Om Gurung

'We ought to keep our integrity intact'

Dr Om Gurung, who heads the Napal Federation of Indigenous Nationalities (NFIN), is an assistant professor of Central Department of Anthropology, Tribhuwan University. Dr Gurung holds PhD degree from Cornell University and loves to call himself a social activist, rather than assistant professor of TU. NFIN has begun to stage a peaceful protest since Saturday to exert pressure on the government for granting autonomy on the bases of language, ethnicity and geography. He says that this protest should not affect the holding of constituent assembly polls.

Dr Gurung spoke with Puran P Bista of The Kathmandu Post, shedding light on how the state should be restructured and ethnic groups and subgroups be empowered in this country.
Excerpts:

Q: Why has your organization been fighting for ethnic rights when the interim parliament has recently been amended to federalize the country?

Dr Om Gurung: In the current political process, we have given priority to ethnic rights. The rationale is that in the last 238-year long history, the rights of the ethnic groups have been denied by the state. The state never tried to address the problems of the ethnic groups. For example, tribes such as Tharu, Magar, Gurung, Rai, etc are the indigenous people but their stakes in state administration, judiciary and armed forces, as per the population, have been minimum. They have been suppressed, oppressed and marginalized. The state has limited their growth because of the denial of the socio-economic and political rights. The state continues to exclude them from all kinds of state welfare schemes. The state benefits directly go into the pockets of those who are in power. And I think you know who are benefiting from such state-run programs.

The ethnic groups became poorer. Their languages have been pushed toward extinction. The indigenous groups have endured the state suppression for long. We can no longer tolerate such practices. We want our rights to be guaranteed in the constitution to be drafted after the constituent assembly polls. The first thing is, the state must acknowledge this fact and restructure it to ensure the rights of indigenous communities. To do so, we must have stakes in all the decision-making bodies. In other words, our representation must be granted on the basis of population.

And we have adopted a peaceful means to exert pressure on the government.

Q: Could you be more specific on your demands?

Dr Gurung: The reality is that the state has failed to accommodate us and recognize our languages, culture and tradition. This is very clear. So long as the current policy of exclusion or discrimination lasts, the indigenous communities will continue to suffer. We think that the three aspects should be taken into account before we restructure the state: Language, communities and geography. Distinct communities settled in particular geographical areas have distinct languages. The state should be restructured on these bases. The theoretical objective is to have provisions of self-determination. We have been claiming “along with the provision of self-determination”, which means that an ethnic community does not enjoy the right to determine the fate of the area it dominates. There are differences between the “along with self-determination and the provision of self-determination”.

Q: What are the differences between “the along with self-determination and self-determination”.

Dr Durung: If we say the provision of self-determination, it can go to the extent of having a separate state. “Along with self-determination” means the autonomy granted to a unit that does not enjoy the right to be a separate state.

Q: Does your version of self-determination mean that any ethnic group enjoys no right to hold plebiscite on whether or not a unit can be part of Nepal?

Dr Gurung: “Along with self-determination” cannot be equated with the demand made by the Sri Lankan Tamils who have been fighting for a separate Tamil state. “Along with self-determination” means a separate geographical unit within the country. We have to take into account the country's integrity and social structure before restructuring it. We have stayed together for so long. Now, we cannot demand for a separate state. Secondly, if we look at the geo-political situation, it is very fragile. Our country has been wedged between two Asian giant countries—China and India. We have to learn from them and live together. If we demand separate states, there are chances of swallowing these states by either of these two Asian giants. So, we have to be careful and should not let the separatist groups have upper hands in deciding the fate of this country. We do need self-determination but not to the extent of granting the ethnic groups to opt for a separate state. It is impossible to think so both in theory and practice.

Q: But one of the demands made by Madhesi People's Rights Forum and Terai Janatrantric Mukti Morka is of provision for self-determination. Don't you think so?

Dr Gurung: We, too, have demanded self-determination. But it is absolutely different from that of MPRF or TJMM. We differ on this count with MPRF. MPRF wants a separate terai state stretching from Jhapa to Kanchanpur, where over a dozen ethnic communities are living. They speak different languages, practice different cultures and traditions. We never let terai be in the hands of a few feudal lords who want to rule the weak and poor.

A few groups want self-determination for a separate state. We have to grant autonomy on the basis of language, community and geography. It empowers every community and provides an opportunity to develop this country.

Q: That means the country does not need to be federalized. There are other political mechanisms as well, to empower the indigenous communities.

Dr Gurung: No, we are very much for federalism. The structure of the country should be federal.

Q: What kind of federalism you think will be suitable to this country? Do you see India as the best example?

