मधेश्वनी इस्सुए

लेट गजेन्द्र नारायण सिंह

न्यू issue madheshvani

Constituent Assembly Election and Madhesh Turmoil

By Bindu Chaudhary

The Madhesi movement has reminded us of the need to take a critical look at dealing with the problem of intolerance and ethnic prejudice that has for centuries plagued the nation.

People of Nepal are, for the first time in history, going to draft a new constitution themselves through the Constitutional Assembly. This is certainly a landmark victory that has granted Nepalese their sovereign power to address the people’s aspirations and institutionalize the achievements of the popular movement.
It is a well known fact that even after the success of the 1990 people’s movement (Janandolan I), the political parties chose to ignore the rights of the oppressed nationalities including the Madheshis, reflected by the discriminatory provisions in the 1990 Constitution of Nepal. Again, the CPN-Maoists had promised federal state in MBindu Chaudharyadhesh, rights to self determination and many other assurances during their decade old revolution, and similar promises were made by the leaders of all other political parties following the 2006 April Revolution (Janandolan II). However, the interim constitution they promulgated reflected that their promises were merely to deceive Madheshis as it paid no attention to their representation in the decision-making body of the State - the ground that paved the way for the Madheshi movement (now called the Janandolan III).
Madheshis have been pressing for rights based constitution, which envisions constitution as a mechanism for entrenching and protecting individuals’ rights. As bona fide citizens of Nepal, Madheshis are the rights-bearers who are justified to claim their rights for constitutional participation on the basis of the right that they hold as individuals and on the basis of collective rights of an ethnic group. Getting a constitutional foothold and constitutional recognition will not only give Madheshis a sense of ‘inclusion’ and ‘self-esteem’, but constitutionalizing rights will also help the government comprehend that the Terai, which contains 49% of Nepal’s 26 million population, 23% land area and 20 of the 75 districts, belongs to Nepal as much as the Madheshis- it can’t be one and not the other.
The issue therefore relates to a movement against the state’s discriminatory politics, a fight for recognition of rights, and a struggle for equal representation and opportunity. The Madheshis are demanding nothing much but their rights of human worth and dignity, which they think can fairly be achieved by the right to self-determination; proportional representation in the constituent assembly; restructuring the constituencies based on population; federal system with regional autonomy; and elimination of all forms of discrimination practiced by the state mechanism.
Thanks to the unity expressed by Nepalese around the globe, and thanks to the international support, the movement has been successful in maintaining its momentum- sparking wide public attention and concerns about the lack of respect for equality of human beings and the violation of human rights through the plethora of racially discriminatory policies and practices.
The domestic front
Madheshis could not pin their faith in the Prime Minister’s first address to the nation on January 31st which was an attempt to mislead Madheshis by promising that the Constitution Assembly elections would address the Madheshi demands. On Feb 7, the Prime Minister had to address the nation again, in which he announced federal system of governance, increase electoral constituencies based on population growth and increase the number of seats for election to be held on the basis of proportional representation.
The interim constitution was amended twice within a few months of its promulgation, but failed to accommodate the demands raised by the Madheshis. In the same tune, the government made some headway by inviting Upendra Yadav led MJF for talks, but with the stipulated pre-conditions, the five rounds of talks remained inconclusive. Nevertheless, as it is said, “Rome was not built in a day”, thanks to the perseverance and firmness of the MJF, the sixth round of talk held with the government team led by Peace and Reconstruction Minister Ram Chandra Poudel on August 30 marked jubilation amongst the Madheshis.
The Government-MJF ultimately reached a 22-point agreement, which includes compensation to those killed during the Terai movement, guarantee of inclusion of Madheshis and other marginalized groups in the constituent assembly, autonomy to the states in the federal system to be designed by the constituent assembly, among others. The MJF similarly agreed to the constitutional provision of mixed electoral system for the upcoming constituent assembly election and announced withdrawal of all the agitation programs, stating that his party can now concentrate on its election campaign. The MJF has gained positive credibility in due course of the movement and has been elevated as a powerful political force in the country.
On the other front, the CPN (Maoist) has raised serious objection to the 22-point agreement between the Government and the MJF, stating that the agreement is a conspiracy inspired by the ‘divide and rule’ theory of the Government, and that it only added fuel to the Madhesh fire. Further, they have also called for the postponement of CA polls, and have threatened to launch a nationwide agitation if their demands, including declaration of Nepal a republic and removal of Army from the royal palace, are not met before the CA polls.
Security scenario is not that encouraging as more and more groups are emerging such as Janatantrik Terai Mukti Morcha (Goit), JTMM (Jwala Singh), JTMM (Bishfot Singh), Madheshi Mukti Morcha, Madheshi Tiger, Terai Cobra Group, Madhesh Mukti Force, Terai Tiger, Terai Army, AASK Group, Tharu Mukti Morcha, Chure Bhawar Pradesh Ekta Samaj, Janajati Mahasangh, TM Don Group, Young Communist League etc., and many of them with militant characteristics are doing their best to strengthen their positions as new armed groups in Terai. In addition, the independent media in Terai faces hurdles in reporting, publication and distribution of newspapers. The situation is bad and getting worse.
The International front
Amid these, one thing that has remained most encouraging is the unity expressed by Madheshis around the globe. Following the movement, the media has been overwhelmed with news and views on Madheshi movement; there have been discussions and debates on the peaceful resolution of Madhesh issue; the Nepalese Diaspora have channelled possible resources, supports and encouragements to the victims and the survivors of the Janandolan III… in short, the number of Nepalese, including Madheshis and the concerned Pahadis who are working nationally and internationally, from micro to macro level, and through individual and organizational efforts trying to help Madheshis get their share of pie, is simply exemplary.
There has been intense pressure from the UN Human Rights Organizations and other International bodies on the government to play an active role in combating prejudice against the Madheshis and to hand over their rights. They have been impartial and have voiced out against illegal detentions, police brutalities and against biased reports even at times when most of the civil societies and Nepali Human Rights organizations had acted indifferent.
Nepal has already received support and words of assistance from India, United States, European Union, United Nations and other countries to conduct the election on time, in a free and fair manner and to get maximum, informed participation from the voters. They have emphasized that the legitimacy of the Nepal Government and the parties would be questioned if the election is deferred again.
The United Nations Electoral Expert Monitoring Team (EEMT) has emphasized on the need to improve the security situation in the country and has stressed on the need for cooperation among political parties to create adequate election climate and to expect free and fair election.
What Next?
It’s no use crying over the spilt milk. The present priority should be the formation of an inclusive and representative assembly to draft a right-based constitution as per the mandate of the movement. The government should mobilize the support of national and international communities including the United Nations, to ensure a timely, peaceful, free and fair CA election, the only available non-violent approach to help achieve lasting peace and consolidation of democracy in the country.
The electoral seats for CA election are 497, of which 240 would be elected directly, 240 by proportional election, and 17 would be nominated. Presuming that the election is held fairly under the mixed system, 164 Madheshi people would be represented including 38 women. For Madheshis, this could be an opportunity to collectively voice their opinions and democratically convince other CA members to address the issue of inclusion. Whereas, for the major political parties such as NC, UML, CPN-Maoists and NC (D), it might mean having to lose many seats in the CA election which they have been enjoying in the restored parliament.
The date for the CA election, which has already been postponed twice, is now fixed for 22 November. Nonetheless, owing to (i) the fear and insecurity of the political parties; (ii) the Maoists’ insistence of taking part in the election only if they are guaranteed with some safe seats, or manoeuvring to put off the November elections for CA till mid-April next year, or owing to (iii) the deteriorating law and order situation in the country, particularly the Terai region, there are doubts in the minds of many that if at all it would be possible to hold the election at the stipulated time and secondly, if the election could be held in a free and fair manner.
The ambiguity amongst people is legitimate in the absence of a favourable election climate when the election date is just a few weeks away. If the government is determined about the election date, which seems to be true until now, the ruling political parties need to issue a joint public statement expressing their unified commitment for conducting a timely election. They also have an important task of concentrating on issues like security, management of cantonments and spreading themselves out to the villages and towns to interact with people about the CA polls, encourage them to participate in the historic exercise and discuss with them about their election manifestos so that people have a perception of the state of things and are able to make informed decisions.
Furthermore, since CA election is going to be held for the first time in the history of Nepal, and the fact that there is very low level of understanding among the people about the mixed electoral system, the Election Commission, as part of its preparation for the CA polls, should also focus equally on making people aware and sensitized about the concept, process, and modalities of the electoral system and the technicality involved in the voting process.
One of the important requisites for holding a free, fair, peaceful and impartial election is a reliable, conducive and credible security arrangement. However, the irony is that the Maoist-affiliated Young Communist League (YCL), which is widely involved in terrorizing people, is likely to provide security for the CA election owing to tremendous pressure from Maoists. Besides the YCL, the government aims to recruit 80,000 temporary security personnel to create a secured environment for the election, while neglecting about the same number of well trained, equipped, experienced and readily available national army. The security arrangement seems to be in need of reassessment to ensure maximum voter participation who will feel free, secured and fearless to go to polling booths to cast their votes.
Last but not the least, the importance of peace journalism in the contemporary world, in particular at the time of internal conflict in Nepal need not be over-exaggerated. The Nepali media has been biased in tone, depiction and revelation while highlighting the unfolding events of the movement, many at times disregarding the Code of Conduct for Journalists. The reporters should understand that the decisions journalists make and the way conflicts are covered, or how they juxtapose and contextualize the conflict or what they choose to report or omit tends inescapably to contribute either towards the momentum of war or towards the momentum of peace. At this crucial juncture where Nepal is trying to get a face-lift, the media, being an important pillar of democracy, should play a crucial role in creating conducive atmosphere for polls by promoting favourable people’s opinion and enabling them to participate in the CA process in an informed and active way by communicating clear, comprehensive and accurate information to people in all parts of the country, including Himal, Pahad, and the Terai.
The Madhesi movement has reminded us of the need to take a critical look at dealing with the problem of intolerance and ethnic prejudice that has for centuries plagued the nation. The structural discrimination can have solution only through systemic reform guided by the principalities of equality, integration, representation and redistribution. Madheshis should find a meaningful participation in the Constituent Assembly and in all other aspects of peace-building and democratic transition. The ‘hegemonic control’ of the age-old ideology of domination of one caste, one language, one culture, one colour, one region, one religion… can and has to change to include and promote multi-ethnic, multi-lingual, and multi socio-cultural Nepal.
(Presented at the Nepalese Association in Southeast America (NASeA) and Association of Nepalese in Midwest America (ANMA) Joint Convention, September 1 to 3, 2007, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.)
(The Author is a Social Worker (M.S.W.) and a Journalist for Human Rights and can be reached at binduc@gmail.com)

