Lok Raj Baral, Nepal – Nation-State in the Wilderness: Managing State, Democracy and Geopolitics (New Delhi: Sage Publications, 2012)

Nepal is at very crucial stage of its history as a “nation state.” While every state by definition is a political and a geographical unit; the nation is a composite cultural and/or ethnic creature. This creature can be defined as group of people who are bound together into a single entity, through history, customs, value, language, culture, tradition, art and religion.

On the contrary, a state is just a patch of land with a sovereign government. As a politico-judicial entity, which is identified by its sovereign rights, a political state constrains the intrusion of outsiders in its internal affairs. When ‘nation’ and ‘state’ coincide, they form a “nation state” which not only assumes a collective political existence of the people living together with an official language(s), a system of law, a currency system, and a bureaucracy to order elements of society, but also presupposes the diversity of unified national identity.

As a nation state, Nepal has its own realities. The new book of Professor Lok Raj Baral Nepal: Nation-State in the Wilderness is a comprehensive attempt to explore these realities in the background of its history and the efforts towards democratic consolidation. Several weeks of mass protests in April 2006 followed by several months of peace negotiations between the underground Communist Party of Nepal (Maoists), the crisis government dealing with the so called ‘people’s war’ and Indian agencies, often acting behind the scene, overturned the evolutionary process of change in Nepal. It also set aside the course of the policy of national reconciliation – the basis of Nepal’s political development so far. This is a significant aspect of recent political change in Nepal. Baral has tried to explain this change on the basis of his characteristic vantage point.

The new process culminated in (a) a November 2006 peace accord, (b) the promulgation of an interim constitution and (c) the elections to the constituent assembly. The assembly elected to draft and adopt a new constitution for the country was expected to chart out a new democratic vision for Nepal and its system of government. Baral explores the contours of the nation state in the wilderness covering a wide spectrum of important issues around these changes, their antecedents, future course and beyond.

There are six chapters in the book. As an introductory chapter, Chapter I is devoted to trace out the parameters of Nepali politics: the thrust of Nepalese people for liberal democracy, ambiguities in the change process, political disjuncture or break with the tradition and the 2006 mass movement. Here, he also describes what he considers the rediscovery of a nation state, values of secularism, the role of fractured parties, and external influence in the politics of Nepal. Chapter II is a precise effort to revisit Nepali state. Baral explains the wars Nepal fought in the history, the treaties it signed and signposts of Nepal’s diplomacy in Chapter III. Then follow a sizable chapter on the issues of democracy, peace and development. In Chapter V, Baral explains Nepal vis a vis the modern world, focusing on the geopolitics. Here, Baral discusses Nepal in the context of its immediate neighborhood. The last chapter is an analysis for the future.

In his preface to the book, Baral maintains that the work is the product of his “long observation and study of Nepali state, politics, political elites, and their orientation.” He has described the finding of his research as the “sum and substance of [his] long academic career.” Although he does not clearly specify the objective of the book, he has unmistakably “tried to make a unified theme by knitting together the origin, growth and limitations of the modern Nepali state, people’s role that came by way of their desire for democracy and the active geo-politics.” The author acknowledges that the book “does not provide any definite clue to the future of Nepali state and democracy. Yet it gives a perspective on the unfolding scenario and their consequences.”

Mapping the overall situation of Nepal, and its future challenges, the concluding paragraph of Baral’s last chapter has the following direction: “Paradoxically the state [in Nepal] has not reached the terminal point [despite the vicissitudes that he has explained]; neither has it given us any promising picture for the future. Democracy is in peril, so is the vitality of the state. Prolonged transition and polarized and uncertain politics may be more alarming when foreign powers start showing their active presence than ever before and when the political and other elites become too weak to manage them. Political parties that take position for and against any country themselves would make these powers active and interventionist as the recent developments have demonstrated.” The reference apparently hints at India, and responses of Nepal’s major political parties on its ghastly meddling in Nepal, its internal affairs and external relations.

