Nepal needs genuine democracy

It's alarming to see that the Himalayan country has no real economic roadmap in place. Industries are either being shut down or they are stagnating. Meanwhile, politics is being shamelessly played out.

In a recent quantum leap, the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), the constituents of United Democratic Madhesi Front and other Madhesi and Janjati parties came together to form a Federal Democratic Republican Alliance, with the professed aim of moving towards ‘a Constitution with federalism, and federalism with identity’. Unfortunately, this hardly presents any positive signal to end the political uncertainty in that country.

The FDRA’s aim is to put pressure on the Nepali Congress and the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist-Leninist) to accept an identity-based restructuring of the state before the polls and then go in for an electoral partnership. Altogether, this alliance has done little more than angering the Opposition and preventing any potential thaw in relations.

The present state of Nepal’s politics allows for such an unusual condominium of parties that make little sense when it comes to resolving the greater political mess in the country. The overblown ambitions of the political class nullify the earlier efforts of democratic experiments. The current state of instability in Nepal seems to be more the result of the behavioural recklessness of politicians rather than the consequence of a celebrated political transition.

Undoubtedly, such pacts and agreements among politicians who are under pressure to survive have pushed governance issues to an all-time low. When the roads were not all rubble and 12-hour-long power cuts were not the norm, things were different. The people of Nepal had hope in the new generation of politicians and their brand of democratic politics.

For instance, the Maoists, until recently, were viewed differently as they focused on inland development and did not wish for Nepal to continue as a dumping ground of imported goods. However, their economic vision has been lost mid-way. Today, the work done by the present Maoist led-Government, headed by the once ideologically pure Prime Minister Baburam Bhattarai, is no less disappointing than any of his predecessors.

The wider connect among the people of India and Nepal has remained the cornerstone of ties between these two countries; the bond here is simply unmatchable. Still, the current level of engagement between these two countries is less satisfactory than it used to be in earlier times. From the Indian side, there is need to limit reliance on the diplomatic mission in Kathmandu for all negotiations, most of which should actually be carried out by Ministerial level delegations.

Also, the inadequate response from India in diplomatic engagement has kept Nepal on the margins; in this regard, there is need for course-correction. Greater people-to-people exchanges will help minimise anti-India feelings among a large section of the Nepali population. In the recent past, India has played the role of a cautious yet concerned neighbour, with respect to Nepal’s fluctuating political scenario. But to stop the vendetta of misguided radicals, India should deal with the situation in a proactive manner and without any biases.

Since 1996, Nepal has witnessed a series of troubling developments. Primary among them was the outbreak of the highly violent Maoist insurgency and later the royal massacre of 2001 which pushed the nation into an age of uncertainty. King Birendra had acceptability among the masses and political parties as well; and his willingness to lead Nepal to democracy was well known. It is true that had he still been alive, the credibility of the throne would not have been lost so early and without the emergence of any better substitute. Before 2001, Nepal was a nation in political transition. Now, it is a land ruled by leaders, who have no other plans except to walk with their erroneous ideas.

It’s alarming to see that Nepal really has no economic roadmap in place. Industries are either being shut down or they are stagnating. Janakpur, a remarkable city in the Terai region, has no other industry apart from a state commanded cigarette factory. As a result, the city is far worse today than it was twenty years ago.

This problem is contagious. The condition of Nepal’s other big cities is not very different. Nepali leaders visiting New Delhi have no will to execute the Memorandums of Understanding signed with the Indian Government or the Indian private sector in the areas of thermal power, telecommunications, tourism etc.

