What Deuba Says

It is well known to everybody that recently our respected prime minister Sher Bahadur Deuba participated in the United Nations meet at New York. I have nothing to say about the 22-minute video delivered at the UN frontier; I am rather going to discuss few things about a separate video footage from the podium of Columbia University, NY, which features Mr. Deuba as the responder of questions hurled by the spectators.  

First, I am not going very deep into the English speaking capability of our premier. By default, English is our secondary language and it is better to be acquainted with one, if not compulsory. Many would argue that English is a colonial language, and it is a matter of pride and glory if one does not know it—as is repeatedly encountered with Vladimir Putin, who always prefers to speak Russian in the international forum. The leaders in fact have to give priority to the culture and language of their own nation, not ones from the outside.

How this case is different is he embraces English, and he does it so badly that it is incomprehensible to the audience what he is trying to deliver, on top of his inherent usual slipping of tongue. It is good to be attending to any interaction program overseas especially when every logistics is paid by the government—only when the papers to be read in the dash are already written. The most things that you have to do are go up there and read. Finish. A thank you. Then a big round of applause. Come down. That’s what he did to the UN. Come Columbia Uni, and here is this fiasco. 

It is not the matter of shame if he does not know the English. After all, who the hell knows? If he accepts his mistakes, I believe he should, he should have asked for an interpreter to do that interaction nicely. But sadly, it’s not about grammar, punctuation, fluency and blah blah blah. The content should have been smart and witty. Every other questioner was left dissatisfied by the PM’s response as they did not get what they were expecting.   

     

The video clip is 7:02 in length, and starts with a girl questioning:

“I was wondering what advice you would give to world leaders to make the world safer and unified.” 

Our PM does not have an iota of knowledge what the crap she is blabbering about. So he, with all perplexity, says, “Pardon?”

The girl in turn repeats the question almost verbatim with the word ‘safer’ replaced with more safe. 

And here is to his answers:

Oh, thank you, it’s very interesting question. I don’t have ready-made answers but leaders should discuss, talk and find its solution. Then comes a halt of uncomfortable silence followed by thank you by the questioner. 

Let us contemplate here: does not the one taking part as the audience know this simple fact? Yes the leaders should discuss, but she was asking what his suggestions were to make the world more safe and unified. He was (is) one of the world’s leaders and he should contribute to that not going off the grid by just letting other leaders to taking the decision. Every leader’s suggestion count, that’s why he is representing Nepal. Ah! That poor girl. 

Second question from Bhrikuti, who says she is from Nepal and a journalism student at the Graduate School of Journalism. She congratulates Deuba’s government for holding third phase of election and asks:

“My question is how does your government look forward to resolving the crisis in Madhes that’s been going on for over two years since the new constitution was promulgated? And also since you talked a lot about good governance, how do you defend the largest cabinet that you have right now in Nepal?”

Hurray, no pardon this time. He goes to answer straightaway like this:

“First of all I would like to answer about the cabinet members, you know. According to the constitution, 10%, uh, uh, of its total number can become ministers. Therefore, sixty ministers can, sixty ministers is the, six thou, six hundred number of the assembly. Sixteen, sixty number of cabinet is, is, bh, according to the constitution. But still the smaller number you know. 

"Regarding your, regarding your question about issue of Madhes, we have entered a dialog, we  try to accommodate their some of the legitimate demand by amending the constitution but unfortunately we couldn’t pass the, pass the amendment because we need two-third of majority to pass the constitution. Therefore we could not pass the con, uh, constitution according we will try to accommodate their demand. But I think they realize and they participated in the local election. They also understand, pwa, pwa, position right now. In future, Nepal’s constitution is very much flexible, ah, can be reformed, according to the wishes of the people. Thank you very much.”

He seems to be gratified answering this question. The size of the cabinet is ever expanding, and it is far known that it has already been annoyingly large. But for him, it’s not. He has an affirmative wish to reach to 60, the constitutional borderline as he asserts. In his answers I have not interpolated many unspecific (foreign to the very language) fillers popped out from his mouth. 

Question no 3: “Hello sir, thank you for being here. My name is Kevin and I am the graduate student in the history department. I have a question for you. As the leader of the country who went through a natural disaster a few years ago, what are some advice you have for international organizations or the international world community regarding responses to natural disasters happening right now?

SBD: “Thank you very much for your concern about the natural disaster because Nepal witnessed devastating earthquake (in Deuba tone), recently. Unfortunately still few months ago with devastating flood in the southern part of Nepal. But, regarding earthquake, it is not easy to find the solution, nobody knows when it happens we have to have a preparedness. Therefore Nepal is very much aware of, uh, uh…..the earthquake. We are, we are now, we can cope with the earthquake in future because preparedness is necessary. Therefore, now, we can, we can, pr, whatever the disaster there, we can, we have prepared, we can mitigate the disaster you know.” (many blabbers and slabbers omitted!)

The response itself is a disaster. Kevin, here, is not concerned about the natural disaster in Nepal. It’s the past, bygone. His concern is what lessons we did learn from the disaster so that it could be duly applied to wherever the disaster is happening right now. He blatantly boasts about the so-called preparedness. What bullshit preparedness does he see here? Has he done something about preparedness to natural disaster? He tells Nepal is aware of all sort of natural disasters, and if so, the flood was in the aftermath of the massive earthquake. Did you guys notice any preparedness to the flood? Heck, it was a mess. Come another earthquake—just for the sake of argument, I bet situations would not change, not even an inch, and here is our leader so ignorantly speaking to the world Nepal is equipped to cope with the natural calamity. Jesus Christ!The preparedness maybe for the elite group like leaders and ex PMs, higher level bureaucrats because for general public we don't see any. Even the relief distribution and monetary reimbursement for the earthquake victims are still taking place what to expect about the future disaster? 

He says nobody knows when earthquake is going to happen. Maybe he forgets or he might be nervous, all natural disasters are unpredictable, not only earthquake. 

With his ignobility, I can’t proceed forward with this discussion. Please be noted, this commentary is totally based upon my personal perspective solely to the interaction footage. If this appears to be politically jaundiced, I am sorry; you do not understand the gravity of situation. First, even if you are a political stalwart, exercise your freedom to think. I have nothing to give or take whatsoever from any school or alliance. Because sadly in Nepalese context, whatever you say will be used against you blaming you are the undercover of phalano ideology. 

You are intellectually handicapped if you can’t say wrong to something which you know is wrong from the bottom top. I have written this piece as an independent opinionator, not as a cadre or sycophant of any politico or school of belief. 

To see the video, click here. 

   

 ©Adhikary Rabindra 2017