As published in Myrepublica. Is 'development' itself the cause of Nepal's problems?
	DR JEREMY RAPPLEYE   What if ‘development’ was the cause of Nepal’s problems, not the solution? If that is true, then wouldn’t more ‘development aid’ push Nepal toward further social disintegration? Let’s take a brief trip back in history. ‘Development’, by which I mean the system of aid agencies and transfer of funds from the First to the Third World, actually has an exact starting date: US President’s Truman’s Four Point Plan speech in 1949. The US was eager to both (a) increase its influence in countries newly liberated from colonization and (b) fight Communist influence that threatened the global capitalist system. As fate would have it, Nepal threw off the Rana oligarchy at nearly the same moment. The confluence of these two events brought ‘development’ to Nepal: The US eager to hold back swelling Communist influence in the region (recall China ‘fell’ in 1949) and Nepal eager to leave behind the legacy of the Ranas, modernize, and build a ‘nation’ through inclusion, education and democracy. The resulting system seemed to work well throughout the 1950s, but by the 1960s it was clear that these two goals were diverging. The US and other donor representatives cared little about how well ‘development’ served Nepal, but instead making sure they could report favorably back to superiors back ‘home’. Take education for example: The system designed by American experts in the 1950s failed to function well with local managed teachers mere ‘slaves’ to powerful village chiefs, no real provisions for creating a cohesive nation, and the production of graduates who found no jobs except in the aid-driven sectors of the economy and refused to return to the villages. The emergence of problems with the earlier American vision was the reason the government instituted the National Education System Plan (1971) attempting to nationalize teachers, create a cohesive Nepali identity, realign education with the economy, and send students ‘back to the village’ through programs like the National Development Service. It is little wonder then that the US and other donors substantially decreased assistance during this time and also dubbed the plan a mere ‘ploy’ by the palace to solidify the Panchayat system. By the early 1980s, however, the Panchayat system was under attack for other reasons. Students protested, teachers went on strike and the discontent culminated in the People’s Movement (1990). But, as with the earlier fall of the Ranas, Nepal’s own vision of its future – inclusion, democracy, equity – was quickly overtaken by international donor demands. By the late 1990s, Nepal’s own vision had all but been turned almost completely around: An exclusive focus on efficiency, cost-effectiveness and a consumer logic. In fact, from ‘citizen to consumer’ characterize rather well the two decades since Janaandolan. Again, consider education. The National Education Commission (1990-1992) inaugurated in the wake of Janaandolan stated that the goal was to create an educational system “consistent with the human rights enshrined in the constitution and the democratic values and norms as well as social justice.” What happens when loss of faith in ‘development’ occurs? The American anthropologist James Ferguson argues that two responses dominate: Exit or violence. For those who have lost faith in the promise of ‘development’ as they watch their living conditions stagnate or sink, one option is to try to get out; exit to a better space. The second option is to resort to violence. Ten years later, the main themes are decentralization and private schools – the exact same policies we see the donors promoting in every other country of the world. It is little wonder then that it has brought to Nepal the exact same results: A massive spike in inequality, growing exclusion along class lines and the breakdown of democracy. Donors took control of the processes of development in the 1950s and we have seen them do the same in the 1990s. For all but a very small number of elites in Kathmandu who are able to profit from the aid enterprise, ‘development’ has twice passed the Nepali people by. For the vast majority, livelihoods have not increased but decreased. This is an important point: Despite the positive image bikas tends to carry, people are clearly waking up to the realities. Loading-shedding has increased, fuel shortages, garbage piling up in the streets, traffic, pollution, and dance bars offering poor Nepali girls to rich Indian tourists. Considering what Kathmandu looked like 50 years ago, what will it look like 50 years in the future? And this is just Kathmandu, where most people still believe in ‘development’. Venture beyond the rim of the valley and that is where the real future of Nepal lies. It is here that the vast majority of the ‘twice-passed-by’ people live and they are losing patience. Fast. The genius of bikas is that it promised that inequalities would be lessened over time. This was true both within the country and across the world: Poor people were told by donors and local elites to wait patiently, do the right thing, and they would ‘catch-up’. Being twice-passed-by, however, has created a disbelief in ‘development’. What is left when our faith in ‘development’ falters? The harsh reality of inequality, but this time without the hope of change. Clearly many Nepalis have lost faith in ‘development’ itself along such lines. And what happens when this loss of faith in ‘development’ occurs? The American anthropologist James Ferguson argues that two responses dominate: Exit or violence. For those who have lost faith in the promise of ‘development’ as they watch their living conditions stagnate or sink, one option is to try to get out; exit to a better space. When viewed in this way, present-day Nepal looks like one big ‘race for the exits’: Villagers leaving to go to the Gulf, students leaving by the thousands to study and work abroad, and many more simply walking into India. This is much more than a search for a better salary or job; these movements signal a lack of faith in the promise of ‘development’ to deliver a better tomorrow for Nepal. Further evidence unrelated to economics help prove the point: Different ethnic groups (think Madheshis) are attempting to ‘exit’ the political system. The loss of faith in ‘development’ has advanced to the point where it is creating a lack of faith in ‘democracy’ as well. The second option open to those who have lost faith in ‘development’ is violence. ‘Crashing the gates of the first class, smashing bricked up walls and breaking through, if only temporarily, to the other side of privilege and plenty’ is how Ferguson puts it. Is this not some of the motive behind the rise of the Maoists? That is, despite well-articulated political goals by the Maoist leadership, is it not the case that some of the more raw violence of those in the party is motivated by this loss of faith in ‘development’, even that promised by its own party? If this is the case, then as the Maoists lessen their radical stance to appeal to more moderate voters, they will simultaneously lose those within their own party who have lost faith and are no longer willing to ‘wait their turn’. These groups will break off and mostly likely launch another attempt to ‘crash the gates of the first class’ this time without a political ideology, but this time also fueled by the grievance of being three-times-passed-over. It’s a haunting image. To conclude, let me shift to consider Nepal’s place in the world. The global economy does not need Nepal, nor will it until the vast human sources of China and India have been exhausted. Donors will continue to talk about the ‘opportunities of the global economy’ and elites who mistake the profit they make from ‘development’ aid for the benefits of the ‘global economy’ will agree to more and more development offered by donors. Yet, because these projects are narrowly designed to serve economic goals, they will do nothing to improve social and political tensions. Nevertheless, as economic goals predictably fail to materialize, stagnation and a loss of faith in ‘development’ will continue to grow among the masses. We will see increased exit and violence, not less. So who is to blame and what is the solution? Blame is perhaps the only growth industry in Nepal; finger-pointing advances in lockstep with stagnation. So we must be careful. Nevertheless, donors need to bear some of the blame. Yet, having seen this happen before, Nepali policymakers must also take responsibility. But the biggest finger needs to be pointed right back at many of the current readers, those who continue to believe in the idea of ‘development’ amid the obvious stagnation of the country. Those who try to carve out a ‘first world’ existence through private schools, luxury hotels, satellite television, and curtains on their SUVs to block out the putrefying stagnation of Nepal deserve the most blame because they are the ones educated enough to see things clearly. Here is the beginning of a solution: Viewing not the future ideal but the current reality of bikas in Nepal, coming to terms with the country’s place in the global economy, and recapturing some of the equity, inclusion, and social justice goals that Nepal committed itself to in 1950 and 1990. This may sound radical, but no more radical that what is likely to occur in the very near future if Nepali elites do not voluntary move in that direction. Writer holds a doctorate degree from University of Oxford & is currently researching on Nepal jeremyrappleye@yahoo.com

