Al Jazeera's interesting report on the ongoing political struggle in Nepal.
Showing posts with label Nepal. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Nepal. Show all posts
June 17, 2010
June 13, 2010
Karnali Highway: Deadliest Journeys docu
Nepalese are far too closely aware of the hellish condition of the Karnali region with no visible signs of civilization. We've seen their lives in drudgery and heard tales of survival. Deadliest Journeys visits Jumla, a place with about 10,000 people, and "virtually forgotten by the rest of civilization" that is accessible only by an "awful hellish and dangerous road." The documentary has compelling visuals of the most dangerous stretch of the road (Surkhet-Jumla) above 3,000 meters in the rugged Himalayas.
DEADLIEST JOURNEYS uncovers the world's most treacherous roads, skies and waterways, where intrepid travelers risk life and limb to reach their destinations.
DEADLIEST JOURNEYS uncovers the world's most treacherous roads, skies and waterways, where intrepid travelers risk life and limb to reach their destinations.
June 03, 2010
Does the US encourage India's interference in South Asia?
“As India looks east, its role in its immediate neighborhood obviously remains crucial. We have complementary interest on the subcontinent, and United States supports India’s leadership in encouraging the emergence of a stable democratic government in Bangladesh, easing tensions in Nepal and promoting peace and reconciliation in Sri Lanka. Neither of us intends [US and India] to outsource South Asia policy to the other, but more often than not our policy prescriptions converge.”
William J. Burns, U.S. Department of State's Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs speaking at the CFR's General Meeting on India’s Rise and the Future of the U.S.-India Relationship on June 1, 2010.
Audio Source: Council on Foreign Relations (17:16)
William J. Burns, U.S. Department of State's Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs speaking at the CFR's General Meeting on India’s Rise and the Future of the U.S.-India Relationship on June 1, 2010.
Audio Source: Council on Foreign Relations (17:16)
April 04, 2010
Bring changes to the tradition
Nepalese revere the Kumari, the virgin deity, almost as much as the Mt. Everest. But once the girl is ceased to be worshiped as the living goddess after attaining puberty or loss of blood due to injury, she loses her divine status. Her life after that mostly remains in seclusion and in unproclaimed banishment for lack of social skills and education.The Supreme Court in 2008 ruled in favor of the Kumaris for their right to education and other human rights. The Kumari of Bhaktapur was in news couple years ago when she created a furor in the conservative religious community after visiting the United States at the invitation of a documentary maker. She was even briefly stripped of her Kumari status. This year the Nepali media have happily reported about the 15-year-old Kumari of Patan who appeared in the school leaving certificate exams. Now there is news she wants to work in the financial sector.
These are signs that the Nepalese people are slowly showing tolerance toward religious symbols and practices that were so zealously guarded for centuries. By tutoring the Kumari at her home and giving her opportunities at par with other students, the Guthi Sansthan has earned more respect for its sensitivity toward the issue.
Nepalese society now needs to challenge the tradition of the Pashupati temple that bars non-Hindus from entering its premises. It is not just against the secular character of a nation but also against the tenets of the religion itself that touts equality. If a religion forbids a non-believer from entering its most sacred place, how can it be assumed that there is respect for all people no matter what?The guardians of the Kumari tradition have taken a bold step, can the Hindus come out of their silos now?
Learn about the virgin goddess of Patan.
Response to Carol Christiano
This is my response to Carol Christiano who considers Nepal to be a part of India when the Buddha was born.
----------
Carol: Thank you for allowing me to briefly educate you on the ancient history of the Indian subcontinent. What we now consider India or Nepal did not exist when Gautam Buddha was born. He was born in a principality whose capital was Kapilvastu. There were several small and large "kingdoms" during that time. The Maurya dynasty of the Magadh Empire gained prominence two hundred years after Buddha's death.
If you read the history of independent kingdoms during that time, you'll find reference to 16 flourishing empires known as "mahajanapad", or great countries. Some of them are Anga, Chedi, Gandhara, Kasi, Kosala, Kuru, Matsya, Magadha, Panchala etc. References to these independent kingdoms can also be found in the Hindu epic Mahabharata. Some of the rulers of these kingdoms even resisted the conquest of Alexander. It is in one such small Shakya republic of the Kosala kingdom, Siddhartha Gautam was born. How can you then say he was born in India? Therefore, a correct reference is: He was born in present-day Nepal.
There's no denial that Siddhartha Gautam spend his life as a teacher in nearby kingdoms that are now in India. Most of the rulers of these empires became his followers. Ashoka was the most prominent ruler of the time of the Magadha Empire who was also an ardent follower of the Buddhist ideology. He officially patronized the religion and appointed "Rajukas" to see that dhamma was followed in his kingdom. Besides sending missionaries led by his own son and daughter, it is also believed that he ordered thousands of stupas to be build across his empire and beyond. It is this expansion that helped Buddhism to spread as a religion in India and other parts of Asia and China. But this attempt doesn't undermine the historical fact about his birth.
If you have time, please read "2500 years of Buddhism" whose foreword is by S. Radhakrishnan, a religious scholar and India's second president.
The question of what constitutes India as a nation became clear only in the last 150 years or so, and politically only in 1947 when India and Pakistan were carved out. When the East India Company came to "India" in 1600 AD, they came to the empires and principalities that were eventually colonized by the British Empire in the next 300 years to form the present-day Indian nation. This political unit is different than the narrative of "India" found in the historical texts that is generically used to refer to the all the empires that existed in the Indian subcontinent, sometimes even extending up to Southeast Asia.
However, you must be aware that the modern day territory of Nepal (that includes Kapilvastu) and the Siamese kingdom (modern day Thailand) are the only two countries in the region that have not been colonized and have remained independent. Therefore, you like many others, are absolutely wrong to say that Nepal was "considered" India at the time of the Buddha's birth.
I hope you'll appreciate the importance of updating your knowledge on this issue. And if you are not satisfied by my explanation, you are free to "investigate it for yourself" just as you've said in your previous post.
----------
The above response was prepared after Carol Christiano responded to my comments on "The Buddha" Facebook page.
This is what I wrote:
PBS must get its fact correct on the birth of the Buddha. The preview video repeatedly mentions he was born in India. You are WRONG! Please be aware of the UNESCO's listing on Lumbini, the Birthplace of the Lord Buddha.
Please don't drag Gautam Buddha to controversy.
Carol Christiano's response:
Sijan: Shakyamuni Buddha was born 2500 years ago in "modern day" Nepal. At the time of his birth it was considered India, so I don't believe it is incorrect to state his place of birth India. There was no Nepal in existence at that time.
----------
Carol: Thank you for allowing me to briefly educate you on the ancient history of the Indian subcontinent. What we now consider India or Nepal did not exist when Gautam Buddha was born. He was born in a principality whose capital was Kapilvastu. There were several small and large "kingdoms" during that time. The Maurya dynasty of the Magadh Empire gained prominence two hundred years after Buddha's death.
If you read the history of independent kingdoms during that time, you'll find reference to 16 flourishing empires known as "mahajanapad", or great countries. Some of them are Anga, Chedi, Gandhara, Kasi, Kosala, Kuru, Matsya, Magadha, Panchala etc. References to these independent kingdoms can also be found in the Hindu epic Mahabharata. Some of the rulers of these kingdoms even resisted the conquest of Alexander. It is in one such small Shakya republic of the Kosala kingdom, Siddhartha Gautam was born. How can you then say he was born in India? Therefore, a correct reference is: He was born in present-day Nepal.
There's no denial that Siddhartha Gautam spend his life as a teacher in nearby kingdoms that are now in India. Most of the rulers of these empires became his followers. Ashoka was the most prominent ruler of the time of the Magadha Empire who was also an ardent follower of the Buddhist ideology. He officially patronized the religion and appointed "Rajukas" to see that dhamma was followed in his kingdom. Besides sending missionaries led by his own son and daughter, it is also believed that he ordered thousands of stupas to be build across his empire and beyond. It is this expansion that helped Buddhism to spread as a religion in India and other parts of Asia and China. But this attempt doesn't undermine the historical fact about his birth.
If you have time, please read "2500 years of Buddhism" whose foreword is by S. Radhakrishnan, a religious scholar and India's second president.
The question of what constitutes India as a nation became clear only in the last 150 years or so, and politically only in 1947 when India and Pakistan were carved out. When the East India Company came to "India" in 1600 AD, they came to the empires and principalities that were eventually colonized by the British Empire in the next 300 years to form the present-day Indian nation. This political unit is different than the narrative of "India" found in the historical texts that is generically used to refer to the all the empires that existed in the Indian subcontinent, sometimes even extending up to Southeast Asia.
However, you must be aware that the modern day territory of Nepal (that includes Kapilvastu) and the Siamese kingdom (modern day Thailand) are the only two countries in the region that have not been colonized and have remained independent. Therefore, you like many others, are absolutely wrong to say that Nepal was "considered" India at the time of the Buddha's birth.
I hope you'll appreciate the importance of updating your knowledge on this issue. And if you are not satisfied by my explanation, you are free to "investigate it for yourself" just as you've said in your previous post.
----------
The above response was prepared after Carol Christiano responded to my comments on "The Buddha" Facebook page.
