What do you do if you’re the high-caste leader of a democratic party faced with a vote that will end your caste’s supremacy?

You avoid voting at all costs. This is what the leaders of the Nepali Congress party and the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist Leninist) did in Kathmandu on May 27. Their refusal to compromise with the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) and other parties led to the failure to pass a new Constitution and the dissolution of the country’s only democratically elected body, the 601-member Constituent Assembly.

This was an unforgivable betrayal of public trust: the citizenry had waited for four years for a new Constitution that would mark the birth of a “New Nepal”.

It also plunged Nepal into a constitutional crisis: the country now has a caretaker President, a caretaker Prime Minister, and a caretaker Cabinet, but no representative body. The judiciary, the bureaucracy and the security forces remain, of course.

But no one is sure what is legitimate and illegitimate now. The Prime Minister has called for elections for another Constituent Assembly in six months. The President is mulling over his options, which are few. With no clear way forward, Nepal is, for now, a constitutional Neverneverland. Was it worth it?

To the leaders of the NC and CPN-UML, it obviously was. They threw everything away over the issue of federalism. Nepal has over a hundred ethnic nationalities and nearly as many languages. But all government institutions, and most non-government ones as well, are monopolised by high-caste Hindus.

Brahmins and Kshatriyas — called Bahuns and Chhetris in Nepal — occupy almost all national space. This is a glaring, undeniable fact and it holds true for all the political parties (including the Maoists), every media house, the entire private and NGO sectors, and the vast informal networks of power — including the well-heeled of Kathmandu who exert immense influence over confused donors and ambassadors.

During the 10-year-long “People’s War”, the Maoists promised the excluded (that is, the majority) autonomous federal states named after each area’s ethnic nationalities. This proved very popular. (Though the 2011 census data is not out yet, it’s safe to say that Nepal’s population comprises 15 per cent Chhetris and 12 per cent Bahun. The Madhesis, Janajatis and other excluded groups amount to over 60 per cent.)

Once the peace process was underway, the issue of federalism got another boost from the newly formed parties of the Madhes, or the south-eastern plains. In 2007, they separated from the Maoists and other parties, demanding an autonomous Madhesi state.

In 2008, the Maoists won almost 39 per cent of the vote in the election for the Constituent Assembly, becoming Nepal’s largest party. The Constitution that resulted was bound to reflect their agenda.

For the NC and CPN-UML, the challenge on the political front was to ensure that the future polity remained democratic. Their vision was firm: they wanted the Westminster model.

On the social front, they had no vision at all. Out of social conservatism or perhaps sheer apathy, they had over the past two decades resisted Nepal’s multiple civil rights movements, consistently delaying or opposing the rights of women, dalits and ethnic nationalities, though these are all important votebanks.

Indeed, the women, dalit and ethnic members of the NC and CPN-UML have had to defy their party leaders several times to pass socially progressive legislation. Their leaders have in turn tried to rein them in by issuing whips.

For NC and CPN-UML Assembly members from various ethnic nationalities, federalism became a core part of the civil rights movement: only by decentralising power would they be able to end the monopoly of high-caste Hindus.

After much debate, and a two-year delay, the Assembly finally proposed two alternatives on federalism: to create either 14 or 10 'ethnic states'.

Flouting democratic procedure, the NC and CPN-UML leadership refused to entertain these proposals, by turns opposing federalism altogether, or proposing six or eight states named after geographic features.

As lines hardened along caste and ethnic lines, a bloc of over 320 Assembly members across party lines declared they would vote in favour of ethnic federalism. The NC and UML leadership began to threaten its defiant members with a whip and with expulsion.

Terrified of putting the issue to a vote, the leaders of all the parties decided to shunt aside the Assembly and to meet, instead, in closed-door sessions, to seek a consensus. The plan was for the Assembly to rubber-stamp their decision at the end. The demoralised Assembly cooperated with this. Serious doubts are now emerging as to how sincere the party leaders were about seeking consensus.

Till the last, they holed away from the public, meeting sometimes at the Prime Minister’s residence, sometimes in his office, and sometimes in holiday resorts. All to no avail. Whatever agreements they reached one day were invariably broken the next day after meeting with fierce public opposition. The exact events of May 27 — now known as a “black day” — are only slowly emerging.

