Review of World Affairs (RWA)
By Shashi P.B.B. Malla
Nepal’s Political Parties Disappoint
Nepal’s political parties have exposed themselves – outside brimming with confidence, inside a hollow shell. And in the nation’s hour of need, the party leaders have not come up to the mark.
The new chairman of the Rashtriya Prajatantra Party (RPP/National Democratic Party), Rajendra Lingden hit the nail on the head when he remarked that in the vast countryside, heads of political parties are greeted not as ‘leaders’ but as thieves/crooks/scoundrels/rogues [you name it!]. It remains to be seen whether the RPP develops into a mature party, capable of fulfilling the aspirations of the Nepali people.
The RPP has made a flying start by electing a leader out of the vast ranks of the Janjati, thereby breaking the stranglehold of the Khas/Arya majority. It should now try to achieve gender parity in the higher echelons. In contrast to the other parties, it has also demonstrated that it can practice real inner-party democracy.
Also in contrast to the other parties, it can face local and national elections with a clean sheet.
The Commies are a divided and divisive pack of jackals waiting to feast on a kill made by others. The Communist vote will be hopelessly divided, and they are looking for ways and means to achieve an electoral alliance – if possible with the gullible, ‘accidental’, but improbable and unconvincing Sher Bahadur Deuba.
The current prime minister himself has become an old and toothless tiger, unable even to become a ‘man-eater’. In the words of the Great Helmsman, the one and only Mao Zedong, Deuba has been reduced to a ‘paper tiger’, only capable of leading his party to electoral slaughter!
However, at his party convention, he claimed that he needed to be elected to the chairmanship for the Nepali Congress to win a majority in all three levels of upcoming elections (my Republica, Dec. 13).
Opposition to his highhanded party politics was already forming during the deliberations. Dr. ShekharKoirala, a medical doctor and nephew of the late B.P. Koirala, had thrown his hat into the ring and received the blessings of Ram Chandra Poudel to contest the presidential election.
Young Turk, Gagan Thapa, who had declared his candidacy for the post of General Secretary from Dr. Shekhar’s panel [i.e. faction] said there was great urgency to transform the party.
Another leader, Pradip Poudel also stressed the necessity for the party to take its shortcomings and weaknesses very seriously to move forward.
The party had ‘structural’ imperfections and was ideologically debilitated.
If Deuba wins the party presidency, the NC will be on the path to damnation; if Koirala comes on top, there is a slight chance of reform and renewal.
Democracy Under Attack Worldwide
U.S. President Joe Biden’s two-day “Summit for Democracy” concluded last Friday. Whether this was a short in the arm for democracy in practice remains to be seen.
Biden was able to pull together more than 100 global participants from government, civil society, and beyond for the virtual summit.
Among the outcomes was a US Dollar $ 424 million commitment to fight corruption and help independent media worldwide.
But now comes the hard part: Biden and his domestic team and multilateral allies must put in the work to democracy is not dying out. In the coming year, it will be an uphill task – in the United States itself and struggling democracies worldwide – to demonstrate vigorously and rigorously that democracy in practice is alive and kicking and the detractors of an open society are kept in their places.
Rose Jackson, a former State Department official, said that the great hope for last week’s gathering was to goad functioning democracies to “grapple with the very real challenges they each face at home and around the world. That means in particular, working on issues that are so interlinked they can’t be defined as just ‘foreign’ or ‘domestic’ “ (Atlantic Council, Dec. 11).
Two interlinked areas are of vital importance: corruption and technology. The U.S. administration did offer a well-regarded anti-corruption strategy and made an effort to limit the export of surveillance technology to autocratic regimes. However, there were not enough teeth. As Ms. Jackson noted: Knowing something is important, but knowing what to do about is also significant!
Graham Brookie, a former White House official, suggested ‘democracies’ pursue three priorities in the coming year: “to counter authoritarian tech use, drive down a dangerous variance in tech policy approaches among allies and partners, and produce coherent domestic approached to technology.”
In the case of Nepal, the nexus between corruption and technology has not even been explored!
View from Beijing
The Chinese government held its own counter-summit and launched a vigorous PR campaign against the U.S.
