INCLUSIVE DEMOCRATIC NEPAL

New Nepal government has a golden opportunity

2009-06-10T16:06:00.000+05:30

Democracy and republicanism have not ended Nepal’s biggest problem—a fractured polity. Exactly a year has passed since Nepal’s Constituent Assembly (CA) declared Nepal a Republic. Over the past year, Nepal’s budding republic experienced several political highs and lows. It began with the abolition of the 250-year-old monarchy. The Maoists rose to power and then fell equally spectacularly. There was an emergence of strong regional forces in the Tarai, the sidelining of the mainstream political parties, rise of the demand for equal representation and autonomy by ethnic and marginalised groups, an upsurge in violent activities and, most importantly, increased politicking by foreign countries in Nepal’s affairs.

However, the climax was the tussle between the Unified Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist (UCPNM) party and the Nepalese Army over the issue of ‘civilian supremacy’. It led to the downfall of the Maoist government and changed the whole discourse on Nepal’s polity.

As of now, the first elected government led by the Maoists has collapsed and has been replaced by a new one headed by senior Communist Party of Nepal-Unified Marxist Leninist (CPN-UML) leader Madhav Kumar Nepal. With the support of 360 CA members from 22 different political parties, Madhav Nepal was elected unopposed as no other candidates filed nomination for the top post. The UML-led coalition easily obtained the magic number required to form a majority government in the 601 member- House.

However, the allegations and counter-allegations, symptoms of virtual and near-splits in political parties, moral posturing, allegation of buying CA parliamentarians and talk of foreign interference continues to be an issue of debate in the country. Moreover, the Maoists alleged that the new government was installed at the behest of foreign powers and have threatened to continue their protest in Parliament and on the street unless the President’s ‘unconstitutional’ move was rectified.

In the past, the coalition that made it possible for the Maoists to head the government under Pushpa Kamal Dahal, or Prachanda, was, at best, a group driven by short-term political interests and evident by serious splits within the coalition. The two main partners of the coalition, the CPN-UML and the Madhesi Janaadhikar Forum (MJF), had two equally divided camps. On the other hand, the Nepali Congress (NC), which had opted to sit in the Opposition, kept an eagle eye on the government’s functioning and did not loose opportunity to criticise it. Thus emerged give-and-take politics, which is a characteristic of parliamentary system where no outright majority exists.

The recent crisis emerged after Prachanda announced that he would sack the Army chief for disobeying the civilian government’s supremacy. The Maoists certainly had an axe to grind here. They wanted to dismiss the current Army chief, who was vehemently opposed to the integration of the 19,000 PLA combatants housed in UNMIN-monitored cantonments. The Maoists wanted to replace General Rutmangad Katuwal with another General who was pro-Maoist and possibly would have been more accommodative with their proposals.

The MJF, for their part, had tried to find a middle path and work out a consensus with other parties by offering two alternative proposals to resolve the crisis. The party proposed that a committee should be formed within the cabinet or a high-level committee consisting of all major parties in the parliament should be set up to study and report on the clarifications provided by the CoAS. At that point of time, all the other coalition partners had agreed to the proposal except the Maoists who were hell bent on removing the Army Chief and the reasons remain unclear.

The issue became more complicated after the President intervened and vetoed the PM’s order and reinstated the Army chief. Analysts believe and blame the Maoists for the foul play, but it is also true that both the UML and the MJF had earlier agreed to seek clarification and sack the Army chief if necessary for surpassing the orders of an elected government. Though Prachanda had consulted his coalition partners and obtained their support, the coalition partners had backtracked. The controversy got more impetus after the NC and a faction within the UML and MJF opposed to the Maoists’ style of functioning decided to go for the final step. However, whatever the reasons, the fact remains that Prachanda had to resign after one of its main coalition partner withdrew support over the Army chief controversy leaving it in a minority position.

In his address to the nation, the newly elected Madhav Kumar Nepal said that taking the peace process to its logical end and drafting the new Constitution within the stipulated time are the two most important tasks. Besides, he also committed to respect the past accords, take care of the country’s law and order situation, provide relief and reform packages to the people and adhere to the civilian supremacy that has held the attention after the Army Chief row came to the fore during the tenure of Prachanda, has been highlighted with the government. Going by his word, it appears that there is a ray of hope in the leadership of Madhav Nepal. However, the uncanny behaviour of the coalition, guided by vested interests, remains worrisome. At the moment, the majority government has laid stressed on the importance of a national consensus and this is a good indication. In fact, this is an immediate lesson learnt from the past government’s ouster in nine months where the Maoists took each and every decision unilaterally.

At this juncture, the trust among the political parties and within them is at the lowest. The NC and Maoists can hardly see eye to eye; the UML and the Maoists share some commonalities but their confidence in each other remains shattered. More importantly, the parties also suffer from internal problems—the UML and NC are all divided. The MJF have somehow managed to pull off from the brink of a split but the internal feud is fast gaining strength.

Therefore, with so many challenges and hurdles on the way, it will take strong resolve, determination, firmness and all support and cooperation from the other parties to see that the UML-led government delivers. Madhav Nepal headed government has several key tasks to perform, most important of them is to expedite the Constitution drafting process and take the peace process to its logical end. Apparently, it is the successful completion of the following tasks that will bring an end to the transitional period. More importantly, isolating the Maoists will also have grave consequences to the peace process. Therefore, it is the prime responsibility of Madhav Nepal to reach out to the Maoists and keep them engaged in the peace process.