Until the political class reacts to economic impulses, things in Nepal will be hard to change. Nepal deserves a better deal than shrinking under the false promises of undeserving politicians. Democracy is indeed desirable but only if Nepal has chances of getting a real one, not something clownish in its place.
Atul Kumar Thakur
September 29, 2012, Saturday
Email: summertickets@gmail.com
(Published in The Pioneer, dated on September 20, 2012/ http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnists/item/52487-nepal-needs-genuine-democracy.html )

Essential Reconciliation

Two most remarkable politician till date in the democratic history of Nepal,Prachanda and Babu Ram Bhattrai is indeed sharing a symbolic bond by wearing this meaningful "Paag'{Maithil Cap}for public but their internal differences have even crossed the level and dignity of spat.Prachanda, with whom the genesis of radical politics begub in the Himalayan state had always remain averse to allign his whole agenda with public or even trusted cadres..with immense merit and acceptance,it's hardly unlikely that he is not finding easy to cohabit with another high rank man in his camp.

The tantrums regarding the potential Indian role in hijacking the key of Maoist brigade is one of biggest folly of Prachanda which have been so far and may be in future will be keep haunting the internal as well the external prospects of Nepal. Baburam Bhattarai has reason to be closer with India as he spent his formative years in this nation,even during the long insurgency era, he received overt support from like-minded Indians.Yes, Bhattarai is very much right if he has dare to look on Maoism as movement instead of political conglomeration since he knows the future of revolution and compulsions of liberal democratic system very closely.

For now,theirs spat hammering the Maoist's prospect more than any other possibility albeit it would indeed possess a big risk for Prachanda himself and his party's further prospect as an alternative hope in national politics.Through my personal sources,I found the peoples growing apathy for this forced political stalemate in the country...they,especially the young generation is badly enchanted towards the politician's role.They no longer want to entwine with the theories which given them even worse political leadership since the end of Monarchy. In no way,I am contemplating any nostalgia for Monarchy but this was the mass reaction following the 17th round of failureness to choose a dignified PM and a working constitution.
Breaking of ice is impossible with the stubbornness of top Maoist ranks as they still have no mood to leave their demand for exorbitant absorption of theirs army with the National Arm Force. These are undeserving demand and at the same time a sort of force dealing with the strife ridden country.In their complacency both the chief Maoist ideologue, Prachanda and Babu Ram Bhattrai had forget to recall that they are part of democracy rather than the upholder of Maoist state; their cynical demonstration in front of official royal set-up with five thousand strong armed cadres for maneuvering the replication of Balkanization in Nepal was out rightly shocking, the way they were pronouncing that Newar community would be given more rights than others in newly formed province had sparked the fuel of mass sentiment.

As Maoist ideologue Babu Ram Bhattrai believes their participation in peace process or constitutional development merely as “tactics” to enter among the bourgeois and a pre-exercise before grabbing the throne and later shaping it into their ideological fervor (Communist utopia) instead of sharing existing democratic model in which they have given fair chances-such game plan is entirely contradictory to their erstwhile preaching when they avoiding such faux pas and desired on numerous occasion for political peace process and constitutional making task.
Now Maoists and other political parties know the fact that the deadlines of constitutional making process wouldn’t be met by easily in the situation of flux that also grew up after the departure of UN Mission in Nepal, so they are adopting different stand-Maoist Babu Ram Bhattarai’s stand is seems explicitly deadly as he thinks in that case they will declare the constitution from the street and capture power albeit they are forgetting their lowering popularity from mass psyche since they couldn’t copied the pious motives of socialization as the communists of Cuba or many other country did in past.

Way back from the Maoist’s insurgency in 1996 and later their mainstreaming and emergence as single largest party in Nepalese politics have been relentlessly co-inside with the large scale violence and civil war like situation, which’s still being far from over as the collapse of central authority with the end of monarchy, any alternative retrieval plan from major political players only creating void and a loose regime that propelled swiftly on hatred, intolerance and violence-far from stable and peaceful state of affairs.

High expectations were prevailing from Maoists prospective role in the wake of their democratization and accession to the highest political order of the country but they couldn’t endured the expectations for long and very soon started to jeopardize the situation over a standoff between the army and the Maoists, and later between the Maoists and their coalition partners…and now eventually within party itself.Maoists consistent distrust in sharing the state authority and their wayward opportunist expediency now forming furore among a large chunk of population including the media who now for the first time explicitly supporting the Nepal’s official army as they feeling the potential fallout of Maoists strategic domination in the country.

