Wednesday, August 3, 2005

Conflict is a societal phenomenon and violence flares up when State proves unable in establishing distributive justice

Prof. Ananta Raj Poudyal, Political Science Department, T.U

Terrorism is "the unlawful use of threat of violence against persons or property to further political or social objectives." There is no consensus on the definition of terrorism but the above definition has been used for the purpose of this study.

The pluralistic Nepali society is considered to be "an ethnic turn-table" of Asia. However, for a long period, the state did not recognize the plural identity of the society. The political process concocted by the ruling clique to perpetuate the domination of the ruling elite and its vested interest groups had been the characteristics until 1951. In the name of developing homogenous national culture, the state policy adopted strategies like racial purity, caste hierarchy, and gender discrimination and even denying the basic human rights of people. Illiteracy and poverty were the major impediments for ethnic mobilization in society against the ruthless Rana rule.

Thirty years (1960-90) of "partyless" of Panchayat polity under an active monarchy was not much different from the autocratic Rana rule. Not only the fundamental rights of the people buffeted under this regime, even the legitimacy of the political system was corroborated by a stage-managed referendum held in 1980. Surprisingly enough, the 1990 democratic constitution of Nepal also inherited some of the legacies of the Panchayat system, which would only serve to further perpetuate the underlying ethos of the elitist Hindu state.

Upsurge of ethnic nationalism, though in a miniature form demanding regional autonomy, linguistic and cultural rights, have surfaced in Nepal during 1950's political change. In later years, ethnic awareness created by the process of modernization has put enormous pressures upon the political system for the recognition of their cultural, linguistic identity. Some ominous signs of breakdown of the politically induced social cohesiveness are clearly perceptible even under the present day democratic framework. The democratic process which begun 15 years before is proved to be weak and the state's capacity to sustain the process in co-opting ethnic challenges is very fragile. Though the ethno-political violence in Nepal does not look as alarming as seen elsewhere in South Asia, the Maoist insurgency is posing a serious threat to Nepal's young democracy. The radical leftists, who want to do away with the present parliamentary system of democracy, seem to have received support from different ethnic groups, as the state has failed in addressing the grievances of plural society. It is reported that the Maoists have exploited Nepali ethnic nationalism and incited them to rise against the existing social order for their own political purpose. As the Maoists have been trying to install their own brand of dictatorship of the proletariat with a tinge of Marxist Puritanism, and the state does not respond ethnic demands properly and at a time, when needs outstrip the goods and services available to satisfy them, it could be attributed for emergence of a more complex motivational force to ethnic violence.

Nepal is in a new democratic transition. The degree of economic development is minimal and the country is facing severe domestic crisis as a results of demands from minority ethnic groups that challenge state legitimacy. If ethno-political violence is regarded as an expression of conflict over state and nation building, the role of state could be conceptualized with the theories of democratic transition and consolidation. Over the years, Nepali society has been highly exposed. Specially, due to exposure of information technology, the pluralistic society is trying to redefine its role and place within the emerging democratic setup. As Nepal appears to have assumed a greater importance in the context of South Asian security, Nepal's political stability is necessary not only for Nepal itself but also for the international community. Situated in a very sensitive strategic location, Nepal's importance in the context of growing terrorism and its interface with ethno-political violence is increasing. With the newly emerging alignment between China, Pakistan and Russia on one hand and India and the USA on the other, a new cold war like situation may be arising.

"Crisis in Nepal could change regional balance," is how Stratfor, an Austin based intelligence firm, titles its report on global intelligence update of January 4, 2001, prognosticating a communist takeover and probable change of the nation's entire political system and strategic tilt of the state toward Beijing. The report adds that given the strategic leverage that Nepal, located literally at the top of Eurasia, enjoys, such a tilt could offer advantages of space linked surveillance, intelligence, and navigation systems of Nepal's high mountains over several Asian regions from Central Asia to South Asia. As far as the emergence of ethno-political violence due do discriminatory state policy and its interface with terrorism is concerned, Nepal faces a challenging task of maintaining a constant and delicate balance among the regional and world powers, especially with the USA.

The Bush Administration is touting the rule of law, democracy and human rights priorities in its effort to create stability and defeat terrorism. Therefore, President Bush remarked, "the best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in all around the world." So the US is supporting human rights and democracy in Nepal. In the words of US Ambassador James Moriarty, "US will stand beside any nation determined to seek the rewards of liberty for its people." Therefore, the US is very committed to safeguard Nepal's democracy. It does not like to see any kind of instability in the country, and it does not like to see Nepal being caught up in the problem of terrorism. In her statement, US Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia Christina Rocca said that Maoists pose a threat to "regional stability" and thus confirms, "democracy is crucial to fight Maoists." Speaking at a talk program on Nepal­-US relations, she pointed out "The US and international assistance was now at risk from brutal Maoist insurgency which intends to impose one party-people's republic, such a regime would almost certainly threaten stability in the region." (The Kathmandu Post, May 11, 2005). In the meantime, Ambassador Moriarty suggested bringing the Maoist in the main national stream through dialogue. He also remarked that democracy means ability of the people to elect and/or change their government, press freedom, and an independent judiciary." We are not believers in different sorts of democracy for different sorts of people because that has always been used to disguise paternalism and authoritarian­ism." Other factors responsible for democratic disruption of Nepal are failure of political parties to institutionalize the democratic process as well as the King's action of February 19. However ethnic mobilization within the framework of social, economic and political institution has appeared a serious challenge as well as an obstacle to transform the Nepali society in a desired manner.

