I would agree with Huntington’s presumption that there will be a struggle over the biggest question of all: who are we ?

-Yub Raj Koirala

He is not an unknown person for the regular readers of this newspaper. In essence, he has appeared in these columns in the past as well. However, this time we have invited him to share his views not only on national issues but also on contemporary international events as well that we presume will arouse some critical interest among the readers.

He is Yub Raj Koirala, a personality who understands Francis Fukuyama and Samuel P. Huntington comparatively better than others do. He is an expert on international relations and hence his views have been presented for your perusal.

We approached this scholar last week for a short tête-à-tête and here is the result: Chief editor.

TGQ1: The Constitutional Monarch’s October 4 move is under debate. Did the King exceed his constitutional limits or it is just the otherwise? How would you Mr. Koirala have taken the Royal step? Your exclusive comments please.

Mr. Koirala: I think it were the political parties who mostly violated the constitutional norms within these last 12 years than the Monarch merely sacking a defunct and in his own words an "incompetent" government on grounds of sheer incompetence. Therefore the debate should not center around barely on its legality, if I understood your question rightly, but rather we need also to see what were the reasons which prompted the monarch to take such stern action that too at a time when the country was facing a grave internal problems posed by Moist movement which is demanding for republicanism. The monarch must have thought that it was high time he acted and save the nation from going to brink. The composition of present cabinet reflects the monarch’s motive behind such a move; mainly that by drawing various personalities from across the various socio-political spectrums, he wanted an end to the ongoing insurgency, stop the corrupt practices, force the state apparatus to perform well and at the same time providing relief and assistance to the ordinary lay man. It is most unfortunate that the present government seems to be incapable of fulfilling what they were assigned to. More or less this government could also one fine morning be dubbed as yet another "incompetent" one.

TGQ2: The sudden spurt of terrorism in the globe is considered by some, for example Samuel P. Huntington as "clash of civilization". Do you agree Huntington’s presumption?

Mr. Koirala: Well, there are clearly two dominant post cold war perspectives on offer. The end of history and the clash of civilization. Francis Fukuyama who rejuvenated the ideals of liberalism in the wake of the dissolution of the former Soviet Union, however, dismisses Huntington’s notion of clash of civilisation by arguing that the cultural differences between various civilisation will not necessarily be the source of conflict. On the contrary, he argues that the rivalry arising from the interaction of different cultures can frequently lead to creative changes and cites numerous examples of such cultural cross-stimulation such as the opening of Japan to the West. I tend to think that the extension of these liberal values from the core to the periphery through the sewage of globalization have resulted in what we today call "global terror". To some extent I would agree with Huntington’s presumption that there will be a struggle over the biggest question of all: who are we? The coming global crisis will force this question onto the global agenda. Unless, it is answered in universal terms, in notion to a common humanity, then the global governance and the rhetoric of globalization will remain irrational at the highest level and prone at the local level to fascism..

TGQ3: The SAARC Summit to be held in Islamabad has been postponed sine thus rendering the entire SAARC processes totally redundant. This happened in the past as well. Clearly, the Indo-Pak rivalry over Kashmir has hit the SAARC process very hard. Who is to be blamed primarily? Should the rest five countries form yet another organization of the sort of SAARC? Your opinions please.

Mr. Koirala: Definitely, SAARC is not working the way the European Union is as a regional cooperation or for that matter as the ASEAN. The European Union has achieved significant success in economic gains, political unity and the security matters since its formation in the early 70s. As regards with SAARC, as you hinted that the Indo-Pak rivalry over the issue of Kashmir has hit the process very hard and I do not see any chances of this issue being settled in terms acceptable to both India and Pakistan in the foreseeable future. This conflict and tension over Kashmir will always determine the function and proceeding of the SAARC processes. This particular problem cannot be expected to solve overnight since it is deeply rooted in their historical causes; even to the extent that both countries may even risk the nuclear war. Should the rest five form another organization as you suggested it could be a welcome step provided India and Pakistan don’t play the one of the five against another.

TGQ4: Madhav Nepal recently challenged the King and told the latter to come to contest the elections. Tell me Mr. Koirala which force prompted or could have encouraged Madhav Nepal to send threat loaded statements against the King? Do you see the challenge made by Mr. Nepal to be his own or some extra-territorial forces behind Nepal?

Mr. Koirala: I would not normally be interested in responding to this particular analysis but since you asked me, Madhav Nepal now needs to tell the people what Marxism-Leninism stood for and what exemplary Marxist rituals he has performed or adhered to in the last 12 years. Just sit down and analyze his statements made during this period and you will be shocked to find that how inconsistent he has been in his erratic utterances; including the interviews given to the BBC Nepali service. One minute he is seeking solace in the parliamentary democracy and the constitutional monarchy and the other minute challenging the king to come to contest the election is his whimsical behavior, which is not very far from yet another congress top-hat Mr. G. P. Koirala. Madhav Nepal or the Mr. Piggy in the Middle is now doing the same that Mr. Chandra Sekhar did 12 years before and there must of course be some extra territorial forces behind him assuring him of the abundance of mini parliamentary comfort.

TGW5: How one should take the Maoist phenomena? They blow hot and cold concurrently and in the process become enigmatic themselves. What formulae you would provide, if any, in order the issue comes to a happy conclusion?

Mr. Koirala: A sad episode has already begun in our history. The reported killing of 5 innocent people recently by the security forces while they were returning from the funeral procession was most profound and shocking to me. It saddens me deeply to see that more and more good governance, human rights and development agenda(s) are flowing overhead everyday while our brethren lay dead in our paddy fields. Our so-called leaders have miserably failed to see that Nepal was not only a country but also a culture-a world heritage site in herself and its people part of that great heritage of whom King Prithivi Narayan Shah so profoundly spoke of. If one strolls along the gore and valley of this mystical kingdom, he or she will have to confront the fairy tales of that imagination, which are found only in myths and legends of the heavenly kingdom. Today, our morals are running low. This is largely because of the legacy the leadership of the last past 12 years left behind. With leaders like G.P. Koirala, K.P. Bhattarai, Madhav Nepal and Sher Bahadur Deuba who so grossly misused the state mechanism to their own personal gain, the country lost its libido. We now need to dust off this leadership to their core and the entire problem will be solved.

There are no quick fix formulae that can be offered to solve the ongoing problem. However, we must all unite in one single cause, which is this nation of ours. We must do everything possible to minimize our differences and work to uplift the morals of this nation. So long as the state sovereignty is not being contested by the threat of the external forces, a round table consensus involving all the progressive force is all that is needed to solve the problem.  

Headline | National | Editorial | 2nd Impression | International | Past