It was very irritated because the gathering included Taiwan which was definitely against the ‘One China policy.
China had already previously increased its vigorous influence operations, which has been referred to as ‘wolf warrior’ diplomacy or part of the country’s discourse power strategy.
Now comes the so-called ‘year of action’ ahead of an in-person gathering slated for next December.
Don’t expect any innovations in the great ‘Himalayan Federal Democratic Republic’ where ‘people’s democracy’ reigns supreme, and endemic corruption and misuse of power by the political parties is a way of life!
The United States as a Declining World Power
There are clear indications that at both ends of Eurasia, the era of “Pax Americana” is slowly but certainly coming to an end.
There are many ways to measure one of the great geopolitical transformations of world politics/world history – the decline of the United States’ power relative not only to a rising rival like China, and a former super-power now aspiring to be a world power like Russia but to the rest of the world in general.
Together, China and Russia command the heartland of Eurasia and are both land and sea powers. Allied, they make a formidable combination. The image of Russia as a weakened and hollow power is outdated.
The continental U.S. may be shielded by two oceans and is basically a naval power. It depends on allies on the periphery of Eurasia – NATO in the west and Japan and South Korea in the
American resources are stretched and the U.S. today faces looming challenges that fall under the oldest category of overall power and influence: military strength.
The United States’ role as a security guarantor in both Europe and Asia, where the buildup of the Russian military on the Ukrainian border and China’s vigorous campaign against its separatist province Taiwan and in South China and East China Seas put into sharp relief “Washington’s increasingly evident incapacity in strictly military terms to prevent either Moscow or Beijing from using military might to achieve their aims” (Howard French: World Politics Review).
The writing on the wall is evident. As a fading relative power, it faces difficult choices that are only going to grow more knotty/thorny/tricky. The paramount question revolves around
how much the country is willing to commit in lives and material resources in containing two countries whose histories are inimitably bound by empire from pursuing their territorial ambitions.
The current tensions with Russia over Ukraine and China over Taiwan will force the U.S. to make hard choices about its ambiguous posture of strategic ambiguity when it comes to defending non-treaty allies from military coercion and attack.
The U.S. is now attempting to prop up its overall strength with bilateral and multilateral alliances and quasi-alliances/affiliation – the Quad, AUKUS [Australia, UK, U.S.].
It can also be said that multipolar world order is now emerging – the U.S., China, Russia, European Union (EU) and Japan.
Germany: A New Broom to Sweep Clean
The 16-year Merkel era is over. The government led by Chancellor Angela Merkel was characterized by stability, but the new generation of Germans yearn for change, and that is why they have given a mandate to the down-and-out centre-left Social Democratic Party (SPD) to lead the charge.
However, the new chancellor, Olaf Scholz has the unenviable task to deliver. He has first to rescue the country from the miserable fourth wave of the global pandemic – an avoidable blunder of the previous government [of which he was a part]. Second, he has to take immediate steps with regard to climate change. These have now become inextricable domestic and multi-national issues of the first rank.
Third, Germany has visibly demonstrated that it is a zone of stability in Europe and people inside and outside of the country now expect that the largest economy takes a more resolute stance on the pressing issues of world affairs. It can no longer be an island or an oasis. And Olaf Scholz is up to the task.
And he is a man of action and not of words and an astute political strategist. He has diligently studied the creeping failure of Social Democrats [and left of centre parties in general] on the continent and around the world and rising fascination with populist movements. Unlike the political pundits, he was one of the lone observers who envisaged the (im)possible victory of the showman, Donald Trump, back in 2016.
Scholz, therefore, worked hard and diligently behind the scenes to resuscitate his party from the unlikely and hopeless position of chancellor candidate [and not even a party chairman].
His election as chancellor is the sensation of the year. Even six months back, no one would have bet on it.
Germany has now achieved gender parity as regards ministerial berths, a woman is chairperson of the Bundestag (parliament), for the first in its history a woman is a foreign minister, and a person with a migration background has also been appointed a minister!
German under Scholz has now arrived and ready and willing to take on onerous tasks, both at home and abroad.
Nepal-German Relations
Compared to the heyday of bilateral relations immediately following the establishment of permanent embassies, today’s relationship is only a shadow of its former self.