India welcomes Nepal's decision to meet demands of Madhesis

India on Friday welcomed Nepal government's decision to meet demands of the Madhesi population and hoped that such issues would continue to be resolved through dialogue and negotiations.
New Delhi said it stands ready, as always, to extend its full support to the efforts of the government and people of Nepal in the ongoing process of democratic transition in which "significant milestones" have already been achieved.
"We welcome Prime Minister G P Koirala's address to the Nepalese nation on Wednesday, addressing the demands of the Madhesi population of the country and the fact that the address reflects a consensus among the eight political parties," External Affairs Ministry spokesman Navtej Sarna said in New Delhi.
The reaction came after Koirala announced that all major political parties, including the Maoists, have unanimously agreed to declare the nation a federal state, meeting the key demand of the protesting Madhesis of Terai region.
In his address to the nation, Koirala said the government will immediately amend the Constitution to fulfill the genuine demands of the Terai people.
Terai has been witnessing widespread violent protests over the last few weeks over this demand.
"We are saddened by the loss of lives and violence in Terai in the last few weeks. It is our hope that the government and the friendly people of Nepal will continue to resolve such issues through dialogue and peaceful negotiations," Sarna said.

Madheshi Movement in Defense of Democracy

Madheshi Movement in Defense of Democracy
and Madheshi Nationalism

Sarita GIRI

Madheshi movement has forced the politics of the country towards a new direction. The
dynamics generated by the movement have been so powerful that it has compelled the eight
parties to accept the need of amending the interim constitution within thirty-five days of its promulgation. The step itself is admittance of the fact that political negotiations concluded
earlier are flawed and inadequate. Earlier the dominant political elites chose to call it a regressive movement. Later on, they called it unforeseen and unexpected. But that does not
entail the truth.

The Madheshi movement is neither unexpected, nor unforeseen nor regressive. It is very much in defense of democracy and Madheshi nationalism. It is for the political acknowledgment of Madheshi nationalism within the widely divergent Nepali nationalism.The movement is as old as the democratic movement in this country. But till now the movement has been defined as an ethnic movement and the intrinsic nationalist aspirations of Madheshis have never been emphasized. But the way the movement is enduring against all odds, speaks loudly of the deeper meanings and emotional values that Madheshi people are willing to assign to the movement. It is due to Madheshi’s nationalist aspirations that an assurance of enhanced representation for Madhesh on the basis of population increase is not able to arrest or stop the movement.The seeds of the movement had been sown in the year 2008 when Tarai congress was formed within Nepali congress. The development at that stage made obvious the discriminatory and domineering tendencies of the hill elites towards Madheshi elites in apolitical party. The current madheshi movement has made obvious again the same domineering, exclusionary and subordinating attitudes prevailing against madheshis in almost all mainstream hill- centric political parties. Consequently, for the first time in the history of Nepal an autonomous Madheshi movement has emerged from within the people. Thus, a careful analysis of the movement is essential.
The movement is essentially a nationalist movement and it embodies deep cry for political acknowledgement of Madheshi’s identity and culture and political equality. It embodies goals of the creation of a new inclusive nation-state and democratization of politics. In the past, the process of democratization has always been thwarted by dominant hill elites to maintain their relentless political grip over the image and reality of the Nation. That in turn has made both democracy and nation building, failed projects in Nepal.
I intend to argue that the success of democracy and nation building will depend very much upon the successful conclusion of the ongoing Madheshi movement. I would also argue that the hill elites, of varying beliefs and ideology across the political spectrum have failed in institutionalizing democracy in the country so far not merely because of their exclusionary nationalist project but also because of other specific trends and tendencies associated with their origin, life circumstances and resulting psyche. I would propose that madheshi perspectives provide the best solution for crises of democracy and nation building in this country from political as well as economic angle. Adoption of federal principle for restructuring of the state is the first essential step in the direction.
Democracy as a political system can never survive for long if psychological, economic and cultural elements are not conducive and political structures not proper. The failure of democracy in Nepal so far is failure of hill perspective and hill psyche altogether. The hill people are mostly familiar with subsistence mode of life. They have never enough in the hills to support their lives and dreams. The culture of war making and migration is a consequence of that. They lack skills of entrepreneurship in lack of surplus in the hills. In lack of surplus, labour has not much meaning in the hills. Thus the labor in the hills gets its value either by migrating or by joining warfare. Consequently, the hill people lack basic aptitude and attributes for capitalist development by nature.
Their sense of nationalism is also disjointed because their attachment with their place of birth is emotional rather than both material and emotional. They understand that their space of origin would not provide them enough to fulfill common human aspirations. Colonization of the Madhesh and strangulation of madheshi identity became essential.Exclusionary nationalism became the foundation of Modern Nepali state. Even the democratic hill elites founded democracy on the foundation of Gorakhali nationalism. Before the advent of democracy, the designs of Shahas and Ranas for Nepali state have been imperialistic and feudalistic in nature. The political elites after 1990 have further built on that.People in Nepal have experience of very limited democracy so far even in democratic rule.Thus, the country suffers from three types of hegemonic traits: exclusionary nationalism,colonialism and feudalism. Consequently, seizure of power in Kathmandu and control of land in madhesh have remained indispensable for the emerging hill elites from 1950 onwards.While the seizure of state power provided the base for political nationalism, the colonization of Madhesh provided the economic base for reinforcing hill centric rule of the country. Thus from the very beginning, Madhesh has been placed at the service of the hills. And still democracy led by hill elites had not able to work. According to democratic hill elites, the king has remained the main obstacle for democracy. But the explanation is not adequate. In the new scenario, the leaders of different political parties and the king found themselves as rivals but the hill nationalism is the common interest that bound them together. Also at times, when rivalries among them for power become very intense, they do not lose sight of this very vital interest. The hill democratic elites have not abstained from making the king active and authoritarian when they have perceived a threat to hill nationalism or when things had gone beyond that control. They have done so on occasions in the past when rivalry among them for power had become very intense. Not surprisingly, power in the past has kept shuttling among the hill political elites including the king even in democracy. But the commonality of interest has kept the old network and old politics has remained intact throughout. Even today some parties are eager to keep the king as the lion in the cage who should be freed to wander and hunt for prey in most arbitrary and authoritarian manner, but should be brought back into the cage when mission is accomplished. The most ironical or interesting part of the design is that the lion will be made to blame for all the mischievous deeds without responsibility and will be caged and guarded by the same elites against any harm. “The king must live on despite of everything and anything” in the design of semi democratic hill elite.
Therefore, from 1950 onwards, Nepal has democratic version of old Bharadari politics rather
than genuine democratic politics where king also has been a key player but with tacit consent
of other elites.
Not much has seemingly changed after Jan Andolan II. The same dynamics of political game are still active. Nepali people are worst affected by such games played in the name of democracy as such political games thwarts the power to go to the people in real terms. And large section of hill elites do not intend the power to go to people in real terms as that would damage the prospects of maneuvering and brokerage in the realm of power. Thus the institution of monarchy is indispensable for them. They need monarchy to keep in place the conspiracy theories as that shield them from accepting responsibilities for wrongs done by themselves. The traditional hill elites would like to throw the King only when they would believe that they would be the ultimate winner in this country of diverse nationalities. The emerging madheshi and janajati movement for democratization and assorted Nepali nationalism could be such a threat to them. So one should not be surprised if the democratic exercise of constituent assembly election will be suspended in the face of emerging new political movements. Though the king and darbariyas will be blamed in the name of conspiracy theory but such an act will serve the common interest of all the hill elites and of those madheshis who are co opted by them. The madheshi movement has emerged as the most serious challenge to all traditional hegemonic interest. After the emergence of the modern centralized state, the hill elites, through the control of state power are virtually in control of natural resources such as forest and water resources. But they have badly failed in managing these resources for economic development. It is basically because of their “capture and seizure” mentality in the realm of governance. Because they fear that development of water resources and loosening of control over forest to local political units would empower madhesh and madheshi, the development of water resources is suspended. In this scenario, near absolute dependency upon foreign aid to run the state is a need of the Hill elites.

