Conflict: A Conceptual Understanding and Maiost Conflict in Nepal

Wednesday, 27 May 2009

This is my ongoing thesis report which is still incomplete.I put this article for the readers of my blog just because my readers can understand the real Maiost idealogy as well the past brutal conflict where more than 15000 people were died : Rajan Subedi

Conflict is a serious disagreement, struggle, and fight arising out of differences of opinions, wishes, needs, values, and interests between and among individuals, groups and between the communities (Hornby, 1995)[1]In other words,conflict is a struggle between and among individuals or groups over values and claims to scarce resources, status symbols, and power bases. The objective of the individuals or groups engaged in conflict is to neutralize, injure or eliminate their rivals so that they can enjoy the scarce resources, the status symbols, and power bases (Coser, 1956)[2]. It is not surprising to read that conflict is conceived as a purposeful struggle between collective actors who use social power to defeat or remove opponents in order to gain status, resources and push their values over other social groupings (Himes, 1980)[3]. Conflict is prevalent within and between social relations such as families, ethnic groups, social institutions and organizations, political parties’ and states. Further, it is prevalent in situations where the goals, aspirations, interests, and needs of the social groups cannot be achieved simultaneously and the value systems of such groups are at variance. Invariably, the social parties purposely employ their power bases to fight for their position with a view to defeat, neutralize or eliminate one another (Anstey, 1991)[4].

‘Conflict’ is an ambiguous word that carries different meanings to different people in different contexts. The genesis of conflict is contextual based. As it is described in the Cambridge dictionary[5], ‘conflict’ is “an active disagreement between people with opposing opinions or principles”, “fighting between two or more groups of people or countries”. Warner (2001)[6] argues that conflict can refer to a debate or contest, a disagreement, argument, dispute, quarrel, a struggle, battle or confrontation, or a state of unrest, turmoil or chaos violence. Like wise, Walker and Daniels (1997)[7] argue that conflict is an active stage of disagreement between people with opposing opinions, principles and practices manifested in different forms (grievance, conflict and dispute).However, conflict is a disagreement over “others”. Conflict forms/creates a clear demarcation between “I” and “You”, “We” and “Them”. Hence, conflict is generally interpreted as the opposite of peace though it is inevitable for a (sustainable) transformation.

Conflicts normally occur when one feels segregated from the totality, feels “minority” that forces to realize where “s/he” is. The dominated, suppressed, or neglected form of identity fosters the feeling of “I” and “you” and “we” and “them”. This is the beginning of a conflict where one group or a person disagrees with the other. Such disagreements, if not managed in the “whole” lead to further development of conflict and in some cases take the form of “armed conflict” if the conflicts find fertile breeding ground, supported either by poverty, social, religious, ethnic or political ideological exclusion. Since the genesis of a conflict is contextual based, it contributes in the totality accordingly. We can also distinguish conflict in two major kinds; say a “good force” leading to welfare of people and “bad force” leading to destruction and disharmony as a goal. Therefore, the nature, intention and context of conflict are important aspects to look at. Interestingly, any thing whether good or bad, as we perceive is the product of the totality itself and it does appear in the totality as a part of it during the process of evolution and transformation. Conflict, therefore is a part of the whole that appears therein during the process of evolution and transformation. Conflicts represent the contemporary state, process and nature of transformation in the totality. Hence, the new ideas and thoughts emerging in different forms and levels at a particular place and time as “conflict” are something very important that give hints of how evolution and transformation is taking place at a particular time and space giving a possibility to further conceptualization in the whole.

The emergence of Khmer Rouge and Al Quada are also the product of the whole which can be characterized as a “bad force” which have claimed the lives of thousands of people and the goal was probably not the welfare of the people in general. On the other hand, in case of Nepal although the consequences of the conflict when we look at the human right abuse, is severe and the conflict has already claimed more than 11000 lives, which is another part of the conflict, may not be equally compared with the “bad forces”

Since the objective of the revolution, as they say, is welfare of people and elimination of “social inequality”[8]. The genesis and the context of Nepalese conflict are different.

