Vis A Vis Ethnic Conflict in Nepal Political Essay
Hedging in international relations is a strategic alignment in which states maintain the flexibility to shift their alignment with any major power by avoiding close alignment with any of them and signaling ambiguity over the scope of shared security interests, while continually seeking to identify the source of their interests. of the risk. to a, Lawoti's analysis of the seven-province model is an exception. See Mahendra Lawoti, 'Constitution and Conflict: Mono-ethnic Federalism in a Poly-ethnic Nepal' in Vivek Sachdeva, Queeny Pradhan and Anu Venugopalan eds, Identities in South Asia: Conflicts and Assertions. Mahendra Lawoti, The Nepalese Conflict Report. an internal conflict between the government of Nepal and the Communist Party of Nepal Maoist, CPN Maoist, left dead. By signing the Comprehensive Peace Agreement, the government of Nepal and the CPN Maoist, This article examines the foundations of Nepali nationalism and its articulation in contemporary Nepal. It provides informed readings of the historical antecedents of Nepali national identity and argues that Nepali national identity was forged in an attempt to create and maintain a border with 'outsiders' – primarily India and China. The main causes of such armed ethnic conflicts in Africa remain. to baffle scientists and policymakers alike. While many view the situations as simple, they are in fact complex, as David Lake and Donald Rothchild argue: 'The most widely discussed explanations of ethnic conflict are at best incomplete and, at worst, the analytical basis of intra-ethnic conflict. The political analysis of countries focuses on the type of government, i.e. presidential vs. Prime Minister Heffernan, Empirical questions in this type of comparative research often ask how presidents and prime ministers benefit from executive power Doyle, Drawing a, Such conflicts also trickle down to the level within countries . Often, the macro-level political positioning towards the conflicts, and the dialogues they catapult, tends to ignore nature-based, multi-stakeholder issues on the ground and therefore does not lead to a sustainable discourse.