Change In Government Premiership
No Bed Of Roses

By Yuba Nath Lamsal

THE present government headed by Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba is the third successive government in the period of slightly over two years. In the general elections held in May and June 1999, Nepali Congress emerged clear-cut winner to form its own government. And it formed the government headed by its senior leader Krishna Prasad Bhattarai. Bhattarai was a unanimous choice of the party for the Prime Minister in 1999. Party President’s Girija Prasad Koirala had announced before elections that Bhattarai was the next Prime Minister of the Kingdom if Nepali Congress emerged victorious. Koirala’s decision was to unify the party as he realised that Nepali Congress might not win comfortable majority if it went to election divided.

It may also be noted here that Nepali Congress won the majority in the first general election in 1991 when the party went to polls under Bhattarai’s leadership. But it lost in the second general elections when Koirala was in the helms of the state affairs. Koirala was not confident enough about the victory of the Nepali Congress in the third general election even when the main opposition was vertically divided. Thus, Koirala, on the eve of election, put forth Bhattarai’s name as the next Prime Minister. Moreover, Bhattarai had and still has untainted image, liberal and accommodative attitude and commands respect from all sectors of the society. It was easier for the party to go to the voters with Bhattarai’s name and image.

Bhattarai, of course, could not bring about miracle change during his brief premiership. But one thing, which needs to be emphasized, is the fact that things had not been so badly spoilt during his premiership. Opposition parties were relatively more comfortable and cooperative with the Bhattarai-led Nepali Congress government. The Maoist insurgents, who had been waging armed insurgency, had established contact for peace talks.

But Bhattarai was forced to step down even before completing one-year in office. His resignation was not his choice but it came under mounting pressure from his own colleagues within the Nepali Congress party. The reason is internal power struggle in the ruling party. This paved the way for party president Girija Prasad Koirala to come to power.

Koirala came to power with three main agenda—law and order, corruption control and good governance.

However, none of the three could be accomplished. The Maoist insurgency further grew and law and order was lowest in the last ten years. The issue of corruption control also went to the background. Instead, the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA), an anti-corruption body, pointed fingers to a senior member of Koirala’s cabinet.

Opposition parties accused Koirala of being involved in a shady Lauda deal concerning leasing a Boeing aircraft. The entire 19th session of parliament was disrupted demanding resignation of Prime Minister Koirala and even threatened to repeat the same in the 20th session, as well.

In the political front, gulf between the ruling and the opposition parties widened. Law and order deteriorated. Poor law and order and instability shook confidence of investors and badly affected national economy. There was even increasing demand from within the party for handing over the leadership to younger generation.

Under such circumstances, Koirala had no alternative other than to step down in order to create an atmosphere of consensus, stability and peace. By announcing resignation, Koirala made a wise decision for the cause of the nation, democracy and the people.

Following Koirala’s resignation, Deuba came in as a formidable leader in the Nepali Congress to take up the leadership of the government. Now Deuba has assumed the leadership of the government. Under his leadership, the atmosphere for peace, stability and consensus is being slowly created.

It is obvious that Deuba had to work hard and wait long to get the coveted job second time. It was, indeed, difficult to get elected as his party’s parliamentary leader and take the leadership of the government. But the days ahead are more difficult for him.

The victory of the Nepali Congress in the third general election was clear evidence that people were fade up with the hung parliament and the consequent political instability that was common during four and half years following the second general electios in 1995. Democracy and national economy were badly bruised during that period. There was widespread feeling for the need of a strong and stable government to end the political instability in the country.

That was the reason why people gave majority and the mandate to Nepali Congress in the third general elections. But in the last two-plus year following the third general elections, too, the
popular expectation of peace and stability were still elusive. Despite having comfortable majority in parliament, Nepali Congress could not live up to popular expectations like maintaining political stability and restoring peace because of internal wrangling and power struggle.

Ensuring political stability, restoring peace by solving the Maoist problem and reviving the economy are major challenges before the new government. Prime Minister Deuba has already started the process of creating atmosphere for peace. People are hopeful of his peace initiatives and solution to the Maoist insurgency through dialogue. If the insurgency related problem was solved and Maoist insurgents were brought to democratic mainstream, it would be Prime Minister Deuba’s greatest achievement. Deuba would emerge as a towering personality in the Nepalese political spectrum. However, things are not so easy and smooth as it is seems. Although his efforts have been hailed by all at present, he needs to understand that his critics are also active, who are looking for an opportune time to strike him back. Peace is a process, which cannot be accomplished overnight but takes long time. The process has now begun. But we need to have patience to wait and see the result of this process.

At in the same time, the government needs to do a lot of homework and move ahead with caution. Any slight mistake would create obstacle towards peace and development. At this crucial juncture, people from all sectors also need to work collectively to bring this new peace initiate to a logical end. Therein lies the future of the country, people and democracy.

Green Revolution Boon Or Bane?

By Abhinawa Devkota

GREEN revolution was coined in the 1960’s to denote increased agriculture production and to mitigate hunger resulting from population explosion. The components of green revolution are the modern agricultural inputs like high yielding variety , chemical fertilizers, pesticides and improved management practices. India is said to have attained green revolution for the first time in the history of this revolution.

A drastic change was experienced in the agricultural field after the green revolution. Many high yielding varities came into existence and the as modern techniques as well as insecticides and pesticides were being used after the green revolution . But the green revolution not only brought positive aspects, negative aspects were also being brought by them whose results are really catastrophic as well as harmful.

In the countries where the revolution has been successful, food shortages is disappearing. Farmers are able to raise their standard of living and some have attained food self-sufficiency. In these countries the production of crops and vegetables are increasing many of these countries have become self sufficient in food, and became able to sell their products in other countries due to which the GNP (gross national product) of these countries is also increasing. This revolution has become a boon for these countries. Norin-lo, a semi dwarf wheat variety has also brought green revolution some decades ago . This variety of wheat was instrumental in ending famine to some extent which was increasing in the world due to population explosion. As a result of this revolution many farmers were trained in the field of agriculture and they were being taught about new ideas and ways in agriculture. Farmers who plough the field using oxen began to use tractors. Farmers who used compost as well as animal-dung as manure began to use pesticides and the farmers who used the traditional way of farming, used modern ways and means. To increase food production and fulfill the demand of increasing number of population, farmers planted hybrid varieties of plants which yielded more than the local ones. Due to these things, the green revolution really proved to be a boon for many countries which could increase their economic condition by agricultural products.

But on the other hand the green revolution had brought health hazards too to human beings and other organism, due to improper and indiscriminate use of chemical fertilizers. As the population explosion is taking place and there is shortage of food, many farmers are using chemical fertilizers to increase the production of food. If some pest or insects attack the crops the farmers use pesticides but, without knowing the ill effects. The date of pesticides may have been expired but they are using it, and as a result this acidity and alkalinity may increase in their field. And after some years the rapid decrease in production many take place and on the other hand this may affect animals and birds. Pesticides and fertilizers are the most important factors to affect natural environment. Improper use of chemical fertilizers pollute natural resources like air, water, soil and ultimately human beings. The best example of this can be seen now in some parts of India and if this process goes on for some years then we can see the result in our own country too.

Since the green revolution has both positive and negative aspects we should choose positive aspects only and correct the negative one. The use of pesticides should be prohibited rather we should apply the method of biological control instead of using harmful chemical fertilizers. Cow dung and composed manure should be used. If we want to use chemical fertilizers, insecticides and pesticides then we should use them with caution.