Nepal’s first resident ambassador in Bonn [then the capital of the western part of a divided Germany], Sardar Bhim Bahadur Pande was the envoy par excellence. He ‘micromanaged’ HM King Mahendra’s state visit to the Netherlands and unofficial visit to West Germany with resounding success [the then HRH Prince Gyanendra was a member of the royal entourage].
A succession of envoys were incapable of building on the solid foundations laid by Ambassador Pande.
Dr. Wilhelm Loeer, the first resident ambassador of the Federal Republic of Germany, was not to be outdone in taking the bilateral relationship to greater heights. During his tenure, the state visit of President Dr. Heinrich Luebke was a grand success.
The then Nepalese embassy in Bonn was situated at a commanding height overlooking the Rhine river and the ‘Dragon’s Lair’ – a crème de la crème location. In contrast, it is now an innocuous address – the location signifying the diminished role that Nepal now plays in the bilateral relationship.
Ambassador Gen. (retd.) Singha Pratap Shah and his capable deputy, Counsellor Arjun Bahadur Singh together with the German Foreign Office – which pulled out all the stops — arranged an outstanding and memorable state visit of HM King Birendra and HM Queen Aishwarya in 1989 – but that is now history!
How the U.S. & Russia View Ukraine
This has gained relevance and raised alarms in that Russia is preparing to launch the largest military offensive in Europe since World War II.
According to Alexander Vindman, a former director at the White House National Security Council, U.S. foreign policy toward Ukraine has failed to keep the Kremlin in check (NYT, Dec. 13).
In Vindman’s opinion, the stark contrast between a prosperous democratic Ukraine and a repressive and economically stagnant Russia are already evident.
A sovereign, prosperous and democratic Ukraine would:
- Upend Russia’s irredentist aspirations for empire, and
- Make Russia a less potent partner to China.
Russia’s permanent president Vladimir Putin and the power elite have a different perception of Ukraine than their Western detractors.
- Putin’s main focus has been to rebuild Russia as a strong authoritarian state, projecting power in the world at large, and above all in its self-proclaimed “sphere of influence” in the former constituent states of the Soviet empire. And that includes Ukraine [and Belarus].
- Putin considers Ukraine a less-than-sovereign, structurally unviable country, not entitled to make its own alliances.
- Russia’s need for a security buffer is ingrained in the collective memory after successive invasions from the West over the past centuries.
had devastating effects in the 19th and 20th centuries.
The Washington Post writes: “in Russia’s ideal scenario, a geopolitical compromise would see its influence over Ukraine restored, or at least Kyiv forced to accept neutrality” (Dec. 11).
- Putin often speaks of “One Russia”, meaning Russia, Ukraine and Belarus, underlying the so-called “historical unity” [not unlike the mythological “Maha-Bharat”].
He also speaks of “Big Russia” [ Russia itself ] and “Little Russia” [ Ukraine ].
“This view highlights the common ancestry shared by Russia, Ukraine and Belarus in the medieval state of Kyiv Rus” (WaPo).
Putin claims that the West divided these tightly bound Slavic brothers.
The great irony is that threatening to invade Ukraine could bolster Putin’s domestic support; however, an actual invasion would have devastating economic effects, and by extension possible political repercussions!
- At the same time, what Ukraine could become is also a Russian nightmare – “a strong, stable, Western-leaning democracy, where corruption is thwarted, civil society thrives and elections work” (WaPo).
After all, a free, thriving democracy in the immediate neighbourhood could give Russians insidious ideas!
Thus, Putin is playing the age-old game of diverting attention from domestic problems to a manufactured external threat [where none exits]. A top Putin aide has spoken openly of “exporting chaos”.
- There are echoes of Russia’s imperial history in today’s Ukraine crisis. Russia is no longer the weak power that it was in the 1990s after the collapse of the Soviet empire. In that sense, it is not a ‘status quo’ but a revisionist power intent on restoring its past glory, power and influence.
It, therefore, rejects all Western influence and interference in the ‘internal affairs’ of its very backyard.
The writer can be reached at: shashipbmalla@hotmail.com
Login to add a comment