Doubts over Nepal’s new approach to Maoist rebellion

KATHMANDU: Nepal’s government is embarking on an ambitious programme to contain the Maoist rebellion through increased security operations, but critics and political parties say this approach only marks the ‘rampant militarization’ of this once peaceful nation.

Faced with a rising tide of Maoist-inspired violence, and the lacklustre performance of Nepal’s myriad security services, the government this week announced a ‘unified command’ by which military and other security operations will be centralized under the Royal Nepal Army (RNA).

The idea is to give the military — two months after the collapse of a ceasefire with the Maoists — a free hand in operations in the rural districts, where the insurgency has been raging since 1996.

Another government idea being pushed side by side is the concept of a volunteer defence force, composed largely of village youth, to protect villages from the rebels. A senior minister told IPS that the youth would be armed and trained by the military in counter-insurgency operations.

But there is also fear that the increasing use of the military would curtail the finding of a long-term solution to the crisis.

The Maoist rebellion, though it emerged as a class-based struggle initially, has added a dimension of ‘exclusion’ that lumps the various ethnic, linguistic, regional and religious issues which had existed just under the surface for more than 200 years.

These issues cannot be settled by a military victory, analysts say, arguing for fundamental changes in the structures of Nepal’s polity and society.

“I hope the government realizes there cannot be a military solution to the crisis,” says Narayan Wagle, the editor of the influential ‘Kantipur’ newspaper. ‘Political solution is the way to go.’

Senior government ministers privately agree that a military solution perhaps cannot be found. But they say that to bring the Maoists back to the negotiating table, a strong military operation is needed. Hence the unified command concept.

Though the concept is still hazy, Prime Minister Surya Bahadur Thapa said the idea calls for unifying the various security services under the command of the RNA for ‘effective campaigns in the districts’.

However, he also said that the civilian and political leadership in the districts would control the overall direction of the security operations.

Minister for Information and Communication Kamal Thapa says that the unified command concept will be pushed together with the government’s plans to reform Nepal’s social and political landscape.

He says the government would provide for affirmative action in the form of reservations in the education, health and government sector to the deprived communities such as the ‘Dalits’ (untouchables), women, and marginalized ethnic communities.

“It’s not that the government is seeking only a military solution,” the minister says. “We are soon going to implement affirmative action to address the grievances of the various groups.”

But instead of welcoming the plan, critics are furiously slamming it. “This is a move towards rapid militarization of the country,” Girija Prasad Koirala, leader of the opposition Nepali Congress party and a former prime minister, explains. “The King and his government are using the ruse of the Maoist insurgency to bring in a right-wing dictatorship.”

The other large opposition party, Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist Leninist), has also come down heavily against the plan, as have a string of smaller parties.

What worries these parties most is that the RNA would be more active under the guise of a unified command. In the absence of an elected polity, the civil and political leadership in the districts are mostly handpicked government nominees, particularly from the prime minister’s Rashtriya Prajatantra Party (RPP) — and critics fear that they will bow down to the demand of the security services.

Analysts in Kathmandu tend to agree with this apprehension. “I think the political parties are quite justified in voicing their concerns,” says Krishna Hachhethhu, a political analyst with the Centre for Nepal and Asian Studies. “They are fearful not just of the militarization, but also of being marginalized completely from the nation’s political life.”

In many ways, the parties have been pushed to the brink of marginalization already.

Since Oct 4 last year, when King Gyanendra ousted an elected government and seized executive powers, the Nepali Congress, CPN-UML, and three smaller parties have been crying themselves hoarse in seeking either the formation of an all-party interim government or the restoration of parliament, which was dissolved in May 2002.

But King Gyanendra has not listened to the parties. In fact he has appointed two royalist governments in the last one year, and has also attempted to negotiate with the Maoists by keeping the political parties out of the equation.

As long as the peace with the Maoists lasted, the Palace and the government were in a win-win situation.

They could talk with the Maoists but also push aside the protesting political parties. But that changed after the peace process collapsed in late August, and the rebels ratcheted up their violent “people’s war” with attacks on government positions and arbitrary killings.

According to the Royal Nepal Army, nearly 900 people were killed, including 700 Maoists, after the ceasefire collapsed in late August.

Some think that with the peace now gone, and the parties protesting from the streets, the government badly needs to show progress. This is especially true since the donor community, which funds more than half of Nepal’s annual development budget, has shown signs of frustration with the Palace and the government for not being able to get the “constitutional process” back on track.

In this context, Thapa has announced his intentions to hold elections next year, first to the defunct local bodies and then later for parliament. Thapa’s latest unified command concept, in this context, is being implemented to “bring the security situation under control so that polls can be held,” as one minister says.—

Dawn/The InterPress News Service.

Why exposing Karachiites to nightmares only?

ONE does not have to think hard to realize that never has the image of meat sellers and butchers been positive in this society, but they surely have received a harsh blow with their decision to hit at vulnerable consumers in the shape of wanting a price rise in the month of Ramazan. In fact, they have taken the lead over the other categories of traders and businessmen. No shame in Ramazan.

