Schoenigkeit

Scoen ist guter,
Gesundheit ist grosser
-Delos

Soft target struck

The catastrophic bombing of Indian commercial capital Bombay exemplifies the audacity of Al Qaida. It remains a global threat. According to my understanding of world affairs, the Third World War began in 2001 or much earlier in 1993, when the first Islamists attacked US helicopters in Somalia, according to Wikipedia chronicles.

Qaida leadership chose India a soft target, poorly managed and with no complex security apparatus of US or UK. India is a growing trade partner of the West. However, its security is completely based on obsolete Russian equipment. India's security ties with Russia hampers transfer of sensitive technology from the West to India. The Western security officials feel high tech dual use technology can be passed to Russians who are increasingly assertive in places like Georgia, a NATO partner.

The attack on India has many analysts guessing the motive. Just few days ago there were reports that an Indian navy vessel was active in the Arabian sea against piracy from the Somali coast. The pirates reportedly hijacked Sirius Star, according to exclusive report carried on Der Spiegel, Saudi tanker carrying crude oil worth $100 million. Additionally, NPR report aired on KCRW 89.9 Los Angeles and other TV reports spoke of another Ship hijacked carrying Russian arms (main battle tanks and other arms). Indian leaders may have decided to launch an operation in which they could boost its service image and recover the Russian arms which is also available in the international black market, according to various books and movies (pls see "Lord of War" -Nicholas Cage, 2005 reference wikipedia.org). However, lack of training budget and professionalism prevents India from mounting something like Israel's Entebbe Raid. And, piracy is rampant not only in Somali coast but in Straits of Malacca, from where the Japanese economy receives all of its oil supply.

The pirates possibly have ties with Al Qaida and its franchises (ref CNN report). The Qaida leadership might have wanted to signal India that its ties with West and Israel (defense ties) should be severed. There is likely to be calls for Indian leadership to severe its close security ties with Israel. The death of a religious worker, a rabbi and his spouse indicates the terrorists are acting "without remorse".

I think the terrorists want to severe and isolate India (see National Geographic issue in which Tory attempts to isolate New England is chronicled in the American Revolutionary War, circa 1775-1783). India's leftists and Maoists are keen to see the withdrawal of multi-national business interest from India. These xenophobic anarchists and extreme nationalists hate West since the Congress party taught this kind of ideology since India's founding in 1948.

Additionally, the mastermind bin Laden might want to foment a fourth major India-Pakistan war. The anarchist ideology is always after mass destruction of human lives. And in India and Pakistan, where religious fervor and superstition is still in its heydey, a war and a nuclear exchange might trigger a massive inflow of refugees to the United States and Europe. Such a calamity would divert resources away from the other fronts of the Global War on Terror.

A penetrating analysis and careful study indicates that India's second capital and financial center has a history of sectarian violence. Hindus and Muslims have been engaged in riots since the 1990s. If one adds Malthus theory and overpopulation, the city is ripe for violence. The existence of criminal networks, extortion married to anti-Western sentiments creates a force which can easily be manipulated by top Qaida planners. They only have to find the would be perpetrators and pay them secretly. The motivation for suicidal attacks can be attributed to family welfare offer and promise to go to heaven to those desperados willing to undertake this kind of sadistic terrorist acts.

Besides, Qaida has wide presence in Internet command and control, subliminal messaging (ref: various sources including www.iacsp.com and its sister journal). The US government also cannot ignore threats to continental US and its citizens abroad. The US should quickly put strong pressure on regimes to stop harboring terrorists and take surgical actions, albeit with economy of force at a time when the burden ofn taxpayers is high to pay for many pork barrel programs (ref, speeches of Sen. John McCain).

Another theory: The Qaida cellular command may have chosen to initiate a nuclear exchange between India and Pakistan. Such a calamity would have resulted in tens of thousands of radiated refugees. Those refugees would have sought to enter United States and Germany, the primary refugee absorbing countries. Swamping American resources and conducting economic warfare and other forms of subversive operations is a major objective of Al Qaida (ref: Bard O'Neill's Insurgency and Terrorism.

I remember a copy of The Intelligence War, a Salamander book, in which an article mentioned that disgruntled individuals are recruited by foreign (particularly Soviet ref: Aldrich Ames and the other plant in Bundeskanzler Willy Brandt's staff in Deutchland ref: Der Spiegel and Newsweek) operatives inside United States and Allied countries. So I request the freedom and liberty to suspect that this individual Robert Sanchez, 46, our Metrolink driver was talking on the cell phone while driving a train? This is heights of negligence. Or could it have been an organized plot by cellular and computer engineers associated with the transnational network engaged in total war with the United States (ref: Histories Mysteries).

My published articles link

http://www.google.com/custom?domains=ekantipur.com&q=%22Pritam+S+Rana%22&sa=Search&sitesearch=kantipuronline.com&client=pub-5855301837617098&forid=1&ie=ISO-8859-1&oe=ISO-8859-1&cof=GALT%3A%23008000%3BGL%3A1%3BDIV%3A%23336699%3BVLC%3A663399%3BAH%3Acenter%3BBGC%3AFFFFFF%3BLBGC%3A336699%3BALC%3A0000FF%3BLC%3A0000FF%3BT%3A000000%3BGFNT%3A0000FF%3BGIMP%3A0000FF%3BFORID%3A1%3B&hl=en

Nepal under SCO shadow

The recent visit by Nepal's defense minister to China and Prachanda's hobnobbing with Russian and Cuban leaders signal Nepal's move away from Western influence. It must not be forgotten that Nepal's sovereignty was recognized first by UK, a western power. If it had not been UK's special relationship with Nepal during its presence in the Indian subcontinent, Nepal would not have existed as an independent state.
Also, the United States, the world's sole superpower recognized Nepal in 1947 much before Russia and China did. Pursuing a closer ties with SCO states might jeopardize Nepal's historic ties with the West.

Cuba's role in world politics is miniscule. The type of rhetoric emanating from Havana, its support for outright socialism in Venezuela would only serve to scare away foreign investment. State led approach advocated by socialist states would fail miserably.

Development of massive industries in China and Russia under communist rule resulted in growth of manufacturing of heavy equipment and not day to day consumer goods. But private sector paid heavily. Stalin ordered murder and liquidation of kulaks, the landowning producers. In China, Mao starved millions in his social mobilization schemes. His bloodthirst for power killed millions of Chinese in civil war with the nationalists. Nationalists under Chiang Kai Shek had better vision for management of resources. Look at Taiwan today. Its much better governed and regulated. Its export based economy and leadership in technology was in effect copied by Beijing. China's Olympics was heavily criticized for pollution, censorship and unrestricted development. Large construction alone would not help China. Nepal cannot afford to be another China, excessive regulation and lack of individual freedom. Its constitution is flawed with complete lack of stress on individualism and private initiative. Individual entrepreneurship is not encouraged in China, where state is the primary sector. Nepalese people cannot depend on their state alone. The money earned from remittance must be properly utilized.

Russia, a state led model, is again unsuitable for Nepal. Nepal does not have oil to sell. Its only resources are human and water. Tourism cannot grow on country with political violence. Judicial system and legal system has completely failed for proponents of violence have the seat of power. The electorate has been duped. Revolution and immediate change is simply not possible. Nepal cannot gain anything by importing ideas which are completely obsolete.

It was the Swiss who started cheese making in Nepal. Russia gave tobacco factory. Education and local development are being provided by the US. The Germans have given money for cultural preservation. That benefits tourism. Sustainable development and tourism are the only sectors suitable for Nepal.

Nepal's present leaders came from starting a war. Their claim to "represent the poeple" is basically derived from threat of violence. Appeals to reform and persuasion were denied to legitimate political organizations. Their clouded vision and socialist ideals would deny Nepal's participation in global economy and creation of more jobs at home. The presence of Nepal's foreign jobseekers in volatile regions like the Middle East poses a threat. Their abrupt return in times of international tensions such as any war involving Iran cannot be overlooked.

The so called leaders created the dangerous environment resulting in a massive outflow of rural youths to foreign countries. There might exist a nexus between the foreign employment business and the warmongering leaders. Tourists also prefer to go to India's hill stations like Sikkim and Darjeleeng and Tibet. Irresponsible politicking since 1990 which magnified after 2006 has led to reduced national income. The country is moving toward dark frontier. Radicalization of the youth and appeals to states which have grievous records of human rights and governance could lead to new conflicts.

SCO's umbrella cannot provide Nepal what the current leaders foresee as a front to mask their poor human rights record and their criminal background. SCO is a tool of autocratic Russia and China to manipulate the world. As the US is embroiled in two fronts, its influence in the world is perceived as weak by SCO adherents. Its recruiting effort to build a new Warsaw Pact and deny freedom to many of the world's peoples is to be oberved with keen interest.

The ignominious end of Saddam

Jan 4, 2007

By Pritam S Rana
During Saddam Hussein’s rule in Iraq, posters often depicted him as one of Babylon’s ancient rulers, Hammurabi or Nebuchadnezzar. Saddam considered himself as all powerful, able to make any decision, eliminate any opposition and rule with absolute impunity just like the ancient emperors. But on the fateful day of December 30, 2006, he was hanged after he was found guilty of crimes against humanity. He was sentenced to death by an Iraqi court for ordering the 1982 killings of 148 Shiite villagers in Dujail, Iraq, which was only a small part of the long catalogue of deaths and anguish he caused among Iraqis and the people of other neighbouring countries.

By 1968, Saddam had become the number two man in Iraq after the pan-Arabist Baath party solidified its grip in that country. Previously, Iraqi politics had been rather volatile with coups and counter-coups and assassination attempts against incumbent leaders. As Saddam was consolidating power within the Baath party leadership hierarchy, the 1973 oil crisis helped him generate massive revenues from the unprecedented rise in fuel prices then. Saddam was able to expand his agenda with the money into various social, agrarian and other development sectors in his country. He provided free education and health care which helped him gain countless well-wishers in his country.
In 1979, Saddam forced the ailing Ahmad Hassan al-Bakr from power and assumed the presidency of Iraq for himself, formally becoming Iraq’s all-in-all. Saddam’s first step after becoming president was the mass purging of the ruling Baath party. In a party assembly called by him in the same year, Saddam expunged 68 other Baathists among which 22 were reportedly executed. This was how Saddam solidified his power base, eliminating any possible threat to his one man rule.

Saddam’s foreign policy was even bloodier. Saddam closely remembered what he thought was an unequal agreement with Iran in the 1970s, which was then ruled by the Shahs and was a close ally of Washington. As revolution swept away the Shahs and the US leverage in Iran, Saddam grew suspicious of Iran’s new Islamist revolutionary government. Fearing that Iran’s Shiite leadership might incite Iraq’s own sizeable number of Shiites to rebel against his regime, Saddam ordered an invasion of Iran in 1980. The war with Iran lasted for 8 years and it killed nearly two million people from the two countries. During the war, Iraq acquired modern weapons from primarily the Soviet Union, China and France. Some analysts have pointed out that the US shared intelligence with Saddam’s regime during the war. The Iran-Iraq war was marked by barbaric bombings of civilian targets and by attacks against neutral shipping.

Also in 1988, the Saddam regime demonstared that it was prepared to violate all international agreements on using banned weapons. Having already used chemical weapons against Iranian soldiers, Saddam’s air force bombed the town of Halabja with nerve and mustard gas, killing about 5,000 Kurdish civilians and maiming another 10,000.
Saddam’s lust for conquest was not lost for long. Two years after the costly war with Iran, Saddam began quarrelling with tiny but affluent oil rich Kuwait. He invaded Kuwait in 1990 and claimed “Kuwait was an Iraqi province.” The whole world led by the US quickly condemned Iraq’s latest aggression and a US led coalition massed combat troops in Saudi Arabia ostensibly to prevent any Iraqi move against the country, the world’s leading oil producer.