In case of land, they have faced resistance of Madheshis from the very beginning. The rise of communist movement led by hill elites is a response to that. Regarding landholding congress has not been much different from the communist parties. Madheshi jeemidars or landlords participated in the political revolution led by Nepali congress in 2007 because they wanted to get rid of Rana's autocratic control over land in Madhesh. It was essentially a bourgeoisie revolution as its success paved the way for having private property in land for the first time in Nepal. But the success of the revolution did not bring freedom and power to them. B. P. Koirala wanted to pursue radical land reform program along the principles of democratic socialism. His targeted was the land in madhesh and the madhesi elites. His whole idea was to institutionalize peasant economy in Madhesh as in the hills. Madheshi elites asked the question that was B.P. willing to have=the same egalitarian approach for sharing of political power? The answer was a big no. Thus, Tarai congress was formed within Nepali congress in form of protest. Land is the base of existence of Madhesis in Nepal. Because of their bonds with land, Madheshis are more nationalist than any other hill group. It is not only emotional as in case of hill people but also material as the land only has provided sustenance and nourishment to larger mass of madheshis of any class against all sorts of onslaught of the state. When B.P was keen on pursuing radical land reform, the madheshi elites were disgruntled. King Mahendra and his allies understood the discontent and capitalized on that. The royal coup was by and large unopposed in the Madhesh. But after imposing his absolute rule he initiated land reform programs that would essentially weaken the madheshi elites. King Mahendra himself was not sympathetic to the Madheshi elites, as he had become aware of rebellion potential of madheshi elites in 2007 revolution. His inner attitudes towards them were essentially not different from democratic hill elites. He used land reform and citizenship act to weaken and alienated all madheshis. Most of the land seized by the state has either been given to hill migrants known as sukumbasi or are with the state.Madheshi landless people were not identified by the state. The dual ownership ofland wasanother severe blow to the productive capacity of agricultural land. Because ofdualownership, people stopped investing in agriculture. Land disputes arose dramatically. The
citizenship acts barred huge number of Madheshi peasants and tenants to claim for land rights in the new regime. Over period of time agricultural farms in Madhesh gradually turned out to be a means of subsistence rather than surplus product A country which has been food exporter earlier became a net importer. Population as well aspoverty increased because of wrong land management policies. Land reform program in the past has served no other purposes (such as industrialization or economic growth) than weakening the Madheshis and strangulating Madhesh.
The worsening economic situation within the country and waves of democracy in Eastern Europe towards 1990 brought political awakening in favor of democracy in the country in 1990. As a consequence of 1990 movement Communists (led by hill elites) emerged as a formidable new force. Revolutionary land reform agenda has been now their political agenda. But it would be naive to say that it was no more the agenda of Nepali Congress.Prime -minister Sher Bahadur Deuba has agreed to reduce the ceiling to 4 to 5 bighas from 11 bighas in Madhesh. It was due to the movement led by Nepal Sadbhawana Party and supported by madheshi elites across parties that the government dropped its agenda.
And now in 2007 they are the Maoists who have designed to march ahead with their agenda of revolutionary land reform. It has explicitly been mentioned in the Interim Constitution. This time too, Nepal Sadbhawan Party (Anandi Devi) has written note of dissent against the revolutionary land reform program. The aim behind such an agenda is obviously to enhance the control of hill centric state over madhesh. This is the context against, which the current Madheshi movement and its demands of republicanism, autonomy, self-determination and federalism should be understood. It is false to call the present resistance movement merely as regressive movement. Madhesi movement has brought forth some of the essential traits of Madhesh.
Madhesh because of its land, culture, agricultural economy, and entrepreneurship skills has been able to contain all forms of extremism, be it that of the king or of any political ideology. And that is something that provides the best possibilities for success of democracy in Nepal, in case of madhesh is integrated on the basis of equality in the New Nepal. But the prior condition would be that madheshi are given political power on equal basis.
The concept of class struggle or class conflict will not have much appeal for madheshisas long as their nationality is not acknowledged within the new political framework. Madheshis participated in large number in the Maosit movemet not merely due to class appeal but because the movement gave them new hope for emancipation and equality. The large chunk of cadres and leaders of Janatantrik Tarai Mukti Morcha and Madheshi Janadhikar Forum have had linkages with Nepal Communist Party (Maoist). Madheshis are not willing to surrender their national struggle for the sake of class interest. It is the call of nationalism which is bringing all madheshis together. A correct approach towards the movement will keep the country intact and pave way for economic development and sustainable democracy. A wrong or biased approach might lead the country towards bloody ethnic conflict.

Madheshi Movement in Defense of Democracy

Madheshi Movement in Defense of Democracy
and Madheshi Nationalism

Sarita GIRI

Madheshi movement has forced the politics of the country towards a new direction. The
dynamics generated by the movement have been so powerful that it has compelled the eight
parties to accept the need of amending the interim constitution within thirty-five days of its
promulgation. The step itself is admittance of the fact that political negotiations concluded
earlier are flawed and inadequate. Earlier the dominant political elites chose to call it a
regressive movement. Later on, they called it unforeseen and unexpected. But that does not
entail the truth.

