* Nepal’s Aviation Disaster
* Nepal: Tragi-Comedy of Errors
* Brazil’s Democracy under
Attack
*Russia- Ukraine War
By Shashi P.B.B. Malla
Nepal: Tragedy Strikes in Pokhara
Nepal’s endemic corruption finally caught up with its so-called leaders, political class and administrative bureaucracy.
If not now, when will the realization step in that ministerial appointments are not ‘to make hay while the sun shines’, but to get things done and serve the people.
The terrible tragedy at the Seti River gorge near the newly inaugurated Pokhara Regional International Airport was quite predictable.
For years now, the European Union (EU) had banned Nepalese planes from flying to the 27-nation bloc and had demanded major improvements in training, maintenance and administration in the aviation sector.
But one government after another did nothing.
For a start, all aircraft of the type and make of the fatal aircraft, if still in operation, should be grounded and thoroughly checked – if possible by an American expert [the aircraft in question is manufactured by French-Italian collaboration].
If the prime minister really means business, he should appoint a technocrat/civil aviation expert to head a separate ministry of civil aviation.
The ministry of tourism should be a separate portfolio.
Nepal’s Democracy in Shambles
Domestic and international observers of Nepal’s democratic process must be shaking their heads in disbelief at the ways and means how Nepal’s leaders are interpreting loktantra or ‘people’s democracy’ – a sham horizontally and vertically.
The Pitfalls of the Coalition
As part of the negotiations in forming the jumbo-coalition, the participating parties should have first:
- Negotiated the common minimum programme. Instead, it was left to the kingmaker of the coalition, K.P. Sharma Oli to formulate it. How can they own such a document?
- They should also have negotiated the distribution of ministerial portfolios before announcing the formation of the coalition.
Both exercises were blatant examples of putting the cart before the horse and does not auger well either for the functioning of the coalition, nor for its chances of tenure.
The Grave Mistakes of Deuba and the Nepali Congress
The former prime minister, Sher Bahadur Deuba and his party, the Nepali Congress (NC) – supposed to be the main opposition [in fact the only one] have made fools of themselves by supporting the jumbo-coalition in the vote of confidence.
It was a grave attack on the proper functioning of representative democracy and the role of the opposition party in controlling the government.
There was no earthly reason for Deuba to grovel before PM Pushpa Kamal Dahal-Prachanda. He can expect no favours from him – like allowing the NC to propose candidates for the House Speaker or Federal President [Oli will have something to say about that!].
There was no need to invoke the image of a ‘government of national unity’.
The Predictable Attack on Brazil’s Democracy
Radical right-wing populist followers of Brazil’s former president, Jair Bolsonaro stormed the capital district of Brasilia on Sunday, January 8.
For observers, it was entirely predictable, and raises questions about the country’s security forces (DW/Deutsche Welle: Jens Gluesing, Jan. 9).
The violent scenes were reminiscent of the storming of the United States Capitol almost exactly two year ago on January 6.
It was a violent and predictable assault on Brazil’s state institutions that was supported by numerous police officers.
Since Friday, January 6, followers of right-wing radical ex-President Jair Bolsonaro had been gathering in Brasilia, allegedly for a protest in front of the National Congress.
Bolsonaro’s hardcore supporters refuse to accept his defeat at the hands of Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva [known popularly as “Lula”] in late October. For the past several weeks, they have been demanding that the military take over.
Hundreds of buses full of Bolsonaro supporters from around the country had arrived in the capital.
The justice minister explicitly warned security officials of the impending danger and asked that the vast mall leading to the National Congress, and Three Powers Plaza – so named because it is home to the Congress, the presidential office and the country’s highest court – be closed to demonstrators.
But the Civil Police of the Federal District, which is in charge of security in Brasilia, did nothing.
Indeed, they even escorted the “demonstrators” in the direction of the seat of government!
Those gathered in the crowd had made no secret that they were planning a raid of the kind undertaken by supporters of former U.S. President Donald Trump on January 6, 2021.
For days, Bolsonaro supporters had been discussing the storming of the National Congress in ‘WhatsApp’ groups.
The chief of security for the Federal District, Anderson Torres, who had served as justice minister under Bolsonaro, has since been sacked.
It is considered possible that Torres had known about the coming assault on the country’s parliament, or even took part in the planning.
Thousands of people stormed Three Powers Tower, with hundreds of them forcing their way into the National Congress building, the presidential palace and the seat of the Supreme Federal Court.
They laid waste to offices and plenary halls, posing in the Senate and filming with their mobile phones.
Only after an hour were the police able to drive the vandals out of the presidential palace and the high court with the help of teargas.
