* Nepal: A New Government of

      Opportunists

* South Asia in 2022 Review

* Ukraine’s Victory: Top Priority in

    2023

  By Shashi P.B.B. Malla Nepal’s New Rainbow Coalition Government After the general elections, Nepal now has a seven-party coalition government, including three independents. It is an ideologically diverse coalition permeated by power-hungry party leaders. It is difficult to see this coalition lasting beyond a year given that CPN-UML Chairman K.P. Sharma Oli and CPN-Maoist Centre Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal “Prachanda” will continue their machinations. Their oversize ambitions and egos mean that they are not in the first instance motivated by the aspirations of the people. They have definitely not turned over a new leaf, and the Nepalese people are bound to be disappointed – sooner than later. The Nepali electorate did give a mixed message, but most did not expect such a diverse and cumbersome coalition. At first glance, it is also disappointing that the nascent Rashtriya Swatantra Party (RSP/ National Independent Party) and the Rashtriya Prajatantra Party (RPP/National Democratic Party) have joined the Communist-led government. The lawmakers from these two progressive parties cannot be expected to achieve much in a Communist dominated government, besides furthering their own personal political ambitions. However, let us just give them the benefit of the doubt and see what they make of the portfolios allotted to them. Numerically, they do have some leverage. Taken together, they have some pressure points and can achieve that the government does not misbehave – it can rise, but also fall! Without the RSP and RPP [20 + 14 seats], the government will have only 135 seats [3 less of a working majority]. Actually they are the real kingmakers, not Oli. Through close cooperation, these two parties have a golden opportunity to demonstrate to the Nepalese people their ability and acumen. Tumultuous Year for South Asia It has been an agitated year for the geographical region South Asia. If Iran in the west and Myanmar in the east are also included – there are geopolitical reasons for doing so – then the region has been particularly restless. Mass protests rocked Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka saw leadership changes. Pakistan’s ousted prime minister, Imran Khan, survived an assassination attempt. Afghanistan’s new Taliban regime has ruled with the same repressive tactics it deployed in the late 1990s. Hate speech poisoned public discourse in India and intensified communal tensions. This has played out against a backdrop of high inflation, energy shortages, mounting public debt, plunging foreign reserves, floods and drought. Amid the general volatility, four developments stand out that hit the headlines. They highlight the striking shared experiences of many countries in South Asia – a region that often struggles to be on the same page (Foreign Policy/South Asia Brief, Dec. 20). Sri Lanka’s Economic Meltdown This year, more than a decade of catastrophic economic policy reached its zenith. After emerging from civil war in 2009, successive Sri Lankan governments have fallen into a debt trap. [Nepal’s foreign policy pundits attacked the Netherland’s ambassador for having the ‘effrontery’ to interfere in Nepal’s domestic affairs by mentioning this possibility in a seminar statement in the nation’s capital]. In late 2019, then newly elected President Gotabaya Rajapaksa enacted tax cuts, which deprived the government of much needed revenue when the Covid-19 pandemic set in at the beginning of 2020. However, Sri Lanka still spent heavily, leading to currency depreciation. [In Nepal, the Oli and Deuba governments do not have a viable and sustainable economic policy] Then, in a sudden and inexplicable decision, Rajapaksa banned the use of chemical fertilizer in 2021, which drastically limited agricultural production and fueled rising food costs. Sri Lanka’s economy was especially vulnerable to the supply chain shocks and rising commodity costs triggered by the pandemic and since the beginning of 2022 by Russia’s war in Ukraine. Covid-19 also decimated Sri Lanka’s tourism industry [as the whole region’s], which accounted for nearly 6 percent of its GDP in 2018 but less than 1 percent in 2020. At the start of 2022, Sri Lanka had plunged into one of the world’s worst economic crises. Foodstuffs inflation at one point surged to 90 percent, petrol stations ran out of fuel, and usable foreign reserves dwindled to a mere US Dollar $ 25 million. Sri Lanka’s currency fell by 80 percent, and the economy practically ground to a halt. In May 2022, Sri Lanka defaulted on its debts for the first time in its history. This severe economic crisis, coupled with mass protests, prompted Rajapaksa to resign in July. Analysts pointed to Sri Lanka’s economic collapse as a cautionary tale:
  • An illustration of the dangers of overdependence on Chinese loans;
  • The disproportionate effects far-off conflicts can have on poor, developing countries;
  • The costs of years of economic mis-governance (FP).
Elsewhere in South Asia, each country faced similar economic woes, but none as severe as Sri Lanka’s. Pakistan’s Catastrophic Floods This summer, early and intense monsoon rains triggered some of the worst flooding in Pakistan’s history, submerging one-third of the country and affecting 33 million people [more than the entire population of Nepal]. Losses were estimated at US Dollar $ 40 billion, and millions of crops were damaged or destroyed, heightening food insecurity. Although most of the floodwater has now receded, outbreaks of waterborne diseases have placed added strain on the public health system, and many flood victims still lack adequate food and shelter. By year’s end, just one-third of the United Nations’ appeal for financial assistance to Pakistan had been met (FP). The floods were a reminder of the perils of climate change and how the countries that contribute the least to global carbon emissions can suffer the most from its effects. The floods spurred action at this year’s annual UN climate change summit in Egypt, where Pakistan led the charge to get loss and damage on the formal agenda. By the end of the summit, countries reached an agreement on a new loss and damage fund. It remains to be seen whether actual funding follows the fine words! [As usual, Nepal is, more or less, a silent spectator with no sustainable policy on the environment. A science-oriented minister is the need of the hour]. Afghanistan: The Taliban’s Broken Promise After capturing power