This is what I wrote:
PBS must get its fact correct on the birth of the Buddha. The preview video repeatedly mentions he was born in India. You are WRONG! Please be aware of the UNESCO's listing on Lumbini, the Birthplace of the Lord Buddha.
Please don't drag Gautam Buddha to controversy.
Carol Christiano's response:
Sijan: Shakyamuni Buddha was born 2500 years ago in "modern day" Nepal. At the time of his birth it was considered India, so I don't believe it is incorrect to state his place of birth India. There was no Nepal in existence at that time.
April 03, 2010
India hijacks Lord Buddha from Nepal
This time it's PBS that must face the Nepalese wrath over Lord Buddha's issue. David Grubin's 2-hour documentary that premieres on April 7 has ample references that will appropriately pique the Nepalese sentiments for calling Lord Buddha an Indian.
Narrated by Hollywood actor Richard Gere, "The Buddha" chronicles young Siddhartha's journey through artwork and animation. A peek into the documentary shows commentaries from the Dalai Lama, Pulitzer-prize winner poet W.S. Merwin and other prominent scholars and monastics.
John F. Wilson, PBS senior vice president and chief TV programming executive says, "By continuing our exploration of the world's religions, we are delighted to participate in broadening people's understanding of Buddhism today with David Grubin's moving portrait of the life of the Buddha."
Wilson's hope of creating an "understanding" doesn't seem to be reflected in the preview video posted on the Web nor on the description of the DVD put up for online sale. At the beginning of the preview video when the Buddha's birth is described, the narrator says, "The stories say that before his birth, his mother, the queen of a small Indian kingdom, had a dream."
This information is obviously wrong. During the time of the Buddha's birth 2,500 hundred years ago, there was no India or Nepal. But Siddhartha Gautam was born in Lumbini, the present-day Nepal. Archeological findings corroborate this fact that is endorsed by the UNESCO. But there seem to be deliberate efforts to either falsify or hide references of Nepal when it comes to the Buddha's birth.
Even if this documentary was made in collaboration with the Asia Society, the essay on The Origins of Buddhism on the Society's Web site mentioned the Buddha was born in North India. It was only after a reader's correction the reference to North India was removed, but even then the article falls short of mentioning Nepal as the birthplace of the Buddha.
While a long-term publicity and awareness campaign might rectify this error, for now we really need to complain PBS for distorting the historical facts. In fact, The Himalayan Voice wrote to the production company "to correct the information before the documentary is aired." In reply the David Gruber Productions claims that the film "explicitly" mentions that Buddha was born in southern Nepal. This is an exquisitely idiotic explanation. No sane person could accept that. How can one ignore the fact that in the 5-minute video preview Siddhartha's mother is called "the queen of a small Indian kingdom," in the blurb of the DVD version the Buddha is called "the Indian sage," and in the PBS TV schedule listing the Buddha's "northern India" affiliation is highlighted?
Certainly, the sage is beyond all disputes but the controversy is real and getting nastier.
PBS not only needs to purge the erroneous information but also owes a sincere apology with a commitment to participate in a publicity campaign to establish Nepal's position against all propaganda.
Raise your voice by commenting on PBS Facebook page and other social networking sites.
March 29, 2010
March 13, 2010
Kali Baba's self-immolation threat and religious discrimination in Nepal
A popular Nepali godman Kali Baba is outrageously making statements of self-immolation if Nepal is not declared a Hindu state.
His threat of self-immolation has been reported by the news media in Nepal and India with equal interest since the notion itself flares up the emotion. Is that a reasonable act to pursue one’s cause?
The godman has been in limelight for his nine-day long sahasra rudrachandi akhanda mahayagya that aimed to restore Nepal as a Hindu country. He was visited at Bankali by the former king Gyanendra Shah along with his wife Komal. Shah is reported to have supported the cause. Other high-profile visitors to the yagna have equally surprised the political pundits because the yagna was more political than religious.
Kali Baba, like many other Nepalese, is frustrated at the political turn of events. He is upset that "vandals and vagabonds" are entering the temple premises and beating up the priests; he believes that secularism is not the people’s demand; and, he is disappointed that the Maoists “did nothing for the country” despite their promises.
Now what Kali Baba is trying to attempt is to rescue the failed politics by religion. His conviction that monarchy alone can unite the nation was booted out in a popular mass movement couple years ago. Though his question on whether the process to declare the country as secular still remains valid, it is an action most likely to be undone.
Kali Baba’s yagya might have a religious and cultural appeal, but it cannot undermine the aspiration of Jana Andolan II. But what Kali Baba is doing now is thwarting the peace process by striving to assert the supremacy of religion over state. Such orthodox mistakes in the past have dragged the nation to the present turmoil.
Historically, Nepal has favored a religion that promotes discrimination. After the completion of the official unification of the country in 1769, Prithvi Narayan Shah declared Nepal a "garland" of "char jat and chattis varna" based on Hindu caste system. When the Civil Code was enacted by Junga Bahadur Rana in 1854, the vedic system of discrimination was further strengthened by classifying people in descending order and separating the tagadharis, matwalis and sudras. In 1962 when the Panchayat constitution was adopted, Nepal was declared a Hindu kingdom once again reinforcing discrimination based on religion. And now comes Kali Baba’s yagya in 2010 that again wants to put the Nepali people in the loop of discrimination.
At a time when the nation is debating to be inclusive, Kali Baba’s action incites extremist feelings in one religious community. The Hindus form a majority in Nepal, but that doesn’t mean the religion should dominate the state. Most wars around the world are fought today because of religious reasons.
Luckily, Nepal has maintained an image of a tolerant society where Buddhists, Muslims and Christians have largely felt secure. But if the emotions of the Hindus are allowed to be played with in the name of religious rites to secure a political goal, we might soon witness discontentment in the streets expressed by other religious communities.
The issue of self-immolation is another sensitive matter. Self-immolation is a powerful tool to express the message of discontent. In recent decades there have been deliberate acts of self-immolation to highlight a cause.
On 11 June 1963 Thich Quang Duc self-immolated in a busy intersection in Saigon, Vietnam, protesting the persecution of the Buddhists by South Vietnam’s administration. The monk had written to the government and told the members of his Buddhist community about the religious oppression at the hands of Catholic Jean Baptiste Ngo Dinh Diem. Duc’s self-immolation captured the sentiment of the time for more political protests that ultimately changed the regime. Several other self-immolations followed the incident.
Other incidents in the sub-continent have sparked wide protests.
In 1990 a student from Delhi University attempted to self-immolate against the implementation of the Mandal Commission that recommended reservations and quotas for backward communities.
On 29 January 2009 K. Muthukumar self-immolated to protest the killing of Tamils in Sri Lanka. Some people of the Tamil origin around the world were inspired to follow suit. In fact, one person self-immolated in front of the United Nations Office in Geneva.
On 21 February 2010 Siripur Yadaiah self-immolated in Hyderabad shouting pro-Telangana slogans. A note found in his pocket revealed he was prepared to give up his life for the cause of a separate Telangana state.
There are numerous such gory incidences of self-immolation that have been planned and warned about. Kali Baba’s threat should be taken within this context.
Nepal is barely catching up to practice the basic democratic ideals. We should be cognizant of the fact that such threats and actions don’t impede our march toward the much sought after peace. There are other religious issues that Kali Baba or people of influence could work upon.
For instance, we ought to scrap the law that considers religious conversion an offense, or the slaughter of cows as punishable by 18 years in prison, or the rampant discrimination in the name of "untouchables.”
Other nuanced forms of discrimination that exist in our households also need to be stopped, such as promotion of fatalism, chaupadi, men-worship in Teej and Swasthani.
Religious leaders have tremendous tasks ahead to preserve the values of religion while at the same time weeding out practices that compromise equality. The influence of Kali Baba should be used to promote harmony and tolerance.
It is in the best interest of a nation to keep religion away from the state affairs.
Published on March 13, 2010 at newpalnews.com.
====================
Read how Kalidas Dahal tricked his way to be known as Kali Baba in Himal published on 28 Mar-13 Apr 2010 (१६-३१ चैत २०६६). Also visit his Web site here where he makes false claims about his age, education and his father's legacy.
Image of Kali Baba's bogus Web site.
His threat of self-immolation has been reported by the news media in Nepal and India with equal interest since the notion itself flares up the emotion. Is that a reasonable act to pursue one’s cause?
The godman has been in limelight for his nine-day long sahasra rudrachandi akhanda mahayagya that aimed to restore Nepal as a Hindu country. He was visited at Bankali by the former king Gyanendra Shah along with his wife Komal. Shah is reported to have supported the cause. Other high-profile visitors to the yagna have equally surprised the political pundits because the yagna was more political than religious.
Kali Baba, like many other Nepalese, is frustrated at the political turn of events. He is upset that "vandals and vagabonds" are entering the temple premises and beating up the priests; he believes that secularism is not the people’s demand; and, he is disappointed that the Maoists “did nothing for the country” despite their promises.
Now what Kali Baba is trying to attempt is to rescue the failed politics by religion. His conviction that monarchy alone can unite the nation was booted out in a popular mass movement couple years ago. Though his question on whether the process to declare the country as secular still remains valid, it is an action most likely to be undone.
