Friday, October 30, 2009

Prof Pradhan has agreed to make a cong. note - federalism

Ratna Sansar Shrestha

It is amusing to “hear” people opining that “primary agenda of restructuring is to effectively implement decentralization and make local governing bodies stronger.” This isn't true even in theory. Practically one doesn’t need to go too far to see that it’s not true. Just a look at our neighbor in south would suffice. Each state is unitary and the problem of the excluded, downtrodden, etc. is still all pervading and is being perpetuated. Basically, adopting a federal structure is fragmenting a nation into various provinces while decentralization is devolution of right to the grassroots. The former doesn’t automatically lead to the other. In Nepal, so far, only lip service has been paid to the concept of devolution of the right to the grassroots and it has never been properly conceptualized and implemented; whether during Panchayat or multiparty system. Therefore, federalism in the context of Nepal is like an old Nepali proverb: “applying medicine for headache in some unrelated place” (I am sure you have heard the popular proverb).

So far no full fledged discussion has taken place with regard to whether Nepal should adopt federalism. Those unelected people “decided” to go for it, without fully understanding the concept and without being able to know whether this is what will redress problems that Nepal is facing. Therefore, I couldn’t disagree more with your contention that discussion about it amounts to “killing time unnecessarily”. On another plane, if this country is to be split on the basis of ill-advised and immature concepts, there will be, I am apprehensive, a lot of killing – not of time but of people – in the process of, for example, demarcation boundaries of various provinces, to have cities dear to one declared as provincial capital and so on. It is lot better to “kill” some time in trying to understand what the problem is and what is the correct solution, what are the ramifications of the proposed solution, etc.; rather than rushing into something that could eventually lead Nepal to emulate Yugoslavia - beyond a point of no return.

I agree with you fully that the ruling clans have cheated people in general. Nobody needs to defend these people. But the problem was in the system, not merely in these people. If we look at the exploitation of Newa people, there were instances of Newa political leaders too doing nothing to mitigate problems faced by us and some actually engaged in exploiting there own community for various reasons, including aggrandizement of themselves.

You seem to be in favor of “ethnicity based federal restructuring” but in my considered opinion, that is the best way to lead to dissolution of Nepal as a nation. Because Newa being one ethno-linguistic-cultural group, there are 74 more of such groups and fragmenting this tiny country into 75 provinces will render this country untenable (financial and economically as well).
Besides, no ethnic group is settled in any specific geographic area and, therefore, even after declaration of, for example, Newa province, there will be a lot of Newa people living outside the province. People are also talking of special right to the specific ethnic group in a particular province and right to be part of governance in that province is to be limited to that particular group. This means Newa people living outside Newa province will be discriminated against; one for lack of special right and, further, due to restriction in joining the governance. This will set off involuntary migration from one province to other which could lead to nightmarish scenarios that people won’t even be able to envisage, including bloodshed.

You have amazingly divined current consensus as follows:
1) Do you want federal restructuring or not? - Yes,
> because 99% elected CA members support federal restructuring.

2) How many federal states are needed? - 11-15
> that is what most parties suggested, but none are sure on it yet.

3) If you are asked to have your federal state, which one would you prefer? Everybody would chose the one close to their ethnicity

I marvel at your capability to divine. But I am unable to lend credence to those numbers for following reasons:

1. I personally have met several members of CA and about 100 CA members have said that they are NOT in favor of federal restructuring. Many more of them don’t even have a clue as to what it entails. Quite a few of them think that you just add the word “federal” in the name: “federal democratic republic of Nepal.” They aren’t aware of the ramifications (including fragmentation of the country) of it.

2. Yes, it’s true that a number of political parties have come with those numbers. But most of them are doing so because they too want to look progressive as the other party. Basically, they think federalisms is fashionable and are confused as what ails this tiny nation and what will redress the ailments. Many people in the three major parties are now doing introspection and anytime soon they will start objecting to half-baked ideas that will ruin the motherland.

3. The word “everybody” you have used is rather sweeping generalization and I happen to know quite a few in all these “big” parties that tend to agree with me.

I could go on for quite a while. However, I have participated in the discussion on this topic ad nauseaum and, therefore, it will serve no purpose to repeat myself again. I am firm in my conviction, though.

Monday, October 26, 2009

नेपाली सेनाका भरण पोषण जम्मै भारतले

October 24, 2009
Mr Gyanendra Lal Pradhan
Chief Patron
Hydro Solutions
Dear Gyanendrajee

I recall you complaining a couple of times that I don’t send emails to you anymore. With the receipt of following email I felt impelled to send this email.

What you apparently have said effectively amounts to asking India to take care of Nepal’s army. I am unable to believe that you would have said so. This effectively amounts to Nepal surrendering her sovereignty to India making her a protectorate like Bhutan, not an independent and free country.

With best regards,


Ratna Sansar Shrestha

From: Amrit Nakarmi []
Sent: Friday, October 23, 2009 19:09
To: Dwarika Nath Dhungel
Subject: Re: Hamro Sena ko bharan-posan Bharat le garidiyako bhayata sena dherai baliyo hunthyo..Gyanendra Lal Pradhan..

I couldn't understand what he is saying. Is he saying from his mind?


2009/10/23 Dwarika Nath Dhungel <>

Dear Friends:

I do not know what is happening with Gaynendrajee. He has come with such comments. Does he know what is saying ? We should ask him .

All the best

Dwarika N. Dhungel

Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 02:54:34 -0700
Subject: Fwd: Hamro Sena ko bharan-posan Bharat le garidiyako bhayata sena dherai baliyo hunthyo..Gyanendra Lal Pradhan..

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Ramesh Parajuli
Date: 2009/10/22
Subject: Youtube Link

Please visit given youtube link and listen what Gyanendra Lal Pradhan is saying about nationality????

म के भन्छु भने तपाईँ राष्टियता सेनामा जोड्ने काम नगर्नुस । है, हाम्रो सेनाले न चीनसँग लडाइँ गर्न सक्छ न हाम्रो सेनाले भारतसँग लड्न सक्छ । तपार्इँ जापान हर्ेर्नुस जापानमा अमेरिकन सेना छ त्यहाँ राष्टियता गएको छैन । तपाईँ कहिल्यै पनि जापानलाई गाली गर्नु हुन्न । भूटानलाई किन गाली गर्नु हुन्छ - म भन्छु त्यो त बुद्धिमानी हो । हाम्रो नेपाली सेनाका भरण पोषण जम्मै भारतले गरिदिएको भए त आज हाम्रो सेना त धेरै बलियो हुन्थ्यो ।...ज्ञानेन्द्रलाल प्रधान

त्यसो भए त हामीले सिक्कीमीकरण गरिदिए भइहाल्यो नि

Hamro Sena ko bharan posan aja Bharat le garidiyako bhayata hamro sena ta dherai baliyo hunthyo....

