Many of my pahade friends I have talked to over the last few days have doubts about the sincerity of demand by Madheshi parties for Madhesh-only province or provinces, arguing that such delineation will soon lead to the loss of Madhesh territory to India, either through a merger proposal likely to be advanced by Madhesi parties or India moving in directly by claiming ethnic homogeneity, much like Russia did last year by taking over Crimea from Ukraine, citing its overwhelmingly ethnic Russian population.Pahade sentiments about the loss of control or jurisdiction over Madhesh territory have further hardened because of the problems unfolding at Nepal-India border that have undercut bilateral trade and obstructed regional travel. None of pahade friends I have talked to believe the Madheshi version of border problem, that this has been initiated by Madheshi people to put pressure on Nepal government to make the needed amendments in the new constitution.
General perception among pahade leadership as well as pahade public is that trade interruption—what has officially been labeled trade blockade—is Indian ploy to subdue Nepal to do its bidding: press Nepal government on amendments to the constitution consistent with Nepal's ethnic diversity. Perceiving that there may be a threat to country's sovereignty—real or imagined—pahade public is more united on this rather than any other issue of national interest, which makes them rigidly opposed to Indian interference. Pahade people's unity against India is evident from the unprecedented camaraderie that Indian blockade has forced upon otherwise hostile parties, those from far right as well as from far left.
Madheshi parties for their part have yet to make a convincing case of their loyalty to the Nepali State, not only now but also in the future if Madhesh-only province is agreed and is granted autonomy and self-rule. The loyalty test, in fact, is hard to prove, unless Madheshi leaders play Hanuman—open their hearts for pahade doubters to peer through! It is in fact little Madheshi leaders can do to establish their credibility—that their demand for exclusive Madheshi provinces isn't a tactic, or a ploy for separation, secession, or, much worse, independence!
Looking at the pahade resolve to safeguard Nepali sovereignty and territorial integrity, Madheshis have no choice than to demonstrate that they are truly Nepalis. But, to tell the truth, there has been no such evidence that Madheshis are unequivocally loyal to the Nepali State and that they can be depended upon for safeguarding sovereignty— which largely means not playing second fiddle to India—if not becoming totally submerged into it.
The other point that needs to be looked at in order to understand the government's rigid stance over Madhesh—a rigidity that has been in place for decades, through revolutions and regime changes—pertains to what we may call a bread and butter issue. Historically, parts of Nepal's southern terrains called Madhesh were gifted to Nepal by British Government of India during the early 19th century, for access to trade routes and recruitments for its armed forces. Madheshi territories then became as birta (land possession) for the pahade rulers of the country which, over years, they freely gifted to their high officials serving in Madhesh, who in turn leased it to Madheshi farmers. Revenues from birta land went to high government officials and elites in Kathmandu.
Although the birta system ended in 1950s, it bequeathed a major legacy for Madheshi society—a subordinate status vis-à-vis pahades, in a way that almost the entire government infrastructure in Madhesh came to be manned and controlled by pahade personnel, from foot soldiers to lieutenants in Army; from traffic police to Superintendants of police; from airport checkers to security guards at government offices; from clerks to judges in local courts; and in all such areas of government in Madhesh. With the inception of democracy over the last few decades, some entry level positions have opened up for Madheshis but their participation in government service remains miniscule and, on the central government level as in administrative and foreign services, it is hard to find any Madheshi presence at all.
If the Madheshi demand for Madhesh-only province is agreed, overwhelmingly ethnic Madheshi population of the region will claim the entire coterie of government jobs. This will mean that most of ethnic pahades in government jobs in Madhesh will be replaced by Madheshis, whether this is based on merit or the result of job quotas.
This kind of massive scale of job losses of pahade office-holders will not only deprive them of salaries and benefits but also of incomes from bribes and kickbacks that, anecdotally, amount to many times the salaries. This is so because pahades dominate job areas that are notorious for bribe-culture—revenue offices, customs, courts and police offices, for example.
In its resistance to Madheshi proposals, the government hasn't argued the case as stated above, but it is hard to look at government's Madhesh policy in any other way. In the current stand-off with government, Madheshi parties believe their demands aren't new and, in fact, all of them have been previously negotiated, agreed upon, signed and sealed. But hardly any of these agreements have been implemented, and those few that have are half-hearted measures. Looking at the progress of granting rights to Madheshis through a quarter century of democratization and pluralism, the scale of official pahade presence in Madhesh is largely unchanged, with the Madheshi perception of official Nepal not changed much from the days of the Ranas.
In all fairness, it is hard to blame just the pahade establishment for the sub-status of Madheshis. Madheshi society and Madheshi psyche overall are equally responsible for the denigration of Madhesh and Madheshis. There is no disputing that iron-fist rule of Ranas continuing with the ethnic totalitarianism of Panchayat era contributed to Madheshi deprivation but this changed after the democratic opening of 1990 that granted equal franchise to Madheshis.
If Madheshis were as aggrieved, they would have rushed to the polls en masse to throw the rascals out—since they claim they constitute over half of the country's population. Astonishingly, Madheshis have done nothing of the sort and, in fact, they have voted in favor of their pahade oppressors! At least on this count, pahade leadership has got it right—that the disputed constitution has the backing of 90 percent of votes in parliament, not a small chunk of which was derived from the Madheshi electorate!
It is then hard to see how the disgruntled Madheshi leadership can prevail over their pahade oppressors when their own people have approved of pahade rule of the country, in the manner they have voted. This is the dilemma Madheshi leaders must resolve before they can claim to speak for the Madheshi public.
sshah1983@hotmail.com
Related story
History of Madhesh to be written
