Inheriting the earth

- DAULAT JHA

 Rearranging of class and caste orders in Tarai
Prejudices are always rooted in history. The nature and intensity of the prejudices may vary depending on contemporary dynamics but they are ‘justified’ by appealing to historical narratives, often revisionist in nature. When I looked at the historical causes of caste, class and ethnic inequities existent in the Tarai in my previous article (Once we were farmers, Oct 8), the intention was not to blame any particular group of people or to suggest that time should turn backwards, as some have suggested (most notably Jay Krishna Goit who believes that the annulations of all previous treaties following the Nepal India Friendship Treaty of 1950 grants sovereignty to the Tarai by default, using some clever twisted logic). When I looked at the history of the current inequities, it was rather to look for the origins of our current predicament. While history in itself cannot be prescriptive, any prescription to end the prevalent inequities cannot be complete without understanding the causes behind it.

In my article, I had argued that since the inception of Nepal as a modern-state, an ad-hoc mechanism had been set up by the rulers that allowed for efficient taxation, while also being politically expedient. For centuries, feudalism was thus adopted as the official political system, leading to inherently unequal distribution of land, which adversely affected the lower and middle castes and indigenous communities in particular. Later, with the adoption of the oxymoronic ‘one party democracy’ system called the Panchayat, Mahendra promulgated a series of land and resettlement acts which achieved the opposite effect of reform – it further entrenched asymmetric land relations, while importing the feudalistic ethos in modern bureaucracy. Thus, we end up at this unique position where our political parties, our bureaucracy (including vital institutions) and our economy (mainly agricultural) are all shaped by and imbibe the spirit of feudalism. Only recently, fuelled by the Maoist-led People’s War and the resurgence of ethnic movements, has there been any serious challenge to this ossified and antiquated system. In this article, I shall focus on how shifting patterns of productivity and economic activity is slowly hammering on the cracks that have appeared in the system, even as resistance to change by the old guard remains strong.

Following the restoration of democracy in 1990, some inevitable changes were made. This included the liberalization of the economy, expanding the network of public services and freeing the media. Despite the obvious failures of multiple post-1990 governments, inter-party rivalry and opportunistic power games ensured that the issues of more interest groups than ever were heard. However, what was lacking at the heart of these changes was that a large portion of the population belonging to lower castes, excluded ethnicities, and living predominantly in villages remained in the margins of the developmental process.

The Maoists were quick to capitalize on the marginalization of these groups – the Dalits, other oppressed lower-castes and indigenous communities. With a shrewd understanding of guerilla tactics, both political and military, they led a textbook example of communist insurgency following on the footsteps of many Latin American countries.

The Maoist movement, however, did not have as much influence in the Tarai as they would have wanted for many reasons, including more entrenchment of the caste system, more asymmetric land relationships, stronger bases of traditional political parties and some strategic errors like criminalization of the party rank-and-file. Logic would suggest that problems of caste and land being more amplified in the Tarai should have favored the insurgency. However, this was not the case because the levels of dependency were simply too strong. The economic and social repercussions for potential recruits were too great. They did, however, gain a significant foothold among the Dalit community and to a certain degree on other landless communities (consequently leading to upper-caste led vigilante groups that were precursors of today’s armed and criminal groups).

It was instead the opening of foreign labor markets that would pave the way for seismic changes in Tarai politics. Already, for decades, many of the middle-class and upper-caste landed families were shifting vocations, choosing governmental or private sector jobs, with rising levels of education. Disillusionment with the Nepali state remained strong because many in this substratum lacked political access. This is reflected today in the large number of civil servants in health, education and infrastructure development sectors, though not proportionally represented in the upper rungs.

In the other substratum were the landed families of both the middle and lower castes. They benefited from the shift from agricultural to non-agricultural vocations of the upper-castes, gradually augmenting their landholdings. Many were also quick to join the exodus of migrant workers in the initial stages of the opening of foreign labor markets. They too now enjoyed better economic prospects but were growing increasingly restless with the lack of political representation.

The third substratum consisted of the landless lower-castes – ‘the wretched of the earth’, to appropriate Franz Fanon’s words. Historical caste inequities had now put them in a position where they could now reap the most benefits of the opening of foreign labor markets. For generations, they had worked as artisans, fulfilling their role by doing jobs that other castes considered ‘beneath’ their station. Now, it was precisely these jobs that were most in demand. Initially, lack of awareness and initial capital inhibited them from benefiting from new opportunities being created. However, as the first few members of the community returned from abroad, they became examples not only of prosperity that lay ahead but also as emerging leaders of the community. It is a testament of the strong sense of these communities that new cooperative structures were put in place, such as migrant labors pooling resources together so that a newly arrived member could pay back the credit owed back home before the interest became too high. This broke the historical shackles of credit that had perpetuated a vicious cycle (first through cultural malpractices such as dowry and high ritual costs and later by credit required for investment in the future), which was now being replaced by a virtuous cycle – as more members of a community went abroad for work, they made it easier for other people of the community to join them. Furthermore, they became more aware with exposure to foreign lands and cultures.

