In depth Analysis

Visible urban violence predictable!

Kathmandu: Announcement of His Majesty's routine check-up at London followed by news of his illness and, then, the departure for the check-up brings public attention and concern on the health of His Majesty the King. This becomes specially so at time when continued un-resolution of critical Nepali issues turn Nepali eyes to the Nepali monarchy for solace.

The problems are evidently mounting. The un-resolution of Nepali congress problems indicated by defiant public standpoints on part of the Prime minister's congress party opposition is merely one indication. This leads one to believe rumors of the possibility of congress parliamentarians not backing Girija babu's budget at time of vote. One source has it that former Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba's departure to United States of America at this juncture is indicative of this.

The opposition, the UML, is desperate. RPP senior, Dr. Prakash Chandra Lohani's win upon appeal after the recounting of the votes in his constituency is a setback in real number in the UMLs parliamentary representation. It is fair that similar litigations may produce more setbacks to the detriment of the UML in the parliament. Constitutional provisions can't but limit the UML's public wrath at the judiciary.

Amidst these developments, it is conveniently forgotten that the UML partnered a Girija led government in the conduct of the last general elections which brought the congress its majority and secured for the UML its place as the largest opposition party in the parliament.

In so many ways, therefore, UML ranks, particularly its disgruntled intellectual support, blame the UML leadership for the current mess. The leadership is aware that its ability to struggle out of its current tangle is increasingly being limited by an image of partnership with a disgraced congress. It is this that provokes senior UML leaders to make public statements of disenchantments' at the prevalent scheme of things.

The urgency for change being voiced nationwide comes from two directions. The public at large appears disdainful at establishment assurances of fundamental relief. Economic assurances apart, government promises of primary law and order are now being taken as mere mouthing from a desperate government. The inability of the congress working committee meeting to bring amidst the public a coherent security policy on even the mundane matter of law and order is perhaps what has damaged the government most. It is perhaps this that will be cashed in upon by the Maoists' movement. If rumors are right, the coming months should see a gradual shift in Maoists' strategy. It may perhaps gain them better if such a shift means urban action where cadre are difficult to locate in the urban jungle and Human Rights excesses are more easily visible while the publicity value becomes high.

The Warsaw Declaration, Towards a Community of Democracies

Kathmandu: The Foreign Ministers and other representatives of well over 100 countries from around the world recently met in Warsaw June 26-27 at the Community of Democracies Conference actively consulted to formulate and issue a Warsaw Declaration that expresses their common aspiration and commitment to promote, strengthen and preserve democracy.

The Government of Poland will expectedly ask that the Warsaw Declaration be circulated as an official document of the Millennium Assembly of the United Nations. Following is the text of the Warsaw Declaration: Excerpts only: Chief editor.

"We the participants in the Community of Democracies Ministerial Meeting convened in Warsaw, 26-27 June 2000: "Expressing our common adherence to the purposes and principles set forth in

the Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Reaffirming our commitment to respect relevant instruments of international law, Emphasizing the interdependence between peace, development, human rights and democracy, Recognizing the universality of democratic values, Hereby agree to respect and uphold the following core democratic principles

and practices: -- The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government, as expressed by exercise of the right and civic duties of citizens to choose their representatives through regular, free and fair elections with universal and equal suffrage, open to multiple parties, conducted by secret ballot, monitored by independent electoral authorities, and free of fraud and intimidation.; -- The right of every person to freedom of opinion and of expression, including to exchange and receive ideas and information through any media, regardless of frontiers- The right of the press to collect, report and disseminate information, news and opinions, subject only to restrictions necessary in a democratic society and prescribed by law, while bearing in mind evolving international practices in this field; -- The right of every person to be free from arbitrary arrest or detention; to be free from torture and other cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment or punishment; and to receive due process of law, including to be presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law; - That elected leaders uphold the law and function strictly in accordance with the constitution of the country concerned and procedures established by law-- That government institutions be transparent, participatory and fully accountable to the citizenry of the country and take steps to combat corruption, which corrodes democracy; -- That the legislature be duly elected and transparent and accountable to the people; -- That civilian, democratic control over the military be established and preserved; -- That all human rights -- civil, cultural, economic, political and social-- be promoted and protected as set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other relevant human rights instruments.

