No one, not even the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) led by the redoubtable Prachanda "" his name means big or large, or even giant size "" thought that the electoral victory in Nepal would be so resounding. One of the consequences is the virtual decimation of the opposition and the old established centres of power and authority. It must now be presumed that this is the end of Nepali royalty and feudalism. The king has gone, and so will those who constituted the court. A new Constitution is to be written, and while it is likely to provide for multi-party democracy, it will almost certainly declare that Nepal is a republic. | |
| As for multi-party democracy itself, the Nepal Congress and the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist-Leninist) have had a poor outing. They have only themselves to blame "" certainly, the Nepal Congress and its leaders made a hash of things when they had their day. But the new situation is not necessarily good news for the Nepali people because old oppressors can be quickly replaced by new ones if the opposition is weak. So it will be interesting to see how the new dispensation led by Prachanda copes with state power and uses it. The Maoist ideology is not known for its liberal values and it must be hoped that cultural influences will play some part. |
| |
| An immediate economic task before the new government is land reform. At the root of many of Nepal's problems lies the grossly iniquitous distribution of assets. If anyone can do anything to improve matters, it is the Maoists and hopefully they will do so through Constitutional means. But the developmental challenge goes beyond land reforms "" and it does not help that Nepal's poor experience with India on old hydro-power treaties has made the very idea objectionable. Nepal has massive hydro-electric potential, and India is the natural customer. Meanwhile, the political task "" of running Nepal as a democracy where the usual freedoms flourish "" is no less difficult, especially when you are dealing with Maoist cadres. After all, the Maoist leaders of yesterday have to give up the role of armed insurgents and assume the role of government. |
| |
| As far as India is concerned, Nepal will probably take a fresh look at the treaties that govern bilateral relations. Having given these a second look, Nepal may well decide that it is the net gainer, for its people have access to the Indian job market and the benefits of an open border, so that it gets domestic supplies from India at subsidised rates. Also, it will face a problem if India restricts transit rights. India for its part may be the loser if it plays the role of big brother. In any case, Nepal will want to warm its ties with China. The question is whether all this will lead to more than change on the margin. |
| |
|
| |
