The Madhes-based parties have served the government an ultimatum to address their remaining grievances about the new constitution, warning of a decisive movement from April-end if their demands are not met.

This would be the regional parties’ second storm of protest since the Constituent Assembly passed the new national charter in September last year. The six-month long siege of the plains by the Tarai forces, which crippled life across the country with an added weight of cross-border trade disruption, is fresh in public memory.

While talks of renewed agitation has given rise to fears of another choking shortage of essential supplies, widening communal divide due to violence surrounding the movement threatens to tear a fragile social fabric.

An opportune moment

This may be the right time to assess the outcomes of the three revolts in the Tarai that took place since the Maoist insurgency ended. Inclusion and federalism were the major achievements of the first two movements while the most recent one compelled the first amendment to the new constitution. Another major statute revision pledged by the major parties is related to federal restructuring.

Changes are lasting if both the end and the means of a revolution are widely acknowledged. There is no popular support for violent tactics even through people are momentarily coerced into following the diktats of a reigning force. For instance, many of the revolutionary agendas of the rebel Maoists did not survive when the public was no more intimidated to follow the party’s command.

The outbreaks of protest have also been counterproductive for the protesting community. For one, the widespread sympathy earned by the people of the plains among the Hills communities such as in Kathmandu after the second people’s movement as a result of their pro-Madhes campaigns evaporated when life froze in the metropolis due to the blanket ban in the Tarai of the movement of people and goods.

As the Madhesi parties prepare to spearhead their next movement against the ‘Hill Bahun/Chhetri establishment’, they may be advised to employ only the widely accepted forms of protest. It is worth recalling that the lynching of poorly-mobilised security personnel in Tikapur as the protests were just breaking out in the run-up to the promulgation of the constitution appeared to have made the police revengeful. Dozens of civilian deaths that followed elsewhere in the Tarai were thought to have occurred due to the action of ‘insecure’ police forces.

The Madhesi Morcha has also been reaching out to the Janajati parties and groups for taking their movement across the country so that they get better recognition of their demands. Democracy, including ours, guarantees people’s right to peaceful protest. And not everyone is happy with the constitution delivered by the historic Constituent Assembly. Dissenting voices against some provisions of the law of the land have not weakened despite an end to the stir.

A decade since the popular revolt that ultimately overthrew monarchy, all the political developments in Nepal have been part of a democratic exercise even as the aspirations of all sections of people have not been articulated equally in the young republic.

Evolution versus revolution

Like every other phenomenon, political developments are sustainable if they take an evolutionary course rather than an abrupt jump in that a vast majority of people will not be prepared to realise the new changes. In today’s context for example, social groups and communities are not sure about several agendas enshrined in the new constitution. There are divided takes on the ways of social, political and regional reorganisation.

For instance, while going secular was a welcome decision for the Janajati population, oppressed Hindu caste groups and religious minorities in general, a major chunk of Hinduism followers has been agitated against the constitutional provision. Many believe India’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party that stands on the Hindutva ground has dissatisfaction about Nepal’s secular state, so much so that it employed the tough weapon of a border blockade to sabotage its small neighbour’s efforts at post-earthquake rebuilding and economic development through political stability.

Progress is never complete and political changes, as has been seen in the past decade, are stirring. But people can digest them only in a gradual progression—not all coming in at a breakneck speed. The remaining gaps in the constitution can be filled gradually when the dust of communal mistrust settles. For political parties as well, time is necessary to embrace the new set-up and be prepared for the next step

of restructuring.

Of all the changes, the most doubted one is federalism. Many view the demand for redrawing the state boundaries in light of an unfounded argument that the emergence of autonomous provinces will encourage secessionist forces where there remain few national unifying factors. But since the traditional force that wielded authority no longer exists, the balance of state power will keep changing in a richly diverse society like Nepal’s. In the process, agendas of all the legitimate powers will be established in due course of time.

Therefore, there is no need for any political group to have a ‘now or never’ attitude about getting all their concerns addressed. The agitating parties can have patience, keep the flame of their movement alive with an aim to woo voters during the next election and rise to prominence. But if they repeat their unacceptable moves and create widespread public suffering, they will only be relegated to insignificance. While they will lose support at home and from the international community, this will defeat their own purpose.

Guragain is a senior sub-editor with The Kathmandu Post