Federalism based largely on ethnic grounds is a necessity for the 
marginalized Madhesis and Janjatis to feel secure in the country

The most unfortunate scenario for a budding democracy is for its leaders not to respect election results. The Maoists flirted with this idea for a while, but they now appear to have accepted the result. These are encouraging signs.

The UCPN (Maoist) did not have any issue with the election until the counting began. Only when they realized that they were performing way below their expectation, they cried fraud! 

There are no compelling reasons to believe there was fraud. But there are plausible explanations on why the Maoists didn’t perform well. One, they were already weak—a significant portion led by an important leader did not participate. Two, they were the ones to bear the brunt of the anti-incumbency effect that is so common in developing countries. Three, their ethnic model for the federalism cost them votes. It’s no secret that the ethnic-model that they dreamt in the jungle, and supported in the first CA, was unpopular among the Nepali-speaking population—particularly the upper castes. 

When this group realized that ethnic federalism might actually happen, they decided to make their voices heard. Attenuating this problem was that many who were in support of ethnic federalism were not allowed to vote because of the new rules of requiring a citizenship card. It is reasonable to argue that among those that don’t have an identity card, a greater portion is comprised of Madhesis and Janajatis, particularly the poor ones—all of whom benefit from ethno-lingual federalism. This partly explains the high participation, and the rise of UML, the main party that opposes an ethnic model of federalism, and does not want to empower the Madhesis and Janjatis. 

The real battle
It is impossible to know which of these reasons played the most important role in the rise of the status-quo. It is also unimportant at this stage. The Maoists should accept the results with grace, and blame themselves for their failure. Ditto with the Madhesis—their reasons for failure are similar. 

Moving on, they need to strategize how to make their voices heard in the assembly, and put their fingerprints on the new constitution. 

Whether the new CA will be able to draft the constitution successfully now rests upon NC and UML. Together, they are close to the two-third majority—so in theory, they could align with the RPPs and draft the constitution, all by themselves. These two parties are the architects of the 1990 constitution and they might want to draft a similar constitution.

The real battle is going to be again on the federalism issue.  Federalism based largely on ethnic grounds is a necessity for the Madhesis and Janjatis to feel secure that they will not be oppressed in the future. But the chances of a federalism structure based largely on ethnic grounds have obviously slimmed. This is a huge setback for the Madhesis and Janjatis, particularly the younger generation, who want to get equal recognition in Nepal, preserve their culture, and have the power to drive the economic policies in their areas. This can have repercussions on their income, lifestyle and life expectancy.

In fact, federalism itself is in danger. True, none of the major parties say they are against federalism. But it is possible that the old guard wants pseudo-federalism, not one that has regional governments with a lot of power. 

If NC and UML push their agenda too far, it might backfire, just as it did for the Maoists and Madhesis. 

Onus on Maoists 
NC and UML need to realize that just like they sank the old CA, the Maoists and Madhesis have the ability to do so this time around—not by being uncooperative in the CA, but mainly by street protests. If NC and UML do not give due space to the Madhesis and Janjatis, including federalism largely along ethnic lines, it is going to be difficult, if not impossible to draft a constitution. The Janjatis and Madhesis are the majority in the country. They are not well organized politically today because of the historical traditions of Nepal, but they will one day, and when they do, they will become a formidable force, and will want to be recognized.

In the present context, the destiny of Madhesis and Janajatis really lies in the hands of the Maoists.  They are the only power who can successfully organize protests to make sure that the future system is designed in a way that Madhesis and Janajatis get a proper say in the governance of Nepal. Those Madhesis and Janjatis in UML, NC and RPP are conflicted to begin with, and it is unrealistic to expect them to fight for ethnic federalism.  The Madhesi parties are too weak and fragmented to have any proper say.

It is unclear if the Maoists will decide to take up genuine federalism, and the inclusivity agenda. But let us hope that Maoists take leadership on the issue of federalism— fight for the rights of Madhesis and Janjatis, and that NC and UML listen to them. Otherwise, we might end up with another CA election in the future; or a Nepal where more than fifty percent of the residents have little voice in their future.

From Republica, December 9, 2013

 
• ethnic
 
• federalism