This political environmental communication noise (barriers in interpreting and
understanding messages due to problems in political and socio-economic
settings) has further divided
them; as a result, the sense of mutual understanding is getting ever distant.
Nevertheless, they have not ceased to talk to one another, especially with
reference to their partisan empowerment.
The intraparty and interparty political dialogue continues,
with an angle of power-sharing or controlling. While the parties have time and
again spent considerable time on whose agenda to adopt or whose leadership to
adopt, the Civil Society has not come up with effective public communication to
overcome the existing political barriers that must be eliminated to witness any
political changes in Nepal.
Because the ruling parties have already misled the Nepalis,
they need inspiration and substantial input to re-activate themselves in the
peace process.
Better possibilities for the Nepali Civil Society
Not to let the peace process decompose into yet another
civil war or bloodshed, the Civil Society--different citizens with varieties of
expertise but with an intellectual level of political consciousness--need to be
proactive during the current political deadlock. If need be, the Civil Society
members, without being loyal to parties, should be prepared to assume active
transitional leadership in the country.
A Civil Society with vague advocacy or fragile communication
physique cannot effectively serve public interests. For this reason, the Civil
Society members need to plan, reinforce and intensify their public
communication. Not launching a continuous series of public dialogues on the
current political crisis would be a loss on the part of the ordinary masses and
the Civil Society.
In the process of public communication on the dominant
political crisis, it would be the best for the Nepali Civil Society to concentrate
on the Comprehensive Peace Accord (CPA) signed between the then Maoist rebels
(now known as the UCPNM) and the Seven Political Party Alliance (SPA). As the
CPA contains the essential dose meant for the overall transformation of the
Nepali society, this is what the Civil Society has to use as launching pad. The
Civil Society becomes no longer the Civil Society if it aligns with any force
that has its propositions incompatible with the overwhelmingly embraced change
agenda.
The change agenda (chiefly, republican setup of democracy,
federalism, inclusive power-sharing and welfare society) have a valid
rationale, with its profound impact and worthiness for Nepal's strategic
future.
Despite the prevalence of ad hoc-ism in the Nepali political
psychology at present, the Nepalis definitely need their long-term future. No
one denies this truth, so mustn't the Nepali Civil Society. In line with this
truth, the Nepali Civil Society can practically demonstrate their rationale and
timely productivity by adhering to the CPA principles of political and
socio-economic transformation. These principles that originated from the
mindset of the suffering masses in Nepal relate to the globally disseminated
agenda of conflict management through good governance and social justice. There
is no reason why the Nepali Civil Society should hesitate to advocate change
agenda directly concerned with the peace process.
The deviation of the major peace process stakeholders from
the peace accord does not mean its end. Since the peace accord represents the
pure realities of the Nepali society, one cannot take a mental flight off the
ground. Doing things with personal motives does not match with the practical
methods agreed on in the peace accord document--a record of the collectively
shared and compromised spirit indeed. The major political parties, though too
untransformed to transform the Nepali society, are still politically presiding
over Nepal. Equally true in this context is the absence of any apparent
alternative force with a claim of replacing them. Any extreme method leads to
spillover reactions. In this critical situation, the pro-change Civil Society
members cannot shirk their moral obligations.
The best principle to deal with the current crisis is the
concept of the golden mean suggested even by many ancient philosophers. The
golden mean is against extremism and absolutism. It favors co-existence and
mutual sharing. This is what the peace accord carries. This is what the Civil
Society members can stand on for communication on the peace process agenda.
They can help the major peace process stakeholders refocus on the mandate of
the massive April uprising (2006). The humiliation of this mandate is not in
favor of peace and change. The Civil Society members need to supply substantial
input to the political decision-makers. The input will be the reconsolidation
of the peace accord ingredients. The Civil Society members, comparatively
better equipped with their own expertise and communication ability, can
interpret the peace accord ingredients.
Room to work: peace communication means change communication
The Civil Society in Nepal, like in any other country,
is marked by the identity of social change advocates. Social justice becomes
the major tool of their advocacy because they are guided by their firm belief
in the fact that peace results from the utilization of social justice
principles. Linking social justice principles to genuine democracy, the Civil
Society members need to refute disguised democracy under which blackmarketeers
and smugglers over-influence the political structures, rendering them defunct
from public perspectives. The political structures in Nepal have physical and
legal presence but their orientation towards public interests is far vaguer,
especially with regard to the accessibility and availability of essential goods
and services.
The working class people feel that the state has been
privatized by a few elite ruling families in the name of democracy. There is a
complete lack of public transport concept amidst an uncontrollable number of
vehicles. People have to pay exorbitant prices for their to and fro because of
this lack. Nepal is considered one of the richest nations in water resources.
Yet there is horrible scarcity of drinking water; private dealers sell low
quality water, securing hundred percent margin. There are similar crises in
every sector, unreported, undug or unexplained. This is where the Nepali Civil
Society can prove their worth through their intellectual exercises. Especially,
those using politics for economic white robbery have apparently misused and
defamed the current transition period. They have not been identified
specifically or individually; it is a trend of practice into which many
political workers fall for various reasons. If the Civil Society in Nepal is
psychologically prepared to become an effective (functioning) role player, they
will definitely realize their social responsibility of combating the metastasis
of crime carcinoma through public communication.
The peace process practically means the change process. No
change, no peace. Peace is not the mere absence of war--the globe knows in
general. Peace is the availability of justice for the people. Peace means a
guarantee of an environment in which the voiceless, the helpless or the
marginalized, including minority communities, can find their viability and
identity. This is what the Nepali peace accord signed in 2006 clearly
indicates. More coordinated peace communication--change communication, to be
clearer--is required in Nepal.
Those who aspire political and socio-economic transformation
of their lives are voiceless. The Civil Society members most of whom belong to
the middle class background; need to give a voice to them. This is how the
Nepali Civil Society can reduce the degree of their vague advocacy.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
