King trying to rapidly transform constitutional monarchy into active monarchy which will reinforce continuing deliberate structural flaws

Dr. Krishna Bhattachan, Sociology Department, T.U

He needs no further introduction to the regular readers of this newspaper.

Dr. Krishna Bhattachan is an academician who pushes his perceptions very force fully. He is adamant on his perceptions and would not compromise come what may. This is a quality that I like most. He is not unlike other academicians who talk differently on different occasions. He is candid and puts his views straight. In the process, he becomes target of his colleagues as well for varied reasons.

He is most vocal against the country being ruled by a set of Brahmins since long. According to this scholar, the prevalence of "Brahminism" in practically each and every sector of the Nepali society, is the root cause for the under-development and for other ailments that continue to grip the country. Those are his views.

Dr. Bhattachan secured his Doctoral degree in Sociology from the University of California, Berkeley, USA in 1993. He is a former Head and currently a senior Lecturer at the Sociology and Anthropology department of the T.U.

Dr. Bhattachan’s working model is RATOS (Research, Advocacy, Teaching/Training, Organization Building, and Social Mobilization).

Dr. Bhattachan has several books to his credit which include, among others, Development Practices in Nepal and NGO, Civil Society and Government in Nepal: Critical Examination of Their Roles and Responsibilities and Gender and Democracy.

He is considered to be the one who is the leading advocates of the disadvantaged groups of the country including indigenous nationalities, Dalit, Madhesi, and women.

He is modest. He is highly experienced and a scholar who could be considered to be an asset of the country. Dr. Bhattachan is an amicable personality. His colleagues love to listen to his comments, at times a fiery one indeed, though they may not necessarily agree to his views and perceptions.

He is talked to be one whom his students at the University love to listen to.

We approached this qualified scholar last week for a tête-à-tête. He agreed.

Below the results: Chief editor.

TGQ1: Nepali academicians do believe that it is the flaw continuing for long in the structural mechanism that has facilitated the emergence of violence of different sorts including those of the Maoists insurgency. What went wrong and where? Who is to be primarily blamed for such flaws? Your opinions please!

Dr. Bhattachan: Narendra Jee, I have no doubt whatsoever that the ideology, policies and practices of Brhamanism (Bahunbad) is to be primarily blamed for continuing flaws in structural mechanism leading not only to recent escalation of violence and counter violence in Nepal but also to "development of underdevelopment" of Nepal. Continuing deliberate structural flaws include unitary, predatory, patriarchal Hindu state, which protects and promotes dominance of one caste (Bahun-Chhetri), one language (Khas-Nepali), one religion (Hindu), one culture (Hindu), one sex (male), one region (Hill) and one class (ruling class). Structural change was not possible during authoritarian rules of the Ranas for 104 years and of the partyless Panchyata rule of 30 years. Unfortunately, it was not possible even during 12 years of multi-party political system. Since October 4, 2002 the King has deconstructed elected representatives by taking over executive power that was not intended by the constitution. He is trying to rapidly transform constitutional monarchy into active monarchy, which indeed will further reinforce continuing deliberate structural flaws. Most of the things that the dominant groups (Brahmanists) did in the last 234 years went wrong. It went wrong in all fronts— political, social, cultural, religious, linguistic, economic, psychological, and emotional and other fronts.

TGQ2: Imminent scholar, Dr. Harka Gurung, is of the opinion that Nepal is not a totally "integrated" nation what it should have been. Do you subscribe to his theory? If yes what plausible reasons you would wish to furnish? Also provide solutions to correct the anomalies that have led Dr. Gurung and many others to conclude on those lines? Your remarks please.

Dr. Bhattachan: Yes, I agree with Dr. Gurung that Nepal is not yet socially and economically "integrated." I want to add that Nepal is not yet psychologically and emotionally integrated. King Prtihvinarayan Shaha territorially integrated Nepal in 1769 but even after 234 years economic, social, cultural, psychological and emotional integration are nowhere in sight. Narendra Jee, when I say "integration", I, like Dr. Gurung, do not agree with some Brahmanists who equate it with a "melting pot." In the past the dominant group misused the whole state machinery to expedite the processes of "Hinduization," "Sanskritisation, "Nepalization" and "homogenization" to melt diverse groups of peoples into one group called "Nepali." In reality, different groups, namely, indigenous nationalities, Dalits, Madhesis, women, different language speakers, non-Hindus etc. maintained their respective identities by surfing against these tides but they all have been increasingly vulnerable to illiteracy, poverty, marginalization and displacement from their traditional homelands. Anomalies in gender, caste/ethnic, linguistic, cultural, religious and regional relations continue to amplify. The only solutions to correct these anomalies are to pursue "unity in diversity" or "salad bowl" or "rainbow" society and culture and inclusive democracy. Full and equal respect for diversity, strong commitment for reduction in social and economic inequalities and inclusion and empowerment of all caste/ethnic, linguistic, religious, cultural, sex and regional groups would really contribute in strengthening unity among the diverse Nepalese peoples. It is not possible without deconstruction of ideology, policies and practices of Brahamansim.

TGQ3: Conflict management, conflict resolution and conflict reduction has become a hot-topic in the country of late. So many seminars on these topics have already been conducted. The conflict, which it should have rightly addressed to, remains intact. Given this scenario, how you as a renowned sociologist of the country, define conflict as such? How would you wish to interpret the Maoists insurgency? Is it a conflict that has terrorist sort of dimension or is it a purely political one? Have you any idea in your mind that can address these conflicts?