And one does not have to strain oneself to realize that the City District Government Karachi (CDGK) has taken a firm, popular and reasonable stand on this vital consumer issue, even though there is not much of consumer resistance in this society. There is, however, perceptible the feeling that the general public backs the City Nazim and city government in this battle over prices. It is so good for the ordinary citizen to learn from City Nazim Naimatullah Khan that his “government would never succumb to the blackmail of any interest group that seeks to usurp the rights of citizens.” Good.

The city government versus the scheming meat sellers makes it possible to contemplate some worrying aspects of not just this price war, but other dimensions to the city government. One housewife was not ready to accept the point that the meat sellers were not playing a political game and which only time would expose. She said that it was hard to understand why the meat sellers and their leaders had chosen the month of Ramazan for striking this blow. Keep in mind that the city government, the Sindh government and the governor have all been making their best efforts to ensure that prices of foodstuffs in particular are within manageable proportions in this month.

Television news on Friday night indicated that by Sunday, normal meat supplies would resume in Karachi meat markets and that alternative arrangements were being made by the city government to bring in a private party which showed interest in supplying reasonably priced meat to the city. But as one newspaper report asked, will the existing meat traders, who control the market from one point to another and from one stage to another, make it possible to do that? Or, will there be some kind of attempt to undermine the efforts?

It will be significant to see the outcome of the meat sellers’ strike, keeping in mind that this is the first time that the city government has shown the toughness and the courage to take on vested interests that challenge the Karachi consumer. The average Karachiite, whether or not he has demonstrated the consumer resistance that he should, (or that he could) to avoid consuming meat for as long as there is this strike, has certainly felt relieved that there is some solid authority that is being asserted to deal with the striking meat sellers with a firm hand. It is certain that the Nazim has won the hearts of many such citizens who may well have been quite indifferent to the city government otherwise.

But to be indifferent to the city government is to be, truly speaking, unaware of the changes that are taking place in this society. A new system of governance at local bodies level is in place, and despite the trial and error, and the hurdle and the challenge, it is finding its way. Having said this makes it easier now to take notice of a rather disturbing story that discloses a development which is so heartbreaking, to say the least.

It is reported that the Sindh chief secretary (i.e. Sindh government) has disbanded the committees formed about eight weeks ago, by the CDGK for carrying out the Rs29 billion Tameer-i-Karachi project.

I hope we have not forgotten that in August this year the uplift project for Sindh capital was announced by President Musharraf. The details were well publicised and one of its striking features was the fact that it brought in the concept of stakeholders in Karachi. As a bitter Karachiite always reminds me (as if I have forgotten) that “Karachi is like a damsel who everyone wants to possess, but not to own.” He argues that it is time that all those who benefit from Karachi must return to the city its full due. Or how else is Karachi going to get the vast resources on a sustained basis? Even the rich who live in the posh areas of Karachi do not spend a rupee on the streets outside their very own houses — palatial houses. Bear this rich man’s apathy to Karachi and society, please.

Let me refer briefly to the Rs29 billion uplift plan that was made public late in August this year. A major, almost revolutionary, aspect of it was that the Karachi was divided into six zones, and each zone had affluent stakeholders who would pay the bill for uplift work to be done in their respective area. For example, in zone-4 which includes industrial estates in Landhi, Korangi, F B Area and North Karachi, Rs2,500 million would be required for treatment plants and the zone’s drainage system. And the Export Promotion Bureau would be the stakeholder. What’s wrong with that, Karachiite?

All these details were discussed at a meeting held at the Governor House, the President was in the chair. The city nazim Naimatullah Khan made a presentation on what was described as a four year package, which “focused on rebuilding various civic infrastructures but did not include the Karachi Circular Railway.”

A good question would be: where would the Rs29 billion come from? Well, the city government pledged Rs6 billion, and the remaining Rs23 billion would come from the Sindh government and the stakeholders. And why not? No love of Karachi?

That’s enough. Has all that gone? Really gone. Was it another pipe dream that we sell to the citizens of a city in a perpetual crisis? Someone, last week, even used the word ‘insanity’ to describe the state of this city. Even local traffic jams have turned into daily nightmares at one place or another, and the thought of Eid drawing near is a very suffocating thought in this regard.

According to a news report carried by an English daily during the week, it was stated that sources (bureaucratic or political one wonders) have said that “the former plans by the CDGK for the development of the metropolis by collecting Rs29 billion from private businesses, and semi-government organizations was more of a child’s dream that a reality.” Was all that time, effort and decision-making in vain? Only a child’s dream? Once again were the citizens of Karachi being given some promises to soften the blow that the heavy rains in July had given to their city. Once again, those hollow promises. And the familiar undoing of plans.

These sources have been quoted as saying that “why should PIA, Civil Aviation Authority, Pakistan Railways, State Bank, Site Association, etc. give away Rs12 billion in the hands of the CDGK for the development of the city? The people of the city, as well as businessmen, do not carry a good impression of professional honesty about various departments of the CDGK.”