Saddam was foolish enough to think that he could challenge US military power. Using the clear skies of the open desert terrain of the region, US airpower paralyzed Iraqi military and other important targets inside a few days in 1991. As Saddam refused to pull out from Kuwait, the largest armoured force ever assembled since World War II entered Kuwait, decimated Iraqi resistance and liberated Kuwait within a few days. The ceasefire agreement allowed Iraq to enjoy its sovereignty but it had to pledge to give away its weapons of mass destruction. It also imposed no fly zones over Iraqi airspace to protect Iraqi minorities from air raids by Saddam’s air force.
Another phase of bloody events followed the 1991 Gulf War. Encouraged by Iraq’s defeat in Kuwait and prodded by the US administration to rebel against Saddam, the Shiite population in the south and the Kurds in the north of Iraq challenged Baghdad’s authority. As no help came from Washington, Saddam’s remnant troops massacred tens of thousands of would be resistance fighters and their families. Thus Saddam remained unchallenged.
The 2001 World Trade Center attacks profoundly influenced the Americans into believing that all anti-US regimes in the world had links with Al Qaida and Osama bin Laden. Saddam, an old time foe who had been challenging UN arms inspectors, was the prime target for the Bush administration in its global war on terror. US intelligence analysts possibly calculated that Al Qaida’s elusive organization married to Saddam’s purported arsenal of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons would pose a lethal threat to Washington and its allies. So in 1993, the US military invaded Iraq.

After facing an array of resistance within Iraq, the US military captured Saddam on December 2003. After a long series of trials marked by the assassination of lawyers and other hindrances, Saddam was finally sentenced to die on November 5, 2006. His appeal was rejected on December 26, 2006 as the verdict was upheld by Iraq’s highest appeals court.
Saddam paid with his life for his hands were bloody. Many opposed Saddam’s hanging while others spoke against the death penalty. Saddam has done many positive things for his country. He modernized his country, gave his people free health and education and oil subsidies, tax beaks, etc. But, he allowed his two sons to go on a killing spree in his country. He himself ordered the killings of his closest aides, his own people and people of his neighbouring countries. After all, he also ordered the murder of his own son-in laws. So how do we remember Saddam? Do we forget his crimes and the suffering he caused to so many families? If we end up supporting dictators and still say we support democratic values, I think it would be a great contradiction.

(From Kathmandu Post)

The day we landed

by Pritam S. Rana

It was six in the morning
as we climbed down the nets
to the old wooden boats rolling fiercely
huddled together in groups of eights.

Our hopes were high for all of us expected
the Turks would simply turn and run
at the sight of our mighty fleet which had blasted
beaches, forts, man and gun.

We went forward to the beaches and the rocks
of Achi Baba and Kilid Bahr defiant and proud
crushing the silence of many peaceful nights.
Black and white smoke obscured beaches, explosions
were loud.

Thunderclaps, machine guns, and whizzing bullets,
the Turks had prepared a nasty welcome.
Men fell screaming as bullets hit chests and limbs
even before they had stepped on the beaches.

Chanting ‘Hail Mary!’ the men went ahead,
jumping out and running forward,
carrying rifle and rucksack, holding on to the helmet,
desperate for cover.

Men may have lost hope as they lay prone on the round
pinned down by enemy fire, shellshocked.
The wounded and the dead littered the ground.

The enemy was well dug-in
while our fellows were scattered about,
Oh, how much we wished for the days in Dublin,
the officers barked to keep our hearts stout.

We prayed for the day to die soon
for the darkness would shield us for the night.
In the cool light of the waxing moon
we began to dig for the next day’s fight.

http://www.spinybabbler.org/publications/display_publications.php?id=creating_verse.htm

Achham incident : Another debacle

Kathmandu Saturday February 23, 2002 Falgun 11, 2058.

By PRITAM S RANA

The recent attack by the Maoist rebels in Achham on army, police and civil administration has demonstrated that despite the emergency in effect, the rebels have not yet lost the initiative. It also proves our Prime Minister wrong when he exclaimed that the rebels have been defeated after the imposition of the emergency. The incident also demonstrates the weakness of the Royal Nepalese Army (RNA) and the largely ineffective police (vis a vis the Maoist insurgency).

The government’s main fighting arm in countering the armed rebellion is the RNA. During the emergency, the RNA deployed itself to the remote corners of the country, especially the affected areas and arrested thousands of people suspected of rebel ties. It also neutralized by fire those unwilling to surrender. However, the Achham incident has shown that these efforts were simply not sufficient. The rebels simply appear to have relocated to areas where the security presence was the minimum, trained in those areas and struck out somewhere. It is sad that only incidents of this magnitude attracts the attention of the government and causes it to take some meaningful steps.

Whether anyone likes it or not there is a war going on in this country. Who is winning is pretty hard to tell. After the declaration of the emergency, many were convinced it was the government, which was winning. But sadly the present Achham incident has proven that it is too premature to expect government victory. To combat the rebellion, the government should change its political and military tactics. There should be greater measures for security. The security forces have to be further furnished with modern equipments. The mental status of officials and leaders of the security apparatus should be changed.

In the Achham incident, an entire platoon (a unit of up to 40 soldiers) of RNA was wiped out. Hundreds, possibly a thousand or more rebels, did it. Here the culprit was lack of modern automatic weapons. An RNA platoon has only three automatic weapons while a US Army squad (7 soldiers) has seven automatic weapons. This shows that the smaller US unit has greater firepower than a much larger Nepali unit. If all the soldiers in the RNA platoon at Achham had automatic weapons, they would have been able to put out a massive volume of fire at the enemy forcing them to scatter or retreat. The standard RNA rifle is semi-automatic and fires in a slower rate. The Maoists used automatic weapons stolen from their past raid on the Dang barrack.

It has been demonstrated time and again that the Maoists rely on human wave tactics to overwhelm police and Army. The only answer to counter this threat is to rely on a massive firepower. The RNA and the police both have to procure automatic rifles as their individual weapons. The police will have to give up their vintage 0.303 rifles for more modern weapons. The Army must also procure belt fed light machine guns and distribute it to sections, subunits of the platoon. It should do away with its magazine fed light machine gun for they are slow and need frequent changing of magazine.

The RNA should also procure night vision goggles to detect and fight with the rebels at night. The news that some newer Army Mi-17 helicopters having night vision system is promising, but units in the field, the infantry also need night vision goggles. In counter-insurgency operations heavier weapons like the mortar should be given to frontline units rather than held centrally by the battalions. If RNA troops in Achham had mortars, by their fires, they could have well dispersed the rebels at a distance making it much easier to defend.

Nepal is a mountainous and hilly country. Much of the rebel activities are also in such remote and inaccessible terrain. So the primary means of movement is by foot. The RNA and police units have to move on foot to maintain their presence on the ground. But moving on foot is terribly slow process. The alternative expensive means of transport is helicopters. Helicopters due to their vertical take off capability can reach all types of terrain. Helicopter does not even need to land or touch the ground to embark or disembark personnel or other loads. It can simply hover above ground and do the job. The current inventory of helicopters is insufficient. The government should procure a large number of helicopters. It is well known that it is difficult for the government to purchase high cost helicopters. But it should look for other ways. Some time ago US Secretary of State Colin Powell was in Nepal. Nepal should ask for security assistance from US at a time when the US administration is up against fighting terrorism globally. The US provides military aid to many countries in the world.

The helicopter would be highly useful in the current counter-insurgency. Troops can be ferried rapidly from one point to another. Isolated outposts like Achham garrison could receive ammunition, food and other supplies via helicopter. A helicopter can also carry rockets, machine guns and cannon capable of supporting ground troops. Injured troops can also be rapidly evacuated to hospitals and other health facilities. Helicopters can be put to other uses as well: carrying out rescue operations in the aftermath of floods and famines.

The loss of RNA and police lives has also made it imperative that government boost the fighting capability of the security forces. A serious evaluation of the past strategy is to be undertaken. New tactics ought to be considered. If possible the RNA and the police should launch offensives against suspected territories where rebels have sanctuaries and training facilities. It should also invite experts from overseas in form of military advisers from countries like the US who have history of counter-insurgency warfare. In case of the US, it has Special Forces, who are elite troops capable of fighting in difficult terrain against all sorts of opposition. The US Special Forces include the Green Berets, Rangers and Delta Force who have latest experience in Afghanistan. The government through proper US government channels should invite these troops. They could train the RNA and the police and hone them up to the standard to effectively counter the Maoist rebels. Since the Maoists have now been declared terrorists, there should be a common ground between the US and His Majesty’s Government in the global war against terrorism. The war between the Maoists and the government is likely to continue. By burning the district headquarters of Achham, the Maoists have proven themselves to be terrorists and not any political group. Therefore it is imperative for the government to curb the continuing activity of the Maoist by employing new ways and with international assistance.

Gunning down choppers

by Pritam S Rana


An army Mi-17 helicopter crashed on Wednesday night near Malangwa while it was on its way to provide air support to the ground troops engaged in combat against the Maoist rebels. Prachanda issued statement saying his warriors had brought down the army chopper using 'modern and domestic' technology. This has raised some hope for the Maoists as army's airpower was a cause of great concern to them since it had so far remained unvanquished.
Army was quick to claim that its preliminary investigation had found out that technical snag was responsible for the crash and ruled out Prachanda's claim. The army added that the helicopter was armor-plated and thus impervious to any known weapon in rebel arsenal.

Despite all this the army may not enjoy air superiority over the rebels in the long run if the conflict persists for a longer time. There are certain types of anti-aircraft weapons available in the international market. There is no reason to assume that these won't fall into the rebel hands. In fact, the rebel high command must already be in the process of acquiring them.

Although anti-aircraft guns have been around since warplanes first appeared during the World War I, their effectiveness was proportional to the number of deployed guns. This means they were highly inaccurate despite advances in technology of improved sights, airbursting shells, and radar cueing and guidance.

Guided missiles began appearing in the 1950s and 60s. By 1967, the United States and the former USSR developed anti-aircraft missiles small enough to be carried and launched by one man. Although these early weapons were largely ineffective, more modern ones like the infra-red (IR) guided FIM-92 Stinger proved effective at the hands of Afghan rebels.

Afghan resistance groups managed to shoot down many Russian planes. US intelligence agencies believe that many Stingers are left in Afghanistan, some possibly in the hands of terrorists. It is not known if they are still usable.

Like the US Stinger missiles, the Russians too had developed Strela (NATO codename: SA-7 Grail) missile, which they exported widely and many of these are operated by international terrorist groups. The latest versions are said to be very effective and are exported widely.

Known collectively as man portable air defense system (MANPADS), these light and portable missiles pose a great threat not only to the royal regime but also to civil aviation. Terrorist groups are believed to have plans to shoot down airliners of target countries with these. The US government is trying to control the export of such weapons in the international market. But it has not been supported well by other countries.

The possession of MANPADS by Nepal's Maoists would give them ability to take down Royal Nepal Army's helicopters with ease. Nepal's open border with India makes it easier for the rebels to import such sophisticated weapons. Besides, international black marketers can simply air drop arms in Nepali territory. Nepal does not have technology to check its air space violation as demonstrated many months back when some foreign planes entered our air space without informing anyone.



Posted on: 2006-04-09 19:23:43 (Server Time)

The origin of name Pri(t)am

Priam
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For the manufacturing company, see Priam Corporation.

King Priam killed by Neoptolemus, son of Achilles, detail of an Attic red-figure amphoraIn Greek mythology, Priam (Greek Πρίαμος Priamos) was the king of Troy during the Trojan War and youngest son of Laomedon. Modern scholars derive his name from the Luwian compound Priimuua, which means "exceptionally courageous".[1]

Contents [hide]
1 Marriage and issue
2 Life
3 In later literature
4 In popular culture
5 Family Tree
6 References



[edit] Marriage and issue
See List of King Priam's children
Priam had a number of wives; his first was Arisbe, who had given birth to his son Aesacus, who met a tragic death before the advent of the Trojan War. Priam later divorced her in favor of Hecuba (or Hecebe), daughter of the Phrygian king Dymas. By his various wives and concubines Priam was the father of fifty sons and several daughters. Hector was Priam's eldest son by Hecuba, and heir to the Trojan throne. Paris, another son, was the cause of the Trojan War. Other children of Priam and Hecuba include the prophetic Helenus and Cassandra; eldest daughter Ilione; Deiphobus; Troilus; Polites; Creusa, wife of Aeneas; Laodice, wife of Helicaon; Polyxena, who was slaughtered on the grave of Achilles; and Polydorus, his youngest son.


