• Nepal in Search of a Government • Myanmar Crisis Worsens • Indo-Pakistani Rapprochement? • BIMSTEC or What?

FROM FAR AND NEAR : REvIEw OF ThE wORLD

A recent nationwide representative survey has established the following indubitable facts:

• 44.3 ? percent of the people think that the country is moving in the wrong direction

• 63 ? percent say that they are not interested in politics

• 46.9 ? percent of the people do not trust what Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli says

• 51.7 ? percent are in favour of declaring [again] a Hindu State

[my Republica, March 30, 2021]

The survey was very representative and was demographically weighted on the basis of caste, ethnicity, educational and occupational status, household income, age group, as well as, rural, urban and city population. It seems that, in general, the people were very impressed with the workings of parliament. Thus, although 53.2 percent of the people said the country was headed in the wrong political direction after the parliament had been dissolved by Oli, that number declined to 44.8 percent after the Supreme Court verdict reinstating parliament on February

23.

The contributing factors for the country’s wrong political direction were cited as:

• 49.3 percent squarely blamed the political parties and their inter-and intra-party squabbles for the dire situation.

• 36.8 percent blamed the general political instability in the country.

• 27.4 percent attributed weak leadership in the country

• 23.4 percent considered endemic corruption

• 20.6 percent cited wrong policies. There is considerable trust deficit in Nepal’s so-called leaders. It is indeed astounding that a whopping 65.5 percent of the Nepalese people do not trust our political leaders at all! There is the general belief that they are constantly jockeying for power and prestige with the sole aim of achieving their ‘fair’ share of bhagbanda i.e. the spoils of office, whether they are in or out of power. They are considered an utterly corrupt breed.

In this ‘august’ constellation is also K.P. Sharma Oli, who, however, ‘only’ 46.9 percent distrust. This means that the trust deficit is less vis-à-vis Oli than with all other so-called leaders of all other political parties.

This is borne out of the fact that only a paltry 6 percent of the people have any faith in the political leaders in general, whereas Oli at least stands at nearly double, with 11.3 percent. All the other leaders wishing to topple Oli should, therefore, look in the mirror -- what they see could not be very encouraging or uplifting. But they do not care two hoots for the peoples’ feelings or aspirations. As long as they can line their pockets, they do not have a care in the world!

The fact of the matter is that for all his foibles, and compared to all his peers, Oli is well above the rest. Even if Sher Bahadur Deuba of the Nepali Congress manages to succeed Oli, things will not change for the better – it will just be Hobson’s choice! It will be the same with all others who attempt to govern the Himalayan Federal Democratic Republic (HFDR) with acute signs of system failure.

We need serious time to think things over and for that, a neutral, nonpolitical and technocratic government is in order. In the interregnum of about one-and-a-half years, the political parties will have time to bring their respective houses in order and put inner-party democracy into practice. Fresh general elections could be foreseen by an independent and temporary head of government such as the current Chief Justice, Cholendra Shumsher J.B. R. It would even be better if he would also be the temporary head of state!

Myanmar Crisis Deepens

Without mincing words, we can say that Myanmar/Burma is now experiencing a national revolution of liberation from military tyranny. Whereas liberty is still a work in progress, the common cause against brutal military dictatorship – the country’s ancient regime – has generated feelings of equality and fraternity among Burma’s diverse ethnic groups. What is terribly missing are signs of effective solidarity from the international community.

In the latest development, ten of Myanmar’s major rebel ethnic groups have thrown their support behind the country’s anti-coup/resistance/ liberation movement (AFP, April 2). According to some, this could fan fears that a broader conflict could erupt in a country plagued for decades by on-and-off fighting between the ruling military and the ethnic armies. But that is just the point: the existential political quarrel is now not only between the major Bamar ethnic group and the Bamardominated military, but now between the awakened Burmese people, more or less in its entirety, and the totalitarian military which wants to crush the whole Myanmar people, cost what it may.

As the eminent Burmese historian, Thant Myint-U succinctly stated: Myanmar needs "a new story that embraces its diversity, celebrates its natural environment, and aspires to a new way of life” [“The Hidden History of Burma: Race, Capitalism, and the Crisis of Democracy in the Twentyfirst Century, 2019].

