The historical developments of the past few weeks, it seems to me, have been arising out of serendipity. Among the important events were the Maoist decision to end the obstruction of the Constituent Assembly (CA) proceedings, and the decision of Nepali Congress (NC) to prepare a five-page-long resume of the party president, the 86-year old Girija Prasad Koirala alias Girijababu, following the Cabinet decision to recommend his name for Nobel Peace Prize. The NC central body must have constituted a committee of people whose political understanding is good and who can write well because that resume was being prepared for international consumption. As a student of textual pragmatics I got mighty interested in this minuscule project of the grand old democratic party. The first page of the resume, apparently, will mention birth dates, etc while the remaining four pages will describe the grand narrative of Girijababu’s epic battle to establish democracy in this land. What a project! Tears could have come to my eyes after reading this news. But I controlled my emotions.
But soon, a feeling of shock overtook my ecstasy. I was surprised that this grand old party should make it appear as though writing resume of their octogenarian leader was their first historical engagement. Questions coursed through my mind. Why hadn’t the NC or Girijababu’s family circle ever drafted a resume of this man for so long? Does the party think ‘five pages’ will be enough to write the grand history of this man? Did they have to wake up only after a jumbo size coalition Cabinet passed the noble resolution of Nobel Peace Prize for Girijababu? I spoke to some senior NC leaders about it. One somewhat inebriated leader said that this was a routine affair. In that response, I got no hint of Girijababu’s epic battle appearing anywhere in the resume. I secretly wished I had gone to Prachanda instead, asked him if he would mind writing the resume of Girijababu in ‘five pages,’ and read his spontaneous response. I have the following reasons for my interest in Girijababu’s resume.
Spontaneity or compulsions aside, the decision of NC top-brass is important for a few reasons. Their total endorsement of the Cabinet’s decision is interesting. This decision must have given the NC CWC an occasion to think of this old man with a modicum of respect after a season of discontent. The CWC, it seems to me, almost despises Girijababu for the peccadillo of making his daughter Sujata Koirala the deputy prime minister. She is an interesting lady who works without much plan and without commitments and ideologies. She creates small storms that easily pass over the political landscape without ripping off the roofs of hamlets. Her recent statement against the country going federal is an interesting dramatic burlesque.
The discontent of NC top-brass with Girijababu goes deeper. First, as the famous Bertrand Russell would say, it is the lust for power. The position taken by Sujata, it later appeared, was coveted by some seniors. When the country needed much more serious discussions about resolving deadlocks and making the constitution, the NC spent its salacious energy on Sujata. They also coined a Freudian Sanskrit terminology putrimoha (too much love for daughter) to critique Girijababu. The male-dominated party leaders glibly used sexist and politically incorrect language.
Secondly, the ‘winter of discontent’ opens up other caveats. Girijababu’s candid conversations with Prachanda show statesmanship. Every time he meets Prachanda it seems the political impasse moves a few inches closer to solution. The recent series of meetings between Prachanda and Girijababu made NC CWC suspicious and angry. The lessons of history cannot be learned by confusing its characters. A frank assessment of the history of past four years shows that Girijababu and Prachanda played crucial roles in the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement on Nov. 21, 2006. Other leaders played important roles, too. But these two politicians, as the recent discontents within their respective parties retroactively show, must have struggled hard to convince party comrades.
The Cabinet decision to nominate Grijababu is a symbolic act of recognition. My questions to NC are: By accepting the Cabinet decision, have you accepted the historical fact that Girijababu and Prachanda had played very important parts in the peace process? Did the peace process this old man made possible result solely form NC policies or was it the result of the colossal success achieved in bringing one of the strongest guerrilla forces in the world out of the jungle to the conference table and then to the parliament? If you accept the latter, why grill Girijababu every time he meets Maoist leaders to broker peace? What would be the content of the grand four pages in your resume? Why has NC written nothing about this man’s long struggle for freedom and democracy so far? Why did you have to wait for the decision of an uneasy Cabinet to recognise Girijababu’s contribution in the twilight of history to write a few pages about his long history of struggles and successes?
Clearly, by nominating Girijababu for Nobel Peace Prize, the political alliance running the government has brought to the fore the contradictions of their understanding of history. They reject the very basis of Girijababu’s success in bringing peace but accept that he played the most crucial role in this process. NC leaders are openly expressing their ambivalence and their misreading of history and harshly critique Girijababu for bringing the Maoists in. That is a very naïve reading of history. Girijababu did not bring the Maoists in. It was an agreement between powerful forces in the country; Girijababu understood that correctly and tried hard to bring the warring parties together. Prachanda and his comrades recognise Girijababu’s contribution better than NC stalwarts, according to my understanding. I asked some Maoist leaders, would they rather nominate Prachanda for Nobel? They said recognising Girijababu’s contribution would be akin to honouring Prachanda’s contribution. And they were happy. I guess that is a more correct reading of history.