[edit] Life
Priam was originally called Podarces and he kept himself from being killed by Heracles by giving him a golden veil embroidered by his sister, Hesione. After this, Podarces changed his name to Priam. This is an etymology based on priatos "ransomed"; the actual etymology of the name is probably not Greek, but perhaps Lydian in origin.

When Hector is killed by Achilles, Achilles treats the body with disrespect and refuses to give it back. Zeus sends the god Hermes to escort King Priam, Hector’s father and the ruler of Troy, into the Achaean camp. Priam tearfully pleads with Achilles to take pity on a father bereft of his son and return Hector’s body. He invokes the memory of Achilles’ own father, Peleus. Deeply moved, Achilles finally relents and returns Hector’s corpse to the Trojans. Both sides agree to a temporary truce, and Hector receives a hero’s funeral. Achilles further goes on to give Priam leave to hold a proper funeral for Hector complete with funeral games. He promises that no Greek will engage in combat for 11 days, but on the 12th day of peace, the mighty war between the Greeks and the Trojans would resume.

It has been suggested by Hittite sources, specifically the Manapa-Tarhunta letter that there is historical basis for the archetype of King Priam. The letter describes one Piyama-Radu as a troublesome rebel who overthrew a Hittite client king and thereafter established his own rule over the city of Troy (mentioned as Wilusa in Hittite). There is also mention of an Alaksandu, suggested to be Paris Alexander(King Priam's son from the Iliad), a later ruler of the city of Wilusa who established peace between Wilusa and Hatti(see the Alaksandu treaty).


[edit] In later literature
In the sack of Troy, Priam was brutally murdered by Achilles's son Neoptolemus (also known in the Aeneid as Pyrrhus), in a scene memorialized both in Virgil's Aeneid and Shakespeare's Hamlet. In said stories, Neoptolemus stormed into the palace of Priam and proceeded to make his way to Priam's chamber. After killing Polites, one of the many sons of Priam, Neoptolemus stabbed Priam in the side with his sword and inserted the blade up to the hilt. In Hamlet, Shakespeare particularly mentions Pyrrhus (Neoptolemus) pausing before killing Priam (i.e. killing him deliberately in cold blood).

In the Prose Edda, Snorri Sturluson claimed that Priam was the ancestor of a race that migrated to Scandinavia and served as a basis for the Aesir.


[edit] In popular culture
In Dark Mirror, a Star Trek novel taking place in the Mirror Universe, Priam has a much darker fate - as he is begging for the release of Hector's body for the burial rites, Achilles kills him in cold blood.

In Troy: Fall of Kings by David Gemmell, Priam leaps to his death from the Great Tower in Troy.


[edit] Family Tree
Zeus/Jupiter Electra Teucer



Dardanus Batea



Ilus Erichthonius



Tros



Ilus Assaracus



Laomedon Themiste Capys



Priam Anchises Aphrodite/Venus Latinus



Creusa Aeneas Lavinia



Ascanius Silvius



Silvius Aeneas Silvius



Brutus of Britain Latinus Silvius



Alba



Atys



Capys



Capetus



Tiberinus Silvius



Agrippa



Romulus Silvius



Aventinus



Procas



Numitor Amulius



Rhea Silvia Ares/Mars



Hersilia Romulus Remus



Kings of Rome



[edit] References
^ Starke, Frank. "Troia im Kontext des historisch-politischen und sprachlichen Umfeldes Kleinasiens im 2. Jahrtausend". // Studia Troica, 1997, 7, 447-87.
[hide]v • d • eCharacters in the Iliad

Achaeans Acamas • Achilles • Actor • Adrastus • Agamemnon • Agapenor • Ajax the Greater • Ajax the Lesser • Antilochus • Ascalaphus • Automedon • Balius and Xanthus • Bias • Diomedes • Elephenor • Eudoros • Euryalus • Eurybates • Hecamede • Idomeneus • Machaon • Mecisteus • Medon • Mégês Phyleïdês • Menelaus • Menestheus • Meriones • Nestor • Nireus • Odysseus • Patroclus • Philoctetes • Phoenix • Podarces • Promachus • Protesilaos • Schedius • Stentor • Sthenelus • Talthybius • Teucer • Thersites • Thoas • Thrasymedes • Tlepolemus

Trojans Aeneas • Aesepus • Agenor • Alcathous • Amphimachus • Anchises • Andromache • Antenor • Antiphates • Antiphus • Archelochus • Asius • Asteropaios • Astyanax • Axylus • Briseis • Calchas • Calesius • Cassandra • Chryseis • Chryses • Clytius • Dares Phrygius • Deiphobus • Dolon • Epeius • Epistrophus • Eteoneus • Euneus • Euphemus • Euphorbus • Eurypylus • Glaucus • Gorgythion • Halizones • Hector • Hecuba • Helen • Helenus • Kebriones • Lycaon • Lykomedes • Melanippus • Mentes • Mydon • Mygdon of Phrygia • Othryoneus • Pandarus • Paris • Pedasus • Phorcys • Podalirius • Polites • Poludamas • Polybus • Polydorus • Priam • Pyraechmes • Rhesus of Thrace • Sarpedon • Theano

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priam"
Categories: Characters in Book VI of the Aeneid | Greek mythology | Characters in the Iliad | Trojans | Mythological kings | People of the Trojan WarViewsArticle Discussion Edit this page History Personal toolsLog in / create account Navigation

Copyright and courtesy:- www.wikipedia.org

Notes:-My mother named me after a name common in Punjab. The people of Punjab have had contacts with Greeks (Ionians) and Indo-Scythians.

Binayak Rana's song

Boli rahane hridayako,
Chari ladi kunni ke bho

Pyaro ramro pinjada nai
Panchhi bina ritto bho.

The bhajan reminds me of serene life in Nepal.

Valley anecdotes

As i jumped out of GOP HQ in Hayvenhurst, San Fernando, I came across a couple of older citizens. They talked about health and life. And then, I took out my Digital Fortress and hit a bump on the word "escrow."

It had something to do with money and credit and debt. I gotta focus on that word. I could not stop giggling.

Tropic treat for Summer

Set in a lush tropical forest of Vietnam, a band of gung ho moviemen encounter unforseen share of trouble. While shooting a classic war movie, an actor playing haggard war veteran "Four Leaf" Tayback (Nick Nolte) and a set hand are stuck in a remote location. Their chopper, a Huey, has been apparently shot down.

Studio exec Les Grossman, played by a savvy Tom Cruise, is admant for success. To Grossman's nightmare, the motley crew bumps into a criminal outfit, in fact a deadly insurgents producing narcotics in the Iron Triangle. As soon as they land into a previously unforeseen hostile territory, the team loses its self styled leader to a landmine.

Cocky Tug Speedman (Ben Stiller) and Kirk Lazarus (Robert Downey Jr.) have a constant clash of personality and ego problem, despite the humor. A particularly funny episode is when Tayback declares he's just a lowly guy and not a veteran he is supposed to play.

The plot hits catharsis as Speedman is captured while trying to "rescue" Tayback.

The kid insurgent depicts the plight of third world child soldiers. The kid is vicious. Speedman sounds crazy as he decides to stay back to perhaps sermonize the criminals, a typical anecdote for trying to serve American values.

As Grossman refuses to negotiate with a ransom demand for Speedman and threatens "massacre", and mocks the UN, the film elevates to comical heights.

Provides intense action. Star studded cast and graphic scenes makes the movie a must watch. A true entertainment for those seeking to escape the scorching California sun. Good value for money.

Blue Bird

-Pritam S Rana

Fair n' flabby,
Gay n' happy

Cute n' blue,
Small black shoe

Beautiful bird,
Able shepherd

Modern day dainty fairy,
Bless thee, merry, merry.

Notes: This poem is is inspired by a combination of Renoir's Loge and Brig. Gen. Suzi Yogev. The Metro driver is only a symbol.

Correct approach will address insurgency

Updated: 20/12/2005 19:08 NST (+5:45 GMT) Current: 21/12/2005 11:22:58 NST Kathmandu

Dr Thomas A Marks
Dr. Thomas A. Marks is a political risk consultant based in Honolulu, Hawaii, USA. He is a scholar with hundreds of articles and research papers (including books on Maoist insurgencies worldwide) to his credit.
He frequently visits Nepal to study the ongoing conflict. Dr. Marks regularly contributes to numerous publications that deal with insurgency and terrorism.
He talked to P Rana of Nepaleyes on his recent visit here. Excerpts: :
How do you analyze the conflict in Nepal? Any likelihood of peace, or will one side prevail decisively?
Let us be frank: Miscues by all concerned have resulted in stalemate. The Maoists, having established themselves in rural areas, have come face-to-face with the structural realities underlying Nepali underdevelopment. The result is marauding gangs of young people who are rapidly becoming minor warlords. Maoist misbehavior and miscalculation have given them a rump state with the GDP of the Sahara
Desert and a sullen, resentful, captive population. Maoist illegitimacy, however, cannot be exploited by a state that has not resolved its own issues of legitimacy. These require little elaboration by me, save to state the obvious. Having proceeded erratically in its approach to the insurgency, the state finds its political
position weak and its security forces, stronger though they are, able to project power anywhere but unable to remain and consolidate gains. Instances of indiscipline remain common enough to negate the advantage provided by the Maoists’ own problems with indiscipline, unbridled kidnapping, murder, and robbery. The major political parties, hamstrung as ever by their lack of vision and determination to engage in
obstructionism, have decided that their battle with the monarchy takes precedence over all else. “Peace” is the card they are presently playing in their bid to return to power. Yet there is not an inkling that they have given any more thought now to the particulars of good governance than they did previously in their decade
of mismanagement. They simply state that they have learned their lesson. As for the foreign presence: it is fairly evenly divided between those working behind-the-scenes to bring down the royal government and those wishing “compromise” could be rendered into Nepali. In summation, no side is able to prevail decisively, and the likelihood is for more of the same.
If the Maoists somehow win and take over Nepal, can they sustain their radical regime given Nepal's geopolitical situation and the current international system?
As I have stated earlier in this forum, key to the nature of such a hypothetical regime is what the Maoists are really after. One thing for sure, they simply are not saying what the political parties claim they are saying.
This evidence is not hard to come by – the Maoists themselves disseminate it. Pris oners and captured documents confirm it. Leaving this point aside and moving further to address your question, it is noteworthy that no radical regime in the past century has been able to sustain itself, unless one places in that category
North Korea. Still, as with its predecessors, North Korea is collapsing. But in collapsing, radical dictatorships have always functioned as killing machines. This is integral to the nature of the beast. They ultimately find themselves isolated, unable to go on. In the short-term, though, such regimes can find support for their
crimes. Simply look south, where on the 16th (of this month) the Indian legal Marxists rallied in support of not only Pyongyang but of those other shining examples of democracy and development – Iran, Syria, Cuba, Venezuela – and the Nepalese Maoists and their Seven-Party Alliance pseudo-comrades! India itself,
winking at the actions of left-wing members of the ruling coalition, is foolish in thinking it can “buy off” the Nepali Maoists, even as New Delhi’s own Maoist problem surges.

