Indepth Analysis

Politics continues to play amidst national crisis!

Kathmandu: The move for an all-party government is on. The Sher Bahadur Deuba government is on the defensive. Opponents Girija Prasad Koirala has touched a soft nerve in the UML both Madhav Nepal and Surya Bahadur Thapa as also Bamdev Gautam want a share of government resources in the manner of participation in the government. And so there is pressure on Deuba to take these parties into confidence. The mechanisms, of course, have yet to be formalized and the race between Deuba and Koirala is on. Of course, all the other parties would want a more amicable congress leadership as an option to Deuba and so thespian Krishna Prasad Bhattarai is weighing his chances once again. He has come out strongly in favor of Sher Bahadur Deuba and against Koirala proposal but has nevertheless sought limelight as the elderly statesman to whom the economic community turned to at these times of dire straits.

All these however, only dilute the political will necessary to do short shrift with the Maoists movement. The army which has successfully gone on the offensive in select Maoists areas must be finding it strange that civic society in shape of other political parties refuse to emerge there even after the Maoists political leadership have gone underground and their military leaders have been decimated in these areas. Amidst the nuances of emergency inspired military news, one can glean, differences in the choice of words released authoritatively from "'cordon and search" we are now briefed that the action is at a "cordon and destroy" stage. Carefully placed news items yet to be contradicted suggest that the army is poised in division-strength for an offensive posture.

But none but the army are better aware that their military machine can only fight an insurgency if the political masters are clear in their mission in terms of objectives and challenges. A civilian authority which begins debating over the army returning to its barracks immediately after it unleashes the army on the population is hardly a source of confidence for the machine itself. The army perhaps is better aware at this stage that the Maoists problem is a political problem and its political masters have created a military problem in the exhaustion of their own political credibility. The population at large is very aware of the eroding credibility of this political sector. It is this widespread awareness that nurtures the mood of negativism among the masses regarding the new political postures. For the bulk these are merely ploys of political benefit. They hardly contribute to the success of the anti-insurgency moves.

Good governance becomes 'elusive' if people continue to be neglected for long-Ambassador Lemp
For Nepal to achieve good-governance it must have a good and independent media

-Robert Kerr, US Official

Kathmandu: The Nepali media, which considered itself sacrosanct and had monopolized in one way or the other the right to criticize others till the other day came itself under scathing criticism by Nepal's noted academicians at a media seminar organized by The Telegraph Weekly in cooperation with the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung.

The Nepali scholars summarily opined that the media could have done better had it not aligned itself with the existing power politics in the country. This implied that a section of the Nepali media were politically biased in their reporting which in essence is a hard reality.

Attending seminar participants also reminded the media to act like Fourth Institution in the truest sense of the term in order to guarantee additional check on the three other official branches of the nation.

The literati also hinted the Nepali media men that their actions and ulterior motives too were being watched by the general masses. This apparently gave an indication that the monopoly enjoyed by Nepali media for all along these years were already under scrutiny.

The high powered diplomats from the developed West attending the seminar too possessed not that kind words for the Nepali media.

It was evident that the Kathmandu based diplomats wished Nepali media to play a critical role that was expected of them in a nascent democracy like Nepal.

From the speeches that were made by Western diplomats what became evident was that Nepali media lacked the ability to access, verification, collection, processing and correctly presenting the information to the public-the real consumers.

However, the diplomats and the academicians hoped that time permitting the Nepali media will enhance its capability and cater to the needs of the people and the nation in sectors like development and more so in providing good governance in the country.

Welcoming the attending guests at the seminar, the chief editor of the Weekly, N.P.Upadhyaya, opined that despite repeated talks on governance, and good governance over these years, the hard reality had been that good governance had remained a mirage indeed and merely confined to academic debates only.

"Instead of providing good governance to the people, the successive governments in Nepal after 1990 remained engaged merely in bringing about a quick changes in government, pulling one set by the other, blocking the entire proceedings of the parliament but yet pocketing the perks' forming unholy alliances in order to pull its own party-rule and yet crying that all these were being practiced in order to provide good governance".