in Kabul last year, the Taliban had promised to remove the ban on girls’ secondary education by March. But it reneged instead, ultimately shattering the illusion that today’s Taliban regime is a softer version than that of the late 1990s (FP). Keeping the ban in place was a precursor to more draconian policies, including new restrictions on women’s dress and movement and the reinstatement of floggings and public executions. On December 20, the Taliban announced an indefinite ban on university education for women. However, this also exposed the Taliban’s growing internal divisions. Some top Taliban leaders reportedly wanted the ban removed, but the radical movement’s supreme leader and its Kandahar-based religious leadership dominated, showing who really calls the shots. The Taliban’s decision to keep millions of girls out of school likely hardened the resolve of many governments – including those of South Asia – not to recognize the repressive regime. This year, a few governments in the region signaled their willingness to engage with the Taliban. Pakistan pursued trade with Afghanistan. India partially reopened its embassy in Kabul. The education ban and the policies that followed explain why not a single South Asian state had established formal relations with the Taliban by the year’s end. The Taliban has effectively manouvred the country to a ‘pariah state’ [like Myanmar]. The UN has not allowed it to take its seat in the General Assembly. Nepal’s lethargic foreign policy means that its chairmanship of SAARC has become a ‘lame duck’. It could easily have convened a formal meeting of SAARC foreign ministers to castigate Afghanistan for its antediluvian policies. India’s Ambivalent Ukraine Policy Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February  did unite the West against Vladimir Putin. However, in South Asia – where Moscow has no enemies and a history of sustained engagement – it was met with a relatively muted response. Half of South Asian states abstained from the first U.N. resolution condemning the invasion. India, with its very close ties to Russia [especially energy and military imports] and commitment to strategic autonomy was the leading power in this regard (FP). For months after the invasion, India called for a peaceful end to the conflict but refrained from outright condemnation or criticism of Putin. This was an instance of pure grandstanding – without any forceful contribution to actually ending the war. Some other South Asian countries did likewise. At a regional summit in Uzbekistan in September, Modi again seemed to take the initiative by calling out Putin while seated next to him” “today’s era is not an era of war”. This was too anodyne a statement to impress Putin, who needed no history lesson from an upstart leader of a developing country fully dependent on Russian fuel and armaments. Putin promptly ignored Modi by ordering a partial troop mobilization and intensified missile attacks in Ukraine soon after. In Putin’s aggressive war in Ukraine, Modi has no leadership role in South Asia. Other leaders have their own reasons for not wanting to align with the Western-led anti-Russian campaign. Modi’s failed attempt at de-escalation is a result of the basic contradictions of India’s Ukraine policy – no direct condemnation of Russia’s egregious violation of the UN Charter and international law, major dependence on Russian oil and arms, and at the same time cozying up to the U.S. in its Indo-Pacific Strategy. Modi was bound to fail in his attempt to square the circle. Putin’s Ukraine War: Russia’s Defeat Top Priority for 2023 In December 2021, Ukraine’s defence minister, Oleksii Reznikov had stated that Europe’s future would be decided in Ukraine. A year later, what was then a bold statement now seems to be recognizable fact. In a new essay, Reznikov writes: “Ukraine has become Europe’s shield, defending the continent along a 2,500-kilometer front line” (UkraineAlert, Dec.22). Reznikov insists that with the mounting success of the Ukrainian army, the threats facing NATO and the European Union will diminish. Russia is currently seeking to buy time in order to rearm. It is bombing Ukraine’s energy infrastructure and creating a humanitarian catastrophe to force Ukraine back to the negotiating table. Western policymakers should now be looking to capitalize on Russia’s weakness. This means supplying Ukraine with the necessary air defences, long-range missiles, tanks, and planes in order to end the war. With sufficient military supplies, Ukraine will be capable of finishing the job of defeating Russia in 2023. This would then bring the prospect of a sustainable peace and the opportunity to build the country’s vast potential. On a global scale, Ukraine’s success would reinvigorate the entire democratic world while demonstrating the renewed strength of the rules-based international order. Securing Ukraine’s victory must be the international community’s top priority in may order A Call to Defend Freedom Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky went to Washington not only to seek aid in the existential struggle against Russia but to remind Americans that there is still a “free world”, and only the United States can unite it (Tom Nichols/The Atlantic Daily, Dec. 23). His visit must be seen in the context of the terrible winter facing all Ukrainians. Putin and his cohorts after terrorizing and murdering Ukrainian civilians, may well try to return to offensive operations. There are also increasing concerns that Putin may order Russian troops to use neighbouring Belarus as a Launchpad for an assault on the Ukrainian capital Kyiv. In a brilliant address to Congress, Zelensky reminded the assembled US lawmakers and millions of Americans at home
  • of the crucial victory at the Battle of Saratoga, 1777 during the War of Independence. The British defeat encouraged France to enter the war in 1778 and was a vital tonic to the American cause.
  • He insisted that the world cannot do without American leadership. He invoked the concept that global security is indivisible.
“This battle cannot be frozen or postponed…or ignored.” The world is too interconnected and interdependent to allow any one state to stay aside and at the same time to feel safe when such a battle continues.
  • Zelensky also reminded the Americans that national security abroad is intrinsic to US well-being at home.
Putin is counting on the United States and NATO to tire and falter. Zelensky made a strong case that Ukraine is the main front in a global conflict. The writer can be reached at: shashipbmalla@hotmail.com