Constitutional Dilema

I have been looking for an article of some sort that explains or at least a perspective on the situation in Nepal at the moment. Living in Nepal for the last couple of weeks, it's been really interesting to be a part of the bandhs that have been held and to hear about the issues that are leading to the strikes. Basically, Nepal is finally drawing up a new constitution, and different groups, most of them ethnic, are trying to bid for their own requests to be part of the constitution. The main issue is around dividing up the country into states based on ethnic groups. If not based on ethnic groups, they want the states to be named after ethnic groups. As far as I am concerned it's a primitive way of viewing things, but as this article form The Economists explains, Nepal is a highly segregated country, with a large number of different ethnic groups, casts, and identities who previously have not had the opportunity to have their voices heard. This article does help a bit to explain where the current turmoil is coming from. 

And, I am glad that it highlights that "Ethnic leaders, national politicians and the media have all failed to explain what ethnic federalism will mean", - this is something I've failed to understand, a relief that it's not just me.


Nepal's minorities  Constituting a nationality                                                                                         The Economist  May 24th 2012, 9:23 by T.B. | KATHMANDU

"....This week politicians were due to fulfil a commitment to divide Nepal into ethnic federal states, under a new constitution. This made many Nepalis anxious, as they feared that their country was on the brink of falling apart. The pressure mounted until, amid alleged conspiracies, strikes and street protests threatening to boil over into something worse, the long delayed charter was postponed for another three months.

Is it really a good idea, dividing a country of around 30m people and over 100 different ethnic, caste and linguistic groups into ten or more federal states, each with a designated ethnic identity? Sceptics argue that ethnic federalism makes a poor fit for the country’s social complexity. Opponents predict it will sow communal divisions and aggravate a spiral of hatred and violence where peaceful co-existence was once the norm. None of this, they say, was an issue until the Maoists messed up everything.

Caste discrimination has not had been embodied in the law of Nepal for 50 years and yet, despite assurances of equality that were written into previous constitutions, very little has been done to address entrenched inequalities. The high castes still overwhelmingly dominate national politics as well as the army, bureaucracy, media and business communities. Nepal is one of the most economically unequal countries in Asia and ethnicity and caste status are closely correlated with a person’s likely fortunes. Many if not most citizens consider themselves “excluded” by the state...."

To read the full article on The Economist visit: http://www.economist.com/blogs/banyan/2012/05/nepals-minorities