The party leaders spent the entire day in closed-door meetings, refusing to come to the Assembly. At five o’clock word leaked that they had come to an agreement after the Maoists, Madhesis and ethnic nationalities had compromised. An agreement had been reached. Then, mysteriously, the agreement broke apart. Those covering events from up-close claim that the NC and the CPN-UML backtracked at the very last minute, demanding that the Constitution hold off on the subject of federalism altogether. This was unacceptable to all the others.

At the Assembly, members picketed, demanding that a meeting begin; but the Speaker never came to the Assembly to do so.

At midnight the Assembly expired. Everyone who had trusted the leaders was left feeling grief-struck and gutted, and very disillusioned.

The NC and CPN-UML leaders had betrayed the very principle of democracy. And they had done so for the lowest possible reason: they wanted to preserve Nepal’s high-caste monopoly. With democrats like these, who needs autocrats? It is not tenable to shut out the majority. It will also not be accepted: the demand for inclusion is too strong in Nepal.

Manjushree Thapa is a Nepal-based writer. Her latest book is The Lives We Have Lost: Essays and Opinions on Nepal.

http://www.deccanchronicle.com/editorial/op-ed/writer%E2%80%99s-block-nepal-109?page=1

the writer went from playing devil's advocate to sounding pure retarded by failing ot make any logical sense.

shantipriya - thanks for sharing this article...even though i'm now dumber for reading this garbage jibberish.

Besides the dalits ( I won't count madhesis because majority of them are 'naturalized citizens'), name one ethic group that has been discriminated against. I belong to the so called 'upper caste.' My father grew up in a hills of midwestern Nepal in a town where half the population was Bahun Chettris and Newars (Shresthas and Tuladhars) and the other half was Gurungs and Magars. The Gurungs and Magars were clearly the wealthier of the two because they had family members working in the Indian and British army for the past three generations. The upper caste on the other hand had to make ends meet toiling in the fields and other odd jobs.

Fast forward 20 years and Bahuns Chettris and Newars from the same village hold lucrative, technical jobs at home and across the world while the max the janajatis ( a very few of them ) could do was to join the British Army. Since the quotas have decreased and the competition is more cut-throat than ever, most of them don't go past the first round of selections.

The only reason for this is that while the upper caste, although modest in means excelled in the classroom while the Janajatis with all their pounds and IC couldn't get past the 8th grade.

Padne bela ma guccha khelna ra jaad khadai masta ra aile aera Adhikaar magdai hidne? Typical American kale mentality...

Yo jatiya rajya magne haru sabai asikshit khate haru hun. Federalism is an outdated model, no one understands that...

Only 26 countries in the world are federal and the ones that went for ethnic federalism eventually disintegrated..

 I view Manjushree’s article from a different perspective than many of Sajha frequent commenters.

Thank God we have at least someone like Manjushree who speaks out her mind without any caste bias, calling a spade a spade.  I know the debate will be turned into a different direction here by pointing a finger at her rather than commenting on the points and the rationale of the article.

The comments made by many here in Sajha accusing Janajatis are so disgusting that it shows a total lack of understanding of the situation in Nepal or unwilling to change with the times and as if they went to the US fully equipped with their inherent caste bias and never learned anything outside of their hajurba stereotype caste bias cocoon. I would not be surprised if many of these Sajha commenters are from or having connection to those families who have contributed to a large extent and still may be doing so in making Nepal a corrupt state.  It is time that we did our soul searching. Some may take this as a proverbial signal "Chorko khutta kat" and attempt a jump out. We’ll see.

It is sheer wrong to label her insane when she has presented her argument with existing statistics.

Manjushree brings such a refreshing air in a caste polluted thinking of so called "sickshit" people commenting in Sajha.

MardShab,
                    Nepal's constitution says that all Nepali citizens are equal regardless of ethnicity or gender. Thats an absolute statement, as long as you're a citizen certain inalienable rights will granted to you which will be the same as everyone elses.

If Nepals current constitution said that some people were inherently more priviledged that the others then this janajati arguement would have been palatable, but it does not. A Rai, Magar, Tamang, Newar, Madheshi, Muslim, Limbu are granted the same rights as a Bahun, Chettri or Thakuri.