The Community of Democracies affirms our determination to work together to promote and strengthen democracy, recognizing that we are at differing stages in our democratic development. We will cooperate to consolidate and strengthen democratic institutions, with due respect for sovereignty and the principle of non-interference in internal affairs. Our goal is to support adherence to common democratic values and standards, as outlined above. To that end, our governments hereby agree to abide by these principles in practice, and to support one another in meeting these objectives which we set for ourselves today.

We will seek to strengthen institutions and processes of democracy. We resolve jointly to cooperate to discourage and resist the threat to democracy posed by the overthrow of constitutionally elected governments. We will collaborate on democracy-related issues in existing international and regional institutions, forming coalitions and caucuses to support resolutions and other international activities aimed at the promotion of democratic governance. This will help to create an external environment conducive to democratic development.

Final, June 27, 2 p.m. (Text courtesy: USIA, Kathmandu.)

Regulate border and introduce passport system with India , suggests MSI poll

Kathmandu: July 3: A resounding majority of Nepalese (85.5 %) wants the traditional open border with India regulated, with 42.9 % of them calling for outright introduction of passport system between the two countries.

An opinion poll survey conducted by the Media Services International (MSI) in 15 hilly and terai districts of Nepal in April this year reveals that only a meagre 8.7 % of the 1300 respondents wants the open border

arrangement left as it is. Those saying that they did not know totaled 5.2% and those expressing no opinion on this matter totaled 0.2 % of the individuals reached.

Why should the open Nepal-India border be regulated? In answer, 28.1 % of the interviewees thought the border regulation would stop cross-country criminal and other undesirable activities.

If 27.3 % of the respondents said border regulation would protect Nepal's nationality and originality, 22.8% said such a move would help retain opportunities and possibilities of employment for Nepalese within Nepal.

Those who believed that border regulation would serve to reiterate and reaffirm Nepal's independent identity constituted 20.8 % of the respondents, whereas only a negligible percentage (0.8 %) voiced no opinion on the issue.

Among those who came out in favor of the status quo (8.7 %), they did so on grounds of matrimonial ties, shopping conveniences, education and medical facilities and employment.

To the query as to what arrangements would be proper and effective for border regulation between Nepal and India, 42.9 % opted for a passport system, whereas 30.2 % said the practice of examining travel documents at

entry points should be initiated and enforced. Respondents asking for introduction of work permit system for employment seekers totaled 14.9 % and those advocating identity cards for border residents totaled 4.8 %.

On the critical issue of who have been taking maximum advantage of the open border between the two neighbours, a majority -- 43.4 % -- singled out smugglers and criminals put together as the main beneficiaries. In the same way, the traders and industrialists were named by 41.1 % of the respondents. If 8.5 % said the general public had taken advantages of the open border, 5.8 % thought the political leaders too had exploited it.

What impact it would have on Nepal if her citizens were to be debarred from employment in India? An impressive majority (66.2 %) of the interviewees were of the view that there would be "no substantial difference" in existing situation.

However, 25.8 % of the 1300 respondents thought that such a debarment would lead to a "grave crisis" in Nepal. Only a small percentage (7 %) of those asked fell under the "don't know" category.

Over the related issue of who outnumbers whom -- Nepalese going to India or Indians coming to Nepal for work-- 43.8 % said the Nepalese outnumbered the Indians while 40.8 % said the Indians outnumbered the Nepalese. Interestingly, the people were almost equally split when they were asked if the Nepalese government, in their view, was willing to have the border with India regulated. In answer, 37.9 % said "yes" and 37 % said "no", whereas 24.6 % said they did not know and 0.5% gave no opinion.

But is Nepal capable of managing the open-border regulation? If 47 % replied in the affirmative, 37.7 % replied in the negative. Those giving no opinion, this way or that, constituted 15.3 %.