All three substrata were gradually becoming more economically empowered, which inevitably would lead to the quest for political influence. Oblivious to these tectonic shifts in demographic dynamics, our traditional political parties were trapped in a bubble pretending that the post-Jana Andolan II era was just another ‘restoration’ of democracy. That the Madhes Movement would burst forth with unprecedented momentum was inevitable. Issues that the Tarai Congress and later the Nepal Sadhvawana Party had been raising could now not be wished away. Along with a larger pan-Madhesi movement, current dynamics are also changing inter-caste and inter-class relationships, most measurable and apparent in landowning. (One should, however, be careful not to oversimplify the caste and class dynamics – these processes have many other facets as well.)

These processes – shifting patterns of economic activity and political influence – are anything but static. It will require a nuanced understanding of these forces of change to better manage them. Policies will have to take them into account. Political parties will have to attune to these growingly powerful voting bases. There will be attempts to misuse these dynamics, as is always the case when changes happen. As I have witnessed firsthand during this festival season, there is a growing dissatisfaction among the upper-castes about the ‘decay in the social fabric’, by casually attributing increase in criminal activities and even more ridiculously load shedding on the growing wealth of the lower and middle castes (now even the teli-suris have television sets and thus more electricity consumption, so the logic goes). What is undeniable is that whether or not the government policies help the worse off in the society, the opening of foreign labor markets has helped them climb the ladder of growth. As Jesus aptly put it in a sermon – Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth

source::http://www.myrepublica.com/portal/index.php?action=news_details&news_id=10955

The Begam from Birgunj who beat big bureaucrat

• Getting candid with Karima

Situation Update:                                                                    88 October 14, 2009

Tarai-Madhes :Searching for Identity Based Security

• • Bishnu Pathak, PhD*
• • Devendra Uprety**

Peace, justice and freedom must be major components of any future security in Nepal. However, Nepal’s transition is deepening in crisis due to the growing ranks of rebel forces, particularly in the Tarai-Madhes. While the State fails to deliver security to the ordinary people, particularly in countryside, the peace process of Nepal is endangered, justice is delayed, and freedom is restricted. The migration of hill-and-mountain dwellers out of the Tarai-Madhes has not stopped. The people who remain in such places have had much to fear. The cases of extra-judicial killings, forceful disappearances, torture, extortions, rapes and so forth continue. To understand this unfortunate state of affairs, it is necessary to delve into a brief history of the region.

Understanding the Tarai-Madhes

Nepal is divided into three areas topographically; Mountains1, Hills2, and Tarai-Madhes3. The Tarai-Madhes, though the flattest and most accessible part of the country, remained isolated until the mid 20th century due to malaria-infestation4. This area stretches from the Indo-Gangetic plains to the Himalayan foothills and connects the plains culture to the hill culture. Constrained between the Mechi River in the east and Mahakali River in the west, it makes up about 23 percent of the total land area of the country. With an average elevation of less than 100 meters (in sharp contrast to the highest Mountains in the world), the average length and breadth of the Tarai-Madhes are about 900 km and 70 km respectively5. The Tarai-Madhes incorporates 20 out of 75 districts, including close to half the 26 million population of the country. The region was annexed into Nepal during the unification period, beginning in the mid 1770s, by Prithivi Naarayan Shah. However, much of the ancient Tarai-Madhes areas, ruled by various kings and principalities for centuries, are now in the Bihar and Uttar Pradesh states of India6. The Anglo-Nepalese war between 1814 and 1816, and the resulting Treaty of Sugauli and subsequent treatieswith British India further reduced the Madhes region. The outer Madhes areas south of Dang and Chitwan valleys were previously under Indian Territory7. Banke, Bardia, Kailali and Kanchanpur districts within this region were once called the ‘New Nepal’ as they were ceded to Nepal by the East India Company in appreciation of the service of Nepali Gurkhas in suppressing India’s independence movement. The label “Tarai-Madhes” is of relatively recent public socio-political discourse in Nepal. The word “Madhes” is derived from the Sanskrit word Madhyadesh8 (middle country), collectively called Madhises or Madhesiyas. Even Manusmriti and Vinayakpitak, have indicated that it is attached to ancient historical traditions9. The Madhyadesh distinguishes the plains from the hill region or Parbat, from which is derived the meaning of Pahade (hill and mountain dwellers) in modern Nepal. A Madhesi, therefore, originally meant an inhabitant of this region10. Similarly, the Tarai (Nawalparasi to Kanchanpur districts) refers to the fertile strip of low-lying land sandwiched between the hills of southern Nepal.