Kali Baba’s yagya might have a religious and cultural appeal, but it cannot undermine the aspiration of Jana Andolan II. But what Kali Baba is doing now is thwarting the peace process by striving to assert the supremacy of religion over state. Such orthodox mistakes in the past have dragged the nation to the present turmoil.
Historically, Nepal has favored a religion that promotes discrimination. After the completion of the official unification of the country in 1769, Prithvi Narayan Shah declared Nepal a "garland" of "char jat and chattis varna" based on Hindu caste system. When the Civil Code was enacted by Junga Bahadur Rana in 1854, the vedic system of discrimination was further strengthened by classifying people in descending order and separating the tagadharis, matwalis and sudras. In 1962 when the Panchayat constitution was adopted, Nepal was declared a Hindu kingdom once again reinforcing discrimination based on religion. And now comes Kali Baba’s yagya in 2010 that again wants to put the Nepali people in the loop of discrimination.
At a time when the nation is debating to be inclusive, Kali Baba’s action incites extremist feelings in one religious community. The Hindus form a majority in Nepal, but that doesn’t mean the religion should dominate the state. Most wars around the world are fought today because of religious reasons.
Luckily, Nepal has maintained an image of a tolerant society where Buddhists, Muslims and Christians have largely felt secure. But if the emotions of the Hindus are allowed to be played with in the name of religious rites to secure a political goal, we might soon witness discontentment in the streets expressed by other religious communities.
The issue of self-immolation is another sensitive matter. Self-immolation is a powerful tool to express the message of discontent. In recent decades there have been deliberate acts of self-immolation to highlight a cause.
On 11 June 1963 Thich Quang Duc self-immolated in a busy intersection in Saigon, Vietnam, protesting the persecution of the Buddhists by South Vietnam’s administration. The monk had written to the government and told the members of his Buddhist community about the religious oppression at the hands of Catholic Jean Baptiste Ngo Dinh Diem. Duc’s self-immolation captured the sentiment of the time for more political protests that ultimately changed the regime. Several other self-immolations followed the incident.
Other incidents in the sub-continent have sparked wide protests.
In 1990 a student from Delhi University attempted to self-immolate against the implementation of the Mandal Commission that recommended reservations and quotas for backward communities.
On 29 January 2009 K. Muthukumar self-immolated to protest the killing of Tamils in Sri Lanka. Some people of the Tamil origin around the world were inspired to follow suit. In fact, one person self-immolated in front of the United Nations Office in Geneva.
On 21 February 2010 Siripur Yadaiah self-immolated in Hyderabad shouting pro-Telangana slogans. A note found in his pocket revealed he was prepared to give up his life for the cause of a separate Telangana state.
There are numerous such gory incidences of self-immolation that have been planned and warned about. Kali Baba’s threat should be taken within this context.
Nepal is barely catching up to practice the basic democratic ideals. We should be cognizant of the fact that such threats and actions don’t impede our march toward the much sought after peace. There are other religious issues that Kali Baba or people of influence could work upon.
For instance, we ought to scrap the law that considers religious conversion an offense, or the slaughter of cows as punishable by 18 years in prison, or the rampant discrimination in the name of "untouchables.”
Other nuanced forms of discrimination that exist in our households also need to be stopped, such as promotion of fatalism, chaupadi, men-worship in Teej and Swasthani.
Religious leaders have tremendous tasks ahead to preserve the values of religion while at the same time weeding out practices that compromise equality. The influence of Kali Baba should be used to promote harmony and tolerance.
It is in the best interest of a nation to keep religion away from the state affairs.
Published on March 13, 2010 at newpalnews.com.
====================
Read how Kalidas Dahal tricked his way to be known as Kali Baba in Himal published on 28 Mar-13 Apr 2010 (१६-३१ चैत २०६६). Also visit his Web site here where he makes false claims about his age, education and his father's legacy.
Image of Kali Baba's bogus Web site.
March 02, 2010
Nepal: Caught Between China and India
Nepal may be most famous for its majestic Himalayan peaks, but much of the country is a vast stretch of plains, the terai, which have long been underdeveloped and largely ignored by the two powers on either side. No longer. India has just launched a plan to spend $361 million over the next several years on roads and rail links in the terai, announcing the grants just before Nepali President Ram Baran Yadav made his Feb. 15 official visit to New Delhi. China, meanwhile, recently increased its annual aid to Nepal by 50% to about $22 million.
Read more
March 11, 2009
UN comes to Charles Sobhraj's rescue
KATHMANDU: In a fresh twist to the six-year-old saga of Charles Sobhraj's arrest and murder conviction in Nepal, that electrified the world
almost three decades after his criminal career had ebbed, the UN has taken up cudgels on behalf of the 64-year-old, giving credence to his claim that he was the victim of fraud and injustice in the Himalayan republic.
After losing the battle for freedom in Kathmandu's district and appellate courts, which held him guilty of the murder of American tourist Connie Jo Bronzich in 1975, Sobhraj, a cult figure in the 70s with reports of his preying on western tourists and staging audacious jail breaks, approached the office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights in Geneva last November for "justice".
According to Sobhraj's lawyer in Paris, Isabelle Coutant-Peyre, the only "evidence" police produced to prove that he had come to Nepal in 1975 – which he denies – werephotocopies of two guest registration cards. According to the prosecution, Sobhraj had visited Nepal in 1975 using the passport of a Dutch tourist and stayed in two upmarket hotels. The handwriting in the two hotel guest registration cards, they claim, matches Sobhraj's handwriting.
Sobhraj's lawyers have reject the cards, saying they are crude forgeries by police. More importantly, photocopies are not admissible in court as evidence, according to Nepal's laws. Though several judges asked police and the prosecutor to produce the actual cards, Coutant-Peyre pointed out to the UN office that they had failed to produce them in six years. She had also complained to the UN that Nepal's officials were deliberately delaying the trial.
Last week, Sobhraj's prayers were heard when Ibrahim Salama, chief of the Human Rights Treaties branch at the office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, informed his lawyer that the UN body is taking up his case. Salama also said that his office has asked the Maoist government of Nepal to send its reply to the complaints within six months.
A triumphant Coutant-Peyre said she was happy that the UN has taken up Sobhraj's case.
"Though a new republican political system has replaced absolute and arbitrary monarchy in Nepal, there is no progress in the judiciary, of whom Charles Sobhraj is a victim," she told TNN. "I hope Nepal will be severely condemned for these violations and the nightmare endured by Charles Sobhraj and his family for five and a half years will end soon."
Sobhraj, who has been stopped from meeting visitors in prison except his lawyers and fiancée, was upbeat at the news, his Nepali lawyers said.
The 64-year-old alleges that bribes were paid to secure a conviction against him. He also says once he is released, he will use the "incriminating tapes" and photographs in his possession in his new book on his trial and imprisonment in Nepal that will "expose" the "rampant corruption in police and judiciary".
Source: Times of India
November 17, 2008
A quest for home
It's a tiny Himalayan Kingdom locked between India and China that locals call it the Land of the Thunder Dragon. It's a country that receives hardly 20,000 tourists annually through a controlled policy. Its pristine valleys resonate the bells from the Buddhist monasteries. It hasn't attracted any attention of the media either. But the expelled Bhutanese refugees who are now being resettled in third countries like the United States are bringing tales of lost homes and lost hopes amid the discrimination they faced at the hands of the Druk regime that they know it as "ethnic cleansing."
In 1992 Hemlal Subba, 43, walked two hours with his pregnant wife, their 5-year-old son and 4-year-old daughter to catch a truck to flee a land they thought that also belonged to them. They marched toward neighboring Nepal where thousands others have found shelters in one of the seven camps set up the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.
"We were 28 people in the group. Four families, all relatives," recollects Sukmati, Subba's wife of the same age.
By mid-1992 nearly 90,000 people were expelled, mostly the inhabitants of southern Bhutan. These new settlers came in the late 19th century from neighboring Nepal when Bhutan opened up the settlement to increase cultivation.
There is no statistic that shows how many of these refugees actually came from Nepal and how many from northeast India. They settled in the sparsely populated temperate and semitropical zone in the south.
Subba's parents acquired citizenship in the 1958 citizenship act that legalized the entire population known as the Lhotshampas, the Nepali speaking Bhutanese.
The wealth in the southern belt brought prosperity among the migrant community some of whom went on to occupy positions in politics and bureaucracy. This became a threat to the political order dominated by the Ngalongs and the Sharchhops.
The modest lifestyle of many southerners like Subba came to a threat when in 1985 they were asked to provide evidence of their settlement in 1958 or risk being expelled.
It is that political decision that begins the story of nearly 110,000 refugees living in the impoverished camps. The King proclaimed that this action would boost the Gross National Happiness of the average Bhutanese. Subba is unaware of what Gross National Happiness is that Bhutan prides itself of, but he knows that India's business interests in water-resource rich country has much to do with unsolved refugee crises.
For 17 years Hemlal Subba lived with his family in a thatched roof in a refugee camp in eastern Nepal. It was their home. They guarded it zealously and prayed that the house be spared from the erratic fires in the camps. When his youngest daughter was born in the camp, he feared she would first be identified as a refugee and her identity will be questioned in a land where her ancestors once belonged to.
