- Nepal: Dictatorship of Political Parties
- UK: Demise of the Modern Elizabethan Era
- Ukraine: Russia on the Backfoot
By Shashi P.B.B. Malla
Nepal: Political Parties Threatening Democracy
Nepal’s main political parties are threatening democracy in myriad ways. They are supposed to be the link between the electorate/people and the government, but this is just an illusion. There is close contact, but only during elections.
We have a so-called electoral democracy, and that’s it. After elections and government formation, there is no control and accountability. This is one of the major deficiencies of the present constitution.
As we are observing daily in the run-up to the elections, the main parties are in the process of forming ‘electoral alliances’ which will make it very difficult for smaller parties and independent candidates. Is there then any real choice?
The smaller parties do not have the cash – especially the huge amounts – which are necessary to fight elections successfully. A further weakness of the electoral process is that the Election Commission is too weak to control the colossal amounts at play.
A fundamental weakness of the current political system is that political participation is very weak, in spite of the fact that the so-called Loktantra [people’s democracy] has been praised and is still praised to the high heavens. It has practically been reduced to systematic kleptocracy from top to bottom.
There should be a proper devolution of power – which is absolutely missing in the current federal set-up. Elected officials, even at the lowest level, think that they have received carte blanche to exploit local resources to their heart’s content. This continues at each rung of the ladder to the national level.
We cannot cater to the opinion that Nepali political parties are not like their Western counterparts and have to support a wide range of clientele – cadres, helpers, advisers and supporters – like a large family or tribe.
Just like we have the imported system of parliamentary democracy, we have to transform our political parties with practicing internal democracy.
And just as in Britain with a healthy democracy and constitutional monarchy, the same should also be possible in Nepal. The Rashtriya Prajatantra Party (RPP/National Democratic Party) cannot be condemned outright as regressive just because it follows these aims.
Compared to the other main parties, it is, in fact, more patriotic and democratic.
End of the Modern Elizabethan Era
Queen Elizabeth II, historically Britain’s longest-reigning monarch, died last Thursday at the family retreat in Balmoral, Scotland after ascending the throne for 70 years. She was 96 years old and carried out her duties till the very end. According to British constitutional law, ‘the monarch reigns, but does not rule’.
News of her death sparked a flood of grief around the world, although perhaps nowhere as intensely as in England, where thousands of tearful mourners congregated outside of Buckingham Palace, London, Winsor Castle and Balmoral [all royal residences] to pay their respects.
British Prime Minister Liz Truss, whom the queen had instated just days earlier, called her “the rock on which modern Britain was built.”
Elizabeth II “may be best remembered as a leader who provided a model of constancy in a rapidly shifting world,” wrote Foreign Policy. “She was admired by monarchists and republicans alike for her unswerving devotion to duty and her refusal to bend to the faddish expectations of critics” (Sep. 09).
World leaders paid tribute to her legacy and expressed their condolences.
U.S. President Joe Biden said the queen “defined an era”. The American ambassador to the Court of St. James was not willing to speculate whether Biden would attend her funeral. At the least, U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris is expected to attend.
French President Emmanuel Macron tweeted that she “embodied the British nation’s continuity and unity”. He recalled: “I remember her as a friend of France, a kind-hearted queen who has left a lasting impression on his country and her century.”
These sentiments were echoed by Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, who said her passing was a blow to the international community.
Even Russian President Vladimir Putin weighed in, wishing the new British king Charles III “courage and perseverance in the face of this heavy, irreparable loss.”
“The long reign of Queen Elizabeth II was marked by her strong sense of duty and her determination to dedicate herself to the four nations of the U.K. “She became for many the one constant point in a rapidly changing world as British influence declined, society changed beyond recognition and the role of the monarchy itself came into question.”
The Economist writes: “It is hard to imagine Britain without Queen Elizabeth II partly because almost everyone has only known it with her.” The magazine adds that her “unwavering professionalism helped ensure the survival of the British monarchy.”
It is that sense of duty – along with humility and a uniting presence – that dominates the reflections and tributes.
UK Legacy & Future Trajectory
But as monarch – and through the Commonwealth – Elizabeth II also presided over an institution with a dark legacy of colonialism, imperialism and subjugation that has profoundly shaped the world today.
The legacy is especially clear in the West Indies, where several Caribbean nations that still retained her as head of state [as do Canada, Australia and New Zealand], also called Commonwealth realms, are now pushing to abolish the ‘foreign’ monarchy.
Elizabeth’s son, King Charles III, ascends the throne as Britain grapples with a spiriling economic crisis under the new Conservative prime minister, Liz Truss, only the third woman – after Margaret Thatcher and Theresa May – in the post.
Liz Truss: Not a Popular Leader for a Troubled Britain
Liz Truss became the 15th and last prime minister to be appointed by the late Queen Elizabeth II.
She came to power not via a general election but after winning the majority of votes in a Conservative Party [or Tory] leadership election decided by fewer than two lakhs dues-paying party activists.
Her main rival, former Chancellor of the Exchequer [of Indian parentage but born in the UK] was more popular among sitting Conservative or Tory MPs.
Public opinion polls show the opposition Labour Party [with social democratic orientation] with its strongest lead in a decade.
A majority of Britons believe Truss will not make a convincing prime minister, and only a quarter consider her an improvement from Boris Johnson, her controversial and polarizing predecessor.
Moreover, she will be unable to muster Johnson’s uncontainable optimism and “Darkened skies already hang low over her nascent premiership” (WaPo/The Washington Post).
In addition to the war in Ukraine and the fallout of Brexit (UK’s exit from the EU), Truss has inherited a vast range of economic and political problems.
