+Nepal Elections +Putin’s War +Conference Diplomacy in South-East Asia   By Shashi P.B.B. Malla Nepal’s Parliamentary & Provincial Elections With less than a week for Nepal’s Parliamentary and Provincial (State) elections, the level of enthusiasm cannot be considered that high. [By the way, the Election Commission has branded the Secular, Federal, Himalayan Republic hundred percent illiterate! Why? Because the ballot papers are printed without the written names of the candidates and political parties/independents! They are identified only by their election symbols! This must be unique in the world] There are many reasons for this state of affairs and it is mainly the fault of the main established political parties.
  1. They have hogged the limelight ever since the establishment of the Secular, Federal, Democratic Republic.
  2. They have taken turns in ruling the country, but accountable governance has not been the rule.
  3. The main aim of capturing power at the national or state capitals has been for the politicians to enrich themselves.
Politics has been the short-cut to riches. This may be the reason for the great number of candidates, especially independents. Service to the people has been forgotten once the politicians occupy the seats of power and prestige. Once elections come around, they tend to promise the stars. While in power they have failed to provide the basic amenities to the people, especially in the far-off regions.
  1. The politicians remain at the decision-making process too long.
They are not willing to hand over power to younger leaders.
  1. They have also failed miserably to promote people from minorities, indigenous communities and above all women to responsible positions.
With more women in leadership positions, the country would be in a far better place. There is, therefore, the general feeling that the elections will not change much in the lives of the broad mass of the people. It is particularly depressing to contemplate that the current ruling alliance – the “Gang of Five” may rule for another 15 to 20 years [ as Dahal and Deuba have been claiming! However, there are rays of hope, and as the poet Alexander Pope wrote: “Hope springs eternal in the human breast” and some of the candidates may truly turn out to be agents of fruitful change. Moreover, as the British politician R.A. Butler said: “Politics is the Art of the Possible” And we may be underestimating some candidates and some political parties – especially independents and smaller parties. They could spur on people to more political participation and break the stranglehold of first, the unnatural and unholy alliance of the Nepali Congress & Communists [Maoists & United Socialists] and second, the power-hungry Communist Party of Nepal – Unified Marxists-Leninists (CPN-UML). Both these conglomerates have been tried and tested many times and found wanting. Their geriatric leaders are on the verge of being senile and have no answers to today’s burning questions. Sher Bahadur Deuba of the Nepali Congress (NC) is also tending towards establishing dynastic or family rule [like the Nehru-Gandhi family in India] – which we absolutely reject. It is indeed remarkable that Manisha Koirala, the grand-daughter of the great NC-leader B.P. Koirala has recently rejected the machinations of the current NC and come out in favour of the Rashtriya Prajatantra Party (RPP/National Democratic Party) and its charismatic chairman, Rajendra Lingden (TKP/The Kathmandu Post, Nov. 12). RPP-Senior Vice Chairman Rabindra Mishra [House of Representatives candidate from Kathmandu Constituency-1] has pointed out the malignant ideological influence of Maoist Pushpa Kamal Dahal on both the NC and CPN-UML (my Republica, Nov. 11). For all intents and purposes, it does seem that the RPP is the only major party with national/patriotic and real democratic orientation. As the RPP-Chairman, Rajendra Lingden stressed, the country has suffered a lot for failing to elect the right party and the right leaders. The RPP strives to be the custodian of the country’s heritage and culture. But has it done enough to inform the people all over the country? And have its supporters and well-wishers done their best to achieve optimal results? Many analysts are not convinced. A Turning Point in Putin’s Ukraine War? Russia’s announcement that it will withdraw troops from the southern Ukrainian city of Kherson marks a major development in Russian President Vladimir Putin’s unprovoked and aggressive war. Putin has distanced himself from what could be a significant reversal to his war effort and did not appear at the televised meeting where the withdrawal was announced by Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu and the commander of Russian forces in Ukraine – apparently to save face and his skin! Putin’s Mindset At the Washington Post, columnist Max Boot writes that the withdrawal could reveal something about Putin’s way of thinking. After all, the costs of withdrawing from Kherson are considerable. The Russian army will relinquish the only Ukrainian regional capital it has captured in its military offensive this year. It will demonstrate to ordinary Russians how badly the war effort is going. On the other hand, it will also boost Ukrainian hopes and help the West’s pro-Ukrainian coalition hold together. Implications of the Russian Retreat The months-long Ukrainian offensive to recapture the city of Kherson, the only provincial that had been under Russian control since the early days of the invasion, has come to a head (AP/Associated Press, Nov. 11). The fall of the city dealt another humiliation to Moscow after a string of battlefield defeats and other setbacks. The Financial Times writes that the retreat from Kherson is “a huge military failure for Putin.” The city and surrounding areas fell into Moscow’s hands in the opening days of the war as Russian troops quickly pushed their attack north from the Crimean Peninsula – the region illegally annexed by the Kremlin in 2014. Its loss was a major blow for Ukraine because of its location on the Dnieper River near the mouth of the Black Sea, and its role as a major