In recent days there has been an issue of severe contention. Tharu, being of native origin, prefer to call the region the Tarai, whereas some others in the region prefer to call it the Madhes. In Tharu language ‘Tar’ means low, leading some to claim that the word “Tarai” is derived from the Tharu language.11 Others obviously disagree, as Wikipedia states:

“The Terai (“moist land”) , or (“foothill”) in Persian language, is a belt of marshy grasslands, savannas, and forests at the base of the Himalaya range in India, Nepal, and Bhutan, from the Yamuna River in the west to the Brahmaputra River in the east12.”

The resolution of this issue is beyond the scope of this update. However, the issue itself serves to highlight one of the overarching socio-cultural conflicts; the struggle for national identity between the indigenous ethnicities of the Tarai-Madhes, and the relatively recent immigrants from India (since the eradication of malaria). Tarai- Madhesi groups interact with each other, immigrants from the hills, and the rest of the country, in different ways.

Literature

The Tarai-Madhes is a less recognized area of study than many others in Nepal13; however, there are several works on the Tarai-Madhes that have been studied time and again by non-native and native scholars. Among the non-native scholars, Gaige14 (1975), Byrne15 (1999), Krauskopff16 (2000), Guneratne (2002)17, Anderson (2004)18, Bernando (1999)19, and among the native Bista20 (1991), Dahal21 (1996), Hachhethu22 (2007), Gupta23 (2004), Jha24 (1997), Lawoti25 (2001), Chaudhary (2065 BS) 26, Chaudhary (2064 BS)27, Panjiar28 (2000), Yadav29 (2003), Pathak (2007)30 Yadav (2060BS)31, can help in understanding the multiple dimensions of the region.

History of Discrimination and Injustice

In 600 BC, Shakya kings ruled the mid western Madhes. Gutam Buddha, who was born in 563 BC belonged to the Shakya (Tharu) dynasty. Similarly, Tarai-Madhes kingdoms were established in Simraungarh in the present day Bara district32. Indeed, several kingdoms were established and ruled by many dynasties. These states perished with time and the land was reclaimed by forests33. Gaige writes: “The ancient and medieval history of this region is a cyclic one in which men and forests havedominated in turns34.” King of Mithila, Hari Singh Dev, defeated by Mugals in 1324, arrived in Bhadgaon (present Bhaktapur) and formed an army of Mithila. Approximately 240 years ago, during the unification of the small warring states, Prithvi Narayan Shah defeated the Sen dynasty Kings of Madhes and then captured Kathmandu valley. When Prithvi Narayan Shah attacked Kathmandu in 1774, Jaya Prakash Malla countered with a 12,000 strong Mithila army, that had been known as Tirhoot army. Shah demolished the Tirhoot army upon conquering it. Following this, the dispute with the East India Company and greater Nepal intensified while the post-Prithvi regimes continued to attack weak principalities. Soon, the dispute of Butwal triggered the Anglo-Gorkha War 1814- 1816 AD. It seems somewhat unclear whom the local people supported, but the literature indicates that Madhes dwellers were closer with the British East India Company35. W. Brook Northey writes that a large number of undisciplined volunteers fought against Gorkha during the Anglo-Gorkha war36. The Treaty of Segowlee (Sugauli Treaty) presented on December 8, 1816 states “the Rajah of Nipal agrees to refrain from prosecuting any inhabitants of the Tarai, after its severance to his rule, on account of having favored the cause of the British Government during the war”. So, it seems there was a lot of dissatisfaction among native Tarai dwellers against the ruler of Gorkha37. Though Article 7 of the memorandum on the Sugauli Treaty mandated that the Nepali government would not take any action against the people living in the Madhes, many Madhesi dwellers were, nonetheless, ill-treated, tortured, and punished on the charges of treason. In this way, the consequences of the actions of the elite landlords overflowed to the common Madhesi. The Madhesi were alleged to be ‘followers of British and adversary of Nepali’ and their recruitment into the army was stopped38. It had not been resumed in the later regimes until now. The Madhesi have felt this an insult, as they were excluded from the national security force (and more likely to suffer brutality as a result). Subodh Kumar Sing writes that after the unification, Shah Rulers saw the virgin Tarai as a source of revenue and distributed land to the king’s family members, courtiers, and to army generals and colonels to garner their support39. Just after the Tarai integration into the Gorkha Kingdom (present Nepal), a number of conflicts erupted with the native Taraian people. Native Saptari people seemed to be uncooperative with Gorkhali at the beginning of 1774. A letter of Abhiman Simha from the period states that for salaries to troops and to meet other expenses, the revenues had been collected in the Tarai areas from Ambarpur and Vijayapur40. During the Rana Regime, prior to 1950, because of their strong relationship with the British, the latter was silent about the ill-treatment of the Madhesis. One form of discrimination toward the Tarain-Madhesi at the time was that they had to obtain visas to visit Kathmandu issued by the elite Kathmandu-based government from the Badahakim (Regional Administrator)41. Mahesh Chandra Regmi writes that both the pre-Rana and Rana rulers viewed the Tarai as a colony, and regularly granted large tracts of land to others. Sometimes even whole areas were captured for themselves, their families and their Bhardar as Birta (granted land) to loyal senior officials.42 However, the ruling elites, both Shah and Rana, did not have an interest in developing the Tarai in their long-term perspective. They feared that such development would not only attract a flood of British colonialism, but were also afraid that it would open the door to revolutionary ideas from south India.

