Submit your Article

There are a few good points in the govern­ment’s Programs and Policies, unveiled on May 21, in what is a precursor to the national budget that will be presented on May 29. One good point is the setting of clear deadlines for big infra­structure projects. For example the Gautam Buddha International Airport in Bhairahawa is to be completed within a year while the Pokhara Regional Internation­al Airport is slated for completion within three years. Such clear timelines will help observers evaluate, in real time, if the government is making steady progress.

These are not the only time-bound promises. The government also envisions close to double-digit eco­nomic growth in the next fiscal and sustained dou­ble-digit growth within five years. Similarly, the average income of a Nepali is to double over the next five years, to over $2,000 from today’s base of $1,004. Progress on this front should also be easy to track as the doubling of income can happen only if the economic growth in each of the next five fiscals hovers around 10 percent.

The government’s backers have termed the new programs and policies ‘visionary’, while critics have dubbed them ‘overambitious’. The critics have a point. For instance it took nine years for the average Nepali’s income to double to $1,004; but this government wants to double it again within five years. Likewise, economic growth over the past two decades has averaged a pal­try four percent; the government aims to take it to 10 percent (or thereabouts) within a year.

There is nothing wrong in dreaming big. After all, no other post-1990 government had the kind of resound­ing mandate that the current left government enjoys. Barring a political catastrophe, it will serve out its five-year term. That is important. Chopping and changing of governments every nine months or so wreaked havoc on the economy. The decade-long Maoist insur­gency proved even more costly. Now, finally, there is a semblance of political stability, which bodes well.

Yet the kind of economic turnaround the left gov­ernment aims for will happen only through sweeping reforms. Cartels of all kinds have to be dismantled. It should be easier for businesses to open and close, and to hire and fire workers. Moreover, big hydro projects should come through on time, and new industries set up to absorb the growing labor force. They won’t hap­pen overnight. Can the ruling Nepal Communist Party display the kind of unity and single-mindedness that will be needed to realize these ambitious goals?

A few incidents marred Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s two-day Nepal visit. While welcoming Modi in Janakpur, Province 2 Chief Minister Lalbabu Raut broke every rule in the diplomacy playbook by asking the Indian prime minister to help resolve a purely domestic issue. Later, while Indian journalists were allowed in a joint press meet between the two prime ministers, Nepali journalists were curiously barred. Then there was the unforgettable botch-job with the Nepali flag.

Yet it would be a stretch to say that the visit was fruit­less or that Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli somehow ‘surrendered’ before Modi. While the Indian prime minister was in town, the hashtag #BlockadeWasCri­meMrModi was the number one trending theme on Twitter. The common feeling was that Modi should apologize for the five-month-long blockade. While that was understandable, given how much people suffered during those testing times, it was also an unrealistic expectation. Seldom in history have state or govern­ment heads formally apologized for the past misdeeds of their countries. The Americans, for instance, have never apologized for dropping nuclear bombs on Japan or, more recently, for needlessly invading Iraq.

Interestingly, this time too Modi fell short of welcom­ing the constitution. But he congratulated Nepalis for the three tiers of elections—held under the same consti­tution. Modi also unequivocally said India is in favor of an undivided and strong Nepal, dispelling doubts that it is supporting divisive forces here. Another important development has been India’s acceptance of the left merger, undoubtedly at Oli’s urging; until now there seemed to be a feeling in New Delhi that the alliance (and now a unified party) was a ‘Chinese construct’.

In other words, there has been a marked thaw in Nepal-India relations since Oli became prime minister, and he must be given some credit for that. Following Modi’s departure from Nepal, Oli has, moreover, clar­ified that he is as keen on improving ties with China, where he is going soon. Notwithstanding the agree­ments that were (or were not) signed during Modi’s recent visit, his recent dealings with our two import­ant neighbors are marked by a level of finesse that has seldom been seen in Nepali leaders. Even his staunch critics grudgingly accept this. Oli may have more stra­tegic acumen than people give him credit for. Now that he is in charge of a strong, unified party, we may just get to witness that acumen put to even better use.