1. Emergence of ‘good force’ and ‘bad force’ during the course of evolution and social transformation.

The process of evolution which occurs in many dimensions during social transformation is really complex. In such a complexity both negative and positive forces emerge and do act accordingly. Good forces are supported by majority of people though less at the time of emergence and they are less supported by military and some times no military support at all. Bad forces are heavily supported by military rather than people. During the course of evolution “good force” and “bad force” emerge, at times get blended in the mainstream or vanish, and sometimes even lead mainstream. The 1990 revolution in Nepal to over throw Panchayat was led by “good force” and had no military support at all which formed new mainstream and led it. It was a good example of inclusion of the “conflicting ideology” in the whole. Sometimes the “bad forces” lead the mainstream, of course with a help of heavy military support which at some point of evolution collapses because military support is less strong than the support of people in terms of sustenance of “ideology or power”. The collapse of Nazi and down fall of communism from the Eastern Europe can be cited as an example. However, it is not good to treat the new ideas and thoughts as “nothing”. Even the conflicts leading to destruction rather than construction can give some inputs to enlarge understanding and to search new paths to further conceptualize in the “whole”. Hence, opposing ideas though contradictory with the establishment should be treated as parts of the whole and should be given a careful attention about the intention of it’s emergence in the whole. The contextual base and the intention of the conflict is to be analyzed in such a way that the conflicts get blended in the mainstream, especially the “good force” otherwise, in most cases it develops into arm conflict in the later stage, if not all. Feeling of exclusion forces and directs people for confrontation that threatens and makes people feel unsafe. Lack of political, social and even economic safety and security is one of the causes of people’s movement. The social and economic cost of staying and migrating is always calculated before a migration takes place (Neumayer, 2004)[9]. Because of armed conflicts, forced migration becomes a compulsion for people though the social and economic cost is higher for migration. Migration be it “in-country” or “international”, is mostly due to armed conflicts and lack of peace, which shatters the economic, social and political stability in a country. Therefore, such conflicts are the major causes of migration too. Generally, we see two kinds of migrations.

1.1. Voluntary Migration:

Unlike forced migration, voluntary migration is willingly done, in which one plans to settle in a new place. Because of the development in communication and transportation it has enabled people to explore new places of their suitability. The people of economically better off strata and academicians also do migrate voluntarily because of their works and possibility to further explore their talents. Family reunion is also another cause of migration. This sort of migration comparatively does not negatively affect the system because it takes slowly and is planned to some extent before migration takes place.

1.2. Forced Migration:

Forced migration is one of the worst scourges that torment humankind (Malender and

Öberg,2004)[10]. Armed conflict is the most obvious cause of forced migration and is consistently found to have significant effects on the magnitude of forced migration (ibid: p4-5). Moore and Spellman (2002)[11] argue that state repression is one of the causes that lead to forced migration as it is one of the results of armed conflict. The main determinants of forced migration, as mentioned in many researches are in-country war, genocide, dissident violence and state repression, with economic non violent and demographic factors (Malender and Öberg, 2004)[12]. The intra state conflict is also found to be a strong factor to forced migration. Human right abuse can cause severe forced migration. However, Migration in general is also a part of social transformation and therefore can not be completely prevented. If migration takes place at a large scale, especially the forced migration, it leads to hamper development process and social fabric affecting the strength of a society. Disturbances in development process and incoherence in societies cause problem in peace keeping. Hence, conflict, migration, development and peace go together and do form a network. By any reason, if one of them is disturbed the whole network gets threatened and peace shattered.

2. Emergence of Maoism in Nepal:

The Maoist movement began by the Feb.16; 1996.Maoist read the minds of the poor, disadvantaged and frustrated people, especially in the remote western Nepal. The region had/has been neglected by the state in terms of development and basic infrastructure, argued as spatial and horizontal imbalance (Murshed,2003)[13], therefore became a fertile ground for the inception of Maoism. The people in Nepal mostly do have a view that rich people send their children in private schools and poor ones in public schools. The result shows that the production of private schools is better and competitive than that of the public schools (in majority). This has created a boarder between private schools and public school.