[Read More]

CS Center -C o n f l i c t S t u d y C e n t e r

PO Box 11374, 214 Rohini Marg, Purano Baneswar, Kathmandu, Nepal. Tel: +977-1-6218777

Email: cscenter.nepal@gmail.com/cscenter@wlink.com.np; www.cscenter.org.np

Federalism: A Way Forward for Nepal

Hari Bansh Jha, PhD Executive Director, Centre for Economic and Technical Studies (CETS)

At the global level, there are over two dozens of federal nations in which 40% of the world population live. In Nepal, Kulanand Jha of Terai Congress for the first time in the country’s history in 1951 raised his voice for the introduction of federal system. Later on, Raghunath Thakur is on record to have put the demand for federal structure in 1958. In 1967, Madheshi Mukti Andolan echoed the voice in favor of federalism. After the political change in 1990, Nepal Sadbhavana Parishad under the leadership of Gajendra Narayan Singh raised voice in favor of federalism. But federalism emerged as a strong issue only when the UCPN-Maoist initiated debate for the introduction of federalism in the country in 2003.

Subsequently, it was the Madhesh uprising of January-February 2007 that helped give concrete shape to federalism. The uprising forced the then government led by G.P. Koirala to amend the Interim Constitution 2007 twice within a very short period time to address such issues as federalism, proportional representation (PR) based on population size and increasing the number of seats from 43 per cent to 49 per cent in Terai constituencies.

The Madhesh-based parties, including SP, MJF and TMDP entered into agreement with Prime Minister G.P. Koirala on 28 February 2008 for the formation of federal system in Nepal. In Article 2 of the agreement, the government accepted Madheshi people’s call for “Autonomous Madhes” and other people’s desire for a federal structure with autonomous regions.” In the same article, the two sides agreed for a federal structure with provision of autonomous regions keeping the sovereignty and integrity of the country intact. There was also a provision made for the formation of high-level monitoring committee to monitor the implementation of the agreement, which, however, is not yet formalized.

Following the CA elections on 10 April 2008, Nepal was declared federal republic on 28 May 2008. Except Rashtriya Jana Morcha (the party that secured 1.4% of the popular vote and 4 seats in CA) all other political parties in CA favored federal form of government. This was a kind of political consensus among the parties for the introduction of federal  structure in the country.

As a sigh of relief, the great majority of the Nepalese population, especially the disadvantaged groups have developed a feeling that only federalism would empower them. Certain groups of people have regarded federalism as recognition of religious, linguistic and ethnic diversity.

Federalism, however, should not be taken as panacea of all the ills. It does not necessarily guarantee the development of a society. What it does is that it creates conducive environment of self-rule and thereby generates development opportunities.

In the existing unitary form of structure, the past governments remained largely reluctant towards Terai in making proper allocation of resources, despite significant contributions made by the custom, excise and income tax offices to the national exchequer. Perhaps, this is the reason why several districts in Terai remained most backward economically. Such mistake is likely to be addressed under the federal structure.

However, the federal units in the country need to be made on the solid ground of geography and economy or what might be called geo-economic. Federalism, if implemented correctly on this approach, will unite the country rather than divide it. Complications, however, might arise if priority is given to ethnic, linguistic or other such considerations in the restructuring of state in the place of geo-economic realities.

The geo-economic factor should be supreme in deciding the number of states. Economic viability is most important for the survival and autonomy of the states. Equally important is the administrative cost of a federation. Formation of more states means greater allocation of resources on administration at the cost of development activities. Also, it will be a mistake if the states as proposed by CPN-UML or Maoists are based on ethnicity. It is possible that the formation of ethnicity-based states may help certain elements in the short run, but it would be a disaster in the long run.

It would, therefore, be worthwhile if only three states are established in the country on be basis of geo-economic structure i.e. the Terai State, the Hill State and the Himalayan State. Within each of these States, there could be provision of ‘sub-autonomous regions.’ Accordingly, there is no reason why some four regions such as Mithila, Bhojpura, Awadhi and Tharuhat cannot be established in a single Terai State. Similarly, different regions could be developed within the Hill and Himalayan States as well. The economy and ecology-based comparative advantage of the three belts can be harvested if the states are organized horizontally.

source:http://telegraphnepal.com/news_det.php?news_id=6399

Soon Mandarin will replace Hindi in Terai: Azad

Maoism today is considered synonymous with violence, brutality and crime. Yet its meaning differs in the eyes of its believers. The newly appointed Maoist leader and coordinator, Azad (who refuses to give away his real name) of the ‘Sanyunkt Jantantrik Terai Mukti Morcha’ says they are fighting for the independence of their motherland- the Terai region, bordering Nepal with India. Wanted in Nepal, he has been in hiding since 2004, away from his family and parents.