Symbolism counts for a lot in diplomacy, and few leaders understand this better than Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli and his Indian counterpart Narendra Damodardas Modi. PM Modi’s projection of raw confidence during his electrifying speech in the Nepali parliament in 2014, when he mesmerized Nepali MPs and common folks alike, will never be forgotten. But nor will the souring of his tone during his second official visit, also in 2014, which in some ways presaged the nearly five months of border blockade.

Or take Oli’s first India visit as government head, right after the end of the blockade. During that trip, Oli stood up to the Indian pressure and refused to toe its line. Oli and his left alliance, it can be argued, rode on the anti-blockade popularity wave to secure a thumping victory in subsequent federal and provincial elections. On becoming prime minister for the second time, Oli went to India again, and the confidence he projected in New Delhi, and his treatment of Modi as his equal in every respect, were just as remarkable.

The focus of Modi’s third Nepal visit is on religious places like Janakpur, Pashupatinath and Muktinath. Besides that, his 36-hour Nepal stay will be peppered with meetings with leaders from across the political spectrum. Keenly aware of the inclinations of his core constituencies back home, Modi apparently wants to show them that he is still close to his Hindu roots, which will come in handy during the 2019 Indian gen­eral elections. Some view his visit to Muktinath in Mus­tang on the northern border as an indirect signal to China to keep a safe distance from Nepal.

Whatever the motive for his visit, Nepalis, who have traditionally treated their guests as no less than gods, should continue the tradition. There is no point harping on past Indian injustices or, on India’s part, bemoaning the unreliability of Nepali political actors. Modi seems keen to forget past bitterness and reestab­lish bilateral ties on a more equal footing. Ditto with PM Oli. That course of action is also in Nepal’s interest. There is really no gainsaying the importance of nor­malizing relations with India.

Whether one likes PM Oli or not, a Nepali leader has after a long time shown himself to be capable of holding his own against any foreign counterpart. Perhaps Oli has a long-term foreign policy strategy up his sleeve. He deserves some time to prove his diplomatic credentials.

Is it disappointing, though hardly surprising, that our new parliamentarians are lobbying hard for the continuation of the controversial Constituency Development Fund (CDF). Previous governments used to allocate funds to MPs—which swelled to Rs 30 million for each during the tenure of the previous par­liament—that were meant for the development of their respective constituencies. They each got an addition­al Rs 5 million, for similar purpose, under a separate Parliament Development Fund. Tellingly, these outlays would be spent at the sole discretion of individual MPs. Most of the funds were predictably misused, which is why they became wildly unpopular.

But the new MPs are now lobbying not just for the continuation of the arrangement, but they also want the allotted amount under the CDF to increase over three-fold, to Rs 100 million each. If the government bows down to their demand, and it seems to be con­sidering doing so, it will cost the exchequer at least Rs 3 billion a year. This is indefensible, for multiple reasons. Now that the country has fully embraced federalism, there are separate budgets for individual provinces and local units. Moreover, any of their budget shortfalls will be met by the central government. There is thus no justification for giving individual MPs such discretion­ary spending power.

These self-serving acts of our MPs and ministers also suggest that they are in politics primarily to make mon­ey, and not to serve the people, a perception that adds to public cynicism about their government. This is an unhealthy development for a budding democracy. Of course, this doesn’t imply that our MPs should not earn enough or that all of them are crooks. But they already make plenty. The basic monthly salary of a federal MP alone is Rs 55,000. When other bonuses are added, the final take-home pay is well above Rs 100,000. How much more do the MPs of a country with a monthly per capita income of less than Rs 8,500 need?

The new government of KP Sharma Oli has of late made some courageous decisions in public interest, for instance in its refusal to budge against the long-en­trenched transport syndicates. Its strong stand against interference in Nepal’s internal affairs by other coun­tries and institutions is also laudable. It is doing a good job in foreign policy too. Now it should have the cour­age to refuse this selfish and unjustified demand of the federal MPs. If it can do so, there would be no bigger proof of its commitment to public service.