From Mediation to Referendum to Stop Ethnic Extremism in Nepal Current Nepal is standing in such a critical juncture of its history, from where it may lead towards the destructive escalation of a communal conflict and possibly a direct foreign interference in the state of affairs. Thus, Nepali leaders at present have two significant challenges. The first one is to come up with a magic-stick constitution that could solve many present-day problems; the second one is to come up a widely accepted solution, which could avoid the possibilities of ethnic and regional wars in the country. Though, Nepal has experienced a number of tensions and political crisis over the past 15 years, which many people had thought that it going to be extremely difficult to resolve. Dramatic transformation of momentous political crisis like bloody armed conflict and semi-authoritarian regime led by the King became possible, due to the bottom up pressure from the citizens through people’s movement of 2006 along with the positive commitment shown by the then political leadership and the blessings from its neighbors and long time development partners from the West. However, current turmoil of the country is something more critical than any other crisis of the past. Why present situation of Nepal is more critical than any other moments from the past? Four different factors fundamentally explain the criticality of the situation. First, things happening all around Nepal by the name of demanding and defending certain identity are the product of the political leaders’ false promise of so-called emancipation and randomly distributed dream for autonomy and rights to self-determination. Agitation all over the country is also an accumulated expression of anxiety and frustration of the leaders of different identity groups where some groups are living with a fear of losing their power and identity, and other groups have an ambition for guaranteeing their long-term control over the existing power structure of the country. Similarly, second factor relates to the growing dominance of identity-based groups in the political domain as well as in the street. However, their aspirations are totally mismatched and counterproductive to each other and to the whole nation. Issue regarding ethnic federalism is mounting in such as a way that this is the only solution of persisting and forth coming problems of the country. Even in such situation, current political leadership has been less vocal and politically weak in making a decision in pro and against of ethnic federalism. Political leadership had never been so weak before. Groups who are waging identity-based movements are taking advantage of the weaknesses of the political actors. Why political actors are so weak, is because of their fear for losing their vote bank in upcoming elections. Third factor responsible for making current situation more critical is because every identity group whatever their names are, think that present timing is ideal for enhancing their bargaining power and establish their agendas as national political agendas. Thus, no matter how feasible and contextual the demands are none of the groups are hesitating to put forward demand so openly and straightforwardly. Nepalese political practices demonstrate that everything becomes contextual and factual, once a group forcefully establishes a certain agenda in the national political domain. All movements that are happening around the country are the continuation of the culture of “forceful establishment” of agenda as a national agenda. Fourth factor and probably the most salient one relates with the prevalence and activeness of visible and invisible spoilers in the political and the public sphere. Spoilers have different appearances, and in most cases, it is difficult to recognize them in the period of political fragility. Even if they are recognized, it is extremely difficult to pinpoint and take action against them due to weak political and administrative authorities. In sum, there is no concrete plan with government and political actors for managing and controlling spoiler’s activities who are the key contributors to escalate ethnic tussle in Nepal. Why, Nepal is experiencing such a critical situation? Three factors are relevant to mention here. First, political leadership is more responsible to have this situation, as key political parties are the ones who germinated the seeds of ethnic and regional division and polarization for their own political benefit. In addition, donor community and I/NGOs operating in Nepal and the so-called intellectuals are also somehow responsible for negative radicalization Nepalese society. Nepalese society has been hugely rights driven over the last 22 years, and remarkably little efforts are there to prepare a bulk of the responsibility-driven citizens. In other words, negative empowerment made people intolerant of people from other than their own caste, ethnicity, religion and place of residence. Second factor associates with the weaknesses occurred during the transformation process of the Nepalese society. Current Nepal is moving from close society towards more open and democratic society. However, the trends and processes of such transformation could not be managed well, the way it was supposed to be. Many groups are indoctrinated in such a way that the radicalized ideas they have the more that becomes politically influential in Nepal. Finally, and probably the most influential one is the lack of visionary and morally strong political leadership to the adequate management and transformation of the present crisis. No matter whether they are youth or adult or old age leader, existing political leadership does not seem capable enough or let’s say so much primed to find a long-term solution for the key problems that the country is currently facing. Where the leaders are pouring their energy now, is to find out an immediate solution for the problems without a prospect for the future. Leaders from all age group keen on continue the existing political structure and follow the similar social and political rituals what it is now. Every conscious citizen of Nepal is aware of the fact that the situation of country is more critical than before. Fortunately, we are not experiencing wide-ranging violence, even in such a complex political atmosphere. Number of strategies could be adopted before the spread of large-scale violence throughout the country. First, Nepal requires third party mediation to solve its ethnic and regional tensions; and such mediation could be done through the help of prestigious civil-society figure of Nepal by facilitating dialogue among government, political parties and agitating groups. Globally, conflicts are mediated only after the breakout of violence and when the conflicting parties have reached in the stage of what Professor Zartman called “Mutually Hearting Stalemate.” Nepal should learn from the experience of other ethnic wars prone areas. Thus, through mediation approach, it needs to prevent the possible damage from identity- based conflict. Mediating conflict after the breakout of violence has nothing more to do than the reduction of violence. However, mediation attempt before the eruption of conflict could prevent violence. Second, it seems like around 15 identity-based organizations are currently in agitation throughout the country, and this number is not many at this stage, but there is a chance to have further increment of this number, as many other new groups may emerge in the future. Instead of organizing dialogues separately with different groups, third party mediators can convene a roundtable conference where the key leaders from all agitating groups, representatives from the government, and the political parties can come together to listen to each others’ interests and positions. Millions of rupees are spent on many worthless workshops and conferences. However, no such initiatives are taken so far. Thus, a roundtable conference, among the concerned group and facilitated by third party mediator, could be one of the best ways to find a durable solution of the present conflict. Third, if mediation could not solve the existing problems and if social harmony gets deteriorates one after another, then ultimate solution could be to go for a referendum on issues around federalism and governing structure of the state. Why a referendum needed, is because the decision taken by CA would not be acceptable for many groups, no matter how best decisions will be those. Likewise, CA in itself and leaders, in each political party, are much divided over the issues of state restructuring processes. Division and polarization have made them weak to take bold political decisions. Moreover, there is also a growing bulk of the population who is against of federalism. In order to address the disagreements and disappointments of different interest groups, nationwide referendum can be the best alternatives. Fourth and a bit hard solution of the problem could be the enforcement of existing law and order to punish those who are driving their actions towards extremism by the name of democratic freedom and open society. Democracy does not allow each one to do whatever they want to do. Freedom is not limitless within a democratic society, at one point every citizen has to compromise when their actions negatively affect the democratic life system.