Mr. Upadhyaya however, also criticized the role of Nepali media in this regard by saying, "we have been acting like lap-dog instead of being true watch-dog. He also assured the establishment that if they sought media's support in enhancing governance in the country, the media was ready to extend its support in whatever way it can.

Professor Anand Shrestha, director NEFAS, on the occasion said that the seminar was in a series of such seminars held in the past which would go a long way in stabilizing and sustaining democracy in the country.

P. Kharel, FES Media advisor maintained that the endeavor should come from the establishment in providing good governance to the people. "If that happens, the Nepali media will definitely cooperate the establishment", Kharel added.

The keynote speaker, Robert Kerr, Director at the American Center, said that "an evaluation of whether governance in Nepal is good or bad must include an evaluation of the performance of the media"'.

He however maintained that "for Nepal to achieve good-governance it has to have a good and independent media. In the same vein Robert reiterated that "if you and others evaluate that Nepal does not have good governance, you need to look seriously at yourselves and the performance of the media to determine whether or not you are functioning at full speed".

In his opinion, independence, integrity, honesty, investigation and the needed follow up were some of the characteristics of a functional media.

Touching upon the stories of corruption (referring to the LAUDA Air deal) raised more often than not by the Nepali media of late, Robert Kerr said that "I have read nothing about this case since the former Prime Minister resigned from his post".

Concluding his remarks, the US official said, "to me the most important 'role of the media' as an institution of governance is in its obligation and responsibility to seriousness".( See third page for Mr. Kerr's full text).

The chief guest, Ambassador of the Federal Republic of Germany, Rudiger Lemp, opined that "for the Kingdom of Nepal where freedom of the press by and large has developed into a remarkable success story since the new constitution of November 1990 entered into force, this would have meant that good governance should also flourish here, however, according to a vast majority of observers, this is clearly not the case".

Ambassador Lemp further opined that there were certain preconditions before the media prior to expecting positive effects on good governance which included, among others, the ability to access, verify, collect, process and correctly present information; the ability to reach the people; a mechanism for interaction between an informed public and decision makers.

"As far as the situation in Nepal is concerned, it was not difficult to detect substantial deficits in all three requirements just listed above", added the Ambassador.

The Ambassador apparently wished to warn the Nepali leaders by saying, " if the common people do not see a possibility or do not really try 'to be counted' and listened to in between the elections, good governance probably becomes elusive".

"'This is perhaps Nepal's biggest problem"', continued the Ambassador.

This apparently meant that the leaders manning this country outrightly neglected their own voters until the next election came to their doorsteps.

The chief guest stressed the need to establish a sort of mechanism that allowed the people in high places to interact with the men in the grassroots.

According to Ambassador Lemp, the Maoists insurgency greatly benefited from a widespread sense of frustration over endemic corruption in the country. (See second page for Ambassador Lemp's full text).

(Telegraph adds: We in the Telegraph weekly express our gratitude to Ambassador Lemp who attended the seminar and read out the remarks as the chief guest despite the fact that Ambassador Lemp was in a state of mourning as his mother had left for her heavenly abode the previous evening , 19 December, in Germany. Accept Mr. Ambassador our heartfelt condolence on the sudden and the sad demise of your beloved mother. May the departed soul rest in peace -The entire family of the Telegraph Weekly and Mrs. N.P.Upadhyaya).

Mr. Ajay Ghimire presented his paper on role of media in enhancing good governance in which he said that the media could play the role of a watch-dog by exposing the cases of bad governance. He suggested the media not to sensitize the issue by scandalizing the person based on the symptoms, they should rather concentrate on the issue.

Mr. Ghimire further opined that in promoting good governance the media should focus more on the process of decision making and the processes through which such decisions are implemented.

He however suggested that in order to discharge their duties more effectively, the media agencies must increase their own capacities in order to become independent and proficient.

Professor Sridhar Khatri had chaired the first session.

Likwise, Professor Lal Babu Yadav in his paper maintained that while the government media were controlled by the party in power and tend to produce "biased news and views", majority of private media were run by individuals, business tycoons and politicians which articulate "private and partisan" news and views and therefore fail to illuminate and enlighten the public-the real consumers.

Mr. Yadav further said that freedom of citizens, a free and responsible press, an independent judiciary and government's data information are the system which can be perceived to be the key to the enhancement of right to information and make the institutions of governance transparent and accountable.

