Consequences of agitation
Chief of Federal Alliance (FA) and ex-Deputy Prime Minister Upendra Yadav in a press conference organised on the eve of the Singha Durbar picketing programme alleged the government of being unnecessarily defensive. He said that even if FA has announced to stage a peaceful demonstration the government 'has deployed security personnel in huge number'. It is true that the government does not need to panic as far as the agitation is peaceful.
The constitution has guaranteed citizens' rights of 'freedom of peaceful assembly'. The government needs to be watchful about not impinging on citizens' rights and it should ask security personnel to remain alert and controlled. Circumstances can turn ugly if security forces use excessive force. Likewise, the agitating leaders of Tarai have to carry out realistic assessment of their protest programmes to find out whether their programmes are people-centric and their protests disciplined and decent.
Media reports have surfaced that some parties in the Madhesi Front that is part of the FA opined that Kathmandu-centric agitation is not appropriate at the time. They might have doubts that their agitation might backfire on them. In this context, party leaders have to reconsider their steps if protest programmes launched in the name of people add to people's worries.
It was established in people's minds from the very beginning that Madhes agitation was not a spontaneous movement. This was further corroborated to a certain level when stones were pelted by agitators from across the Indian border at a time when India had imposed economic blockade on Nepal. Even the international community knows that some leaders who had lost the Second Constituent Assembly elections fuelled the agitation that crippled people's lives in the Tarai.
Seasoned Indian diplomat MK Bhadra Kumar's opinion in Asia Times is relevant here: "The last weekend’s developments in India-Nepal relations expose that what was perceived up until recently as the main bone of contention between New Delhi and Kathmandu – constitutional rights of Madhesi communities of Indian origin living in Nepal – is more a symptom than the real problem. The cancellation of the visit by the Nepalese President Bidhya Devi Bhandari to India on Monday; the abandonment of the idea of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi attending the ‘Buddh Purnima’ in Lumbini on May 21; Kathmandu’s decision to recall its ambassador in New Delhi – the weekend is packed with dramatic developments that have deeply wounded the India-Nepal relationship."
Bhadra Kumar falls in the category of those opinion-shapers, thinkers and writers who are worried about growing coldness in Nepal-India ties that is about to hit the red button. Bhadra Kumar bluntly asks powers that be in New Delhi whether instability in Nepal is in India's interest. He concludes that India has adopted wrong policy regarding Nepal and some positive signals seen after Modi's ascent to power have now turned meaningless.
Anti-Indian feelings are on the rise in Nepal and none of the governments in Kathmandu can neglect this reality. Worryingly, those doing politics in the name of Madhes and Madhesis have not understood this reality. Government needs to stop activities that strain social accord and drive wedge between communities.
Excessive focus on small interests will harm the large national interest. Foreign powers will always play one group with the other to keep Nepal under perpetual instability. They might have adopted the policy of inciting Madhesis and ethnic groups. That is why constant alertness seems necessary. After all, democracy demands continuous watchfulness.
Interview
Covid-19 management: A herculean task for Nepal
Read More
"We are in dire need of a comprehensive legislation to deal with pandemics"
Read More
'National unity' led Qatar's resilience against the blockade imposed by neighbors - Yousuf Bin Mohamed, Qatar's Ambassador to Nepal [Interview]
Read More
Comment