Yet, whose weakness -- Nepal's or India's -- accounts for no change in the open border status between the two countries? A majority of the respondents (44.4%) blamed both Nepal and India, whereas 40.7 % held Nepal alone as responsible. Only 3.8 % held India as responsible for no regulation of Nepal-India border. The "don't know" category claimed 10.3 % of the respondents.

This poll, the last in the current series, was conducted in Jhapa, Morang, Sunsari, Dhankuta, Kathmandu, Lalitpur, Bhaktapur, Parsa, Lamjung, Baglung, Rupandehi, Surkhet, Banke, Doti and Kanchanpur with the cooperation of the London-based Westminster Foundation for Democracy (WFD).

What Nepali intellectuals say of Koirala's India visit?

Kathmandu: Nepal's foreign ministry sources say the Nepalese Prime minister is all set to pay a "goodwill" visit to India some time early next month.

However, congress affiliated newspapers critical to Koirala say the proposed visit of the Prime minister to India appears yet remote.

Intellectuals still have not forgotten Koirala's tall claim made at the Airport upon his return from the Colombo SAARC Summit that he would not visit India until the Indian military men remain stationed in Kalapani.

The fact is that the Indian security personnels were very much kicking and alive in Kalapani with no signs of their leaving the Nepalese soil.

Foreign policy experts ask why the Prime minister should visit India at this critical juncture? They rather suggest the Prime minister to delay his Delhi visit sine die.

In their opinion, Nepal has ever remained friendly towards New Delhi and her "countless" concerns. However, South Block instead of reciprocating to the Nepalese gestures has always applied "pressure tactics" to extract benefits of all sorts from Nepal. In the process, Nepal has already annoyed Pakistan and China, to say the least.

"This is just unacceptable", said a Political scientist to this scribe Tuesday morning over telephone.

To recall, Dhruba Kumar-a political scientist of international standing, only the other day said talking to a local news weekly that "why should India come to Nepal with arms and ammunitions when she can threaten Nepal by simply erecting a dam just across the border that submerges a considerable number of villages inside the Nepalese territory. The Nepalese response to this ghastly Indian act is feeble, unfortunately.

Yet another set of intellectuals opine that if the Prime minister is in Delhi, the leaders there would press him hard to go "unfriendly" with Pakistan in the wake of their continued and never ending rivalry beginning from the partition days in 1947.

This set predicts that Koirala will be further told in Delhi to "keep close watch" on the Nepalese personalities dubbed as men of the ISI listed in the fake bundle of the calculatedly prepared India Today report that definitely divided the national population, including the media, into two halves- the RAW and the ISI men.

Koirala will undoubtedly not react to the Indian allegations as usual is with the Koiralas' rather would politely "request" the authorities there to exempt his "relatives" from the fresh India today allegations. Perhaps India will oblige but at what cost yet remains to be watched.

This notwithstanding, the frequency of Indian authorities visiting Kathmandu has suddenly increased raising concerns in Kathmandu's political circle.

The transparency part remaining totally absent, what the two sides talk at the negotiation table only the Almighty knows. Brajesh Mishra's visit yet remains a mystery for the Nepalese population. The Indian home secretary is already in Kathmandu. What transpires between the two sides every time only the Indian media could tell as the Nepalese side has allergy in talking with their own media men.

India watchers in Nepal say that Prime minister Koirala should plan his pilgrimage to Delhi well after all the "important" authorities from India conclude their Nepal trip. This would make Koirala understand better the Indian "demands" and thus facilitate him to act accordingly. Admitably, by time he will have finalised what his agenda were to be dealt with the other side while in Delhi or else he will have to sign yet another agreement which the court back in Nepal will perceive as a "treaty".

If India continues to station her security men in Kalapani, if she continues to reject the Nepali demands of the 1950 treaty reviewal; if she remains averse to the Bhutani refugee imbroglio; if she continues to exhibit her "elderly" attitude towards this tiny neighbour plus if she does not respond to the allegations of border encroachment , the Nepalese Prime minister should withheld his visit to Delhi till the otherside exhibited its readiness and willingness to reciprocate friendly gestures.