What has not been covered in the book of Baral is the sad reality that all these efforts in the post 2006 scenario and the actors who led the process failed. Had Baral waited by any chance for another couple of months to publish his work, he would have been able to cover the 27 May 2012 demise of the constituent assembly without accomplishing its task, and the nature of disaster that the country is to manage in the upcoming months. By all these machinations, India has established itself in Nepal, setting aside the factors of stability and sustainable political development. This is the factor that will continue to trigger off quiet responses from other quarters as well.

If this particular perspective is not ignored, many of Baral’s arguments on monarchy, the process of national unification and evolution of Nepal’s politics, the challenges of national reconciliation and nation building, and the role of neighboring countries might entail alternative explanations. As Nepal moves into the second decade of the 21st century, a new power rivalry is taking shape between India and China. It does not seem to be possible to explain the “nation-state in the wilderness” without giving credence to the fact that Nepal is in the range of high-tech geopolitics. The context of the collapse of distance brought about by the advance of military technology must not be minimized. For an average Nepalese, what ails more is Nepal’s national security. The treatment given by Professor Baral to this aspect of his theme is not adequate.

Yet the book Nepal – Nation-State in the Wilderness is a significant addition in the library of political science of contemporary Nepal. It is a ‘must read” book for the political analysts of Nepal and abroad who want to pursue his themes more.

Francis Buchanan Hamilton, An Account of the Kingdom of Nepal and the Territories Annexed to this Dominion by the House of Gorkha (Edinburgh: Longman, 1819)

The book of Francis Buchanan Hamilton An Account of the Kingdom of Nepal is the second book in English ever written on Nepal’s history. The first is the 1811 book by Colonel William Kirkpatrick, which was worked on before 10 November 1793.

Hamilton spent fourteen months in the country, during 1802-1803, mostly in the vicinity of Kathmandu, as a low profile visitor of the British government. He spent another two years along Nepal’s tarai frontier. Apparently, the intention behind his mission was to report to the authority back home about his findings on the state and people of this Himalayan country. The book of Hamilton is the only account which discusses the entire country of Nepal and does not limit itself to the Kathmandu Valley or its vicinity.

As a foreign visitor, Hamilton “employed to obtain information, so far as [he] prudently could, without alarming a jealous government or giving offence to the Resident, under whose authority [he] was acting.” He had some support of Colonel Crawford, at that time surveyor-general in Bengal, with several drawings of Nepal and valuable geographical surveys and maps. The account of Nepal by Kirkpatrick which was already published by that time had provided him with certain definite background to proceed.

Hamilton worked with some Nepali and Indians to trace out the details about the tribes, the physical features of the country, laws and government and the various princely states that formed the unified Nepal. Trained as a physician, he seemed to be good in geography, zoology and botany as well. That helped him a lot in making his study visit a success.

Hamilton divided his book in two parts. Part I has two chapters. Chapter I deals with the inhabitants of Nepal. Here he deals with what he describes as Hindu colonists from ‘Chitaur’, ‘Asanti’ and ‘Chaturbhuja.’ Attempts have been made here to describe the Hindu tribes east of the Kali River here. There are descriptions on Brahmans, their diet, festivals and offspring. He has specific mentions about Rajputs, and adopted and illegitimate low tribes in the Hindu community. This follows his general observation on the customs of these mountain Hindus east of the Kali, and those west of it. Then he provides details about Magars, Gurungs, Jariyas, Newars, Murmis, Kirats, Limbus, Lapchas and Bhotiyas. The later group has been described by him as tribes who occupied the country previous to the arrival of Hindus. Chapter II is about the nature of the country, the plains, hills and mountains, their production, animal and vegetables, cultivation, climate, rivers, and so on. Chapter III devotes to laws and government of Nepal. There are orientations on courts and forms of proceeding, punishment, provincial government, revenue and endowments, state officers and military establishment. They all make the book interesting reading.