The Bank of England predicts the UK will suffer protracted recession starting this October. Inflation already stands at 10 % percent, with economists warning that 15 % percent is quite possible.
“There’s an impending cascade of woes: A mammoth cost-of-living crisis is driving a historic drop in living standards” (WaPo).
Two-thirds of British households may face “fuel poverty” by the end of 2022, struggling to pay for the surging costs of heating their homes. [Across the channel, Germany and the EU are claiming that the situation is not so dire there].
In various sectors of the economy, industrial action has already started, with strikes shutting down train services, garbage collection and the operation of ports.
Ukraine’s Counteroffensive Gains Momentum
After much speculation about a Ukrainian counteroffensive near the southern city of Kherson, the Institute for the Study of War reports Kyiv’s forces are “tangibly degrading Russian logistics and administrative capabilities in occupied southern Ukraine.
Acknowledging the counteroffensive as truly underway, the War on the Rocks praises what it sees as a limited effort aimed where Russian forces are most vulnerable.
At The New Statesman, Lawrence Freedman writes: “After a period in which the fighting seemed stuck in a groove and was threatening to turn into an attritional slog, it may be about to enter a dynamic period.”
The British defence think tank RUSI suggests the current operation is a prelude: “We may…understand Ukrainian offensive operations to be implemented in three broad phrases: the Kherson offensive, a protracted period of asymmetric skirmishes and deep strikes to disrupt Russia’s occupation and demoralize its troops, and a period of major combat operations in 2023.”
As Ukraine’s military purposes a nascent counteroffensive, the UK’s defence ministry suggests Ukrainian attacks in both the south and north will test the Russian army’s ability to coordinate – something at which Moscow’s forces failed during the war’s outset.
Germany’s leading news magazine Der Spiegel notes cautious optimism surrounding Kyiv’s effort. More Ukrainian soldiers and materiel have arrived near the southern front, but concerns linger over those troops training levels and Russian forces’ ability to dig in.
Putin Criticized by Hawks Who Trumpeted His War
Putin is now facing a major political challenge after Ukraine’s stunning rout of Russian forces. His image of competence and might that he has worked for two decades to promote is sorely undermined (NYT, Sep. 13).
As Russian forces retreated in north-eastern Ukraine in one of the most embarrassing setbacks of the war, Putin was presiding over the grand opening of a Ferris wheel at an amusement park in Moscow (NYT/Sep. 11).
This brought in sharp contrast the growing rift between the Kremlin and the invasion’s most ardent supporters.
For them, Russia’s retreat confirmed their worst fears: that senior Russian officials were only concerned with maintaining a business-as-usual atmosphere back home and had (deliberately) failed to commit the necessary materiel and personnel to fight a long war against a determined enemy.
Putin had indeed succeeded in eliminating the liberal and pro-democracy opposition in Russia’s domestic politics, but he now faced the risk of growing discontent from the hawkish end of the political spectrum.
It has now become exceedingly difficult for Putin and his inner circle/elite to maintain the fiction that the invasion was merely a “special military operation”.
The extreme conservative elements of Russian society are convinced that Russia was, in fact, fighting a full-fledged war – not just against Ukraine, but against a united West that is backing Kyiv.
According to analysts, Putin faces no good options: “Escalating a war [also by a general mobilization] whose domestic support may turn out to be superficial could stir domestic unrest, while continuing retreats on the battlefield could spur a backlash from hawks who have bought into the Kremlin narrative that Russia is fighting ‘Nazis’ for its very survival” (NYT).
India Has No Weapons to Deter China
PM Narendra Modi’s push to boost domestic manufacturing of defence systems has left India vulnerable to persistent threats from China and Pakistan, according to knowledgeable officials from all three branches of the armed services (Bloomberg, Sep. 7).
Shortly after sweeping to power in 2014, Modi unveiled his expansive “Make in India” policy to build everything from mobile phones to fighter jets in India to generate jobs and reduce outflows of foreign exchange.
India’s military readiness is set to further decline just as it faces greater risk from its two antagonists.
China has deployed toe-to-toe soldiers against troops from India along their Himalaya-Karakorum border following deadly clashes in 2020.
India’s weaker air force in particular means it will need twice the number of soldiers on the ground to deter the Chinese.
The particularly dire situation with the air force means the Indian Air Force (IAF) may be left with less than 30 fighter squadrons (16 to 18 fighter jets), well below the 42 the military says it needs to adequately protect borders with both China and Pakistan – after grounding squadrons that reach the end of their flying life.
Helicopters are another problem. Most of the army’s fleet of single-engine choppers will have to be grounded by 2026 even though domestically made light helicopters will not be ready before the end of 2030.
The navy is also facing problems over the push to use home-grown equipment.
India’s new aircraft carrier, the Vikrant – its second – is a generation behind the design of China’s latest aircraft carrier the high-tech Fujian launched in June. The first supercarrier to be built outside the U.S., it is far larger than the Vikrant, will be able to hold more aircraft, and most importantly uses an electromagnetic system to slingshot aircraft at takeoff. This allows the Fujian to launch far heavier aircraft, laden with weapons and fuel, at a much faster rate than the Vikrant.
Rahul Bedi, a New Delhi-based independent defence analyst said Modi’s import substitution plans did not consider the fact that developing world-class weapon systems require billions of dollars in investment and years of research.
He also noted that even Indian defence platforms such as light combat aircraft or tanks have roughly 50 % percent imported components.
Like many of Modi’s schemes, the ‘Make in India for defence’ and ‘Agnipath’ are nice slogans, but have not been thought through properly.
The writer can be reached at: shashipbmalla@hotmail.com
Login to add a comment