Can someone point to me how dividing the nation into ethnic states would help anyone? Janatatis already have 50 percent reservation in the state apparatus. Even the indivual janajatis are segregated into their own caste system and if federalism was to be franchised along ethnic lines the only ones benefitting will be the ones at the heirarchy of every ethnicity.

 Lets remember that poverty is the biggest form of opression, if the Maoists, instead of fanning the fire of ethnic divide were to concentrate on economic development, we'd have a united and egalitarian Nepal in a few years, but now it seems another big genocide is the writing on the wall.

Manjushree Thapa is just another arundhati roy wanna be. 

Here are few question for Janajati:

1. Will a SHRESTHA respect and voice equality for a Jyapoo in an ethinic state

2. Will a GURUNG respect and voice equailty for a MAGAR in an ethinic state

3. Will a Rajput respect and voice equality for a YADAV in an ethinic state

Its not like the ethinic people are treating eachother with respect or equality. They have a huge division within their own ethinicity. People who are thinking everything will be good once the power is taken away from Bahun Chetri but they are wrong,  the next  fight will start between Gurung/Magar, Rajput/Yadav and Shrestha/Jyapoo. This is a slippery slope we all want to jump into.

At one point these same Janajati will come crying to a bahun and say " bahun baje ma Magar ra you Gurung ko kuro milaideu na"

Here's the list of the current maoist/madhesi cabinet

Baburam  (Bahun)
Gacchedar (Tharu)
Narayankaji (Upper Caste Newar)
Hridayesh Tripathi (Madise Bahun)
Post Bahdur Bogati (Chettri)
Top Bahadur Rayamajhi (Chettri)
Barsaman Pun (Magar)
Dinanath Sharma (Bahun)
Mahendra Prasad Yadv (Madise)
Rajkishor Yadav (Madise)
Chandradev Joshi (Madise Bahun)
Keshav man Shakya (High Cast Newar)
Eknath Dhakal (Bahun)
Kumar Belbase (Bahun)
Yaduvans Jha (Madise Bahun)
Badri Neupane (Madise Bahun)

Khoi ta mantrimandal ma tetro janajati ko khal odeka tetro janajati ko proponent haru ta  ta sabai tyo jaat ma upper caste matra raichan ta....ho tei ho...maile bhanne khojeko, jalle jati andolan garepani akhir ma mooj garne inai janajati ka higher caste hun. Madise bhane pani, Newar bhanepani, magar, gurung, rai limbu jo bhanepani tei ho...

Tei bhaera milera basa, neta ko pachi nalaga...

Actually, in my honest opinion, Manjushree Thapa made sense in her essay above.

If you are a proponent of unequal society, as it has been from past to present, NC and UML are your parties because they favor statusquo.  If you are a proponent of democratic and equal society, you basically have no choice but Maoists.

Note that I have not referred to the former as bahun-chettris and latter as janajaatis because either can be in both categories.

The reason I say Maoists is because at least they are talking about building a progressive society where all groups from all socio-economic strata can participate in the governance of the nation.  NC and UML are loudly quiet on this front.

Having said that I am not saying Maoists are the right choice because while the cards they have shown display a rosy potential, I am not sure what is on the cards that they are holding close to their vests.  Who knows, they might be trying to make Nepal into North Korea secretly.  

Bottom line is this: if you believe in just and equal Nepal for all Nepalis, there simply is not a party that fully fits your aspiration at this time, and unfortunately, the closest you have are the Maoists.

Hakimsaab,
I read your both postings thoroughly on this thread. I don't really like the names calling (khate, ashikshit, jaand khaane, etc.) to others with whom (or the lifestyles they are made to accept) you do not agree, but certainly you are entitled to express your views. 

If I may, I would kindly direct you to read Nepali_American's posting above which does have some real 'gudi'. We are discussing here Manjushree's article. I would stand to learn more through any comments, negative or positive, on the article you may have. Yes, you are right. Nepal's interim constituion recognizes Nepal being a multi ethnic, multi lingual and a secular country and thus guarantees equal rights for all citizens and that's what certain people are demanding in practice. 
IMHO, tolerance towards each other, understanding of each others problems and needs, and working out a solution collectively or jointly is an inherrent part of a Nepali tradition which makes our country great. Agree?