In Part – II, there are two chapters. Chapter I has four sections – each dealing with Sikkim, the dominions of the family descended from ‘Makanda Sen’, Raja of Makwanpur, and the history of Nepal Proper previous to the conquests by the ‘Gorkhalese’, and the countries belonging to the Chaubisi and Baisi Rajas. Chapter II deals with the countries west of the River Kali. The second part is a valuable record on distinct political units of Nepal including Sikkim, Sen Dominions, Nepal Proper, Baisi-Chaubisi and Kumaon-Garhbal-Barh Thakuri. There are notes on twelve petty chiefdoms in the western Himalayas. The book describes Nepal as it stood previously to the war with the British, commencing in the end of the year 1814. There are interesting information in Part – II as well.

The book of Hamilton stands out as the best of the early accounts of Nepal. Beginning the first part, the author describes Nepal, a name celebrated in Hindu legend, as the country in the vicinity of Kathmandu, but as it stands now it means the whole territory of the unified Nepal. East from the Nepal Proper, he notes, the mountains are chiefly occupied by Kirants, who are frequently mentioned in Hindu legend as occupying the country between Nepal and ‘Madra’, the ancient denomination now called ‘Bhotan.’ Towards the west again, according to Hamilton, “the country between Nepal and ‘Kasmir’, over which the present rulers of the former have far extended their dominion, in the ancient Hindu writings is called Khas, and its inhabitants Khasiyas. I am told, that, wherever mentioned in ancient records, like the Kirats, their neighbours to the west, the Khasiyas are considered as abominable and impure infidels.” 

For any reader, this book is a window of knowledge about many important aspects of Nepal at that point of time. While the book is very useful, there are many factual errors, hearsay and misinterpretation. One significant example is his thinking that the Khas people are different from the mountain Hindus. They are the same lot in Nepal, but with different levels of reception of Hindu values. His reference that Hindus of mountains arrived there following invasion by the ‘Muhammedan’ king of ‘Dili’ is another mistake of fact. Hamilton noted that the king wished to marry a daughter of the Raja of ‘Chitor’ or ‘Chitaur’, celebrated for her beauty, and the offer was denied. There is simply no truth in the story. Maybe there are unknown exceptions, but most of the rulers he described as Hindu colonists from ‘Chitaur’, ‘Asanti’ and ‘Chaturbhuja’ have been indigenous rulers, and the story of their connections with these places have been willful fabrication for political benefits.

Similarly, Hamilton described the mountain Hindus as “deceitful and treacherous people, cruel and arrogant towards those in their power, and abjectly mean towards those from whom they expect favour.” This is too subjective a statement for anybody. He has a very low opinion about the Khas people for unstated reasons. He described them as “abominable and impure infidels” as noted above.

Many of these errors could be attributed to the informants who assisted Hamilton with information and helped him make judgments. But more than that Hamilton had a skeptical attitude about the rulers of Nepal, and those who assisted them to rule the country. The ‘Gorkhalese’ were victorious people, and were considered expansionist as well. As a jealous British official it was natural that his misgivings about the rulers and their associates had some effect in his writings as well. 

A. Patricia Caplan, Priests and Cobblers: A Study of Social Change in a Hindu Village in Western Nepal [Aylesbury Bucks; International Textbook Company Limited, 1972] [Reprinted in Nepal by Mandala Publications, 2006] 

The book Priests and Cobblers is a study on the changing caste relations in Nepal. The system still exists here, especially in rural Hindu areas, dividing people into a hierarchy based upon heredity.

As a rule, the state of Nepal cannot discriminate against any citizen in the application of general laws on grounds of religion, race, gender, caste, tribe, origin, language or ideological conviction or any of these. Similarly, no person shall, on the ground of caste, descent, community or occupation, be subject to racial discrimination and ‘untouchability’ in any form. Such a discriminatory act is to be punished and the victim is entitled to compensation as provided by the law. The country continues to have legal provisions prohibiting caste discrimination for many decades.

However caste prejudice continues in Nepal in many places. In places where it continues, it not only dictates one’s occupation, but dietary habits and interaction with members of other castes as well. Members of a high caste enjoy more power, wealth and opportunities while members of a low caste perform menial jobs. The most discriminated in the lot are the poor and historically suppressed people considered ‘untouchables.’ There is tendency toward endogamy, meaning that people marry within the same caste exclusively. Upward mobility is very rare in the caste system. The system is full of discrimination. It is a scar on the face of humanity.

