French Immigration dispute: Tough road ahead for Socialist government

- Pramod Raj Sedhain
pramodsedhain@gmail.com

On October 9, 15-year-old Leonarda Dibrani was expelled from the eastern French town of Levier and deported to Kosovo along with her family. Leonarda’s expulsion has triggered anger against the Government. Emotional student protests and the deported case has been the centre debate over French immigration. Government spokeswoman Najat Vallaud-Belkacem has urged patience while the incident is investigated.
French President Francois Hollande has offered her return to finish her studies. In a live television speech, President Hollande said, “If she makes a request, and if she wants to continue her studies, she will be given a welcome, but only her.” Later in the day, Dibrani rejected President Hollande’s offer. Prime Minister Jean-Marc Aero had promised in the parliament to provide fixes a potential error in the right of the evicted family and said, “In the event proved an error, the expulsion order will be canceled outside the borders of this family will return to the re- determination of the dossier.”
On September 24, French interior minister Manuel Valls said most of some 20,000 Roma migrants housed in makeshift camps around French cities could never be integrated into the French society and should be “taken back to the border” for transfer to Romania and Bulgaria.
Migration policy has been a major political topic in the past few decades in France and seen a new cause for debate. Immigration has always been a controversial issue of France since 2000 French immigration law has been tight. Political debates expanded over time to include the role of immigration in such issues as national identity, migrant incorporation, security, and terrorism. President Hollande has intended making changes in the French immigration law.

The situation in France has seen some major improvements since he took office. France holds a record for legislative change in the area of immigration. The immigration-flow decreased by the early 1970′s when the economic crisis generated a low employment rate in the country. Since 1973, immigration policy in France focused primarily on stemming and deterring migration. Major reforms were passed in France in 1980, 1984, 1987, 1989, 1993, 1997, and 1998. Immigrants’ integration and promoting French identity, honoring the French tradition’s principle by welcoming political asylum to promote solidarity within the immigrant population was a policy that the country adopted.

France is home to more than five million people of Arab and African descent. It’s colonial past is a major contributing factor in the presence of a richly diverse multicultural population. French Interior Minister Valls criticized the hardliner immigration policies of the former French President and described as “random, discriminatory obstacle course” and expressed the view that immigration should, instead, be an “engine of integration.”
Career of charismatic leader: opportunity or challenges
Manuel Valls, a socialist charismatic leader, action-oriented French Interior Minister is widely considered as the country’s next Prime Minister. In the 2012 presidential election, the energetic leader was the communications director of Socialist party and one of the major pillars of the Francois Hollande election campaign team. The emerging figure of France Valls adopted the harder-line of security policy and now in battle against immigration.
The optimistic Interior Minister strongly defends his immigration policy and saying, “nothing will divert me from my course” following widespread criticism in the media and from his own political party after a 15-year old girl of Roma gypsy origin and her family were rounded up and deported. He said he would continue current efforts to return undocumented migrants to their countries of origin despite criticism. President François Hollande made a televised speech in which he said Leonarda could return to France to continue her studies, but without the rest of her family.
Opposition MPs on both the left and right have joined students in calling for Valls’ resignation. But he has no intention of stepping down, even if the family had been allowed to return to France. The minister popularity describe as “ray of light” and his tough stance on crime and immigration, has internal support but wide outside criticism. Speaking at most of immigrant backgrounds audience of youngsters, the Spanish-born youthful good-looking minister Valls said: “I was born in Spain. I had to learn French. I was naturalized as French. My parents taught me to love France. This country needs optimism.” He added “My stance is not populist”.
The most popular French Minister describing himself as “reformist rather than revolutionary,” he wants to “reconcile the left to the liberal approach.” He is involved in politics when he was 17 when he joined the French Socialist Party. This student of history had an experience of advisor on youth issues (1988 – 1991) for Prime Minister Michel Rocard and Communications Advisor (1997- 2001) of Prime Minister Lionel Jospin. Before being appointed Interior Minister he served as Mayor of the town of Evry, from 2001 to 2012. With the slogan of “The Left Needs Optimism” on June 30, 2009, Valls founded a political organization, for purpose of candidacy for the Socialist primary. But, first primary round in 9 October 2011 Valls defeated and endorsed François Hollande for the second round. A minister had frequently accused for Roma gipsies don’t integrate well in France and called to ‘return to Romania or Bulgaria’. Amidst a backdrop of fresh controversial cause Interior Minister Valls’ political future seems not big shift of popularity, but reflects his hardliner politic against illegal migrant.