industrial centre. Ukrainian resistance fighters have challenged Russian troops for control of the city and environs ever since, with acts of sabotage and assassinations of Moscow-appointed officials. Kherson also sits at the point where Ukraine can cut off fresh water from the Dnieper to Crimea. Kyiv blocked those vital supplies after the Crimean annexation, and Putin mentioned the need to restore the water supply as one vital reason behind his decision to invade Ukraine in February. “Russians have moved to positions [on the eastern bank of the Dnieper River] they hope will be easier to defend. Ukraine will have to decide whether, when, and how to keep pushing, according to the International Crisis Group. Meaning of Russia’s Loss The retreat from Kherson and other areas on the Dnieper’s west bank has shattered Russian right of way to the Black Sea. Moscow had also hoped to build a land corridor to its separatist Transnistria region of independent and sovereign Moldova, home to a major Russian military base. “The loss of Kherson will turn all those southern dreams by the Kremlin into dust,” according to an Ukrainian military analyst. End of the Road for Putin? Whether the apologists of Putin’s war like it or not, there is now lively debate within and outside Russia about Putin’s immanent fall from grace. The “Kherson debacle” has allegedly led to movement to remove him from power – not by a sudden coup d’etat or putsch – but by creeping coup. According to the Russian analyst, Kirill Rogov, his underlings are deliberately not following vital orders from Putin in order to sabotage the decision making process at the top of the regime. This could lead to an implosion. Biden & Xi Meet at China’s Backyard Nowhere has Chinese President Xi Jinping’s assertive foreign policy had a greater impact than in East and South East Asia – China’s strategic backyard. [Similarly India considers the whole of South Asia its strategic backyard – which, of course, is disputed by China – for all intents and purposes also a South Asian power, considering its presence in Ladakh/Kashmir and its territorial claim to India’s north-eastern Arunachal Pradesh]. As Beijing’s power has increased in the region as a whole, so has Washington’s tensions correspondingly. Now, after years of oscillation, the U.S. is trying to engage with (BBC/Jonathan Head, Nov. 12). ASEAN When Biden attended the annual summit of the Association of South East Asian Nations or ASEAN last week in Cambodia. He became the first US President to make that trip since 2017. He was there virtually last year too. And then he went on to Indonesia, another important player in the region, where he is scheduled to meet Chinese leader Xi Jinping before they both attend the G-20 meeting. But unlike in the past, the U.S. today is now operating in a more precarious political environment. ASEAN, once considered a diplomatic hub in the Asia-Pacific, is now struggling to remain effective in an increasing polarized world. [However, it is still relevant unlike SAARC] It has fashioned itself as a Zone of Peace and Neutrality, where its 10 member states seek consensus, avoid criticizing each other and feel free to engage with different powers. Its small and weak secretariat, and lack of any process for enforcing decisions on members, reflects this mindset. Today, the countries that make up ASEAN are in a problematic position. First, China is so important economically, and so powerful militarily, that few dare confront it openly. Second, China has effectively weakened ASEAN unity by picking off smaller states, such as Laos and Cambodia, which are now so dependent on Beijing’s largesse they are virtually client states. China also fully backs Myanmar, the international pariah. Third, ASEAN countries have also become disenchanted with Washington. They see it as an unreliable partner, too preoccupied with human rights and democracy. All ASEAN countries – in varying degrees – now recognize that China will be the dominant power in this region and one that is unwilling to make concessions where its own interests are at stake. In this charged atmosphere, to what extent can the U.S. maneuver and reshape alliances in China’s backyard? Biden-Xi Bali Meeting: Taiwan & Ukraine Top of Agenda Taiwan topped the agenda when US President Joe Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping met this Monday – their first in-person encounter since Biden took office in January 2020 (BBC). The much-awaited meeting came at a time when bilateral relations between the two superpowers have deteriorated considerably. This has been fueled by Beijing’s claims over self-ruled Taiwan and its increasing self-assured and strong-willed policies in the Western Pacific/East & South East Asia; Indian Ocean/South Asia. The U.S. has responded, among others, by restricting access to vital computer chip advanced technology. That has hit China’s export-driven economy which uses the technology to make and sell everything from phones to electric cars. Given the recent surge in tensions and rhetoric, the world and America’s Asian allies such as India, Japan, South Korea and Australia were closely watching the meeting in Bali ahead of the G-20 Summit. The New Cold War: A Reality Taiwan and security issues have been central to every leadership talk between Biden and Xi. These have contradicted and overshadowed  Biden’s insistence that the United States and China can cooperate on climate change, health security and other global crises. This may also be the case in Bali. Biden’s assessment of Xi has been prescient: “I think we’ve got our hands full with this guy” (NYT). And indeed, Biden has treated the Chinese leader more like a Cold War-era nemesis than the calculating bureaucrat he once knew [when he was vice president]. Ms. Yuen Yuen Ang, a political scientist at the University of Michigan argues that naturally Xi feels threatened. He knows that Biden is a formidable and determined rival of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). “The new Cold War is here to stay and will escalate” (NYT, Nov. 14). The writer can be reached at: shashipbmalla@hotmail.com