Hi 2015 Nov/Dec links are not considered old news ,here is some more food for thought .
Why India is concerned about Nepal's constitution
By Sanjoy MajumderBBC News, Delhi
- 22 September 2015
- From the sectionIndia
Share
Image copyrightAP
Image captionPresident Ram Baran Yadav signed the document in the capital Kathmandu on Sunday
Nepal's adoption of a new federal constitution has led to a souring of ties with its giant neighbour India.
The document defines the majority Hindu nation as a secular republic divided into seven federal provinces.
Although Delhi was one of the major backers of the process over the past decade, it believes the new constitution is not broad-based and is concerned that it could spur violence which could spill over into its own territory.
India's reaction in the past few days to events in Nepal has been quite remarkable.
On Friday, just a couple of days before the constitution was formally adopted (but after it had been passed by the Constituent Assembly) India's top diplomat was sent to Kathmandu at the behest of Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
Foreign Secretary S Jaishankar held discussions with Nepal's president and prime minister and leaders of all the major political parties including those who had opposed the constitution in its current form.
He is believed to have pressed the Nepalese government to delay the adoption of the constitution and hold discussions with political groups opposed to it.
Reports in the Indian media say that India's ambassador in Kathmandu spoke to Prime Minister Sushil Koirala hours before Sunday's constitution ceremony to express Delhi's disappointment at the process going through.
Violent reaction
And hours after the constitution was formally adopted, the Indian foreign ministry put out a terse statement only "noting" that it had taken place.
"We are concerned that the situation in several parts of the country bordering India continues to be violent," the statement said.
"We urge that issues on which there are differences should be resolved through dialogue in an atmosphere free from violence and intimidation, and institutionalised in a manner that would enable broad-based ownership and acceptance," it added.
It's hardly a ringing endorsement.
India's concern has been with the violent reaction to the constitution in the low-lying southern plains, adjoining India, the Terai.
Communities living in the Terai, especially the Madeshis and the Tharu ethnic minorities, have expressed concern that the proposed boundaries of the new provinces could lead to their political marginalisation.
The two groups make up nearly 40% of Nepal's population and the Madeshis share close ethnic ties with people in India.
Image copyrightAFP
Image captionThe Madeshis have often protested against Kathmandu
Image copyrightAFP
Image captionA protest in Kathmandu on Sunday was quickly broken up
India's strong reaction, some believe, stems from the fact that it was assured by Nepalese leaders that these concerns would be taken on board.
"But that did not happen," says Prof SD Muni, a strategic analyst who closely follows events in Nepal.
"India's concern is genuine because whatever happens in the Terai will spill over into India. So the violence is really worrying."
India shares a 1,751km (1,088-mile) open border with Nepal through which people pass freely but which has often concerned the country's security agencies because of its use by smugglers, human traffickers and terror suspects.
Next month,
elections are due to take place in the politically crucial state of Bihar which adjoins Nepal.
'Interference'
The state is one of India's most lawless and there is concern that political instability across the border could have an impact on the elections.
But India is also aware of the sensitivities involved in its relations with Nepal because of which it finds itself in a difficult situation.
Many people in Nepal have long accused India of interfering in the country's affairs, something that Prof Muni concedes is not always unfounded.
"There was no point in sending [the foreign secretary] after the constitution had already been passed. It can be construed as interference," he says.
But he also believes that Nepal plays India to its advantage.
"They ask for India's help when they need it. But if they don't like what we do, they describe it as interference."
And then there is China, India's regional bugbear.
Image copyrightAFP
Image captionThe constitution has evoked a mixed response in Nepal
In recent years, China has been ramping up its involvement in Nepal mainly through economic engagement much to India's discomfort in what it considers its backyard.
It is also wary of China's links with Nepal's Communists, never mind that most of its leadership has either been schooled in India or has spent many years in exile in this country.
And Beijing's reaction to Nepal's new constitution is noticeably warmer than India's was.
'Mature and evolve'
"As a friendly neighbour, Chinese side notes with pleasure that Nepal's Constituent Assembly has endorsed the new constitution," its foreign ministry spokesperson said.
There are some in India, though, who believe that the country should not be too critical of Nepal.