Speaking to Devika Chhibber of Zeenews.com, he deliberated on the issues dealing with the struggle of his people, the apathetic attitude of both Nepal and Indian governments towards them and China’s presence in Nepal and India.

Excerpts:

Devika: Tell me something about yourself and your movement?

Azad: Born in 1971, like my many of my other colleagues I have dedicated my life for the cause of my land. I adopted Maoism in 2004. Born in the middle of this movement, I have always wanted to see my people and land free of all the atrocities heaped on them. So my movement is all about the freedom of Terai region.

Devika: What is this Terai conflict actually?

Azad: Terai basically was a part of India, but after the memorandum of 1816 and the treaty of 1860, the East India Company divided the land of Terai from west to Mechi, east to Mahakali and north of present Indo-Nepal broader. This treaty forced us to be a part of the Nepalese regime.

Later after the independence of India in 1947, Nepal and India signed in “Peace and friendship Treaty 1950?, which nullified all the prior accords that Nepal signed with British rulers. That means the treaties of 1816 and 1860 were considered void. On the basis of UN charter’s Section 73, Terai became an autonomous region. But Nepal refused to grant us any autonomy and thus here we are fighting for our independence.

Devika: You are called Madheshis. What does it mean?

Azad: We are not Madhesis (With anger in his tone). This word is often used by Nepalese to humiliate us. This word actually means an object which is worse than the dead (I was politely asked not to refer to the word again).

Devika: What is the present situation in Nepal? Do they use threats too?

Azad: Yes, first they tried to shoo us away from the region by bringing in the Citizenship Act according to which only those were granted citizenship who spoke Nepalese. Later they started treating us like slaves and labourers. They also hired goondas(goons) to torture, murder, rape and evacuate us. The situation here is much worse than you can understand. Due to these tortures, many have fled to other nations. Several bonded labourers in Bihar and UP are our people.

Devika: You call yourselves Maoists, so do you intend to follow their violent methods?

Azad: We have adopted Maoism recently and yes we are determined to adopt violent methods to gain our objectives and kill those who try to barricade our movement. But actually, speaking from my heart, we do not want to do any of this. We want to live in peace and harmony, it’s just that we have no other choice.

Devika: Do you believe in communism?

Azad: I hate communists no matter where they are, be it India, China or anywhere else. I can assure you that in today’s scenario, communism just doesn’t exist and all those who call themselves communists are phony and bogus. In fact they are Kamao-ist i.e. they just want to earn money by idealizing the old beliefs.

Devika: What are your basic demands?

Azad: We want independence at any cost. Be it through blood or sacrifice. We want to do things which you can do in free India. We want our generations to breathe in free Terai.

Devika: How far have you been successful?

Azad: Recently held elections in Nepal answer your question. You won’t believe it, but no Nepalese was able to win from the Terai region and the winners were our people, who are all sitting MPs in the Nepal government currently.

Related Stories

Orissa plans joint operation against Maoists: Naveen

`Weak element` betrayed Kobad Gandhy, claim Maoists

UP to deploy 203 special rank cops in Naxal-hit districts

Betrayal by courier led to Kobad`s arrest: CPI-MaoistDevika: Do you think Nepal Maoists are aiding Naxalism in India?

Azad: Yes, certainly they are. Not many know that there is an organization known as Communist Party of South Asia Association, which up to recently was headed by Prachanda. All the Maoist movements in the world are funded by this particular organization only.

Devika: What is your source of funding?

Azad: People who have faith in our movement support us (refused to comment any further).

Devika: Has change in power (from monarchy to democracy) in Nepal helped solve your problems?

Azad: No our woes are still the same. Be it the Kings, Maoists or democratic parties in Nepal, no one has ever supported us. They just want to use Terai for their own benefits least caring as to what happen to those residing there.

Devika: Has the Indian government been of any help to you?

Azad: Not at all. The Indian government has remained partial and biased as ever. The situation is still the same as it was at the time of independence. India has never supported our cause. In fact many a times they extradite us along with other criminals in Nepal. They name us as terrorists. Recently 22 weapons seem to have been recovered in Kalpi, but this we feel was a part of a conspiracy against us.

Devika: What do you think about Chinese presence in India and Nepal?

Azad: China is the mastermind and cause of the plight of India and Nepal. If you ever visit Nepal and Terai you can find pagoda shaped temples. Both the regions follow Hinduism, then why the shape of Chinese temples? It is not fair. It may be very soon that Mandarin will replace Hindi in the text books there.

China always wanted to exercise its control on the neighbouring nations. It has already established control over Tibet which is the first in its plan. Leh, Ladakh, Nepal, Bhutan, and Arunachal will follow. Through them it will try to create disturbances and unrest in the nearby areas. The recent incursions in India are also the result of the same strategy.

source::http://www.zeenews.com/news566998.html

The explosive plains of Nepal

Anuj Chopra, Foreign Correspondent

TERAI PLAINS, NEPAL // At first glance, Jaikrishna Goit defies every image of an armed militant.