Wednesday, October 21, 2009

Re: [NNSD] Prof Pradhan has agreed to make a cong. note

October 21, 2009
Dr Yubaraj Sangroula

Yubaraj jee

You have made rather sweeping comment to generalize views of those who you deem to be against federalism and who, in your opinion, “hold extreme views and interests.” You have jumped to the conclusion that "This group comprises generally of those people who had massive access to powers in the past. In the context of restructuring of the State, they are not going get the same 'haikam' (exclusive position). They are therefore against the change. They want status quo- the feudal pattern of power exercise.”

I do grant that some of those who oppose federalism do conform to your description. Not all, though. There is a multitude of examples of people who never have had “massive access to powers in the past” and nor do they aspire “the same 'haikam' (exclusive position)” in the future too (yours truly included), but don’t agree with restructuring of Nepal on ethnic lines or otherwise for genuine reasons. It’s also neither true that these people are ignorant of the meaning of federalism and nor do they negate or deny benefits that could accrue therefrom. They, however, are aware that a specific medicine in a specific dose maybe effective for a specific mammal (like an elephant), but may not be that well effective for other mammal (e.g. human beings). It could rather be a case of OD – over dose.

Although, I don’t need to come to the defense of those who have had “massive access to powers in the past” but quite a few of them have taken the stance not because “they are not going get the same 'haikam' (exclusive position)” in future. As far as I know him, Pradip Nepal, for example, is not opposing federalism in Nepal for reasons you have cited. I know of innumerable other people like him who are in disagreement out of genuine concern for the motherland.

This scribe too has made his opposition against implementation of federalism clear in his writings, including with regard to demand for declaration of autonomous Newa state, in spite of being a fiercely chauvinistic Newa himself, (which have been uploaded at for a number of valid reasons, like inter alia the benefits of restructuring will not accrue to Nepal but the likelihood of emulating the example of Yugoslavia is high. You have cited the example of Sikkim but Nepal needs to learn quite a lot from Yugoslavia, too as repenting afterwards will be meaningless and too late. In my considered opinion, there is a different set of lessons we need to learn from Sikkim which I don’t need to repeat here.

I have already agreed with you and other proponents of federalism that there are many upsides of going federal. While singing paeans in praise of federalism one must not lose sight of the fact that Nepal is such a tiny country (comparable to or smaller than a province of our neighbor) and addition of federal governance structure will further eat into fund/resources intended for the grassroots. Additionally, it costs about Rs 1 billion/year for our governance now. Even if the additional provincial governance after restructuring is to cost about only half of that, the tax payers will be burdened with additional tax liability of Rs 8 billion/year if we were to have 16 provinces. This accounts only for running expenses of the provincial governments. Huge outlays will be required to meet capital cost of establishing provincial capital. No doubt it will lead to some infrastructural development but the important question is: is Nepal in a position to afford cost of constructing, for example, buildings for various ministries, departments, etc at provincial levels when people in villages aren’t even availed water to drink and sanitation such that in this age and time people are dying of diarrhea and cholera? Being a student of economics, I doubt if additional outlay of this magnitude will be, among other things, justifiable. Moreover, we also need to internalize that provinces tend to be unitary too and there are example aplenty in Indian provinces.

Tyranny of Kathmandu has also been cited by some as a justification for provincialization of Nepal. They have opined that the people have “suffered Kathmandu's totalitarianism" for quite a while. But that too is hardly true. I even wonder if Kathmandu did ever get to rule over Nepal subsequent to its "unification" by rulers from Gorkha. Till monarchy was abolished, Nepal was ruled by erstwhile monarchs hailing from Gorkha who ruled (merely reigned most of the time) for close to 240 years and they did so, physically, from Kathmandu. They had merely shifted their capital from Gorkha to this valley. Therefore, for those many years it was, effectively, rule of Gorkha, if one is to go on this tangent on ethnic lines. Out of which for 104 years Ranas (actually Kunwars, who “elevated” themselves by choosing to call “Rana”) were the effective rulers and the Shahs were relegated to merely reigning, taking advantage of their greedy and philandering nature. I am at a loss as to whether this period should be called a totalitarianism of Gorkha or else. Tyrants they were, as it was a dictatorship of one particular family. Then there were Pandes, Thapas, Basnets, et al. I am not too sure about their root too (I am, I must admit, weak in history).

After the Rana autocracy was overthrown, we had a brief spell of "democracy" till early 60s but during that time Nepal was ruled by Biratnagar twice and many others. But Kathmandu didn’t get to rule, ever. Then we had Panchayat “democracy” which basically reinstated the Gorkha rule, till 1990. I shouldn't forget that once under Shah Monarch’s Panchayat system, Marich Man Singh did get to occupy the prime ministerial chair. I am given to understand that he was from Salyan. However, after the addition of “Shrestha” suffix in his name, it could be claimed that Kathmandu did get to become a sub-ruler at the fag end of Panchayat era. After people's movement of 1990, it was again Biratnagar ruling Nepal for over a decade out of about a dozen yeas and Dhankuta, Dadeldhura, Baitadi, etc. too did get to rule by turn for brief periods. And after the abolition of monarchy Chitwan (or rather Kaski) got to rule for 9 months and now Rautahat is taking its turn.

Therefore, all these years all those people ruled Nepal, albeit from Kathmandu. But, it is not justifiable to blame Kathmandu for the tyranny of people hailing different parts of Nepal, merely because they did so from Kathmandu. Perhaps it is the soil of Kathmandu that is to be blame; or rather the wind that blows here. People could even have blamed the water that flows here, but unfortunately only sewage flows in the rivers here instead of water due to massive migration of people from outside Kathmandu valley. Therefore, asking for fragmentation of Nepal into various provinces on this ground too is like a Nepali proverb: one wife soiling husband’s lap after becoming angry with his other wife. From this tangent the solution may lie in simply shifting the capital instead of splitting this tiny country into small provinces. In other words, if this is the only reason for going federal, then we should look somewhere else to mitigate the problem.

Centrifugal force has already set in even in ethno-cultural-linguistic community known as Newars and it is being rendered asunder. People are “discovering” that the only thing common in this community (asking for an autonomous state of its own) is language and that it is not a homogenous or cohesive group. Ethnically some Newars are descendants of Mongoloid stock while others are of Indo-Aryan; latter generally professing Hinduism (comprising four Varnas) while former are mostly Buddhist. The dissimilarity is so pervading that this year many Newars celebrated Mhapuja (and New Year) on Sunday and Bhai Tika on Monday, including yours truly, while some did so on Monday and Tuesday respectively. I am given to understand that similar things are happening in other ethno-cultural groups, too.