"empower local bodies, cut the power of central government"

"Cease all property of corrupt people by local bodies and let them investigate without fearing the central or top-level influence"

How do you propose to make that happen? Or what do you think are the series of practical events that will result in what you said above?

I am usually against abrupt change. A gradual plan and detailled workout is heavily needed. A few regions should be chosen for pilot program and gradually expand elsewhere depending success/failure of the plan. But I know it would be controvertial because the leaders who are going to lose their power will oppose it heavily.

A hypothetical test case:
"empower local bodies, cut the power of central government" -- "Cease all property of corrupt people by local bodies and let them investigate without fearing the central or top-level influence"

The ward chairman of Koteswor region will be more powerful than PM Madhav Nepal in local development planning/implementation, and the ward chairman may cease Madhav Nepal's property while Madhav Nepal being investigated in corruption case at any level of the government.

Now you think, how Madhav Nepal would react in such case? will he ever allow this proposal be a law? Will he ever dare to get involved in corruption if this sort of law is there? Would he ever dare to play "halo adkayera goru chutne" game?

Chana tarkari

What you are thinking of are ideal scenarios but you should know by now that ideal scenarios only exist in books.

How do you propose to make the Ward chairman of Koteswor more powerful than PM?

What series of event would make the chairman of Koteswor more powerful than PM like you suggested? Let's be practical here. Thanks.

khomeronam:

I like your view point too, has substance in it. Keep posting:

khomeronam::: "By the time, revolution for slavery started................ west started using rights of slaves in the name of human rights while Nepal was practicing the traditional development concepts."