The highest poverty rate is measured in the rural mid and far western hills and Mountain where the Maoist found a suitable breeding environment. Maoist conceptualized that the existing feudal structure from the village to the capital, is the main obstacle to Nepal’s Underdevelopment”. Therefore, on this understanding they forwarded forty points agenda (Hutt, 2004: 285-87)[14], demanded a grand discussion in the parliament and if possible a change in the constitution. It does not mean that the entire problem would have been solved or eliminated even if the agenda was discussed in the parliament. It also does not guarantee that it would have prevented the rebellions to raise guns even if it was openly discussed in the parliament. The question is that, had it been discussed as a part of the evolutionary process of the “whole” I think it would have at least provided a space to take a different direction, because the demands, as one can see, were addressing the very basic needs of citizens and institutional changes in order to set up a relative egalitarian society. But it was blindly refused which forced them to work underground and raise arms in order to make a change in the whole. As a result, they announced people’s war as the only way to over come the existing chronic social, political and economic problem. Manandhar (2004)[15] mentions “the Maoist claim ‘People’s War” was inevitable because all the attempts to carry out reforms within the old ‘semi-feudal’ system had failed. The BBC new analysis says “their anger at the plight of the rural poor - prompted them to take up arms”[16] .Gradually; the CPN (M) is expanding its influence and has been able to take a large area completely under its control. They have also developed strong guerrilla fighters, militia and brigade level army equipped with modern weapons and able to control a large portion of the country, around 70-90 percentage ( Upreti , 2004:2)[17].Raising taxes, forming their own government and expansion of the military as well as non military activities are taking place. The movement has already claimed more than 15000 lives and thousand have been forced to migrate. The figure illustrates the conflict

The conflict in Nepal since the inception of the Maoist movement on Feb-16, 1996 has passed through three stages. In the beginning the underground rebellions were the target of both the palace and parliamentary parties where as in the second stage there was a time when they all were target of each other (a big confusion!). At present, especially, after the Royal take-over, the entire environment and politics has dramatically changed. The Maoist and parliamentary parties protesting the Royal takeover is largely in favour of a change. Interestingly, this is one of the achievements of the conflict, because the very change was refused before. Hence, at present, the situation is such that the CPNM and the parliamentary parties are anti palace though they don’t accept each other’s methodological approach to end the ongoing conflict.

3.Causes of conflict in Nepal

The decision to take arms is a complex process involving many actors in a wide range of conditions and circumstances.

3.1. Socio-economic, Cultural and Political failure:

Nepal, a small country between two giant forces; the India and China, has its own geopolitical foundation since long .Geographically; Nepal seems to be small but is rich in cultural diversity. The World Bank (2004) reports US$ 260. The national budget largely depends on international loans and grants which has been one of the major drawbacks of Nepali economy. Chadda (2000:124)[18] mentions that though Nepal received heavy foreign aid poverty increased. Most reports say that 60% of the total development budget is dependent on foreign aids and donations. On the other hand, high magnitude of loans and lack of proper planning has fostered economic gap among the people. In the later half of 1990s political failure opened a possibility for corruption and abuse of authority in the country. Consequently, the country has been forced to step backward economically and politically even after the restoration of democracy in 1990. Upreti (2002:82)[19] gives an argument that the persistence of poverty is the outcome of inappropriate use of foreign aid and misallocation and abuse of national resources by the government Deraniyagala (2005)[20] argues that the “income poverty” has accelerated during the period of economic liberalization. The chronic problem of corruption, mismanagement of the national as well as foreign aids has caused economic situation worse. The regional imbalance in planning is another aspect to look at. Murshed et al (2003) clearly articulate that there is a spatial and horizontal imbalance in Nepal. Development budgets were largely focused in cities and towns. The agricultural sector which is the main base of rural economy and source of income for more than 80% of the population was/has been less prioritized. One of the major parts of agricultural growth, irrigation facility is very low in Nepal. Only 35% of the total cultivated area has provision of irrigation at least one season (Deraniyagala & Sharma, 2003)[21].Elimination of subsidies in fertilizer also helped to deteriorate agricultural sector, especially the small farmer. This, be it either because of unawareness or negligence, ultimately created a huge imbalance between the rural/village and urban economy.

To improve economy of the country, as it is said, there had been many changes made in the name of industrialization, liberalization and facilities with subsidies. There are many sources of argument Pandey (1999)[22] argue that despite the country’s planned development efforts since first democracy in 1950, the basic indicators of life and the economy have in most cases even deteriorated or remained almost the same.

