The widespread opposition to the new Constitution of Nepal is not a bolt from the blue. In January this year, lawmakers belonging to the Madhesi and Maoist parties scuffled with the ruling party MPs in Parliament and gained worldwide notoriety. Like now, they were calling for new provinces to be created along lines that could favour historically marginalised communities such as the “untouchable” Dalit caste and the Madhesi ethnic minority besides janjatis or indigenous groups like the Tharus.But it was the blockade of fuel and other supplies at the Indian border that finally forced the Kathmandu power elite and its residents to think about an issue they have historically brushed under the carpet of Nepali unity. The ruling class in Nepal has always been an alliance of upper caste Chettris (Kshatriyas), and Brahmins, called Bauns in Nepal. They are the most powerful of the Khas Arya. Khas Arya comprises of Chhetri, Brahmin, Thakuri and Sannyasi (Dasnami) communities.The three main parties, Nepali Congress, United Marxist Leninists (UML) and United Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), essentially represent the interests of these ruling classes. The Chettris and Bauns are also settled historically mainly in the hilly areas.The Madhesis along with the Dalits and janjatis have been excluded from mainstream politics and development in Nepal for centuries. It was to address this historical exclusion and injustice that the first Interim Constitution of 2007 incorporated ethno-federalism and proportional inclusion, the basic demands of Maoists and Madhesi parties.In the first Constituent Assembly in 2007, Maoists had more than 200 seats while Madhesi parties had over 100. However, this time, the three main parties had a two-thirds majority in the Constituent Assembly and, despite various attempts of the excluded groups, their pleas for proportional inclusion in the future parliament and division of provinces based on language, ethnicity, culture, and history were not heard. The new Constitution has seven provinces but there are contentious areas that are at the core of the present stand-off. 14 out of 22 districts in Madhes or Terai have been divided into two predominantly Madhesi provinces.The Tharu demand for a separate Tharuhat hasn’t been met at all. Tharus are the indigenous people of the inner Terai areas and are also settled in bordering areas of India , in Uttarakhand mainly. Till the 1950s, they were the only inhabitants of the inner Terai as the region was infested with deadly malaria, and to even spend a night in the Terai was thought to tempt death. The malarial jungles and swamps acted as a sanctuary for Tharus, and they survived with little contact from the outside world. After the eradication of malaria with the use of DDT, the region saw largescale migration from the hills.This has drastically changed the demography of traditional Tharu areas. For instance, in Kailali district, which saw brutal violence that killed eight security personnel and a toddler, the percentage of hill people has gone up from 5 % to 52% in the past three decades alone. There are signs though that the Madhesi and Tharu dissident groups are coming together; in a recent development Tharu Lawmakers’ Unified Struggle Committee (TLUSC) has decided to collaborate with Madhesi groups to press the government to address the concerns of the Tharu community through an amendment to the new Constitution.Discrimination against the Madhesis can be seen easily in the hilly areas. Pejoratively called Madhesiya by the Chettris and Bauns, they have been excluded from government jobs, allocation of national resources and cultural and social assimilation. Monica Jha, a women’s rights activist of Madhesi origin, points this out: “I still have to prove to people that I am a Nepali. Because I am from a middle-class family and I am educated, I face relatively mild harassment but think about those who are poor and uneducated; they are still treated as second-class citizens. Madhes’s Mithila art and culture is so rich but go to any library and museum in Nepal and see for yourself how much space is given to our culture. The discrimination is very internalised among the hill people. Now that my people are dying like cattle, there is no way I can just look the other way.’’In Terai, more than 40 people have died in protests against the new Constitution in the last two months. Jha adds, “I am also offended by the biased media coverage of the Madhesi point of view; how can the media call fellow Nepalis terrorists and describe Terai as ‘terror-affected’?”Speaking from Birgunj, a town in the plains, Professor Vijay Kant Karna, an intellectual and member of civil society, explains that, “since the 1960s the Chettri-Brahmin power elite have portrayed Madhesis as foreigners and more Indian than Nepali through socialisation, and by projecting India as an expansionist power that threatens Nepal’s sovereignty. This is nothing but a strategy to consolidate and continue their upper-caste hegemony over Nepal”. The ‘otherification’ of Madhesis may have worked to preserve the power of the elite castes but with unrelenting opposition of Madhesis to the Constitution