Immediate provocation for the return of BP Koirala to Nepal was the hardening of Indian establishment’s attitude towards Nepali Congress. Soviet adventures in Afghanistan also influenced his decision. However, the rise of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto may have emboldened him to take the life-threatening risk of returning to the country and facing charges of treason. Relationship with political developments in Pakistan partly explains the dread-fueled student’s agitation in Kathmandu in the wake of Bhutto’s hanging in 1979, which forced King Birendra to declare the Referendum. Koirala accepted the monarch’s offer unconditionally because he saw the futility of opposition under prevailing geo-strategic environment.
coromandal.wordpress.com
Reasons behind dismissal of Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto on charges of incompetence and corruption and the mysterious rise of Nawaz Sharif in 1991 remains as yet unexplained. What is known however is that Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) had socialistic leaning and relatively ‘secular’ outlook. Immediately upon assumption of office, Sharif pushed Pakistan further to the right by announcing market rather than people friendly policies and incorporated Islamic Shariah into the national legal code.
Parallels between Musharrafship in Pakistan and Royal-Military Regime (RMR) of Chairman Gyanendra are too recent to need recounting. Suffice it to say that both based their adventures upon the dubious Doctrine of Necessity, an archaic theory of political science rehabilitated by the courts of Pakistan in 1950s. Little wonder, “the bloodiest election in Pakistan’s history” and its “first democratic transfer of power” created so much interest among Nepalis everywhere.
A Pakistani academic monitoring social media from the West noted that the most apposite pre-poll prognosis had been offered by an Afghanistan-based Nepali journalist Subel Bahadur (Former The Week editor Subel Bhandari): “PTI will surprise. PML-N might lead. PPP disappointment, ANP suffering continue. MQM same-same. Judic will flex muscle. Army wins.” It’s the most succinct statement about the permanence of the Establishment in Pakistan, which consists, among others, of the clannishness of Khans, full-spectrum dominance of Punjab, weaknesses of secularists, neglect of the marginalized, limitations of long-distance politics, influence of bureaucracy and judiciary, and the supreme authority of the armed forces.
Pakistan is not free of foreign interference, but as in Nepal, they make their moves through local playing pieces: rooks, knights, bishops, and pawns are invariably ‘nationalists’ of various colors. There is one crucial difference between politics of Pakistan and Nepal, however. The extremist in the land of the ‘pure’ are called Mullahs. The country of the ‘brave’ has its Marxists, Leninists and Maoists. Both name their chauvinism and xenophobia nationalism.
Power games
The de jure and de facto players of power are rarely, if ever, the same. In terms of authority, the office of the President of the United States is akin to an elected but absolute monarchy. The real power, however, is often exercised by an “Iron Triangle” consisting of the military, the industry and a clutch of powerbrokers and lobbyists. Influential players exit and enter with change in circumstances, but the hold of Zaibatsu over Japan continues unabated. The Chaebols of South Korea determine whether they need a strongman or a popular personality to lead the country. Common to all these players of power is a strong sense of ethnicity. Money matters, but nationalism is the playfield of dominant ethnicity. If that were not so, Jews—the most integrated, cultured and ‘Germanized’ of all minorities would have controlled Europe and Marwaris would be collectively running Nepal.
Polls in Pakistan have shown that ethnicity is increasingly becoming the main determinant of political outcome in multi-ethnic societies. Despite the buzz in the social media and even though he speaks no Pashto and was born in Lahore, Imran is a Pashtun Khan and slated to reign over Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. As Punjabi and representative of 60 percent population of the country, Sharif would rule Pakistan. The Sindh has once again placed its faith in a third generation Bhutto-Jardari. It is natural for the armed forces to claim that they are the only uniting factor in a diverse nation. The most influential instrument of power is the army, which throws away any regime that refuses to do its bidding. Visionary leaders recognize this reality and rarely mess with the armed forces.
Hazy legitimacy
It’s not just in democracy; even absolute monarchs rule in the name of the people. They claim the consent of the governed on the basis of mandate of heaven. Evocation of tradition, along with coercion, persuasion and deception, are established ways of claiming legitimacy. Autocratic regimes rely mainly on coercion and deception. Democracies depend primarily upon persuasion but seldom shy away from making use of deception or coercion whenever its existence is threatened. A hybrid regime has nothing more than deception to maintain its hold over power until it succeeds in delivering promised results and persuading people of its reason for existence.
The IC Chairman Khil Raj Regmi is heading a quintessentially hybrid regime. It can’t be called democratic by any stretch of imagination: It’s neither representative nor accountable and is not responsible towards anyone save the conscience of individual members. Formed through extra-constitutional maneuvering, it can be ousted only through similar manipulations, mass movement, a revolution, or a coup d’état. And yet it has found widespread acceptability in the country. The reason perhaps lies in the impression that the IC has full backing of the largest organized force in Nepal: The Nepali Army. After the fall of monarchy, the army has become the new holy cow.
Pointing fingers at India and invoking specters of Bhutanization and Sikkimization is intellectually lazy but culturally correct and proper. After all, anti-Indian posturing is the sine qua non of Nepali nationalism: Outbursts of UML rank and file and its affiliates in the neo-bourgeois society are symptomatic of all-pervasive vacuous patriotism. Blaming President Ram Baran Yadav is even easier. A Madheshi is invariably the fist scapegoat that Gorkhalis find to release their collective guilt. Cursing leaders of political parties is the second habit of White Shirts and social entrepreneurs behind Astroturf Movements that have little or no connection with the grassroots. Overworked and underpaid (sometimes unpaid) scribes love to wallow in the muck of mutual mudslinging. The army had no need to offer where it stood in la’affaire Lokman Singh Karki.
Wild card
In their weaker moments, democratic governments after 1990s helped form a Frankenstein in the form of Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA). In deeply unequal societies like Pakistan and Nepal, National Accountability Bureau (NAB) and CIAA merely add another layer to entrenched corruption. They are however extremely useful in hitting out at real or perceived opponents of the Permanent Establishment.
On the charges of holding Akoot Sampati (Literally, untaxed income), almost anybody of some means and any connection with the government at anytime in the past can be arrested and made to endure grilling that is believed to ignite “hypertension, diabetes, heart problem and depression” simultaneously. Everyone in politics, bureaucracy and businesses are possible suspects. Elections have to be held sooner or later. It’s not difficult to guess that the PEON will benefit immensely from all pre-poll maneuvering. Subel’s prognosis is correct. In xenophobic and militarized societies, the army always wins. Everything else is divertissement.
Related story
Forest officer, peon caught red-handed with bribe of Rs 200,000
_20200211065424.jpg)
