Federalism in Nepal: How
real it is or merely Propaganda???
Nepal is an independent country tucked between two Asian
giants- China and India. It was divided into numerous kingdoms for a long time.
In the late 18th century, Prithvi Narayan Shah, the then King of Gorkha (one of
the small kingdoms of Nepal prior to its unification) conquered most of the
Kingdoms and principalities to constitute them into what it is known present
day Nepal. Since then Nepal remains a unitary state. The wind of Mass movement II has created a call for of new constitution.
With great expectation from coming constitution a term ‘New Nepal’ has been a
hot cake among Nepalese people and a banner for the political parties. One of
the perilous promises that the political parties used was to turn Nepal into a
Federal Republic knowingly and unknowingly. Federalism is
a system based upon democratic rules and institutions in which the power to govern is
shared between national and provincial/state governments, creating what is
often called a federation. It has successfully worked in many countries like
USA, India, Germany and many more. But does
our context and condition match theirs’?
Let
me begin with a few questions; Making sense of what’s actually happening in our
country.
What is happening in the country today is
not as much of as any drama-filled with clamoring
characters echoing the tone of dissension. Country has been made a guinea pig to examine
all sorts of political doctrines. Country had never been into this state of confusion and disarray as it is today shown immediate effects-
resulted in bush-fire in very fabric of our society. Who among them have answers as to why
there is unending trend of youth fleeting to Middle East countries for sake of
nominal employment? Why
there is dearth of internal growth in the country? Why there is frustration in
common public and mostly the youths about their prospects? Where is the affordable access to health
services and quality education for all, what action plans are there in place to
make public transport in accident prone highways safer? What strong institution or law is there
to put an end to impunity and corruption, why
are politicians getting richer everyday irrespective where they come from be it
from jungle, cave or from street? If
every Nepali is the sufferer and when every Nepali wants to come out of it- how
can so called single or multiple or whatever based federal state will be
solution to this. Federalism or having of multiple states is not the solution
of Nepal’s problem. Is Federalism panacea or magical in nature? Does it mean that when Federalism is
established, Nepal will turn into another heaven? Is Nepal that much large? To see how
federalism can become poison, the former Soviet Union is sufficient. The
Soviets broke into 15 nations and there still exists the possibility of the
emergence of more new nations from the already decimated Soviet empire. To be
honest upfront, how
on earth by provoking people on ground of ethnics and Communism help Nepal
come out of the vicious cycle.
Nepal is heavily
bestowed with natural beauty, climate, ethnicity and biodiversity what’s more
it is known in the world as the land of Everest.
The dangerous of all is the leaders chanting the same Mantra of Federalism
where each indigenous group of people will have an autonomous republic. I don’t
know what they have in their head, a step to bring strong communism or make a
separate nation in their leadership. What I know is Nepal is a multi-ethnic
nation where no group is in majority. According to the 2001 census of Nepal,
there are 103
different ethnic groups in
Nepal. They speak at least 90 different languages. Some of the ethnic groups
are as small as 164 people. For example, according to the 2001 census of Nepal
there are only 164 Kusundas in Nepal and these people are not anywhere else in
the world. Different groups of people especially the ones demanding the
autonomy are spread out throughout the nation. Therefore, introduction of Federalism or declaration
of self governing regions based on ethnic groups will spell disaster for the
whole country. It
would not even benefit the group that is claiming autonomy. The ethnic groups
such as Magars, Tharus, Tamangs, Newars, only constitute 7.14%, 6.75%, 5.64%,
and 5.48% respectively. Moreover, these groups are not living in a particular
locality. They are pretty much spread out throughout the country except the
Tharus who mainly reside in the Terai belt. But
to our great distress, each major caste/ethnicity has prejudices against
another. The “madhesi’s” are referred to as “dhotis”, the bahun as “chor” who
have ruined our country, and so on. If we divide this country by ethnicity, aren't we sowing deeper on the emotions of
“us” and “them” instead using the rhetoric of “us”.
