• Nepal’s Democracy at the Crossroads
  • Putin’s Idea of Russian History
By Shashi P.B.B. Malla Nepal’s Democracy After the promulgation of the present Constitution in 2015 and more than seven years of practice, one would have thought that Nepali democracy is now fully entrenched and that our ‘able’ politicians are ardent practitioners of ‘government of the people, by the people and for the people’. Unfortunately, the majority of the people and from all sections are hugely disappointed. This lies in the first instance in the political parties and their leaders. The people have the right to vote unencumbered – unlike in most countries – and the election process is largely free and fair. But that’s it. ‘Electoral democracy’ has been established, but it is ‘party dictatorship’ in practice. We now have governments ‘of’, ‘by’ and ‘for’ the political parties. The record number of independent candidates in the last local elections is proof. And party dictatorship is synonymous with endemic corruption at all levels of the bureaucracy and government. Oli’s Latest Critique CPN-UML Chairman K.P. Sharma Oli’s own tenure as prime minister during the current term of parliament has not been particularly ‘clean’ or above board, but he has now utilized the pre-election period to berate the government of the “Gang of Five” political parties (THT/The Himalayan Times, Aug. 27). Domestically,
  • The government is acting against democratic norms by trying to pass bills even after provincial and parliamentary elections have been declared by the Election Commission.
  • The government is misusing all state organs to suit its interests.
  • The government is adopting a confrontational approach vis-à-vis the CPN-UML, the main opposition.
The fact is that within the current alliance government of the “Gang of Five” political parties there is push and pull within the individual parties and among themselves to get the maximum of seats allotted. The end game is to make a clean sweep and then ‘govern’ unencumbered, i.e. no hindrance to “bhagbanda”, or division of the spoils. The old fox, Oli is also looking around for election partners. At the same time, he is looking for ways and means to break the alliance of the “Gang of Five” and possibly even resurrect the old Communist alliance – much favoured by China and a nightmare situation for Deuba, the aging ‘Tiger of Dadeldhura’. In external affairs, Oli critiques (without much proof):
  • The ruling alliance of trying to appease external powers and undermining Nepal’s relations with neighbouring countries.
[just the height of gobbledegook or hogwash!].
  • The government is refusing to negotiate with India to get back Limpiyadhura, Lipulekh and Kalapani back, but is trying to create an artificial boundary dispute with China.
This too has little substance, since the Oli government itself made a mess of the boundary question. On the question of our close relations with both our giant neighbours, we should remain bipartisan and not use the so-called India-card or China-card. The cardinal principle of our neighbourhood foreign policy is maintaining strategic equi-distance from both New Delhi and Beijing and we should in no instance deviate from it [for domestic/election advantage, the Communists have deviated from this cardinal principle]. We cannot change our ‘geography’, but we can very well mitigate the ‘geographic disadvantage’ and even transform it into positive mastery. However, this requires versatile and far-sighted leaders willing and able to interact purposefully -- bilaterally, regionally and multilaterally and not like frogs in a well with limited horizon. With such leaders with other axes to grind, it will be difficult to overcome our debilitating ‘land-locked’ position. Primacy of Leadership PM Sher Bahadur Deuba let the cat out of the bag the other day when inaugurating [he is also the Inaugurator-in-Chief] the Nepal Army’s ‘Command General Coordination Meeting, 2079’. He is worth quoting in full: “It is only through the honesty and duty of the officers at the leadership level that the morale of the subordinate troops will be high and the confidence and trust of the Nepali people towards the Nepali Army as a whole can be maintained” (TRN/The Rising Nepal, Aug. 26). As far as the Nepal Army (NA) was concerned, Deuba should not have been concerned at all. Rather, he should look himself in the mirror, follow his own advice, and clear the mess, starting with his own party! The Strange Case of Pradip Giri In death, NC-life-member Pradip Giri was eulogized to the heavens for his erudition and oratory. But besides being a mere lawmaker, he did not rise in the ranks to take on responsibility as a decisive decision-maker. Proof that the party suppressed his talents. He seems to have fulfilled the words of the great John Milton: “They also serve who only stand and wait.”          Russian History According to Putin There is the adage that those who do not study history (properly), are condemned to repeat it. This could very well apply to Russian President Vladimir Putin. He thinks that he has learnt the lessons of Russian history. Unfortunately, he has a very lopsided view of it. As two of the leading experts on Russia and Eastern Europe, Fiona Hill [currently Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution and former Senior Director for Europe and Russia on the U.S. National Security Council] and Angela Stent [currently Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution and Professor Emerita at Georgetown University] have written in their latest brilliant essay in Foreign Affairs (September/October 2022), Putin’s strives for an unrealistic world of his own making – his distortions about the past are feeding