Over the top

In today’s Nepali Times, Rabi Thapa wrote:

From 1950 to 1990, 13 countries in Latin America, Africa and the former Soviet Union moved their capitals. Even the Indian capital moved from Calcutta to Delhi in 1911. Why not Nepal?”

I have been a big critic (like many) of the highly-centralized governance in Nepal. The result? We aren’t any better than we should have been, and the problems are plenty. The levels of disconnect and disparity between Kathmandu and the rest of the country are so high that they are like two different countries in themselves. People talk of marginalization of the Madheshi, of the Sherpas, of the Dalits, and so on. In my opinion, Nepal’s problems are not as much on ethnic grounds, as they are on regional differences. The Human Development Index (published by the UNDP) of Kathmandu district is comparable to that of South Africa, while that of Far-Western Nepal is comparable to that of Sierra-Leone. You call this class-difference or whatever, but a century of wrongs by the Bahuns and Chhetris in Kathmandu should not be the reason for the Bahuns or Chhetris in Jajarkot to be wronged for another century. Ask a Madheshi and an uneducated Chhetri from outside Kathmandu- the level of discrimination and the treatment of second-grade citizen offered by the residents of Kathmandu are more or less similar for both of them.

Level of disparity in Nepal (click for larger picture). source: Nepal Human Development Report 1998.

The fact that Kathmandu is the most developed city in Nepal is both both the cause and effect of the city being the capital of Nepal. Hence, blaming outsiders for the disorder in Kathmandu and not thanking them for the development of the city at the the cost of their own native cities and villages is a very uncivilized thing to do.

Some in today’s meeting of high level Maoist leadership have proposed Chitwan as the new capital of the country. Many think such talks by leaders are more related to influencing the land-prices than addressing real problems. Despite that, I support the proposal. Many years ago, (in the 50s or the 60s) somebody had proposed (in Nepal’s parliament) moving the capital to Pokhara. That was an idea whose time had come. Rapidly decentralizing Nepal has no substitute, especially if we keep talking of democracy and inclusiveness.

In today’s Maoist meeting itself, some leaders reportedly opposed the choice of Chitwan because of it being a district near to India. Now, can there be a comment more naive than that? Will Nepal be able to defend the supposed Indian attack if it ever takes place? And has India been unable to do so because of Kathmandu being surrounding by hills and a little (some 40-50 km air distance from Chitwan) far off from India ?

Or have we not been able to accelerate our development because of that highly-protective and defensive mentality (read inferior-complex) of ours? I think Nepal owes that mentality to the city of Kathmandu. It’s time for us to get rid of that.