The Madheshi movement is neither unexpected, nor unforeseen nor regressive. It is very
much in defense of democracy and Madheshi nationalism. It is for the political
acknowledgment of Madheshi nationalism within the widely divergent Nepali nationalism.
The movement is as old as the democratic movement in this country. But till now the
movement has been defined as an ethnic movement and the intrinsic nationalist aspirations
of Madheshis have never been emphasized. But the way the movement is enduring against
all odds, speaks loudly of the deeper meanings and emotional values that Madheshi people
are willing to assign to the movement. It is due to Madheshi’s nationalist aspirations that an
assurance of enhanced representation for Madhesh on the basis of population increase is
not able to arrest or stop the movement.
The seeds of the movement had been sown in the year 2008 when Tarai congress was
formed within Nepali congress. The development at that stage made obvious the
discriminatory and domineering tendencies of the hill elites towards Madheshi elites in
apolitical party. The current madheshi movement has made obvious again the same
domineering, exclusionary and subordinating attitudes prevailing against madheshis in
almost all mainstream hill- centric political parties. Consequently, for the first time in the
history of Nepal an autonomous Madheshi movement has emerged from within the people.
Thus, a careful analysis of the movement is essential.
The movement is essentially a nationalist movement and it embodies deep cry for political
acknowledgement of Madheshi’s identity and culture and political equality. It embodies goals
of the creation of a new inclusive nation-state and democratization of politics. In the past, the
process of democratization has always been thwarted by dominant hill elites to maintain their
relentless political grip over the image and reality of the Nation. That in turn has made both
democracy and nation building, failed projects in Nepal.
I intend to argue that the success of democracy and nation building will depend very much
upon the successful conclusion of the ongoing Madheshi movement. I would also argue that
the hill elites, of varying beliefs and ideology across the political spectrum have failed in
institutionalizing democracy in the country so far not merely because of their exclusionary
nationalist project but also because of other specific trends and tendencies associated with
their origin, life circumstances and resulting psyche. I would propose that madheshi
perspectives provide the best solution for crises of democracy and nation building in this
country from political as well as economic angle. Adoption of federal principle for
restructuring of the state is the first essential step in the direction.
Democracy as a political system can never survive for long if psychological, economic and
cultural elements are not conducive and political structures not proper. The failure of
democracy in Nepal so far is failure of hill perspective and hill psyche altogether. The hill
people are mostly familiar with subsistence mode of life. They have never enough in the hills
to support their lives and dreams. The culture of war making and migration is a consequence
of that. They lack skills of entrepreneurship in lack of surplus in the hills. In lack of surplus,
labour has not much meaning in the hills. Thus the labor in the hills gets its value either by
migrating or by joining warfare. Consequently, the hill people lack basic aptitude and
attributes for capitalist development by nature.
Their sense of nationalism is also disjointed because their attachment with their place of birth
is emotional rather than both material and emotional. They understand that their space of
origin would not provide them enough to fulfill common human aspirations.
Colonization of the Madhesh and strangulation of madheshi identity became essential.
Exclusionary nationalism became the foundation of Modern Nepali state. Even the
democratic hill elites founded democracy on the foundation of Gorakhali nationalism. Before
the advent of democracy, the designs of Shahas and Ranas for Nepali state have been
imperialistic and feudalistic in nature. The political elites after 1990 have further built on that.
People in Nepal have experience of very limited democracy so far even in democratic rule.
Thus, the country suffers from three types of hegemonic traits: exclusionary nationalism,
colonialism and feudalism. Consequently, seizure of power in Kathmandu and control of land
in madhesh have remained indispensable for the emerging hill elites from 1950 onwards.
While the seizure of state power provided the base for political nationalism, the colonization
of Madhesh provided the economic base for reinforcing hill centric rule of the country. Thus
from the very beginning, Madhesh has been placed at the service of the hills. And still
democracy led by hill elites had not able to work. According to democratic hill elites, the king
has remained the main obstacle for democracy. But the explanation is not adequate. In the
new scenario, the leaders of different political parties and the king found themselves as rivals
but the hill nationalism is the common interest that bound them together. Also at times, when
rivalries among them for power become very intense, they do not lose sight of this very vital
interest. The hill democratic elites have not abstained from making the king active and
authoritarian when they have perceived a threat to hill nationalism or when things had gone
beyond that control. They have done so on occasions in the past when rivalry among them
for power had become very intense. Not surprisingly, power in the past has kept shuttling
among the hill political elites including the king even in democracy. But the commonality of
interest has kept the old network and old politics has remained intact throughout. Even today
some parties are eager to keep the king as the lion in the cage who should be freed to
wander and hunt for prey in most arbitrary and authoritarian manner, but should be brought
back into the cage when mission is accomplished. The most ironical or interesting part of the
design is that the lion will be made to blame for all the mischievous deeds without
responsibility and will be caged and guarded by the same elites against any harm. “The king
must live on despite of everything and anything” in the design of semi democratic hill elite.
Therefore, from 1950 onwards, Nepal has democratic version of old Bharadari politics rather
than genuine democratic politics where king also has been a key player but with tacit consent
of other elites.
Not much has seemingly changed after Jan Andolan II. The same dynamics of political game
are still active. Nepali people are worst affected by such games played in the name of
democracy as such political games thwarts the power to go to the people in real terms. And
large section of hill elites do not intend the power to go to people in real terms as that would
damage the prospects of maneuvering and brokerage in the realm of power. Thus the
institution of monarchy is indispensable for them. They need monarchy to keep in place the
conspiracy theories as that shield them from accepting responsibilities for wrongs done by
themselves. The traditional hill elites would like to throw the King only when they would
believe that they would be the ultimate winner in this country of diverse nationalities.
The emerging madheshi and janajati movement for democratization and assorted Nepali
nationalism could be such a threat to them. So one should not be surprised if the democratic
exercise of constituent assembly election will be suspended in the face of emerging new
political movements. Though the king and darbariyas will be blamed in the name of
conspiracy theory but such an act will serve the common interest of all the hill elites and of
those madheshis who are co opted by them. The madheshi movement has emerged as the
most serious challenge to all traditional hegemonic interest. After the emergence of the
modern centralized state, the hill elites, through the control of state power are virtually in
control of natural resources such as forest and water resources. But they have badly failed in
managing these resources for economic development. It is basically because of their
“capture and seizure” mentality in the realm of governance. Because they fear that
development of water resources and loosening of control over forest to local political units
would empower madhesh and madheshi, the development of water resources is suspended.
In this scenario, near absolute dependency upon foreign aid to run the state is a need of the
Hill elites.
In case of land, they have faced resistance of Madheshis from the very beginning. The rise of
communist movement led by hill elites is a response to that. Regarding landholding congress
has not been much different from the communist parties. Madheshi jeemidars or landlords
participated in the political revolution led by Nepali congress in 2007 because they wanted to
get rid of Rana's autocratic control over land in Madhesh. It was essentially a bourgeoisie
revolution as its success paved the way for having private property in land for the first time in
Nepal. But the success of the revolution did not bring freedom and power to them. B. P.
Koirala wanted to pursue radical land reform program along the principles of democratic
socialism. His targeted was the land in madhesh and the madhesi elites. His whole idea was
to institutionalize peasant economy in Madhesh as in the hills. Madheshi elites asked the
question that was B.P. willing to have=the same egalitarian approach for sharing of political
power? The answer was a big no. Thus, Tarai congress was formed within Nepali congress
in form of protest. Land is the base of existence of Madhesis in Nepal. Because of their
bonds with land, Madheshis are more nationalist than any other hill group. It is not only
emotional as in case of hill people but also material as the land only has provided
sustenance and nourishment to larger mass of madheshis of any class against all sorts of
onslaught of the state. When B.P was keen on pursuing radical land reform, the madheshi
elites were disgruntled. King Mahendra and his allies understood the discontent and
capitalized on that. The royal coup was by and large unopposed in the Madhesh. But after
imposing his absolute rule he initiated land reform programs that would essentially weaken
the madheshi elites. King Mahendra himself was not sympathetic to the Madheshi elites, as
he had become aware of rebellion potential of madheshi elites in 2007 revolution. His inner
attitudes towards them were essentially not different from democratic hill elites. He used land
reform and citizenship act to weaken and alienated all madheshis. Most of the land seized by
the state has either been given to hill migrants known as sukumbasi or are with the state.
Madheshi landless people were not identified by the state. The dual ownership ofland was
another severe blow to the productive capacity of agricultural land. Because ofdual
ownership, people stopped investing in agriculture. Land disputes arose dramatically. The
citizenship acts barred huge number of Madheshi peasants and tenants to claim for land
rights in the new regime. Over period of time agricultural farms in Madhesh gradually turned
out to be a means of subsistence rather than surplus product
A country which has been food exporter earlier became a net importer. Population as well as
poverty increased because of wrong land management policies. Land reform program in the
past has served no other purposes (such as industrialization or economic growth) than
weakening the Madheshis and strangulating Madhesh.
The worsening economic situation within the country and waves of democracy in Eastern
Europe towards 1990 brought political awakening in favor of democracy in the country in
1990. As a consequence of 1990 movement Communists (led by hill elites) emerged as a
formidable new force. Revolutionary land reform agenda has been now their political agenda.
But it would be naive to say that it was no more the agenda of Nepali Congress.Prime -
minister Sher Bahadur Deuba has agreed to reduce the ceiling to 4 to 5 bighas from 11
bighas in Madhesh. It was due to the movement led by Nepal Sadbhawana Party and
supported by madheshi elites across parties that the government dropped its agenda.
And now in 2007 they are the Maoists who have designed to march ahead with their agenda
of revolutionary land reform. It has explicitly been mentioned in the Interim Constitution. This
time too, Nepal Sadbhawan Party (Anandi Devi) has written note of dissent against the
revolutionary land reform program. The aim behind such an agenda is obviously to enhance
the control of hill centric state over madhesh. This is the context against, which the current
Madheshi movement and its demands of republicanism, autonomy, self-determination and
federalism should be understood. It is false to call the present resistance movement merely
as regressive movement. Madhesi movement has brought forth some of the essential traits
of Madhesh.
Madhesh because of its land, culture, agricultural economy, and entrepreneurship skills has
been able to contain all forms of extremism, be it that of the king or of any political ideology.
And that is something that provides the best possibilities for success of democracy in Nepal,
in case of madhesh is integrated on the basis of equality in the New Nepal. But the prior
condition would be that madheshi are given political power on equal basis.
The concept of class struggle or class conflict will not have much appeal for madheshisas
long as their nationality is not acknowledged within the new political framework. Madheshis
participated in large number in the Maosit movemet not merely due to class appeal but
because the movement gave them new hope for emancipation and equality. The large chunk
of cadres and leaders of Janatantrik Tarai Mukti Morcha and Madheshi Janadhikar Forum
have had linkages with Nepal Communist Party (Maoist). Madheshis are not willing to
surrender their national struggle for the sake of class interest. It is the call of nationalism
which is bringing all madheshis together. A correct approach towards the movement will
keep the country intact and pave way for economic development and sustainable
democracy. A wrong or biased approach might lead the country towards bloody ethnic
conflict.

The Madhesi Issue in Nepal

--K Yhome
The recent turmoil in Madhes (or the Terai plains bordering India) was a stark reflection of the challenges confronting the restructuring process in Nepal. It was also a reminder to the current interim government that the problems in Nepal are not yet over and that there are serious socio-economic and political issues that need to be addressed.
The Madhesi uprising in January was marked by bans, protests, and violence in some major areas of Nepal’s terai resulting in the death of over thirty people. This has in several ways changed the interim government’s approach to and the management of Nepal’s political restructuring and peace process. It has also raised many questions. Why was the violence so potent? Who was responsible? How will it affect the restructuring process? And so on.
These questions are palpable in the context of Nepal’s fragile political restructuring process that is underway. While exploring answers to these questions, however, there is a proclivity to misinterpret the Madhesi issue. Some (mis)conceptions that have come about in the wake of the uprising are not only erroneous but also dangerous.
The Madhesi issue is not a communal issue. It is not one of Madhesis (”people of the plains”) vs Pahadis (”people of the hills”) as some tend to view it. This misinterpretation of the Madhesi issue commits a serious mistake by making it a community-based issue that could have grave implications for the country. To view the issue as a problem between Madhesis and Pahadis reveals a poor understanding of Nepal’s complex society.
While one may have some facts supporting such an argument, it fails to explain the real issue of the Madhesis. There were also reports that certain “forces” (implicating the “Royal agents” and the “right wing” elements in India) of allegedly instigating the Terai riots to create trouble for the interim government in a bid to salvage the “monarchy” in Nepal. Hard evidence to ascertain the involvement of these forces is difficult to unearth, but many in Nepal point fingers at these forces as being responsible for the violence.
Whatever the motive of those behind the terai violence, many ordinary Madhesis have lost their lives. Madhesis out on the streets at the risk of their lives were there for a different reason. For them it was a fight for a genuine object - the Madhesi cause.
The Madhesi issue did not suddenly emerge in January 2007. A long history of a sense of discrimination is at the root of the Madhesi struggle. To explain the recent uprising it is necessary to understand the issue from the correct perspective. The issue relates to a movement against the state’s “discriminatory” politics. It is a fight for recognition of rights - political, cultural as well as economic - and a struggle for equal representation and opportunity. This forms the core ingredient of the Madhesi issue.
For over five decades, the Madhesis have been waging a movement against “discriminatory” laws of citizenship and language, as well as recruitment policies to the armed forces and bureaucracy. The struggle can be traced back to 1951 when a party called the Nepal Terai Congress was formed under the leadership of Vedananda Jha to advocate “regional autonomy” for the Madhesis.
Again, in 1983, Gajendra Narayan Singh established an organization called Nepal Sadbhavana Council with the aim of combat discrimination against the Madhesis. In the post-1990 era, the organization turned into a political party called Nepal Sadbhavana Party and in the general elections of 1991, 1994, and 1999, the party’s manifesto called for a federal system of government, a liberal policy on citizenship and a separate Madhesi battalion in the army.
Despite the long struggle, however, the Madhesi issue has not been resolved partly on account of Nepal’s five-decade history of being under autocratic rule - 1960 to 1990 and 2002 to 2006 - where political activities were restricted. Even during the short-lived democratic experiments in Nepal - 1950 to 1960 and 1991 to 2002 - the issue remained unresolved because of the lack of political will on the part of the successive governments.
The failure of the movement is also partly because of the internal divisions within the Madhesi leadership. The Sadbhavana Party has seen frequent infighting and splits that have further weakened the movement. It is in this context and in light of the predicaments mentioned that the Madhesi uprising of January needs to be understood.
The resolution of the Madhesi issue depends on how the interim parliament drafts a new constitution taking into account the various socio-political issues of the country. Should it fail to ensure the aspirations of the people, the recent outburst of violence in the terai will only be an indication of more chaos to follow.
Source::http://www.ipcs.org/whatsNewArticle11.jsp?action=showView&kValue=2243&status=article&mod=b

