Extremists In The Driving Seat
Political forces in Nepal including King Gyanendra seem to be under very strenuous pulls and pressures from extremists of both ends
By KESHAB POUDEL
Extremists on both the sides - left and right - are in a mood of jubilations as the country continues to suffer in the throes of contradictions and conflicts. Leftist extremists engaged in violence and rightist extremists working in the guise of active monarchists have common interest - not to allow the functioning of the constitution.
Leftist extremists have already issued threats that they will not allow the holding of elections whereas the rightists have made it clear that they do not want to see any representative government. Thus, one should not be surprised if one fine day the vice chairman of Council of Ministers Dr. Tulsi Giri and leaders of left extremists shake hands in a same platform.
Extremism in any form is inimical to liberal democracy as it thrives in a situation where anarchy prevails and constitutional process remains derailed. Only one interest of the present ministers in the cabinet is not to hold the elections as the elections will shorten their tenure. Similar logic is applicable to the left extremists who will be rejected by the people. In present scenario, only extremist elements are taking benefits pushing the monarchy and liberal democratic forces headlong into conflict.
Confident and tough, King Gyanendra has a commanding look with a robust personality but he seems to be under strenuous pulls and pressures from extremists of both ends.
What he has stated since ascending to the throne as the King, as far as commitments in words are concerned, he has maintained the continuity whereas the actions taken on ground indicate a trend towards contrary. “Of course, we need democracy. However, we must be able to exercise it right from the grass-root level up to the parliament. Like a house, the strength of democracy rests on the foundations and pillars,” said King Gyanendra in his recent interview to the reporters of official media. “The nation has made a firm commitment that terrorism is unacceptable and democracy should be made meaningful and mature.”
The statements and interviews given by the King in last few years leads one to believe that the King is not the originator of the contradictions but that he is merely reflecting the contradictory situation in the country.
From the day he ascended to the throne, King Gyanendra has been consistently repeating his commitment for the constitutional monarchy and multi-party democracy upon the basic stricture of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal 1990. Likewise, main political leaders, too, have been demanding the activation of the Constitution through the constitution of parliament. “We don’t want anything but the power to the people through the parliament,” said Congress president Girija Prasad Koirala.
Any sensible person may like to release the King from the pulls and pressures of the situations he appears to be in. King Gyanendra is an educated, quite enlightened and had a long apprentice of several jobs and at a matured stage; he assumed the responsibility of the institution of monarchy. One cannot wish to have more qualified and matured person like him for the job in a traditional institution like a monarchy to assist and promote modernizing democracy.
| Living Thought Of A Dead Leader
The country needs a statesman like B.P. Koirala to educate people as well as the monarch with these words, which are still valid as before:
….. The question that is uppermost in my mind is whether the coup of 1960 has permanently, definitely, and irreconcilably alienated the democratic force and the monarchy from each other. I hope and pray that in spite of everything, it is not so, and the breach is not final. My endeavor will be towards the reconciliation of these two elements in our national life. If they are not reconcilable, statesmanship, as distinguished from political chicanery, personal aggrandizement and advancement of petty temporary gains, calls for a large hearted approach to the problem of reconciliation. The democrats will see, I hope, that there are other dangers to democracy more serious than monarchy. I also hope that the king will also see that there are dangers to monarchy more serious than democracy. (Page 262 and 263 “Jail Journal” By.B.P Koirala) |
What B.P. Koirala had said during his eight-long-years in detention in 1960s in his “Jail Journal” are still valid regarding the source of threat faced by monarchy and democratic forces. (See box).
Compared to educational background and professional training of Gyanendra as a person, top leaders of Nepali Congress and the Unified Marxist Leninist (UML) - two prominent parties - Girija Prasad Koirala and Madhav Kumar Nepal have no such education and training. However, leaders are not brought from the blue, they are built up in a process of long and rigorous exercise. Personally, they have tendency towards moderate views. Nepali Congress definitely has no problem with the democratic orientation but the party, which Madhav Kumar Nepal leads, has gone through a long process of conversion from communist totalitarian to democratic pluralism.
These two and other prominent political parties in Nepal , too, are not the originator of conflicts but like the King, they are merely reflecting the contradiction of the political situation, which has an extraneous origin.
“Political crisis 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,” said American professor Edward McMahon. (See Spotlight September 9-15).
As it is very much apparent, the crisis in Nepal is a miniature model of the conflict affecting the whole Himalayan range from Kashmir to Assam . “However, difficult situation might be, people of Nepal have the responsibility of creating an environment of trust and cooperation for concentrated efforts to live in peace. Monarchy and democratic forces have no basic contradiction between them as rhetoric statements are issued by each side in anger and frustration,” said a political analyst.
“I feel the current relationship between the King and the political parties could be compared to the petty daily squabbles between loving couples. The closer they are, more squabbles there will be,” said King Gyanendra in his recent interview.
Leaders of political parties are also issuing such statements. “If the King does not want to remain as a constitutional monarchy, we have no option other than to struggle for republic,” said CPN-UML general secretary Madhav Kumar Nepal . “It is up to the King to decide what he wants.”
Enough of angers and frustrations have already been expressed but that have complicated the situation more than resolving the problems of any side. What is sincerely expected from the general people in Nepal is to see rival political forces easing the pulls and pressures form the other - that again be popularly expressed as the politics of the reconciliation. “Let the true followers of B.P. Koirala at least initiate for reconciliation again from this week which is being celebrated as his birth anniversary,” said a political analyst. “B.P.’s words and ideas are still sources of great inspiration to the common person in Nepal . Whereas persons who have politics as their profession care more about promotion of their own interest rather than any superior ideal, which a committed democrat like B.P. Koirala adhered as a faith up to his last days.”
As both the political forces have already sided with the extremist elements – which do not have any stake rather than to derail the constitutional process - the time has come now for the national unity for the sake of activation of constitution. Hatred and anger will unite only extremists; and the losers will be the liberal democratic forces including the monarchy.