Exclusion of certain ethnic groups, downtrodden, dalits is said to be one of the major reasons behind the demand for this. But federalism requires geographic delineation of various provinces and none of the proposed provinces will mainly comprise of any specific excluded community. Therefore, in each such province the likelihood of such communities continuing to be excluded is still high. I agree with Deepak Khadka that what is needed is strong local governance, with an eye on development of grassroots with better backward and forward linkages. Furthermore, delineation of boundaries of various provinces and declaration of provincial capital too could result in bloodshed as evidenced by the turmoil following announcement of new universities in far west and mid western development regions.

Therefore, we should not invite unwanted trouble in the name of going federal. You have made a correct statement about “feudal pattern of power exercise.” I agree that this needs to be changed; but fragmentation of Nepal into a number of provinces will not abolish “feudal pattern of power exercise.” Something else needs to be done for the purpose.

With best regards,


Ratna Sansar Shrestha

From: [] On Behalf Of Yubaraj Sangroula
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 15:29
To: NNSD@yahoogroups.comS
ubject: Re: [NNSD] Prof Pradhan has agreed to make a cong. note

Dear all,

Thanks for taking time to discuss on very important issue- federalism. Let me have some ideas about it. I start with honesty that 'I do believe on theory that in country like Nepal, where diversity of territory as well as human beings' is widespread, the concept of federalism can be an effective instrument of 'co-existence', which in turn provides a basis for national integrity, and the national integrity is a pr-condition for economic and social transformation or development.

Almost a century ago, Herbert Spancer, who used evolutionary theory in enquiry about society and state, said that 'the evolution of human society means 'progress towards co-existence'. Those societies who believed in co-exitence were developed, and those who isolated themselves got lost their identity and every thing. Hence, the philosophical basis of restructuring is founded on 'necessity and realization' of the notion of co-existence. If some group or community goes against the notion of co-existence, it is eventually bound to ruin itself and get lost. Every human society therefore must make rules and standards, including values and norms, to promote co-existence of alll.

What we need to realise is that 'Nepal has many groups and communities' in terms of race, culture, geography and income'. One's existence calls for existence of other. There is 'group' called Brahmin, so it itself necessiates that the other is recognized by its ethnicity, vice versa. If the country had only one group, the others would not be existing. Hence, each one's exitence is determined by other's exietence. So if one discards other's existence, the co-exietence is not possible, and if the co-existence is not possible, the federalism has no meaning.

Two types of extreme views and interests are bringing the federalism into a debate or controversy in Nepal. Federalism, as such, as a concept is a nice democratic concept. Hence, it is not the federalism, but the practice or vested interest attached to the federlaism might create a problem of national disintegration. Before 1990, panchyatis vehmently opposed the idea of multi-party system. The argument was that 'multi-party' system would divide people, and weaken the nation. So is it safe to say that 'democracy' is bad in Nepal? No, democracy is still good, but the vested interests of political parties and their subsidiaries made the democracy a 'monkey game'.

Today, one category of view is that 'Federalism' will result in disintegration of the nation. This group comprises generally of those people who had massive access to powers in the past. In the context of restructuring of the State, they are not going get the same 'haikam' (exclusive position). They are thereofore against the change. They want status quo- the feudal pattern of power exercise. They want to continue same domination over women, dalit and other people put into backward condition. They want to exclusivly enjoy the powers as well as wealth. Since, they cannot go against the wave of change, to protect their hidden interest, they are blaming the federalism. They are making noise that 'it would disintegrate' the nation. These types of people do not study and do not attempt to flow according to the context.

Other category of people come from 'so-called or self-protrayed revolutionary' brand who belive on violence. They have developed a notion that 'things can be done by violence' on streets. They are dreaming themselves 'as chief ministers' of the provinces. Since they have nothing- ideology, people base, and capacity of democratic governance- they want to ensure that the change should give them exclusive powers to rule, in isolation of others. Hence, they are making noise that 'once the federal system is constituted only the majority population will have right to rule'. So they say that, Brahmin, Chettris, Newars, and others should not live in Limbuwan. In Kathmandu some are saying that 'Brahmin, Chettris or other than Newars should not live in Kathmandu', and so on. These are slefish people, who are making efforts of fishing in muddy water.

These two extremes have created a controversy about federalism. Otherwise, federalism is a good concept that vertically maintains check and balance of the state power;
a. it is a democratic concept which calls for vertical distribution of the powers.
b. it is system of governance which devolves powers to the local level, and makes people directly participate in the system of governance.
c. it is a system of controlling central power by the help of provincial government.
d. it is a system of 'distributing responsibility amongs different levels of governments'.

Are these charcters of federalism prone to disintegrate nation? No at all. The bad peoples, who do not have alligence to nation, will disintegrate the nation, irrespective of the politcial system. When Sikkim got lost its sovereignty, it was being ruled by monarchy, not federalism.

The federalism is thus based on the concept of 'co-existience' by guaranteeing four major democratic rights or values.

a. Fedralism is based on 'political pluralism'- so all kinds of ideologies are respected. The government is formed based on the trust of people, which is expressed by popular elections. Hence, no community can claim exclusive rights to rule. Any demand to exclusively rule is against basic values of democracy. The 2063 movement was waged by people to end 'autocratic system' and to establish full complete democracy. Hence, no body can calim such rights that excludes others for the benefit of one. The argument of rajnitik agradhikar (political precedence) is aginst the democarcy and the notion of co-ecxietnce.
b. Secualirm is another attribute of federalism. No province can rule people based on any religion, culture or language. The government is conducted only based on democratic ideology. Hence, no race or ethnic group can claim that it will have sole rule over people. The race and ethnicity are not the basis of political powers. Only in 13th century, people used to calim such rights.
c. Devolution of powers to people is the fundamental concept of federalism. The federal states are not created for some persons, groups or political parties' benfit, but to the benefit of people. Hence, no one can claim powers to the state based on racial or ethnic identity.
d. Econmic and social transformation of the people is the objective of the federalism. Hence, when federal constituents are created, it is not something else but the econmic and social prosperity of the people is what considered fundamental.