Maoists views are extremely critical on past agreement with India including the border issues; they are in favour of tectonic shift in alliance with the Indian state by daringly asking for removal of Indian army from Kalapani and restraining their so-called encroachments in Susta region-most of claims are prejudicial and could cause for large scale misunderstanding between these two very interdependent and cordial nation.Whatever the Maoists oral assertions like-abolition of the President’s un-constitutional move, maintaining civil supremacy, safeguarding national independence, checking foreign interference etc, they act entirely opposite from their own front with preoccupied contentious motives.

Maoists have shown terrible performances on most of issues since their arrival as a force in 1996-frequent human rights violation and barbaric suppression including murder of dozens of journalist for merely their ideological opposition with Maoist functional methods. Situation is indeed turning in very grim shape as things are again being ready to be fall apart-presently little hopes persists to visualize consensus among the political parties in near future to look after on the crucial issues of peace process and constitutional drafting. Political parties and members of civil society must refute any maneuverings of Maoists to merge their arm cadres with national army, otherwise stalemate would be never halted; international community have also play a major role to lift Nepal from this very unfortunate state of affairs.

Today India’s neighborhood policy cries for greater attention, so India must monitor the situation closely and assist in stable and united Nepal-where there is will there is always a way…we can’t and shouldn’t see Nepal moving like Bosnia. I think nobody could suggest the exact way to resolve his trust deficit with Babu Ram Bhattarai, even if the reconciliation would take place, there is little chances that they would think better than theirs past action for the nation. Anyway, there will be no wrong, if we wait for another turn…hope the wait this time will be much shorter than the Godot in Samuel Backett’s immortal political play-“Waiting for Godot”!

Atul Kumar Thakur
January 22nd 2011, New Delhi
Blog: www.onesstandpoint.blogspot.com
atul_mdb@rediffmail.com

Tracing Aspirations for Nepal

The Constituent Assembly’s failure to deliver a Constitution on stipulated time-line and even after and Parliament’s failure to elect a Prime Minister despite prolonging the exercise for double digit rounds raising serious concern over the accountability of political parties in Nepal. Following perplex state of action in absence of any outcome makes an observers side completely drudgery and concomitant despair for all concerned components.
With unkept promises, political class especially Maoists are now being seen as hellion with their brusque attitude towards the ground realities and needs of nation. No denying the fact, that Maoists are not alone accountable for the quivering domestic political scenario though with putting upon theirs ostensible demand after putsching the Monarchies quintessentially makes them a catalyst in entire persisting deadlock.

Signing twelve point understanding in November2005 in New Delhi with the Indian mediation for anti-Monarchy movement was a hurried step that couldn’t be adequately sensed by the Maoist or other seven pro-democracy parties from Nepal. Instant reason for Indian involvement in anti-Monarchy movement was shaped through the aberration created by King Gyanendra during the 2005 SAARC Summit where he laid the proposal for China as an observer which was unanimously accepted by the member nations-without any mediation, indeed it was a sort of unofficial breach that caused deep insecurity in Indian diplomatic side.
Given the historically trusted and entwining relationship between India and Nepal, it was unbearable for India to see China’s unnatural involvement with its very dear Himalayan state. China has been so far played feeble and inconsistent role in Nepal but the Maoists emergence at Centre-stage suddenly given them a level playing field against India which now fuelling the rivalry of engagement.