You have intensively studied the conflict in Colombia. Do you see parallels between Nepal and Colombia? Can we learn anything?
Both major insurgent groups in Colombia see themselves as Marxist-Leninist: the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, and the National Liberation Army, or ELN. They are not Maoist but advance many of the same hackneyed slogans and programs as does the CPN (M). FARC does utilize for its operational doctrine the same “people’s war” approach as the Nepalese Maoists, so one sees a close
correspondence in developments on the ground. In fact, by mid-1998 in Colombia, elimination of police presence, attacks upon government main forces, and lack of national strategy and planning had produced a serious situation that some saw as stalemate. That events have turned around so dramatically does offer
lessons for Nepal. A federal system of democracy, based upon maturing local autonomy, especially at the local level, produced a superb wartime president in Alvaro Uribe. He was able to implement an integrated, multifaceted strategy to Colombia’s challenges by using a greatly reformed military as the shield behind
which social and economic development could further political legitimacy. Negotiations are part of Uribe’s approach, but all has depended upon security forces that, in 2005, are better than those of most NATO member states – and only vaguely resemble those of, say, 1995, when the situation began to deteriorate.
Defense experts in Nepal say the government lacks coherent military strategy to defeat/contain the insurgency. What advice would you offer to the government?
Any military strategy must exist only to facilitate the political struggle, which in turn includes the economic and social campaigns. The Maoists, as the counter-state, are quite aware of this and have played their cards rather better than the state. The generic advice is as simple in concept as it is complex in implementation. A
counterinsurgency campaign gets in place that which is correct and sustainable, then it plays for the breaks.
A “correct” approach is one that addresses the causes of the insurgency. Legitimacy is always the center of gravity, certainly it is in this case. A “sustainable” approach is defined by the state itself, most particularly in terms of human and fiscal cost. “The breaks” come from those shifts in internal and/or external
circumstances that lead to a change in the correlation of forces. Countries such as Thailand, the Philippines, and Peru have all been through this process. Operationally, what they did was set in motion a plan that built upon local democratic capacity, sound governance, micro-development, and social equality in order to mobilize the state against the Maoist “new order.” They all articulated a vision. It is not enough to fight against something; you must fight for something. If you can’t state why you fight, you’re lost.

Do you, as an expert see the insurgents serious about peace and their commitment to multi-party democracy this time?
What is noteworthy about Maoist insurgencies is that they say and advocate the same things – and they all claim they will be “different,” avoid the crimes of the past. Unfortunately, the crimes are part and parcel of the structural “answer” they advance to society’s ills. It’s simply too easy, under a dictatorship of the
proletariat, by whatever cover name, to stop trying to convince people and to kill them instead. Yes, the Nepali Maoists have stated that they will be different. Yet their strategy has been textbook in all its particulars, right down to the present use of nonviolent means to accomplish violent ends. They see themselves at an epochal moment when they can play Mr Outside to the seven parties Mr Inside, classic
salami tactics of the first (Leninist) order. This is also what they are telling their people. Does this mean there is no room for accommodation? Certainly not – but not under the terms of reference as tabled by the UML, claiming to faithfully represent what the Maoists have undertaken. The UML is either naïve or quibbling. The
Maoists have stated quite clearly that “absolute democracy” – which means ousting the monarchy – is to be achieved by a united front (they use other terms) of themselves and the seven-parties. That doesn’t sound like compromise.
Do you think the Royal Nepal Army (RNA) is under equipped to deal with the rebels? If yes, what does it need? Leadership, strategy, materials or all of them?
RNA needs to be part of a national strategy for democratic governance. Tangible weapons are secondary to intangible ones, such as leadership and planning. Operationally, RNA has not yet accepted that there is no way around the classic force-multiplication conundrum inherent to counterinsurgency save through
mobilizing local forces. Call them Home Guards, call them neighborhood watch; debate all you like whether they are to be armed with their agricultural implements, firearms, radios, or simply whistles; when all is said and done, security forces must duplicate what the Maoists have done – mobilize a mass base. It is Maoist
crimes that allow this to be done, whether one talks about the Thai Maoists’ attacks upon the monarchy, or the Philippine Maoists’ attacks upon restored democracy, or the Peruvian Maoists’ savagery. Nepal’s Maoists have behaved in similar fashion, despite the efforts of their apologists to paint them as Robin Hoods. What is needed, then, is not weapons as I believe you have in mind but rather the ultimate weapon (ask the Maoists!), mobilization. But mobilization only works if it grows out of democratic capacity. The Maoists have shown that their version of society is youth gangs led by apostate teachers and politicians from the old-order. A Nepal that is to stand against that version must be a Nepal that grows out of the
demand for democracy but channels it into constructive action, such as development of hydropower. Notice where we’ve come: mobilization comes from local democracy extending to national democracy; it comes from enforcing the already passed laws of social equality; it comes from finding a means to deal with corruption and to institute good governance; it comes from economic development that will be built upon
micro-development. And that micro-development needs to move beyond the tired solutions of the development community and tap the “liquid gold” that makes Nepal second in the entire world in hydropower “reserves.” As odd as it sounds, this country should be an Asian Switzerland, not a conflicted basket case.
Realizing that is what counterinsurgency is all about – the RNA has to provide the shield behind which is happens.

Has the Royal Nepal Army (RNA) lost much popular support? If this is so, would you like to suggest anything on how an embattled army can manage its image?
In any conflict of any sort, whether a civil rights campaign or general warfare, information shapes reality. That is why no state can simply state, “We allow a free press,” and leave it at that. Even before the Maoist insurgency began, Nepal’s media were only just beginning to come to grips with issues of accuracy, accountability, and professionalism. In no area were they more deficient than in knowledge of conflict. Add to this an isolation bred of position, and you have a recipe for what you see today, a mix of the very good and the very, very bad. RNA, early on, produced some personalities who demonstrated an understanding that media were no longer an annex to the operations order, rather the very oxygen which all involved in the struggle breathed. These RNA personalities were targeted by the Maoists, consequently their policies languished. In targeting them, the Maoists knew very well what they were doing. The result today is the active hostility of much of the media to anything save parochialism, whereby even standard issues of state
interest and responsibility are considered an infringement upon “freedom of the press.” Combine this with the “learning curve” that the security forces have been going through in moving from a peacetime army to one on a war footing; add the involvement of international human rights organizations and their own narrow
view of “human rights,” and the result is on full display here. The security forces are labeled the enemy.

As a US citizen, do you think the US government should provide military aid to Nepal? Is there any US interest involved in either helping Nepal defeat the insurgency or letting the Nepali government fend for itself?

Yes, the US has and should continue to assist Nepal. Military aid to a legitimate government is part and parcel of that. It is the question of legitimacy, as determined by our law, that places the US in the difficult position it now occupies. On the one hand, it has long been a major force for development in Nepal. On the
other hand, security assistance is a normal part of our relations with the country. Now, amidst the conflict we are discussing, one can appreciate the delicate line any embassy must walk. It wants things “to work out.” Ironically, all the elements necessary for compromise would seem to be present – but men of good will, shall
we say, are in short supply. But let us end where we began, by speaking frankly: you can’t believe in Maoism and not have given up your critical faculties. You can’t claim to be a citizen of a global community in this day and age yet put up pictures of Lenin, Stalin, and Mao. Why not add Hitler? Or Pol Pot? In that
sense, the Maoists have played their cards very poorly, because they claim to be “good guys” even as they wave the bloody red banner responsible for the greatest crimes humanity has ever witnessed. Thus the US, while willing to examine tactically all viable forms of compromise, strategically will remain committed to a set
of principles and their tangible expression that is quite the opposite of those trumpeted repeatedly by the Maoists. If the Maoists are serious about compromise – and the UML, for that matter – let them put away the butchers’ pictures and furl up the flag of tyranny – and walk like democrats rather than simply talk.

Response to Kaemer

Karl-Heinz Kraemer
Department of Political Science of South Asia, South Asia Institute, University of Heidelberg



Democratization and political parties in Nepal

Lecture presented at the South Asia Seminar, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA,
March 19, 1999

Introduction: State formation and society


About 250 years have passed since Nepal was transformed into a nation state by the military expansion of the small kingdom of Gorkha (Stiller 1975). The numerous mini states that had prior existed on the territory of the new state had been geographically and economically secluded autonomous agrarian societies. Their respective population had been a number of ethnic groups with divergent social structures along their respective religious, cultural, social, economic and legal necessities.

After the Anglo-Gorkha War (1814-16), which brought the Gorkhali expansion to an end, the Nepali state tried for political, administrative and legal unity. The final result of this endeavour was the muluki ain of 1854, Nepal's first legal code, based on Hindu law and the social and cultural values and structures of former Gorkha. But it also contained a number of compromises towards values and practices of non-Hindu groups. The most important element of the muluki ain was, that the Hindu social order was applied to the whole state. Numerous ethnic groups found themselves only in the lower social strata as castes (A. Höfer 1979). As a consequence, all political, social and economic power exclusively lay in the hands of members of the high Hindu castes, while there was no chance of participation for the other population groups.

The development of civil society was further hindered by the Ranas who usurped all power from 1846 to 1951. With British support they secluded Nepal hermetically from the outside world and exploited the country for the sake of their own pockets and prevented every kind of social development. People from outside the Rana-family had no chance of education and participation. Even high Hindu castes favoured by the muluki ain were degraded to minor figures of the Rana-state. It were especially the latter who went to India in the first half of the 20th century, where they used better chances for education at Indian schools and universities.

Political parties and the introduction of democratic ideas


A side-effect of this education in India has been the growing political consciousness of the exiled Nepalis. They got entrance to western political ideas and many of them actively took part in the Indian independence movement. Quite a number of them were members of the Indian National Congress, while others joined the Communist Party of India. At the time when the Ranas prevented the formation of political and social organizations in Nepal, the emigrant Nepalis were even able to found political parties in India. In January 1947 some minor political and student organizations on the initiative of B. P. Koirala joined under the name of Nepali Rastriya Congress (Nepali National Congress). Other important parties formed in the Indian exile in the late forties were the Nepali Prajatantrik Congress (Nepali Democratic Congress) and the Nepal Communist Party.

When the British left India the Rana government deviated from the principle of political isolation and tried for international recognition by extending diplomatic relations to evade political pressure from India. The independent India regarding the Rana system as outdated and tyrannical showed growing support for oppositional politics in Nepal, especially among the exiled Nepalis living in India. But accruing from this was the danger of Nepali dependency from India and of loosing her identity. This had a very negative impact on the Indo-Nepali relations during the following decades. Leading Indian politicians time and again not only stressed the close historical and cultural foundations of both countries, but even went as far as saying that Nepal had always been a part of India. These declarations were confirmed by exiled Nepali leaders, who being mainly members of high Hindu castes stressed their descent from India. For example during the founding session of the Nepali Rastriya Congress in 1947 the then president of the Indian National Congress, Acharya J. B. Kripalani, declared,

Nepal was always a part of India. Thus, Nepal's economic and political development is dependent upon free India. (Prem R. Uprety 1992:93)

And B. P. Koirala took almost the same stand when he said,

Actually Nepal and India are not two countries. From racial, religious, and economic perspective and in all respects Nepal is a major organ of India. Today the political difference you find is basically the game of selfish diplomats and politicians. (Prem R. Uprety 1992:94)

Nepal's political events of 1950/51 have often been praised as a people's revolution (janakranti) (Bhuvanlal Pradhan 1991). This proves problematic because political changes were not brought about by the masses, but they were the result of the cooperation of internal and external forces in a highly effective regional political situation. Independent India was looking for internal stability and external security. In face of the Chinese invasion of Tibet and declared Chinese claims for the Himalayan region, the rotten Rana system and the actions of exiled Nepalis in India constituted an enormous threat to Indian interests. So, India was looking for a system that satisfied Nepal's three political interest groups – Ranas, King and the young party politicians – and that at the same time gave India direct control over the political affairs in Nepal.

