King G And The Concept Of Democracy

The first thing to be noticed is a fundamental disconnect between words and action. The king has consistently paid lip service to the idea of democracy, but he and his underlings have fundamentally violated the very idea. Press freedom is just one example. Suspension of basic rights through ordinances another.

The second is regression. The king is for an activist, constructive monarchy, not a constitutional one. He wants what his elder brother and his father had. He wants to be at the center of it all.

The third is a childish attempt to redefine the very concept of democracy. As if the western nations don't get it either, and the politicians in Nepal definitely don't. It is as if he were playing a mindgame. Since it is 2005, you can not be for autocracy outright, so instead you mangle your nouns and verbs. It is true, democracy is slightly unique in each country, but the fundamentals of democracy and human rights are universal. Either they are there, or they are not. There is not much of a grey zone there.

The fourth is that he is not really fooling anyone. Not the foreign powers. Not the Nepali people. Only his yes men, the discredited individuals of a different era, are consuming his delusional propaganda.

All four points go on to show the king's grabbing of power is fundamentally illegitimate.

There is also an issue of competence. His "activism" has spread the insurgency from three to 70 districts. The overwhelming majority of lives lost to the insurgency has been after he became king. Those numbers have gone worse after 2/1.

As heir to the throne, it is understandable if he wished to save the monarchy. But the choice is between a full democracy and a republic for him.

Democracy has to be earned. In a way Nepal never really had democracy. And now it will have it. But that asks for a movement. And that is underway.

The king started out by trying to sell the terrorism rhetoric to the global audience. That backfired. Now he is selling the corruption rhetoric to the domestic audience. The Asian Development Bank has cleared Deuba's name, but the king thinks otherwise. And so you have a king who is competing with the Asian Development Bank!

And then there are outright lies. "..... throughout the history of over 200 years, the institution of monarchy in nepal has always been guided by the will and consent of the people ..... " "..... totalitarianism and authoritarianism are entirely inconsistent with the Monarchial traditions of the Shah Dynasty....." Oh, really?

Well then why is the king the biggest impediment to the idea of an interim government and a constituent assembly, something that will bring the civil war to an end? The people speak for the people, the king does not speak for the people.

In his February 1 speech, he is after not just the insurgency, but the entire democratic period after 1990. Meaning, he would have done the 2/1 thing also in 1995 if he were king. That is how much he understands and respects and wants democracy. I see a fundamental character flaw. If he were to seriously critique the 1990-2004 period, he would mention things like, well, all the roads that got paved, the vibrant media of the period. Measured in money terms, the royal corruption of expanding the royal budget 10-fold puts all the Congressia corruption to shame.

So no matter which way you look at it, in terms of lives lost, state money gulped down, and basic rights taken away, the dogged royal experiment has been an utter failure.

But then his recent Doha attack on "the decade and half" suggests he has no plans to usher back multi-party democracy on his own. At best he will hold elections if possible, but he does not intend to voluntarily walk away from center stage. In another country, it is called being Musharraf. That guy by now has several parliaments. And guess who shows up for peace talks on Kashmir: Musharraf!

On their part, the seven parties can speed things up by seriously reflecting upon the 1990s, offering fundamental reform in the way the parties work, and getting creative with the movement.

1. March 2004, Pokhara .... An inherent feature of the Institution of Monarchy is to be guided by popular aspirations .... History is testimony to the strong bond between the king and the people. This intimate relationship is also the cornerstone of Nepalese nationalism. This is the essence of the historical legacy of our great forefathers; this is the source of the distinctive Nepalese psyche. ..... Without wasting any more time on empty rhetoric, concrete measures must now be adopted to realise the Nepalese people's desire for good governance..... it is necessary to adopt, in the greater interest of the country and the countrymen, an attitude free of selfish interests, be they personal or collective....... Multiparty democracy can be consolidated and made meaningful only if national politics, guided by the people's aspirations and dedicated to their welfare, promotes peace, harmony and stability...... We believe that a corruption-free and pro-people form of governance, with elected representatives responsible to the nation and people, can be the basis for a bright and secure future. ...... We are hopeful that necessary cooperation will be forthcoming from all those who have faith in multiparty democracy, including political parties. .... Gorkha, famous as the place where the foundations of the Kingdom of Nepal and Nepalese nationalism were laid ..... let us pledge to develop our motherland into a prosperous state, with democratic norms and values guiding our perceptions and performance.
   
