Question of Defining National Security Council of Nepal
Prakash Bom
June 25, 2008
First all, in defense of democracy from being violated by the poor and ill minded politics of politicians of Nepal it has to be absolutely clear that neither the government cabinet nor its national security council can overrule the electoral power of people´s representatives either in the transitional Constituent Assembly or in the future Parliament. What it means that the government cabinet has no authority to recommend President on behalf of its national security council to impose emergency or move army for the national security without the consensus of vote of the people´s representatives. In any circumstance bypassing people´s representatives will be considered illegitimate and undemocratic act of rule.
Secondly, we have to define the objective of our national security council (NSC) before making irrelevant political statements for who can and against who cannot be the member of the council. Generally, the objective of NSC is to protect national interest and it varies from nation to nation depending on its demography, economic development and strategic political interest. Let us examine the objective and organization of NSC of the two major democratic countries – India and the United States of America.
FYI the NSC of India was first established in 1998 and why India did not establish NSC during its independence and why India found it relevant only in 1998 are the questions for us to ponder over. But the objective of NSC of India is to look into the political, economic, energy and strategic security concerns of India. The Bill was introduced by BJP coalition government and it was sanctioned with the vote of the House in November 19, 1998.
The primary members of the NSC of India are ministers of defense, External Affair, Home, Finance and Depute Chairman of Planning Commission. It is composed of three sub-organizations – Strategic Policy Group (SPG) and its members are government secretariats; Joint Intelligent Committee (JIC) and its members are Intelligent Bureau and Army; and Nation Security Advisory Board (NSAB) and its members are persons of eminence and expertise outside of government.
The objective of NSC of the United State of America as a federal executive council is to plan, coordinate and evaluate the defense policies of the United States in regard to its foreign policies. It also gives directions to the Central Intelligent Agency (CIA). Basically, NSC serves as the President´s main forum for taking up national security and foreign policy matters. The National Security Act was approved by Congress on July 25, 1947 to establish the National Security Council (NSC), the Central Intelligent Agency (CIA) and Security Resources Board (SRC) for unified military establishment.
The United States´ NSC is chaired by the President and its primary members are Vice President, Secretary of State (foreign affair), Secretary of Defense, among top leaders of ruling or opposition parties, and persons of eminence and expertise as advisors. It is composed of sub-organizations such as CIA and SRC under the National Security Act.
The statements of Communist Party of Nepal "no democratic nation in the world includes opposition party in NSC" – by both Maoist and UML against the demand of Nepali Congress Party based on the objective and formation of NSC of India and USA has no referential evidence and therefore it is objectionable. It is not only the government of the ruling party is responsible for the national security but also the opposition party and particularly at this transitional political stage NC as (if) opposition party has greater responsibility to a new democratic nation for the successful establishment of the democratic institutions.
However, it would be unfortunate if Maoist as major political party in Constituent Assembly fail to form a consensus based coalition government with the participation of NC because the fundamental objective of the Constituent Assembly government is to draft a federal democratic republic constitution for a new democratic Nepal. It will be against the aspiration and spirit of people for inclusive democracy in which all have proportional accountability to create a new democratic Nepal.
Politically, it is clear that Maoist as a major political party in Constituent Assembly do not have mandate to create a new democratic Nepal all alone on its own or by including some and excluding the rest or including all except NC. That will marginalize Maoists´ popularity from 39% to minimal in the next general election unless Maoists try to rule forcefully under the gun point, which by all their might will not last that long before the will and power of people and democracy.
It is true that NC has failed both as Democratic Party and intra-party organization-wise to establish rule of law against party leaders´ tradition of hierarchy, practice of nepotism, and vested interest for corruption and political power. The poor and ill minded political leaders have thus far overruled the ability of charismatic and talented new generation NC leaders. It has not yet given up the feudal ´Bihari´ style of politics to win elections with the power of money. That´s why, party´s proposal for electing GP Koirala as the first president of federal democratic republic did not get that far.
At this point in time, if NC has given up the expectation for GP Koirala to be the first president of federal democratic republic Nepal then Maoist led new government must include NC with its proportional representations in the cabinet and NSC. The solidarity of the political parties at this point in the modern history of Nepal should not be disregarded for the dirty party politics of power. It is a time for the political parties´ alliance to build a new democratic Nepal and without the democracy and the rule of law Nepal is not going to be prosperous nation on the face of the world no matter how high is the dream of proletariats for the rule of communism. It will not going to yield unless proletariats open their eyes to the fact that without the rule of law in democracy prosperity is transitional.
The communist parties of Nepal – particularly Maoist party has to be clear that people´s aspiration for Maoist to win as the major political party in Constituent Assembly is mainly to coordinate drafting the constitution of federal democratic republic Nepal. People have hope in Maoists not as hardliner communist proletariats but as political party with the leaderships who can establish federal democratic republic system in which bylaw people´s civil liberty is guaranteed and civil rights are protect with their full right to participate in nation building process. People will no longer tolerate ill and poor minded politics of politicians, who make statements out of the blue without reference which sets unnecessarily double standard for justice and democracy.
It is a golden chance for Maoists if they can honestly fulfill the aspiration of people for peace and democracy leading all political parties in alliance. If they could, then they will set the example of a modern communist party in the history of the world which has successfully establish the federal democratic republic of Nepal as per the aspiration of people of Nepal despite their hardliner communist ideology. Perhaps as much as communism has contributed to democracy in making people aware of their rights (public awareness) since the French Revolution no other movement has in the socio-political and economic human evolution.