Freedom loving people know that terrorism has not boarder and diversity of nations have all jumped into anti-terrorism bandwagon. India, China and Pakistan too have expressed solid backing to ferret out suspected mastermind Osama bin Laden from his hide out. Terrorism to have a snowballing effect in South Asia and even in Nepal needs to be dealt with in a collective manner.

Situated in a sensitive strategic location of the Central and South Asia, the growth of violence from ethnic and political discontent in Nepal interfaced with Maoist insurgency could go out of proportion and create an alarmingly destabilized region.

As Nepal traveled from a long way from autocratic regime tc parliamentary democracy, and again by royal absolutism, democratic institutions have appeared completely fragile. Though ethnic violence is not yet alarming as seen elsewhere in south Asia, but the terrorism unleashed bv the Maoist in the name of people's war have taken a heavy toll on men, money and material. More that 12,000 people have already been killed, and people have lost faith on the government. It is reported that the security forces have also been engaged in serious human rights abuses including unaccounted for detentions, abuse and disappearance of detainees, torture, and employing arbitrary and unwarranted lethal force. Institutional weaknesses hamper the government's ability to respond appropriately and effectively to human rights violation. Violence against women, trafficking in women and children, child labor, the rights of women and refugees and the impact of insurgency-related violence on children remain serious human rights concerns.

Life is constantly under threat in a few districts; people are flocking to the district headquarters and towns for safety. The security budget has already increased considerably, and is bound to increase further in view of the long term liability associated with the increased paramilitary force for combat duties. Worse still there is danger of domino effect in other places, for any government no task is more important than the security of life and property of its citizens. The menace of terrorism seems to be spreading in other parts of country. What is at stake here in Nepal is not just law and order in a few districts, but sustainability of the democratic process and the country's economic future as well. Interestingly, a number of press reports confirm that terrorism unleashed by the Maoist insurgency in South Asia is linked with the Revolutionary International Movement aiming at establishing the communist rule. In Nepal too, they are said to be getting support from across the border like Andhra Pradesh, West Bengal, Bihar and Uttar Pradesh states in India. How ethnic movement of Nepal has been interfaced with terrorism could be justified with evidences with ethnic leaders like Dev Gurung, Suresh Ale Magar, and Matrika Prasad Yadhav active in the Maoist movement. At the same time, the Maoist of the Indian provinces are reported supplying small arms and light weapons as tools for supporting and pursuing armed conflict in pursuit of terrorist's interests. The ethnic conflict in Nepal, therefore, seems to have manifested in a variety of ways ranging from political protest to terrorist insurgency.

Upsurge of ethnic nationalism, demanding regional autonomy and federalism, linguistic and cultural rights and religious secularism have been openly surfaced in Nepali society. Ethnic awareness created by the process of modernization has put enormous pressures upon the political system for the recognition of their cultural, linguistic and religious identity. The Hill people versus the Tarai people dichotomy, (to the extent the majority hill people reflect minority fear psychosis against the bordering Indian states), which has remained a great psychological barrier in the integration of Nepal over the years, has shown some ominous signs of breakdown. The politically induced social cohesiveness is clearly perceptible and the state's sustainable capacity to sustain the process in co-opting the demands of the Tarai people appears to be fragile even under the present democratic set-up. More specifically, ethnicity of the Terai people is related to the discriminatory state policy such as economic inequalities, territorial dissatisfaction and socio-political discrimination in terms of valued resources. The radical leftists, who want to do away with the present parliamentary system, have exploited Nepali ethnic nationalism and have urged people to rise against the existing social order for their own political purpose. The ethno-political problem, specially the Tarai identity, is found to be deep and divisive, persistent and impoverishing. It is tending to attract external predators and opportunists, who, for reasons of their own, have exploited internal rifts, adding fuel to the fire in Nepal.

It could be concluded that only those societies have been successful in reducing ethno-political conflicts where ethnic groups are allowed to share power through the democratic process and where plural identity is maintained on the basis of minimum value-consensus. When ethnic groups are provided equal opportunities for sharing the valued resources they are found to be functioning within the rules of the political game. On the contrary, when the state responds to ethnic mobilization with exclusion and repression, ethno political violence is bound to occur with bigger magnitude. Provision of consociational democracy (e.g. Belgium, Norway and Sweden), federalism (e.g. the United States, Switzerland and Canada) electoral reform for minority groups, preferential programs or quota system, and direct and representative democracy have so far proved to be the most effective strategies in containing ethno-political unrest. Conflict is a natural phenomenon in any society and violence flares up when a state proves unable to establish distributive justice such as allocation of goods and services, honors, statuses, and opportunities of various kinds due to discriminatory policy. Under such circumstances, conflict emerges between different ethnic groups to obtain the best position in society. To deal with problems, development of democratic institutions, formation of civil society and citizen's participation in the policy making process have been considered to be the effective strategies for containing ethno-political violence.

Text kind courtesy of the T.U. Journal of political Science Vol VIII, No 3, Nepal. -Ed.