-By Baldeep Pravashwar Chamling
Unfortunately, the complete process of constitution-writing will come to a halt as to what name-giving (baptism) should be given to the six autonomous provinces which has been delineated by a unilateral team of three Bahun leaders. However, things have gone so far that the identity-based federalism is mistaken for ethic state, i.e., nation-state. Be that as it may, objective reality of Nepal brings us to an idea that federalism, in context of Nepal, is at least for the settlement of the crisis of identity, though not for ethnic emancipation (Jatiyamukti).
We can’t forge a consensus on identity-based federalism unless we have had an understanding about the identity of Bahun-chhetris. Bahun-chhetris are rich in identity. So, no need for them to fight for their own identity. ( Ethnic identity refers to language, culture and religion.) Whole Nepalese living-standard, geography and psychology have been cultivated with the ethnic identity of Bahun-chhetris. Let’s expound it.
Obviously, numerous Indigenous Nationalities(Janajati) of Nepal have voluntarily adopted the culture and religion of Bahun-chhetris, thereby, providing a ground to claim that more than 90% of Nepalese population is Hindu. The language and script they use formally and informally are of Bahun-chhetris. Interestingly, Bahun-chhetris’ identity pervades even the family domain of Janajatis. For instance, the family members of Janajatis, for the sake of Bahun-chhetris’ identity, heartily love being named with the words such as ‘Ram’, ‘Hari’, ‘Bishnu’, ‘Krishna’, ‘Shiva’, ‘Ganesh’, etc. for male; and ‘Gita’, ‘Saraswati’, ‘Parbati’, ‘Laxmi’, etc. for female. What are these words related to? Certainly, they are related to the mythological character of Hindu religion promoting the identity of Bahun-chhetris. Not only this, almost all the people from Janajatis have their name in Khas language that ethnically belongs to Bahun-chhetris. So, are janajatis feeling any harm while adopting the identity of Bahun-chhetris ? Certainly not. Then why should Bahun-chhetri dread the Janajatis’ identity?
Geographically, rivers, mountains, hills, etc. all are baptized with Khas language (Bahun-chhetris’ identity). Rivers named as Mahakali, Bishnumti, Narayani etc. stand for the identity of Bahun-chhetri. The whole hilly region is named as Mahabharat relating to Aryan community. In substitution for original indigenous names of mountains such as Chomolungma, Faktalugma, etc., they have been named as Byas Himal, Ganesh Himal, Gaurishankar Himal, Sagarmatha, etc.
Let’s see the names of the units of administrative area. The seventy five districts, the fourteen zones and the five development regions all are baptized with Khas language. Likewise, almost the names of about four thousand VDCs, are in Khas language. Thus, the Bahun-chhetris’ identity expressed through the geographical administrative units is politically legalized by the Local Administration Act.
Bahun’s identity has historically permeated Nepalese social psychology as well, in that, no matter what, all people shall, if asked who the senior most caste is, respond this way: it is Bahuns who are senior to all. So each and every place bears the ethnic identity of Bahun-chhetri. Frankly speaking, there is no place without the Bahun-chhetris’ identity. As Nepal is multi-ethnic, other ethnic communities except Bahun-chhetris also need their own identity. But through where are they to express their identity while almost each and every place has already been occupied by Bahun-chhetris’ identity?
No places are left for the identity of Janajati and Madhesi community. Such places are already cultivated with Bahun-chhetris’ identity. So, the space for the identity of non-Bahun-chhetris is the autonomous provinces yet to be formed and demarcated under federalism. Only the autonomous provinces can be reserved for the identity of Janajati and Madhesis. So, the name-giving to provinces should be as Kirat, Magarat, Limbuwan, Tharuhat, Tamangsaling, Tamuwan and Madhesh.
It is only the name-giving to provinces just on the basis of ethnic identity. But all the peoples living within the provinces have an equal rights and opportunities. Even Bahun-chhetris deserve right to be chiefs of the provinces. Eventhough no provinces are to be named with Bahun-chhetris’ identity, theirs is already there as mentioned above. A question might be raised- is it possible to demarcate provinces for other numerous ethnic communities ? But, the qualification(requirement) for an ethnic community to name a certain province is its historicity and notable population as guaranteed in Interim Constitution. Does a person having the qualification of SLC dare to fight for the post of section officer that requires the qualification of Bachelor Degree? Do Madwari community demand for a Madwari province? But, for the identity of the rest of other ethnic communities, the historical places, the spots of tourism, the would-be municipalities and VDC can be named after their ethnic identity.
Well managed is the crisis of ethnic identity elsewhere even in the UK, the USA, China, India, Russia etc. Eventhough the UK and China are unitary states principally, they have devised political structure to address ethnic identities. In the UK with a doctrine of ‘Countries Within a Countries’, there are Scotland for Scottish ethnicity, Ireland for Irish ethnicity, England for English ethnicity and Welsh for Wales ethnicity. In China, Mongolian Autonomous Province for Mongol, Uigur Autonomous Province for Uigur, Hui Autonomous Province for Hui, Jhuwang Autonomous Province for Jhuwang and Tibet Autonomous Province for Tibetan. Mongol, Hui and Jhuwan are in minority even in their own the province. Likewise more than a dozen states formed on the basis of ethnic identity are there in the USA such as Utah, Illinois, Kansas, Missouri, Alabama, Iowa, Indiana etc. In our neighbouring country, India, there are Tamilnadu, Punjab, Nagaland, Assam, West Bengal, etc. that are the autonomous states for ethic identity. In Russia there are 22 republics named after the identities of ethnic groups.
The titular nations (Jatis) after whose names the republics of Russia are titled are less in number of population (minority) than other ethnic groups living there in their respective republics. For Adyghe community, there is Adygea republic; for Altay, Altai; for Bashkir, Bashkortostan; for Buryat, Buryatia; for Chechen, Chechnya; for Chuvash, Chuvashia; for Crimean Tatar, Crimea; for 10 indigenous communities, Dagestan; for Ingush, Ingushetia; for Kabard and Balkar, Kabardino-Balkaria; for Kalmyk, Kalmykia; for Karachai and Cherkess, Karachay–Cherkessia; for Karelian, Karelia; for Khakas, Khakassia; for Komi, Komi; for Mari, Mari El; for Mordvin, Mordovia; for Ossetian, North Ossetia–Alania; for Yakut, Sakha/Yakutia; for Tatar, Tatarstan; for Tuvan, Tuva and for Udmurt , Udmurtia republic.
Thus, the countries mentioned above in terms of ethnic identity are in all respects rising-power, let alone their national disintegration. So, dispute should pack up for consensus on identity-based federalism which is one of the factors crafting among the ethnic communities a political cooperativeness, without which state-building is in vain. Not vertical, but horizontal development of all ethnic communities actually matters as Albert Camus said this, ” Don’t walk before me, I may not follow you; don’t walk behind me, I may not lead you; but walk beside me and be my friend.”
Cont. 9741078435
(Chamling is a columnists / Political analysts )