Which party that called a banda hasn’t similarly boasted of “success”? Never mind that many daily laborers went to bed hungry that night. Who cares if patients died because they couldn’t get to hospitals? At Gaushala, one child-carrying lady told her husband over the mobile phone that with taxis off the streets she didn’t know when she’d get home. Shops shut not because they supported RPP-N’s ideals, but because they feared its cadres’ possible tantrums.
Every party that calls a banda asks the citizens to bear with the hardships because their workers agitate for a higher goal, greater benefits, and the perpetual pie-in-the-sky. The Maoists called for a three-day banda not long ago, and urged similar sacrifices. When Nepali parties run out of constructive ideas, they resort to the only solution they can think of—the banda. That without much effort makes the suffering people realize they can’t ignore the particular party. The threat of the banda hangs like the Damocles’ sword over the heads of the Nepali people. Thus RPP-N, almost lost in oblivion, roared with its bussed-in cadres on February 22. We had to say, “Sorry RPP-N, we ignored you to our peril. Forgive us. Now, we realize you can create havoc as well.” By disrupting public life and education, RPP-N certainly made itself tangible. Just rumors made many schools shut and vehicles stay off the roads on February 21 as well.
Positively, I admire RPP-N’s leader Kamal Thapa for his grit and fierce loyalty to monarchy. The former king Gyanendra must be rejoicing that he has such a fervent disciple. Even Panchayat eternals like Pashupati Shamsher Rana and Surya Bahadur Thapa ditched constitutional monarchy long ago. Kamal Thapa hangs to it as if his life depends on it. There’s the secret—his life did depend on it. No one benefitted as much as Thapa during Chairman Gyanendra’s dictatorship. Thapa had permission even to spend Rs 5,000,000 per day against the king’s opponents during the last phase of the 2006 uprising. Thus, with the dead constitutional monarchy revived, Thapa would again be pulling the strings which after 2006 have eluded him.
However, should Nepal again become a monarchy, can RPP-N guarantee that the king will ever remain “constitutional”? Every monarch after 1950 paid lip service to the concept while turning totally dictatorial. With Gyanendra, Thapa ended up nursing the former’s ego rather than warning him about his “constitutional” limits.
Kamal Thapa had permission even to spend Rs 5,000,000 per day against the king’s opponents during the last phase of the 2006 uprising. Thus, with the dead constitutional monarchy revived, Thapa would again be pulling the strings which after 2006 have eluded him.
Before the 2006 uprising, many intellectuals wanted the monarchy to continue. Royals like Paras Shah tired the people with their above-the-law pranks, but those irritations appeared minor to the Maoist menace of a totalitarian regime (understated as “Peoples’ Republic”) that we continually face at present. However, February 1, 2005 and Gyanendra’s declaration of dictatorship changed all that. Not being able to listen to news from Kantipur and Sagarmatha FM stations did more to convince many that the monarchy just couldn’t last. As the Home Minister then, Kamal Thapa should shoulder partial responsibility for the February 2005 to April 2006 dictatorship.
In this light, RPP-N’s slogans for “democracy” and “liberalism” now sound hollow. We have more of both under Madhav Kumar’s government than under Gyanendra’s with Thapa at the helm. We needn’t even mention RPP-N’s “nationalism”, which lacks a clear definition. Certainly, Thapa hasn’t adopted the Maoists’ anti-Indian stance, which mellowed radically after the Indian Foreign Minister SM Krishna’s visit. (Evidently, the Maoists received a thorough scolding from Krishna and company.) Are being monarchists and turning into advocates of a Hindu, unitary state marks of RPP-N’s nationalism?
RPP-N’s goals, if successful, will turn the country’s clock backward. First, a referendum to decide whether Nepal should revert to becoming a Hindu kingdom. Posters presented Thapa with the longest tika imaginable. RPP-N wishes to outdo Prithvi Narayan Shah in wanting to make Nepal “more Hindu” than India itself. Meanwhile, Thapa appears as the Nepali version of the Maharashtrian Bal Thackeray who aims to turn India from a secular to a Hindu state.
Second, a referendum on Nepali federalism. While the development on federalism hasn’t progressed as one would have hoped, that and other issues hardly justify an expensive, time-consuming referendum. People have already voted 601 candidates to the CA. These have decided on a federal state.
While RPP-N’s protest against price-rise commends itself, it should realize that paralysing traffic causes the cost of commodities to shoot up even more. A banda can hardly bring down corruption or promote security. Rather, clashes between the police and RPP-Nepal’s protesters, the firing of tear gas cells, and the cadres’ damage to vehicles instils more insecurity in the protest-fatigued people. Similarly, a banda can’t ensure that the constitution gets written on time.
On Feb 21 and 22, RPP-N made an impact disproportionate to its size. Now, it should discard bandas forever. Rather, it should play the constructive opposition and help a modern, republican, secular, and federal Nepali unfold. What’s the positive outcome of the Feb 22’s banda? The satisfaction that RPP-N the “mouse”, has roared. Let that be the last banda.
Related story
Mouse found on Yeti Airlines aircraft at Pokhara Airport