Right to self determination is not a right to break the nation. Some people talk of Lenin's concept. But in Soviet Union, the right to break from SU was given because SU was formed by several sovereign states. In Nepal, the federal structure is not a 'process of creating a union by several sovereign states'. It is a distribution of powers of rule by creating adminsitratives units called provnces. The right to self-determination is therefore a right to cultural and econmic development of the people. Hence, the following issues need to be understood well by all:

a. Every citizen of Nepal has right to make choice of place where he or she want to live in. No provincial government can stop people's migration according to their choice. However, every citizen must fulfill certain conditions to enjoy political rights in that province.
b. Every citizen has right to participate in the political process and the system of governance. It is not the caste but the trust of the people will make someone public official. To calim public post based on caste is a feudal concept.
c. All Nepalese are represented in internatiuonal community by the Central Government.The nationality is not going to be created by province.
d. Noby has right to disintegrate the nation. If someone advocates inconsitent to the integrated nationlity of Nepal, she/she can be prosecuted and punished.

But if restructuring is denied and group identity with rights to respect and promote culture, language and values is ignored, the nation's existence would come in question. Therefore, both who are opposing federalism and who want to use it for their exclusive political powers are threatening the integration of the nation. It is not the federalism, but these two types of people are the real culprits.

Yubaraj Sangroula, PhD

----- Original Message -----
From: Ratna Sansar Shrestha
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 10:47 AM
Subject: Re: [NNSD] Prof Pradhan has agreed to make a cong. note

Dear Pradipjee
I am glad that you have come out with your categorical and clear view with regard to Nepal's provincializatoin. I hope you party shares your view.

With best regards,

Ratna Sansar Shrestha

Thursday, October 15, 2009


October 15, 2009
Mr Pradip Nepal
Dear Pradipjee

I am glad that you have come out with your categorical and clear view with regard to Nepal's provincializatoin. I hope you party shares your view.

With best regards,


Ratna Sansar Shrestha,

From: [] On Behalf Of Pradip Nepal
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 5:49
Subject: Re: [NNSD] Prof Pradhan has agreed to make a cong. note

दीपकजी,एमालेले बुझाएको भनिएको सँघीयता सम्बन्धी प्रस्ताव पार्टीको सँस्थागतहोइन । त्यो एउटा सानो कार्यदलको प्रस्ताव हो । हामी धेरैको विमती छत्यसमा । नेपालमा प्रान्तीय सरकारको आवश्यकतै छैन । नेपालको सँघीय सँरचनाभनेको समुदायको शासन हो ।अर्को बिहीबार मेरो गोरखापत्रमा छापिने लेख समय भएमा पढिदिनु हुन अनुरोध गर्दछु ।

On 10/14/09, nepe nepe <> wrote:

Dear friends,

I feel I won the Nobel prize. I am that happy. Let me share> my story.

Some of you with whom I had a chance to share my view on federalism for Nepal might know that I have been advocating for a federalism based on the STRONGER LOCAL GOVERNMENT and WEAKER/NOMINAL PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT and I had used the success story of the FUGs (Forest User Groups) as my rationalization.

While I was encouraged by the positive view of some of us, I was deeply discouraged by my failure to influence those who were already in bandwagon of STRONG PROVINCIAL or ETHNIC FEDERALISM. I was disappointed with the PROVINCIAL model UML recently submitted to Constituent Assembly.

Anyway, Elinor’s and Keshav Raj’s works and the recognition it has received now has brought my dead spirit to life. And I am encouraged to continue with my advocacy.

If you would to receive the copy of my presentation, let me know. Is it okay, if I send it to this group ?

Deepak Khadka
New Jersey, USA

Federalism and internal migration

Ratna Sansar Shrestha

Looks like people are pushing the debate a little too far. As far as I am concerned there is no scope for a question like "What happens if non-Newars refuse to leave Kathmandu". Any restructuring of the state should not require anyone to leave her/his place of residence/vocation involuntarily. One of the prime concern of mine behind this ill-advised so called restructuring is this involuntarily emigrationthat could snowball into even ethnic cleansing. Due to the misadventure on the part of some people, who are smart by half, this trend has already started (even before restructuring) in Terai. People have already emigrated from Tarai after disposing off their landed property at distress value (while real estate prices are skyrocketing everywhere else). What is urgent is to nip the trend in the bud.

As I have reiterated time and again that in the first place, a country as small as an Indian province should not be further fragmented into a number of states. To spin off various ethnic provinces in this country is inviting disaster. I will end this discourse from my side (after this email I will not join the discussion on this particular issue) by firmly saying that we in Nepal cannot afford to partition this country into over 75 odd ethnic provinces by asking for an ethnic province of our own. Asking for an ethnic province for ourselves while refusing the same to other ethnic communities will not project Newa identify in the good light. Actually if we continue to take this stance then we could be projecting a rather dismal image of ourselves. I propose that we should not do so and we should work to ensure that we don't continue to afford opportunity to other ethnic communities to think that we are intellectually retarded.

Tuesday, October 13, 2009

Re: What others should do... (philanthropic acvities)

September 21, 2009
Mr Rabindra Mishra
Speaking through Action &
BBC Radio (Nepal)

Dear Rabindrajee

No problem. In this race of existentialism all of us have to keep busy; especially for the likes of us who have abhorrence to easy and fast money.

It will be my pleasure for you to mention about my desire in your article at appropriate time; however, I hope we could have a discussion before you actually disseminate it.

As putting in place a water tight mechanism to start the inheritance tax is mandatory you are in an ideal position to at least initiate a discourse about it by way of taking the first step.Feel free to call on us if you need any assistance from us.

With best regards,


Ratna Sansar Shrestha

From: Rabindra Mishra []
Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 10:59
To: Ratna Sansar Shrestha
Cc: Dipak Gyawali
Subject: Re: What others should do...

Dear Ratna Sansar Jee,

My sincere apologies for the delayed response. As I was occupied with several things, I could not respond to you in time.

Re Dipak Jee: I think you interpreted my mail wrongly but thank you so much for sharing your thoughts on philanthropy. There is no harm in putting your name on the institution that you establish. The most important thing is to do things. That will only inspire others to follow suit. Positive actions always create positive vibes.

I would be very keen to mention your desire in my article at an appropriate time. Hope that is okay. I also agree with you regarding the inheritance tax. I would prefer a strict one.

Best regards

From: Ratna Sansar Shrestha []
Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 11:18
To: Rabindra Mishra
Cc: Madhukar; Arup Rajouria; Ajaya Dixit;; Yubaraj Ghimire
Subject: Re: What others should do...

Dear Rabindrajee

I too read your article with interest and almost instantaneously knew that a sharp rejoinder as such will soon be forthcoming. But I am both surprised and shocked that you have thrown in towel so quickly and in such a manner. What Dipakjee is saying has its own merit in the backdrop of what was meted out to KingG by the "loktantriksters" - to borrow a term from him. But I firmly do believe that you too have a valid point in terms of what is the best use of one's property -acquired by means fair and/or foul - not just in the case of KingG but all and sundry too.