It is time to acknowledge that the ideologues of communism can no longer put themselves in the image of Engels, Marx, Lenin, or Mao to personify themselves like religious fanatics in the image of god or superstition. This is a modern scientific age of 21st century that gives ample of tools to address human backwardness of a nation in honesty with the rational human and scientific thinking that can co-relate with the global economics. This is where a nation and its political leaderships can be considered progressive with the democracy and the rule of law.
Secondly, we have to define the objective of our national security council (NSC) before making irrelevant political statements for who can and against who cannot be the member of the council. Generally, the objective of NSC is to protect national interest and it varies from nation to nation depending on its demography, economic development and strategic political interest. Let us examine the objective and organization of NSC of the two major democratic countries – India and the United States of America.
FYI the NSC of India was first established in 1998 and why India did not establish NSC during its independence and why India found it relevant only in 1998 are the questions for us to ponder over. But the objective of NSC of India is to look into the political, economic, energy and strategic security concerns of India. The Bill was introduced by BJP coalition government and it was sanctioned with the vote of the House in November 19, 1998.
The primary members of the NSC of India are ministers of defense, External Affair, Home, Finance and Depute Chairman of Planning Commission. It is composed of three sub-organizations – Strategic Policy Group (SPG) and its members are government secretariats; Joint Intelligent Committee (JIC) and its members are Intelligent Bureau and Army; and Nation Security Advisory Board (NSAB) and its members are persons of eminence and expertise outside of government.
The objective of NSC of the United State of America as a federal executive council is to plan, coordinate and evaluate the defense policies of the United States in regard to its foreign policies. It also gives directions to the Central Intelligent Agency (CIA). Basically, NSC serves as the President´s main forum for taking up national security and foreign policy matters. The National Security Act was approved by Congress on July 25, 1947 to establish the National Security Council (NSC), the Central Intelligent Agency (CIA) and Security Resources Board (SRC) for unified military establishment.
The United States´ NSC is chaired by the President and its primary members are Vice President, Secretary of State (foreign affair), Secretary of Defense, among top leaders of ruling or opposition parties, and persons of eminence and expertise as advisors. It is composed of sub-organizations such as CIA and SRC under the National Security Act.
The statements of Communist Party of Nepal "no democratic nation in the world includes opposition party in NSC" – by both Maoist and UML against the demand of Nepali Congress Party based on the objective and formation of NSC of India and USA has no referential evidence and therefore it is objectionable. It is not only the government of the ruling party is responsible for the national security but also the opposition party and particularly at this transitional political stage NC as (if) opposition party has greater responsibility to a new democratic nation for the successful establishment of the democratic institutions.
However, it would be unfortunate if Maoist as major political party in Constituent Assembly fail to form a consensus based coalition government with the participation of NC because the fundamental objective of the Constituent Assembly government is to draft a federal democratic republic constitution for a new democratic Nepal. It will be against the aspiration and spirit of people for inclusive democracy in which all have proportional accountability to create a new democratic Nepal.
Politically, it is clear that Maoist as a major political party in Constituent Assembly do not have mandate to create a new democratic Nepal all alone on its own or by including some and excluding the rest or including all except NC. That will marginalize Maoists´ popularity from 39% to minimal in the next general election unless Maoists try to rule forcefully under the gun point, which by all their might will not last that long before the will and power of people and democracy.
It is true that NC has failed both as Democratic Party and intra-party organization-wise to establish rule of law against party leaders´ tradition of hierarchy, practice of nepotism, and vested interest for corruption and political power. The poor and ill minded political leaders have thus far overruled the ability of charismatic and talented new generation NC leaders. It has not yet given up the feudal ´Bihari´ style of politics to win elections with the power of money. That´s why, party´s proposal for electing GP Koirala as the first president of federal democratic republic did not get that far.
At this point in time, if NC has given up the expectation for GP Koirala to be the first president of federal democratic republic Nepal then Maoist led new government must include NC with its proportional representations in the cabinet and NSC. The solidarity of the political parties at this point in the modern history of Nepal should not be disregarded for the dirty party politics of power. It is a time for the political parties´ alliance to build a new democratic Nepal and without the democracy and the rule of law Nepal is not going to be prosperous nation on the face of the world no matter how high is the dream of proletariats for the rule of communism. It will not going to yield unless proletariats open their eyes to the fact that without the rule of law in democracy prosperity is transitional.
The communist parties of Nepal – particularly Maoist party has to be clear that people´s aspiration for Maoist to win as the major political party in Constituent Assembly is mainly to coordinate drafting the constitution of federal democratic republic Nepal. People have hope in Maoists not as hardliner communist proletariats but as political party with the leaderships who can establish federal democratic republic system in which bylaw people´s civil liberty is guaranteed and civil rights are protect with their full right to participate in nation building process. People will no longer tolerate ill and poor minded politics of politicians, who make statements out of the blue without reference which sets unnecessarily double standard for justice and democracy.
It is a golden chance for Maoists if they can honestly fulfill the aspiration of people for peace and democracy leading all political parties in alliance. If they could, then they will set the example of a modern communist party in the history of the world which has successfully establish the federal democratic republic of Nepal as per the aspiration of people of Nepal despite their hardliner communist ideology. Perhaps as much as communism has contributed to democracy in making people aware of their rights (public awareness) since the French Revolution no other movement has in the socio-political and economic human evolution.
It is time to acknowledge that the ideologues of communism can no longer put themselves in the image of Engels, Marx, Lenin, or Mao to personify themselves like religious fanatics in the image of god or superstition. This is a modern scientific age of 21st century that gives ample of tools to address human backwardness of a nation in honesty with the rational human and scientific thinking that can co-relate with the global economics. This is where a nation and its political leaderships can be considered progressive with the democracy and the rule of law.
Print
Email
