JB Pun has rightly pointed out ('Race for identity' #318) that ethnic autonomy, if taken seriously, would only sow 'the seeds of future conflict by creating new exclusions'. Due to centuries of east-bound migration, most individual settlements in the country are ethnically mixed, with members of a large plurality of caste and ethnic groups eking out an existence based on mutual cooperation. Given such a situation, any plea for so-called ethnic autonomy, whose operational structure apparently continues to elude the 'ethnic' leaders themselves, must also take into account the identity of the majority of the caste Nepalis who also comprise a vast proportion of the poor and deprived. The new constitution (including the proposed interim one) should, instead, provide for a highly decentralised system of governance under which individual Nepalis, irrespective of their caste, ethnic, or gender status, would be inalienably and substantively empowered to participate in making decisions for their own socio-economic advancement. The success of community forestry in Nepal provides a good indication as to what all is attainable through devolution.

Bihari Krishna Shrestha,
Chakupat