Unfortunately, MPRF as well as other Madhesi parties are now massively fragmented, which also has meant the erosion of their influence in CA and in government decision-making generally. The latest split occurred late last month that was initiated by Forum Co-Chairman Gupta. With this split, the original CA strength of MPRF has been reduced from 52 to 12 seats, now under Yadav’s wing.
In his parting shots, Gupta accused the Forum Chairman of a number of wrongdoings which, he said, made it impossible for him to continue working with him and maintain party unity. He accused Yadav for his authoritarian style, his decision to join the Khanal government without party approval, and most importantly, Yadav’s close relations with the Maoist party. All these traits of Yadav, according to Gupta, made him less than a democratic figure, unfit for leadership of a democratic party like MPRF.
MADHESI INTERESTS
I would personally agree with all the mentioned weak points of Yadav’s leadership but this does not justify in any manner Gupta’s move to split the party. The reason is that Madhesi battle is not for democracy or for a republic, not even for independence and sovereignty. The battle is for much more basic purposes—civil rights, local governance, equality of opportunities as citizens of the state. There is no guarantee that democracy or any other system of government would help achieve these ends. This battle has to be fought separately from the mainstream politics of the country as human rights and civil rights issues. Such, indeed, was the original goal of MPRF that Yadav founded, which specifically mentioned Janadhikar or civil rights as its primary objective.
At the very basic level, focus on Janadhikar should be the only issue that needs to concern Madhesi leaders in order for them to establish their relevance and legitimacy. This is so because for all practical purposes Madhesis are being treated as non-nationals, in a manner that, as a group, they are excluded from the affairs of the state and, at local levels, there is virtually no self-governance.
The right approach to uplift the lot of the Madhesi people is nothing other than a focus on Janadhikar or civil rights that can help unite them under one banner like Martin Luther King did for the Black people in America half a century ago.
Given such reality—absence of basic citizenship and civil rights for the Madhesi people—it is ridiculous, reckless, and foolhardy for Madhesi leaders to be divided as democrats, republicans, communists and other shades of political coloring in-between. These very sophisticated and finer points of differences should concern Madhesi leaders only after civil rights and equal treatment for Madhesi people get institutionalized and visible progress is made implementing them.
The right approach to uplift the lot of the Madhesi people then is nothing other than a focus on Janadhikar or civil rights that can help unite them under one banner like Martin Luther King did for the Black people in America half a century ago.
However, the sad part of this story is that Madhesi people cannot unite—not that they do not want to but their leaders would not let them for no greater reason than their leaders’ desire to carve out a chunk of territory for themselves and their followers, which appears very much like the old zamindari system practiced in much of Madhes.
UPENDRA YADAV’S CHOICE
Given that most of the Madhesi leaders have vested interests in keeping Madhesi people divided, is there anyone else who could be trusted for fighting the battle for Madhes? Here comes Yadav.
Yadav knows that Madhes and Madhesis have been ill-served by all factions of politicians who have governed Nepal during the past half century. They have not helped change the status of Madhes and of Madhesis. Even the Ranas performed better. They built the first railway line in Madhes way back in the 1930s, which was the very first act of infrastructure development in the country and also a serious attempt at national integration.
Given that all administrations since the Ranas have been either indifferent or hostile to Madhesi interests, why not then take a bet with something unaccustomed and new? Work with Maoists!
I would admit Gupta´s assertion that Maoists cannot be trusted for doing good to Madhes. But I—and most likely Yadav—do not trust Nepali Congress (NC), CPN-UML, Rastriya Prajatantra Party and all their offshoots doing any better for Madhes either.
Then what is it that Maoists are going to offer for the Madhesis?
If Maoists happen to make this choice voluntarily—to be or not to be good to Madhesis—they would not do any better than NC, UML or other such factions; more likely, given a free-hand, they would push Madhesis further into the status of sub-citizens and excluded group.
My point then is that a well-meaning Madhesi leader can work on the weak points of Maoists to gain strategic advantage and use it as leverage and a bargaining chip. In my view, the major weakness of Maoists—and of communist parties in Nepal generally—is their outdated political philosophy. There is more than an even chance that a smart Madhesi leader can nudge the Maoists to rule democratically if they are serious about getting a foothold in Madhes. By their very nature and region’s geography, Madhesis are a democratic people and they cannot accept communist rule in the country, however poor they may be.
Second, Maoists cannot govern Nepal without keeping good relations with India and a Madhesi-backed Maoist government can facilitate such relations. Madhesi leaders can convince India to soften up on the Maoists and also they can pressure Maoists to lean toward India and maintain a distance from China.
Third, with Madhesi backing, a Maoist government can more easily get accepted in the international community whose cooperation Nepal needs to develop and modernize. Madhesi participation in a Maoist government can provide a bridge for the Maoists to tap international goodwill and get their cooperation.
Finally, Madhesi leaders will have the clout to force a Maoist government to do what all previous governments have failed to do—to help develop Madhes by earmarking its fair share of development budget for the region, which has been a miniscule amount compared to what is being spent for other regions of the country.
The late great Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping defended his tilt toward capitalism with this quip: It does not matter if the cat is black or white, as long as it catches mice. My translation: It does not matter where Yadav tilts as long as it helps lift the lot of Madhesis.
sshah1983@hotmail.com
Related story
DPM Upendra Yadav moving to Madhesh CM's residence
_20211010140020.jpg)
_20191222200001.jpg)