delusions about the future. The two experts, Hill & Stent are convinced that Putin “is determined to shape the future to look like his version of the past.” According to Russia’s ostensible reasons put forward and even conventional wisdom, Putin ordered the invasion of Ukraine not because of Western provocations and his feeling of threats from NATO, but because Russia has a historical ‘divine right’ to rule Ukraine, to extinguish the country’s national identity and to integrate its people into a Greater Russia. Putin insists that Russians, Belarusians and Ukrainians are all descendants of the Rus, an ancient people who settled the area between the Black and Baltic Seas. He asserts that these people are bound together by a common territory, language and religion (Orthodox Christian faith). In his opinion, Ukraine has never been a sovereign state – it tried and failed to be really independent. He claims that the establishment of the “Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic” under the Bolsheviks was an anomaly. He wants Russia to preside over a new Slavic union composed of Russia, Belarus, Ukraine and the northern part of Kazakhstan (which is heavily Slavic). All other post-Soviet states would have to recognize Russia’s suzerainty (superior role/over-lordship). The West and the Global South (the Third World; developing countries) on their part would have to accept Russia’s predominant inter-continental role in Eurasia (stretching from the Baltic Sea to the upper Western Pacific). However, this would be more than a sphere of influence; it would be a sphere of control, entailing outright territorial re-integration of some territories and complete dominance in the political, security and economic spheres of others. According to the writers, Putin is determined to achieve these goals by military and non-military means. Ukraine has rejected Putin’s narrative. The invasion of February 24, 2022 has, in fact, helped to forge a new national identity in Ukraine centered on the Ukrainian language – even among native Russian speakers. The people living today in Ukraine have fluid, compound identities, but it came into being as an independent state [In Putin’s perspective, the real problem was not Ukraine’s relationship with the European Union or NATO or bilateral relations with the United States. It was the effrontery that Ukraine would want to associate with any entity or country other than Russia [similar to the conundrum of Indo-Nepalese relations]. In Putin’s eyes, Ukraine’s efforts to break out of the Russian orbit were an affront to Russia’s history and dignity. Seen in this light, Putin detests that the United States and European countries are supporting Ukraine militarily and financially. In response, he has launched an economic and information campaign against the West signaling that this is not only a military conflict. Russia has since then
  • weaponized energy, grain and other commodities
  • spread disinformation, including by accusing Ukraine of the very atrocities that Russia has carried out on the battlefield;
  • blaming Western sanctions for exacerbating famines in Africa.
Till date, Russia has been winning the information war. Western support for Ukraine – in weapons, finance and sanctions -- has been significant. Western energy, financial and export control sanctions have been extensive, and they are affecting the Russian economy. However, according to Hill & Stent, sanctions crucially will not alter Putin’s view of history or his determination to subjugate Ukraine. Thus, they have not changed his overall calculus or his war aims. Close observers claim that Putin has rarely consulted his economic advisers and is not much concerned about the long-term economic impact of his war. He will feel the real pinch from Western export controls only in 2023. In the meantime, Putin is willing to pay the price of losing energy revenues. He is only intent on undermining European support for Ukraine. Russia’s economic and energy crusade also extends to the weaponization of nuclear power. Russia shelled and took over Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhya nuclear plant, Europe’s largest, and turned it into a military base. Russia has also weaponized food supplies, blockading Ukraine and preventing it from exporting its abundant grain and fertilizer stockpiles. Putin has been adept at using the historic Russian military tactic of bogging and trapping down foreign armies in the midst of winter – as Napoleon’s armies and the German Wehrmacht learnt to their regret. With the coming of winter, the Kremlin aims to fracture Western unity against Russia under the pressure of energy shortages, high prices and economic hardship. Popular economic discontent is rising in the EU’s three largest economies: France, Italy and Germany. There have been calls for a negotiated settlement that would involve some Ukrainian territorial concessions. However, Putin’s mindset points to the fact that he is uninterested in a settlement that would leave Ukraine as a sovereign, independent state. Russia is not isolated in the international arena. Whatever the West says and does, a large number of states in the Global South, led by China and supported by India, regard the Russo-Ukrainian war as a localized European conflict that does not affect them. Ironically, with his dreams of a new Russian empire, Putin is reversing one of the greatest achievements of his professed greatest hero. Peter the Great opened a window to the West and to winds of significant change. Putin’s aggressive expansions have slammed that window shut. Peter the Great “took Russia into the future. Putin is pushing it back to the past.” The writer can be reached at: shashipbmalla@hotmail.com