*Nepal: Local Elections; *France: Presidential Elections; *Pakistan: New PM & Government; *Putin’s War; *Russia: Threat of Nuclear War

  By Shashi P.B.B. Malla Nepal’s Local Elections Blues  Nepal’s local elections for 753 local units are slated for May 13, less than a month away, but except for one fringe party, no party has as yet released a political manifesto, outlining their agendas for the next five years. This is particularly troublesome for concerned citizens as they are still in the dark about how the parties are going to address the people’s needs and aspirations. It is indeed funny, if not sad, that the two main political blocks – both dominated by scheming, corrupt and contradicting Communists – have been constantly busy with hatching intrigues and conspiracies about how best to capture the most seats. The “Gang of Five” in the ruling coalition – Nepali Congress (NC), CPN-Maoist Centre, CPN-Unified Socialist, Janata Samajbadi Party and Rashtriya Janamorcha, as well as the main opposition CPN-UML have until now completely failed to inform the general public about their plans. To talk of any ‘vision’ would be really misguided. Alliance Politics the Need of the Hour? With nothing better to say, or to defend his party’s [purporting to be social democratic] close association with undemocratic Communist forces, the “leader” of the NC, Prakash Man Singh has said the ruling alliance and the electoral alliance are the present needs of the hour and the country (my Republica, April 18). It would be such sweet revenge if the Nepali people proved him wrong! The unprincipled “leader” even had the effrontery to claim that the ruling alliance was formed to protect the constitution! Far removed from the ‘grand politics’ of the provincial capitals and/or the ‘swamp’ of the nation’s capital itself, the politics at the ‘grassroots’ are of fundamental importance in the daily lives of the people. The Constitution of Nepal has assigned no less than 22 explicit areas which are the purview of local governments, including school education, basic health services, local roads, and irrigation facilities. Since the promulgation of the Constitution in 2015, this is the second time that local elections are taking place. The last local elections in 2017 were held after an interval of 20 years!  The local elections are crucial in the ‘bottom–up’ approach to good governance and essential for empowering women and marginalized groups and former lower-caste people. Putin’s War in Ukraine & Nuclear Threat The distinguished Israeli historian and bestselling author Yuval Noah Harari says the growing risk that Russia may turn to nuclear weapons poses an existential threat to humanity (CNBC, April 14). Eight weeks into Russia’s war with Ukraine, still escalating tensions position human society at perhaps the “most dangerous moment in world history since the Cuban missile crisis” [October 1962 ], when nuclear war is a sudden possibility, said Hariri. The brilliant writer of:
  • Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind
  • Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow
[ both spellbinding, clear, witty, fresh and lively ] said the growing risk that Russia may turn to nuclear weapons or other forms of chemical or biological warfare to advance its onslaught posed an existential threat to humanity. At the same time, Hariri expressed cautious optimism about the possibility of bringing about a peaceful end to the conflict. A peaceful resolution is not just in the interests of Ukraine and its immediate neighbours, but wider human society. Another eminent academic has also raised alarms. Nina Khrushcheva [professor of International Affairs at The New School, New York City], the great-granddaughter of the late Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev [the direct antagonist of U.S. President John F. Kennedy in the Cuban Missile Crisis] has also said that Putin may take recourse to nuclear weapons in the ongoing Ukraine war (Newsweek, April 18).    Pakistan’s New Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, leader of the Pakistan Muslim League – Nawaz (PML-N) party, took office as Pakistan’s new prime minister last week Monday, bringing a weeks-long political turmoil to an end. Previously, PM Imran Khan and his government were ousted after he failed a no-confidence vote. He had first blocked the vote, which he argued was part of a U.S. plot to remove him, but the Supreme Court ruled that the vote must take place. Shehbaz Sharif, the younger brother of former PM Nawaz Sharif [presently recuperating in London], is a very different leader than Khan. During his term as chief minister of Punjab province, he earned praise as an understated but efficient administrator who emphasized infrastructure development (Foreign Policy/South Asia Brief, April 15). He has also emphasized the importance of relations with the West, particularly the United States. Sharif, like other Pakistani politicians, does face corruption charges that he and his supporters say are politically motivated. The new government’s honeymoon period will not last long according to observers of South Asia. It inherits an economic crisis marked by one of Asia’s highest inflation rates and a rising terrorist threat from the Pakistan Taliban. It will also face relentless pressure from Khan, now back in the role of opposition leader. Two Sundays back, thousands of his supporters took to the streets on his behalf – a testament to the mass public support he continues to bag that Khan can in no way be written off. Rather, Pakistan’s highly charged political atmosphere will grow even more polarized, with Khan likely to keep up the narrative that his ouster was a result of a U.S. conspiracy. The next elections are scheduled for 2023, but early polls cannot be ruled out. Khan & the Pakistan Military Pakistani writer Mohammed Hanif speculates: “Why is Khan not blaming the army for his ousting? Behind his petulant façade, there is a pragmatist at work. His party cadres are seething at the army for abandoning them, but Khan himself doesn’t want to burn the bridge that may one day bring him back to the office.” France on the Cusp of Metamorphosis? Emmanuel Macron was elected president of France’s Fifth Republic on 6th May 2017 after running on a “neither-left-nor-right platform and defeating his far-right rival, Ms. Marine Le Pen. The new leader of the European Union’s (EU) second-largest economy made a promise to the French people that the country would never again see a far-right candidate reach the second round of the presidential election: “Our task is immense,” Macron said as he took office. “In the five years to come, my responsibility will be to appease fears, to revive the French optimism . . . I will fight with all my strength against the divisions that undermine us” (The Guardian, April 11). He vowed to “rally and reconcile” the French, for “the unity of the people and the country.” Today, however, almost five years later, France has woken up to