Destabilization Role in Nepal: Overt and Covert

-Pramod Raj Sedhain
pramodsedhain@gmail.com

Foreign forces have been frequently questioned over their overt and covert role in destabilizing Nepal. Various international actors in Nepal seem to involve in protect their geo-political, economical, regional and religious interest. Unfortunately, covert activities far from the reach of Nepali investigators and overt participants seem to be out of control of the government. The recent and ‘visible’ controversial role of the Royal Norwegian Embassy in Kathmandu can be dubbed as one of such instance.
Nepal seeking to stabilize situation but Norway and some western countries are alleged to have been using various tools to destabilize and encourage ethnic turmoil in the pretext of peace, which ultimately is sure to plunge the country into internal conflict or even worse. These allegations can be justified if we sincerely peek into their activities. Norway has remained a champion of inciting conflict either in Myanmar, Sri-Lanka or Israel and Palestine. Some seem to benefit by the de facto partition of a country, for instance creating ethnic tension in Nepal with the long-term purpose of destabilizing China and India and hold political control in Nepal. This is woefully a silent issue.
Norway, whose role has been criticized in Nepal in recent times, is famed for controversial peace role in a third county aimed at seeking a global role. In the name of imposing various agendas and proposals, this country appear to be involved in covert assistance to some vested interest groups trying to destabilize Nepal.

What Norway really wants in Nepal?
Norway has been often criticized of delving into controversial peace initiative in several war-torn countries. Norwegian role has mounted criticism of coercing ethnic and other conflict in conflict-affected countries, including Burma or Sri Lanka. Norway involves in multi-million dollar project in the name of peace or humanitarian assistance with covert objective to destabilizing the state to influence its interest. Interestingly, Norway’s tactic has failed in every region, including Israel-Palestine conflict to Burma or Sri Lanka.
If we analyze Norway’s role thoroughly, it has incited ethic tension, destabilization in the name of mediation and donations or humanitarian aid. Norway – in the last few years – has focused in destabilizing Nepal, which is multi-racial, multi-linguistic, multi-ethnic and multi-cultural to fulfill its vested interest, particularly by fuelling ethnic tension to pave way towards mediating in Nepal’s peace and constitution. Nepal’s multi diversity has been a consequential ground to meddle for Norway.

