An in-depth research is essential to identify actual actors and factors that have been contributing to fuel violence and rise of criminality. Are they armed/paramilitary groups, security officials or the mainstream political parties? There is a well-founded suspicion among the general public that most armed groups are either being operated by the mainstream political parties or directly or indirectly being promoted by state security agencies.
In Janakpur, a senior officer of the Nepal Police was reportedly operating three armed groups. Ram Chandra Jha dared to share the fact that a faction of his own party in Dhanusha was operating an armed outfit called Liberation Tiger of Tarai (LTT). The chairperson of Nepal Human Rights Commission too made a similar argument claiming that security forces’ and political parties’ affiliation with criminal gangs and armed groups has made violence highly complex these days.
In Janakpur, most cases of violence are unleashed and masterminded by the police. Theoretically, it is a universally accepted fact that ‘state elites themselves use violence to preserve the status quo and unequal distribution of resources; they tolerate and/or encourage routine abuses by state security agents; they fail to deal with the sources of violence within society and even indirectly or directly gain from the illegal accumulation processes which take place through it’.
The latest thrashing of journalists by police personnel in Janakpur is a clear evidence of the routine use of violence by the state. Security agencies in Tarai routinely abuse their authority to cover up and silence legitimate dissent rather than to ensure security. Serious injuries of journalists, namely, Bikash Sah, Jay Narayan Jha and Suresh Yadav who are undergoing treatment at Kantipur Hospital in Kathmandu remind us of the previous incident of Tika Bista that got a wider media coverage.
The demise of Girija Prasad Koirala overshadowed the current incident of police brutality. It is very serious because it involves the rape of a newly married Muslim woman who had come to Janakpur from Madhubani — a Maithili-dominated town of Bihar which has strong cultural relations with Janakpur. As she had left her family to marry a Hindu boy, what will be her condition now? How can her trauma be addressed? Due to decreasing faith in the state institutions, the rape incident has created a sense of psychological terror among locals that their daughters, wives, sisters and mothers are not safe from those who are paid by their tax money for ensuring protection.
An in-depth research is essential to identify actual actors and factors that have been contributing to fuel violence and rise of criminality. Are they armed/paramilitary groups, security officials or the mainstream political parties?
The public has lost faith and are not hopeful that the situation will improve anytime soon. Therefore, it is vital to find out root causes — why do state actors and armed groups resort to violence in order to achieve their objectives? Can we see violence as a disconnected issue?
Kathmandu-Tarai corruption highway, lack of opportunities for the urban poor youths, the easy availability of guns, unequal distribution of resources, widespread discrimination based on caste and class, continuation of patron-client politics, high degree of societal acceptance of violence and an uneven development priorities are some of the key factors maximizing the worst elements of violence in Tarai.
Realization of powerlessness could also push individuals to adopt violent means to reassure his/her might. Jenny Pearce has supported this argument claiming that ‘Power as capacity for action, for example, or as a potentiality which everyone can realize in themselves, is the opposite of violence’. Transformation of power and promotion of non-domination are the two key secrets to revive the conventional culture of non-violence.
The declining faith in the state institutions has caused, or at least empowered, local armed groups who use violence for their own ends. Possessing political patronage, some leaders having criminal background try to reap maximum benefits denouncing violence. To win public sympathy, they stand against state terrorism such as rape of a woman. But in truth they are not much bothered by the inability of the government agencies to guarantee personal safety of people living in the area.
There has always been violence in Janakpur, but now the risk has become such that some of us are either afraid to denounce or attempt to seek justice in the name of strengthening state institutions. Avoidance through silence and looking away will invite violence at our own doors on any given day. Every citizen has thus the dire responsibility to contribute to the efforts made for peaceful social change and renouncing violence by adopting dialogue, interaction and social harmony.
If we can gradually make violence unfashionable, it will be easier to move toward the path of tackling other forms of structural and symbolic violence. Moreover, state-backed violence needs to be dealt with a systematic reform. Political dimension of such violence is much complex than the ‘wars’ waged by groups brandishing certain political ideologies. Fundamentally, it demands a multidimensional approach. For example, along with a systematic reform, it requires creating a sense of local ownership and encouraging community policing.
Addressing structural causes of violence in Tarai is the best option to make unfashionable. A comprehensive civil-state approach could generate greater confidence amongst the key stakeholders and provide room for engaging people in peaceful initiatives. Thus, civil society members, academia, mass media and political parties have to try creating space for constructive dialogue and interaction to respond to the crises facing the poor and marginalized people. A more transparent, open and critical collectivism should be adopted to bring together the people and decision makers to develop local mechanisms and approaches for tackling violence in society. It is time to speed up such discourse and ‘roll back violent movement’ to create grounds for effectively dealing with the spiraling violence in Tarai today.
Finally, for the locals of Janakpur, it is essential to contemplate upon the saying of Michel Foucault who argues that ‘violence can be justifiable, but it never will be legitimate’. The New-Marxists of the 21st century have gained better education from the world experience that nonviolent resistance is the ultimate way for the historically oppressed groups to counter state violence. Advocating nonviolent actions, they claim that ‘revolution’ does not mean to carry guns and throw stones.
Challenging state violence through various means of peaceful revolution could generate more impacts than any physical and public violence. Adopting violence to bring forth social change generates backlash and reactions overshadowing genuine grievances. A coward uses physical force to achieve an aim whereas a courageous revolutionary struggles for a long-lasting peace through ‘nonviolent resistance’ to oppose oppression, domination and any other forms of state-backed violence. Lederach argues that ‘Nonviolent resistance’ shares a common commitment to social change and increased justice through peaceful means.
Let us not forget that the Russian and Chinese revolutions, decolonization wars in Africa, Tamil War in Sri Lanka or the Maoists’ war in Nepal further increased violence as they denounced non-violent resistance.
dipjha@gmail.com
Related story
16-day Campaign against VAW: 80 percent of GBV includes domesti...