As a very close entity in varied terms, Nepal must understand the growing insecurities of India from its strategic point of views and instead of pushing both superpower for negative engagement at the domestic turf; it would be quite better to engage with both of them without forgetting its natural akinness for India. It would leverage Indian role in forming conducive environment both at domestic arena in Nepal as well as at international juncture-positive involvement would give India too a chance to strengthen its diplomatic ties with Nepal by giving its actual due to the Himalayan state. Energized co-operation with spillover of goodwill would forge better environment of concord and prospects of democracy.
Nepal here must have to prefigure the China’s dual playing at its every crucial juncture; from1950 to 1989{during trade blockade by India which lasted for twenty months that badly affected its economy}-at both the crucial occasion, China checked them with realistic visualization and kept reiterating India’s natural closeness to Nepal. Even in 2006, when India along with the Nepalese democratic forces was poised for heading-on with Monarchy, China was feeding the King with arms and ammunition to crackdown on Maoists and other demonstrating political parties-thanks laudable collective efforts, China’s plan of bloodshed didn’t worked out in Nepal. Nepal must be reckon with its strategic standing without too much reshuffling some of its conventional basic lesson of diplomacy-otherwise, contemplation of experiments wouldn’t be ended more than deadpan per se following the ambitious dualism.

The most inevitable thing that Nepal has to do the figuring out of its people’s aspiration as now Maoists too sounds pragmatic about the prospective merger of Armies and noticeably on the role of Monarchy. Without deviating under any forcible ideological compulsions, it would be prudent for Nepalese political parties to delve with the best possible options suitable for theirs quest for democratic establishment and supremacy of Constitution.
This would be true healing touch from democratic political forces who have been disappointing the mass Citizens since 1920-if Maoist Supremo ”Prachanda” sensing the blunder of abrupt abolition of Monarchy without giving them even a minimum Constitutional prerogative, that remorseness must be seen in true light and without contentious convictions. Prolongingness of deadlock in Nepal is neither feasible not ideal for the sake of peoples genuine aspirations…there is need of rebuilding the confidence among the mass Nepalese for a brighter prospect of this beautiful nation.
Atul Kumar Thakur
October20, 2010, Wednesday, New Delhi
atul_mdb@rediffmail.com

Nepal: Looking for Consensus

Consensus politics as the most scarce reality, have badly disturbed the deadline of a new constitution on May28th,2010 and possibly same can happen next year in the presence of deep political divisions in Nepal.
In present assembly, Maoists have biggest stake and slightly change in their outlook have made things on streamline but the most vital aspect is Maoists inconsistent reckoning to their commitments and promises which hitherto they have failed to deliver on most of occasions.
Now Maoist’s conducive stand is making two change inevitable-first resignations of PM Madhav Kumar Nepal and thriving for a consensus government with the help of Nepali Congress and CPN {UML}, until these two changes wouldn’t take place it’s hard to assume the words of Maoist’s turning into practices.

Presently, Nepal desperately needs to align all its political forces towards the target of new constitution which is prerequisite for the further political maneuvering in the nation. Alienation from masses is another unusual area where political parties, especially Nepali Congress and CPN {UML} have to be worked hard to compete genuinely with the Maoist’s at the political arena.
In absence of strong mass back-up, these two political parties are destined to adversely juggle between Indian government and old security establishment in the country, which is an embarrassing development that never going to address the real flaws.

There is an immediate need from all quarter to understand the grimness, Nepal facing as a young democracy-it would be worthwhile to note here that transition to democracy in Nepal appeared shortly then other democratic countries, but so far, its enactment have been more prone to disappointment.
India, as a natural and most trusted ally is closely entwined with the domestic affairs of Nepal-besides sharing a long stretch of land and commonness on most of fronts,these two countries needs to upbeat on their trusted relationship and faith which built in centuries. In recent past, some unfortunate developments have come across the natural relationship between these two neighboring nation-they all derived from the misjudgment of Maoist’s towards India’s role in Nepal and their ideological compulsion which drew them closer with China.