it now threatens to lead to a dangerous scenario that could rupture the social harmony of Nepal.Madhesi leaders have consistently alleged that they have been betrayed as most of their conditions were incorporated in the Interim Constitution of 2007. Sharad Singh Bhandari, leader of Madhes Samajwadi Party and a former defence minister, had issued an ominous statement in 2012. Speaking about the marginalisation of Madhesis, he had said that if the promises of inclusion and more representation in government jobs was not kept, the 22 districts of Terai will have no alternative but to think of other options, including a separate Madhes. His statement was followed by national indignation and the Hill parties charged him with being anti-national and an Indian agent and forced him to resign as defence minister.Anti-Indianism won the day for the upper-caste power elite of Nepal once again. However in the present scenario, Madhesis are not ready to back down, having suffered repeated betrayals; and Bhandari’s statement underscores the reality then and the reality now, of Madhesi discontentment and marginalisation. Disappointed by the new Constitution, Bhandari says, “This is in fact a regressive Constitution in every sense; why do they want to go back in time and undo the progress we have made in the turbulent 10 years?”Soon after the blockade of fuel supplies at the India-Nepal border Nepalis started an online campaign called #backoffindia. India should take this as a learning in geopolitics in an interconnected world. As much as India denies having anything to do with the blockade at the border it is widely believed by Nepalis that big brother is again trying to bully them.It does no good to India-Nepal relations or the hill people-Madhesi relations. Madhesis have close and historic ties with parts of India and there is a thriving tradition of ‘roti-beti’ (interdependence and intermarriage). That Madhesis are identified with India is a reality that cannot be wished away. While Indian government doles out aid and wisdom to Nepal, it would do well to remember that generations of hill Nepali immigrants have faced harassment and discrimination in India. They have carried those sordid tales back to their children and thus, in a way, Madhesis are paying the price of that discrimination faced by Hill Nepalis, identified as they are with India because of their ethnic ties.Indian leadership should also factor this into their geopolitical reading of, and response to, Nepal. There is no easy way out, but India needs to realise that to stem anti-India feelings in Nepal, the least it can do is to not be partisan to any one group.In 1768, when King Prithvi Narayan Shah ‘unified’ several small kingdoms and principalities into what we know as Nepal today, he left a note of caution for future rulers. “This is not the nation gained by my trifle efforts, this is the garden of all kinds of flowers, and may all be aware of this’’.The present Nepali leadership must remember his words. Leaders of the three major political parties — Nepali Congress, CPN-UML and UCPN-Maoist — have decided to hold ‘meaningful talks’ with the agitating Madhes based parties, Tharus and other groups but a resolution can only be achieved if they are ready to share their power and let the old Chettri-Baun hegemony be dismantled. The new Nepal that Nepalis aspire for is not a nation that’s feudal and exclusionary.Bikkil Sthapit, a young member of the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), says that, “although the new Constitution was passed by a two-thirds majority it seemed that more than 60 % of Nepalis were unhappy and opposed to it. Women groups are unhappy and so are the indigenous people, and of course the Madhesis have been ignored in a big way. This is an unacceptable situation for Nepal”.Sthapit is from the Newar community, traditionally traders and with their own rich culture and language. But according to Sthapit, the Khas or Chettri- Baun dominance has ensured the neglect of all other groups including Newars. This really is the reason why every group but the ruling elite supports federalism, decentralisation of power and proportional inclusion. This is also why Nepal saw the rise of the Maoists and lived through 10 years of civil war in which around 20,000 people lost their lives. Today, with this Constitution it seems that all those years and all those lives were lost in vain. It is for the three main parties, to see reason and open a sincere dialogue with dissatisfied sections of Nepalis.Jeetendra Dev, a Madhesi leader, and member of the 75-strong Drafting committee of the Constitution, says that though he and other Madhesi members along with other groups tried to include proportional inclusion and delineation of constituencies based on population, they were outnumbered and outmanoeuvred by the majority parties. “As long as our core issues are not addressed we will not accept this Constitution,” he says.For a fledgling democracy like Nepal, the future lies in inclusion and devolution of power; the old power elite will have to share power or they might end up undoing Prithvi Narayan Shah’s legacy.(The author is a freelance writer and photographer)