 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| |
| |
|
|
|
Krishna Hachhethu/The question of inclusion and
exclusion in Nepal: Interface between state and
ethnicity
The
discourse on ethnicity in Nepal has developed
with conflicting views – pre-modernist versus
instrumentalist – on the conceptual framework.
This division among scholars refers to the problem
of inclusion along the lines of majority/minority
or Bahun-Chhetri, i.e. in terms of dominant group/subjugated
group. This debate comes up in relation with matters
of politics, polity and state. Addressing the
issue of inclusion through an examination of the
interface between the state and ethnicity, Krishna
Hachhetu analysed historical inter-group relations
to see what spaces exist for inclusive democracy
in Nepal, and investigated the chances of democratic
consolidation. In present times, when Nepal is
looking at caste relations, it is important to
recall whether these were harmonious or historically
conflict-ridden, even if latently so. Noting that
national integration itself was an imposition
from the top, Hachhethu said that since the history
of a nation is non-democratic, the nation-state
was by definition exclusionary.
In
Nepal, after 1990, ethnic activism increased.
The domains of identity, resources and participation
were the principal sites of struggle. But, while
appreciating the importance of ethnic movements,
he warned that these could easily degenerate into
a communal struggle depending on what/who was
the target of academic criticism.
Hachhetu
briefly discussed the evolution of Nepal’s
constitution, describing each of Nepal’s
four constitutions between 1950 and the present.
The success of the 1990 movement and post-1990
activism, he said, could be seen in the greater
respect for identity as manifest in the inclusion
of the category of caste in the census, and some
legislation. Enumerating the achievements of janjati
activism, Hachhetu said they were a) the breaking
of old symbols of nationalism and the building
of more accurately representative ones in a move
towards multi-culturalism; b) the tension, precipitated
by the Maoist conflict, between the monarchy and
new emerging nationalisms; c) the progress from
a majoritarian democracy to a consensual system,
and the realisation that a better system should
be in place that will promote decentralisation;
and, d) the impact of pressure groups, which will
eventually lead to the restructuring of the state.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
