Nepal Inching Towards Dictatorship
Divash Sharma
Authoritarianism starts with propagation of absolute negativism about existing political values, beliefs and practices. Generally, it targets the softer sides of a system to start the destruction process. In the second step, it initiates campaign to discrediting its opposition political parties. In extreme situation or at its prime stage, it bans their activities or even such parties. Bureaucracy is its primary target as a vehicle to implement what it wants to implement. The core function of the authoritarian organization or an individual is to make the military loyal to it either by ideological indoctrination or by bribing through 'legal' or illegal incentives. Hence, to completing a cycle of establishing an authoritarian regime takes quite a long time.
The authoritarian regimes are that of two types – openly declared class states such as communist party governed regimes and the other mix-pack regimes such as Fascist Italy, Nazi Germany etc. The first types are predictable about their course of action including their goals, line, programs, strategies and tactics. If they capture the state power, they will go by the rules of the game, generally. This had been seen in the Soviet Union and China. Much has been talked about this phenomenon and the information is abundantly available about its nature, functions and course. Hence, in this brief discussion, I will examine the second type of authoritarian regimes nature and face in Nepal also by looking at the broader international picture.
The Fascists in Italy used mass rebellion and terrorized authorities to capture the state power. The Nazis used election, a more legitimate way, to capture state power. In Zimbabwe, ZANU-PF organized its own force to overthrow the White rule and used the same force to introduce and continue its authoritarian regime. Although, they adopted three different methods to capture state power, they had the same nature, face and characteristics when they implemented their plans.
The fascists, Nazis and ZANU-PF had the organization they mobilized to implement the decisions made by the chief architect of their organization. Mussolini, Hitler and Mugabe were the sole decision makers of their respective parties or movements. Hence, there is an all powerful dictator at the helm in this type of authoritarianism.
Now, let us examine the situation in Nepal briefly.
The history of Nepal is that of the history of authoritarian regimes. It is probably natural that during the early time of newly unified Nepal in the Eighteenth century, a militarist feudal regime emerged. That was dominated by Shah Kings and their courtiers. They were marginalized afterward and a powerful Rana aristocracy ruled Nepal with iron fist. They were again replaced by the Shaha Kings in 1950. Though there was a period of political anarchy called multi-party system from 1950 to 1959, the real power was with the King and he effectively took over. The Kings ruled for another 30 years with full play of authoritarianism. In 1990, the King was marginalized and in 2008 he was removed and a period of political anarchy has been continuing since 1990. This is also known as multi-party system in form, whereas in substance, it is also an anarchies regime of a corrupt lot of 'political leaders'. This is some form of disguised authoritarianism.
Now, the picture is getting clearer.
The Maoists had started a war for the liberation of working class people in 1996. They had cultivated and distributed the imaginary buds of roses. The people, particularly the youths in the country side were thrilled. They had a dream - a dream of emancipation, freedom, prosperity and happiness. They lined up to get recruited as party cadres, people's army soldiers and activists of class organizations and interest groups. The Maoist party grew in geometrical proportion. And, its leaders became new Gods in the traditional Nepali society. Finally, the leaders at the top wanted to march to the seat of power in Kathmandu taking the shortest route. They discovered that path too and started worshiping the Indian hegemonic power to get blessing from them.
In a very secretive way, the top leaders of the Unified Maoist party made arrangement with the Indian establishment that they will better serve Indian interest than anybody else in Nepal. With some "give and take', they reached to an understanding that Prachanda-Baburam will get freedom in running Nepal's administrative and financial institutions and will abide by Indian decisions regarding Nepal's political developments, larger security arrangements and the issues related to natural resources and foreign affairs. In this way, India created another Bhutan in its periphery and Prachanda-Baburam willingly accepted to play the role of the agent-implementer of this design. The letter they sent in 2002 to Indian government was its beginning and that matured in 2006 with signing the India-brokered 'Comprehensive Agreement'. Moreover, the marriage between the Unified Maoists and the ruling Madhesi parties and the formation of Baburam's government started to deliver what India wanted.
The authoritarianism that had targeted to subverting state institutions as Unified Maoist's fiefdom, weakening the mechanisms that create a balance of power, behaving as if they themselves are the state and being prosecutor, judge and jailer themselves; the Unified Maoists in general and Prachanda-Baburam in particular have grown as full-fledged rulers in Nepal. Their modus operandi is simple and clear – function as an agent-implementer of India made decisions, rule as dictator in Nepal and accumulate wealth as much as possible for rainy days that may come as every dictator has a bad end. Thus, we are seeing all sorts of strange dramas including that of election. Now, we are seeing Egypt. Morsi took strange path to turn to a dictator. No legal means could dethrone him. The same is true in Nepal's case too. After a brief power struggle between Prachanda and Baburam, the later will emerge as victorious as he has the blessings of India. India knows that Prachanda is the most unreliable person and will not put its weight behind him. When, Baburam defeats Prachanda, the full course of the emergence of a dictator in Nepal will be completed.
The Nepali people have no option left other than staging total rebellion. That rebellion could take any form. The difficult days in the past are gone, more difficult recent days are also turning to be the past and the most difficult time is waiting for us. Let's prepare for that most difficult time and motivate ourselves to stay on the course resolutely as the Egyptian people are going through right now. Rebellion, rebellion and rebellion are the only three options the Nepali people should choose from.