A former Nepalese foreign minister who "understood" India better during his tenure divulged recently, "the current set up in Delhi will neither be friendly to Nepal nor to her small South Asian neighbors".

Telegraph adds: However, care should be taken during the bilateral talks to honor the traditional friendship with that country. Nepal must have very good relations with India but not at the cost of our genuine national interests. . All that Nepal has to do is to do her homework properly prior to Delhi visit or else our diplomats will "listen" to Indian lectures at the table as "most obedient listeners" like what a former congress' appointee Nepalese Ambassador to Delhi told this scribe during mid 90s.

Islam does not contradict democracy

Kathmandu: The Egyptian foreign minister, Amre Moussa, addressing a conference entitled "Towards a community of democracies" in Warsaw- the Polish capital, said June 26, 2000, that attempts at defining democracy have indeed occupied intellectuals for the past two millennia, from Plato to Tocqueville. However, democracy, for all intents and purposes, said the minister, can be cloaked in its romantic ideal which aims at a political entity where the common good is realized by means of the population deciding issues through the elections of individuals who carry out the people's will.

A case has often been made, said Moussa that Islam -- as a religion -- comes into conflict with democracy. It is sometimes claimed that as a system of beliefs based on sacred tenets, religion clashes with a political system whose basic tenet is what the majority wants, and that no opinion or political view is sacred or has eternal value or validity.

Refuting to those allegations made in some quarters of the globe, the Egyptian foreign minister said , "Islam does not contradict democracy in any possible or conceivable way. The whole concept of the Islamic, or Islamic-inspired, system of government is based on two principles -Shura and Ijma', or consultation and consensus.

Islam is incompatible with dictatorship or arbitrary rule by one man or any group of men said Moussa adding that the very essence of Islam is its negation of all racial, ethnic, hereditary criteria of distinction among individuals in the society in terms of rights and responsibilities.

Whither SAARC XI Summit?

Kathmandu: The reconvening of the abruptly suspended SAARC Summit of the last year appears still remote. However, there is nothing to panic as signals for the resumption of the entire SAARC process is underway apparently.

Only recently Ambassador Nihal Rodrigo, the SAARC Secretary General told a media gathering that much depended on the "attitudes" of India and Pakistan for the resumption of the whole SAARC process and that he was still not in a position to divulge the dates for the reconvening of the suspended Summit.

To recall, Nepal was to host the last SAARC XI Summit in Kathmandu.

However, since then the Secretary-General is visiting SAARC countries and compiling their responses in this regard. His last leg is Bhutan, according to SAARC Secretariat sources.

In the meantime, the Nepalese foreign minister has "hoped" that the normal SAARC activities would now get "underway".

He made these remarks at a meeting of the SAARC Technical Committee on Agriculture and rural development, Tuesday morning in the presence of all the delegates of the SAARC nations, save the Maldives.

(FM Bastola specially thanked for understandable reasons the Pakistani participant for attending the Kathmandu meeting-editor).

"The presence of participants from all SAARC member states is a testimony to the fact despite "difficulties", we all are committed to carry the SAARC process forward, said the Nepalese foreign minister in a subdued voice.

Welcoming the guests, Ambassador Nihal Rodrigo, also hinted that Kathmandu could still host the suspended XI summit. "The meeting is being held in and to be chaired by Nepal, the venue of the forthcoming, slightly overdue, SAARC Summit.

Dwelling on the meeting now in progress, Ambassador Rodrigo highlighted the salient features of the SA scene stating that 45 percent of the people were categorized as being below poverty line and that the vast of the category were in the rural sector.

He hoped that the current meeting would set a healthy precedent not only in timely attendance but also in commitment to regional cooperation in functional areas overcoming other impediments to such cooperation.

Minister Baldev Majgaiya also spoke on the occasion.

National | 5 Question  | Editorial | 2nd Impression | International | Past |