Dr Gurung: Again, we define it on the basis of how we draw provisions for self-determination. We are not looking for a union sort of federalism as the Soviet Union had, nor a confederation. Grant autonomy to the unit and empower the local people. We need a loose and indivisible federal structure, where our sovereignty is kept intact.

Q: Don't you think that we got to look into the economic aspect as well, while federalizing this country? Is it possible to grant your kind of self- determination to 90 ethnic communities?

Dr Gurung: It should be based on ethnicity. The separate regions are dominated by separate ethnic communities. For example, Solukhumbu is dominated by Sherpas. If you visit Manang, you find Manages. In terai, Maithelis, Bhojpuris, Awadis, Tharus etc speak different languages. So, if it is possible to grant autonomy on the basis of language, then let us do so. But take for granted that it is not applicable to all parts of the country. Terai cannot be made a single unit citing Hindi as a binding language. We can grant autonomy to western and far-western regions on the basis of geography. Whether you call it Karnali Pradesh or Western Pradesh, we have to make it a separate unit on the basis of region rather than language. The rest can be split into different units on the basis of ethnicity. For example, Gandagi Pradesh is dominated by Gurungs, it should be made a separate unit. Similarly, let us have Magarat Pradesh for Magars.

Q: Economically, the curving of such Pradesh may not be possible as some of them, you just mentioned, lack adequate resource for sustaining themselves as separate units of this country.

Dr Gurung: Yes, we have to see into economic aspect as well. But how are you going to protect language, preserve culture and practice tradition? Many units could sustain and revenues generated by some of the units should be allocated to the weaker units.

Q: You have discussed on three aspects—language, ethnicity and geography. Granting autonomy or self-determination on these aspects may lead to ethnic cleansing as there would be several minorities living within each unit, and they may face the same sort of exclusion.

Dr Gurung: All forms of exploitation should not be based on ethnicity. Let us say that there are several subgroups within the group. The majority represents the unit but the minorities should also find space in decision-making bodies.

Q: How is it possible?

Dr Gurung: We have to make special arrangements for the subgroups to ensure that they find voice in all decision-making bodies.

Q: You mean introducing a reservation system as India has done so?

Dr Gurung: Yes, we can go for that. And let us not take only the backward and poor communities. Within the unit, there could be other communities as well, provided they fall in the category of minority groups. So, there is no question of ethnic cleansing. We must accommodate all the communities into the unit to address common problems. We cannot deny the basic rights and displace them simply because they happen to be subgroups living in a particular region.

Q: Such ethnic cleansing may not take place in Limbuwan, Khumbuwan or Gandak region. Can you rule out such possibility in other parts of the country?

Dr Gurung: I have a special reservation. I call it an ethnic violence. We have to dissociate from such ethnic division and those who promote violence. What is happening in terai is dangerous. It is gradually taking a shape of ethnic violence whatsoever the leaders of terai claim it.

Q: Why do you support MPRF then?

Dr Gurung: We have supported on certain issues only. The state exploited the Madhesi community. It suppressed the rights of the Madhesis for long. We support the organization that is genuinely fighting for the political rights. We have been unable to reach an understanding with MPRF because of this reason. First, MPRF talks of federal structure but on the basis of geography only. They want to have three federal units—terai, hills and mountains. How can the entire terai be a single unit only? At the most, they can compromise on a vertical division of the country into 14 zones and 54 districts only. We do not agree with such political agenda. Don't take that Madhesis alone are in terai. Second, our interpretation of Madhes is different from that of Madhesis. We want to know where Madhes is. We indigenous communities think that Madhesis are there in this country but there is no land called Madhes in Nepal. These Madhesis have come from Madhyadesh. It is a place between India's Bihar and Uttar Pradesh. So, we call them Madhesis. The rulers of this country brought them into Nepal. Now they are demanding a separate Madhes.

The third thing is that the Madhesis want the entire terai to be a separate state. There are several ethnic communities living in terai. MPRF must acknowledge this fact and seek our cooperation. Otherwise, we are not going to back the movement, no matter what they claim and demand.

MPRF talks of proportional representation of total terai. We have told them that proportional representation should be based on the population of ethnic communities. The intention of MPRF is to deny the rights of Tharus, Rajbansi, Shanthal and other minority groups living in terai. It will be dominated by Yadavs, Jhas, Shahs, Mishras, etc who have been wielding power.

Gaur: Prachanda's Reichstag Fire?