"The concerns of the Madhesis most certainly can be addressed through an amendment process in the coming months and years," an Indian Member of Parliament, DP Tripathi, told The Hindu newspaper.
"Nepal has adopted a constitution and like all other constitutions of the world, this too will mature and evolve," he said.
‘India used economic blockade to dictate Nepalese constitution’
MALIHA DIWAN |
MALIHA DIWAN — UPDATED NOV 06, 2015 09:52AM
WHATSAPP
25 COMMENTS
PRINT
Kanak Mani Dixit.—White Star
KARACHI: India’s interference in Nepal’s domestic politics and its alleged fuel and economic blockade of the country probably stemmed from the Modi government’s failed attempts to steer the Nepalese constitution to be more “friendly towards India”, said Kanak Mani Dixit, a publisher of Himal Khabarpatrika and the editor of Himal Southasian, during his lecture at a university here on Thursday.
He added that Nepalese politicians were even summoned to India but the Modi government wasn’t “effective” in persuading the politicians and the resulting blockade was a tactic to pressure its neighbour.
His talk on ‘Nepal’s Search for Constitutional Stability’ at Habib University revolved around the history and political context of the passing of Nepal’s constitution — the first in nearly 250 years as a nation state — and highlighted the crisis gripping the small but diverse nation.
Mr Dixit said that historically “South Asia as a whole received its constitution after Partition” but since Nepal was never formally colonised — unlike the rest of the region — the country didn’t ‘inherit’ one.
What made the country’s constitution-writing unique was that “in most of the decolonised world, the constitution was written by the elite who had the same ethos and values as the departed Europeans”, but this was not the case with Nepal — a very diverse nation consisting of more than 120 ethnic groups — as politicians made an effort to accommodate the “spectrum of demands” put forward by the electorate and any group that “was organised or raised a voice”, he said.
The main reason the constitution writing was so democratic, according to him, was greater public awareness of rights due to the social media, a strong independent liberal media and education. He felt that the media in particular had been instrumental in pushing people to demand their rights. The Nepalese people, Mr Dixit said, were “well versed in news” and that unlike countries such as Pakistan and India, there was no “English-vernacular divide” in the media and “FM radio channels can chose their own news”.
It was due to such an inclusive process during writing of the constitution that many groups were protected not under the law as was common in many other countries but under the constitution, he said.
He said “fundamental rights” on the basis of “religion, gender, women’s rights, children’s rights and sexual orientation” etc were guaranteed under Nepal’s constitution. “LGBT rights are the most progressive under the constitution,” he said, adding that Nepal was also the first Asian country to provide constitutional protection to the LGBT community. “This constitution is providing fundamental rights beyond civil and political rights which the state has to fulfil,” he added.
But Mr Dixit said one of the negative aspects to emerge from the passing of the country’s constitution was the “political agitation” of the minority group, the Madhesis, as under the constitution, children born to a Nepali married to a foreigner were ineligible for full citizenship rights. Madhesis, an ethnic minority, who reside close to the India-Nepal border and often marry Indians, particularly felt marginalised and targeted by the passing of the constitution that also resulted in street protests. However, this controversy was being blown out of proportion since most of “the constitution is very flexible and amendable” and the Madhesis’ demands could still be incorporated into the constitution, he explained.
He severely criticised India’s interference in Nepal’s domestic politics and the economic blockade of the country, pointing out that any differences should be resolved within Nepal and that “it wasn’t for any outside power to dictate”.
Mr Dixit said Nepal was unique in that “the distance between the ground-level politics and the national politics” was very small as it was “a nation of micro-communities” and thus “needed democracy and political stability” not just the latter.
On an optimistic note, he concluded that given that Nepal entered the “modern era only in 1990” and that a decade-long Maoist insurgency ended only in 2006, the passing of the constitution was something that should be celebrated and that the main challenge for the small nation in the next three years would be figuring out how to implement it.
For Bangaldesh
http://newagebd.net/44063/a-government-with-no-political-legitimacy/
http://odhikar.org/20-months-of-emergency-in-bangladesh-the-government-lacks-legitimacy/
Any dictator will do any thing in his/her power to please his masters