Burning Madhesh, Bleeding Madhesis- Govinda Neupane

Burning Madhesh, Bleeding Madhesis
= What happened to Madhesis? Why they are bleeding? Why they are on the streets, particularly on the central and eastern part of Madhesh? Is this a new phenomenon or is it the continuation of something that has its roots in the past? Historically, Madhesh had been suffering from the oppression and suppression as an internal colony of the Khas rulers. The Gorkha Khas kings and their entire Khas brethren treated Madhesh as their private property. By extension, the feudal lords among the MongolKirats and Newars also sided with the Khas ruling clique. Hence, the Madheshis had been suffering for centuries under the brutal rule of the Khas kings.
Many politicians from non-Madhesi nationalities have been busy projecting the present movement called by Madhesi Janadhikar Forum as part of the exercise orchestrated by the regressive forces to create disturbances to block the election of the constituent assembly. There could be infiltration. Therefore, this could be true as a small part of the truth. But, the greater part of the truth is that the movement is for politico-economic equality, social justice and durable peace. Unfortunately, most of the politicians from the mainstream are queuing up to defame the Madhesi movement. Either they don’t understand the social composition, or they are politically blind. They are ready to go any far to quell ‘the destruction and anarchy’. It sounds that even they are ready to travel to the extent of breaking the country into pieces. The new leaders of the regime in Kathmandu have started to behave as new Khas feudal lords and are issuing similar decrees as once the infamous king was busy issuing. This all reveals the prejudiced views of the Khas leaders, Khas-dominated organizations, and their administration in Kathmandu.
The primary thrust of the Madhesi movement is simple to understand. They want to get rid of the past political arrangements based on the principles and practices of internal colonization. Now, they want Madhesi autonomous governance mechanism, federal system and proportional representation including in the election of the constituent assembly. Simply, they are asking for equitable power sharing. The Khas political masters and their so-called civil society brethren argue that these problems should be addressed by the constituent assembly. The simple logic here is that “we will get elected first through the election of non-proportional system based on existing constituencies. Submit your demands to us afterward.” This is one of the most non-inclusive logic. This is nothing other than a ploy to continue the dominance of the Khas masters. Not only for the Madhesis, but also this logic could deny representation for other non-Khas nationalities including MangolKirat (Janajati), Dalit and Newar. Therefore, the Kirats in the east have started their agitation against the Khas arrangements. The other nationalities and regions could follow the paths shown by them.
The king is gone, but the king is breathing. This is the mystery of the Khas arrangement. The election of the constituent assembly will be held to design an inclusive system, but the Khas supremacy will be maintained. This is another mystery of the Khas arrangement. But, after the impact of the mass awakening through out the period of the Maoist movement, the oppressed nationalities have developed critical understanding of the socio-political and economic realities. It is too difficult to deceive them, now.
As a person of Khas origin myself, I argue that the Khas leaders, the parties and organizations dominated by Khas personalities and the Khas administration should start to understand the reality. The days of Khas domination, subjugation and oppression are over. Now, let’s not be the part of problem; let’s not be the party to disintegrate the country and let’s not pretend that we and only we are Nepal. Let’s contribute to build a new multicultural Nepal. The building process is not so complex. Let’s agree to have a federal structure with autonomy to nationalities. Let’s agree to have proportional representation and for this purpose let’s have new demarcation of constituencies based upon the sole criteria of the size of the population. Let’s repent for all the injustices we Khas have committed and our ancestors had committed. Let’s offer our profound apology to all oppressed nationalities – be they Madhesi, Mangolkirat (janajati), Dalit or Newar and begin a healing process so as to build a new Nepal. If we will not accept the power sharing arrangement through the introduction of multiculturalism and federalism now, then the future political as well as social courses may create new arrangements that certainly would finish Khas supremacy through a communal and/or nationalities’ upsurge. In that case, we the most stupid and stubborn Khasas should have to pay a heavy price. According to a Chinese saying “Hundred years ago it was the best time to begin and today is the next best time to start”. Now, let’s start the healing process. Simply but definitely the new rulers in Kathmandu should stop to bleed the Madheshis; the Madhesis certainly would stop to burn Madhesh, their own beloved homeland.
source::http://parivartannepal.blogspot.com/2007/01/

NEPAL'S Madhesi Movement: Against Khas Chauvinism?

"We Madhesis joined CPN (Maoist) believing that CPN (Maoist) was a scientific Marxist party. Many of us worked honestly as per the party's policy and direction. However, we found discrimination inside the party. We used to send People’s Liberation Army of our areas, but they would be bothered unnecessarily. There was discrimination from Pahade to Madhesi. We were unsatisfied with such domination. We said that since we are Madhesi fighters, Madhesi shall be an in-charge and a Madhesi regiment shall be established following party’s vision for Madhes. As some responsible Maoists termed it was dangerous to establish a Madhesi regiment separately in Tarai area, we left the party and are fighting for the liberation of Madhesis against the discrimination and exploitation of Pahade led executive, judiciary, legislature and bureaucracy."
Anonymous ex-Maoist leader
Madhes (Tarai) is derived from Sanskrit Madhya Desh (Middle Land) ranging from southern foothills of Himalaya to Northern foothills of Bindhaychal Mountains that covers Nepal and north-central India. The present Madhes, the southern plains of Nepal, covers 34,109 sq. km. that accounts 23% of topography and comprises 48.4% population in 20 districts, including all castes, ethnicities and Dalits migrated from hills and mountains along with Madhesis. The porous border with India runs two-thirds of the total 1,753 km, to the east, west and south. When Prithvi Narayan Shah started his concurs the southern plains were annexed, after the Sugauli Treaty with the British on 1816, the present borders were sketched and the land in western part including Banke and Bardiya were gifted by the British on 1857 after Nepal sent army to quench Sepoy mutiny in India.
Nepal is a multi-ethnic, multi-lingual, multi-cultural and multi-religious country. People of Nepal are socio-cultural portioned along the lines of caste (jat descent) and Janajati (ethnicities and indigenous) in both hill/mountains and Madhes or Tarai regions. The deep cultural pluralism of Nepal consists of at least 61 castes, sub-castes, ethnic and sub-ethnic groups[1]. There are about 103 socio-cultural groups - caste, ethnic and religion population, 90 languages and 10 religious communities[2]. Professor Tej Ratna Kanskar advocates for 141 linguistic groups, but, Armit Yonjan, language expert, differs with 112 groups[3]. The National Committee of Nationalities enlisted 59 distinct groups within Janajatis, and the Dalit Commission listed 28 cultural groups within Dalits, of which Madhesi Dalits consist of 18, Pahade 5 and Newar Dalits 5[4]. According to census 2001, 41 ethnicities/Janajati live in hills/mountains, whereas 18 in Madhes.
The 2001 census identified for group population 57.5%, Janajatis for 37.2%, religious minorities for 4.3%, and other groups for the remaining 1% of total population. Madhesi consist of different caste hierarchy: Brahun, Rajput, Janajati and Dalits; including Muslims. Tharu, Dhimal Satar, Rajbanshi and quite a few other minorities are the indigenous groups living in Tarai (See Annex 1).
Madhes is burning and bleeding. Abductions, killings, retaliations, extortions, torture are headlines in each day. Quite a few violent and non-violent/armed groups are existing and some are being born in Madhes. Right to life, liberty, security and dignity are being more and more endangered. Till now there are 22 armed and non-armed groups are working in eastern and central Madhes. They are: Madhesi Janadhikar Forum (MJF), Janatantrik Tarai Mukti Morcha (JTMM-Goit, Jwala Singh and Bisfot Singh factions), Janabadi Ganatantrik Mukti Morcha, Tarai Cobra (Naagraja), Defense Army, Tarai Army, National Army Nepal, Ulpha Group, Change Nepal, Nepal Gorkha Army and Madhesi Special Force. Similarly, others are: Madhesi Tigers, Taraibadi, Madhesi Mukti Force, Nepal Janatantrik Party, Madhesi Virus Cleaners, Madhes Mukti Tigers, Gorkha-Line Mukti Sena Samaj, CPN [Maoist (United Rebellion Front)], Far-Western Revolutionary Party and Chure-Bhawar Ekata Samaj (CBES).
The JTMM Goit and Jwala Singh factions are the most militant. Many see the Madhesi Movement as against Pahade, some see it as against Khas race, whereas some see it as a struggle for existence (because of their fight to finish amongst themselves). These groups active in nine – Morang, Sunsari, Saptari, Siraha, Dhanusa, Mahottari, Bara, Parsa and Rautahat – out of 20 districts, and are advancing as regionalist and secessionist forces in favor of Madhesis only. As a result, many Pahade officials/inhabitants of those districts have either left or gone underground. According to Kathmandu Post of August 5, 2007, more than 900 Pahade civil servants, including above 700 VDC secretaries and 200 staffs from Land Tax and Revenue Office and Inland Revenue Office, have vacated their offices. The Asian Development Bank has twice extended its huge projects for rural roads and livelihood, and consequently closed, due to lack of government employees in the districts.
After the peace accord, the Seven Party Alliance and the Maoists (SPAM) focused on political agendas, paying little attention to a federalism, autonomy, inclusion, proportionate representation and republican Nepal[5]. Many of these are advancing with demands for regional secession and their numbers are mushrooming. The CBES, as a counter-Madhesi movement operated by Khas particularly Bahun and Chhetri is also active as a regional force along the northern side of East-West highway bordering Madhes. As a result, the mobility of Madhesi in hills and mountains and Pahade in Madhes has virtually less or stopped. On the main problem of the Madhes, Jwala Sing of the JTMM said, "There are three main issues in the Nepal-occupied Tarai. The first is the suppression by authoritarian Pahadi sectarian state and colonial exploitation of Madhes and Madhesi. Second is class difference in the Tarai and third is difference among different caste groups."
Major Demands of organizations involved in Madhesi Movement: independent state – federal democratic republic; proportionate electorate system; end of internal colonization; regional autonomous governance system that includes right to self-determination; rights on the land, natural resources and biological diversity of Madhes; end racial and regional discrimination; Pahade civil servants and security forces leave Madhes; and provide citizenship certificates to all Madhesis without discrimination, etc (Annex II and III). The trend of movement is inflammatory which is aiming to promote communal harmony.
Major demands of CBES: District headquarters to be established in Chure-Bhabar (inner-tarai between Shivalik and Mahabharat ranges); independent state; special security to Pahade-origin dwellers in Madhes; withdrawal of cases of its nine cadres under trial; compensation to families of their cadres killed; an inquiry into loss of property and lives by Madhesis in Chure-Bhavar, etc.
1. Identity theory
After the decade of unification land acquisition in Madhes by the government adopted direct and indirect methods. As settlement in Madhes through forced labor (direct) failed and Indians across the border were promoted to settle as tenants (indirectly)[6]. In 1956, the Nepal Malaria Eradication Organization was founded and announced that Malaria was eradicated in Nepal, which led to influx of Pahade. In 1920, the government initiated organized settlements in Rapti valley and Morang, the aim of which was to build settlements of Pahades in Madhes who were offered free facilities with minimum land tax. It was not successful, and in 1964, a Resettlement Company was established and resettlement programs were initiated based on Israeli model in Nawalparasi and Banke districts. Its main aim was Pahadization of Madhesis and control smuggling and dacoit along the border with India by settling ex-army families. Harald Skar states that Pahadization involves two streams: migrate modern Pahades to Madhes and establish old Pahade property owners politically[7]. A Task Force on Internal and International Migration was formed in 1983 headed by Dr. Harka Gurung, which led to influx of Pahades in Madhes and to Pahadization over Madhesi languages. As a result, in the census 1951, Pahades living in Madhes was mere 6%, whereas after 50 years, in census 2001it grew to 33%. The trend of Madhes movement seems to prioritize the return of the 33% Pahades to hills/mountains. Is this trend just? What affect will it have on the Pahades and how will they react?
Table 1: Central Committee Members of the Mainstream Political Parties in terms of Caste/Ethnicities
Categories
NC
UML
Maoist
NC-D
RPP
Total Population (%)