Reichstag fire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The Reichstag Fire allowed Hitler to accelerate the banning of the Communist Party and was used to confirm Nazi claims of a pending Communist revolution.
The Rise of Hitler - Feb. 27, 1933 The Reichstag Burns Adolf Hitler, the new Chancellor of Germany, had no intention of abiding by the rules of democracy. He intended only to use those rules to legally establish himself as dictator as quickly as possible then begin the Nazi revolution. .... Hitler's storm troopers were about to reach new heights of power of their own and begin a reign of terror that would last as long as the Reich. ..... President Hindenburg had fallen under Hitler's spell and was signing just about anything put in front of him. ..... He also ordered the police not to interfere with the SA and SS under any circumstances. This meant that anybody being harassed, beaten, or even murdered by Nazis, had nobody to turn to for help. ....... Göring set up an auxiliary police force of 50,000 men, composed mostly of members of the SA and SS. The vulgar, brawling, murderous Nazi storm troopers now had the power of police. ....... Göring and Goebbels, with Hitler's approval, then hatched a plan to cause panic by burning the Reichstag building and blaming the Communists. The Reichstag was the building in Berlin where the elected members of the republic met to conduct the daily business of government. ...... the elderly Hindenburg ..... "You are now witnessing the beginning of a great epoch in German history...This fire is the beginning," Hitler told a news reporter at the scene. ...... Chancellor Hitler demanded an emergency decree to overcome the crisis. He met little resistance from his largely non-Nazi cabinet. That evening, Hitler and Papen went to Hindenburg and the befuddled old man signed the decree "for the Protection of the people and the State." ....... truckloads of SA and SS roared through the streets ...... The Nazis now turned their attention to election day, March 5. ...... "The sacrifice we ask is easier to bear if you realize that the elections will certainly be the last for the next ten years, probably for the next hundred years," Göring told them. ...... With no money problems and the power of the State behind them, the Nazis campaigned furiously to get Hitler the majority he wanted. ..... On March 5, the last free elections were held. But the people denied Hitler his majority, giving the Nazis only 44 per cent of the total vote ...... the lack of the necessary two thirds majority in the Reichstag was an obstacle. For Hitler and his ruthless inner circle, it was obstacle that was soon to be overcome.
How Hitler Became a Dictator Hitler and his fellow members of the National Socialist (Nazi) Party, who were determined to bring down the republic and establish dictatorial rule in Germany, did everything they could to create chaos in the streets, including initiating political violence and murder. ...... The July 31, 1932, election produced a major victory for Hitler’s National Socialist Party. The party won 230 seats in the Reichstag, making it Germany’s largest political party, but it still fell short of a majority in the 608-member body. ...... intolerant, noisy and undisciplined. .... during extreme national emergencies, people are most scared and thus much more willing to surrender their liberties in return for “security.” And that’s exactly what happened during the Reichstag terrorist crisis. ....... the average non-Jewish German was pretty much unaffected by the new laws and decrees ....... The Nazi terror in the early years affected the lives of relatively few Germans and a newly arrived observer was somewhat surprised to see that the people of this country did not seem to feel that they were being cowed.
Sounds and Images of Adolf Hitler
BBC - History - Audio: Hitler and the Jews

Look at how Prachanda has reacted. The 28 dead bodies are to be taken to Kathmandu. And the Maoists have announced they will launch the "third" people's movement. Prachanda has asked that the MPRF be banned.

The parallels are too many. I am not suggesting Prachanda is Hitler, but what I am saying is his dictatorial tendencies have not subsided. A man who used to take pride in the words "I hate revisionism, I seriously hate revisionism" might not have intentions to transfrom after all. Let's face it, this guy wanted to dedicate his life to the establishment of a one party communist dictatorship. But we started doing business with him because we thought he has had a change of heart, and he has accepted the basics of multi-party democracy. 30,000 Maoist soldiers have enteted UN cantonments with 3,000 guns. And that sure is progress.

But the alarming signs are too many. As a Madhesi I have expressed my moral support to the MPRF's civil rights movement for Madhesi equality. But I have also consistently stated that this movement that has now grown to become a Madhesi Janajati Dalit Movement is the last stand by the masses against the Maoist menace. The democrats need to stop seeing the Maoists as their ally and start seeing the Madhesi Janajati Dalit Movement as their true ally.

Hitler saw the German Communist Party as his primary roadblock to power. Prachanda sees the MPRF, and the Madhesi Janajati Dalit Movement as the roadblock to his party becoming the largest in the constituent assembly. Hitler wanted to ban the communist party. Prachanda wants the MPRF banned. Those are dictatorial tendencies.

Hitler used the fire as a pretext to make a final push for total power. Prachanda is using Gaur as a pretext to launch the "third" movement. These are warning signs.

You hear regular news of Maoists' mass meetings. You don't hear news of Congress or UML mass meetings.

The Congress and UML workers have not exactly gone back to their homes. Unless cadres of all parties can freely work and campaign in all villages, all towns, is it possible to have free and fair elections to a constituent assembly?

Most of the Maoist guns might have been put away. But is it not more about the ideology, the culture inside the party? Small groups of organized Maoists without weapons who are willing to beat people up are as capable to maintaining the climate of fear in the country as are armed ones. And that is precisely what has been happening. The Maoist party has not transformed, people, wake up. You have little time.