2. February 1, 2005 Even when bloodshed, violence and devastation has pushed the country on the brink of destruction, those engaged in politics in the name of the country and people continue to shut their eyes to their welfare. Tussle for power, abuse of authority on gaining power and unhealthy competition in fulfilling personal and communal interests at the expense of the nation and citizenry contributed to the further deterioration in the situation. There were attempts to flout the universally accepted rule of law in the name of politics. ..... Whereas all democratic forces should have adopted an unified approach against terrorism, leaders instead continued their tussle for power, encouraging simple political workers to vandalise public utilities in the name of politics...... Democracy and progress always complement each other. But, Nepal's bitter experiences over the past few years tend to show that democracy and progress contradict one another. Multiparty democracy was discredited by focusing solely on power politics. Parliament witnessed many aberrations in the name of retaining and ousting governments. Not a single House of Representatives was allowed to complete its tenure. Continuous confusion and disorder resulted in the obstruction of the democratic process. While the people's aspirations continued to be shattered and their trust trampled on, they became increasingly disenchanted with democracy itself. After being incapable of holding elections, there were conspiracies to form undemocratic governments, which would be responsible to no one. There was also a written consensus amongst all political parties on vacuuming the people's representatives out but they could not see eye to eye when it came to working together in filling this void...... We also met a number of times with members of the general public, senior citizens, representatives of the civil society and leaders of political parties in our effort to gauze the popular mandate and try to convince them of the country's requirements and people's aspirations. .... opportunities were given to leaders of various political parties to constitute the Council of Ministers, with executive power...... National politics was plagued by not uniting in running the government but opposing it on being ousted from it. .... The habit of passing carefree remarks on matters of national security continued. Political parties were unable to display responsible behavior in augmenting the patriotic fervour of our dutiful security personnel, who are active round the clock in ensuring security of the nation and people. Multiparty democrats could not sincerely unite, with national interest as the focal point, to forever end the cycle of devastation being lashed out against the nation and people. Likewise, political parties also could not identify national priorities in keeping with the people's aspirations...... parties who claim to represent the people do not act in their defence...... Nepal's independence, national unity and sovereignty are best safeguarded by the intimate relationship between the King and people. An Institution of Monarchy ever devoted to the country and people and a people with an innate love for their land is the glorious history of the Kingdom of Nepal, its present and also its future. In keeping with this glorious tradition, popular will as always remained the guiding light for Nepal's Monarchy. We are committed to social justice; totalitarianism and authoritarianism are entirely inconsistent with the Monarchial traditions of the Shah Dynasty....... no serious efforts were made towards initiating elections to the House of Representatives within the year 2061 B.S. .... time was wasted on paying only lip service on the urgency of holding elections...... Only a meaningful multiparty democracy can be an effective means of governance by the people. A successful multiparty democracy alone is synonymous with people's democracy. Such a system, which is people-oriented, mature, cultured and refined, has been disrupted......
   
3. Jakarta, April 2005 democracy, globalization, liberalization and a free market economy have been the standard-bearers of the 21st century ..... we must overcome them by forging a regime which is synergized by a spirit of sincere fellow-feeling for our collective interests..... the scourge of terrorism, and with it the spread of international terrorist networks, is a matter of serious concern for all of us today. nepal condemns terrorism in all its forms and manifestations. we call for a resolute international action plan against terrorism in every nook and corner of the globe. sustained international co-operation, including enhanced regional and global initiatives with strong support to national initiatives, is critical in dealing with terrorism. nepal, on her part, will fight it resolutely and responsibly....... the first thing to confront in writing or reading about terrorism is that it often escapes mention, yet it stands as a major obstacle to clear thinking, adequate discussion and objective analysis. one has to think about ugly events, horrifying actions that kill and maim unsuspecting people going about their daily lives. one has to focus on the terrible effects of death, injuries and destruction on those whose worlds and bodies are torn to pieces by senseless explosions. one has to reflect on the people who undertake such inhuman merciless actions, on those who design and plan atrocities actually hoping for deadliest of results. like the victims, like the survivors and like us, terrorists are also human beings. reflecting on terrorist acts is the stuff of blame and tears, raised voices and raised fists, sleepless nights and nightmares. precisely because it engages our deepest feelings and challenges our moral commitments, terrorism takes on a political potency rivaled only by war and by deep-seated ideological or religious differences....... a discarded ideology of an outdated era is sadly brainwashed in their formative minds ...... terrorism and the self-induced inability of the political parties and various governments to rise to the challenge of ever-emboldening terrorists were driving the country to the edge of a precipice. the nation, left with little choice, was compelled to take a decisive course. the decision we took on the first of february this year was in response to the call of our constitutional duty to prevent the nation from further sliding down to chaos and anarchy...... throughout the history of over 200 years, the institution of monarchy in nepal has always been guided by the will and consent of the people. our commitment to multiparty democracy, human rights and rule of law is total and unflinching.......
   
4. Doha, June 2005 Nations like men can be healthy and happy, though comparatively poor...... freedom, democracy and human rights have been sublimated by painful experience into international concerns. Democracy is a universal aspiration. So is freedom. So are human rights. A perusal of recent documents in South-South cooperation gives the impression that these values can be qualified. In fact that is not the case. We must wisely determine and discriminate that in a political system, there are three levels at which they are handled. The first is the level of values. No establishment, governmental or non-governmental, can be legitimate which denies or contradicts these values. The second is the level of institutions. As institutions have to evolve around men and conditions, they can only be approximations. While they have to be consistent with values, their practises have to be judged in the grey areas of the realm of reality and the pools of idealism. The third level is the level of deliberate and selective use of democracy and human rights for political purposes. Sadly, this is a fault in which both the countries of the South and the developed North are not free from....... My own country is a sad witness and a microcosm of how inequality, social and economic exclusion, poor governance, rampant corruption and non-delivery by various governments in the last decade and a half have been exploited by terrorists to fulfil their own agenda - an agenda already discarded and rejected by the world at large.......