More than 550 people have already been killed in the countrywide liberation unrest, the bloodshed that has angered most of Myanmar’s 20 plus ethnic groups and their militias, who control large swathes of territory mostly in border regions.

The Chin is concentrated in the northwest, the Kachin in the north, the Shan and Karen in the west and south, and the Mon in the south.

Last Saturday, 10 of these rebel groups met virtually to discuss the tense situation, condemning the junta’s use of lethal force on peaceful protesters. “The leaders of the military council must be held accountable,” said General Yawd Serk, leader of the rebel group, the “Restoration Council of Shan State.” He added: “I would like to state that the [10 groups] firmly stand with the people who are…demanding the end of dictatorship.”

Last week, a U.N. special envoy for Myanmar had warned the UN Security Council of the risk of civil war and an imminent “bloodbath.” The rebel groups’ meeting also comes a week after another one, the “Karen National Union” (KNU), seized a military base in eastern Karen state, killing 10 army officers. The junta retaliated with airstrikes. The KNU has been a vocal opponent of the military junta and said it is sheltering hundreds of resistance activists.

With the junta cutting wifi services, mobile data and imposing a nightly internet blackout that has gone on for nearly 50 days, information flow in the country has been effectively suppressed.

“This madness must stop,” UN rights rapporteur Tom Andrews said in a tweet, “Sanctions & an arms embargo must be imposed to cut their [junta’s] access to revenue and weapons.

Guns have fallen silent along the Line of Control (LoC), the de facto border that divides the Himalayan/ Karakorum region of Kashmir between India and Pakistan. This came about after the South Asian arch-rivals reaffirmed in February their ‘ancient’ 2003 cease-fire accord. This unexpected and astounding decision has prompted a thaw in the otherwise turbulent relations between the nuclear-armed neighbours – at daggers drawn since their joint independence from the British Raj in 1947 (Associated Press, April 2). The question is only how long the fragile peace will last between the two normally brawling neighbours. “Some sort of pressure, possibly from Washington and Beijing for different reasons, is pushing India and Pakistan for wider peace moves in the region,” according to Siddiq Wahid, historian and former vice-chancellor of the Islamic University of Science and Technology.

Beijing wants Pakistan to focus on securing its investments as part of the Belt & Road Initiative (BRI), a massive, cross-continental infrastructure development project aimed at expanding China’s economic interests globally. Islamabad is a key partner and some Chinese-built highways snake through Pakistancontrolled Kashmir.

The U.S., on the other hand, is courting India to focus its energies on countering China in the near region and beyond in the wider Indo-Pacific. Last week, Pakistan’s powerful army chief Gen. QamarJaved Bajwa said it was time for the two countries to “bury the past” and resolve the dispute over Kashmir peacefully. First of all, India and Pakistan will have to cease completely playing up rhetoric against each other. Otherwise, the solution to the Kashmir problem is quite simple. All three countries involved in the territorial dispute will have to recognize the current status quo not only as de facto but as de jure, i.e. recognize the Line of Control [between India and Pakistan] and the Line of Actual Control [LAC/ between India and China] as the international boundaries. In addition, India should again recognize the parts of Kashmir under its effective control as an Indian state with special status. Pakistan should desist from supporting Kashmiri separatists. This will be a win-win situation for all concerned, including the people of Kashmir since a separate, independent state comprising all the [disputed] units is only a pipe dream!

BIMSTEC Fails to Act on Myanmar

The 17th BIMSTEC ministerial meeting was held virtually at the beginning of the month. There was the usual

exchange of pleasantries and bland statements, but no forceful stand on the burning questions of the day, for instance, the terrible crisis in the member state Myanmar. Nepal’s Foreign Minister, Pradeep Kumar Gyawali [as well as his colleagues] completely avoided the question, but said that only a dynamic and resilient BIMSTEC can catalyze growth, spur innovation and propel development and prosperity.

He also underlined the need to make the 5th BIMSTEC Summit successful in furthering and deepening regional cooperation for the larger benefit of the region (my Republica, April 2). This will all go up in smoke since Myanmar is on the verge of economic collapse, and the member states are not willing or able to address an escalating humanitarian crisis.

The “Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical

and Economic Cooperation” (BIMSTEC) – an international organization of seven nations of South and South-East Asia – Bangladesh, India, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Nepal and Bhutan – clearly failed to meet an acute regional challenge!