The focus of this book, however, is on the changing relations between members of the priestly caste (Bahuns) and group of so called ‘untouchables’ (cobblers) in a Hindu village in Western Nepal. Even though these cobblers continue to suffer under extreme forms of discrimination, exploitation, and violence, and their caste still imposes enormous obstacles to their full attainment of civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights, the book explains how the deprived ‘untouchables’ from a position of almost total economic dependence on the priestly caste, had become increasingly independent because of the new opportunities available in the expanding economy of the area. This also enabled them to oppose the Bahuns, who have been exploiting them, in the interest of their community.

The author of the book, A. Patricia Caplan is a senior professor of Anthropology at Goldsmiths, University of London. This was her first work published as a book in 1972 when she was a young researcher. It was republished in 2006 – again after 34 years. The field work on which this book is based was conducted from January to December 1969, as part of a project of research on aspects of social change in Nepal, sponsored by the Social Science Research Council of Great Britain. The study covered a period of several decades up to the time of field work at the end of the 1960s. Caplan has analysed the situation on the basis of available resources, opportunity for earning a living, recent changes in the village economy, the factional politics in the village, and the growth of caste conflict. 

In her own words, “this book focuses on a mixed-caste community in the far western hills, here called ‘Duari’, where the upper-castes had successfully consolidated themselves at the expense of the lower castes (untouchables, now called Dalits) not only in terms of land-holding but also educational opportunities, trade and government posts. Nevertheless, at the time of fieldwork, the lower castes had begun to achieve a modicum of economic independence because of new opportunities, and as a result, had dared for the first time to challenge the upper castes politically.”

In republishing this book, the author had two objectives in mind. One was that the original version, written for a commission to a US publisher which wanted to launch a student-friendly series on social change in different parts of the world, was never available in South Asia, and particularly in Nepal. A second reason was that this book was originally published in 1972 and since that time, more than three decades of history have changed the face of Nepal. This book, according to the author, ‘gives a snapshot of a particular moment in time which may go some way to explaining the roots of the radical changes now taking place.”

In her concluding paragraph, the author notes: “first I have examined economic development, to note, in particular, whether or not it leads to a reallocation of resources or a weakening of the tiers of dependence of the lower castes upon the higher. Second, given universal adult suffrage, the demographic composition of the village, and, indeed, of the region surrounding a village, is important. Where low castes are in very small numbers, they are unlikely to be in a position to defy the higher castes, nor is their support likely to be sought by aspiring leaders.

Third, the lower castes must receive some concrete support from external agencies. It is not enough merely to introduce new laws and a new constitution: these have to be enforced at the village level. Alternatively, the wider society has to provide other mechanisms which give members of lower castes some opportunity for mobility outside the village, such as government jobs, political parties, or reform movements.” There is little to disagree with the author.

When it was written in 1972, the book was certainly the first of its kind in Nepal. Now there are several such studies, in both Nepali and English. Nevertheless, the book is still an important work on ‘Duari’ village, and the author’s finding on changing social relations is still as valid as it was 40 years before.

A book entitled Chakrabyuha ma Chandra Surya: Rastriya Surakshya ra Swadhinata ka Chunautiharu [The Sun and the Moon Caught in Chakrabyuha: Challenges of National Security and Independence], which was released in Kathmandu on 30th November 2012, has become the talk of the town for its candid analysis of modern Nepal and its plight.

Written by Saroj Raj Adhikari, a journalist working with Kantipur Daily, ‘Chandra Surya’ is the shorthand expression for the mighty historical Nepal which has now been caught in what is described as ‘Chakrabhyuh’ – a multi-tier military formation (also known as “Padmabyuha” in the Mahabharat epic). The strategy was used in the epic battle of Kurukshetra by Guru Dronacharya, who became commander-in-chief of the Kaurava army after the fall of Bhishma Pitamaha, to trap the adversary into it. 