Hitler had limitless money on his way to power. Noone knows how much money the Maoists have. They obviously act like they have more money than all other parties put together. They are the only ones conducting mass meeting after mass meeting after mass meeting.

At this point holding elections to the constituent assembly is akin to rubberstamping the dictatorial ways of the Maoists. They don't even have to gain a majority. All they have to do is become the largest party, and then how do you stop them? You can't stop them now. They work side by side with the police now. Wait until they command the Home Ministry all on their own.

I have been a strong proponent of peace talks with the Maoists. And I do think it is a huge achievement that the civil war has ended.

But now I am a strong proponent of an exhibition of strength by the democrats, political strength. We have to stop acting like we owe the Maoists an electoral victory, that if we don't allow them to emerge the largest party by hook or crook, they will go back to the jungle, and then what? We have to make it absolutely clear the only way we will accept them is as a political party. And we have to take a strong stand. We have to draw a line in the sand.

The abductions, extortions and beatings continue. Ceased property has not been returned. How have the Maoists changed? Prachanda is not accepting Girija's leadership, he is using the old man. Krishna Sitaula is not a peacemaker, he is an appeaser who lets the Maoists act like they were a parallel police force.

The Madhesi Janajati Dalit Movement is a friend of the democrats, it is not the Maoists. The sooner they realize that, the better. The Madhesi Janajati Dalit Movement is the final stand by the masses against the Maoist menace.

Vague calls for dialogue and peace are not helping. We have to get specific. The democrats have to agree to the three basic demands of the Madhesi Janajati Dalit Movement, and then form a federal republic electoral alliance against the Maoists for the constituent assembly elections.

1. Home Minister resign.
2. Form probe commission.
3. Hold proportional elections to the constituent assembly.

Gaur: The Madhesi Gongabu
PM, Defense, Finance: Congress, DPM, Home: UML, DPM: Maoist
Magar Event
Mainstreaming Maoist Tendencies In The Madhesh
Lawoti: Ethnic Or Administrative Federalism
Mainstreaming The Maoists: Various Scenarios
Madhesi, Janajati, Business Community
Three Parties: Congress, Communist, Sadbhavana
ANONYM: Association Of Nepali Organizations In New York Metro
Joint Movement
What Girija Could Have Done
Empowering Nepalis In New York City
Dipendra Jha: The Real Picture Of The Madhesi Movement
No Guns, Explosives, Weapons Outside Cantonments
MPRF: A Few Scenarios
It Is Tough For The Madhesi
Upendra Yadav: Madhesi Martin Luther King
New MJF Strategy: Hit The State, Not The People
Krishna Sitaula: Appeaser, Not Peacemaker
A Federal Republic Electoral Alliance Against The Maoists Needed
Sadist Koirala, Kans Sitaula, Pol Pot Prachanda
Further Compromise: Mixed Election With Reservations
5 Point Demand: Compromise Formula So Elections Can Be Held In June
MJF And NEFIN Must Become Political Parties
The Economist: Nepal's Ethnic Politics: The New Battlefront

Alliance for Democracy and Human Rights in Nepal,USA

Press Release
22nd March, 2007

New York

Alliance for Democracy & Human Rights in Nepal (ADHRN), USA is deeply saddened by the recent loss of 28 lives in a violent clash between Madhesi People's Rights Forum (MPRF) and the Maoist-aligned Madhesi Rashtriya Mukti Morcha in Gaur, Rautahat. As Nepal is making slow and difficult strides towards achieving greater democracy and stability, such incidents can only have obvious detrimental effects on the process.

ADHRN, in the strongest possible terms, reiterates the sheer unconstructiveness of violence in settling any disputes among any groups. Nepal has experienced enough share of violence in the past years, and this cycle of violence must end if we are to move forward.

As the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) is on the verge of entering the government, they must renounce, in totality, the culture of violence, intimidation and extortions. Similarly, any other groups aspiring to fulfill their genuine concerns must also proceed with utmost reliance on peaceful protests.

ADHRN also urges the current government, and the members of the civil society, to deviate from the tradition of playing blame games, take responsibility, and make sincere efforts towards addressing the genuine concerns of every Nepali citizen in creating a just a equitable society. Genuine peace can only be achieved by addressing the real concerns of the people with utmost sincerity.

At this hour of great uncertainty, we urge all sides to resort to maximum restraint, so as to ensure that the cycle of violence is ended, and that the road to further chaos is timely and decisively terminated.

ADHRN also take this opportunity to express our heartfelt condolences to the families of the victims.

Sanjaya Parajuli

President

ADHRN

www.alliancenepal.org