A few more questions are in order. Why does the Cabinet make it the responsibility of the NC to draft a resume of Girijababu? Is the nomination of NC president for the prize yet another gesture of coalition politics rather than a call of the nation? Otherwise, why could not the Cabinet request historians like Triratna Manandhar and Pratyoush Onta to write a short booklet about Girijababu’s role in history highlighting why he deserves this honour instead of throwing it to the court of discontented NC leaders who are analysing Girijababu’s psychological complexes more than his political achievements?
Your first step is correct, but what lessons you have learned from Girijababu’s epic battle is what matters more.
But soon, a feeling of shock overtook my ecstasy. I was surprised that this grand old party should make it appear as though writing resume of their octogenarian leader was their first historical engagement. Questions coursed through my mind. Why hadn’t the NC or Girijababu’s family circle ever drafted a resume of this man for so long? Does the party think ‘five pages’ will be enough to write the grand history of this man? Did they have to wake up only after a jumbo size coalition Cabinet passed the noble resolution of Nobel Peace Prize for Girijababu? I spoke to some senior NC leaders about it. One somewhat inebriated leader said that this was a routine affair. In that response, I got no hint of Girijababu’s epic battle appearing anywhere in the resume. I secretly wished I had gone to Prachanda instead, asked him if he would mind writing the resume of Girijababu in ‘five pages,’ and read his spontaneous response. I have the following reasons for my interest in Girijababu’s resume.
Spontaneity or compulsions aside, the decision of NC top-brass is important for a few reasons. Their total endorsement of the Cabinet’s decision is interesting. This decision must have given the NC CWC an occasion to think of this old man with a modicum of respect after a season of discontent. The CWC, it seems to me, almost despises Girijababu for the peccadillo of making his daughter Sujata Koirala the deputy prime minister. She is an interesting lady who works without much plan and without commitments and ideologies. She creates small storms that easily pass over the political landscape without ripping off the roofs of hamlets. Her recent statement against the country going federal is an interesting dramatic burlesque.
The discontent of NC top-brass with Girijababu goes deeper. First, as the famous Bertrand Russell would say, it is the lust for power. The position taken by Sujata, it later appeared, was coveted by some seniors. When the country needed much more serious discussions about resolving deadlocks and making the constitution, the NC spent its salacious energy on Sujata. They also coined a Freudian Sanskrit terminology putrimoha (too much love for daughter) to critique Girijababu. The male-dominated party leaders glibly used sexist and politically incorrect language.
Secondly, the ‘winter of discontent’ opens up other caveats. Girijababu’s candid conversations with Prachanda show statesmanship. Every time he meets Prachanda it seems the political impasse moves a few inches closer to solution. The recent series of meetings between Prachanda and Girijababu made NC CWC suspicious and angry. The lessons of history cannot be learned by confusing its characters. A frank assessment of the history of past four years shows that Girijababu and Prachanda played crucial roles in the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement on Nov. 21, 2006. Other leaders played important roles, too. But these two politicians, as the recent discontents within their respective parties retroactively show, must have struggled hard to convince party comrades.
The Cabinet decision to nominate Grijababu is a symbolic act of recognition. My questions to NC are: By accepting the Cabinet decision, have you accepted the historical fact that Girijababu and Prachanda had played very important parts in the peace process? Did the peace process this old man made possible result solely form NC policies or was it the result of the colossal success achieved in bringing one of the strongest guerrilla forces in the world out of the jungle to the conference table and then to the parliament? If you accept the latter, why grill Girijababu every time he meets Maoist leaders to broker peace? What would be the content of the grand four pages in your resume? Why has NC written nothing about this man’s long struggle for freedom and democracy so far? Why did you have to wait for the decision of an uneasy Cabinet to recognise Girijababu’s contribution in the twilight of history to write a few pages about his long history of struggles and successes?
Clearly, by nominating Girijababu for Nobel Peace Prize, the political alliance running the government has brought to the fore the contradictions of their understanding of history. They reject the very basis of Girijababu’s success in bringing peace but accept that he played the most crucial role in this process. NC leaders are openly expressing their ambivalence and their misreading of history and harshly critique Girijababu for bringing the Maoists in. That is a very naïve reading of history. Girijababu did not bring the Maoists in. It was an agreement between powerful forces in the country; Girijababu understood that correctly and tried hard to bring the warring parties together. Prachanda and his comrades recognise Girijababu’s contribution better than NC stalwarts, according to my understanding. I asked some Maoist leaders, would they rather nominate Prachanda for Nobel? They said recognising Girijababu’s contribution would be akin to honouring Prachanda’s contribution. And they were happy. I guess that is a more correct reading of history.
A few more questions are in order. Why does the Cabinet make it the responsibility of the NC to draft a resume of Girijababu? Is the nomination of NC president for the prize yet another gesture of coalition politics rather than a call of the nation? Otherwise, why could not the Cabinet request historians like Triratna Manandhar and Pratyoush Onta to write a short booklet about Girijababu’s role in history highlighting why he deserves this honour instead of throwing it to the court of discontented NC leaders who are analysing Girijababu’s psychological complexes more than his political achievements?
Your first step is correct, but what lessons you have learned from Girijababu’s epic battle is what matters more.
No comments:
Post a Comment