A lean, bespectacled sexagenarian, clad in a handspun cotton kurta, he proffers quotes from history books to articulate his argument – that his native Terai, a low-lying stretch of alluvial plains in southern Nepal, has the right to secede and form an independent state.

“Our land was annexed by colonial powers and then ceded to Nepal’s Pahadi rulers in the 19th century through different treaties. But with the 1950 Indo-Nepal accord, all previous treaties stood abrogated. Nepal’s rule over Terai is illegal,” Mr Goit said in an interview at an ashram in a dusty Indian village near the border with Nepal. “We want – and deserve – liberation.”

For many Nepalis, Mr Goit is a terrorist, responsible for the deaths of innocent civilians and and willing to engage in criminality to achieve his separatist goals. When asked about his group’s methods, he paused to consider his response.

“Gandhi, too, advocated the use of arms for independence,” he said, before digging into his bag to pull out a magazine carrying an Indian government advertisement that had a quote from Gandhi. “Gandhi once said,” he began, quoting from the ad, “I would rather have people resort to arms in order to defend her honour than that she should in a cowardly manner remain a hopeless witness to their own dishonour”.

“We, Madhesis, aren’t cowards,” he added.

Once a top Maoist leader, Mr Goit is now high on the Nepali government’s most-wanted list. He leads the Akhil Terai Mukti Morcha (ATMM), an underground militant group fighting for a separate homeland for ethnic Madhesis, who make up one-third of Nepal’s population. He sidled out of hiding in Nepal through the porous Indo-Nepal border for an interview with The National.

Madhesis complain of institutionalised political, social and economic discrimination against them at the hands of Pahadis, people originally from the hills of Nepal who have held sway over the country for centuries, from the ancient Shah dynasty to recent spells of democratic governance. Madhesis accuse Pahadis of marginalising them by monopolising government and military jobs; currently, in the 95,000-strong Nepalese army, there are fewer than 1,000 Madhesis.

“You don’t know what it’s like to be a dark-complexioned Madhesi,” Mr Goit said grimly. “We have been slaves for centuries.”

ATMM was the first armed group in Nepal’s southern Terai plains when it was established in 2004. But in recent years, Terai has witnessed a proliferation of armed militant groups and criminal gangs. There are currently more than 100 armed groups in Terai, according to the Informal Sector Service Centre (INSEC), a Kathmandu-based human rights organisation. Some are fighting for Madhesi rights while others are merely criminals, engaging in extortion, killings and abductions, often in the guise of the Madhesi movement. There are even Islamist militants and organised crime rackets from such surrounding countries as Pakistan and India hiding out in Terai and taking advantage of the region’s lawlessness.

Terai’s myriad insurgencies threaten to destabilise the whole of Nepal, which only recently emerged from the shadows of a decade-long war with the Maoists.

Terai, which is hemmed in between the Himalayan foothills and the Indo-Gangetic plains and is known as the “granary of Nepal” for its fertile land, makes up one-fifth of Nepal and is home to nearly half the population. The region, bordering India, accounts for 65 per cent of Nepal’s agricultural output and 70 per cent of its industries.

But now the region is going through its bloodiest period in years.

Because of the growing unrest, and facing violence and intimidation, thousands of Pahadis living in Terai have sold their lands and fled to the hills. Factories are shutting down, severely impacting the economy of Nepal, as businessmen flee the region.

Hira Lama, a Pahadi tea-stall owner whose family has lived in the eastern Terai village of Bharda for two generations, was accosted earlier this year by a group of gun-wielding Madhesi militants on motorbikes who told her to leave. “They told me I have no right to be here,” said Ms Lama. “I told them I’m a Pahadi who grew up in Terai. I’m a part of this civilisation. My parents got married here. I was born here. I belong here.”

She has stayed on but has to pay “protection” money to various armed groups and has sent her daughter to school in India for fear she might be kidnapped.

But Madhesis, on whose behalf the Terai militant groups claim to be fighting, are suffering too. According to INSEC, Madhesis accounted for 67 per cent of the 383 people the organisation estimates to have been killed last year in fighting – although locals believe the actual figure to be far higher – 82 per cent of those abducted and 80 per cent of those raped.

“Madhesis are killing Madhesis,” said Lodulal Biswas, an elderly paddy farmer living in Bharda whose 35-year-old son was kidnapped late one night in July by a gang of 10 men who had turned up at Mr Biswas’ mud hut. The men had asked him for water, saying they were passing through the village on a long journey by foot. But as Mr Biswas went to get them water they stormed into his home and took his son.

Mr Biswas has no idea why his son was taken or whether it was planned, although abductions are endemic in Bharda, where armed gangs are believed to use ransoms from kidnappings to raise money to pay for weapons and salaries of gang members. The family has scoured the local jungles looking for their son without success and suspect the kidnappers have taken him across the border into India. “I have no money to pay even if they approach me for ransom,” said Mr Biswas as his wife lay her head on his shoulder sobbing.