This is one topic I have always discussed among my friends and colleagues. I do not only talk about slavery but also about the environmental impact the west made in their industrial era. They now balme the developing nations mainly India and China for pollution. The west was developed based on two black thing viz. Black Man and The coal. Use of both of these was neither good to the humanity nor good to the environment.  They extensively used child labour during both pre and post war period for development and now they want the sweat shops in Bangaldesh closed. They should understand that the sweat shop in Bangladesh provides food for living for that child, otherwise they would be dead.

There was a poem at the end of Hijo Aaja ka Kura recently..... which roughy translates to .... " A worker working at gas station does not gets chair to sit down in his 18 hours shift in your country and you come to my country and talk about human rights " How fair is that? How true is it?

khomeronaam, I think you have written one of the most unique posts in this thread.

What I am really enjoying about this particular thread on sajha.com is that no one is being dismissive in cynicism. Though we differ in opinions, what is great is that everyone has the right attitude in being solution oriented. First and foremost, most Nepalese need to be able to communicate in this way, for us to get anywhere. What Nepal needs is voices of reasonability and 'forward-lookingness' dominating the conversation. We need these moderate voices to, in an educated and rational way, erase the extremes of cynicism on one hand and excuses for corruption on the other extreme. We need to hold on to a consistent, realistic and attainable vision of what  can be achieved in the next 5-10 years. And we need the people holding this perspective to fight the extreme perspectives of negative cynicism and dreamy idealism.

Like Shantipriya is saying, we Nepalese need to define our own 'middle path.' This middle path needs to be:

                                                                 Specific
                                                                 Measurable
                                                                 Attainable
                                                                 Realistic
                                                                 Timely

It needs to be based on criteria that is realistic on Nepal's needs, not on Western values or standards. But for us to carve our own standards we first need free thinkers who can think for themselves without being automatically enamored by Western ideals nor be turned off by the ground reality of slow progress in Nepal. It is this that Nepal needs.

Leadership first needs to come in the realm of thought. We need leaders who can come up with a realistic vision for Nepal, and then, be able to communicate this vision without putting other people down. This is a very rare quality. It is a quality that very few Nepalese have mastered. This is why we have not built the kind of consensus that is needed to move towards a common goal in Nepal. That's how I feel.

Very well written Shantipriya and Babal Khate !!!

 Thank you Santi Priya, gyanguru and BABAL khate.

khomeronaam,

Though I really enjoyed your first post. I found your second post to be slightly long winded.

It seems that basically what you're saying through your long post is that you feel that the countries priorities are misguided. Yes? Whereas in China, the education is focussed to make them into nationalists that focus on the future of the country, in Nepal, we are so caught up in the superficialities of trying to adopt Westernization in the name of progress that we think we have bettered ourself by learning English. Isn't that what you're saying?

You feel that Nepal's education system should be more focussed in producing Nepalese that can take their nation forward developmentally. Yes?

Khomeronaam,

Just knowing that Nepal's education is "wrong" is not enough. We need to define what would be good for Nepal. And before that, we need to define the "middle path" for Nepal. Once we define what the "middle-path" that would be good for Nepal to take, then we would make the case to shape the educational system to influence and make the case for people to take the "middle-path."
This is what China did.

Although i agree with most of what Khomeronaam, i do not think the education system of leading industrial nations and the self sustaining nations of the world such as China, Germany and France would work for us.

Learning english is crucial for us for the reasons such as keeping ourselves updated with current informations and also being able to sell ourselves in the world labor market.

Learn from India, After 200 years of British slavery Indians have no hate for the English language, PV Narshima Rao led India into open market with massive investment in English System Education in Technology that started paying off in next five years. When Indira Gandhi was upset with US on wheat embargo deal, she vowed to make India indepedent on grains. She launced a GREEN REVOLUTION which made india indepedent on grains within 5 years of the revolution. So, sometimes we do not even need much to get little ahead. The green revolution by Indira Gandhi and Education investment by Rao has pushed India 50 years ahead of us already. Keep in mind how small we are compared to India, it would take far less effort and far less time to get where India is right now if things are done right. Here are some of my thoughts on what we can do.

1. Do not manufacture anything mass product in Nepal. We cannot compete with China and India on mass manufacturing. Let them produce and us buy it cheap.

2. Focus on Tourism business, trecking, hotels, ski resorts, rock climbing, mountain climbing, rafting, gliding, and other outdoorsy sports, we need a good global marketing team to promote those things. Someone who can market Nepal Tourism the same way they market Cancun, Cabos and such. Tourism industry alone will be enough to employ majority of Nepalese.