This throws another light upon the events of 1950/51. The Treaty of Peace and Friendship of July 31, 1950, gave the Ranas a last hope for the survival of their political system, but at the same time it guaranteed the continuation of Indian influence and infiltration of Nepal. The toleration and unofficial support of the armed rebellion of the Nepali Congress confirmed the politicians of that party in their positive view of India and kept them dreaming of creating a democratic Nepal with Indian support. King Tribhuvan's flight arranged by India and the so-called Delhi compromise initiated by Nehru in discussions with the Ranas and King Tribhuvan finally led to the restoration of monarchy in combination with special democratic elements (Grisma Bahadur Devkota 1960-83: vol. I:40-1; R. S. Chauhan 1971:33).

Thus, the events of 1950/51 have not been a turning point for the Nepali civilization. They only brought the replacement of one autocratic government, that of the Ranas, by another one, that of the Shah kings, with a mere touch of democracy. As a result of this unfinished political change the fifties became the stage of power struggle between the traditional feudal forces, represented by the institution of monarchy, and the young but totally inexperienced leaders of the political parties. The more the party politicians demonstrating their own incompetence turned for advice to India the more could the king as "father of the revolution" play to the gallery as unifying bond, symbol of the nation and popular leader. This already started in the early fifties under the ailing King Tribhuvan who played the party leaders off against each other. By several amendments of the initially democratic interim constitution of 1951, Tribhuvan stabilized his political position in the sense of an absolute monarch and successfully foiled elections for a constituent assembly.

Nationalism and the meaning of democracy


This became even clearer under his son Mahendra who ascended the throne in 1955. Mahendra tried to free Nepal from her strong Indian dependency introduced in follow-up of the events of 1950/51. For this reason he transformed Nepali nationalism by referring to stated traditional values. These were identical with those of the early Nepali nation state as reflected by the muluki ain of 1854: the Shah monarchy, the Hindu culture with its social and legal order, and the propagation of Nepali as the official and later national language of the country. Mahendra got in direct touch with the people and presented himself as the leader of the nation who was to the utmost concerned about the welfare of his "subjects". With the separation from India being a fundamental aspect of his new nationalist ideology, Mahendra demonstrated that the party leaders had too close connections to Indian parties and politicians.

At the same time the Nepali parties and their leaders did little to counter this negative impression. Most of the time the parties were struck by inter- and intra-party struggles caused by different leaders striving for power. At the same time they missed any kind of feeling for the real problems of the masses. Most of the party leaders belonged to an elite of high Hindu caste members educated in India and belonging to the urban middle class. Many of them had no knowledge of the hardships of the mainly rural population of the country. The poor masses, on the other hand, lacking education and political consciousness had no access to the democratic institutions of representation and participation offered by the political parties. They were more open to the arguments of King Mahendra who as raja represented a political institution well known in the mountain region for centuries.

In 1959 the people for the first time could decide about the composition of a parliament in common and free elections. But the convincing victory of the Nepali Congress (NC) winning 74 out of 109 seats could not hide the fact that the process of democratization had suffered severe setbacks during the fifties. Not only had the democratic forces represented by the political parties to do without elections for a constituent assembly that had been part of the Delhi compromise of 1951, but they even had to accept a constitution, enacted only one week before the elections, that clearly bore King Mahendra's marks. The king promulgated the constitution

in exercise of the sovereign powers of the Kingdom of Nepal and prerogatives vesting in Us in accordance with the traditions and custom of Our country and which devolved on Us from Our August and Respected forefathers. (preamble, see P. Neupane 1969:87)

There was no word about the introduction of a democratic system. Instead the preamble spoke about the "establishment of an efficient monarchical form of government". The supremacy of the king was further elucidated by calling the people his "subjects".

All executive power lay in the hands of the monarch and was to be "exercised by him either directly or through ministers or other officers subordinate to him" (article 10). The latter had only the right to convey recommendations. The power distribution in the legislative sphere was similar. There was a parliament,

which shall consist of His Majesty and two Houses, to be known respectively as the Senate (mahasabha) and the House of Representatives (pratinidhi sabha) (article 18).

All bills presented in parliament needed royal assent, and it was in the king's discretion whether to give or to withhold this assent (article 42). Already a sketchy glance at the functions and powers of parliament made clear that the Nepali parliament of 1959 was hardly able to represent public opinion or even to introduce socio-political changes. Rather the king could seize all parliamentary power without violating the constitution (Parmanand 1982:202-3). Within the judicial sphere, the absolute power of the monarch was not directly mentioned, but it could be derived from his right to appoint or remove the judges of the Supreme Court (article 57).

Of special importance were the regulations of articles 55 and 56 which gave the king the right to cancel the constitution or parts of it in cases of emergency. Especially mentioned was the case when the parliamentary system should prove unable to function. These emergency articles were King Mahendra's final means in case he should lose control over the political power. He used them in December 1960 when he dissolved the parliamentary system after only one and a half years and introduced the partyless panchayat system, that was to be in power until 1990.

So, the short parliamentary interlude of 1959/60 must be interpreted less as a victory of democratic forces than as an epilogue of the democratic experiments of the 1950s. The difference compared to former governments was that the Koirala government was not nominated by the king but elected by the people. Even though the NC hat a great majority in parliament the party had no constitutional right to implement decisions; according to the constitution, this right lay in the hands of the king. But Prime Minister B. P. Koirala nevertheless behaved as if he had a democratic legitimation corresponding to western conceptions. This gave the impression to the outside world that democracy had entered Nepal, but at the same time it provoked the intervention of King Mahendra, who obviously had been surprised by the overwhelming victory of the NC.

If Mahendra wanted to finish the restoration of absolute royal power, then he had to put an end to the politics of B. P. Koirala and his party. He had to introduce a system based on Nepali traditions of state and politics but containing elements that satisfied the younger generation which had come under western influences. So King Mahendra praised the new panchayat system as an indigenous one:

We have to open up a new spring of power which will remove the centuries-old poverty, ignorance, and backwardness of the country and which will nourish to maturity and fruitfulness the tree of democracy rooted in our soil and suited to our conditions. Since Panchayats are the basis of democracy and a democratic system imposed from above has proved unsuitable, as is apparent from the present experience of the country, we have now to build democracy gradually layer by layer from the bottom upwards. It is our aim to associate the people in the administration at all levels and to develop village, district, and municipal Panchayats.

In this context Mahendra spoke about a process of national reconstruction. Nepal's history verifies that at least till 1951 the people had only been exploited, and this abuse had little changed during the experimental phase of the 1950s. With the introduction of a parliamentary system in 1959 only a precondition for broader participation of the masses had been fulfilled. So, if there had been something to reconstruct after the forceful dissolution of this hopeful political system, then it must have been institutions which had existed before 1959 and which had been endangered by parliamentary democracy, and that were the monarchy, the Brahmans and the old feudal elites. Together with western democratic conceptions, liberal ideas and western socio-cultural values had entered the country. With the cancellation of these influences and the dismissal of a parliamentary democracy of western style King Mahendra had the ulterior motive of reconstructing absolute royal power. He could count on the support of all those forces that had benefited from the conservative traditional system, and these were the upholders of the Hindu social order, i. e. the Bahuns, and those members of high Hindu castes upon whom after the unification of the country in the 18th/19th century – in some parts of western Nepal even earlier – the Shah kings had transferred land previously belonging to ethnic groups.

Calling the panchayat system a traditional Nepali system, Mahendra could fall back upon the new national consciousness he had forced to be built up during the late 1950s. Especially the educated elites recognized, that Nepal had to safeguard her own cultural and political identity, if it did not want to be absorbed by India. Many Nepalis thought that this danger was greatest under a western democratic system with political parties founded on Indian soil and having very close relations to Indian parties and politicians. So, Mahendra also had the support of the new intelligentsia, a fact that might explain why so many young members of the banned political parties joined the new system in its early days. Right from the beginning, the king co-operated with these young men of the second generation of party politicians, most of them from the NC.

The constitution of 1962 for the first time officially identified Nepal as a Hindu kingdom. Since Nepal was a multiethnic state – even though it was not called so at that time – monarchy was described as the unifying factor of the nation. According to Hindu philosophy it was assumed in an ethnocentric manner that also the numerous non-Hindu people of the country accepted and respected the Hindu king in the same way. This "self-identification" of the Nepali people was taken for granted in article 2 of the panchayat constitution.

King Mahendra’s brutal actions against the banned political parties and their western democratic ideology nipped every kind of resistance in the bud. For many years the party leaders, as far as they had not been imprisoned, could only be active in Indian exile, a situation well-known from Rana times. It took until the seventies that parties again intensified underground activities in Nepal as well. They began with militant communist riots in Eastern Nepal; later also the NC adopted such tactics. Student unrest in spring 1979 finally caused King Birendra, who succeeded his father in 1972, to hold a referendum on the future of the political system.

Even though the party politicians received no governmental support, they, for the first time since 1960, could openly talk about their political opinions. As in the 1950s, irreconcilable differences between parties or politicians prevented the close cooperation of the political parties, which was especially rejected by B. P. Koirala and his Nepali Congress. The consequence was the defeat of the party political side in the national referendum of May 1980 (G. Acharya 1985; L. R. Baral 1983). But the other option had been an amendment of the constitution, and this brought the opening of the system and gave the political parties an opportunity for infiltration. Again, it were communist splinter groups which first made use of this chance, having members of their parties been elected into functions of the panchayat system. After 1986 the NC cautiously did the same.

At the end of this development stood the people's movement of spring 1990 with its far reaching consequences: abolition of the panchayat system, transformation of the absolute monarchy into a constitutional one and introduction of multiparty democracy. This development was possible, since NC and Communists worked together for the first time. But the success of the movement came so quickly, because of great mass participation, which was not confined to urban areas. Different from 1950/51 it was not the movement of a small elite of mainly high caste Hindus, but members of all strata of society took part. Remarkable was the forefront participation of groups that had especially been discriminated under the Hindu state in modern Nepal: organizations of ethnic groups, low Hindu castes and women in general. Similar to the political parties these groups had used the liberalised panchayat system of the eighties to organize themselves.

Institutionalization of democracy


Correspondingly high were the expectations upon the "new" Nepal in 1990. Nine years have passed since then and the initial euphoria has been replaced by disillusionment and frustration. The reasons are different. On the one hand had the expectations been too high in 1990; also a democratic government could not do wonders in one of the poorest countries of the world. On the other hand showed the newly responsible persons rather soon the same kind of misbehaviour that previously had been criticized as typical for the panchayat system. This caused popular slogans like "nothing has changed, only persons have been exchanged" or "previously corruption happened in a hidden way, now we have democracy and so it is done in public".

The constitution of 1990 is the legal basis of the current political system of Nepal. It has been drafted within a few months by representatives of the NC and the left parties that had jointly organized the movement. These people tried to lay the foundations for a democratic system, but at the same time they avoided radical changes. This resulted in numerous compromises with the conservative feudal forces. The most serious change was that one from a partyless to a multiparty system. Another important change concerned the monarchy. King Birendra became a constitutional monarch who in almost all actions depends upon the prior recommendations of the democratically elected government. This means that the original aim of the 1950 revolutionaries of the NC, which had been foiled by the Delhi compromise had been achieved 40 years later.

One of the striking features of the preamble of the new constitution is the special emphasis of public will. The sovereignty lies in the hands of the people, and the constitution has been drafted with the greatest possible participation of the masses. Adult franchise, the parliamentary system of government, constitutional monarchy and the system of multiparty democracy are emphasized as cornerstones of the constitution. The rule of law shall be a living reality on the basis of freedom and equality for all Nepali citizens, and it shall be guaranteed by an independent and competent system of justice.