Mr Goit, the ATMM leader, bristles at the suggestion that Madhesis are killing one another and pointed out that Terai is infested with many criminal and insurgent groups who seek refuge there.

Mr Goit insists his group are of a different ilk – “We are freedom fighters”, he said.
“We only forcibly tax Pahadis. We don’t extort money from Madhesis. I tell my men – ‘Don’t trouble Madhesis. They are our people, our wealth.’”

Many Madhesis willingly contribute to the movement, he said. “You knock on a Madhesi door in the middle of the night to say, ‘Can you help me, brother?’ People take us in, feed us, and keep us away from the army.”

Across Terai’s lush countryside, amid agricultural land harvested by farmers with scythes, there are roads strewn with the mangled remains of torched vehicles.

Analysts warn that the lawlessness in Terai and the subsequent influx of armed groups from surrounding areas pose a serious risk for South Asian security.

“A tight-knit network of informal traders is exploiting a vacuum of law enforcement in Terai to generate significant operating capital for the Pakistani militant group Lashkar-i-Taiba,” said a report released earlier this year by the Oslo-based International Peace Research Institute.

Conversely, many armed groups from Terai base themselves in India and launch attacks on Nepalese authorities from there, analysts say.

After the interview, Mr Goit crossed back over the porous border into Terai through the flood plains of the monsoon-swollen Koshi river, which is lined with sandbanks and riddled with shifting grasslands.

“Terai is waiting to implode,” said Subodh Raj Pyakurel, chairman of INSEC. “The trouble is the world doesn’t realise yet how serious the situation is.”

More worrying still is that many of the armed groups claim – and Mr Pyakurel believes them – to possess much of the hi-tech weaponry once used by Maoist rebels in Nepal’s civil war between 1996-2006.

According to the 2006 peace agreement signed by the former rebels, these weapons should have been deposited in UN-monitored Maoist cantonments and locked away in UN containers.

The former Maoist government, which came to power after a landslide victory in 2006 and which was Pahadi-dominated, reached informal ceasefire agreements with several Madhesi armed groups, but those hang in limbo after the Maoists resigned from power in May over a bitter row to integrate Maoist rebels into the Nepalese army. The prominent Madhesi groups, like ATMM, are averse to direct talks with the current government and call for UN mediation, a demand the government chooses to ignore.

As the armed conflict intensifies, the government under Madhav Kumar Nepal has indicated it plans to bolster its troop presence in Terai to rein in the armed groups.
But militants say they will not be defeated.

“No matter how much they beef up security, they cannot touch us,” Nagendra Paswan, a hardline militant leader, said in a telephone interview from his hideout.

Once with Mr Goit’s ATMM, Mr Paswan, more commonly known by his nom de guerre of Jwala Singh, splintered away in 2006 to form his own militant group, Jantantrik Terai Mukti Morcha-Singh. He claims his group is active in 20 of Terai’s 22 districts.

Armed with an inventory of sophisticated weapons, he said he was preparing a contingent of guerrilla fighters who swear by the motto of “Maro ya maro” – Kill or get killed. “We’re killing Pahadis because they don’t belong here.”

In an interview in a school building in Siraha town in south-western Terai, 15km from the border with India, the military commander of ATMM, a lanky, mustachioed man with a suspicion of outsiders, revealed a more ominous message.

Giving his name as Shekhar, he claimed he was readying a special contingent of “manav bombs” – or suicide bombers – to launch kamikaze suicide missions on Nepalese government installations.

“Madhesis were once a coward race that once was scared to pick up arms,” Shekhar said. “There will be a day, I assure you, when every Madhesi man and woman will become a soldier.”

He revealed that two years ago, he met with Tamil Tiger rebels in the southern Indian state of Tamil Nadu, before the Tigers had been defeated by the Sri Lankan army.

“We wanted cyanide capsules. They wanted our recipe to manufacture time bombs cheaply,” he said.

“It’s very easy to manufacture time bombs. All you need is this,” he said, picking up a plastic bag to reveal what was inside. It was full with dynamite.

foreign.desk@thenational.ae

source::http://www.thenational.ae/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090912/FOREIGN/709119835/1103/rss

Ram Chandra who?
The media’s obliviousness to Ram Chandra Mishra’s passing shows how little we care

- PRASHANT JHA

source::http://www.myrepublica.com/portal/index.php?action=news_details&news_id=9621

Himalyan Kingdom�s Constitutional Crisis?

Quaisar Alam

No crisis is as discounted as avoiding, nor any solution so lasting. Vice-President Paramananda Jha of Nepal will not want any new set of constitution nor regret the controversy of so expensive diversions or plunge the country if he can be amused with Madhesi or Hindi in his closet. Probably he only needs acceptance at the bedrock of the changing history of the Himalayan Kingdom. But the other side of the story too waits unfolding!