"Living in a camp is just survival," Subba says.
Even the thought of a modest living in a refugee camp is a luxury. The odds they encounter become a routine. A lifestyle.
Now Subba has a different routine. Almost a fictional lifestyle.
The fallout of 15-rounds of failed talks between the governments of Nepal and Bhutan spurred United States, Canada, Australia, Sweden, Norway, UK to announce they would absorb all the refugees into their countries. Tek Nath Rizal, the leader of the refugees fighting for the right to return went on a hunger strike to pressurize Bhutan.
"It's now all about my children and a better life that I had hoped for them," says Subba. Though he agrees with Rizal, he knows a different future lay unfolded for him in the United States.
The transition from a stoned-roof, wooden house in Bhutan to about two decades of misery in the camps makes a stark contrast to a modest two-bedroom apartment in Akron.
"The government takes care of everything here for them until they become independent," said Goran Debelnogich, Director of the International Institute of Akron that facilitated the arrival of Subba's family.
Resettlement is not just a physical relocation, it's everything about settlement in a normal way. It's adjusting one's mindset to the environment. It's acceptance and searching for as sense of belongingness that has long been lost.
The International Institute gave the Subba's the power of speech by teaching them, and other settlers, to learn to speak English. But it's a slightly different story for the kids.
"They give food here in schools," says Kamala, the youngest daughter in grade 9.
With a new found hope and a secured legal status, Subba's soul seems to have rejuvenated to forgive the torture and humiliation he once faced.
"I had never dreamed I would own a car," he says talking about his first Kia possession that he bought by paying $3,200. Cash.
Happiness is about independence, being able to do what one wants.
It wasn't a new lifestyle he sought, neither did he seek a home in a developed world. His only subtle quest was to reaffirm his identity that he could proudly claim his own with an unalienable birthright.
In 1992 Hemlal Subba, 43, walked two hours with his pregnant wife, their 5-year-old son and 4-year-old daughter to catch a truck to flee a land they thought that also belonged to them. They marched toward neighboring Nepal where thousands others have found shelters in one of the seven camps set up the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.
"We were 28 people in the group. Four families, all relatives," recollects Sukmati, Subba's wife of the same age.
By mid-1992 nearly 90,000 people were expelled, mostly the inhabitants of southern Bhutan. These new settlers came in the late 19th century from neighboring Nepal when Bhutan opened up the settlement to increase cultivation.
There is no statistic that shows how many of these refugees actually came from Nepal and how many from northeast India. They settled in the sparsely populated temperate and semitropical zone in the south.
Subba's parents acquired citizenship in the 1958 citizenship act that legalized the entire population known as the Lhotshampas, the Nepali speaking Bhutanese.
The wealth in the southern belt brought prosperity among the migrant community some of whom went on to occupy positions in politics and bureaucracy. This became a threat to the political order dominated by the Ngalongs and the Sharchhops.
The modest lifestyle of many southerners like Subba came to a threat when in 1985 they were asked to provide evidence of their settlement in 1958 or risk being expelled.
It is that political decision that begins the story of nearly 110,000 refugees living in the impoverished camps. The King proclaimed that this action would boost the Gross National Happiness of the average Bhutanese. Subba is unaware of what Gross National Happiness is that Bhutan prides itself of, but he knows that India's business interests in water-resource rich country has much to do with unsolved refugee crises.
For 17 years Hemlal Subba lived with his family in a thatched roof in a refugee camp in eastern Nepal. It was their home. They guarded it zealously and prayed that the house be spared from the erratic fires in the camps. When his youngest daughter was born in the camp, he feared she would first be identified as a refugee and her identity will be questioned in a land where her ancestors once belonged to.
"Living in a camp is just survival," Subba says.
Even the thought of a modest living in a refugee camp is a luxury. The odds they encounter become a routine. A lifestyle.
Now Subba has a different routine. Almost a fictional lifestyle.
The fallout of 15-rounds of failed talks between the governments of Nepal and Bhutan spurred United States, Canada, Australia, Sweden, Norway, UK to announce they would absorb all the refugees into their countries. Tek Nath Rizal, the leader of the refugees fighting for the right to return went on a hunger strike to pressurize Bhutan.
"It's now all about my children and a better life that I had hoped for them," says Subba. Though he agrees with Rizal, he knows a different future lay unfolded for him in the United States.
The transition from a stoned-roof, wooden house in Bhutan to about two decades of misery in the camps makes a stark contrast to a modest two-bedroom apartment in Akron.
"The government takes care of everything here for them until they become independent," said Goran Debelnogich, Director of the International Institute of Akron that facilitated the arrival of Subba's family.
Resettlement is not just a physical relocation, it's everything about settlement in a normal way. It's adjusting one's mindset to the environment. It's acceptance and searching for as sense of belongingness that has long been lost.
The International Institute gave the Subba's the power of speech by teaching them, and other settlers, to learn to speak English. But it's a slightly different story for the kids.
"They give food here in schools," says Kamala, the youngest daughter in grade 9.
With a new found hope and a secured legal status, Subba's soul seems to have rejuvenated to forgive the torture and humiliation he once faced.
"I had never dreamed I would own a car," he says talking about his first Kia possession that he bought by paying $3,200. Cash.
Happiness is about independence, being able to do what one wants.
It wasn't a new lifestyle he sought, neither did he seek a home in a developed world. His only subtle quest was to reaffirm his identity that he could proudly claim his own with an unalienable birthright.
July 30, 2008
How realistic South Asian leaders could be
South Asian leaders in Colombo are going to make another "historic" declaration at the 15th South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) Summit scheduled for 2-3 August. This year the Summit will be held amid two political uncertainties in the region: formation of a new government in Nepal and a week after Indian prime minister won the no-trust vote over the Indo-US civilian nuclear deal. For two days leaders will try to hold off bilateral differences and focus on removing trade policy barriers in favor of intra-regional trade.
With the transition from SAARC Preferential Trading Agreement (SAPTA) to South Asian Free Trade Area (SAFTA), the first step toward regional economic integration is complete. By 2012 the member-states, other than the four Least Developed Countries -- Bangladesh, Bhutan, the Maldives and Nepal -- will reduce their duty to zero percent. These LDCs have until 2015 to fulfill this commitment.
India has a crucial role in realizing the SAARC ideals as it shares borders with all member-countries. A cordial bilateral relationship, especially between India and Pakistan, should build up trust toward regional cooperation. The current Indo-Pak trade under the Most Favored Nation status remains at below $2 billion, but experts talk of a $12 billion potential.
However, the ongoing hostility has thwarted prospects of any regional integration including cancellation of several summits.
India's considerable business interest in the region remains unexplored due to fragile political landscape in the sub-continent. Investors like the Tata Group are keen on setting up steel, fertilizer and power plants in Bangladesh that aims to bolster the economy of India's Northeastern states benefiting 40 million people. Such capital investments and enhanced commercial activities can bring down trade imbalance of $100 million exports and $2 billion imports.
Despite volatile political climate, Nepal opened up its market by recently awarding a 300 megawatt hydro-electric contract to GMR Energy, an Indian infrastructure company. However, the soon-to-be-formed government must create conducive environment for foreign investors. Two multinational subsidiaries, Unilever and Colgate-Palmolive, closed their operation due to insecurity. Since SAFTA also does not accommodate Indo-US ventures, and is thus ineligible for duty-free access, the Summit has a serious business to do.
The Summit should work toward goodwill measures in the interest of the region by increasing people-to-people contact as promised in recent declarations. Increasing physical connectivity, liberalizing visas for education, media and medical purposes are as important as duty-free access to goods. More specific cooperation can be reached in the sub-regional "growth quadrangle" comprising Bangladesh, Bhutan, India and Nepal for power and water sharing.
Another contentious issue is cross-border terrorism. While India does not want any categorization of terrorism, Pakistan maintains some acts are "freedom struggles." Since both the countries have rejected the role of the United Nations in dealing with the Kashmir issue, the call for a Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism among member- nations remains significant. India now seems to favor the UN Security Council Resolution 1373 (2001) to deal with terrorism.
Although the difference in approach over terrorism exists between the two arch-rivals, other bilateral issues in the region should not build further acrimony. Only recently India provided a soft-loan of $1 billion to Sri Lanka to upgrade its defense capabilities, and the two nations may ink a Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) on the margins of the Summit. India is further planning a multilateral cooperation to set up gas pipeline through Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. Therefore, a regional consensus to contain terrorism and violence is as much important for big countries as it is in the economic and social interest of the smaller nations.
In addition to goodwill achievements, such as setting up of the South Asian University and agreement on SAARC model village, the Summit has to work toward a functioning South Asian Customs Union and operationalization of the SAARC Development Fund. The Intergovernmental Agreement on establishing the SAARC Food Bank is a credible move in dealing with the food security. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has also put this agenda at the forefront, besides climate and fuel crises.
SAARC observer-countries have shown immense interests in the development of the region. The Chinese proposal for a China-South Asia Business Forum and SAARC-Japan Special Fund could actually complement the intra-regional development vision. The Summit should be able to accommodate trans-SAARC issues beyond rhetoric.