Monday, October 12, 2009

JCWR meeting and Pancheshwar

October 11, 2009
Mr Shankar Koirala
Ministry of Energy, GoN
Dear Shankarjee

I was troubled after reading the news today wherein it was reported that Nepal will benefit by Rs 45.88 billion from Pancheshwar and it was also reported that you were going to finalize various issues related to this project during coming JCWR meeting. My financial analysis shows that this number is bunkum and I have sent following email to Mr DB Singh who has been credited with coming up with this illusionary number. But he has not dared to accept my challenge. I have similarly (and publicly) challenged him on television and radio programs and also by writing articles but he has not necessary mustered courage to pick up the gauntlet.

Please note that trying to mislead people, politicos and bureaucrats of Nepal as such amounts to high treason. I trust that you will not be party to this, by endorsing the fictitious amount. Because, if you become instrumental in advancing the project development based on this illusive number, you too will become an accomplice in the high treason. I am sure you don’t’ want to be recorded in the history of Nepal (related to water resource) as one of the traitors.

I pray the all mighty that S/he (as I don’t know whether the almighty is a male or female) give you strength, wisdom and vision to do what is good for this country. Or at least give you capability to ensure that no harm is done to our motherland by lending credence such fictitious numbers. More importantly, I also pray that S/he give you ability to discern what is correct and what is not.

Please feel free to contact me if you need any clarification. Unlike some other people, I am very willing and able to defend my analysis.

With best regards,


Ratna Sansar Shrestha

From: Ratna Sansar Shrestha []
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 11:36
To: D B SinghCc:
Subject: Mirage of illusionary benefit of Rs 45 billion from Pancheshwar Project

Mr DB Singh
Project Chief
Pancheshwar Project

Dear DBjee

Federalism and polarization

Ratna Sansar Shrestha

I too want to ensure that the interest of Newa people is not undermined. But I am not in favor of getting them to meet this demand of ours at the risk of fragmentation of this country on ethnic lines. If we want our demand on ethnic lines to be met, then we will lose moral authority to refuse the same demand from other ethnic groups which number about 75. This is a very slippery path that could snowball into emulating the path taken by Yugoslavia. For me financial/economic viability of each province is equally important and the people of this country, in my opinion, should not be further burdened by additional taxes to support various provincial governmental entities. Division of this tiny country (equal to or smaller than an Indian province) into a huge number of provinces will not be sustainable.

I agree that we need to work on finding a resolution that will result in a win-win-win situation.

Friday, October 9, 2009

Re: Federalism is fraught with potential failure

September 6, 2009
Mr Ambika Adhikari
Dear Ambikajee

Thanks for your encouraging words. You are right. I did sit before my laptop to write this article hoping to open the eyes of people. This article is somewhat based on the talk I delivered at GAA forum last Thursday (other speakers on the panel were Dr Krishna Bhattachan, Jainendra Jivan and Dr Shankar Sharma).

I do take trouble to write articles, hoping that my writings will benefit the politicos, besides others; expecting at least that a discourse will be triggered. However, I am disappointed that the moderators of NNSD have been suppressing my articles by not circulating to its members since early January 2009 (except for an article on Pancheshwar, circulated on 18th August after I expressly talked to Arjun Dhakal on the phone enquiring as to why was I being blacked out).

In the case of following article also I talked to Arjun jee before sending it for circulation and he sort of promised to circulate it but …

I do realize that it is their “system” and they are free to make policy decisions but I strongly feel that such policies should be at least prudent. I wonder if they will circulate this email.

With best regards,


Ratna Sansar Shrestha,

From: [] On Behalf Of Ambika Adhikari
Sent: Saturday, September 5, 2009 22:16
Subject: Re: Article in Nepali Times # 467

Dear Ratna Sansar jee

Congratulations on the very timely and thoughtful article. I am certain politicians and leaders and Nepal will benefit from your insights and analysis in this piece.

With regards.

Ambika Prasad Adhikari, Dr. Des., AICP
Senior Planner, SRPMIC, Scottsdale, and
Faculty Associate, Arizona State University
Phoenix, Arizona, USA

To: ;
Subject: Fw: Article in Nepali Times # 467D
ate: Fri, 4 Sep 2009 13:27:49 +0545
Jumping the gun

Federalism is fraught with potential failure

Thursday, October 8, 2009

RE: NESOCA Mail #3656] Re: Federalism

October 8, 2009
Mr Kul Chandra Gautam
Asst Secretary General, UN

Dear Kul Chandrajee

Thanks for the encouraging words. If everybody was to try to be politically correct and fail to speak up that the emperor is naked, then it will be too late before people wake up to it. As I didn't feel like sitting idly by while people are proposing to tear our motherland apart and, therefore, I have opened a front even with my own kith and kin (besides a number of other fronts that I am "actively engaged in"). Lokendra Bista (UCPNM leader gaining fame after bringing a gun in the parliamentary committee meeting) once asked me if I didn't fear. I, earnestly, responded to him that "living with fear is like dying bit by bit and I prefer to die once not everytime I felt fear."

We have a huge stake in terms of potential disintegration of our motherland subsequent to fragmentation of it on ethnic lines. More people need to be engaged in this discourse to open eyes of the people who believe in resetting the button to the medieval ages. This particular person (Tribhuvan Tuladhar) has dared to speak up in so many words, but most of those believing in ethnic federalism also do believe in the same, may be at subconscious or unconscious levels of their collective mind.

With best regards,
Ratna Sansar Shrestha
From: Kul Gautam []
Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 14:52
To: ratna sansar shrestha
Subject: RE: NESOCA Mail #3656] Re: Federalism

dear ratna sansarji,
i admire your forthrightness and objectivity. few others dare to be politically incorrect in these highly charged times.i find so much of the debate on federalism of the ethnic kind completely back-ward looking. people seem to be solely motivated by the desire to undo real or perceived injustices of the past, rather than outline how their proposed system will help build a bright future in thee globalizing world of the 21st century. in current nepalese terminology i find most advocates of ethnic federalism really pratigami (backward looking) rather than agragami (forward-looking).
setting the clock back to 1768 to create a new and just society reminds me of the Khmers Rouges attempt to set the clock back to "Year Zero" in cambodia...and look where it took that country. as they say, two wrongs do not make a right.
best regards,
kul g
Kul Chandra Gautam
To: ;
Subject: Fw: NESOCA Mail #3656] Re: Federalism
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 11:28:44 +0545
Tribhuvan ju

I was both shocked and stunned after reading your email. I read it all over again to ensure that you were asking to “reset the button to 1768 and see the country of the region as it was before the conquest” merely in jest. But you were not even saying this just sarcastically.