He however sees the role of media in informing, socializing, communicating and articulating the power of the public and preparing them for social transformation and good governance.

Senior journalist Shrish Rana chaired Mr. Yadav's session.

Thus ended the Telegraph /FES seminar on good governance.

Is Royal Palace that weak as suggested by Koirala?

Kathmandu: The internal squabble in the Nepali Congress has apparently touched a new height.

President Girija Prasad Koirala is determined to destabilize rival Sher Bahadur Deuba's regime come what may. In the process, Koirala is not only talking absurd but is also indirectly "irritating" the Royal Palace.

"The situation in the country is that neither the political parties nor the Royal Palace command respect from the people and hence the need for a "broader democratic alliance" which if materializes would correct the prevailing anomalies in the Kingdom", says President Koirala these days.

In his opinion, both the Royal Palace and the political parties currently operating in the country had lost their credibility or whatsoever.

Kathmandu intellectuals remain baffled on how to take Koirala's utterances wherein he suggests that only his "new formulae" of the formation a broader democratic alliance could bring about a dramatic change in the country which will apparently "save the democracy" which he apparently sees under threat.

However, Koirala's new formula does not provide answers to the impending threat to democracy and is also silent from whom this danger emanates?

If Koirala's indication is towards the King then looking at the various interviews which the new constitutional monarch granted to a number of Nepali journalists of late what becomes clear is that His Majesty will prefer not to cross the limits of the constitution.

Now if we take the King's assurances at its face value then there is nothing to panic regarding a threat to democracy as hinted by President Koirala.

Now the people have to decide whom to believe: the constitutional monarch or president Koirala?

If one were to recall Koirala's previous remarks regarding threat to democracy, one could easily recall that Koirala sees a threat to democracy as and when he is out of power. He sees things to have gone upside down the moment he is chair-less person.

Even his one time close aides admit that Koirala at times exhibit such funny symptoms when he is not the prime minister which implies, say his political rivals both within and without, that the existing constitution be amended in order to make Koirala the nation's prime minister for life-time.

"'Koirala's new proposal of broader democratic alliance is nothing but a ploy to bring his political rival down and rebound back to power"' said a NC man who comfortably disagrees with Koirala's new plan.

Majority of the NC cadres apparently have not even understood the underlying meaning of Koirala's new plan and feel some what ashamed over how the people belonging to other political parties and the international community would take Koirala's new plan which is nothing more than a game to bring Deuba down and that too at time of the continuing state of emergency.

Though the international community has so far not commented on Koirala's plan, however, what is believed is that they too would perhaps first listen to the mood of the countrymen and then would decide whether or not Koirala's plan were justifiable.

Undoubtedly, the people are not that happy with Deuba's present regime either in the sense that Deuba apparently has made the Maoists issues the country's single agenda. The people admit that the issue in question is but one agenda. However, the fact is that the establishment under Deuba must concentrate his efforts on other equally pressing agenda confronting the nation, for example, alleviation of poverty, health, education, price rise and above all the ever down going prestige of the country abroad.

This not withstanding, the people, wish that the petty internal matters of "power game" of the NC be settled well after the country take a respite from the state of emergency.

Retorting to Koirala's plan, the NC thespian leader Bhattarai described Monday evening that it was nothing but a "Koirala adamancy". He further said that there was no need for a different sort of government other than what was now in place.

This means that Bhattarai's blessings continue to be with his mentor Deuba that concurrently means that Bhattarai wishes Deuba regime to continue for long to the utter discomfiture of President Koirala.

Last week saw a sort of war of words in between Sher Bahadur Deuba and president Koirala. While on the one hand, Koirala hinted that Deuba regime had become redundant and hence there was a need to form a entirely new government comprising of members from various political parties, on the other the sitting Prime Minister dismissed Koirala's proposal as saying "blowing trumpet in the wrong season". Thanks that Koirala later got Deuba's mood and brought about a change in his former version.