The reason is that the poor did not benefit even from structural adjustment programs. The socio-economic condition of many people remained almost the same though the percapita income went up. In fact, poverty has further accelerated even after the restoration of democracy in 1990 which has been heavily supported by the unstable political situation. Consequently, the poor became poorer comparative to that of the past. The gap between the poor and rich went up which has helped to found a critical thinking among the people about their socio- economic status. The accessibility of the resources like health, education and income sources are not within easy access to majority. People of economically and socially better off strata educate their children in private schools and even can afford for education abroad; where as, the poor can not even send their children to the local public schools. Nearly 30% of children still lack access to primary education (Khatiwada, 2003)[23]. The case is almost same with health sector.

If we look at more than two century long history it is very clear that the feudal political economy, as well elite biased socio-cultural structure has been dominant factor in Nepal. The first democracy established in 1950 was unfortunately snatched away by the King Mahendra, the father of the present King Gyanendra in 1960 giving an explanation that multiparty system in Nepal could not work to maintain harmony. He might have been afraid of the growing consciousness among people regarding freedom, democracy and development which definitely could be an unbearable threat to the palace if not dealt in time. Therefore, he might have taken an undemocratic and of course autocratic step in order to suppress the newly emerging “people’s consciousness” and provide a new identity under his direct rule so that the newly blooming consciousness fades away. The poor minds were again forced to accept the king a “supreme” subject. Obviously, this was the foundation for inception of party less Panchayat system under his direct leadership. The Rastraiya Panchayat (national council), Jilla Panchayat at the district level and Village Panchayat at the lower level were the clear divisions of political institutional decentralization but were directly monitored by the upper levels and of course, the center.It was a very good institutional chain to monitor from central to the village level to give .Good way to spread the party-less Panchayat system in order to foster “Absolute Monarchism”. The Panchayat system lasted until the beginning of 1990.The thirty year long (1960-1990) Panchayat monopoly was shattered in 1990 through the Jana-andolan (people’s revolution) and multiparty democracy was established. A new constitution was formulated. The new constitution formulated in 1990 explains that Nepal is a country of multiparty democracy and constitutional monarchy. The constitution gives supreme power to the king even to dissolve the parliament in case of so called “problematic situation” .The king is the supreme commander of the Royal Nepalese Army, as the constitution declares. There are some other questionable articles[24] like: “No question shall be raised in any court about any act performed by His Majesty”, “The income and personal property of His Majesty shall be exempt from all kinds of tax, fee or other similar charge”.

Despite the transition to democracy in 1990, traditional elites and upper castes continued to dominate the state apparatus and left wing parties were marginalized within the political process (Deraniyagala, 2005:56)[25].The result was political instability and conflict.The political parties could not make clear and far-sighted vision for the development of the country. Their intra-party conflict and personal interests paved the way for the palace to emerge at the political forum. Sedan and Hussein (2002:9)[26] mention

that;… a short period of considerable optimism, it became increasingly evident that the new political order was characterized by instability, corruption and patronage (a crisis of governance) and that a rapid succession of governments was unable to achieve any real headway in addressing Nepal’s continuing economic underdevelopment and deep-seated social inequalities. In this already unstable context – and ostensibly in response to it – an armed insurgency began in February 1996, led by Nepali Maoists.

In fact, the period post 1990s has divided people in different ways and has fostered for the search of sense of ethnic identity and civic consciousness. During this period, to some extent, dominance of Brahman and Chetri has been questioned (Bista, 1991)[27].No doubt, it is a contribution of globalization. Especially, the NGOs, rural political activities and freedom in media have contributed remarkably though consensus in the national level seemed to be lacking among the political parties. Post 1990s multiparty and democratic political system in Nepal has given possibility of commercialization of the education system which is one of the reasons of further isolating poor people to some degree. The two systems of education (private for the rich and public/government for the poor) have created a sentiment of discrimination among the people. This has created an immense social stratification and severe strife in the society. The gender inequality, cultural as well as legal pluralism (Upreti, 2002)[28] also have contributed much for the ongoing conflict. This is the reason that within the period of ten years the country has witnessed despair in democracy due to the extremely poor performance of the government and lack of institutionalized bureaucracy. The bureaucracy in Nepal was highly influenced as the change of government. Hence, the political parties are blamed of not creating an environment where people could feel a real democracy and enjoy safety. Less participation of the public and even the civil society in the present movement launched by the parliamentary parties against royal take over is the result of what the political parties have offered to the people in the past. It does not mean that the movement will not be supported but may take some time.