N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

Bahun
17
46
36
56
17
46
12
35
4
13
12.7
Chhetri
3
8
6
9
8
22
10
30
13
42
17.3
Newar
3
8
4
6
3
8
2
6
2
7
5.5
Madhesi
4
11
4
6
1
3
3
8
6
19
21
Janajati*
5
13
8
12
5
13
4
12
5
16
31.7
Dalit *
1
3
1
2
1
3
1
3
0
0
12.8
Women
4
11
6
9
2
5
2
6
1
3
101
Total
37

65

37

34

31

50.04
* Pahade and Madhesi both Source: Informal/April and June 2007
In table 1, the number of Bahun and Chhetri, which is 30% in total population, are 54% in NC, 65% in UML and Maoist 68%. Newar, comprising 5.5% in total population is represented as 8% in NC, 6% in UML and 8% in Maoists. Madhesi, 21% of total population is 11% in NC, 6% UML, and 3% Maoist. In a nutshell, Madhesi, Janajatis and Dalits are not proportionately represented in the decision making level of any of the mainstream political parties.
Table 2: Caste/Ethnic Representation in Interim Parliament
Categories
NC
UML
Maoist
NC-D
RPP

N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
Bahun
39
46
32
39
15
18
13
27
0
0
Chhetri
14
17
13
16
8
10
16
33
3
43
Newar
6
7
6
7
8
10
3
6
1
14
Madhesi
15
17
14
17
21
25
11
23
3
43
Janajati*
10
12
16
19
19
23
5
10
0
0
Dalit *
1
1
2
2
12
15
0
0
0
0
Total
85