The author deals with three main issues in the book. Firstly, he describes the series of international crimes that Nepal has witnessed in its land over the last few years. They include the assassination of Mirja Dilshad Beg, Kamal Singh Nepali, Majid Manihar, Shaukat Beg, Jamim Shah and Faijan Ahmed and attempted murder of Yunus Ansari. The author states that they were all killed with the involvement of external actors. He believes that the former Crown Prince Paras could also be the next target. Secondly, the issue of crumbling national security and excruciating geo-politics that Nepal is struggling with has also been described at length in the book. It tries to unearth harsh realities of modern Nepal , its pre-planned political changes, the structural anomalies, the problems of decision-making, and the national stakes that are being ignored by the government. The third part of the book analyses what Adhikari believes as the search for the Nepalese version of ‘Lhendup Dorjee’ – the Sikkim politician who played a historic role in his country’s accession to the Indian Union. All these chapters are interrelated in their approach and conclusion in that Nepal is in crisis and the reason is mainly conspiratorial and external.

Written in journalistic style, Adhikari quickly puts the main points in each of his chapters in the first couple of sentences of the first paragraph. He is always clear, to the point, and unbiased. In a language that will have far reaching impact on the citizenry, the author has expressed his view on national security and issues that have been created over it in recent years. It is the study of the threat, use, and control of Nepal . In the preface to the book, Adhikari makes it clear that the main part of the book is concerned with national security issues. This is precisely the reason that the indivisibility of the country, its sovereignty, and independence are inseparably linked in his analysis of national security and the geo-political issues which come to be linked up. The book is full of references that show how India and China are linked with the political course in Nepal . 
 

Even though Adhikari has covered wide-ranging issues of modern Nepal , he does not write on the Constituent Assembly and its demise in the framework that he has developed for this book. For the issues that it has covered, this is a book that all the politicians and anybody who has interest in contemporary security issues must read.

Book Review

Ajit Bhattacharjea, Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah: Tragic Hero of Kashmir (New Delhi: Lotus Collection, 2008)

Asoj 30 2066

When the British were leaving South Asia, there were approximately 600 ‘princely states’ in the subcontinent. All of these states were ruled by their respective kings or hereditary rulers. The British gave such kings and rulers the option to accede to India or Pakistan or remain independent.

The majority of these ‘princely states’ acceded to India. A few of them joined Pakistan. It was not all voluntary or a well thought-out process. In each case, the decision was made by the rulers, not by the people, of the respective territories. Problems arose in a few states that claimed a different identity, and therefore, were unwilling to accede to either of the countries or had rulers who were of a different religion than the majority of their subjects. The state of Jammu and Kashmir was one of them.

The state of Jammu and Kashmir prior to 1947 covered an area of 86,024 square miles. The entire state included, beside the Jammu region, Ladakh, Gilgit, Hunza, Nagar, Punial, and Yasin. The tiny state of Chitral, located towards the north-western side of Gilgit, used to pay tribute to Kashmir ruler.

The Hindu king of Kashmir, Maharaja Hari Singh, did not want to accede either to India or to Pakistan. He wanted to continue ruling an independent kingdom. But both India and Pakistan, the two rival states that were fast emerging in the subcontinent, wanted Kashmir to be a part of their territories. In this environment, the king was somehow able to sign a Standstill Agreement with both of these countries and buy some time for a proper environment to make his decision. Until the last moment, he toyed with the idea of remaining independent, but his strength to survive as a nation was too feeble in view of the forces that wanted otherwise.

Ajit Bhattacharjea, a renowned Indian scholar on Kashmir, explains in his new book, Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah: Tragic Hero of Kashmir, the currents of change and the following turn of events that lead Kashmir to where it stands today. The book provides a comprehensive and well-documented account of Abdullah, a prominent figure in India’s struggle for independence from the British rule, and different aspects of his intriguing personality. This account vividly explores how Abdullah, also known as the Lion of Kashmir, contributed crucially to the making of modern India and its founding ideology of secularism. This naturally involves the issue of accession of Kashmir into India on October 26 , 1947 and its right to self-determination. 