 MardShab,
                      Again my question begs, where are the alleged discrimination and shackles of opression lie that give fodder to writers like Manjushree. The constitution says all are equal. Janajatis have half the seats reserved in every field. Now what more is Manjushree clamoring for? Does that not level the playing field for everyone? 

Everything comes down to specialization of labor. You don't see Bahuns and Chettris partaking in a bandh because they are 'discriminated' by the selectors of the British Army. You don't see Marwaris complaining because they don't have a proportional representation in the governance of the state. If you choose not to participate, then why do you even complain? 

Yes, I'm all in favor of promoting an equal and egalitarian society. But what I believe more in is a merit society. Thats how the potential of a people as a whole is realized. If you start making reservations and taking affirmative action then you'll become many more times inefficient than we already are. Level the playing field and let the best man win. The whole world is moving ahead with a competitive zeal, so should we.

At a point when we there should be reconciliation and unity, we've turned to divide and racism. People like Manjushree serve no purpose other than to trigger hatred among fellow Nepalese.

Dear Hakimsab,

I feel Manjushree's article (above) gives you the answers to your queries. One must be either naive or deliberately ignorant to be talking about a level playing field without taking cognizant of the existing situation when you have all the resources to your disposal. Please check the statistics and therein lie the answers. The stereotype rote that janajatis don't study hard, addicted to alcohol, they want to be a "rikrutay" and a "lahure", and they have no ambitions, and so forth are the things of the past and it is not fair to generalise it. Of course, there are exceptions and prevalence of such tendencies in any groups. 
The point being that those who have already reached 30 steps up a ladder, nothwithstanding the way how one climbed up may be a matter of contention though, it is silly to talk of a level playing field without thinking of due considerations for the underrepresented and disadvantageous. Manjushree's article does quantify this fact solidly.
I can see that there is a great deal of disinformation out there to blame each other. Like I had said earlier, unless we understand each others pains, sufferings and needs (first step) and do something sincerely to alliviate them (second step), there is no way out from the hole we have created. 
One does not need to believe what Manjushree has written at its face value. If one only checks the facts without going on tangent with an inherrent caste bias, the article answers it all in brief.  
PS: I am not either for this or that. At this critical juncture in Nepal, we need to shred our caste bias and ask ourselves a simple question: are we being fair? Fairness is all what we need. Altho I have always taught my adolescent students, who come from various caste, creed and religions, to be fair as much as possible, I always stand to be corrected and never cease to learn from others.  
Best. 

I didn't find any insanity in Manjushree Thapa's post. Let's admit that most of janjatis are frustrated, and non-janjatis are also insecure about janjatis hijacking all the opportunities. These are the ground reality. On top of that there are crooks like Prachanda who want to cash by creating chaos.

Yes, the brightest should be given the opportunity. Non-janjatis always give the examples of janjatis dominating in the fields like foreign services, business houses, etc. Do you think that state (government/ministers/politicans...) plays a role in these recruitments?

There was no reservation system until few years, and according to you, only the brightest were getting the jobs in government services. Then how come our government people are the least qualified and most incompetent? Have you looked how qualified majority of government administrators are? Let's not even go to the territory of corruption/nepotism etc. Corrupted politicians are the first to be blamed for most of our problems, and the government administrators are the second ones. They're incompetent and least qualified. I may be totally wrong but if you look at the qualifications of most of government administrators, many of them passed their degrees with third-divisions. I emphasize on government administrators, not the ones working in the technical fields. People working in the technical fields in government are brighter than these administrators, and the system (written or non-written) discriminates against the technical fields. In administration service, I don't need to tell which race are the majorities (~90%); but if you look at technical fields, I doubt if one race dominates as much as 90%.

Let's not be color blind. Let's admit we have problems, and let's stop accusing each other. Asking for the rights of janjatis won't disintegrate our nation. Let's admit our system, how fairly it is written, discriminated some races. The pity is that maoists are leading the movements and using janjatis as tactic to reach their goals. The issue of janjatis are very sensitive issue, and it can kill all of us as we are seeing in this thread and posts in facebook. In that sense, maoists have succeeded, and all of us, both janjatis and non-janjatis have falled into their trap, perhaps because of our own blindness.

I restate that ethnic states are not the solutions.