83

83

48

7

Women
7
8
14
17
31
37
3
6
1
14









Source: Informal/April and June 2007
In table 2, Bahun and Chhetri comprise 63% in NC, 55% UML and 28% Maoist. Madhesi comprise 17% each in NC and UML, and 25% Maoist. Janajati consist of 12% in NC, 19% in UML and 23% Maoist, whereas Dalit 1% in NC, 2% in UML and 15% in Maoist. Women representation is 8% in NC, 17% in UML and 37% in Maoist. In an overall, Maoist is more close to population sizes. The issue of representation has been a major challenge in Nepal. The representation of Madhesi is very little (12%)[8] in legislative, executive, judiciary, civil service and NGOs, whereas their inclusion in Security Forces is negligible.
In an early May 2007, Tarai Tigers distributed the pamphlet in district headquarters of Bara and Parsa urging Khas including Janajati to leave tarai in one-month period. It stated that those who unwilling to leave their native land tarai during the said period will receive stern action by them. The highlights of the pamphlet are:
§ Pahades having grains of Madhes returned to their old habitat;
§ Pahade civil servants working in Madhes transferred to hills/mountains;
§ Pahade leaders go to hills/mountains for political activities and candidacy from Madhes shall not take;
§ Warn the police and administration not to mistreat the Madhesis, otherwise will face untimely death like the training officer of district education office;
§ Advocate Krishna Kafle sold his property in Madhes and fled to hills, others are preparing to sell and flee and all should do the same;
§ The Pahade Private School owners cheating Madhesis leave Madhes, you taught us a lot, but we do not need your education;
§ We are concerned of Madhesi children's lives, we will not be responsible if anything happens;
§ Tarai is ours, lands and grains are ours, so why we need Pahade rulers?
§ Why Pahade officers in Madhes?
§ There are 20 boarding schools in Bara of which five are run by Pahade, why there are no Pahade students in Madhesi run boarding schools?
§ Why the Municipality Mayors and MPs of Madhes are Pahades?
§ If Madhesis do not become aware on time, we will not be free from Pahade oppression, and our future generations will blame us for that.
JTMM­–Goit killed Basu Dev Poudel, training officer of district education office, on charges of economic, cultural and political exploitation. It also demands Pahades to leave Madhes and called on May 25, 2007 all Pahade civil servants and security forces to leave Madhes with seven-day ultimatum.Altogether, different Madhesi groups have killed seven Pahade civil servants (from Engineer to Junior Technical Assistant) and countless have been abducted and tortured, along with extortions.
Fission and fusion amongst the Madhesi groups are frequent. The Sunsari in-charge of JTMM-Jwala Singh differing from its criminalization of politics left with 600 activists and joined JTMM-Goit, whereas Bisfot Singh broke away with eight other commanders from Goit faction and formed his own group and claims to have a company numbering 150 militants. He alleged that the Goit faction is engrossed in self-interest and an agent of Pahade in the name of liberation of Madhesi. Jaya Prakash Prasad Gupta, former NC leader and ex-minister, commented on MJF that it is not able to liberate Madhes due to the structure of the organization and serious drawbacks. Bijay Singh, former Central Vice-President, said that Upendra Yadav has deceived greatly the Madhesis, which is unforgivable. The Madhesi Student Front (MJF wing) President Keshab Jha said that they had formally dismantled their ties with MJF after the second Madhes Movement. Many Madhesis who do not believe with violence said that some leaders in the name of Madhesi are trying to grab an opportunity to popularize them.
In fact, the MJF have tried to create an impression of broader participation in the movement including Dalits, Janjatis, ethnicities, but in reality is completely different. None of Pahade living withTarai communities have participated in this movement due to their slogans of Madhes and Madhesis. Maithili communities such as Jha, Mishra, who are considered aborigino of the central tarai are spoken 13% of the population[9]. On the other hand, Tharus, Rajbhansis, Dhimals, Jhagars have not shown any interest to participate in this movement. In fact, Tharu community comprising 6.8% of the total population has informed publicly through press release, as it does not consider itself Madhesi community. None of the Tarai-based Dalit communities such as Mushar, Dom, Chamar, Harijan etc have found reasonable existence within armed and non-armed groups including MJF. The central committee members of the MJF belong to Yadav, Mahato, Mehta, Gupta, Kamath, Sah, and Das communities.
2. Resource theory
Madhes is known as the food-bowl of the country. Most of Industries locate here. There have been many debates and discussions based on resources originating from Madhes. Huge amount from the treasury has been spent for infrastructures of Madhes. The East-West Highway, Customs points, Dry Ports, Telecommunication, Education facilities, Hospitals, Irrigation canals, domestic airports etc. are in tarai. A large part of revenue is generated from Madhes. If there is problem in Madhes, the rest 77% hills/mountains, including Kathmandu, will be 'double landlocked'.
In June the Madhesi Tigers also reportedly distributed letters to Businessmen, civil servants and Medical Officers demanding amount varying from 100,000-500,000 Nepali Rupees and threatening those who failed to give the money with abduction and death. In middle of June, TJMM (Jwala Singh) issued letters to several I/NGOs in Eastern Region's Sunsari District, demanding varying amounts. The letters were reportedly followed by death threats to individual I/NGO workers who failed to comply with the demands. Many targeted of them are leave to Kathmandu, India and other safer place or some are made underground.
The major problem faced by Madhes is citizenship. The Citizenship Act 1964 and The Constitution of 1990 had played double standard role. According to which, people including Madhesi, had to offer land ownership deed. Birth certificate was not issued without the citizenship certificate of parents. Similarly, citizenship certificate was a must to get passport. But, land ownership could be obtained only with citizenship, which is a stringent criteria based on descendence. In the report of the 1994, the government accepted that 3.5 million people were deprived of citizenship certificates. But, after formation of the Interim Government, citizenship certificates were distributed at VDCs, which reduced the number. The major demand of Madhesi Movement is more or less fulfilled. The Interim Constitution has been revised twice within six months in order to address the issues raised by Madhesis. Pahades including few Madhesi elite have controlled all resources of the entire areas of the Madhes in general marginalize the Madhesi. Therefore, the armed and unarmed Madhesi movement is guided due to the huge discrepancy between rich and poor and exclusion of state including mainstream political parties policies their treatment of second class citizen to them.
3. Sanctuary
There has been a wide concern that most of the non-armed and armed groups are taking shelter in India and Indians are supporting the MJF. People are raising a lot of question of double standard, but it is obvious that all political parties such as NC, UML and other communist factions in the history of Nepal including the king Tribhuwan had used India as the shelters. When the Maoists started the People's War with many critics of India in their 40-point demands of nationality[10], they again chose India as a protective ground of shelter for their leadership. The 12-point understandings was also signed in New Delhi on the witness of India in between the seven party alliance (SPA) and the Maoists (SPAM) to toppling the Royal authoritarian regime at the end of 2005. Similarly, India is also providing protection and shelter to MJF and other armed d groups sometimes by people and sometimes by government level. Moreover, they have sympathy with them as they belong to similar socio-cultural patterns and behaviors. The recent visit in India of the president of the MJF, Upendra Yadav, and meting with the establishment forces in Delhi is not at all a new phenomenon in Nepal. Till date it has observed that all political roads of Nepal end in Delhi. However, the politicians are the champions to rebuke a lot to Indian government and politics in front of people to hide the fact of their closeness with India. It is to be sure that sometime they take shelter in government levels and sometime in regional government and people in general. Before Delhi agreement, the Maoists had been taking shelter in India with the cooperation of people and regional government.
Ragnunath Thakur of the Madhesi Janakrantikari Dal in 1960s went to India in the course to receive support and popularize their Madhesi movement from Indian government. He finally met the then President, Dr. Sharba Palli Radhakrishnan including Prime Minister Indira Gandhi and so forth[11]. He used to burn petrol on his forehead in front of Indian parliament. When asked what he was doing, Thakur replied, “Justice is lost or vanished from India and Nepal. I am in search of it with the help of petromax in the broad daylight”. While struggling for Madhesis, he died on June 21, 1981 with rulers’ conspiracy[12].
In the course of the Movement launched by Janadhikar Forum since 2007, Indian Political and Social groups have had opened shelters for displaced people in Jogbani, Raksaul, and Sitamadi (Indian towns bordering Biratnagar, Birgunj and Sarlahi). Wounded militants were also found to be treated there. Member of Parliament and of members of Legislative Assemblies participated in protest rallies on suppression of the Movement. Indians supported the Madhesi movement with money and muscle.
4. Challenge theory
After Democratic Movement in 1950s, Nepal Tarai Congress (NTC) proposed for Regional Autonomy. The NTC led by Bedananda Jha raised issues relating to recognition of Hindi as State language language, autonomous Tarai State, entry of Madhesis in Nepal's civil service, etc. But, Nepali was the medium of instruction in schools in Madhes. The Tarai Congress launched Save Hindi campaign, in which NC, Communist Party of Nepal, Rastriya Praja Parishad also supported the campaign. Violent clashes occurred between cadres of Save Hindi campaign and Nepali Pracharini Sabha (Nepali Campaign). In the First General Elections in 1959, NTC offered candidates to 21 constituencies and all were defeated, which led to collapse of the campaign. The then PM Bisheswar Prasad Koirala, who spent most of his time in Patna and Baneras (India), had said that the Movement for Hindi was appropriate. However, he forgot upon arriving at Kathmandu possibly seeing it as a threat for future. Until 1958, not only Indians but also Madhesis required getting permit to enter Kathmandu valley at Birgunj and they were checked at Chisapanigarhi, whereas Pahades did not require it. After Mahendra's coup, Nepali was recognized as national language.
After the first Popular Movement in 1950s, there were many movements for Madhes but the government was successful in suppressing those. Raghunath Thakur established Madhesi Liberation Movement, the demands were similar to Bedananda Jha, including appointment in security forces, bureaucracy and land ownership rights. Later, Ramji Mishra, Satyadev Mani Tripathi, Raghunath Ray Yadav and so on founded Madhesi People's Revolutionary Front in 1960s and initiated guerrilla warfare. In June 1963, Ramji was shot dead by police and in August 1967, Raghunath Ray Yadav was killed by military. Satyadev Mani Tripathi, the Chairperson, was also killed in August 1969 at Nautanawa, bordering India. Dr. Rabindra Thakur, who raised the question of Madhes during Panchayat regime, was murdered. After the Janandolan I in 1990, democracy was established in the country but Deb Narayan Yadav was also killed. Suraj Mahato, who was known as red star of Tarai, was also killed. In this way, the Pahadi government has killed the Madhesi fighters. The wondering part was that no media gave priority to this.
In 1983, Gajendra Narayan Singh established a Nepal Sadbhvana Council, which later changed into a political party in the name of Nepal Sadbhvana Party. It proposed: federal government structure, recognition of Hindi as major language for Tarai, reservation, and Madhesi battalion in the Nepal Army. But, rather than focused the voices and demands of Madhes, they prioritized power and politics. As the result, the desires of Madhes were neglected all the ways.
On June 23, MJF cadres reportedly damaged the CPN (Maoist) office in Parasi, Nawalparasi District. The incident took place after MJF had declared a bandh on June 22, during which some of its supporters smashed vehicles escorted by the police which were challenging the bandh. After the police arrested 11 persons in relation to the attack on the vehicles, the MJF demonstrated in Parasi to demand the release of the arrested members. On June 14, following the shooting of and serious injury to a VDC Secretary by TJMM (Jwala Singh), all the 49 VDC Secretaries of Sunsari District protested from June 14 to 25 demanding security security. On June 25, the protesting VDC Secretaries agreed to restart services only in the villages where the police posts were established. After the death of the Ram Hari Pokhrel, VDC Secretary of the Govindapur, Siraha three week ago and subsequently nation-wide protest done by VDC secretaries for a long time, the agreement reached between the government and association to work living in district headquarters if they fill insecure in the concerned VDC office. Thus, people do not deprive from the services of the VDCs, but also from local representatives again.
Chief of Tarai Cobra, Rajeswor Prasad Singh (Nagraja) got his both hand mutilated while preparing bombs. Police rescued and treated him at Nepal Medical College, Teaching Hospital, Jorpati, Kathmandu in a fake name. Mahanta Thakur, Science and Technology Minister (NC), Rajendra Mahato, Minister of Industry and Supplies (NSP), ex-minister Rameswar Ray Yadav (NSP) and NC MP Amaresh Kumar Singh visited him at the hospital. Similarly, the persons related an dclsoe to them are continually visiting him. The government also has not issued authoritative information of his arrest. Is this is not a game to save him? People are wondering if such people are behind the curtains of such groups in Madhes.
5. Conspiracy theory
There have been evidences of suspicious characters playing dubious roles in agitating the Madhes Movement. In the early February 2007, the arson to NC office in Sunsari was disclaimed by MJF, as it was campaigning then. Similarly, in Gaur incident, 30 Maoist cadres were killed in clashes between MJF and Maoists. Prabhu Sah, General Secretary of the Madhesi Rastriya Mukti Morcha (sister organization of Maoists) in a press release regarding the incident stated that Indian criminals were hired by MJF. The Medics and Police estimate that nine were burned alive to death and four women were raped prior to burning alive. All the Maoist cadres were of Pahade origin. Maoists blame MJF for the massacre, whereas MJF again alleged that it was the work of JTMM-Jwala Singh. Are not these plotted conspiracies? In the Lahan clash between MJF and Maoists, the security forces state that Indian professional criminals were seen with modern weapons. The UNOHCHR points to the local administration for the incidents. Some academics and conscious people indicate that the king is fishing in troubled waters by infiltrating violence in Madhes Movement.
On May 11, 2007, all the groups waging armed and unarmed movement in Madhes for "common slogan, common front and common leadership" organized a secret program at Patna, India. Ram Raja Prasad Singh was invited as the Chief Guest. The meeting proposed the following main agendas:
§ To protect Tarai, the motherland of Madhesis, identify throughout the globe as a separate country with facts and figures;
§ Advancement to liberate Tarai by preparing a 10-year plan uniting all the Madhesi forces;
§ Acquire foreign support from UN, China, Pakistan, US and especially India is pertinent for liberation of Madhes and build cordial relationship with them
§ To build cordial relation with Indian Embassy at Kathmandu for advancing the war in Tarai;
§ Understanding of aims and objectives of the different Madhesi groups fighting in Tarai
§ Develop strategy on common problem identification, common concept, common demand, common consensus and common tactics;
§ Establish Common National Madhesi Morcha or Sajha Tarai Mukti Morcha offices in each district to carry out political and administrative functions;
§ To make the media – press and radio – to realize their rights and duties to succeed Madhes Movement; and
§ Change the strategy from Tarai Bandh (strike) to Kathmandu Bandh;
Jwala Singh proposed Ram Raja Prasad Singh to lead all the Madhesi groups, but he declined and said that he is completely not in favor to Madhes as a separate state. He further said that secession of Madhes is not only wrong but is also not possible.
Most of the Indian politicians, civil servants, bureaucrats, diplomats, security force personnel, etc. conceive Nepal not as a foreign country and many say that it would take time for Madhesi people to get Madhes recognized as an independent state. A police officer in Lukhnow (India) said 'We are all one, Nepalese are our people.' Most of Indian politicians say that Nepal's politics should follow Indian model: possibly republican, most likely secular. Some politicians and bureaucrats supporting the Madhesi movement say that they know what Madhesis are going through in Nepal, because they had experienced the same treatment when they visited Nepal. An Indian former bureaucrat commented that China and the UN could not do anything without India and added that when we go ahead they cannot stop us. He further said that the UN was helping their cause right now and they need not worry. A Bihari (India) bureaucrat said that Madhesis are their own people (Indian origin) who settled in Nepal[13].
6. Ideology
As a few factions are fission from the CPN (Maoist), they have adopted the same ideology. However, great majority of the armed Madhesi groups are neither having ideology nor political means (objective) nor vision along with destination. The MJF, JTMM factions and others in Madhes Movement are not accepting the existence of one another and even furiously fighting amongst themselves. The fighting groups have no common aims, objectives and strategies Therefore; this movement seems not against Khas chauvinism rather showing off power to others who are similar. There is a lack of a regional/rational leadership. Even a small group seems to be huge when its members carry guns and bombs. The armed and unarmed movement categories into:
§ Type I: Those involved in Marxist-Leninist-Maoist ideology, seem to fight for class struggle, political economy and for scientific socialism. They seem to fight for class-interest, protection and liberation.
§ Type II: The splitters dissatisfied from Maoist class, region and culture; which are struggling to wipe out the Maoists from Madhes and extend control according their interests.
§ Type III: The forces that are against the CA elections fearing to loose are manipulating the whims of Madhesi people.
§ Type IV: The Indo-Nepal Hindu fundamentalists in cooperation with monarchy want to re-establish monarchy trying to fail the liberal democratic system.
§ Type V: The criminal forces that are capitalizing the unstable situation to fish in troubled waters for power, property and prestige, that is expanding the ranks of professional criminals.
All the forces wishing the decline of the communist ideology and organization are trying their best by providing overt or covert support the above-mentioned groups in order to create violence and disorder.
Conclusion
Some demands raised by them are genuine and some are quite unreasonable and illogical particularly on the issue of right to self-determination. Autonomy is today's high-sounding word to all but self-determination provides an autonomous geographical region as both a legal and political right on the course to segregate and declare itself as an independent state if it desires to do so. Geographically Madhes has plain and fertile land in terms of country's economy with maximum infrastructures concentrated in that area. In other words, the resources of the entire nation are in Tarai. If it separated, the rest of hill/mountain Nepal will be landlocked by double means: first by India and then by independent Tarai. If Madhes segregated, what about the demands of Kirant, Magarat, Tamuwan, Tharuwan, etc. and their economic activities as they are demanding for right to self-determination too.
Many Khas believed that Madhesi refers less or no Nepali inhabitants as the Parbatiya, which is known as Pahade, has always dominated to Madhesis. On the other, the Nepali culture is more inclined to Indian than Chinese/Tibetan is for instance Irish vs. English, Portugese vs. Spanish, and Ukrainian vs. Romanian. Indeed, the people migrating west Eurasia via Iranian plateau settled in Sindh-Ganges plains and some settled in the hills and mountains south of the Himalayas, both Indo-Aryans. Those settling in the former became Madhesi and those in the latter Khas/Pahade. There is no discrimination in the originality of both, but grew as there developed differences in topography, political, economic and cultural spheres.
The government has initiated and is continuing dialogue with some Madhesi and other groups. The Minister for Peace and Restructuration Ram Chandra Poudel is leading the government team, who himself is a Khas and his some influencial members consists of Khas too. The talks has not even taken the speed equal to a tortoise. The members in the talks team have no idea of the gravity of conflict nor able to analyze root causes and pros and cons. The more significant issue is that they lack proactiveness which is a prime tool of dialogue. There is no facilitator too. Poudel's role is significant, but devoid of qualities required for dialogue: commitment, sincerity, dedication, and capacity. He has not been able to break the chain of the feudo-elite circle. There is no much hope from this dialogue; except cosmetic change as a lollipop.
The talks is leading to a dead end; what has to be done? First of all, the proposals put forward by Maoists proportional electoral system and republican Nepal proclaimed prior to CA elections could solve the problem. Nevertheless, in the present circumstances there is no possibility for SPAM to proclaim such. Maoists could play a vital role to solve the present conflict utilizing their resources as a window opportunity. For that, Matrika Prasad Yadav (Maoist) should lead the team to talk with MJF. Secondly, if alliance is developed between these two, Upendra Yadav (MJF) could be an instrumental to talk with Goit, and other groups. If they could do alliance with NC to whom they fought for 10 years with 15,000 killings and damage of billions of properties, why not with MJF? The desire of the entire Nepali people today is the politics of fusion rather than fission and wants the new forces in the government rather than repeating the same feudo-elites. If these could happen, Indian government could support these forces including Maoist. Since, the attachment and concern of the Indian government over the Madhes Movement is more than other political parties in Nepal. Otherwise, imagination of CA would be an utopia because of security reasons. Ban Ki-Moon in his report on Nepal submitted to the Security Council on July 24, 20074, said, "The security situation in the Tarai has remained extremely disturbed and efforts to improve law and order have been halting at best."