Wednesday, October 7, 2009

Federalism - reset the button to 1768

Ratna Sansar Shrestha

I am both shocked and stunned after learning that there are people who are asking to “reset the button to 1768 and see the country of the region as it was before the conquest”. Even at the risk of being called a “supporter of status quo” I have to firmly disagree with such a proposal for a number of reasons.

After resetting the button pursuant to the proposal we will have 3 separate “nations/countries” in Kathmandu valley ruled by 3 “monarchs”. Similarly, Baise and Chaubise kingdoms in the west will get reinstated. Moreover, monarchies in Palpa, Jumla, Makwanpur, etc. will also get revived. Further, in the east too we will have one too many kings or their equivalent and we will end up with over 100 kingdoms in this tiny country. In this age and time, after just having succeeded in getting rid of one king (who liked to call himself “king of kings”), they are proposing to put hundreds of crackpots back in various thrones. In those times, lacking infrastructure, transport (except for walking on foot or riding horse/ass/mule for the feudalists) and communication, quite a few of those kingdoms (most were actually fiefdoms) were actually viable. But in this age and time it will be surprising if any of these reinstated kingdoms will be viable. I wonder if they are really serious with this proposal.

At one level they are proposing to go back in the history which is not possible, yet (for lack of a time machine which exists only in the movie world!). At another level, excepting a few (rarely, though!), most of the kings were autocrats and had dictatorial tendencies and they are proposing to bring them back. I seriously doubt if the suggestion is practical/pragmatic.

Whether one likes it or not, between 1768 and now a lot of things have changed. Just from demographic perspective, a lot of people have emigrated from this valley and many more have immigrated into this valley. This is a reality that nobody will be able to negate; excepting if one is to go on a denial mode. The pour scorn over the “new settlers” but if one is to go back into geographic history, everyone and each person in this valley are “new settlers” as it was a lake in the ancient times. It’s just a matter of date used as the threshold. I myself am a highly chauvinistic Newar settled here since a long time back but my own ancestors migrated here via Simraungarh in 14th century. Therefore, it is not prudent to talk in this vein which could disturb ethnic/communal harmony. Some people are already emigrating from Terai after selling their property at distress value as communal harmony was similarly disturbed in those areas. It is not wise to try to set of similar trend in Kathmandu. People need to remember that Newars are not limited to this valley. Even from selfish perspective, there are Newars almost everywhere in this country who too will be vulnerable to such inflammatory attitude from other ethnic communities as well. Please do remember that it’s just matter of reciprocity.

On the one hand they want to do away with the feudalistic system but at the same time by resetting the button to 1768 they want to have those feudalistic despots back. It sounds rather anachronistic as well paradoxical. Feudalism will not be uprooted by fragmenting this tiny country into many “kingdom/fiefdoms”. We need to undertake another set of measures to do so. You have said that “blatant violation of basic human rights and dignity has to be repudiated again” and have also referred to the “realm of contemporary human rationale” in the same breadth. Restoring tiny kingdoms existing prior to 1768 is actually beyond the “realm of contemporary human rationale” and “blatant violation of basic human rights and dignity” too cannot be abolished by traveling back in time to 1768. Human rights and dignity can be established by ensuring fundamental rights to all; irrespective or caste, creed, sex, ethnicities, etc.

If human right of a particular ethno-linguistic-cultural group is violated, the human right of women in that group gets doubly violated. Same is the case of women of dalits and other downtrodden communities. However, the resolution of this problem doesn’t lie in having a “Swayatta Rajya” for women. It is true that Newars have been deprived from many innate rights but this is not an isolated example. There are many ethno-linguistic-cultural groups who share same fate with us. But the resolution of this problem cannot be secured by declaring separate states for each of them with autonomy and right to self determination, literally traveling the same path trodden by Yugoslavia that exists only history.

They go on to say that “These artificial means of the recent will not hold water in the court of International Law and in the world public opinion.” I am student of law (besides being a chartered accountant and a management professional) and have been practicing as a legal professional for more than 3 decades and I am not aware of any provision in the international law that will approve of what you are proposing or will support the demand of “Newah Swayatta Rajya”.

Tuesday, October 6, 2009

Vijaya Dashami 2066

Ratna Sansar Shrestha

The practice within your family has evolved with time and due to necessity into a convention which brings together all 5 brothers together. I am glad you guys are keeping it up. In my case too something similar happens. Due to space constraint (and various other reasons) we three brothers and our parents (who live in a house next door to mine) live apart from each other (one brother is abroad in New Zealand along with his family and youngest one is in Finland alone). However, all of us (except for ones abroad) assemble at our parents’ place to celebrate Kuchhibhoya through till Swan Salegu during Mohani. We organize Nakhatya also together. Same thing happens during other festivals too I, unfortunately, know of some brothers, who don’t come together even for Mohani after having been separated.

Monday, October 5, 2009

Federalism - revisited

Ratna Sansar Shrestha

People want to be free from khas domination and protect the NEWAH identity in order to agree with my view
Agreeing with me
No two people agree with each other on the gamut of issues. On certain issues two of us can have similar view (may not necessarily be the same, though) and on certain issues our beliefs can be diametrically opposite of each other. Even at my home there are instances and times when I don’t see eye to eye with my parents as well as my siblings and similarly on certain issues my children’s ideas are very different from that of mine. Therefore, it is neither necessary for all of us to agree completely all the time, nor can it be expected as such, excepting situations and times when people have herd mentatlity which is not that healthy. Therefore, I propose that on this issue we agree to disagree and let’s cherish the diversity in our thinking, thought processes and beliefs.

Moreover, it’s not the case of me being an Ekla Brihaspati. There are many Newars who are in agreement with me, including Khopami, as you yourself have pointed out. What we need to strive for is to reach a consensus that is agreeable to the most and, most importantly, is beneficial for our motherland; might nightmare is Nepal emulating Yugoslavia after creating provinces on ethno-linguistic lines.

Identity as NEWAH
I fully agree with you that we need to protect, preserve and conserve our identity as Newa. Each of us needs to endeavor to do as such. However, we seem to disagree as to how we can achieve it. In my email of 25th September to Naresh Shakya I have made it clear that in the ethno-cultural-linguistic group known as Newa there is diversity in the sense that there are Hindu Newars and Buddhist Newars. Further, even amongst Hindu Newars there exists various Varnas. I am sure that same must be true amongst Buddhist Newars. Therefore, accordingly, there exist diverse cultural practices amongst Newa people (for instance Newars in Khokana neither celebrate Mohani nor Dashain). Meaning we have rich and different cultures.

