federalism
Related story
No major rain ahead for Kathmandu Valley, caution advised in ea...
Although they sound distinct, state restructuring and national security are closely related. Geography, governance, political ambience and social framework matter in security of a federation.
With the establishment of the republic, the process of transforming 'centralized unitary system' into 'federal system' was started. To an extent, the rationale for federalism is convincing. In the past, due to ad hoc allocation of resources and authority, the state power was in the hands of certain elites. Marginalized groups were deprived of opportunities, resulting in larger fissures within the society. It hampered overall development.
The leaders don't seem to have learned and federalism has remained a bone of contention. Intentionally or not, other aspects of federal issue have been overlooked. The leaders have been viewing the issue only from their tinted political lenses and are trying to shape states to keep their political domination intact.
Federalism is a sensitive issue and its impact goes far beyond politics. National security in federal structure is susceptible and failing to give it a serious thought will cost the nation dear. At the heart of a nation's security are national harmony, territorial integrity, good governance, political sovereignty and stability. For Nepal, which is underdeveloped, economically fragile, dependent on foreign aid, and politically fragmented, upholding all these values is a distant dream.
Federalism is not easy. Maintenance of double layer state mechanism (center and state), (executive, judiciary and legislative) along with bureaucracy and security forces (police and intelligence), will not only subject citizens to double taxes, but also causes frustration among them. As main income-generating resources (industries, arable lands and economic transit routes) and development structures are concentrated in southern plains, unscientific demarcation of states will further aggravate economic disparity.
Nepal is a heterogeneous society. Multi-ethnic, multi-lingual, multi-religious, multi-racial and multi-cultural people live in harmony, from east to west, and no particular race or ethnic group holds majority in any region. Amidst such diversity, drawing boundaries on basis of race, ethnicity or language might bring social division. Our South Asian neighbors are examples.
Now the question is: Which federal model should be adopted in Nepal? It should be the means to maintain national harmony, economic stability, social inclusiveness and political integrity. How to carry it out? Geographical demarcation is a sensitive issue while forming federal states. Nepal, sandwiched between India and China, extends from east to west. Therefore the states should be demarcated vertically, which provides following advantages.
First, all states will have access to both the neighbors, the booming economies. Second, national resources such as agriculture, industries, hydropower and tourism will be proportionately divided among the states, which will again, more or less, give every state equal economic opportunity. Third, this kind of division will help maintain equilibrium of social values and culture, as there will be no 'dominant' and 'dominated' groups. Fourth, it will help maintain overall political balance. None of the regional forces will be 'kingmakers' in national politics, which is not possible if the boundaries are crafted horizontally.
Similarly, the number of states should be kept at a minimum so that resources to run these states will not be over-stretched. With this, maintenance and administrative costs will be kept to a minimum. It will be an economic blunder if the country, heavily dependent on foreign aid and hardly bigger than a state of either of its neighbors, is divided into many states.
Another question is: "How to address the needs and dissatisfactions of ethnic groups, castes and communities that were discriminated against in the past?" For this, there can be a special national policy to allow them special authority, opportunities and reservations. If that happens, social harmony and inclusiveness can be maintained.
Indeed all these values are the strands of national security. We have seen how states with full autonomy have seceded, how communities have plunged into violence and how external forces have exploited opportunities when a nation becomes weak after compromising those values. In our context, if we don't hold these strands together, the result might not be to our liking. By then we can only regret the historical mistakes.
Time has come for our leaders to rise above petty interests and contemplate federalism with a broad mind. It is imperative that instead of taking rash decisions, we conduct vigorous discussions. Advice from specialists and scholars should be sought. If that happens, not only can we make our country harmonious and prosperous but also safeguard its national interest.
The author is a graduate in Political Science and Strategic Studies from Tribhuvan University shrijan7malla@hotmail.com
