Ambassador Frank's frank statement

When enough becomes enough some one articulates. When the situation becomes really very jumbled and the lay men found it difficult to air their grievances or feel that their problems will not be heard by the establishment the nation's media comes to their rescue. And it is through the media that the responsible citizens become suddenly active and prefer to speak the voices of the people. In the case of the diplomats of very friendly countries, they first analyze the situation, go deep into the causes of the situation and finally taking due care of the protocol matters conclude that their timely "suggestions" were needed to alert the nation from going closer to the brink.

Some fifteen years ago it was then American Ambassador Leon J Weil who had suggested the then government to give ear to the voices of the people and act accordingly. Ambassador Weil had extended very valuable suggestions to the then Panchayati government which if brought in to effect perhaps would have given a new lease of life to the very tenure of the system. However, the government then took it as an affront and commanded its media to condemn the US diplomat to the extent that some of the Nepali media urged the government to declare Ambassador Weil as 'persona non grata". Contrary to the expectations and the design of the government against Ambassador Weil, the US envoy did his job well and the effect was seen in the change of the system itself within a very short period of American diplomat's famous speech made at the Rotary Club.

Diplomats hardly speak. They hardly talk against their host government. However, it is the situation perhaps that forces them to speak and that too in mild language. This they do in the larger interest of the people and the government. In doing so they apparently wish to indicate the host government that not all was going well in the nation and that the establishment must do the needful and deliver the goods to the people through good governance. What Ambassador Frank has done this round by airing his anxiety over the continued poor performance of the establishment and the ever-sliding law and order situation in this Himalayan Kingdom should perhaps act like an eye opener to the Nepali government under Koirala. What Ambassador Frank did is that he collected the needed courage to sound his "feelings" over the country's situation right in front of the Prime Minister. What the Ambassador has accomplished last Tuesday evening is simply superb from the common men's point of view. When it is the Prime Minister Koirala and his team at the helm of state affairs whose disgusting performance have invited chaos and all sorts of anomalies in the nation then who else be told of his misperformance and malgovernance in such an explicit manner? Whether Koirala listened to the Ambassador's remarks or not is simply immaterial. What is important is that the nation's media forced him to listen those "significant" comments. However, Koirala must not panic from such meaning loaded statements but instead take it as a valuable proposal and embark on a path which assures the donor community that every thing would be brought under total control and that the rejected and the neglected citizenry too would be taken proper care of henceforth.

When Ambassador Frank sees clouds hanging over current development efforts, he is hundred percent correct. Even a lay man will presumably tell the same sorry state of affairs in this sector. The fact is that for so many reasons no development activities have taken place over these years. Even if some started, the intermittent change of the project chiefs at the whims of the government retarded the very speed of the development in the said area. Add to this the corruption factor, which begins right from the moment the project is at its embryonic stage and continues till the project gets if finished by the Almighty's grace. At yet another level, the US diplomat makes a fervent appeal to all and sundry for an improved national dialogue to facilitate better atmosphere for the prevalence of peace and furtherance of developmental efforts in the country. Perhaps no one will disagree to this million-dollar suggestion coming as it does from the seasoned US diplomat who knows Nepal and her politicians since quite long. The total absence of a national consensus on the pressing issues confronting the nation is what perhaps the Diplomat is hinting about. So what is the harm in it when some one friendly to this country reminds us of our duties? And when the Ambassador says " my plea is for political leaders and government officials to renew their commitment for good governance, and for all Nepali citizens to commit themselves to peaceful participation in the democratic political process", he is speaking the truth as he has himself witnessed these shortcomings by being very much in Kathmandu over the years. Most remarkably, the Ambassador implies in his statement there has been less participation of the people in the democratic process. He is again correct. For it is clear that the system now in place could not become "inclusive" for all. Unless the system becomes inclusive and brings in the total support of the citizenry, the order can't continue for long. However, the grand reality has been that the nation became so much polarized after the advent of the new order that non-partisanised people concluded or were made to conclude that the system was not for them instead but for those only who were in the congress, communist and other political camps. It was this alienation of the majority of the people over the years that weakened the system from within.

In fact the donor community had been hinting the establishment for effecting certain changes in favor of the people. However this was not forthcoming. In essence, the Finnish high level delegation that came last year to finalize its aid package program for Nepal clearly told Nepali government to provide good governance or else face consequences. Only last week, the newly accredited German Ambassador Rudieger Lemp talking to Nepali scholars hinted that what this country needed most at this critical juncture was "political stability" and providing of "good governance" by the government. In saying so, Ambassador Lemp spoke so many things albeit in an indirect fashion. Finally, Ambassador Frank summed up the collective feeling of the entire donor community presumably. If it is so then Nepali establishment must think twice and thrice on how to improve performance and maintain peace at the earliest or else prepare itself for the impending penal actions from the powerful community. However, in what form the penal actions will approach Koirala administration is any body's guess.

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