Moreover, their premonitions with India have larger binding on domestic turf rather on international sphere as these trivial issues are hardly decisive in the India-China or any other relations from Indian point of view. India has adequate sense of some past mistakes and now anticipating to balance them by revised acts-so, in wider perspective, India and Nepal must remain closely intertwined in all crucial affairs.
Consensus among the political parties and Maoist’s attitude at large would decide the role of ousted King, who in the wake of rampant corruption and opportunism in Nepali party politics gaining unprecedented support from a chunk of citizens who stands for religious and social harmony.
Their fears are acknowledgable as they absolutely emerged from the vested power play of Maoist’s who in the name of affirmative action poised to give big jolt on the integrity of nation. Indeed, this is an unique disturbance in the history of modern Nepal when an administrative proposition is forming on the line of caste and ethnicity,worst of all with an idea of federalism for this small nation.
Amidst, those fears and uncertainty, former King Gyanendra received grand reception during his recent trip to Terai region of Janakpur and Nepalgunj {west Nepal}-peoples were shouting in Maithili “Raja aau, desh bachau {King come back, save the country}”; condition have changed dramatically in his favour, like Indira Gandhi during the 1977-80 phase, he appeared as a cementing force who brought together the diverse political parties united only by animosity towards him {Yubaraj Ghimire, All hail the King, The Indian Express, May29th2010}.

Working pattern of political parties in Nepal would decide the next course of possibility albeit the Maoist’s conception about mainstream and their prospective handling with the ambition of party cadres are going to main catalyst. Unfortunately, till now, they have been mostly subdued the national interest on the cost of party interests that will keep raising question marks on Maoist’s real intention and any endorsement they would contemplate as plan of next order.
Presently conditional alignment of parties for new constitution is only a drop in the desert; the real change would appear visible only after the lessening of intra and inter party rivalry and consensus at least for the crucial issues of national interest. Like on most of occasions, it’s indeed hard to see the next moment in Nepal…
Atul Kumar Thakur
June1st 2010, Tuesday, New Delhi
atul_mdb@rediffmail.com

Nepal-Caught in Personifying Assertions

The present coalition of Nepal shows a paradoxical scenario about its acceptance at large; within country government led by Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal uprightly facing the crisis of legitimacy besides consistent hostile opposition from Maoists but in external affairs it receiving warm accolades from friend nations like India, where this government has seen as best alternative representation through democratic practices.
Here Indian concerns are vital since historically India have been sharing the plights of Nepal with strong sense of responsibility; in recent past India played very positive role in post monarchial political adjustment in Nepal especially in peace process with Maoists and forming a consensus on twelve point agreement.

But through recent developments in Nepalese politics, Maoists role could be just extrapolated as bemoaning force who blurring the entire peace process and move for constitution drafting. At this point Maoists must strive for at least an expedient move for consensus with ruling parties to hold its prominence intact in national politics and stop embittering Nepal’s most trusted ally, India.
Indian concerns to Nepal has always been genuine and will remain same, the only things has to be see in proper light by the Maoists or other dogmatists who suspiciously rated the Indian involvement in their country; they must have sense that an unstable Nepal with its ramifications would equally pose threats for a vast home land which India sharing along with the border of Nepal, so good or bad stack for both countries will depend upon the stability and harmony across the border without disturbing the elegant threads which these two nation have been relentlessly maintaining so far.

At present juncture Maoists are playing the game of personification inside the Nepal in exactly confused state to locate themselves at the helm of affairs within country and outside; ideology is major deterrent before their potential impartial role in Nepalese politics.
Indeed Maoists are caught in ambiguous web of ideology which they are not becoming to shape in their indigenous circumstances that making their attitude haughty with sharp divergence between their saying and intention. Pragmatism is the need of hour for all democratic forces of Nepal; and being a strong component, Maoists also have to act with more responsibility to end the apprehensions of India about theirs undue proximity with China and anti Indian sentiments in Nepal’s some quarter which forming negative biases towards the traditional ties of India and Nepal.

From Indian side, intellectuals and officials of Ministry of External Affairs have frequently stressing on the crucial role of Maoists in new political order which also well acknowledged by the Maoists chief Pushpa Kamal Dahal”Prachanda” in an interview with Prerna Marasani of The Hindu (Friday,October6th2009).
Now Maoists must hails such word of support and legitimacy by striving to sort out all complexities of its further involvement with India; indeed Maoists proactive and peaceful participation in crucial matters, like civil supremacy, constitution drafting etc would broaden their acceptance in country and abroad.

