed them in Sudra Varna model (paniachalne or the untouchable). However, the Kayasthas claim that they are the descendent of Chitragupta (A professional record keeper of Yamaraj according to Hindu mythology). Socio-culturally as well as occupationally they are similar to Brahman community but they are neither Brahman nor Kshatriya nor others. So they often suggest to create one more new Varna to represent them. As such it seems it is an appropriate time to rethink about this four-fold Varna system in Nepal.

In Nepal, certain caste/ethnic group carries the unique social symbolic prestigious status itself in many aspects. Consequently, the sanskritization process is undergoing. The people of hill communities are upgrading themselves by using ‘upper-caste’ titles after the migration or modification. There is a significant difference between the Hill and the Terai communities in using the titles. The hill people like to use various castes/ethnic groups but in Terai many castes and Varnas share the same title. In the special condition of hypergamy, the Brahman’s titles used by degraded people or the Khatri/Chhetri (in these days the anglicized abbreviation of K.C. is being common) in the hilly communities. Generally the term "Bahadur, Dhoj, Bikram, Man, " etc. are used by Chhetris, whereas the Brahmans commonly use the term "Prasad, Nath, Raj, Dev," etc. in their middle name.

But in the context of Terain communities, many titles are common in different caste/ethnic groups. Rajput, Kurmi, Yadav/Ahir, Tharu, Brahman, Danuwar, Kushwaha etc like to use "Singh" title The Brohmin use "Sharma" whereas, Lohar, Barahi, Nai, Marwari etc. use "Chaudhari" title. Similarly, the title "Raya" is used by Kurmi, Yadav/Ahir, Danuwar, Bhedihar, Brahman etc whereas the titles "Raut, Thakur, Gupta, Das" are used by several other caste/ethnic groups.

Anyway, the Terain, especially, low or untouchables caste groups are objecting the present socio-cultural stratified purity and caste system through the mythical stories, which tries to link the ancestral root with high caste or twice born caste groups.

One interesting story is popular among the Chamar communities about how they became different from each other being one’s descendant with Brahman. Once all sons of a Brahman family went outside their village to earn money. When some of the villagers were ready to offer the huge amount of money to them if they clear the carcasses then the elder one did that. But when he returned back all villagers socially boycotted him including his family members. Thus the Chamars became the untouchable. This is not a story only, but rather the dissatisfaction of so called untouchables towards the present rigid socio-cultural as well as the caste structure of Nepal.

As people are free to express their views in democracy they are raising many hidden issues. Every caste/ethnic group is examining the present status from the holistic approach and fighting for their rights in this socio-politico-cultural structure.

Similarly, the urban people are dividing on the basis of class rather than on the basis of caste/ethnic groups. This is mainly due to the impact of Eurocentric model through the revolution of information technology. Indeed, the caste/ethnic groups are separate cultural groups and they should be treated legally and practically.

The diverse languages, cultures, arts and ethnic identities are the national ornaments, properties and the real strength of the nation, which need to be preserved. To maintain the peace and prosperity all the social, cultural and religious issues should be justifiably settled by the state, following the goodwill, trust and non-violence. The caste/ethnic groups should also be responsible, practical as well as tolerable each other not lining up the biasness and ethnocentrism for harmonious existing relationship.

Money Matters

By PNK

THERE was a time when money had not been invented and the lust for the pot of old was not there. But civilisation has had its way and man learnt many tricks to meet his needs. But what made matters easy did not always augur well.

Fights and quarrels and even murders have occurred just because of the need to get hold of some extra money. Fights just for a trifle rupee has also been heard or seen. Money is indeed a temptation for the majority though there are some for whom it’s nothing like if you remember what Madan of "Muna Madan" was told that gold was nothing by the person who had saved his life.

But that doesn’t hold true in the real world. Here money matters a lot. It’s a never-ending game with people running after money as if everything depended on it. Yet, without money life can’t run. This fact is realised by all. From the big leaders right down to those who lead the rather humiliating life of a beggar are after money.

There are beggars who do not hesitate to hurl out abuses to anyone who does not give them a rupee or two. Just look at that and you feel how humiliating it is for even a passer by.

There are times when, on reflection, one comes to realise that if money hadn’t been there life certainly wouldn’t have been so interesting. The sheer thought of a loaded wallet gives you the thrill to dance on the street. But that’s not the case with everybody. Only some have the luck and that means probably money.

Do whatever you may, money must flow into your pocket. This fact is borne those who take to smuggling , black-marketing or even adulterating food items. After all, the efforts are directed towards making some more buck which, in fact, quite a sum. The lust for more comes from an unsatisfied heart.

People go for bandhs, strikes or other forms of protest programmes just for the sake of getting more money either as salary, bonus or something like that.

Remember the time the banks and many corporations were shut down by the employees just for getting more monetary benefit from their respective institutions. The salary that you receive somehow never seems to be enough. So when some employee, whether in the government offices or corporations, ask for bribe, may be sympathy must come from the client ( even if he/she maybe seething inside) in the shape of money.

A little more of money is not bad if it comes in the genuine form but asking for it in an undue manner is of course a bad move. Well, when the hotel unions demanded a mere10 per cent service charge to be given to them as tips then the hornet’s nest was stirred. They were out to bring the hotel activities to a standstill. But the hoteliers were also not behind and had their trick up their sleeves.

The hotel workers have decided to postpone their strike by two months but the hoteliers have put their foot down. The case revolves around money. Everyone is out for making money so the hotel workers are not to be wholly blamed because they had their eyes on the service charge to make their pay packet larger. Whether right or wrong, it’s money that brought to the fore the tussle between the hotel operators and the workers.