The constitutional feature most restricting for social development is the concession towards conservative forces in the definition of the kingdom (adhirajya):

Nepal is a multiethnic, multilingual, democratic, independent, indivisible, sovereign, Hindu and constitutional monarchical kingdom. (article 4)

New are the terms multiethnic, multilingual and democratic, aspects that had been stressed during the movement and at the time of constitution drafting. But the makers of the constitution rejected the idea of a secular state which had so vehemently been demanded by the left parties and by the many non-Hindu groups. This concession to the economically, socially and politically dominating high caste Hindu population is mentioned in the preliminary part of the constitution above all other fundamental rights. What does it mean for example that article 11 guarantees the equality of all citizens, if the state has before been declared as a Hindu state? This means that not only the religion, but also Hindu social order, Hindu values, Hindu ways of thinking and living, and Hindu politics with all their effects are binding for state and society.

Article 6 of the constitution can be seen in a similar way. It defines Nepali, the mother tongue of the centrally dominating Hindu society, as language of the nation and official language (rastra bhasa and sarkari kamkajko bhasa). All other mother tongues of the country are named "national languages" (rastriya bhasa). They shall be preserved and promoted by the government (article 26), even though little has been done so far. This language policy gives the speakers of national languages hardly any chance in competition with those, who have Nepali as their mother tongue, and discriminates them in politics, administration and society.

The current executive and legislative system is very similar to that of western democracies. The king is only formally sharing power. The legislative consists of a bicameral parliament, the house of representatives (pratinidhi sabha) with 205 members directly elected by the people and the national assembly (rastriya sabha) with 60 members. The king is required to appoint the leader of the strongest party in the house of representatives as Prime Minister. The other ministers are to be appointed by the king on the recommendation of the Prime Minister. The thus constituted council of ministers is responsible not to the king but to the house of representatives.

Part 17 of the constitution (articles 112-114) sets fundamental rules for the formation and recognition of political parties that had been banned for so many years. The parties are required to organize themselves along democratic rules, to have their office bearers elected at least once every five years and to have at least five percent female candidates for elections to the house of representatives. Article 113 (3) gives the election commission the right to bar parties from elections, which are formed on the basis of religion, community, caste, tribe or region:

The Election Commission shall not register any political organisation or party if any Nepali citizen is discriminated against in becoming a member on the basis of religion, caste, tribe, language or sex or if the name, objectives, insignia or flag is of such a nature that it is religious, communal or tends to fragment the country.

The Nepali state has used this very interpretative article several times to control non-Hindu parties and organizations. In 1991 the Election Commission withheld the recognition of three parties representing ethnic or other social groups that were discriminated against by the Hindu state. For the mid-term elections of November 1994 this number grew to six (Gorkhapatra 06.08.1994). Critics say that this article 113 is nonsense, since the state is declared to be a Hindu state and so it is communal itself. In any case, the Election Commission only rejects those parties that confront the state communalism with ethnic communalism.

But irrespective of such shortcomings has the system change of 1990 provided the conditions required for the development of civil society in Nepal. The political power has been transferred from the hands of the king to those of elected representatives of the people. Today the elected politicians and their political parties are responsible for the implementation of democracy and social changes. Within the first two years after the movement of 1990 three parties came to the limelight, while the other parties more and more lost importance and influence. Those three leading parties were the Nepali Congress (NC), the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist-Leninist), which had been formed in early 1991 by the unification of two splinter groups of the former Nepal Communist Party, and the Rastriya Prajatantra Party or National Democratic Party (NDP), the party of the erstwhile panchas, the politicians of the partyless panchayat system.

Election behaviour of the people


The constitution of 1990 has laid sovereignty into the hands of the people. The people have the chance to take influence upon the political, economic and social state formation and development by general and free elections, and they can control the elected representatives of the parties. Since 1990 the people could make use of this right twice each in parliamentary and local elections. The participation in the elections of over 60 % may be proof enough that the people are willing to play their political part. With the exception of the local elections of 1997 all elections can be called peaceful. Disturbances did not arise from the people but mainly from representatives of the political parties, and no party can acquit itself of guilt.

But even more impressive is the way the people have voted. Let us first have a look at the parliamentary elections. In 1991 the people clearly voted in favour of the old traditional party of the Nepali Congress. It seems that the reason for this was not only the important role the party had played during the democracy movement of 1990 but also the memory of the glorious past of the NC: The people gave their vote for the same party that had been expelled from power by King Mahendra's coup d’état in 1960. In this context, it may be characteristic that irrespective of the many undemocratic features of the constitution of 1959 the NC of the 1990s always spoke of the restoration of democracy and not of its introduction. So in the eyes of many people the restoration of democracy was identical with the restoration of the political power of the Nepali Congress.

But the elections of 1991 had also some other aspects of fundamental importance. The developments of 1990 had produced great a number of parties, 20 of which took part in the first parliamentary elections. Contrary to expectations, the people with their clear vote avoided a stalemate in parliament. With the exception of very few parties, all the minor ones were totally ignored. This trend continued in 1994, when only five parties were able to win seats in parliament.

Another important feature of the 1991 elections was the crushing defeat of those forces that had "represented" the people under the panchayat system. This defeat of the then two Rastriya Prajatantra Parties, which together only won four out of 205 seats, led to their unification in the aftermath of the elections. In 1994 this conservative party obviously had recovered winning 20 seats and becoming the third party-political force. This improvement of the RPP was not only caused by its new unity but also by the peoples dissatisfaction with three and a half years of NC government.

And finally we have to mention the election of the CPN-UML as main opposition party in 1991 and then as strongest party in 1994. Abroad, there has been lack of understanding for this election behaviour of the people at a time of world-wide decline of communist systems. Parts of the western press even wrote about political immaturity of the Nepali people. But there have been several reasons why the people thought it necessary to vote for this party. First, the CPN-UML has deviated from the traditional ideology of communist parties since its foundation. The party declares its support to constitutional monarchy, the multiparty system, parliamentarianism and even a free market economy on the basis of the constitution of 1990. Compared to other parties world-wide, the CPN-UML is more a social-democratic than a communist party, but it sticks to its name because of its historical development. Thus the party fulfils a function, which at the times of B. P. Koirala had been that of the NC, while the NC of the 1990s in many aspects has become a party even right of the centre.

Role of political parties in democratic Nepal


In a society characterized by poverty and socio-religious inequalities the people are looking for a kind of political representation that opens up perspectives and hopes changing their fate. The masses in general had been deeply disappointed by the NC, and so they elected the party out of government in 1994. The NC is not only suffering from a distinct turn to the right, but it is also shaken by deep rooted interior problems. The few remaining personalities of the first hour – Girija Prasad Koirala, Krishna Prasad Bhattarai and Ganesh Man Singh who died in 1997 – have been fighting each other publicly punching below the belt since the elections of 1991, when the then interim Prime Minister Bhattarai was not elected and had to give way for Koirala. Singh finally even left the party, Bhattarai handed over the NC presidency to Koirala and the latter facing a possible split of the party laid the leading role in parliament into the hands of a younger generation. But also the experiment to make Sher Bahadur Deuba the party leader for the years to come poorly failed. The one and a half years of his coalition government based on a majority of only one vote, overshadowed by corruption, nepotism and abuse of authority, led to the absolute low for the young Nepali democracy.

All political parties are facing problems with implementing intra-party democracy. Confining our view to the three leading parties we see that NC and RPP elect their presidents in a democratic manor, but then endow them with enormous power. The persons responsible for the ideological line of the party, like the members of the central working committees, are not elected but nominated by the party president on his own decision. Bhattarai even delayed these nominations for many months at a time of greatest conflict within the party. Only within the CPN-UML the central committee is directly elected by the national congress, towards which it is responsible. The undemocratic structure of the leading parties makes the introduction of a broad based and equal participation of all strata of society even more difficult. Only the established party elites, which in all parties belong to the Brahmans and Chetris, decide, if other groups of society are allowed to participate or not, for example when election candidates have to be nominated. This is for the disadvantage of those groups that already had been disadvantaged before the advent of democracy: the ethnic groups, the so-called untouchables, the women and the Tarai population.

With greater parts of the people still having no positive perspectives, the leading parties steadily lose control. One of the best symbols is the fate of the NC. Being the strongest party in Parliament in 1991 with an absolute majority of seats and winning the local elections of 1992 with about 60 % of the votes, the party has been falling into an abyss. In November 1994 the NC lost its majority in parliament and in May 1997 it was swept out of the local bodies securing only 30 % of the votes. An end is not to be seen. The split of the CPN-UML in March 1998 again has made the NC the strongest party in parliament. Girija Prasad Koirala became prime minister for a second time, first as head of a NC minority government, then as leader of a coalition with the CPN-ML, the splinter group of the CPN-UML, and finally as prime minister of a coalition of NC, CPN-UML and Nepal Sadbhavana Party (NSP). As the 1999 general elections approach, Koirala has even presented his party rival Krishna Prasad Bhattarai, who so far has lost three elections, as the coming prime minister of Nepal. One will have to see if this brings more unity into the Nepali Congress. Younger leaders have already shown signs of disappointment.

The conservative forces represented by the RPP have been in an upward trend since the local elections of 1992, irrespective of its participation in the Deuba government, for whose failure the RPP had been especially responsible. But like the NC, the RPP, too, is split into two camps headed by Lokendra Bahadur Chand and Surya Bahadur Thapa respectively. Both of them led coalition governments in 1997/98. First Chand was prime minister of the absurd coalition government of RPP and CPN-UML forced by the NCP-UML rebel Bam Dev Gautam. After half a year, this coalition was brought down on the intention of Chand’s party colleague and president, Surya Bahadur Thapa, who then headed a coalition government of RPP, NC and NSP. This government was again brought down, when Chand split his party forming the New RPP in early 1998.

The main beneficiary of the negative trend of the NC has been the CPN-UML. Several reasons can be mentioned in this context. Nepal's masses are living in great poverty. It was under the first government of Girija Prasad Koirala that the people recognised, that the NC is no longer a party representing the interests of the poverty stricken and backward strata of society. This position became more and more filled by the CPN-UML whose ideology is concentrated on the hardships of the poor. This has already been decisive for the party's success in the parliamentary elections of 1994. The minority government of Man Mohan Adhikari, which lasted for only nine months, initiated such great a number of populist measures in advantage of the rural masses, that the NC saw no other chance but to overthrow the government, if it did not want to loose possible mid-term elections. Even the later irrational coalition of the CPN-UML with the rightist RPP did not bring any harm to the party in the eyes of the people, as the great success in the local elections of 1997 has shown.

But the politics of the CPN-UML, too, became more and more guided by power ambitions. One prove may have been the coalition with the RPP accepting a former pancha as Prime Minister. Another evidence is the intra-party struggle and later split of the party initiated by Bam Dev Gautam. For sure, the party still has internal problems with the integration of radical communist forces into a more and more social-democratic party conception. So, similar to the NC and the RPP the CPN-UML is suffering from internal tensions, conflicts and power struggles. Such insufficiencies of the leading parties are increasingly provoking activities of radical extra-parliamentary forces. The best example may be the so-called people's war (jana yuddha) of the Maoists with its growing effectiveness in recent times.

Extra-parliamentary extremism


For about three years, the hill-area of middle and later also of eastern Nepal is hit by some kind of revolution that is shaking the foundations of state and society. This war is organized by extremist communist forces calling themselves NCP (Maoist). After the democracy movement of 1990, some extremist splinter groups of the erstwhile NCP joined under the name NCP (Unity Centre). They formed the Samyukta Jana Morcha Nepal (United People’s Front Nepal) as their political wing, which participated in the 1991 elections winning nine seats and becoming the third strongest party in parliament. The split of the Unity Centre in 1993 was also the end of the SJMN as a parliamentarian force. One of the splinter groups was that of Kamal Pushpa Dahal, better known as Comrade Prachand. It called itself NCP (Maoist).

Its highly talented ideologist, Dr. Baburam Bhattarai, calls his party’s activities a people's war, with the aims of fundamentally changing the economic and social structure of the country and introducing a new kind of democracy. The Nepali state represented by the political parties, on the other hand, is speaking about terrorist activities, which have to be opposed forcefully by the state.