Assertions of radical ideology in a multi party democracy like Nepal is a very tough task, since its lacking the required authoritarian mechanism, so experiments of Maoism in Nepal are an unusual phenomenon that was hardly occurred anywhere else in similar manner.
Rudimentary principles of Maoism in Nepal stand on the notional basis of a strong and energetic state that Nepal completely lacking today; so foremost task that Maoists must have to deal immediately to strengthen the pillars of Nepalese state and rationalize their ideological practices as per their local conditions without completely emulating any other nation’s experiments.

In his recently published article in The Hindu (Monday, September14th2009), Kathmandu based journalist Prashant Jha has revealed that India could enjoy two strategic options, generative and degenerative to deal with Nepal.I have slightly different standpoint about his perceptions, with reiterating again the fact that India could never play a spoiling role in Nepal because of close inherent nature of their relationships and that must be taken as true matter of perception in this regard.
So former options seems completely subversive as per the track record of Indian involvement in Nepal, somehow, it’s a completely unrealistic proposition from both countries perspectives. What India could find a niche for itself in a stable and peaceful Nepal forming out through the people’s aspirations and consensus of its political parties?

Atul Kumar Thakur
October10th2009, New Delhi
atul_mdb@rediffmail.com

Changing Paradigms in India- Nepal Relations

Today Nepal stands at the crossroads amidst the swiftly changing political tracts and it becoming scarce now to found a closer understanding over the core issues among all the political parties. Such political opportunism truly missing the plight of democracy besides pulling down the national priorities in crucial matters;lucidly it’s an outcome of internal political strife instead from an imposed international pressure. Stability is very crucial for Indian point of views,as in the case of Nepal,India hasn’t any option except to see a sovereign Nepal; concerned authorities in India’s External Affairs Ministry have been consistently showing similar concern and landed all possible support to assist in Nepal’s integration.
Through an honest introspection it’s easily revealed that India never resolute any action in past against the national interest of Nepal, further India never obstruct the formation of any democratic government even including the Maoist government and send their foreign secretary just three days before the government formation.

India- Nepal relations are so strong that it’s very hard to shape in mere words because these two neighboring nation has a history of deep ties and shared concern from ancient times. Quality of relationship between these two countries shouldn’t be seen in terms of treaty; having faith in each other’s role any dispute can be solved and consensus could be formed between these two friendly nations. Indeed there are no reasons among the peoples of the both side of border to involved in any sort of hate campaign against each other; any development in this regard would be ended with an impractical and unviable consequences.
So, it must realized that that interest of India wouldn’t affect the any move of peace process in Nepal; it’s need of hour to end the causes of political insecurity among the diasporas on the both side of borders.

State of Nepal’s internal security possessed as much concern as her own existential safety for India, so any anti Indian move will jeopardize the friendly terms and left alarming ramifications for both the country. India’s concern over the presence of ISI’s agents inside the territory of Nepal must be seen in genuine light by the Nepalese government since it could be highly disturbing in long term for Nepal’s own sake as well. Indian government is very serious towards tackling the terrorist network with wrenched resoluteness and would keep affirming on Nepalese government to check their activities from their sovereign territory.
With more meticulous action some unfortunate developments may be easily avoided; that would required a consensus based approach in top notch Nepalese political circle and within their civil society towards the India’s plight for security.

India never felt any sort of discontents with the democratic proceedings in Nepal; of course Maoist should stay and play active role within their national political framework. Indian government would remain very keen for strengthening of democracy in Nepal and issues like human rights would be a key priority for them with putting finest efforts to see it in universal way beyond the geographical boundaries. In recent past Gorkha’s role in Indian Arm Forces has gained some critical applauds from a reactionary section in Nepal which is quite unfortunate and is an effort to dampen the historic and marvelous symbolic ties between these two friendly nation.
The word consensus has been largely misused in Nepal consequently ultra nationalism in Nepal largely seen in the context of anti- Indian sentiment; a very clear approach would be needed from Nepalese side over such relentless unfortunate developments.