=================
Contributed by Bishnu Pathak, PhD and Chitra Niraula
Assisted by Sabitra Pant, Shankar Poudyal and prem
[1] Pathak, Bishnu. 2006. Politics of People's War and Human Rights in Nepal. Kathmandu: Bimipa Publication. p.303
[2] Basnet, Lalit Bahadur. October 16, 2005. Restructuring State based on Caste/Ethnicity. In Kantipur. Kathmandu: Kantipur Publication
[3] Rai, Dhan Bahadur. October 27, 2006. Question on Indigenous List. In Kantipur. Kathmandu: Kantipur Publication.
[4] Pathak, Bishnu. 2006. Intra-Dalit Discrimination: Status of Tarai Dalits. Lancau. Nepal. Kathmandu
[5] Presently, the Madhesis are facing the problems of unity in Madhesi communities with high prevalence of untouchability; Nepali as national language; a Madhesi is considered as an Indian unless evidence of his citizenship is obtained; child marriage with high prevalence of dowry; gross domestic and structural gender based violence; huge discrepancy between rich and academia but the vast majority is poor and illiterate; exclusion, non participation, and so forth.
[6] Regmi, Mahesh Chandra. 1971. A Study in Nepali Economic History 1768-1867. New Delhi: Manjusri publishing House.
[7] The Myths of Origin the Janajati Movement, Local Traditions, Nationalism and Identities in Nepal. 1995. Contribution to Nepalese Studies. p. 31.
[8] Nepal's Troubled Tarai Region. International Crisis Group. July 2007.
[9] Bhojpuri by about 8% as mother language whereas Hindi is spoken merely by 0.47% (as mother tongue) as Census 2001 stated.
[10] Such as abrogate Nepal India Treaty 1950 and all other unequal agreements including Integrated Mahakali Treaty (IMT); regulate the open border between Nepal and India and prohibit entry of Indian number-plate vehicles; abrogate Gorkha recruitment; implement work permit and set up priority to Nepali workers; abolish monopoly[10] of foreign capital in Nepali economy; implement self-reliant national economy; and ban objectionable foreign media and control cultural pollution. Stop imperialist/hegemonic[10] encroachment through NGOs and INGOs.
[11] Acting Prime Minister Guljari lal Nanda , Prime Minister Morariji Desai, Agriculture Minister Jagjiban Ram , Home Minister Y.B. Chauhan, Industrial Development Minister Farukhdeen Ali Ahmed, Communication and Parliament Minister Ram Sughav Singh , Minerals and Mines Minister Channa Reddy, Transportation Minister Dr. B.K.R.B. Rao, Rail Minister C.N.Punatha, Law Minister Govinda Menon, Aviation Minister Dr. Karna Singh, Trade Minister Dinesh Singh, Information Minister K.K. Shah , Education Minister Dr. Trigul Sen, Planning Minister Ashok Mehata, Labour and resettlement minister Jai Sukhalal Hathi and other leaders like Dr.Ram Manohar Lohiya, Acharya J.B.Kripalani, MP Mrs. Sucheta Kripalani, Raghunath Thakur also meet with different newspapers editors, ambassadors and Chief Minister of Bihar Pandit Binodananda Jha, CM K.B. Shahaya and distributed his book about Madhesi people ((Goit, J.K.:http://madhesi.wordpress.com/2007/04/04/history-of-tarai-in-nepal).)
[12] Ibid
[13] Nepal's Troubled Tarai Region. Op. cit. pp.22-24