The SJMN had already called the people's movement of 1990 an unfinished revolution. In order to bring this revolution to an end, the SJMN had tried to use the parliament as an operation level under the disrespected constitution of 1990. Its then convenor, Baburam Bhattarai, saw no sense for the extension of this kind of politics after the collapse of the Koirala government. In his eyes there was not much ideological and structural difference between the established parliamentary parties. After the split of the SJMN, Bhattarai tried hard for a common line of the Maoist forces. At least after the downfall of the Adhikari government in autumn 1995 and the installation of the coalition government of the NC with the conservative RPP, these extreme left forces found the time ripe for revolution. So in February 1996 the Maoists started their people's war in some districts of mid-western Nepal, especially in Rolpa, Rukum, Jajarkot, and Salyan, partly also in Gorkha.

Baburam Bhattarai calls the people's war an epoch-making event in Nepali history. For the first time, the Nepali people had woken up from a deep slumber of semi-colonial and semi-feudal oppression and exploitation. Even individuals with little political consciousness would see the current deep political crisis of the state. As reason Bhattarai mentions Nepal's semi-colonial integration into British India by the treaty of Sugauli (1816) and the continuation of this status by the Indo-Nepali Treaty of Peace and Friendship of 1950. The slavish acquiescences of the feudal ruling classes to foreign powers would have distorted the independent socio-economic and political development process. A small coterie of feudal comprador and bureaucratic capitalist classes comprising about 5% of the population would have been monopolizing power and resources and exercising hegemony over 95% of the people. This had given rise to intense class, national and regional contradictions. As a result the country would now have slumped to the ignominious status of being the second poorest country in the world. So, Bhattarai thinks that it is necessary to overthrow the state with its rotten socio-economic structure and to make a revolutionary transformation on a new democratic basis. (Spotlight, March 21 1997, p. 22)

The Maoists first started their actions according to classical revolutionary methods: identification of the above mentioned so-called negative state forces and deliberate attacks upon the life and property of these persons. As a result, the law and order situation in the affected areas deteriorated seriously. In spring 1997 the Maoists used the local elections to intensify their actions. In some parts of the country elections could not be held at all, in others they were hindered considerably. The revolutionary forces demonstrated impressively, that their activities were no longer a passing fancy of crazy left revolutionaries, but a socio-political process that needed to be taken seriously.

The governments since then have not shown much interest in the political arguments of the Maoists. According to government declarations they are terrorists that must be met by nothing else but repression. So the Deuba government concentrated police forces in the affected districts. Operating in the same way as in panchayat times they killed great a number of people by shooting. Time and again, the people have heavily complained about the arbitrary measures of the police. In fact, many more people have been killed or hurt by the police than by the Maoist actions. Torture and other human rights violations in police custom as well as arbitrary killing are often reported events.

Baburam Bhattarai denies to be a terrorist. The capitalist and imperialist nations idolizing the USA would only regard themselves as democratic. All people opposed to their world order would be called terrorists. So Bhattarai calls the Maoist people's war a counter-terrorism against the imperialist global terrorism. (Spotlight March 21, 1997, p. 23)

The Nepali state has problems offering a political dialogue. Even after three years of Maoist activities, the government explains not to know the reasons for the people's war, because it cannot admit that many of Baburam Bhattarai's arguments are true. Official statistics as well as anthropological and historical research verify Bhattarai's statements concerning the distribution of wealth and power in the kingdom. And a glance at the ethnicity of ministers, party politicians, parliamentarians, leading government officials and entrepreneurs makes clear that the movement of 1990 has not been a revolution by its name. Only persons have been exchanged, and even this has often been revised today. Those forces that guaranteed the feudal conservative system of society until 1990 have been sitting at the cabinet table several times since autumn 1995, and for short, they even held the office of Prime Minister. Corruption, nepotism and abuse of authority, once called the fundamental evils of the panchayat system, are practised today in public by members of the same elite circles that have feathered their nest at the expense of the masses for the past 200 years.

For the latter, the democratization has not brought any improvement, neither economically nor in respect of socio-political participation. If the leaders of the main political parties, who are now responsible for the fate of the country, really wanted to change this situation, they would have to rob themselves of their own privileges. While changing the government they can woo needed coalition partners by powerful positions laden with chances for corrupt practices. But how shall the same politicians negotiate with people who have nothing to offer but their poverty and their exploited and underprivileged status? How shall they explain to these people the whereabouts of millions of international money that every year disappear in dubious channels? How to make the masses understand that they have to be deprived of fundamental education, because else their growing political awareness would endanger the privileges of the ruling elite? A dialogue with the rebellious left forces has not been possible so far, because the party politicians are neither able nor willing to answer such questions.

But besides such objections against the government one also has to ask, if the Maoists offer some kind of alternative to the current system. Their leader, Baburam Bhattarai, may side with the poor masses, but accidentally or not, he and the other Maoist leaders, too, belong to the privileged elite of the Bahuns. Bhattarai mentions three main causes for the social, economic and political inequalities: Nepal's inclusion into the sphere of British colonialism, the extension of this dependency in form of modern India, and the submissive cooperation of Nepal's ruling feudal elite with these foreign powers. But Bhattarai does not mention that the real causes for the above cited inequalities are much older. They go back to the time of Nepali unification (1743-1816), when the Gorkha rulers applied their Hindu-political and social ideals upon the conquered territories. The legal formation and fixation of this order was a domestic process with no influence by British colonialism.

The impoverishment of the greater parts of the population have been caused by this application of Hindu-political principles. Affected were all those persons, who, according to the thinking of the high caste elite, were inferior creatures, because they belonged to ethnic groups or were so-called untouchables. Strikingly, Baburam Bhattarai does not mention these fundamental causes of inequality. He is talking about colonialism and imperialism of leading western nations like the USA, but he is silent about the colonialism and imperialism of communist or former communist states, like China and the Soviet Union, against the numerous national minorities within their own countries. Both communism and democracy are western ideologies developed to fight class differences. Religious, cultural and ethnic inequalities had only minor importance in 19th and early 20th century Europe. But in Nepal they are decisive. So it remains doubtful if the Maoist ideology provides a way for social changes. But one thing is sure: For the present they offer the poor masses hopes the government and the established parties are not able or willing to provide.

Monarchy, Hindu fundamentalism, and ethnicity


The introduction of democracy and the process of its development has also influenced a number of extra-party groups. First to mention are the conservative forces with the monarch as their personified symbol. In the course of the 1990 movement and its aftermath, King Birendra had to give up his absolute rights step by step. The political parties involved in drafting the new constitution treated the king with respect and so made it easier for him to renounce his former absolute rights, even though the palace on several occasions tried to keep as much power as possible. The greatest concession of the party politicians was the definition of the state as a constitutional monarchical Hindu state. This was a guarantee for the continuation of the Shah dynasty and it elevated its socio-political foundation, the Hindu religion, culture and society, against the other numerous cultures and societies of the multiethnic state Nepal.

In 1990 the constitution drafting commission had asked the people to submit suggestions for the new constitution. According to Vishvanath Upadhyaya, the chairman of the commission, 95% of these suggestions concerned religion, language and culture. Upadhyaya, who later became Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and who himself was a Bahun like most of the members of the drafting commission, called these things totally unimportant for the formulation of a democratic constitution. Representatives of the Nepali Congress in the commission insisted upon the continuation of the Hindu state, as it had been demanded by the traditional feudal elites, the palace, the former panchas and the leading Bahuns. The commission rejected the idea of a secular state, which the left parties and the organizations of ethnic groups, low Hindu casts and women had been fighting for.

The corresponding heated discussion in the political parties subsided soon after the promulgation of the constitution. The king has put up with his new constitutional monarchical role, and the leading parties soon forgot their public commitment to equality and participation of all citizens. At least at the national level, the parties are still dominated by members of high Hindu castes; members of ethnic groups have only chances in their main living areas. All political parties have problems with the constitutional regulation, that at least 5% of the election candidates must be women. And very often, these female candidates are set-up in constituencies where they hardly have any chance to win. As a consequence, only seven of the 205 members of the House of Representatives (3.4%) are women. All this must be seen in context with the socio-political conceptions of the Hindu state.

The continuation of the Hindu state has been the highest maxim of both the conservative forces and the leading party politicians of democratic Nepal, because this alone guarantees their elite privileges. Secularism has always been identified with the lifting of the ban of missionary practices. There are talks of the decline of Hinduism, its eradication by Christian missionaries and finally the expulsion of Hindus from Nepal. Taking the mean practices of some of the numerous Christian aid organizations working in the Country for common, there are never ending talks of thousands of conversions to Christianity day by day.

But the discussion of dangerous Christian missionary distracts from the negative attitudes of the Hindu state for the many indigenous cultures. In support of the Hindu state-religion the king and the politicians are courting Hindu dignitaries and sponsoring Hindu organizations and events. One never hears any word about the danger of Christian missionary for the ethnic cultures, the Buddhists and the Muslims, not to talk about the danger of state Hinduism for these religions and cultures.

Summary: Democracy and civil society


The one-sided cultural and religious politics of the Nepali state has led to the neglect of great parts of the population. According to the national census of 1991, 42% of the population belong to ethnic groups, some of which have become superficially Hinduized. Another 22% are Hindus belonging to so-called untouchable castes. Both groups take no advantages from the socio-political order and distribution of power in a Hindu state. If we also include the 3-4% Muslims mentioned by the census into this number game, the number of beneficiaries of the Hindu state, i.e. the high Hindu castes, is reduced to little more than 30% of the population. This number has to be halved again, since the women, according to Hindu laws, have no economic rights and so can only participate in state and society with the allowance of their fathers or husbands.

So Nepal currently is in a dilemma. On the one hand has democracy entered the country at the beginning of the 1990s, and the parties have played a decisive part in this development; on the other hand is this democratization unfinished. Of course, democracy cannot come over night, but Nepal's special problem is, that there has been no socio-political change and no political will to participate the population as a whole. The people have the right and liberty to elect their representatives for the different state levels and, by this way, to influence the political development of the country. But the selection of who is eligible, is still in the hands of members of the same elites, which had once been sharing power in the feudal royal state and which are now dominating the political parties. The poor masses remain excluded and have hardly any chance to save their interests through the current parliamentary system. This provides a fertile soil for extra-parliamentary forces calling for the boycott of elections and instigating a revolution.

A compromise is offered by some organizations of disadvantaged groups like those of ethnic groups, low Hindu castes and women. These organizations today have partly joined to federations in order to have a stronger voice in the discussions with the state. With growing intensity, they are trying to inform their respective population groups about their civil rights, and they provide them with what officially should be the task of state and politicians: political consciousness, self-esteem and legal advise in their struggle for political and economic rights.

Like executive and legislative, the judiciary as well is dominated by the traditional elite. During the past years the justices of the Supreme Court had to decide a number of complaints about infringement of the constitution charged by members of disadvantaged groups. They rarely took the heart to force the lawgiver to legal amendments shaking the foundations of the traditional system. Parties representing non-Hindu communities, for example, found no recognition as political parties, while the Nepal Sadbhavana Party, representing the India based Hindu population of the Tarai, had no such problems. Other examples are the numerous suits of women against their legal discrimination. So far, the Supreme Court has not ordered parliament to implement the constitutional principle of legal equality irrespective of race, caste, gender, etc.

It is a common feature, that such measures aiming at fundamental social changes are not initiated by political parties. The latter have prepared the way for democracy, but they withdraw from its implementation and instead turn to corruption and internal power struggle. In interest of Nepal's future one can only hope for new democratic leaders, who are willing to enforce the socio-political, participatory and economic changes necessary for the development of civil society, before radical and anarchic forces are able to take the lead.

Literature

Acharya, Giriraj. 1985 [2042 v. s.]. Janmat sangraha darpan (janmat sangraha avadhibhariko satya-tathya-vistrit dastavej). [Mirror of referendum (documentation on the time of the national referendum)]. Dharan: Indranath Banstola.

Baral, Lok Raj. 1977. Oppositional Politics in Nepal. New Delhi: Abhinav Publications.