Dr. Bhattachan: Yes it is hot indeed. Those agencies and actors who were intensively involved in the industry of poverty reduction" and domination have transformed themselves in the industry of "conflict reduction." Among the Nepalese agencies and actors, those who are part of the problem are claiming to be part of the "solutions." Those peoples, who continue to be victims of multiple discriminations, have always been out of the loop.

Conflict is a violent or non-violent, manifest or latent struggle between individuals or groups to control power, resources and status by eliminating, injuring or neutralizing the rival individual or group. Like many others, I, like many others, also firmly believe that Maoist insurgency is not a terrorist but purely a political act. Use of "counter violence" by the Nepalese Maoist could be seen as one of the forms of, following Charles Tilly, "politics of collective violence." If use of "collective violence" is sufficient for implicating the Maoists as terrorists, does it mean that use of violence in the past during the French Revolution, the American War of Independence, Bolshevik Revolution, The Chinese Revolution, civil wars and national liberation movements in different parts of the world and in Nepal, violence used by the Nepali Congress Party against the Rana rule and partyless Panchayat political system was acts of "terrorism"? What about the state that has monopoly over violence? In practice, winner is generally considered as "liberator" and looser as "terrorist." Personally I, like many others, do not like violence and counter violence; direct and indirect violence. Irrespective of our dislikes it was present in the past, it is present at present and it will be present in future also. The key question is how to minimize it and stop needless all forms of violence and counter violence?

My observation is that Nepal's Maoist insurgency should be interpreted in a multiple ways—as a "struggle," as a "violent struggle," as a "class struggle," as a "conflict," as an "internal conflict," as a "resistance," as a "collective action," as a "collective violence," as an "insurgency", as a "rebellion", as a "liberation movement," as a "people's movement," as a "civil war," as a "people's war," as a "guerrilla warfare," and as a "revolution." In order to address the issue of direct and manifested violence and counter violence, first of all, we should directly address the issues of latent and manifest structural and cultural violence. Direct violence will continue as long as structural and cultural violence continue. Women, indigenous nationalities, Dalits, Madhesi, 125+ mother tongue speakers and non-Hindus are multiple victims of caste/ethnic, gender, linguistic, religious, cultural and regional discriminations.

Ceasefire, dialogue, writing a new constitution by constituent assembly, inclusive democracy with federal structure, ethnic/linguistic/regional autonomy and sub-autonomy, proportional representation, positive discrimination, right to self-determination, referendum and secularism are the only solution to stop and prevent all forms of existing and possible conflicts in Nepal. In order to bring positive peace in Nepal, the dominant group should voluntary give long over due space to all hitherto denied caste/ethnic, language, religious, cultural, gender, class and regional groups. Otherwise, one or the other form of violence and counter violence will prevail.

TGQ4: Nepal is its hardest of times ever she have had in the recent memory. A sort of civil war is already on in the country. With presumably a sort of ego in between the political parties and the monarch, do you see any light at the end of the tunnel? How the country could be brought back to the rails from where it derailed? How you rate the performances of the political parties and of the King since October 4?

Dr. Bhattachan: Nepal, like any other state, must go through ups and downs. Most of the developed countries had already gone through hardest of time. In Nepal, we went through hardest time during the territorial unification, which was very violent. As it was not a war of liberation, Nepal, unlike other countries, could not make any breakthrough in terms of economic development. Therefore, it appears that the on-going hard time is a necessary condition for development of our country.

State should not pursue a policy of "eye for an eye." Military action is not a solution of Nepal's raging problem. It will do nothing other than increasing bloodshed of innocent peoples. Political problems must be handled politically and democratically and solutions must be found politically and democratically. The first step is building trust and confidence among the actors—civil society, the Maoist insurgents, parliamentary political parties, the King and the international community. The second step is obviously a round table conference with representation of these four actors, except international community. The third step is formation of a constituent assembly and writing a new constitution.

I am optimistically pessimist and pessimistically optimist. I know for sure that the trail traversed by the Barhamanist in the last 234 years is heading down. On the contrary, trail traversed by all suppressed, oppressed and subjugated groups in the last 234 years is heading up. We still have some time to correct the past wrongdoings.

Grading of performance of the King and political parties is easy. One needs not to be an eminent professor to give grades. I believe that even poor and illiterate people would give F (Fail) grade to both the King and political parties. My rating is not different from them.

TGQ5: You more often than not talk of the highhandedness of certain dominant castes that have caused much damage to others belonging to other ethnic tribes and the likes. How would you justify your claims? Your exclusive comments please.

 Dr. Bhattachan: Evidences are everywhere. It can be seen in the lighted areas, such as executive, legislative, judiciary, media, political parties and non-governmental organizations. Evidences are in dark areas as well. Available data/statistics speaks loud about it. Social scientists, especially anthropologists, have documented evidences in volumes and volumes of books and articles published since the fifties. More recently, donors' reports and documents also reveal these facts. Damagaes are evident from persisting poverty, illiteracy, lack of awareness, displacements, unemployment, lack of representation, lack of access to and control over resources and benefits and so on by women, Dalits, Madhesis, indigenous nationalities, mother tongue speakers, non-Hindus etc. By now increasing number of peoples, be it Nepalese or foreigners, know that the "emperor" ("dominant group" or "Brahamanist") has no "new clothes" but "naked."

Headline | Opinion | Dateline | National |  Editorial | Letter | 2nd Impression | Views | International | Past