To achieve all these, an effort in "building of trust and understanding" among member-states has been long due for the realization of a South Asian economic union.
Originally published on The Kathmandu Post.
With the transition from SAARC Preferential Trading Agreement (SAPTA) to South Asian Free Trade Area (SAFTA), the first step toward regional economic integration is complete. By 2012 the member-states, other than the four Least Developed Countries -- Bangladesh, Bhutan, the Maldives and Nepal -- will reduce their duty to zero percent. These LDCs have until 2015 to fulfill this commitment.
India has a crucial role in realizing the SAARC ideals as it shares borders with all member-countries. A cordial bilateral relationship, especially between India and Pakistan, should build up trust toward regional cooperation. The current Indo-Pak trade under the Most Favored Nation status remains at below $2 billion, but experts talk of a $12 billion potential.
However, the ongoing hostility has thwarted prospects of any regional integration including cancellation of several summits.
India's considerable business interest in the region remains unexplored due to fragile political landscape in the sub-continent. Investors like the Tata Group are keen on setting up steel, fertilizer and power plants in Bangladesh that aims to bolster the economy of India's Northeastern states benefiting 40 million people. Such capital investments and enhanced commercial activities can bring down trade imbalance of $100 million exports and $2 billion imports.
Despite volatile political climate, Nepal opened up its market by recently awarding a 300 megawatt hydro-electric contract to GMR Energy, an Indian infrastructure company. However, the soon-to-be-formed government must create conducive environment for foreign investors. Two multinational subsidiaries, Unilever and Colgate-Palmolive, closed their operation due to insecurity. Since SAFTA also does not accommodate Indo-US ventures, and is thus ineligible for duty-free access, the Summit has a serious business to do.
The Summit should work toward goodwill measures in the interest of the region by increasing people-to-people contact as promised in recent declarations. Increasing physical connectivity, liberalizing visas for education, media and medical purposes are as important as duty-free access to goods. More specific cooperation can be reached in the sub-regional "growth quadrangle" comprising Bangladesh, Bhutan, India and Nepal for power and water sharing.
Another contentious issue is cross-border terrorism. While India does not want any categorization of terrorism, Pakistan maintains some acts are "freedom struggles." Since both the countries have rejected the role of the United Nations in dealing with the Kashmir issue, the call for a Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism among member- nations remains significant. India now seems to favor the UN Security Council Resolution 1373 (2001) to deal with terrorism.
Although the difference in approach over terrorism exists between the two arch-rivals, other bilateral issues in the region should not build further acrimony. Only recently India provided a soft-loan of $1 billion to Sri Lanka to upgrade its defense capabilities, and the two nations may ink a Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) on the margins of the Summit. India is further planning a multilateral cooperation to set up gas pipeline through Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. Therefore, a regional consensus to contain terrorism and violence is as much important for big countries as it is in the economic and social interest of the smaller nations.
In addition to goodwill achievements, such as setting up of the South Asian University and agreement on SAARC model village, the Summit has to work toward a functioning South Asian Customs Union and operationalization of the SAARC Development Fund. The Intergovernmental Agreement on establishing the SAARC Food Bank is a credible move in dealing with the food security. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has also put this agenda at the forefront, besides climate and fuel crises.
SAARC observer-countries have shown immense interests in the development of the region. The Chinese proposal for a China-South Asia Business Forum and SAARC-Japan Special Fund could actually complement the intra-regional development vision. The Summit should be able to accommodate trans-SAARC issues beyond rhetoric.
To achieve all these, an effort in "building of trust and understanding" among member-states has been long due for the realization of a South Asian economic union.
Originally published on The Kathmandu Post.
May 20, 2008
Media Stereotype: What is normal and what is a type?
Stereotype seems easy to define: an image that people hold about other people; but it is difficult to rationalize. When people have a "fixed mental image" that is applied to members of a group, it might seem justified because this image has been unconsciously approved by people who constantly use it.
In Bollywood movies, stereotypes of territorial regions or communities are predominant. For example, a south-Indian Tamil will be shown to be speaking a distorted version of Hindi, a north-Indian UPite is almost always a beetle-nut chewing bhaiyya (literally, a brother but used pejoratively), Pakistan is always India’s enemy, and a Nepali is always a baton-bearing Gurkha gatekeeper or night watchman who patrols the urban streets.
At one level stereotype actually helps people to get a larger picture of the "other" who is different from the rest, and therefore, the general opinion is an economical way of viewing the world. So, can journalists also go by these stereotypes?
We see people using stereotypes in every culture. Some usage may be humorous while other can be negative and scathing.
The world of entertainment is replete with creative uses of stereotypes. In 2005, Screen Actors Guild commissioned a research on stereotypes that reported actors with disability faced “stereotypical” attitudes and were considered only for supporting roles. People with disabilities are rarely “allowed to develop into fully-rounded characters or shown as valuing and participating in typical activities like sports or fitness, thereby further reinforcing stereotypical views." This situation isn't likely to change in the next decade.
However, other groups of minority have had a favorable stereotype. For instance, in the United States Asians are considered as some sort of wiz-kids. In the 1960s, William Petersen wrote for the New York Times Magazine about the Japanese as the “model minority.” All immigrant communities in the US have some kind of stereotypes associated to them because stereotyping is deeply rooted in human nature.
In Bollywood movies, stereotypes of territorial regions or communities are predominant. For example, a south-Indian Tamil will be shown to be speaking a distorted version of Hindi, a north-Indian UPite is almost always a beetle-nut chewing bhaiyya (literally, a brother but used pejoratively), Pakistan is always India’s enemy, and a Nepali is always a baton-bearing Gurkha gatekeeper or night watchman who patrols the urban streets.
One such recent example of extreme stereotyping is the Hollywood blockbuster Borat. This movie outrageously ridicules Kazakhstan to the meanest degree. The humor in the movie comes from cynical portrayal of their habits and customs. I've talked to couple Kazakh nationals and they don't find this humorous at all. They felt it created an erroneous ethnic prejudice and created an unfair label about their people. The government of Kazakhstan objected to the movie for its misrepresentation of the country. Forbes.com reported about the “pernicious influence” of the movie and how government of Kazakhstan launched a massive ad campaign to salvage the country’s image.
An important question to answer is, does the entertainment industry reflect the characteristics of the society? If not, what ethical consideration should it make to create a better understanding of the ‘other’ culture? Can the media, both as journalism and creative arts, truly play a catalytic role? Do mass media have a responsibility to differentiate between reality and stereotype?
In the Code of Ethics of the Society of Professional Journalists, there is a clear guideline, “Avoid stereotyping by race, gender, age, religion, ethnicity, geography, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance or social status.” This guideline almost puts a journalist to perform a didactic role in an attempt to treat others with dignity. That is for journalists who strive for objectivity.
But how much is too much in the field of creative expression? Is there a line that one shouldn't cross? Well, that's another serious debate.
May 09, 2008
An onward march toward media professionalism in Nepal
(This is an excerpt of my short analysis of the struggle between free press and professionalism after the restoration of Democracy in 1990.)
Nepal has been a democracy in the making for more than half a century now. Theoretically, all the four Constitutions since 1948 supported the ideals of liberalism and pluralism. In the democratization process, journalists claim to have played an important role in the “upliftment of Nepalese society” (FNJ, 2008). The first step toward professionalism was the establishment of the Press Commission in 1959. The formation of a 12-member Press Council in 1972 was the next important decision that aimed to develop “healthy journalism” (Press Council Nepal, 2008). However, the history of the press goes back to as early as 1851 when prime minister Jung Bahadur Rana started the Giddhe press. Fifty years later, Gorkhapatra, a state-owned newspaper came to the scene. But the press could not enjoy full freedom, especially after 1960 when the party less Panchayat system of government controlled the press. The Council was forced to follow the policies formulated by the government of the time.
Unlike the development of media in the region, Nepal was silently left out due to its internal political instability and little geo-political significance in the region. Constitutional guarantee of the press came to a complete halt when the King dismissed the elected government and assumed executive powers in 2005. The hope for free press is revived once again after the April 2008 Constituent Assembly election which is charged with the making of a new constitution. Until then, the Interim Constitution of Nepal-2007 continues to guarantee “full freedom of the press” (The Interim Constitution, 2008). To help the press function professionally, the Code of Journalistic Ethics has been revised and amended in 2008 (Press Council Nepal, 2008).
Present Issues of the mediaThough the idea of free press was upheld by the rulers, it did not thrive as a profession until after the restoration of democracy in 1990. The history of Nepali journalism has been dominated more by the diktat of the political parties who had been fighting the autocratic rule in the nation. Since the media supported the democratic ideals, it tended to naturally align with the politics. In the past two decades, the media have been operating more or less independently, both as a profession and as business.
The two biggest challenges for the Nepali media are raising the professional standards and catching up with the pace of the technology, both in content generation and distribution. The use of New Media technology in communication is still a distant dream. Less than 2 percent of the total population has access to the Internet (Towards a Digital Future, 2004). Therefore, the Nepali media are still traditional as compared to media in the western world.
