Peace & Democracy : Sustainability Measures

Yuba Nath Lamsal

Both peace and democracy are fragile in Nepal at present. Both are nascent, which need better nurturing and careful handling. If our political actors make a slight mistake, peace and democracy may be at risk.

A Fact

Democracy cannot flourish and function at the absence of peace. Our recent past is a witness to this fact. At the same time, sustainable peace is not possible without democracy and open society.Nepal used to be described as a peaceful country and a Himalayan Shangri-la until the Maoist insurgency began. But it was a coercive peace but not the spontaneous and sustainable peace. Coercive peace is the state of situation when political activities and dissenting voices are summarily suppressed. The dictators dub this situation as the state of peace. Whenever people get an opportunity, they revolt against the authoritarian regime and the coercive peace is automatically broken.

Before the Maoist insurgency began, there was no physical war or any armed conflict. But there were conflicts beneath the surface. There was ethnic grumbling against the discriminatory policy. Women were unhappy with the existing system as they were not treated equally and not given equal rights and opportunities. Dalits were suppressed and exploited but they were not allowed to speak against the exploitative and discriminatory system. Politically, a centralized system was in place with both political and military power in the hands of the so-called upper caste elites. Parties had been banned and political activities prohibited. Only those who supported the king's autocratic regime were allowed to function and carry out political activities. So there was a simmering disgruntlement among the general people who were out of the mainstream.

There was definitely no physical or military war but the mental and psychological conflict and war was always deep rooted in the society that came to the fore after the political change in 1990 and intensified after the Maoist armed insurgency started. The Maoist raised the issues that were never raised prominently before. The Maoist agenda were elimination of feudalism, introduction of proportional representation system in election, empowerment of women and other backward communities and their due representation in the political and decision making level. These issues and agenda of the Maoists attracted the hitherto oppressed and alienated people towards their political organization. As a result, the CPN-Maoist rose to such a powerful political organization around which the entire politics of Nepal has been revolving. But the state failed to assess the this disgruntlement against the system. The political parties, instead of addressing the problem politically, described the Maoist insurgency as a mere tempest in the teapot and tried to quell it by use of force, which miserably failed.

The conflict was there at every level even before the Maoist insurgency began. But it was the failure on the part of the state not to visualize the situation and take initiative to address the problem in time. They realized only when the situation had already got complicated. The political parties had to pay a heavy price for their inability to assess the situation in time and take effective measures to address it. The king, taking advantage from the situation of conflict and insurgency, took over power and tried to rule with an iron fist but finally failed. Had the political parties been united and worked sincerely and seriously for the larger good of the nation and the people, the situation would not have arisen. The political parties were involved more on grabbing power and retaining it by hook or by crook. The national issues and agenda of the people remained in the backburner. The political parties not only lost power but credibility as well.

They had to labour hard to regain this lost credibility. When political parties launched their protest against the king's takeover demanding the restoration of democratic process, the people, in the beginning, were reluctant to join hands with them. The programmes of the civil society and the professional groups were more effective than those of the political parties in the beginning. The people went to street at the call of political parties in a massive way only after the party leaders publicly apologized for their mistakes of the past and promised not to repeat such mistakes in future. This was a great lesson for the political parties.

People thought that parties and leaders learnt lessons and would not commit the same old mistakes again and over again. Given the behavior, attitude and activities of the political parties and leaders, they have not changed at all even after the success of the Jana Andolan II. They are committing the same old mistakes, which have only frustrated the people and considered a breach of their promises. The nation and people are above individual and partisan interest. But our political parties and leaders have still not been able to rise above the partisan interest. This is the reason why Nepal's democratic movement was weakened and suffered setbacks at different times. When in opposition, Nepali political parties feel the need of unity and united approach.

Once they are in power, they forget the past and start biter fight for power?no mater whether it is moral or not. What we have achieved from the success of the Jana Andolan II is due to the joint struggle of all political forces. But some political parties and leaders have shown a tendency of minimizing the role of other partners. All the political forces that played positive role in the Jana Andolan II must have equal say in the decision making process for creating a new Nepal. Parties must develop a coalition culture so that decisions are taken through consensus for the greater interest of the nation and the people.

The partisan interest of the political parties has once again hindered the peace and political process in Nepal. The priority of the parties and the government at present is the election to a constituent assembly. If the constitutional provision and public commitment of the parties are any basis, constituent assembly election would have to be conducted by mid June this year. This was not done, which has been attributed to the lack of adequate time for preparation. It was breach of promise of the political parties and violation of the interim constitution. Even now the date for the election is still uncertain. It is all because of the inaction of the political parties.Peace and democracy are interdependent. Sustainable peace is not possible at the absence of democracy, open and free society. The peace and political process must go hand in hand at present.

But the delay in political decisions, this process has been delayed, although not derailed. CompletionConstituent assembly election is the only way to complete the peace and political process. Thus, political parties need to shun partisan interest and work together in the spirit of coalition culture to hold the constituent assembly election that would complete the political and peace process. It is the only process to institutionalize democracy and establish durable peace in the country.

Source: The Rising Nepal, May 29, 2007