In international affairs domain Nepal needs to play more matured role and must develop a sense of its own best interest; mutual integrated relationship with India paves way for safe passages of trust between them which is quite symmetric to the actual requirements and should remain a foremost concern for both the countries to keep intact these flame of spirits; any constructive solution of joint interest would be emerged from mutual effort instead through isolatory stances.
In changing circumstances it’s quite essential for both the countries to make immediate revisions in bilateral treaties and shaping them as per the suitability of present time. Infrastructures are major issues that needs to look on in such active manner since perennial floods is a major impediment for socio-economic structure of Terai region in Nepal and entire north Bihar.

A radical shift in policy towards the existing infrastructure of water management is the first step that required to be taken by the governments of both countries. Water management possessed very crucial and strategic place in the sphere of India- Nepal relations as their catchments are very productive for the vast agricultural areas as well an alternative source of energy; projects like Pancheswar, Saptakosi, Naumure etc needs rational handling as they are immensely crucial for the sake of both countries energy requirements.
Border management is another issue that needs more regulated treatment though it should remain open as even before because prevalence of open border is the biggest asset of India- Nepal relation and it has potential to be framed as an ideal border of south Asia.

Indeed open border plays crucial significance in the lives of population adjacent to border; since time immemorial they have been sharing the ties of Roti (Bread) and Beti (Matrimonial ties) which even creates complexities of identity.In present state Nepal is coping with the difficulties of constitution making besides having to win the trust of peoples in democratic institution which shown severe fluctuation in immediate past.In this situation grooming of an idea of ethnic federalism and other major issues wouldn’t be less than a fatal as handling of such major issues depends upon the state of stability which is completely out of seen in present circumstances.
Terain’s plight and refugee’s problems are some other rudimentary issues that need proper concern and action from the governments of both the side as law and order situation is a matter that requires the co-operation of other side due to geographical nature and open borders.

In decade long civil war like situation, the Terai region faced adverse setbacks and witnessed the losses of human lives, infrastructure, ecology, law and order etc. Even in last few months toll of losses in Terai is quite frightening, almost 1200 peoples has been killed and more than 3600 were abducted; situation is still very grim inside the Terai region and peoples have some distraught feeling as they used to feel during the bloody strife phase.

Glorifications of Terain Armed groups are caused by the political affiliations and patronage that’s making situation worse in any effort to contain and disband their growing role; catchments areas of North Bihar or Mithilanchal region becomes a hideout place for these groups in the absence of a specified and clear set of mechanism on joint level; a strategic move in this regard is immediately required.
Till today Nepal is missing the actual taste of democracy and whatever has been represented on the name of democracy that never touched the ground of actual aspiration of its citizen. Maoists short stint in government couldn’t materialized their own professed goals instead they turn up to attack on religious identities, authoritarianism, non-pluralism, against right of property besides showing very immature stand on Nepalese Armed Force chief Rukmangad Kotwal; such bad conflict management with Arm force deciphered the feeble understanding of realpolitik in Maoist camp.
Before that incident Nepali Army has history of passive presence and following the civil supremacy which was very conducive with the expectation of Nepalese intelligentsias. But now stands humiliated, Nepalese Army becomes more powerful and strategic which may played crucial roles in further phage of development.

India too witnessed some implications after this incident as the role of India felt prominent by a section of reactionaries in Nepalese politics; former Prime Minister Prachanda’s remarks as “Promped by Prabhu” to present Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal was clearly referred towards the India which was completely unjustifiable. India maintains silence over such rambling propositions even the Indian side never downbeat with the growing Chinese influence in Maoists rule and regarded it just as lacking immune system.
India has huge concern with Nepalese state of affairs in similar manner; Nepal too has immense benefits from a stronger India, so despite some ups and down in events it would be compatible to remains in same strong bond of sharing forever’ Brotherhood always remains a great idea as in such set of relationship every member has some specific roles to play irrespective of identities like big brother and small brother; being sanguine for same must in case of India- Nepal relations.

Atul Kumar Thakur
17thAugust 2009, New Delhi
atul_mdb@rediffmail.com