Written in a biographical style, the book has twenty-four small chapters. The first chapter explains the roots of tolerance of the Kashmiri people. Then there is some background for the Dogra rule (1846-1947) in Kashmir before its accession to India. It is towards the last quarter of this period that Abdullah emerges as a vibrant opposition leader in Kashmir politics. In contrast to the rise of the Muslim League in much of the subcontinent – which was to lead to Partition – Abdullah and his party turned away from communal politics and embraced secularism. On June 11, 1939, he was even successful in changing the name of his party from Kashmir Muslim Conference to National Conference. A great influence of Nehru and his secular principles is of course beyond dispute. 

While the theme of secularism has been discussed with much importance in this book, there emerges different aspects of the story of accession of Kashmir in India, the intriguing role of Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah in this regard, the manipulative exercises on the part of the Indian establishment in transition, the unfulfilled promises on the part of Jawaharlal Nehru, the charismatic leader of India, and subsequent political developments. No doubt, this aspect of Kashmir could be illuminating to any reader who has limited knowledge in the upheavals that continue to characterize the politics in this Himalayan state.

In this regard, Bhattacharjea explains in full rigour Abdullah’s Quit Kashmir Movement of 1946, the vicissitudes of the last King, Maharaja Hari Singh, and a period of brief independence that Kashmir enjoyed before it signed the instrument of accession. He then elaborates on the accession drama, something which is very illuminating, the emergence of differences on the perspectives of the parties involved, and the sword of plebiscite that was contemplated to ease the process to honour the Kashmiri people’s right to self determination.

The author is able to explain how key a role Abdullah performed for the accession. Bhattacharjea also leaves no stone unturned to explain the manoeuvres that led to Abdullah’s downfall and arrest on August 8, 1953 and the role of the Home Ministry’s Intelligence Bureau. Obviously, his honeymoon with Nehru was over. After the monarchy was set aside, and the transition was completed somehow smoothly, the author astutely explains how Abdullah’s long, tragic periods of detention was achieved until he was persuaded to return to Jammu and Kashmir as chief minister . 

A person who was sworn in as the Prime Minister of Kashmir initially was in due course refashioned into a state chief minister in the Indian union. Indeed, the author explains the tragedy conclusively in one of his concluding paragraphs:

“Abdullah’s national status was recognized by the presence of the president and prime minister at [his] funeral. New Delhi had, however, miscalculated if it believed that the desire for azadi [independence] has died with him. Instead of the continuing democratic campaign for self determination he had waged, it was replaced by encouraging violence and communalism by terror and state counter-terror. Abdullah himself became a victim of militancy with many of his followers distancing themselves from his compromise with Indira Gandhi.” [p. 237]

By the time one completes reading the 257-page book, nothing prevents the reader from suspecting that the power and clout achieved by Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah in the opposition politics of Kashmir was used by Jawaharlal Nehru and the then (transitional) establishment in Delhi to weaken Maharaj Hari Singh, manoeuvre him to sign the instrument of accession, and eliminate monarchy from the state of Jammu and Kashmir forever.

Abdullah was crucial in connecting Kashmir with the larger freedom movement of the Indian National Congress in the plains and align Kashmir with democratic India. But he was perceived to have only a limited role after the Independence of India. Along this line, his demand that the pledge of special status for the Jammu and Kashmir in the accession documents be honoured was also described as anti-national, even pro-Pakistani.

Ajit Bhattachargea concludes his book without any prescriptions for the policymakers of modern India. It is, however, a most recommended reading for all who have interest in the politics of the Himalayan region and nation-building.

Jared Diamond, Guns, Germs and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies (London: Vintage Books, 1997) [pdfjs-viewer url=”https%3A%2F%2Fbipinadhikari.com.np%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2009%2F09%2FA-History-of-Everybody.pdf” viewer_width=100% viewer_height=1360px fullscreen=true download=true print=true]

Justice is a moral concept about what is right, fair, appropriate, and deserving. As a concept of righteousness, it builds on ethics, rationality, natural law, equity, fairness and similar principles. This is the reason why justice happens to be a complicated subject. Nevertheless, it is a subject that has been subjected to rigorous philosophical, legal and theological debates throughout the history. 



