Harmony has a long history in Nepal. It had been worth saying Buddha was born in Nepal. The truth though cannot be changed, the disturbance in harmony not only among the political parties but among people regarding federalization actually does not suit to the people of the birth place of Lord Buddha.
The talk now is about the Ethnic Agendas : Partition and nomenclature of the federal states on basis of “Race”. I never understand, how many states will be required to suffice the demand, 8, 10, 15, 100 or still more. To the mixed populated country like Nepal, is it possible to divide states on basis of ethnicity ? My answer is No. There can never be a distinct border in that context. Each ethnic state however we try will always be overlapping and rise of more and more demand of states, if an ethnic gets a state then why not the other? Its a never ending target for country like Nepal.
I always wonder, why Ethnic states ? Will the state give special facilities to the ethnic? If the answer is “Yes”, the first question is “Is it possible?”, lets forget about it, the second question “What happens to the rest?” “Will the rest people agree giving certain distinction to some people by ethnicity and constraining them (other ethnicity) in their own Nation?” Don’t ever anybody think, its just giving rise to a etnic war. Or do they envision to let people shift to their respective states, I just feel it humorous. How could a sensible person of this century even think about that? Everybody knows the consequence of trying to draw a border between India and Pakistan on basis of religion. Trying to divide Nepal on basis of ethnicity is no different. Are we fools?
So, will the state give special facilities to the ethnic group? I say No. If so, what’s the motive? Why Ethnic Agendas, and Ethnic federalism for? An identification? What sort of identification? Is the ethnic division and nomenclature the only way for identification of the ethnic group. Is there no alternative? There is of course, various ways.
Even if there were no alternatives, did the identification of some ethnics worth failure of “Constitution Assembly I”? “Elongation of transition phase of nation?” “Linger the country in fast growing international competition?” The nation can never develop where people compete and fight among each other for dividing and/or naming a state on basis of ethnicity, race, religion, language, costume etc. It continues ever with a hatred and ends never without extinction of the other, which means war: blood. The only solution is ending the competition of those ethnicity, race, religion, language or custom. History and the experience of the world is the proof of it.
If the agendas of ethnic federalization persists, there no doubt “Constitution Assembly II” will also fail. And if it succeeds, it wont be the end of the transition phase of nation, it will be the beginning of hatred among the ethnic groups, an ethnic war.
“Does division and nomenclature of federal states on basis of ethnicity (Ethnic Agendas) worth all that has happened and will happen?”
Cannot we imagine of the free societies, where the constitution is not designed to benefit this or that person or group, and respect the rights of every citizen regardless of ethnicity, race, religion, language, color, gender, family or other accidental feature.
Post Contributed by : Anuj Niroula