Gagan Thapa Does Journalism

As we are passing through another critical period (oh lord, how many more of these do we have to endure???) of our history again, the media is replete with gossip and behind the scene "news". There are opinions galore. There are myriad suggestions and advice. There are people writing nonsense. There are reporters reporting clueless junk.

Mostly, there are countless reports of straightforward what happened journalism. And these days what happened amounts to: the top leaders of the parties met; they met again and they met again. Or they didn't meet today as they said they would. The news is basically a routine, a schedule of meetings. You can count on the leaders meeting everyday; and as such you can count on each and every meeting reported as another data point, another piece of the puzzle. There is a lot of heat of the moment reportage.

What is missing is any ray of light. Nobody asks anybody what are the issues of contention? There is no real political research to figure out what is causing the bottleneck. Yeah, we do hear occasionally about some vague horse-trading on the identity of the next prime minister; or the number of PLA members to be integrated; or the easiest analysis of all: because India said so.

So depending on the media to do journalism and ASK QUESTIONS is futile. They are too busy reporting exactly when the next meeting is to be held and what the leaders said after the meeting. Who do we turn to for political research, analysis and genuine journalism of asking and answering the actual issues that divide the parties this way? 

It turns out, at least for this one instance, a politician is doing the journalist's work. 

Gagan Thapa, the only actual youth leader of Nepali Congress (a party replete with creaky old "youth" leaders such as Sher Bahadur, Ram Chandra and oh, my, Shekhar Koirala, the ultimate youth leader!) has published a must-read article in eKantipur.

For a politician this is a not an article about insider gossip or ideology masquerading as a newspaper column. Thapa's piece is a straight up report on the actual points of disagreements between the two major political parties in the Constituent Assembly. This article is the political research and analysis of the first order for all the readers to see beyond the daily back-and-forth,  daily meetings and the gossip. 

According to Thapa, there are 11 points of ideological, philosophical, and political differences between Congress and the Maoists in regards to the articles of a new constitution. It is safe to assume that the A-Ma-Le sides mostly with the Congressi position. So we have the crux of the debate highlighted in one article. For ordinary Nepali citizen, these 11 issues and others that are to be decided in the CA, are of utmost importance. We need to be ready to discuss and argue on the points of contention that is raised in this article. What kind of a future country and society do the Nepali people want? Do we want the Maoist (Socialist) vision or are we more comfortable with the Congressi (Republican) vision? That is the main debate, isn't it? Going through each of these 11 points that Thapa has presented, as a Nepali citizen and a reader, I have an opinion, I have questions, and I need a moment to reflect and try to understand the implication of each position. As an informed reader, I can make up my mind for or against either party's position on each of these issue. 

But until I read this piece of journalism I had no idea what to think because no journalist had taken the time to research on these differences and report the findings like this yet. They were just content to "report" when the next meeting was taking place, as if they were the personal sectaries of the political parties tasked with setting up the daily schedule. Inasmuch as the Nepali political turmoil is caused due to the ineptitude of the political leaders, they are equally aided and abetted by the lack of hard-hitting and informative research journalism from the mushrooming media houses.

Needless to say, quantity hardly equals quality.

Dr. Gautam's Take on Nepali Optimism

In response to my previous post, Prabaas commented to bring to my attention a wonderful article enumerating the "sins and virtues of new Nepal" by Dr. Kul Chandra Gautam. It is a must read. If you haven't read it, I highly recommend it. The article clearly distills the ills and the achievements of the past twenty years of social turmoil and political change. So I thought the article deserved a post of its own. 

While the "sins" (I rather like the word "ills" instead of "sins" in this context) as identified by Dr. Gautam seems to be quite evident to every Nepali citizen. All we do nowadays is: rail against the tyranny of a hyper-politicized culture while eagerly participating and contributing to it; cynically blame the government and the leaders for the culture of impunity and lawlessness; and rue the disregard of the economic and development matters because of the political feuding. We have became a wholly cynical society and we accept our common cynicism as a badge of Nepali honor. 

However, the seven virtues of the new Nepal that Dr. Gautam identifies aren't highlighted as often. For all the limitations and distortions of the last twenty years' worth of historical political changes, there have been many areas of growth and progress. Dr. Gautam lists seven areas of optimism. 

It is imperative that we constantly remind ourselves of the many virtues and achievements in our long journey on a very uneven and incomplete road to progress. 

More on Nepali Optimism

As stated on my previous post, I am quite optimistic about Nepal's evolving political, social and economic situation, especially so when considered in the context of the rapid changes in the last twenty years. Needless to say, all the progress that has been made could be stopped or even partially reversed if some dramatic event (military coup, another civil war, or major ethnic violence) were to send the country into extreme chaos. But, an objective observer has to acknowledge that the recent period has accorded the Nepali people with  greater access, ability and opportunity. Bikalpa Paudel (via mohammad.tajim) has a wonderful rundown of all the positive changes that has occuredd since the restoration of democracy in 1990. 

The reason everyone feels so pessimistic and cynical about the experience of the last twenty years is that all the progress has been achieved not because of the wise leadership of the government or the political parties, but despite them. So most of us only rue the continuing political turmoil and ignore the progress achieved in the social and private sector despite the best efforts of our political class. The progess has clearly been due to the fortuitous amalgam of many  reasons.

First, the systemic change from the closed and autocratic Panchayat system to the relative openness in the political, social and the economic life of democracy set the stage for Nepalis to take important steps towards progress in many areas, especially in media, communications, education and travel.

Second, the tremendous rise of India and China influenced Nepal's trade and economy. The sudden rise of our next door neighbors clearly provided the Nepali people with many examples of progress in various areas and also gave us the opportunities to tap into their innovation and experiment. Due to our own openness, we could no longer ignore our neighbors material, cultural, and intellectual exports.

Finally, globalization played a major role. With globalization and its attendant dispersion of information and communication technology, cheap and easy transportation, and open flow of information and labor helped us get a foothold in the global economy. Of course, the only major export that we have been able to make is our labor force but if it were not for globalization not only would we be bereft of the remittance money but also from the ideas and innovations from the rest of the world. 

So it has to be said that even despite the ineptitude and constant feuding by our political leaders, the Nepali people, the private sector and the civil society have made tremendous progress in the most unfavorable conditions. If the situation were to remain the same, in the next twenty years we may be still be able to realize similar progress. As stated earlier, if the situation deteriorates drastically, much could be lost. 

But imagine, how much we could achieve if the political quagmire were to end and result in a modest period of stability? The Nepali people do not need a whole lot from their political leaders  and their government. If the current flux were to end by producing even a mediocre constitution which gives way to a modicum of political stability, a lot of the pessimists would see the real prospect of continued progress and durable change.