Nepal has teetered on the brink of the election-or-no-election ledge for the last two months. Twice postponed, the elections for the Constituent Assembly, scheduled for 10 April, hang fire as we go to press. This is largely due to the challenge of the 'Madhes', the amorphous term used to denote a non-ethnic, caste-based plains identity that ropes in a large part of the eastern Nepali Tarai plains.
The assertion of Madhesi identity, long denied by the hill-centric Kathmandu establishment, suddenly invaded the national consciousness with the Madhes Movement of last winter. It was a movement driven by the fear of the people of plains origin that they would not get proper representation at the Constituent Assembly polls. Energised by the perceived weakness of the Nepali Congress and the Maoists in the Tarai, new political groupings began simultaneously to compete and collaborate in an effort to represent the Madhesi people. These groups, bent on building a base in the little time available, adopted ultra-populist rhetoric that has heightened agitation to an unprecedented level. The reluctance to go to the April polls was not lost on observers, and was evident in the reliance on public rhetoric, each leader making pronouncements more dire than the other. The leaders also seemed hemmed in by the presence of militant groups working mayhm from across the open border in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, including targeted killings in a clear attempt to foster a hill-plains communal divide.
It was the Madhes Movement that forced the interim government and parliament in Kathmandu to concede to demands to place 'federalism' in the interim parliament as a declaration of intent vis-à-vis the scheduled Constituent Assembly polls. As 2007 turned to 2008, and as many politicians from the Nepali Congress and the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist-Leninist) jumped ship to start or join regional plains-based parties, the demands and preconditions began to add up. In the latest instance, these calls included the declaration of the Madhes region (used by the activists to mean the entire Tarai) as one autonomous province; adjustment in the electoral system (so that the Madhesi parties would not be restricted by the rules of proportionality in fielding more Madhesi candidates) and the acceptance of the principle of self-determination.
The reluctance of the newfound political organisations to go to elections was thus clear. However, the primary fault for getting the country to such a pass resides in Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala, and secondarily in the nature of the government he commands. Essentially ruling from a sickbed, and increasingly isolated from the political players, the 84-year-old Koirala's ego has seemed to demand that he and he alone have the final say in matters of both governance and negotiation. Koirala has not maintained a prime minister's office ('PMO') worth the name, nor has he allowed a trusted political lieutenant or two to represent his views and act as conduits and interlocutors. Thus, the prime minister diminished the capable colleagues within his party into straw figures, even as he neglected ties with the CPN (UML), a partner in government and the only other democratic force with size and credibility.