One
could also argue that this is already happening today at a national level where
Bahun and Chettri communities are running the country. I have no-doubt about
it, but to end this cycle we have the quota system where a percentage of seats
are reserved just for the minorities. That is not to say that minorities cannot
run for other seats; they just have an increased advantage and a guarantee
because of this system. However, their inclusion also needs to happen on an
economic and educational level. Breaking a country by ethnic states doesn't guarantee any of that. It only gives an elitist group within the same minority groups further power, whereas, integrating quotas in our education and
empowerment programs may break the cycle. The thing that is at stake is there
should eligible and competing candidates from any ethnic group in bureaucracy. To
truly integrate them, perhaps introduce quotas in universities and schools
(especially private schools), while focusing on empowerment activities for the
minorities. Definitely,
respect and dignity begins at the ground level when we educate our children at
home. If we teach children to stop discriminating against each other, stop
using derogatory words, there would be greater unity and peace, and perhaps the
harmony that all of us want in Nepal.
My
next big concern is
strictly an economic one. What
is going to happen to the supply of food/ materials when you create ethnic
borders? Aren't people without a border with India going to suffer the most? Aren't industries going to suffer because of further taxation and new border
policies? How is the domestic economy going to compete with the international
market? Also, those ethnic states with borders touching India are going to
benefit the most economically, while the rest will be left in jeopardy.
Going
further into history, what about the
example of Bosnia and Rwanda. Have we forgotten the genocide and ethnic
cleansing in both these countries? Both
wars happened as a result of ethnic conflicts, and the sights aren't pretty
even today. My fear with ethnic federalism is that it will lead to a backlash.
Once the states are divided by ethnicity, what guarantee is there that other
ethnic groups can live in the same place in peace? Also, a friend of mine
recently pointed towards another danger - of favoritism. When a particular
ethnic group runs local bodies, wouldn't they favor the same ethnic group to
take over and run business, politics and society for that matter? My
friend gave me an example of Nigeria where Muslim Nigerians and Christian
Nigerians are still struggling with such divisions.
Initially
ethnic federalism was a Maoist agenda. I am worried about ethnic federalism
because this seems like a Maoist strategy to keep their powers and win the next
elections- "satta
kabza" as
they say in Nepali. Nepal is a small country which can be managed even without
federalism if the power is decentralized in the true sense. Nepal is divided into 5
Development Regions, 14 Administrative
zones and 75 districts. The
14 administrative zones are grouped into five development regions. These
development regions can well serve the principles of federal states if the
power is wisely transferred to them. The development regions can manage among
others promoting and protecting the cultures, traditions and other important
issues of the ethnic units that fall under their responsibilities. Federalism
is a costly system. Now we have a central parliament and central cabinet. In a
federal system, there will be a parliament and cabinet in all the provincial
states and this system will definitely put a burden on the national exchequer.
In
the name of identity, we are focusing on a lesser identity while ignoring our
greater and more important identity (the land of Everest, birth place of Lord
Buddha, and the mighty place having collections of temples, stupas and chaityas)
as previously Hindu nation tag was removed. I
am gonna lay my view on this regard on my upcoming article. Thus, instead of adopting federal structure,
decentralization and a system of strong and effective local self- governance
would serve Nepal better.
Disclaimer:
I also want to make it
clear that I am not against giving ethnic groups indigenous recognition. Yes,
every minority group should get equal rights (obviously!!) but I don’t think
ethnic federalism is the right way to go about it. I also understand the idea
of “preservation of culture” but don’t think forcing people to celebrate
festivals and be a part of an identity through ethnic federalism is the right
way to go about it. In fact, I see it as an infringement to people’s private
spaces and the whole idea seems rather un-democratic. The promotion of cultural
activities can be done in non-ethnic based states as well. Everyone is free to
do musicals, dances, food-festivals etc. I am in fact very proud of the
diversity in our country.