Amplified activities of Norway
Nepal and Norway established diplomatic relations on January 26, 1973 and opened its residential embassy in Nepal on January 12, 2000. Norwegian Embassy assigned its staff to Gorkha and other remote areas to explore possible opportunities to expand its possible role and influence. During Nepal’s insurgency, Norway had even desired to mediate between the then Monarchy and the CPN-Maoist but to no avail. Norway has not remained a priority for Nepal until conflict started owing to our geo-political proximity, intimacy and of course cultural similarity. With the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Accord, Norwegian role increased significantly after it showed interest to engage in the peace process. With this, there were several high-level visits to Nepal seeking an influential role here.
Most significantly, the visit of Former Norwegian Peace Envoy to Sri Lanka Eric Solheim’s visit to Nepal clearly indicated that it desired an influential role in Nepal’s peace process. His failed role in Sri Lankan conflict would not have been acceptable here as well. The role of Norway as a peace mediator in Sri Lanka has been the most controversial issue with Eric as the key person. Currently, he is the Chairman of the Development Assistant Committee of the Economic Cooperation and Development Organization and playing a controversial role in Nepal through Norwegian Embassy in the pretext of donation.
Mr. Solheim was a key player in Nepal’s engagement policy. He visited Nepal on May 2-5, 2006, March 7 to 8, 2007. His last ministerial position was less than three months. His motive in Nepal was to restore his failed effort in Sri Lanka.
Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg also visited Nepal on 8 February 2008. Nepal’s then Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal paid an official visit to Norway on March 29-31, 2009. Norway wanted to influence one side of the conflict – either the government or the CPN-Maoist. However, since it failed to succeed, Norway opted for a different approach by providing NOK 30.6 million for Nepal Peace Trust Fund seeking its engagement and bolster influence.
Minister of International Development Mr. Heikki Holmas visited Nepal on 4-5 June 2012. Every visit by a Norwegian authority had a clandestine mission. After all efforts failed, Norway started playing a different role to destabilize Nepal and wanted to play the role of a mediator to earn international fame. The role gathered speed by covertly supporting some ethnic groups in the name of human rights or transitional justice.
What we do?
Nepal, in fact, has a weak strategic and foreign policy. This is sure to give space to foreign powers or donors to interfere by taking advantage of the fluid situation. Norwegian provoking role or activities cannot be acceptable for Nepal’s traditional neighbors – China or India. Norway has been provoking several groups by making huge investments in favor of ethnicity-based federalism. Growing foreign influence in Nepal in the name of donation, human right, justice, inclusiveness, federalism has weakened nationalist forces as well as Nepal’s political parties in recent times.
Failing to act strongly to rein-in Norway’s role will – without doubt – lead to unfortunate circumstances. It is high time that Nepalese leaders and people work towards preserving Nepal’s unity in diversity. We must need to ensure the country’s diversity on an equal basis to create ethnic balance in all sectors by discarding the donor’s interests. Norway honestly does not want to contribute, preserve or promote Nepal’s ethnic diversity. It simply is hell-bent on destabilizing the age-old harmony through donations.
The policy and priority should not be to serve such country like Norway inciting ethnic conflict in the name of peace. These countries have been trying to play in the Chinese strategic region, Tibet, which is becoming an opening point for Nepal. If we fail to control such activities, these vested interest groups will not only destabilize Nepal but will also spread its wings to strategically destabilize both China and India. The increasing reliance of donors will only widen rift among Nepalese politicians and professionals. Nepal needs to maintain this effort and strength to safeguard its national interest by confronting any overt and covert plots.

Norway’s controversial role in conflict
Infamous for third party mediator, Norway has played controversial roles in several conflict-afflicted countries. Norway, the self proclaimed truly neutral peace broker, does not have a good history. However, it boasts of being a mediator in international peace processes, which began in 1992 between Israel and Palestinian leadership. The process started covertly and held 14 secret sessions but crucial negotiations process failed without progress.
Norway also engaged in the ethnic Kachin conflict in Myanmar. Peace Support Initiative under the Norwegian coordination initiative failed to achieve fruitful result. Norway played futile roles by providing multi-million dollar in the name of humanitarian and peace efforts in Burma. The Myanmar government has also accused Norway of donating without the government’s consent. 40 percent of the Burmese population is ethnic minorities. Therefore, the government fears that Norwegian donation might fuel ethnic tension.
Another instance of Norwegian failure was in Sri Lanka. Norway’s direct indication to negotiate or facilitate in the Sri Lankan conflict was in February, 2002. On 12 September 2006, Norway announced that the Sri Lanka Government and Tamil Tigers had agreed to hold “unconditional peace talks” in October in Oslo. But the Sri Lanka government criticized the Norwegian role and cancelled the talks since the announcement of the date and venue was made without the consent of the Sri Lankan government. Norway’s intention was not to bring peace in Sri Lanka. In early 2011, Norway offered to play another role aimed at reconciling Tamils living abroad, which Sri Lankan government flatly refused with the fear of ethnic tension. The former LTTE regional commander and a current Sri Lankan member of parliament Colonel Karuna exposed Norway’s role in Sri Lankan conflict in an interview. They disclosed Norwegian support for the LTTE and the existence of exchange money, goods, and expensive gifts to penetrate the LTTE leadership. Norway also sought mediation in the Pakistan conflict as well as Kashmir issue, which yielded no results.

PRAMOD SEDHAIN: नेटो– रुस विवाद परिणाम

नेटो– रुस विवाद परिणाम

नेटो– रुस विवाद परिणाम

प्रमोदराज सेढाई

pramodsedhain@gmai.com