Baral, Lok Raj. 1983. Nepal's Politics of Referendum: A Study of Groups, Personalities & Trends. New Delhi: Vikas Publishing House.

Baral, Lok Raj. 1993. Nepal: Problems of Governance. Delhi: Konark Publishers.

Baral, Lok Raj and Leo Eugene Rose. 1995. Democratisation and the Crisis of Governance in Nepal. Presented at International Colloquium on Legitimacy and Conflict in South Asia. Internationales Wissenschaftsforum Heidelberg (mimeo).

Brown, T. Louise. 1996. The Challenge to Democracy in Nepal: A Political History. London and New York: Routledge.

Chauhan, R. S. 1971. The Political Development in Nepal, 1950-1970: Conflict between Tradition and Modernity. New Delhi: Associated Publishing House.

Devkota, Grisma Bahadur. 1960-1983. Nepalko rajnitik darpan. [Political mirror of Nepal]. 4 vols. Varanasi: Jaya Bharat (Printing) Press.

Gautam, Rajesh. 1989/90 [2046 v. s.]. Nepalko prajatantrik andolanma nepal praja-parishadko bhumika. [The Nepal Praja Parishad in Nepal’s democracy movement]. Kathmandu: Rajesh Gautam.

His Majesty's Government, Central Bureau of Statistics (ed.). 1993. The Analysis of the 1991 Population Census (Based on Advance Tables). Kathmandu: Central Bureau of Statistics.

Höfer, András. 1979. The Caste Hierarchy and the State in Nepal: A Study of the Muluki Ain of 1854. Khumbu Himal, vol. 13,2. Innsbruck: Universitätsverlag Wagner.

Krämer, Karl-Heinz. 1995. Ethnicity and National Integration in Nepal: A Conversation with Parshuram Tamang. European Bulletin of Himalayan Research 8:41-48.

Krämer, Karl-Heinz. 19961. Ethnizität und nationale Integration in Nepal: Eine Untersuchung zur Politisierung der ethnischen Gruppen im modernen Nepal. [Ethnicity and national integration in Nepal: the politization of ethnic groups in modern Nepal] Beiträge zur Südasienforschung, Südasien-Institut, Universität Heidelberg, vol. 174. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner.

Krämer, Karl-Heinz. 19962. Politik und Militanz in der ethnischen Bewegung Nepals. [Politics and militancy in Nepal’s ethnic movement] Südasien 16,5:58-62 u. 16,6:48-51.

Krämer, Karl-Heinz. 1997. Die Strategie der nepalischen Maoisten und die staatliche Unfähigkeit zum Dialog. [The strategy of the Nepali Maoists and the government’s inability to dialogue] Südasien 17,3:51-53.

Kumar, Dhruba (ed.). 1995. State, Leadership and Politics in Nepal. Kathmandu: CNAS.

Mitra, Subrata Kumar (ed.). 1990. The Post-Colonial State in Asia: Dialectics of Politics and Culture. New York etc.: Harvester Wheatsheaf.

Neupane, P. 1969. The Constitution & Constitutions of Nepal. Kathmandu: Ratna Pustak Bhandar.

Parmanand. 1982. The Nepali Congress since Its Inception: A Critical Assessment. Delhi: B. R. Publishing Corporation.

Pradhan, Bhuvanlal. 1991. Nepalko janakranti (2007). [The people's revolution of Nepal (1950/51)]. Kathmandu: Rumu Prakashan.

Sharma, Jagadish Prasad. 1986. Nepal: Struggle for Existence. Kathmandu: Communications Inc.

Stiller, Ludwig F. 1975 (1973). The Rise of the House of Gorkha: A Study in the Unification of Nepal, 1768-1816. Kathmandu: Patna Jesuit Society.

Tamang, Parshuram. 1997 [2054 v.s.]. Janajati ra rastravad (kehi lekhaharusangalo). [Nationalities and nationalism (a collection of works)]. Kathmandu: Jana Sahitya Prakashan Kendra.

Uprety, Prem R. 1992. Political Awakening in Nepal: The Search for a New Identity. New Delhi: Commonwealth.


Nepal's ties with the Western world goes beyond the British rule. When Greeks began contacts with the Scythia. Aristotle's teachings and its symbiosis with eastern world resulted in the founding of a new peaceful religion, Buddhism in the East (ref. Ancient Greece book I read in Chicago). The opening of the Silk Road resulted in long established contacts with China and Greek colonies and Greece proper. The greater proportion of Indo-European people and India originate from Central Asia ref wikipedia). The contacts with Ionian Greeks (Yavanas) and Scythians is well established in Hindu scriptures including the Mahabharata (ibid.) It is obnoxious and deceitful to blame the Ranas for supporting the East India Company as the company represented order and a positive force with great contribution to the development of the subcontinent. Great personalities of the company like Robert Clive have important role in Indian subcontinent's overall development. Nepal's ties with West goes back to the missionaries from Rome who came to study Buddhism in Tibet and northern Nepal. Newar Malla kings were the first to welcome and embrace them. The Presidency of Bengal sent a company of troops to support King Jaya Prakash Malla when his kingdom was threatened by Gorkha king Prithvi Narayan Shah. Nepal's incursion in Tibet following the silver currency dispute with Tibet resulted in Sino-Nepal war of 1792-93. Nepal's contacts with East India company, its trade relations and diplomatic support were crucial in helping Nepal stand the might of China's main forces in Dhaibung, Rasuwa district. Without muskets and manportable cannons, the Gurkha Royal Army had no chance against the Chinese army of emperor Chien Lung. The army was lead by Chien Lung's son in law. After mutual court intrigue of the Thapas and Pandes which resulted in imprisonment and death of important Nepali prime minister Bhimsen Thapa, Nepali court politics became extremely volatile. At that time Bir Narsingh Kunwar, an ordinary soldier ala Napoleon seized control of power. His alliance with the East India Company was important for the soveriegnty of Nepal as an independent and free state. After solidifying his power base, he headed on a tour of Europe to learn of the Industrial Revolution, Renaissance and other vante garde ideas prevalent in Europe. He brought reforms like building of postal roads. He introduced heliography (ref. Seto Bagh, Diamond Shumsher Rana) a technology of communications which helped rapid transformation of information. In pre-telegraph Nepal, such technology helped save lives of people. Jang Bahadur Rana with his tacit support of the East India Company won back Butwal and Syuraj into Nepal. This is in sharp contrast to the present chaotic turbulence and unrest. His visit to England, the greatest power of that time expanded Nepal's diplomatic ties with Europe. British prime Ministers like Disraeli learned from Nepal's experience as a tumultous state. These experiences may have influenced Lord Balfour to declare a separate and vibrant state for the Jews in Plaestine. (excuse me, this is my enthymeme). But his attempts to reform the social structure met with odds of the Brahmin elite, resulting in Nepal's general backwardness and its slow growth. Therefore, I strongly disagree that Ranas were usurpers. The Ranas were first to introduce schools and colleges in Nepal. Gen. Nara Shumsher introduced sports in Nepal. As a result of Ranas contribution in the development of Nepal, United Kingdom government recognized Nepal in 1923, much before India. The Rana led government allowed and facilitated the recruitment of hill peasants into the British Army, which began after the Anglo-Nepal war (1814-16). These people with no other opportunity in the hills became economically independent and cosmopolitan through their foreign travel and education opportunities for their children. Otherwise, the traditional Hindu castes, especially the Brahmins who dominate Nepal's education, civil service, political parties and media, would have had total control over elite postions of Nepal.

The handing over of power to the masses through 1979 referendum, 1990 people's movement and 1996 pro-Maoist loktantric movement has resulted in a violent political culture in Nepal. The so-called people's war initiated by Maoists and supported by the left has resulted in physical destruction of millions of dollars worth of investment in infrastructure, primarily of aid money. Tourists are being scared with extortion and double taxation.

The veering to republic has served to alienate different ethnic groups to lose their sense of identity. Platonic rule of Kings of the Shah dynasty and Rana prime ministers had been giving a uniting spirit to the nation state. The application of blatant Marxism-Leninism into an agrarian society has resulted in protracted violence. Tens of thousands have left the country in search of foreign employment. According to Nepal Rastra Bank (the Federal Reserve Board of Nepal), the country earns nearly one billion dollars in foreign exchange. The money is being primarily spent in consumption. Nepal needs to invite foreign oil firms to explore petroleum deposits in Eastern Nepal. The companies ought to be encouraged to stay. They should be assured that their investment would be returned. Jobs would be created and the oil revenue can be used to develop more smaller and medium level hydro-electic projects. The energy can be exported to India.

The multitude of so called political parties which are de-facto armed groups creates new challenges to liberal democracy (ref. Insurgency and Terrorism, Bard O'Neill, presented to me by noted American scholar Dr. Thomas A. Marks). Armed coercion of electorates and appeals to populism deviates the goal toward real democracy. It creates illiberal democracy, according to Newsweek International editor Fareed Zakaria.

The poor electorates of Nepal have been duped by adherents of traditional Marxism-Leninism. It was antediluvian for Nepal to seek socialism in 1990 when the Iron Curtain fell in Eastern Europe. Communism is not the answer to Nepal's status as one of the poorest and least developed economies. Communists invited civil war into Nepal and squarely blamed the bloodshed on the King and the army. His Majesty the King after the unfortunate incident of 2001 only tried to restore order in the country. His slogan to make Nepal a transit center of South Asia between India and China is laudatory.

Dr. Baburam Bhattarai's armed outfit has threatened to ally itself with Al Qaida to respond to any attempt by the US government to intervene in Nepal. By allying itself with this murderous outfit which organized the infamous 9/11 attacks, Dr. Baburam Bhattarai, Prachanda and so-called military leader "Badal" have to bear responsibility for the murder of ten thousand plus Nepali lives. They must be dragged to the International Criminal Court to stand trial. Badal's education in communist Russia and purportedly his training in once pariah state Libya, a known sponsor of terrorism e.g. the Lockerbie bombings and aggression in Chad, proves he is a known Carlos the Jackal wanna be of Nepal. This character deserves the worst punishment for teaching young children to build bombs. The exploitation of rural indigenous women into cannon fodders by the so-called communist rebels have completely depleted precious human resorces. These people could have been farm hands or industral labor instead of rifle toting lemmings.

Citing elite theory, the rise of neo-elites, primarily the Brahmins has brought Nepal into a new age of fatality and warfare. Rana regime may have been restrictive but it was in many ways scientific. The population of Kathmandu, the capital city, was carefully controlled. Pilgrims from India were asked to leave after the end of religious festivals. The present overpopulation of Kathmandu from rural residents is a sign that post 1950 planners have completely failed to plan cities. Centralized development ala Paris has resulted in woefully mismanaged infrastructure.

The talk of colonialism and imperialism by Dr Baburam Bhattarai is nonsense. But he needs to remember that foreign investment is key to Nepal's sustainable development. The dismantling of Hindu social structure sought by the communists has a serious danger of igniting ethnic tensions like that of Southeastern Europe-Bosnia-Herzegovina.

The rise of RPP denotes that conservatism is a force to be reckoned with. Traditionalists and anti-communists can again unite and defeat the forces of Marxism-Leninism and its destructive socio-economic practices. Marxism has brought turmoil throughout the Third World. In Cuba, Fidel Castro the dictator came to power promising salvation to Cuba's poor. Considered the leader of world communists, this miserable character ordered the death of his most loyal soldier, Gen. Ochoa Sanchez on trumped up drug smuggling charge. He had him arrested for he feared the future of his regime. The number two man in Cuba right now is Fidel's brother, Raul. What an example of family rule and an anathema to meritocracy. And, this dictator Fidel has $90 million in his bank account, says Forbes magazine. If Nepal follows the road of Che Guevera and Fidel Castro, Nepal is on its way to become the next gulag archipelago of South Asia. Now do we need another failed state?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Copyright © 1999, Karl-Heinz Krämer