3. Sell the religion, sell Hinduism to 1 billion hindus on the south and sell budhism to 500 millions to the north. We can market Pashupati and Lumbini as a Mecca for Hindus and Buddhist and generate huge amout from there

4. Make it easy for Nepalese to go work outside the country such as Golf for however long it is needed. Do attempts to reduce abuse at a government level. Make easy financing to avoid poor people get into shark loans for foreign employment.

5. Proper use of Hydro electricity. Sometimes the nonsense nationlism with our water resources is harming no one but ourselves.

6. Encourage Herbs plantation and mechanise it.


Right management Tourism and Hydroelectricity revenue alone should put us on the path to sponsor good education and mechanse foreign employemnt. As people find some economic peace, the other chaos should gradually reduce. So what do we need for all this, i think, given the size of our country all we need is 200 good and qualified managers(leaders, not just political leaders), who will work together to acomplish those goals.

But the problem is we either do not have those people or there are great forces the external and internal who do not allow such combinations.

 Sidster, you have some good points and I agree with them.
But I have add something in your point number 4.

Sending Nepalese overseas has both pros and cons. Today we see most of the Nepalese selling brain in WEST and labor in GULF, this is a bitter truth of under development of Nepal. What country needs for development? Brain, Labor and Capital. Foreign Aids suffice the capital requirement, there is no doubt.

In current scenario, national level plans regarding foreign employment should focus on the idle human resources who are involved in dirty Nepali politics. Majority of YCL, Ne Bi Sangh, ANNFSU students are idle human resources who neither are good in studies nor good for society and are the wastage of the society. They should be dumped and there is no better dumping site than GULF. 
In one hand they will be providing foreign remittance and in other side crime, corruption will also settle down gradually.

And, I could not stop appreciating your view which you mentioned on religion. 
3. Sell the religion, sell Hinduism to 1 billion hindus on the south and sell budhism to 500 millions to the north. We can market Pashupati and Lumbini as a Mecca for Hindus and Buddhist and generate huge amout from there.

I am not sure if we can send off the student political forces into GULF for labor becasue its a cyclic group. The new ones keep on coming as the old ones get out of college. One thing they can do is discourage politics in Colleges.

Braindrain and labor drain is every developing world's problem. But it can also be beneficial. When Korea was in deep economic trouble some 20 years ago....the current politician said we have nothing to sell so we will sell labor. Korea produced thousands of Nurses and supplied to US and Europe similar to what india has been doing since last 10 - 15 years. Those Korean mothers, wives and sisters sent money home and they themselves retured home after some time contributing huge to the Korean economy.

I am not an advocate of foreign employment, i am just saying till the things are better at home, we should do what is there possible to do to get it going.

But again...it all comes down to few visionary people who can lead the country. We need few good/loyal/moral people who are also QUALIFIED to run the country for some time. Sometimes we get good people but are not qualified and other times we get qualified people but are not good.

We either have PETER GRIFFINS, a good hearted idiots or Bernie Maddofs, an intelligent bad person.

Sidster,
I am really appreciating your vision. Having you thought about expanding what you wrote in the post and making it into a serious article? I for one would love to hear more in depth of what you're saying. I think you're really unto something. What I'm really appreciating about what you're saying is that you are looking at it in a geo-political strategic way. And most importantly you are addressing the economics of the issue. I want to hear more about how you are proposing to strategicly position Nepal to take advantage of its strengths: Religious Tourism, it's labor market and Hydro-electricity.

You seem to have thought about the issue out quite well. Let me know if I can help you in anyway to expand your post into an article.

Babal and Khomeronaa,

Thanks for agreeing. I am not a good writer. I think i can observe well but cannot put it in good words. If you are willing to write an article on the points i have mentioned and need my help let me know. But i doubt the article will make any impact. It will be something for us to talk about on the Sajha board or Nepali parties, nothing more than that.

But if you think you can get those views to publish in Nepali media go ahead and do that.

You can find plenty of online materials on Korean Nurses, Indian investment in English Medium Technoligy education, PV narashima Rao, Green Revolution by Indira Gandhi, Countries on tourist based economy, remmitance, and other things i have  mentioned.

Even if you get it to publish it, it will come down to the same issue.....LACK of Managers.

Have you ever wondered why the same Nepali who works outside Nepal makes a good impression at his Job regardless of what he does?? He could be a dishwasher, a sweeper, Cust Service Rep, a cook, a server, IT person, a nurse, an engeneer, or a doctor he exceeds expectations in most cases but the same Nepali at home remains as a mediocre resource in whatever he does. What does that mean.....?? i think it means we suck as a managers and planners....we are working horses...a horse who would perform depending on his manager's capability.