Ethnically too Newa people are not homogenous. There are descendants from Indo-Aryan lineage and so are from mongoloid. My own ancestors are known to have migrated north into this valley via Simraungarh in 14th century. Basically this valley has been like a melting pot; whoever came here adopted the language and culture of this place, including Lichchabis. Gorkha people too got somewhat assimilated in this valley after Shah kings conquered it, except for language, which they didn’t adopt. Therefore, only commonality amongst Newa people is the language (I am ignoring various dialects of Nepal Bhasa here, although I have difficulty understanding what a Newa from Dolakha is saying even when s/he professes to speak in Nepal Bhasa).

What bothers my conscience is: if we were to ask for an autonomous state on the basis of our language, then we will have to concede to the demand of other linguistic groups too for separate autonomous states on the basis of same criterion. I have read an article written by Noble Kishore Rai, in Kantipur on 2nd October, who advocated restructuring Nepal on the lines of various languages and he also mentioned that there are between 92 to 140 languages in Nepal. That means a small country like Nepal will have to be fragmented into 100 odd autonomous states. This is a lot more than what various parties have proposed (I think Maoists have asked for 13 provinces, UML 15 and congress 16). I know of some Newa people who either don’t want to have to deal with such a thing or opine that other ethno-linguistic groups don’t deserve autonomy. This may amount to behaving like an ostrich. Therefore, I think we, the Newa people, need to decide whether the restructuring should happen on linguistic lines or not. If we go for the former, then we have to be prepared to have 100 odd autonomous states with right to self determination. I think Newa people need to do a soul searching on this issue with regard to whether some thing as such will be good for such a tiny country. I propose that we deal with the issue realistically.

If we were to demand an ethnic federal state for ourselves then we will need to be prepared to have about 75 states on ethnic lines. We could even ask for Newa autonomous state (on ethnic lines) and also selfishly take the stand that other ethnic communities be not granted statehood on ethnic lines. But this will hardly be possible. In other words, I may be willing to join you all in asking for Newa autonomous state if it could be guaranteed that we will not fragment this tiny country into over 75 ethnic states. However, this approach too is not tenable.

At the risk of sounding paradoxical, I believe that we need to ensure that Nepal doesn’t disintegrate while trying to preserve our Newa identity. If people from other communities were to read these lines it is certain that they will call me selfish, self-centered and self-serving. I am prepared to accept being called as such because I know enough to understand that my Newa identity has very little chance of survival if Nepal doesn’t survive. One doesn’t need to go far to see it. A look at things in Darjeeling should suffice.

Khas domination
I will begin by agreeing generally with you that I am unable to stand domination of no one, whether Khas or even Newa. I have been reading a lot of correspondence on this subject including on Bahunbad. It’s time we conduct an introspection on this subject too when we talk about this. I have already mentioned that amongst Hindu Newa there are various Varnas including Bahuns, Rajopadhyas being a good example. Similarly, in the past there have been inter-marriages (arranged ones, not “love marriages”) between Newars in Kathmandu valley with Thakuris and Sens from Palpa, Makawanpur etc. (even with people from Coochbihar in Northeast India). I am sure that people will not deny this historical fact. All this was deemed natural in the past because denizens of this valley, as I have mentioned above, actually migrated from outside and got assimilated here but their cultural and family ties with people outside the valley got continuity. Therefore, I have trouble identifying who actually is a Khas.

Moreover, I am not trying to defend Khas people, though. Given an opportunity to be part of the governance, Newars too haven’t been different. Newars in the governance have unfailingly been responsible for bad governance, exploiting general public, resorting to corrupt practices and nepotism. Same is true of people in governance, irrespective of their ethnicity. Therefore, it’s not the case of a particular ethnic group dominating others. Rather, the governance system was and is at fault. The problem that you have correctly identified can be solved by improving governance system; from the perspective of policy and practice, devolution of right to the grassroots and by ensuring that every rupee intended for the grassroots actually gets spent there, not eaten up by the medium. Once we have federal structure we will be adding one level of provincial governance which too will eat up what is intended for the grassroots.

India has a federal structure sort of on ethnic or linguistic lines. But domination of a particular group still exists there. Meaning the problem that we are trying to address by restructuring Nepal on ethno-linguistic lines exists in various provinces in India due to, basically, bad governance.

Hindu & Buddhist

Ratna Sansar Shrestha

One, all Newars are not Hindus; nor is Buddhism a part of Hinduism. It amounts to denial of diversity within the ethno-cultural-linguist group that is famed over the world as Newars. Instead of denying the diversity we should learn to be proud of it. Newa history and culture is very rich because of this very diversity.

Two, it is good idea to try to abolish what you have called the stratification within Newars. I fully support it. But people will have to remember that with the abolition of it, the diversity too will be eliminated. I am unsure whether it will be good or not so good for Newa identity. Further, such things have the tendency to change over time gradually and generally it is not possible to change by just wishing it away. Just look at communist in general and Maoists in particular, who are supposed to be atheists but most of them have failed to change. It is interesting (depending on the perspective, may be distressing) to note that quite a few of Maoists leaders have converted to Christianity instead.

However, it is indeed heartwarming to note that compared to times when I was a kid, Newars have opened up more than other people in terms of dehumanizing practices of untouchability.

Friday, October 2, 2009

Dashain vs Mohani Nakha

September 25, 2009
Mr Naresh Shakya
Manka Khala

I partly agree with you. Even within ethno-cultural linguistic community (indigenous nationality) known as Newa there is diversity in the way Mohani Nakha is celebrated. There are Hindu Newa and Buddhist Newa and the way of celebrating Mohani is very different among these two diverse groups. Further, even amongst Hindu Newa there exists diverse ways of celebrating it in tandem with the existence of various Varnas within Hindu Newa. I am sure same must be true amongst Buddhist Newa. It is noteworthy here that Newa in Khokana neither celebrate Mohani nor Dashain. I am sure that we have many more unique practices even amongst other Newa people.

Besides, our ethno-cultural linguistic group is famous for its religious tolerance such that it is not surprising that Hindu Newa worship Buddhist deities with equal (or more) fervor (if that is at all possible) and vice versa (in Sri Lanka Hindus and Buddhists are at each others’ throats). Essentially the beauty lies in this diversity within the ethno-cultural linguistic group known as Newa identity. Therefore, during our Mohani festival some Newa will be worshipping various manifestations of Goddess Kali while others will be worshipping entirely different set of gods and goddesses. We should all strive to preserve such diversity which is famed as New culture.