On one hand there are media organizations that are engaged in traditional journalistic enterprise, on the other hand there is a need to participate in global issues (UNESCO, 2004). In true essence, the Nepali media didn’t carry out the watch-dog role until the restoration of democracy in 1990. The development of media has been supported mainly by foreign sponsored agencies. The ideology of the nation that supports any project has influenced the development of the media. For instance, a German sponsored project run by FES-NEPAL states its preference to enhance media coverage in “issues pertaining to conflict management and strengthening media role in democratization process” (FES-NEPAL, 2003). Another program implemented by USAID’s Office of Transition Initiatives in 2006 focused on “transition to peace and democracy.” One of the objectives of the program was to “increase access to information and diversify public debate on issues critical to the political transition” (USAID/OTI, 2007). However, the program spent only 5 percent of the total $3.5 million budget.
Several international projects of similar nature are implemented in Nepal. But there are hardly any national or international strategies that focus on improving the overall quality of journalism. While there is a general agreement that journalists lack proper training and need specialized skills in reporting, partisan media have themselves been the biggest impediment in creating a value-based journalism. Since the development of journalism has been a fight for the freedom of press, the question of journalist integrity has received less attention.
For example, in June 6, 2001 a privately owned daily newspaper published an article by an underground Maoist rebel leader criticizing the king for masterminding the infamous royal massacre. The editor-in-chief and two executives were immediately arrested on sedition charges. The arrest led to worldwide condemnation and an appeal to release the journalists. Yubaraj Ghimire, the editor-in-chief, later said to the New York Times that his decision to publish the article was to present uncensored views of “person whose opinion is important to the nation” (Dugger, 2001, “Plot Thickens in Nepal”). The author of the article reacted to the incident after six months and wrote in the Monthly Review saying “Since a strict press censorship is imposed and the general public is subjected to one-sided royal military propaganda, the outside world is forced to buy the deliberately floated theory that the fight there is between ‘democracy’ and ‘terrorism’” (Bhattarai, 2002, “Birth Pangs of Democracy”).
Media Censorship
On February 1, 2005, King Gyanendra took absolute power by dismissing the government on charges of not holding the general election and the inability to restore peace. Immediately after he appeared on the television, telephone lines, cable and Internet connections were cut. The Army started patrolling the streets. Houses of prominent leaders were surrounded by the military. This was the second time he assumed political power after he became King in 2001 following the Narayanhiti Palace massacre that saw the death of 10 members of the royal family.
After the takeover, the fundamental rights of the citizens were curtailed. Military personnel were posted in media outlets and all news reports were monitored before they were published. There was a complete ban on FM stations that broadcast news. Equipments from stations were seized and journalists were beaten up. Reporters Without Borders (RSF) in its 2006 report mentions that out of 1,066 cases of media censorship worldwide 567 alone were recorded in Nepal including two deaths. (Reporters Without Borders, 2006). Nepal was also placed in the list of “Enemies of the Internet” (p. 6). Even though the emergency was lifted on April 30, the independent media lived in great fear as a result they started imposing self-censorship. Even the state-run media faced some amount of censorship.
It was only when the press was facing such extreme censorship, Nepal got into the blogosphere. Views that could not be expressed in the mainstream media were now seen in blog sites like blog.com.np and mysansar.com. The educated Nepalese people craved not just for news but also waited for the censorship to be over so that they could see the media function the role of watch-dog, a role that was just beginning to be realized as an effective means in nation building process.
Brief history of Journalism in Nepal
The year 1950 marks the beginning of democracy in Nepal. With the end of Rana oligarchy and the return of King Tribhuvan B.B. Shah to Nepal from exile in India, democratic institutions were formed on the models of the Western countries, especially the UK. The freedom of the press has always been guaranteed with the promulgation of the constitutions in 1962, 1990 and 2006, but time and again the state has imposed restriction of some kind. There is hardly any historical record between the period of 1851 and 1960 with regards to the state of the media. When the state-run Radio Nepal was established in 1951, it had the characteristics of an Authoritarian model. But over the past decades the impressive development of community-radio stations has set a model even for commercial stations that broadcast in community-radio style. This transition from a strict control to following a Social Responsibility Model has not been that successful in the print media. The state-run Gorkhapatra that started as a weekly in 1901 was converted to a daily in 1960. However, even until today, the newspaper could not break away from the grip of the government, primarily because of the state control in appointing the management board.
The situation is similar in the state-run Nepal Television that was established in 1985. The total number of newspapers has increased by more than 60 percent since 2000. As of April 2007, a total of 4,600 newspapers have been registered, out of which 341 are daily newspapers and 1667 are weeklies. (Nepal Press Institute, 2008).
With the opening up of airwaves in 1995, commercial, cooperative and community-owned radio and television stations showed their independent presence. This breakaway from state-control and control from the political parties is the first step toward professionalism.
The community-owned FM radio stations are now networked to benefit from programs produced by other stations. In 2001 a project called Networking FM Radio Stations in Nepal (NFMRSN) was supported by Center for Advanced Media Prague and Panos Institute South Asia. The objective of this project was to “enable all radio stations in Nepal (FM/AM/SW) to benefit from shared program content by establishing a network that connects them through a mixture of internet, wireless and other new media technology” (PANOS South Asia, 2007). Nearly 50 FM stations currently run programs through such networks.
The most impressive feature of the growth is the spatial distribution of the stations across the nation ranging from lowlands to midland to remote areas. The initiative of the private sector is a breakaway from the state-centric model that was characteristic of the Southeast Asian political culture. Atkins (2002) mention that the idea of nation-building was tied to the media policy, and “television worked both to educate and promote national identification in the interests of national development and cohesion” (p. 14). Since the politics in the region has to accommodate a diverse culture, mass media was used to propagate messages that favored the ruling parties. Domestic media organizations were required to support state authorities by airing positive news about the government and ignoring the negative news of the opposition.
The idea that free media will disturb the social cohesion of a diverse society was a strong argument that leaders in Southeast Asia pursued for nearly half a century. However, the wave of liberalization in the 1990s, finally, paved a way toward free media enterprise that also influenced the scenario in Nepal significantly which brought professional interest in the practice of journalism.
(Write to me to read the complete paper. Thanks!)
April 01, 2008
Coverage of the Tibet crisis by CNN.com
Allison Rupp writes the magnificent journey to Lhasa in his article The Sky Train on CNN.com only three days before the exiled Tibetans in India began their march to China to protest Beijing’s hosting of the Olympic Games. The March 10th protest coincided with the uprising against China that forced the Dalai Lama into exile in 1959. Protests in India and Nepal were marked with violence. News of unprecedented world-wide protests were reported all over the world. The Chinese government ignored the issue for couple days, but as the protests grew more violent, China reacted by saying that the whole episode was orchestrated by the Dalai Lama. The Dalai Lama has condemned China's statements and extreme actions.
Ever since the protests began, CNN.com has written more than 70 articles to date, and has posted nearly 140 videos on the Web site. This is a remarkable media coverage given the time span of just three weeks.
Let me briefly discuss how CNN.com reports present the Tibetan side of the story more positively or neutrally and the Chinese side of the story more neutrally and negatively. These reports cover violence in different parts of the world, mostly in India and Nepal. The write-up is based on my experience of reading and watching stories posted on the Web site over the period. I haven't employed any empirical methods to come to a conclusion, hence I must warn you the evaluation might seem subjective!
As violence continues across Lhasa and Nepal, the international community has appealed for peace. The European Union has appealed China to handle the Tibet crisis peacefully calling for respecting Tibet's cultural heritage and maintaining China’s integrity at the same time. The Dalai Lama has called this crisis a ‘cultural genocide’ and the Chinese government blames him for perpetuating violence deliberately.
In the CNN.com reports, what is most glaringly seen is the viewpoint of the Tibetans mostly and not that of the Chinese. The Tibetans have a human interest frame, whereas the Chinese have only the official version which is mostly the denunciation of the Dalai Lama. But as we go to alternative media like YouTube, there are several videos counteracting what the western media have been portraying about the protests. These response-videos and blogs have mostly targeted the western media for overweighing the Tibetan’s cause. In doing so, they have used this medium to put forth their own biased message. One of the YouTube videos shows why an independent Tibet is not acceptable to the Chinese.
The video attempts to expose the myth of the ‘crackdown’ in mainland China. It shows images that were actually taken in Nepal and printed by the western media, including the BBC, Bild Zeitung, CNN, Aljazeera, and others. Very clearly, this video itself presents a slant, but the international media haven’t been fair either in reporting the exact nature of violence that erupted in the streets of Lhasa or in Nepal, India or other parts of the world. This is an excellent example of how the gatekeepers control the message in the newsroom. The Tibet crisis also brings the question of whether international media have differing parameters in tackling issues of the Communist regimes like Russia, China, and some Latin American countries. The historical aspect of the country in the present crisis is completely ignored.