It is said, a civilized country is known by the treatments being meted out to the ethnic groups and minorities of that country. But how far this holds with Nepal�s present crisis is a great concern for the Minorities Rights in this country. The present crisis in question is Nepali Vice-President�s oath taking ceremony in Hindi. Is oath-taking ceremony in Hindi tan amounting to unconstitutional? Is the insistence of Paramananada Jha on his stand violates in any way the covenants of the Nepali constitution? Or is the case in this discussion the blatant violation of minority or indigenous nationalities in the Himalayan kingdom?

Background

Vice-President Parmananda Jha refused to retake the oath of office and secrecy in Nepali language as per the Supreme Court�s order, sparking a constitutional crisis in the country. Paramananda Jha neither re-took a swearing-in ceremony in Nepali nor announced his resignation.

Historically, Nepal lies in South Asia as a Himalayan kingdom. It is a small landlocked country sandwiched between the People�s Republic of China in north and the Republic of India in southeast and west. Nepal, following King Prithvinarayan Shah, is a ��Yam between two boulders���China and India. Some say it is �India locked,� others say it is �idea locked.� However, geographically, it is indeed land locked.

Coming back to Vice-President�s controversy, I can consider retaking the oath in Nepali only after the government and the constituent Assembly commit to respect all mother tongues, Paramananda Jha said to the media persons. As per amendment to the interim constititution under consideration in the Parliament proposes that the public officers including the President and Vice-President can take oath in their mother tongues. During the press conference, VP Jha blasted the Supreme Court orders and accused it of misinterpreting the interim constitution and meting out a big injustice to him.

Controversy

��The decision to nullify my oath-taking in Hindi more than a year ago was against the spirit of the constitution, democratic norms and people�s fundamental rights to use their mother tongues,�� he said.

He claimed, when he took the oath, why during that time, there was no problem, and why this is being created now? According to Jha the Supreme Court verdict was accountable to create constitutional crisis and not me. As it always happens, these are sensitive issues related to religion, community, culture and language. Jha said, he respects sovereignty, unity and integrity of the Nepal. But he belongs to Madhesi group, and that should be respected, acoording to Jha.

Madhesi

Then question is what is the term ��Madhesi all about?�� This is one of the contested and controversial terms in Nepal. Many Nepalese peoples wrongly refer as ��Marsya,�� ��Madhise,�� ��Madise�� but they consider that uses of all these terms are insulting for them. The Madhesi scholars differentiate between the terms ��Madhesi�� and ��Teraibasi�� (Deweler of Terai region), the former is a historical, political and sociological concept that refers to a groups or communities discriminated by the dominant groups where as the latter refers to a groups or communities discriminated by the dominant groups where as the latter refers to any caste or ethnic group, including the dominant caste or group, who lives in the Terai region (Yadav 1997).

Establishment view

Even Nepali cabinet in the meeting requested VP Jha to retake the oath in Nepali language and respect the highest court of the country. Moreover, the meeting further urged Jha to understand the fluidity of transition and respect the people�s aspirations. In a new development, to persuade Jha, the leaders of Madhes-based parties called on him today and asked to take oath in Nepal and mother tongues, namely Bhojpuri, Abadhi and Maithali. ��We requested Jha to retake the oath in Nepali and his mother tongue. He assured us of considering our request,�� said chairman of Teraj Madhes Loktarik Party Mahant Thakur after speaking to the media people.

In a further development, Jha asked PM of Nepal to request the President to invalidate the Supreme Court ruling by activating the Article 151 of the interim constitution. The lawyers fraternity of Nepal is split over the VP�s refusal to take retake the oath. President of Nepal�s Bar Association and senior advocate Bishwokanta Mainali said that Nepal has become Vice-President less due to the failure of the oath in Nepali language ignoring the oath of office and secrecy of the Supreme Court. ��He is no more a Vice-President of Nepal,�� he said.

He further stated that VP Jha would face action for abusing the authority, if he continued to enjoy perks and allowances from the Nepal government. He further accused the Vice President of being a handy tool of a grand design to suppress the rights of the ethnic and indigenous people living in the Terai.Commenting on the crisis, lawyer Sher Bahadur KC said that it was very unfortunate for the nation that the VP turned down the Supreme Court ruling to retain the oath in Nepal.

However, advocate and lawmaker Radheshyam Adhkary said that the VP�s dignity would be enhanced if he had taken the oath of office and secrecy as per the SC ruling. On the other hand, VP�s lawyer Hiltman Singh said he cannot be forced to resign from the post just because he refused to retake the oath.

Conclusion

��For every grievance, there is a redressal mechanism, and Supreme Court of Nepal is the highest judiciary of the land. But unless any specific amendment is there to bypass the law, one feels the voice of the people of the land should be respected,�� this is how the Delhi based veteran journalist Seema Mustafa said over the ongoing crisis in the Himalayan Kingdom of Nepal.

source::http://www.dayafterindia.com/sep109/international7.html