I agree with you that for non-Newa people Dashain is not as culturally rich as for us. For them it is just about getting Tika on Vijaya Dashami (continue to go get it on following days if unable to finish making the rounds on that particular day). They don’t have anything else to do during rest of the Dashain. What distresses me are two things. One, this “tika” culture is metamorphosing into chakari culture – going to get tika to curry favor. Two, although for quite a chunk of Newa people this isn’t a culture but they have adopted it and will be busy currying favor by way of going to get tika (I an not referring to those Newa people for whom going to get tika is a culture).

My family joins me in wishing happy Mohani to you and your family and all Newa people here and abroad.

With best regards,


Ratna Sansar Shrestha,

From: [] On Behalf Of naresh shakya
Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 9:33
Subject: [NESOCA Mail #3507] Re: Happy Vijaya Dashami 2066

Dear Sirs

Please note Mohani Nakha we observe is different from Bijaya Dasami or Dasai. Newars identity is on Mohani Nakha.

We newars observers Mohani Nakha to strengthen oneself and gain courage to fight against all evils where as Dasai is observed to get blessing from goddess . Mohani Nakha is getting obliged to all good deeds done to mankind (tangible/intangible )which helped people to observe life easier, that is why we newars worship all the tools that we use to earn our livelihood. So Mohani is our traditional and unique festive.

So we should know the difference and stick with our own identity.

Mohani Nakha ya vintuna. HAPPY MOHANI NAKHA


Thursday, October 1, 2009

FW: हिंसा अन्त्य अभियान शुभारम्भको निम्तो

September 16, 2009

Mr Kanak Dixit
Himal Khabarpatrika


After learning about the program yesterday from Kul Chandrajee, I too attended it. And I am glad that I could attend it. I couldn’t agree more that the violence has to stop, not only SOON but RIGHT NOW.

Incidentally, before the program started your dad came to me (I was in third row and he was in first) and said that he knows me very well, although I may not know him and added that he was a “fan” of mine. That got me very embarrassed. He added that he is appreciative of the stance I have taken. I said that it is very important that nationalist Nepali take that stance as it is a stance against the violence to be perpetrated against our motherland.

I am sending this email to you to discuss about this violence against our motherland as a nation that is being proposed and further violence that it will beget. I am terrified by the so called restructuring of Nepal into provinces and the high likelihood of it triggering a series of further violence.

In preparing the attached paper for presentation to about 35 members of Constituent Assembly (I made the presentation on last Sunday), it suddenly struck me that Nepal going federal will incite more violence at least on two counts. One, to decide which city is to become provincial capital. Two, due to dispute related to overlapping boundaries of the various provinces in delineating provincial borders. You would remember that there was a lot of violence due to question related to where the university should be located as soon as new universities were announced for far western and mid western regions by Prachanda government.

During the course of my presentation to the CA members, people like Dina Nath Sharma, Pasang Sherpa, Buddha Sayami adopted the cavalier attitude that restructuring of Nepal is a must, irrespective of whether it will kill some people (I could almost read their mind using the word "expendable"). Bhim Acharya commiserated with me and agreed with the issues I raised. Gagan Thapa, agreeing with me, expressed the collective helplessness that notwithstanding the serious adverse ramifications of going federal, it couldn't be stopped. Having articulated my reservation against splitting this tiny country into many smaller provinces, as it would impede optimal exploitation of our water resource, I had proposed limited provinces on the basis of major river basins, like Koshi, Gandaki, Karnali, etc. Gagan Thapa agreed with my logic but added that it is inevitable that we will have at least 8 provinces. This has disturbed me a lot. I read in the news today that UML is proposing 15 provinces. (I couldn't help recalling that a huge neighbor of ours like India too has only 28 states and 7 union territories.)

What disturbed me most was the fact that most of the participants were completely bewildered by the proposal. They were not aware of the serious ramifications and the matter hasn't been discussed thoroughly with them. When the CA members, that is reposed with the responsibility to write the constitution are like this, I am not surprised that the general public don't have a clue about the whole thing.

Therefore, I wonder if there is a way to raise people's awareness about the serious adverse ramifications of Nepal going federal. This too will go a long way in preempting potential imminent violence.

With best regards,


Ratna Sansar Shrestha

----- Original Message -----
From: Ratna Sansar Shrestha
To: Kul Chandra Gautam
Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2009 10:03
Subject: RE: FW: हिंसा अन्त्य अभियान शुभारम्भको निम्तो

Thanks. But I got to listen to you and others live. I just had to get excused from the other program a little early and I reached Nachghar with plenty of time to spare as a few members of the "campaign" were delayed due to traffic jam.

With best regards,
Ratna Sansar Shrestha
From: Kul Gautam []
Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2009 3:26
To: ratna sansar shrestha
Subject: RE: हिंसा अन्त्य अभियान शुभारम्भको निम्तो

herewith my remarks at the event
kul g
Kul Chandra Gautam
Subject: RE: हिंसा अन्त्य अभियान शुभारम्भको निम्तो
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2009 06:25:54 +0545
Dear Kul Chandrajee

Thanks for the info. I will to be there if the program supposed to begin at 2 pm starts on time and ends in time such that I could travel back from Gaushala to Jamal by 4 pm. Securities board is organizing an interaction program on water resource to understand problems involved in mobilizing small savings (from general public) for the exploitation of water resource.

With best regards
From: Kul Gautam []
Sent: Saturday, September 12, 2009 18:42
Subject: FW: हिंसा अन्त्य अभियान शुभारम्भको निम्तो

हिंसा को प्रयोग ले नेपाली को सामाजिक, राजनीतिक, आर्थिक, पारिवारिक तथा मानसिक स्थितीलाई अस्तव्यस्त पारेको छ । शान्ति र सहिष्णुताको मार्गमा र्फकन मुलुकभरका नागरिक आ-आफ्नो तरिकाले अग्रसर हुन ढिलो भैसकेको छ । विभिन्न खालको हिंसाको श्रृङखलालाई पछाडी पार्दै स्थिरता र प्रगतिको बाटोमा अघि बढौँ । हिंसा अन्त्य अभियानको शुभारम्भमा यहाँलाई स्वागत छ । यही भदौ ३० गते साँझ राष्ट्रिय नाचघर, जमल जाउँ,हिंसा अन्त्य अभियानको शुभारम्भ कार्यक्रममा सहभागी बनौँ।हिंसा अन्त्य अभियानका सदस्यहरुको तर्फबाट अमृत गुरुङ, आनी छोईङ डोल्मा, सि.के. लाल, कुलचन्द्र गौतम, मदनकृष्ण श्रेष्ठ र हरिवंश आचार्य, राजेश हमाल
थप जानकारीको लागि अनुलग्न फाईलमा हेर्नु होला । धन्यवाद ।