Amartya Sen’s new book The Idea of Justice ( Penguin-Allen Lane, 2009) is a major addition to these debates. A Lamont University Professor at Harvard, Sen presents in this book his theory of justice in a very broad sense. His understanding is based on a positive analysis of already existing general theories in this regard. Its aim, as Sen points out, is to “clarify how we can proceed to address questions of enhancing justice and removing injustice, rather than to offer resolutions of questions about the nature of perfect justice.” 



Dedicated to John Rawls, who wrote A Theory of Justice in 1972, one of the primary texts in political philosophy, the book goes far beyond his concept of justice. In his book, Rawls highlighted the problems of distributive justice at length and offered the concept of justice as fairness to solve the ensuing problems. 



From fairness, Rawls derived his theory of justice which contained two important principles: the liberty principle and the difference principle. He argued for a principled reconciliation between liberty and equality. He also emphasized that “most reasonable principles of justice are those everyone would accept and agree to from a fair position.” 



John Rawls built on philosophical foundations laid by Kant and Rousseau – the two important predecessors in this area (among many others). He employed a number of thought experiments – including the famous veil of ignorance – to determine what constitutes a fair agreement in which “everyone is impartially situated as equals,” in order to determine principles of social justice. 



Amartya Sen who won the Nobel Prize in Economics in 1998, explores in this book the ways in which, and the degree to which, justice is a matter of reason, and of different kinds of reason. It is in the nature of human beings that they hardly agree on a final, perfect set of institutions and rules. Disagreements are quite common everywhere. It is because not everything is in principle resolvable. Moreover, different people regard different positions as just. As such, Sen argues that there is no need to overcome disagreement. The search for a perfect set of arrangements can distract theoreticians from tackling injustices that the human society needs to confront. 



Sen’s work is not grounded in idealised justice. It is grounded in what can be made to work practically in the real world. He argues that a philosophy of justice should require the agreement not just of the community which is making the laws, but of important outsiders also. The whole world has a role in it. It is in the nature of reason, says Sen, that it does not allow all questions to be settled from first principles; But these pluralities are not a shortcoming. 



Amartya Sen has divided his book into four parts and eighteen chapters after sharing with the readers his approach to justice at the outset. 



Part 1 deals with the demands of justice in general. It has four chapters which cover reason and objectivity in the justice discourse; Rawls’ theory of justice and beyond: institutions and persons; voice and social choice: impartiality and objectivity; and analysis of closed and open impartiality. 



Part II deals with forms of reasoning. It also has four chapters: position, relevance and illusion; rationality and other people; plurality of impartial reasons; realization consequences and agency. 



The materials of justice are discussed in Chapter III. It also has detailed explanations on lives, freedoms and capabilities; capabilities and resources; happiness, well-being and capabilities; and equality and liberty. 



The last part explains democracy as public reason. Here he also gives his impression about the practice of democracy, human rights and global imperatives, and the place of justice in the world. 



Amartya Sen holds that justice has a key role to play in the concept and practice of democracy. But his emphasis is not in terms of the institutions of a democratic state, but in terms of its capacity to enrich reasoned engagement. Democracy allows public argument and debate. It allows public reasoning. “The working of democratic institutions, like that of all other institutions” depends on the activities of human agents. But democracy “has to be judged not just by the institutions that formally exist, but by the extent to which different voices from diverse sections can actively be heard.” 



At the heart of Sen’s argument is a respect for reasoned differences in our understanding of what a “just society” really is. He stands firmly within the traditions of Anglo-American philosophy, but the book is full of philosophical references from the Indian sub-continent and their analysis in view of contemporary problems. He has been able to bring Buddha, Ashoka and Akbar in his theoretical discourse in such a way that nobody ever even tried to do. 



The book is long and repetitive at times. But the breadth of Amartya Sen’s vision and intellectual keenness make it an outstanding work for every thinking person. 

lawyers_inc_nepal@yahoo.com

Sanjay Upadhyay, The Raj Lives: India in Nepal (New Delhi: Vitasha Publishing House, 2008) [pdfjs-viewer url=”https%3A%2F%2Fbipinadhikari.com.np%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2020%2F01%2FEmbracing-Tight.pdf” viewer_width=100% viewer_height=1360px fullscreen=true download=true print=true]