Let’s face it: the people and the businessmen do not have a good impression of many of these organizations or departments within them. Then where do we begin if this mutual mistrust is allowed to go on. Somewhere, a beginning has to be made; a first step has to be taken. And to identify the stakeholder in Karachi is a very forceful, valid, potent argument. It is a concept that could work, given the chance.

Of course the city government is neither perfect, nor should it be expected to be. Neither are other government platforms, organizations and institutions, for that matter. Is corruption all round?

And, of course, the city government and its dogged Nazim Naimatullah Khan have their critics and opposition. But it is in the interest of the Sindh capital (a mini Pakistan) that attempts to provide it with the infrastructure that it needs, are made to bear fruit. That fruit will then be shared by all. Or else sorrow and misfortune will descend equally.

Why Hazuri Bagh?

THE garden between the Lahore Fort and the Badshahi Mosque is known as Hazuri Bagh. Why is it called Hazuri Bagh? This question has always puzzled me. There are many versions to this name, and like all things, good, bad or ugly, in Lahore, there is always a story to it.

There are two credible versions to the use of the name Hazuri. The first one is that all courtiers who mattered, the “Jee Hazuri” type (flatterers) waited for their turn in this beautiful garden. The old folk in the walled city still jokingly call it the “Jee hazuri bagh”, and they point out to the grave of Sir Sikander Hayat in the garden who they claim was the chief “flatterer” of the British rulers.

If you heard from Garhi Shahu across the canal towards the Mian Mir Graveyard in Dharampura, to the left you will come across, in a lane on the road that heads towards the CMH, a small graveyard which is built on two levels. The main structure has a green dome. Through the main door one comes to an open space with a lot of graves enclosed by a wall. In the middle is a small tomb built of small bricks. Inside is the grave of Syed Mahmood Hazuri. There are two graves in this tomb. One of Syed Mahmood and the other of Syed Shah Nuruddin, the son of Mahmood. Next to this small tomb is yet another small tomb, again with two graves, of Syed Jan Muhammad Hazuri and his son Syed Sarwar Din. Next to them is a small mosque of the same period.

The name Hazuri comes from this great family, who claimed to have direct lineage from Imam Jaffar Sadiq. This is a tall claim to say the least, but then the family claimed, in writing, the exact lineage.

On one side of the tomb is the exact lineage given, and it seems reasonable to accept it as correct. Every year a small Urs is held in which on the first day people come to pray and light mustard oil lamps in the traditional clay ‘deevay’, while on the second day ‘qawwalis’ are held.

Our piece is about which exact “Hazuri” was the garden outside the Lahore Fort named after. This calls for a short history to be told. The story goes that this famous family of Musavi Syeds had their origins in the mountains of Ghaur in Afghanistan. They were considered a very pious family, and in their tradition of learning they wrote out copies of the Holy Quran and also excelled in the art of bookbinding, almost always in leather. Two copies of their works can be seen in the British Museum, excellent specimens of calligraphy and leather bookbinding. This family of Musavi scholars moved to the sub-continent and settled in Uch Sharif in Sindh, where the environment was conducive. The exact time period of this migration one cannot dare to mention, as the oral tradition seems to vary so much.

From Uch Sharif during the period the Moghal Emperor Shah Jehan was in power, this family moved to Lahore, as in those days this city was the main seat of learning and scholarship. They lived, initially, inside the walled city in, as one account puts it, near Akbari Mandi. Which exact mohallah or area one does not know. But they definitely soon acquired a reputation for scholarship, and also, more importantly, as being “masters of the known and the unknown” sciences. This was a very good reason for them to become well known to the royal court, which kept an eye for such people to cover all options, or threats, to their power. In a way, this still goes on as we read in newspapers about various saints and seers.

The royal court is known to have been deeply influenced by the learning of Syed Jan Muhammad Hazuri, a man who refused to accept any money or gifts from the Moghal rulers. He was a humble man and saw it best to come and go to the Lahore Fort as an unknown seer. That this great man of learning may have waited, or dwelt in Hazuri Bagh, one cannot say with any certainty, but he surely would have passed this way, or waited here. Jan Muhammad Hazuri died in AH 1064. In the graveyard also exists a number of leading personalities of Lahore, including the poet Mufti Ghulam Sarwar.

Over time this graveyard has fallen into disrepair, and along with the graveyard next to the tome of Mian Mir, it has become an encroachers’ delight. Every year a few houses creep up, with the living building on the dead.

One account describes Syed Mahmood Hazuri as the person after whom Hazuri Bagh was named by the Moghals. But then one piece by a scholar names Jan Muhammad as the person after whom it was named. It would be futile to pinpoint the exact person. It seems that the entire family, for several generations, continued with the tradition of learning and ‘advising’ people on how to solve their problems by following the ways as described in the Holy Quran. It might come as a surprise that even today there are four persons claiming direct lineage from that family who are today working as holy men. It seems that the garden was named after the family, not one person, all of whom acquired the name Hazuri in Lahore, being described as ‘hazoor’ as is normally the manner in which such people are addressed. But that the name has a mystery to it is all the more alluring. After all, that is what Lahore is all about.— ajid Sheikh