the first round of the presidential election – and the prospect, once again, of a runoff between Macron and Le Pen. The incumbent president [of the La Republique En Marche party founded by Macron in 2016] won 27.6 % percent of the vote last Sunday, followed by Le Pen [National Rally, formerly National Front] with 23.4 % percent. Jean-Luc Melenchon, the leader of the leftwing party La France Insoumise, came close but failed to qualify for the runoff with 22 % percent. Then came Eric Zemmour [Reconquete party], the openly far-right, racist candidate who ran on a platform based entirely on the “great replacement” theory [that white European populations are being replaced by ‘non-European’ people by rampant immigration], with 7.1 % percent. France’s traditional parties are close to extinction. Valerie Pecresse, of the right-wing Republicains, got only 4.8 % percent, while Yannick Jadot of the Greens reached 4.6 % percent and Socialist candidate (and Paris mayor) Anne Hidalgo, only 1.8 % percent. None of the three reached the 5 % percent threshold to be fully reimbursed for their campaign spending, effectively putting their parties’ futures in existential danger. According to The Guardian’s French columnist Pauline Bock, it was indeed gloomy that adding up Le Pen’s and Zemmour’s results, almost one in three French citizens who cast a ballot, chose to vote for the far right, although turnout was low as compared to 2017 [74 % percent as compared to 79 % percent ]. Many analysts critique Macron for failing to honour his first and most crucial pledge to the French people. Indeed, he helped create the French “far-right monster”. Macron appears “young and dynamic...intelligent, bold and ambitious,” writes Celestine Bohlen (in Persuasion), but “the fact is that he is a divisive figure: half the country admires him, sometimes grudgingly, and the other half detests him.”  This time around, Le Pen has a real chance of winning. Polls show an extremely close race, with Macron at 54 % percent to Le Pen’s 46 % percent for the second round – a much thinner margin than in 2017, when Marcos defeated her by 66 % percent to 34 % percent. “A victory for Le Pen should terrify anyone who cares about democracy and peace” (Bock). Le Monde has warned that “the changes she is planning to the constitution aim for the implementation of an authoritarian system”; and she has several times declared her “admiration” for the Russian president, Vladimir Putin.  Now Macron’s only hope is the Left voters, whom he did enough to antagonize during his [ first ] term. Russia’s Role in International Relations Russia occupies an unusual/unique position on the world stage. Under President Vladimir Putin, Moscow has repeatedly demonstrated that it has the capacity to destabilize the liberal international order, most recently with its brutal invasion of Ukraine (WPR/World Politics Review, April 12).  It has demonstrated its ability to upset power dynamics in various regions like the Middle East and now Europe. However, Moscow has so far not shown any capacity to fill the vacuums it exploits – or creates. This is substantiated by its gruesome ‘exploits’ in Ukraine, where the Russian military has proven operationally incompetent at anything but imposing punishing costs on the country’s civilian population, including probably war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. The Russian military excels in its scorched earth policy – raining death and destruction and turning whole cities to rubble. Its bungling and blundering are evidenced by the unusually high number of deaths among the top brass, not to mention the common soldiers. Russia has, on the one hand, shown that it lacks the conventional military strength to challenge US supremacy in Europe, let alone globally – it is literally punching above its weight. However, the NATO alliance is very much aware of Russia’s enormous nuclear capabilities as shown by the alliance’s refusal to intervene directly in Putin’s aggressive war against Ukraine. Moscow uses arms sales and military engagements to build ties to countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America and especially the Middle East. India’s utter dependence on Russian arms shipments made it reluctant to condemn Russia at the UN General Assembly. Its massive exports of fossil fuels to Europe – especially Germany – even now, after more than seven weeks of the war in Ukraine, offer Russia additional leverage and its ability to continue its war of attrition, despite debilitating sanctions. Domestic Pressures While Moscow maintains an outsize influence on the global stage, discontent is growing at home. Putin has now dominated the domestic political scene for more than two decades. His popularity is waning amid a slowing economy and following a deeply unpopular pension reform effort. That did not stop him – like all autocrats, authoritarian leaders and strongmen -- from manipulating a way to hold on to power after his current political term ends in 2024, despite a constitutional term limit. This has opened space for Putin’s long-suffering political opponents to call attention to the rampant corruption and antagonists] that have marked his regime.  The most prominent among them Alexei Navalny almost paid for his life for doing so [poisoned with a chemical nerve agent, but saved by specialized doctors in Germany], and is now paying with his freedom in a Siberian, Soviet-style penitentiary. Putin Cannot be Allowed to Succeed One of America’s leading commentators, Fareed Zakaria of CNN and The Washington Post has written that Russian forces may have struggled up to now, but Putin has moved onto a backup plan: a narrower campaign in the East and South of Ukraine that “could well succeed.” Western military aid has helped Kyiv’s forces, but if Russia cleaves off these Ukrainian regions, it “will have turned Ukraine into an economically crippled rump state, landlocked and threatened on three sides by Russian military power, always vulnerable to another incursion from Moscow” (Zakaria). “The only pressure that will force Russia to the negotiating table is military defeat – in the south. Putin’s Plan A failed, but we cannot let his Plan B succeed.” However, it could be a combination of three crucial factors that finally break Putin’s back: a crushing stalemate in the East and South, economic sanctions that finally bite, and overwhelming international pressure, including from the UN General Assembly.  Key Questions to be Explored Important questions about future developments remain:
  • What impact the war in Ukraine will have on Russia’s economy
  • What consequences will the war have on Russia’s strategic partnership with China
  • The ramifications for another striving great power, India and its role in the South Asia region and the wider world
  • The possibility/probability for Putin to be able to maintain his grip on power should his military adventurism in Ukraine boomerang.
The writer can be reached at: shashipbmalla@hotmail.com