Divash Sharma
Authoritarianism starts with propagation of absolute negativism about existing political values, beliefs and practices. Generally, it targets the softer sides of a system to start the destruction process. In the second step, it initiates campaign to discrediting its opposition political parties. In extreme situation or at its prime stage, it bans their activities or even such parties. Bureaucracy is its primary target as a vehicle to implement what it wants to implement. The core function of the authoritarian organization or an individual is to make the military loyal to it either by ideological indoctrination or by bribing through 'legal' or illegal incentives. Hence, to completing a cycle of establishing an authoritarian regime takes quite a long time.
The authoritarian regimes are that of two types – openly declared class states such as communist party governed regimes and the other mix-pack regimes such as Fascist Italy, Nazi Germany etc. The first types are predictable about their course of action including their goals, line, programs, strategies and tactics. If they capture the state power, they will go by the rules of the game, generally. This had been seen in the Soviet Union and China. Much has been talked about this phenomenon and the information is abundantly available about its nature, functions and course. Hence, in this brief discussion, I will examine the second type of authoritarian regimes nature and face in Nepal also by looking at the broader international picture.
The Fascists in Italy used mass rebellion and terrorized authorities to capture the state power. The Nazis used election, a more legitimate way, to capture state power. In Zimbabwe, ZANU-PF organized its own force to overthrow the White rule and used the same force to introduce and continue its authoritarian regime. Although, they adopted three different methods to capture state power, they had the same nature, face and characteristics when they implemented their plans.
The fascists, Nazis and ZANU-PF had the organization they mobilized to implement the decisions made by the chief architect of their organization. Mussolini, Hitler and Mugabe were the sole decision makers of their respective parties or movements. Hence, there is an all powerful dictator at the helm in this type of authoritarianism.
Now, let us examine the situation in Nepal briefly.
The history of Nepal is that of the history of authoritarian regimes. It is probably natural that during the early time of newly unified Nepal in the Eighteenth century, a militarist feudal regime emerged. That was dominated by Shah Kings and their courtiers. They were marginalized afterward and a powerful Rana aristocracy ruled Nepal with iron fist. They were again replaced by the Shaha Kings in 1950. Though there was a period of political anarchy called multi-party system from 1950 to 1959, the real power was with the King and he effectively took over. The Kings ruled for another 30 years with full play of authoritarianism. In 1990, the King was marginalized and in 2008 he was removed and a period of political anarchy has been continuing since 1990. This is also known as multi-party system in form, whereas in substance, it is also an anarchies regime of a corrupt lot of 'political leaders'. This is some form of disguised authoritarianism.
Now, the picture is getting clearer.
The Maoists had started a war for the liberation of working class people in 1996. They had cultivated and distributed the imaginary buds of roses. The people, particularly the youths in the country side were thrilled. They had a dream - a dream of emancipation, freedom, prosperity and happiness. They lined up to get recruited as party cadres, people's army soldiers and activists of class organizations and interest groups. The Maoist party grew in geometrical proportion. And, its leaders became new Gods in the traditional Nepali society. Finally, the leaders at the top wanted to march to the seat of power in Kathmandu taking the shortest route. They discovered that path too and started worshiping the Indian hegemonic power to get blessing from them.
In a very secretive way, the top leaders of the Unified Maoist party made arrangement with the Indian establishment that they will better serve Indian interest than anybody else in Nepal. With some "give and take', they reached to an understanding that Prachanda-Baburam will get freedom in running Nepal's administrative and financial institutions and will abide by Indian decisions regarding Nepal's political developments, larger security arrangements and the issues related to natural resources and foreign affairs. In this way, India created another Bhutan in its periphery and Prachanda-Baburam willingly accepted to play the role of the agent-implementer of this design. The letter they sent in 2002 to Indian government was its beginning and that matured in 2006 with signing the India-brokered 'Comprehensive Agreement'. Moreover, the marriage between the Unified Maoists and the ruling Madhesi parties and the formation of Baburam's government started to deliver what India wanted.
The authoritarianism that had targeted to subverting state institutions as Unified Maoist's fiefdom, weakening the mechanisms that create a balance of power, behaving as if they themselves are the state and being prosecutor, judge and jailer themselves; the Unified Maoists in general and Prachanda-Baburam in particular have grown as full-fledged rulers in Nepal. Their modus operandi is simple and clear – function as an agent-implementer of India made decisions, rule as dictator in Nepal and accumulate wealth as much as possible for rainy days that may come as every dictator has a bad end. Thus, we are seeing all sorts of strange dramas including that of election. Now, we are seeing Egypt. Morsi took strange path to turn to a dictator. No legal means could dethrone him. The same is true in Nepal's case too. After a brief power struggle between Prachanda and Baburam, the later will emerge as victorious as he has the blessings of India. India knows that Prachanda is the most unreliable person and will not put its weight behind him. When, Baburam defeats Prachanda, the full course of the emergence of a dictator in Nepal will be completed.
The Nepali people have no option left other than staging total rebellion. That rebellion could take any form. The difficult days in the past are gone, more difficult recent days are also turning to be the past and the most difficult time is waiting for us. Let's prepare for that most difficult time and motivate ourselves to stay on the course resolutely as the Egyptian people are going through right now. Rebellion, rebellion and rebellion are the only three options the Nepali people should choose from.