3.2. The System Failure: A Cause of Conflict and Migration

In fact, the historical process shows that there were many hidden and neglected aspects that fostered the presently ongoing conflict in Nepal. Seddon and Hussein (2002:8) clearly and strongly argue that;

A historical perspective reveals that a failure of development and of governance created the pre-conditions – poverty, inequality, social discrimination and lack of social justice and democracy – for widespread discontent, and ultimately for the Maoist insurgency. Not only has the government been ineffective in providing for the needs of the poor, it is generally seen and experienced as corrupt, repressive and as working against, not for, the interests of ordinary people. International and national development agencies have also failed to strengthen the capacity and commitment of state structures or to change practices at local level to any marked degree.

As has been argued by Deraniyagala(2005), the economic aspect has played an important role for the growth and sustenance of the conflict in Nepal. There are social and political reasons as well. The growing frustration of the people in the remote areas, joblessness, insecurity, and social discrimination, feudal structure that dominated the socially and economically poor has fuelled the conflict. The 235 year long social and economic structure, the governing system of promoting and providing protection to the elite, power cantered system, discriminatory social practices are some of the main causes behind the existing armed conflict (Upreti, 2004). The Maoist looked at all these “social evils” and targeted the constitution and the palace as the sole problem of the country. They were able to attract and lure the frustrated mind which is one of the reasons of the growth of the ongoing conflict. Intensity of the conflict and migration: weakening of development and peace.

The conflict in the Himalayan kingdom seems to be growing gradually. The failures of political parties and growing conflict created the conducive ground for the royal take over, announcement of state of emergency and thereby home-arrest of most of the political leaders in the beginning of the Royal-takeover. Restriction for the leaders to travel (though temporarily), media censorship and human right abuse are the direct consequences of conflict and hijacking of democracy in the country. King’s willingness, of course, with the support of Army to be an active monarch and the Maoist’s goal to establish peoples republic though they at preset might agree for constitutional assembly (which is not acceptable to the palace, as it is seen from the very beginning), international forces not in a collective and a single views shows a symptom of intensification of the conflict. The former parliamentary parties though protesting together do give different views at that time, which is an indication of lack of strong unity among them. The resuming of the Indian military support though said non- lethal, which was suspended after the king’s take over in Feb. might intensify the ongoing conflict. The Maoist claim that it’s people’s war is in the third phase- the “strategic offensive” phase, which is supposed to mark a change in it’s military strategy from “decentralized” to “centralized action” to Keep the unified command of security forces on a defensive and encircle the city from villages(FES,2004)[29]. As reaction, the Kings government has adopted a policy not to allow the mobiles phones and many other forms of telephones, especially in the regions where Maoist have strong hold. According to the present government, it is done in order to prevent the rebellion to be able to run communication and easy movement. Though it is said that it has weakened Maoist network, which partly may be true in terms of communication but in reality they seem to be continuing their struggle and growing. Recent clash in Kalikot in western Nepal is one of the examples where RNA has faced heavy casualties after Royal takeover. Likewise, the open views from king, indicates the rare possibility negotiation with political parties because though the king expresses the willingness to democracy it has been executed in practice, as the parties argue. Hence such a situation hints that there is a less possibility of negotiation for peace, therefore fosters conflict further. “One family one militia” strategy adopted by the Maoist is another threat for the civil society. Which has forced many families and youth to flee .Human right abuse in different periods like abduction and brutal killing are very common from both of the warring parties. There have been already 400 children killed and more than 20000 internally dispalced so far.

After the 19 days of glorious strike of Nepalese people against the former king Gynendra people of Nepal became of the citizen of new republic of Nepal. Maoist of Nepal were also agreed to come in political mainstream after the 12 point common agreement between the main political parties of Nepal and also gained public support in Constitutional Election which was held in 2008.Maoist party became a largest political party of Nepal and also formed the government in the leadership of Maoist leader Puspakamal Dahal.