All in all, Koirala could be sincere in his proposal. Granted that he means business in the interest of the nation. But then yet his indirect pinching the Palace every now and then perhaps is completely unwarranted which time permitting could boomerang his political career as Koirala must understand the fact that the Palace is not that weak as he considers it to be. As for political parties his comments could be brought under debate indeed. The fact is that the Royal Palace gains strength from the people who at the moment feel utterly cheated by their own leaders. Moreover, the Palace is gaining strength by default. If there is no performance, law and order is deteriorating, the leaders fight amongst themselves, naturally the people will direct their eyes towards the Palace considering it to be the last resort for addressing their unfulfilled aspirations and long standing grievances that remained totally neglected by the government's of the day. It is simply very natural. It is upto Koirala himself to judge his own performances being in the government for almost all the time since the advent of this new order. Will he do so? Perhaps yes but by being again in power.

More so, Koirala must understand that any change in the government set up at this juncture might hit the military's morale who were now out of the barracks to tame the Maoists insurgency.'

We wishes national consensus, not a seat in govt says UML leader

Kathmandu: The leader of the main opposition, Madhav Nepal, has perhaps pulled the rug under the feet of President Koirala.

The UML leader who preferred to go a long way with Koirala's new proposal for the formation of a broader democratic alliance appears to have left the latter in the lurch and invite comments not only from the opposition but from his own party men.

Talking to a congress affiliated vernacular weekly, Monday morning, Madhav Nepal now prefers to distance himself from Koirala proposal by saying that his party wishes a national consensus but not a seat in the government.

Clarifying it bit more further, Madhav Nepal opines that he has not discussed the matter of the formation of a sort of national government with any one in the recent days.

This is a clear hint to Koirala who had earlier claimed that he had discussed about it with Madhav Nepal and other leaders of the nation.

Taking Koirala talks very lightly, Madhav Nepal disclosed the interviewer that once he had suggested Koirala to do at least one good job for the benefit of the nation prior to leaving for heavenly abode.

"However, I see no seriousness in and among congress leaders. Could be due to age factor. Yet Deuba is rather different but Deuba talks too much ", added Madhav Nepal.

The UML leader also made it clear that his party differed with Koirala on question of the Maoists as well.

"He wishes to annihilate the Maoists summarily. We wish the Maoists be disarmed and be brought under the national political mainstream", continued Madhav Nepal.

According to Madhav Nepal, his party favors a suitable amendment in the 1990 constitution in order to do away with the anomalies that grip the nation at times.

He lamented that the NC is not serious in this regard.

In sum, what could be guessed in advance is that for the moment the UML will not side with Koirala in his new proposal regarding the formation of a broader democratic alliance.

Should this mean that Madhav Nepal in the mean time has suddenly given a second thought to his previous thinking? Guess works only indeed.

Whither South Asian Quadrangle?

Kathmandu: After a lapse of almost three years or so, the SAARC Summit is all set to happen early next year, January 4-6,2002, given the confirmations of the leaders of India and Pakistan that they would attend the Kathmandu SAARC Summit.

The fact is that Nepal as the host of this eleventh Summit could play an immense role provided it wishes to play such a role in bringing about a charismatic change in the attitudes of rival India and Pakistan simply because for this country both the South Asian arch rivals perhaps were close and very trusted friends.

However, much will depend on India and Pakistan as to whether they wish Nepal playing such a role to mend their five decades long differences over the one and the only issue-Kashmir.

To recall, both India and Pakistan have fought wars on account of their dispute over Kashmir and at the moment they are poised for yet another war should the leaders of the two countries so decide.

Given the SAARC Charter stipulations, no contentious issues could be raised in the forum. But yet, say intellectuals, the smaller countries of the SAARC forum would do well if they collectively approach both India and Pakistan and tell them in no uncertain terms that let their bilateral rivalry not hamper the SAARC process.

In the process, Nepal, as the host country could initiate such moves on the sidelines of the Summit albeit taking into confidence the explicit support of the rest of the smaller nations.

Nepal too could initiate actions that promote sub-regionalism. One would wish to recall the big-bang with which a sort of South Asian Quadrangle was established a few years back which, we suppose, has already died a premature death.

This quadrangle housed Nepal, Bhutan, India and Bangladesh, to recall.

Will the countries belonging to the quadrangle raise the issue so that the people of the region benefit?

We wish the SAARC Summit a grand success.

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