The history of how Tibet was a part of China during the Yuan, Ming and Qing Dynasties until the making of the People’s Republic of China in 1949 is what is often referred. China ‘regained’ Tibet in 1950 when it was under the influence of the British Colonial Empire. Historians contest whether Tibet is a suzerain of China or an autonomous region. But the Chinese consider it as part of the territory, much like Taiwan and Hong Kong. While the relationship with Taiwan isn’t what the Chinese want to discuss, Tibet’s case has brought infamy to the Chinese. A majority of the Chinese believe the Dalai Lama is funded by the CIA ever since his exile in 1959. In the news covered by the CNN.com, there is no indication of any covert funding, but the US has sponsored a radio station and a Web site. The Chinese see this as signs of anti-China policy, and actually an instance of supporting the Tibetans cause in breaking away from China.
The media have, however, not reported the history behind the present crisis. News reports have merely focused on the event itself, and long form report that occasionally report the historical facts use most of their space talking about how the upcoming Olympics will be hurt.
Once I had an opportunity to talk to a Chinese student regarding this crisis. He candidly remarked that it’s the so-called ‘fair, western media’ that actually propagates ‘Free Tibet’ slogan more vociferously than the Tibetans themselves.
The Chinese model of authoritarian press doesn’t permit independent reporting. In China, you ought to support the state, and it’s the state’s interests that matters most. The press is the product of the regime.
When the only journalist from the western media -The Economist - was invited to visit Tibet, Chinese official had hoped a more positive coverage based on the subsidy granted. However, the nature of violence was too brutal to be ignored. The magazine reports that Lhasa television “broadcast over and over again, alternately in Tibetan and Chinese, a government statement accusing the “Dalai Lama clique” of being behind the violence by a ‘small number’ of rioters.”
Where can you find a truly objective media?
Ever since the protests began, CNN.com has written more than 70 articles to date, and has posted nearly 140 videos on the Web site. This is a remarkable media coverage given the time span of just three weeks.
Let me briefly discuss how CNN.com reports present the Tibetan side of the story more positively or neutrally and the Chinese side of the story more neutrally and negatively. These reports cover violence in different parts of the world, mostly in India and Nepal. The write-up is based on my experience of reading and watching stories posted on the Web site over the period. I haven't employed any empirical methods to come to a conclusion, hence I must warn you the evaluation might seem subjective!
As violence continues across Lhasa and Nepal, the international community has appealed for peace. The European Union has appealed China to handle the Tibet crisis peacefully calling for respecting Tibet's cultural heritage and maintaining China’s integrity at the same time. The Dalai Lama has called this crisis a ‘cultural genocide’ and the Chinese government blames him for perpetuating violence deliberately.
In the CNN.com reports, what is most glaringly seen is the viewpoint of the Tibetans mostly and not that of the Chinese. The Tibetans have a human interest frame, whereas the Chinese have only the official version which is mostly the denunciation of the Dalai Lama. But as we go to alternative media like YouTube, there are several videos counteracting what the western media have been portraying about the protests. These response-videos and blogs have mostly targeted the western media for overweighing the Tibetan’s cause. In doing so, they have used this medium to put forth their own biased message. One of the YouTube videos shows why an independent Tibet is not acceptable to the Chinese.
The video attempts to expose the myth of the ‘crackdown’ in mainland China. It shows images that were actually taken in Nepal and printed by the western media, including the BBC, Bild Zeitung, CNN, Aljazeera, and others. Very clearly, this video itself presents a slant, but the international media haven’t been fair either in reporting the exact nature of violence that erupted in the streets of Lhasa or in Nepal, India or other parts of the world. This is an excellent example of how the gatekeepers control the message in the newsroom. The Tibet crisis also brings the question of whether international media have differing parameters in tackling issues of the Communist regimes like Russia, China, and some Latin American countries. The historical aspect of the country in the present crisis is completely ignored.
The history of how Tibet was a part of China during the Yuan, Ming and Qing Dynasties until the making of the People’s Republic of China in 1949 is what is often referred. China ‘regained’ Tibet in 1950 when it was under the influence of the British Colonial Empire. Historians contest whether Tibet is a suzerain of China or an autonomous region. But the Chinese consider it as part of the territory, much like Taiwan and Hong Kong. While the relationship with Taiwan isn’t what the Chinese want to discuss, Tibet’s case has brought infamy to the Chinese. A majority of the Chinese believe the Dalai Lama is funded by the CIA ever since his exile in 1959. In the news covered by the CNN.com, there is no indication of any covert funding, but the US has sponsored a radio station and a Web site. The Chinese see this as signs of anti-China policy, and actually an instance of supporting the Tibetans cause in breaking away from China.
The media have, however, not reported the history behind the present crisis. News reports have merely focused on the event itself, and long form report that occasionally report the historical facts use most of their space talking about how the upcoming Olympics will be hurt.
Once I had an opportunity to talk to a Chinese student regarding this crisis. He candidly remarked that it’s the so-called ‘fair, western media’ that actually propagates ‘Free Tibet’ slogan more vociferously than the Tibetans themselves.
The Chinese model of authoritarian press doesn’t permit independent reporting. In China, you ought to support the state, and it’s the state’s interests that matters most. The press is the product of the regime.
When the only journalist from the western media -The Economist - was invited to visit Tibet, Chinese official had hoped a more positive coverage based on the subsidy granted. However, the nature of violence was too brutal to be ignored. The magazine reports that Lhasa television “broadcast over and over again, alternately in Tibetan and Chinese, a government statement accusing the “Dalai Lama clique” of being behind the violence by a ‘small number’ of rioters.”
Where can you find a truly objective media?
March 11, 2008
First impressions and the sanctuary debate
My first impressions of the United States of America were developed through Western Comics. As a young boy I knew it as a country full of gun-wielding cowboys. Later, when my history teacher said it is one of the super-powers (the other was Soviet Union), I wondered how cowboys could do that. Yet later, most of what I knew about this country would come from television or other media. However, my old image lingers on as I experience a country that long forsook the wagon trains.
Ever since my nomination for a Fulbright award, I thought about ways to deal with the new situations, people and culture here. At the Gateway Orientation in New York, a speaker talked about reverse cultural shock. He said it’s not cultural shock that affects us most in an alien land, but what is more vexing is the reversecultural shock, a phenomenon of adjustment difficulty in home country after having lived here – or any foreign land.
After the NY orientation was over, I was going to my destination university. This event got me to know something odd about airplanes. After waiting for nearly an hour inside the airplane, we finally got the signal to prepare for take off at the J.F.Kennedy airport. As our aircraft slowly took the curves toward the runway, I saw more than 30 airplanes lined up in front of us – all waiting to fly. That meant another one hour wait before we hit the sky.
When I reached St. Paul, Minneapolis, to board my last flight, I found I had less than 10 minutes to get to the concourse where my plane was waiting. There was no way I could get there, not even on a sky-train. I frantically ran over the rolling floors, now cursing the legendary delays of the JFK airport. People run that fast only when chased by a raging bull. But when I got there, the boarding door was already closed. Even the attendants were gone. I had no idea what to do now. I waited at another counter for someone to show up. Shortly, a lady came in. I explained why I was late. I requested her to let me in as the plane was still there. But instead, she told me about the rules and wished me “Good Day!” handing my new ticket for the next flight along with a $10 complimentary lunch
coupon. And then, she went away.
I was now looking at my missed flight through the glass pane, waiting for it to go. But the aircraft didn’t move. Even after half an hour the plane didn’t go. I didn’t know what the problem was, but I thought, may be, just may be, I still had a chance. Luckily, the same lady came and told me I could check in if I wished.
“Definitely,” I said.
“But what’s the problem with the plane?” I asked.
“Oh, nothing. It has a flat tire,” she said it so casually as if she was talking of a hole in a bicycle tire.
This was an amusing discovery after coming to the US.
I arrived here in August 2007 to join a graduate program in journalism and mass communication. The school is surely the owner’s pride with latest state-of-theart technology. The TV or the radio studios of the school are much better than average commercial studios. As a student here, I take opportunities to let people know about Nepal. Not everyone knows where or what Nepal is, but they’ve heard about Mt. Everest and Lord Buddha. That’s where I usually
start at. People seem to show a great deal of interest about the culture. Whenever I talk about the Hindu festivals, it’s a spice. In certain occasions, I talk about how I want to generate resources for institutions in Nepal that teach mass media and also discuss scopes of development.
There are several interesting features of the society here. The most obvious is the respect for laws. There’s so much to appreciate when the road traffic comes to a complete halt as the easily recognizable yellow school bus is taking or dropping off the kids. Or, a salesperson will not sell alcohol if she suspects you are not 21. I was told a story about a child who dialed 911 because her parents were quarreling for too long in the house!
But what fascinated me most was the willingness of a church to allow the Nepali community celebrate Tihar in the church itself. For me, this gesture epitomizes the intermix of faith and secularism of this nation. I want to tell the presidential candidates for 2009 to stop debating that USA is actually becoming a sanctuary. It already is. Isn’t the much sought after peace a by-product of tolerance? Let’s talk of better ideals instead.
Originally published by USEF (the Fulbright Commission) Nepal.
Ever since my nomination for a Fulbright award, I thought about ways to deal with the new situations, people and culture here. At the Gateway Orientation in New York, a speaker talked about reverse cultural shock. He said it’s not cultural shock that affects us most in an alien land, but what is more vexing is the reversecultural shock, a phenomenon of adjustment difficulty in home country after having lived here – or any foreign land.