But this government has also face the same problem like earlier because Maoist loose support from its coalition partner as well other political parties regarding the sacking issues of Military General of Nepal army.

---

[1] Hornby, A.S. (1995). Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English (Fifth Edition). London: Oxford University Press

[2] Coser, L. (1956). The Functions of Social Conflict. New York: Free Press).

[3] Himes, J.S. (1980). Conflict and Conflict management. Athens: University of Georgia Press).

[4] Anstey, M. (1991). Negotiating Conflict: Insights and Skills for Negotiators and Peacemakers. Cape Town: Juta and Co, LTd.)

[5] http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=16125

[6] warner M.,(2001). Complex-Problems-Negoited Solutions:Strategies and Tolls for reducing conflict as an obstacle to Sustainable Rural Livelihood.London:Overeas Development Institute.

[7] Walker G:B.and Denial S.E.(1997).Foundation of natural resource Conflict:Conflict theory and Public Policy,in solburg,S.B and S.Mina(Edt) Conflict management and Public participation in Land management,S.EFT Proceeding No.14 European Forest Institute.P.13.37

[8] http://www.india-seminar.com/2005/548/548%20baburam%20bhattarai.htm(baburam Bhattarai is the member of the standing committee of the politburo and convener, United Revolutionary People’s council.

[9] Neumayer.E., (2004).Bogus Refugees? the determinants of Asylum Migrations to Western Europe

[10] MalendarErick and Magnus Öberg,(2004) Forced Migration: the effect of the magnitude and the scope of Fighting. Uppsala Peace research papers No.8 Department of peace and conflict research. Uppsala University Sweden

[11] Moore,will H and Shellman Stephan M.,(2002) Fear of Persecution:A global study of forced migration.1952-1995

[12] MalendarErick and Magnus Öberg et.al

[13] Murshed,S.Mansoob and Gates, Scott,(2003).Spatial horizontal inequality and the Maoist Insurgency in Nepal. United Nations University, World institute for Development and Economic Research.

[14] Hutt,M.(2004).Himalayan People’s war: Nepal’s Maoist Rebellion. Hurst and company London

[15] Manandhar Prabin.(2004).The potential for the political transformation of rural Nepalese civil society:A case study of Maoist-Run village.Political Studies Association.

[16] http://www.news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south-asia

[17] Upreti,Bishnu Raj,(2004).political and Democratic Future of Nepal at crossroads: Reflections of the peace process and negotiations(draft).A paper presented at the international Conference’ Nepal in conflict’ Organized by the Danish Association for international Cooperation(MS),Amnesty international and Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Copenhagen on 18-19 November 2004

[18] Chadda,Maya,(2000)Building democracy in South Asia: India. Nepal and Pakistan. Lynne Reinner Publisher,Inc

[19] Upreti,Bishnu Raj,(2002).Management of Social and natural Resource Conflict in Nepal.Realities and Alternatives. Adroit Publishers, Delhi

[20] Deraniyagala,S (2005).The political Economy of Civil Conflict in Nepal. Oxford Development studies,Vol.33,No.1,March.Routledge

[21]Deraniyagala,S.and Sharma,S.,((2003)Agricultural Liberalization and Rural Poverty in Nepal Kathmandu .UNDP

[22] Pandey,D:R.,(1999).Nepal´s Failed Development:Reflection on the missions and melodies.Kathmandu.South Asia Center.

[23] Khatiwada,Y:R( 2003).Macro policies in Economic Growth in Nepal. UNDP Conference on the macroeconomics of poverty Reduction, Kathmandu

[24] source: http://asnic.utexas.edu/asnic/countries/nepal/nepalconstitution.html

[25] Deraniyagala et.al

[26] Seden David and Hussein Karim,(2002).The consequences of conflict:A Livelihoods and Development in Nepal.Working paper 185.Overses Development institute.111 West Minister Bridge Road London

[27] Bista,D:B.(1991).Fatalism and Development: Nepal’s struggle for the Modernization. Calcutta: Orient Longman Ltd.

[28] Upreti,Bishnu Raj,(2002).Management of Social and natural Resource Conflict in Nepal.Realities and Alternatives. Adroit Publishers, Delhi

[29] Friedrich Eburt Stiftung.(2004).Political Economic and social development in Nepal in the year 2004.kathmandu office