“It Is Entirely Possible For Democracy To Take Root Here In Nepal”

-- PROFESSOR EDWARD MCMAHON

Professor Edward McMahon - who came to Nepal at the invitation of US Embassy to discuss with politicians at all levels the positive role that parties can play in crisis situations – is a lecturer at the University of Vermont in the Department of Community Development and Applied Economics and the Department of Political Science. He is a senior research associate at Freedom House and also has worked for the Department of State, USAID and the National Democratic Institute. Professor McMahon spoke to KESHAB POUDEL on various issues. Excerpts:

You have been here for a week discussing the role of political parties in Nepal. As an expert on the role of political parties in conflict, how do you evaluate the role of Nepal’s political parties in the ongoing political process?

Clearly, Nepal is living in difficulty with highly polarized environment. It seems to me that there is active sector of political parties that are struggling to expand and create democratic space within this country. There is a press which is very courageous. There are very active NGOs and Civil Society groups. There are elements of pluralism existing here, which I think hopefully serves for foundation for future democratic development in the country.

How difficult is it to evolve the modern institutions including political parties in a country like Nepal where the process of modernization began just over five decades ago. How do you view the evolutionary process?

It is critical that parties evolve and develop both in terms of their institutional functions and how do they move simply from protest mob to being credible and effective managers of the country. There were problems in the past and there were also achievements in the past. Parties need to embrace the fact that there were mistakes in the past as well as achievements and learn from them and further evolve and develop in terms of internal party democracy, party finances and in terms of candidate selections. This idea of inclusiveness is the idea that I heard a lot about in my weekend meeting with the leaders and workers of political parties. Parties need to understand and develop ways to make those ideas of inclusiveness, specific and related to problematic goal.

When legitimate political forces are involved in the conflict, the diplomats from western countries including the US are pursuing the idea of reconciliation. What will be the important factor for Nepal’s national unity or conflict resolution to strengthen the democratic process?

What I have seen in other countries that I have reached and other countries that have situation like that in Nepal now is that Nepal is unique. We have seen political parties that can show their strength, and can be effective and credible representatives of the people. And that when people support them they become strong enough to force autocracy or regressive elements to realize they are not going to win and they have to negotiate with democratic parties - that happened in Burundi, El Salvador, South Africa and elsewhere. I think that the message of political parties in Nepal needs to give is make sure that they are strong, which will heighten their credibility. Other parties will have to negotiate, dialogue so that the conflict can get channeled into peaceful democratic dialogue.

How do you see the role of institutions like judiciary, legislature and political parties in strengthening democracy?

Again, I believe that the important issue is that these institutions evolve and learn from past - that is what democracy is. It is continual evolution and change. For example, my understanding is that one of the problems in Nepal between 1991 and 2002 was often time conflict between the leadership of political parties and parliamentary party leadership. These kinds of conflicts have weakened democracy here. The parties were split on its part and coalitions failed all the time. That does not give a sense of stability and that does not give people confidence that this democracy is going to respond to their needs. Political parties have responsibilities to do diagnosis of these kinds of problems and to propose solutions. And for these solutions, many in those parties, have to compromise- which is not easy for the parties.

After discussing various problems faced by Nepalese political parties, how do you see the process of evolution and how will they respond in future?

Democracy very rarely happens immediately. Democracy is something that evolves and develops. If countries can build their previous democratic experience, they can build upon the pluralism that can exist within society like NGOs and press sector. So, I would like to be optimistic that these very difficult problems will be resolved but they are only going to be resolved if political parties understand and adequately develop the ways – that’s why people support them.

What is your observation regarding Nepal’s on going situation?

I had been to Kathmandu and I had been to Biratnagar. I talked to many people from different walks of life. My observation is that this society is in transition. But it is entirely possible for democracy to take root here in Nepal. I don’t think that there is any prerequisite that can forbid democracy.

There are conflicting views about the capability of democratic process to solve the violent crisis like the Nepal is currently facing. How do you look at it?

My understanding is that the Maoists do not have huge amount of popularity in this country. Maybe they intimidate people and they have been able impose to certain places but that the idea can translate into some sort of dictatorship given the fact that there is pluralism in Nepal. And given the fact that the international context now makes it very difficult to conceive any kind of imposition, the Maoists have to realize this that they will have to be pursue the chances for peace like in Burundi, South Africa and El Salvador and many countries around the world.

Nepalese political forces have been blaming each other for present situation. Are internal politics of any country always influenced by internal factors alone or are there external elements also? How the geo-political situation influences internal politics? Do you have any comment?

o, it does not depend obviously and solely upon internal factors alone. I know Nepal lies between two Asian giants India and China. Clearly, the immediate regional context affects the situation. The broader international context also affects the internal situation. I cannot speak in the context of which of your neighboring countries’ influence affects in the internal political process of your country. But I do know that in this world today, it is becoming much more difficult to be autocratic or dictatorial. Moves towards democracy are good also from international side as well as the domestic side. Hopefully that international context and domestic context will eventually work together to settle the problems of Nepal.