Thousands of people were still gathered out in front of the National Congress building.
Brazil’s parliament and highest court are on summer break [it is the southern hemisphere] until the end of the month.
Lula was also out of the capital when the raids commenced, visiting victims of severe recent rainfall in the state of Sao Paulo.
Lula has now essentially placed the capital’s security in the hands of the president.
He promised that all those who participated in or helped plan the raids would be “found and penalized.”
He accused Bolsonaro of having inspired the storming of Brazil’s democratic institutions. “Nothing like this has ever happened in the history of the Republic,” he said.
Questions about the Security Forces
“The threat to Brazil’s democracy did not come to an end with Lula’s inauguration and is likely to continue hanging over the country for the next several months. The most pressing question is how the country’s security forces and military will respond” (DW).
The riot demonstrated the significant degree to which the country’s militarily organized police forces, which are under the control of the state governors, have been infiltrated by diehard Bolsonaro supporters.
Lula can really only trust the federal police force, but even there, he must be very circumspect.
The military has thus far stayed in the background and there does not appear to be an imminent threat of a military putsch.
Paradoxically, Lula, the president may be constitutionally the commander-in-chief of Brazil’s armed forces, but this does not mean the troops will readily obey all orders.
They were unwilling to clear the tent camp that Bolsonaro followers had established in front of army headquarters in Brasilia after Lula’s election on October 30.
Nor did they do anything to diffuse the situation.
Last week, governments from across Latin America and Europe expressed their solidarity with Lula and Brazilian democracy.
The gesture of German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier, who met Lula before he was sworn in and was photographed arm-in-arm with the Brazilian president-elect, carries new meaning against the backdrop of the capital vandalism.
It has also become clear that Lula is dependent on international support.
The crisis of Brazilian democracy has just begun.
Ukraine: A Steady Trudge?
It’s nearly a year since Russian President Vladimir Putin, self-deluded by outlandish imperial ambitions, ordered an all-out but unprovoked invasion of Ukraine.
Currently, expert opinions differ drastically as to how the war will unfold.
Some in the West are optimistic that Kyiv could reclaim much of its occupied territory, including Crimea. These are positively confident about Ukraine’s prospects, while others are even more downbeat about Russia’s trajectory.
Casey Michel, in the Financial Times opines that Russia could fall apart if it continues to lose soldiers, conscript more men and mire through a sluggish economy beset by Western sanctions.
He even advises: “The West must be ready for what comes next, including a possible Soviet-style disintegration.”
Others foresee a stalemate.
In the latest prediction of that outcome, Ivo H. Daalder and James Goldgeier write in a Foreign Affairs essay that wars don’t often end in a clear victory or defeat.
For instance, North and South Korea are still technically at war, and the Russo-Ukrainian war may end up that way too.
The writers argue that the West needs “an effective approach to dealing with a prolonged war”: a “multipronged strategy” to contain Russia, maintain economic pressure, keep Moscow isolated diplomatically and increase Europe’s military spending even more.
Europe Holds Together – For Now!
From the outset, Russia’s all-out war on Ukraine has strained European unity.
Carnegie Europe’s Judy Dempsey has written that the war has exposed a fundamental rift between major European Union powers in Western Europe which have favoured caution in supporting Ukraine and some Eastern European governments that have stronger anti-Russian predispositions after living under the repressive Soviet Union.
However, even within countries opinion is not monolithic.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has faced divisions in his coalition government over whether to send heavier weaponry to Ukraine.
After a recent decision to send ‘Marder’ fighting vehicles, Matthias Gebauer and Marina Kormbaki write for Der Spiegel”: “pressure on the chancellor to do more for Ukraine remains high”.
To other commentators, it’s a marvel that Europe has held together in supporting Kyiv so consistently.
At the World Politics Review, Stathis Kalyvas deliberates on so-called European disunity over Ukraine as “the dog that didn’t bark”!
From east to west, leaders of Europe’s populist right – some of whom have been seen as Russia-friendly in the past – have been muted on or opposed to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s war.
More broadly, Kalyvas points out, Russia’s war has not become a polarized issue in the Western world’s bitterly divided left-right schism.
Crimea: ‘Bone of Contention’?
But there is still time for that unity to be tested.
At the New Statesman, Jeremy Cliffe foresees a rift over Crimea, if Ukraine’s forces find themselves in position to recapture it.
Western governments may not agree on whether that’s a good or sustainable idea.
“And therein lies the paradox that may well come to define the next stage of the conflict, Cliffe writes” “the more Ukraine advances from here onwards, the more the international support enabling it to do so will be at risk of fracturing.”
The writer can be reached at: shashipbmalla@hotmail.com
Login to add a comment