After the NY orientation was over, I was going to my destination university. This event got me to know something odd about airplanes. After waiting for nearly an hour inside the airplane, we finally got the signal to prepare for take off at the J.F.Kennedy airport. As our aircraft slowly took the curves toward the runway, I saw more than 30 airplanes lined up in front of us – all waiting to fly. That meant another one hour wait before we hit the sky.
When I reached St. Paul, Minneapolis, to board my last flight, I found I had less than 10 minutes to get to the concourse where my plane was waiting. There was no way I could get there, not even on a sky-train. I frantically ran over the rolling floors, now cursing the legendary delays of the JFK airport. People run that fast only when chased by a raging bull. But when I got there, the boarding door was already closed. Even the attendants were gone. I had no idea what to do now. I waited at another counter for someone to show up. Shortly, a lady came in. I explained why I was late. I requested her to let me in as the plane was still there. But instead, she told me about the rules and wished me “Good Day!” handing my new ticket for the next flight along with a $10 complimentary lunch
coupon. And then, she went away.
I was now looking at my missed flight through the glass pane, waiting for it to go. But the aircraft didn’t move. Even after half an hour the plane didn’t go. I didn’t know what the problem was, but I thought, may be, just may be, I still had a chance. Luckily, the same lady came and told me I could check in if I wished.
“Definitely,” I said.
“But what’s the problem with the plane?” I asked.
“Oh, nothing. It has a flat tire,” she said it so casually as if she was talking of a hole in a bicycle tire.
This was an amusing discovery after coming to the US.
I arrived here in August 2007 to join a graduate program in journalism and mass communication. The school is surely the owner’s pride with latest state-of-theart technology. The TV or the radio studios of the school are much better than average commercial studios. As a student here, I take opportunities to let people know about Nepal. Not everyone knows where or what Nepal is, but they’ve heard about Mt. Everest and Lord Buddha. That’s where I usually
start at. People seem to show a great deal of interest about the culture. Whenever I talk about the Hindu festivals, it’s a spice. In certain occasions, I talk about how I want to generate resources for institutions in Nepal that teach mass media and also discuss scopes of development.
There are several interesting features of the society here. The most obvious is the respect for laws. There’s so much to appreciate when the road traffic comes to a complete halt as the easily recognizable yellow school bus is taking or dropping off the kids. Or, a salesperson will not sell alcohol if she suspects you are not 21. I was told a story about a child who dialed 911 because her parents were quarreling for too long in the house!
But what fascinated me most was the willingness of a church to allow the Nepali community celebrate Tihar in the church itself. For me, this gesture epitomizes the intermix of faith and secularism of this nation. I want to tell the presidential candidates for 2009 to stop debating that USA is actually becoming a sanctuary. It already is. Isn’t the much sought after peace a by-product of tolerance? Let’s talk of better ideals instead.
Originally published by USEF (the Fulbright Commission) Nepal.
February 19, 2008
Can BBC fail?
Let me discuss whether a journalist's superficial knowledge about a particular event could undermine the credibility of a reputable news organization.
British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) is unquestionably the most trusted name in the media when it comes to reporting. Its regional services have been expanded to several countries, including Nepal. These services have been providing international news in local languages. They have been equally resourceful in chronicling a local event and making it international. Local natives who work in the BBC newsroom act as an interface between the larger corporation and the smaller versions of the BBC.
Most times this relationship works, but at times it doesn’t work that well. This leads to not just misinformation but misrepresentation of an event. A case in point is how the BBC Web site in its recent story “Nepal strike hits petrol supplies” on 15 February reported by a BBC correspondent misrepresented facts about the event. It’s not that the news distorts the truth, but it does not tell the truth accurately.
There are two facets to this reporting:
1) Opinion of the reporter
2) Misrepresentation of the situation
While the news story is just a brief overview of the overall situation prevailing at that given time, the story somehow doesn’t correctly say the cause of the event which is the consequence of the larger scenario.
The event behind the news is acute fuel crises in the Kathmandu valley due to strikes in the terai (southern part of Nepal) by various political parties demanding equal representation in the forthcoming constituent assembly. The deck head hints at what the situation is and it is a correct representation of the event in itself. It says, “Nepalese petrol stations have been hit by severe fuel shortages, largely triggered by protesters blockading key roads in the south of the country.”
Being a landlocked country, Nepal is mostly dependent upon India for commerce. One of principle commodities that we import almost entirely is natural gas. But the BBC correspondent does not really investigate this fact. The news says, “Roughly 90% of Nepal's imports travel from India via the southern roads.” The truth is, it is almost 100 percent.
Such arm-chair reporting not only harms the credibility of the news organization but gives out false information. This could have been avoided if the reporters from the regional desks were consulted.
Similar misrepresentation of truth is exemplified by another example in the same story. Toward the end of the story it says, “BBC correspondents say the shortage has also been caused in part by Nepal's failure to pay its sole oil exporter, India, for outstanding fuel bills.”
In the statement above, the actual reason is not the non-payment of outstanding bills alone, but other management issues like leakage and artificial shortage created by dealers. These facts are not highlighted. Instead, the reporter is more interested in stating the fact that “almost half of Nepal's population lives in the impoverished, largely agricultural Madesh region.” Due to the reporter’s weak frame of reference objectivity in reporting is not achieved. Perhaps the news story is an outcome that merely fulfills the basic professional compulsion to cover the event.
Such reporting tactic diverts the readers’ attention from the actual event. Organizations like the BBC have a double responsibility toward its readers: First to say what is accurate, and secondly, say it in a balanced way.
Several questions arise with such reporting style.
1) Who is responsible to verify the information that comes from reporters?
2) Is the fact checked with the right sources?
3) In this case, is it proper to quote other BBC correspondents as sources for the news?
4) What purpose does it serve when a news report try to editorialize?
Since media messages have the potential to influence readers almost instantly, reporters must be careful enough in what they actually say. This is especially true in situations when nations that are poorly represented in the media are covered on the merit of an event that took place, like the fuel crises in Nepal.
What the audience expects to hear about an event should be distinguished from what the audience ought to know. It is this difference that separates good versus bad reporting.
British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) is unquestionably the most trusted name in the media when it comes to reporting. Its regional services have been expanded to several countries, including Nepal. These services have been providing international news in local languages. They have been equally resourceful in chronicling a local event and making it international. Local natives who work in the BBC newsroom act as an interface between the larger corporation and the smaller versions of the BBC.
Most times this relationship works, but at times it doesn’t work that well. This leads to not just misinformation but misrepresentation of an event. A case in point is how the BBC Web site in its recent story “Nepal strike hits petrol supplies” on 15 February reported by a BBC correspondent misrepresented facts about the event. It’s not that the news distorts the truth, but it does not tell the truth accurately.
There are two facets to this reporting:
1) Opinion of the reporter
2) Misrepresentation of the situation
While the news story is just a brief overview of the overall situation prevailing at that given time, the story somehow doesn’t correctly say the cause of the event which is the consequence of the larger scenario.
The event behind the news is acute fuel crises in the Kathmandu valley due to strikes in the terai (southern part of Nepal) by various political parties demanding equal representation in the forthcoming constituent assembly. The deck head hints at what the situation is and it is a correct representation of the event in itself. It says, “Nepalese petrol stations have been hit by severe fuel shortages, largely triggered by protesters blockading key roads in the south of the country.”
Being a landlocked country, Nepal is mostly dependent upon India for commerce. One of principle commodities that we import almost entirely is natural gas. But the BBC correspondent does not really investigate this fact. The news says, “Roughly 90% of Nepal's imports travel from India via the southern roads.” The truth is, it is almost 100 percent.
Such arm-chair reporting not only harms the credibility of the news organization but gives out false information. This could have been avoided if the reporters from the regional desks were consulted.
Similar misrepresentation of truth is exemplified by another example in the same story. Toward the end of the story it says, “BBC correspondents say the shortage has also been caused in part by Nepal's failure to pay its sole oil exporter, India, for outstanding fuel bills.”
In the statement above, the actual reason is not the non-payment of outstanding bills alone, but other management issues like leakage and artificial shortage created by dealers. These facts are not highlighted. Instead, the reporter is more interested in stating the fact that “almost half of Nepal's population lives in the impoverished, largely agricultural Madesh region.” Due to the reporter’s weak frame of reference objectivity in reporting is not achieved. Perhaps the news story is an outcome that merely fulfills the basic professional compulsion to cover the event.
Such reporting tactic diverts the readers’ attention from the actual event. Organizations like the BBC have a double responsibility toward its readers: First to say what is accurate, and secondly, say it in a balanced way.
Several questions arise with such reporting style.
1) Who is responsible to verify the information that comes from reporters?
2) Is the fact checked with the right sources?
3) In this case, is it proper to quote other BBC correspondents as sources for the news?
4) What purpose does it serve when a news report try to editorialize?
Since media messages have the potential to influence readers almost instantly, reporters must be careful enough in what they actually say. This is especially true in situations when nations that are poorly represented in the media are covered on the merit of an event that took place, like the fuel crises in Nepal.
What the audience expects to hear about an event should be distinguished from what the audience ought to know. It is this difference that separates good versus bad reporting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