Courtesy: The Pioneer

Nepal is main venue of anti-China activities

2009-04-04T00:12:00.003+05:30

Chandra Prakash Gajurel

Polit Bureau Member, Nepal Communist Party-Maoist

TGQ1: The Chinese foreign minister recently said that China was ready to safeguard Nepal’s national sovereignty and territorial integrity. Is it that the country has been pushed to that level?

Gajurel: It is not so at the moment. Nevertheless, the Chinese Ambassadors and Ministers have been talking on that line since long. The Chinese have been saying since long that if there is any sort of attack on Nepal’s sovereignty and geographical integrity, China will be ever ready to support Nepal. China might have told so sensing that of late foreign interference, more so from the immediate neighbor, has increased in Nepal.

China perhaps told these things upon studying the Nepali scenario as it stood today.

From when such interferences began to your knowledge?

Gajurel: The unequal treaties that we have signed with immediate neighbor in itself tantamount to interference. But why this issue took a different dimension in these days is because only last Thursday, the parliament members raised the issue that at 54 different places Nepal’s lands have been encroached upon by the other side. We can call such acts as interference or even encroachment. Of the total 54 places where Nepalese lands have been illegally occupied, there are two such places wherein a sizeable chunk of our lands have been already amalgamated by the other side.

Well, what must be kept in mind is that there has been interference in Nepal’s politics from that side and it has also been seen that the other side pushes its instructions every now and then. Isn’t it?

TGQ2: Has the time already come to invite third country to resolve Nepal-India border dispute?

Gajurel: No! It is not that. The time has not come yet. We must resolve our issues bilaterally.

But your Home Minister recently sought the Chinese support to resolve the Kalapani land dispute with India?

Gajurel: We have felt that the Indian interests in Nepal have exponentially gone up in these days. We, however, don’t want to tease India in this regard and come up as a different sort of nationalists. This would not be logical. Neither we want to “use” India. But the time has come that we must put the entire Nepali perspective in a positive and forceful manner for the perusal of the Indian government.

TGQ3: Why it is that we always raise the issue of 1950 treaty but shelve the matter every time. What could be the reason?

Gajurel: This is a paradox. All happen to raise this issue but shelve it sine die.

At least, I could raise this issue at a New Delhi seminar recently. Many Indians told me that at least you put your things straight. To tell you frankly, the 1950 Treaty has become a “burden” for the Indian establishment as well. Neither it can abandon the treaty nor can it carry on with it.

The treaty is in itself a faulty one in that it has no provision of affecting a review on a timely basis. Either you scrap it or bear with it. This is the position.

When we talk of scrapping the treaty, India gets irritated. India maintains that how come Nepal got the strength to challenge the Indian establishment? The other side presumes that it should be China behind such Nepali strength?

Be that as it may, the treaty as such has already become a “heavy” burden both for Nepal and India to put it plainly.

TGQ4: Two of your ministers recently sneaked into the Chinese territory without informing the government. Doesn’t this event force one to raise questions as regards the motive of such a secret visit?

Gajurel: This is impossible. No ministers can do that. I too went to Lhasa but did not inform the party. I went to Lhasa without introducing myself to avoid making an issue out of the visit.

However, while crossing half of the bridge, one Chinese police officer recognized me and demanded certain documents. Luckily, the party unit too was present there which facilitated my easy entrance into Khasa.

But it was a case associated with the government ministers? Wasn’t it?

Gajurel: Why to make a mountain out of a mole? Has it been written any where that it would be a crime if one stepped into the Chinese land? It would have been a different matter if some high Chinese officials had arrived there and met with the Nepalese ministers. But it was not so then why to blow up the issue out of proportion?

TGQ5: There is the growing fear among the population that Nepal could turn up some time soon into Yugoslavia and Haiti if India, the US and China are allowed to play in Nepal?

Gajurel: If we talk of the recent days activities, Kathmandu has become the venue for initiating anti-Tibet activities. While China was busy with its Olympic games, each and every day there could be seen anti-China activities. The anti-China activities went to the extent that some enthusiasts even tried to climb the Nepali mountains wearing “Free-Tibet” vests.

The Dalai Lama lives in Dharmashala, India. However, there were no such protests against China in India. Now it has been an established fact that the Dalai men came down to Kathmandu and encouraged the anti-China protests during that time. It became evidently clear that some one tried to make Nepal their play ground.

If China senses a threat to its security, it will not remain as a mere onlooker. The talk of Yugoslavia is thus not in the talk for nothing.

2008-12-09 16:11:59
Source: Telegraphnepal.com.np

Madhesh as such doesn’t exist in Nepal

2009-04-04T00:11:00.000+05:30

Raj Kumar Lekhi, General Secretary

Tharu Welfare Society, Nepal

Raj Kumar Lekhi is the leader of the Tharu community. He is concurrently the General Secretary of the Tharu Welfare Society.

Lekhi’s society and some other Tharu organizations in support of some indigenous political entities agitated for some good thirteen days and forced the government to bow down and sign an agreement which now, claims Lekhi, secured and ensured the rights of the Tharus community.

The Tharus appear to differ with the idea of declaring Nepal’s entire Tarai belt as One Madhesh.

Tharus claim that there is no such place or special territory in Nepal which could be taken as Madhesh.

Lekhi claims that with the signing of the 6 point agreement with the government of Nepal in favor of the Tharu rights, a historic achievement has been accomplished.

However, Lekhi’s detractors opine that he and Laxman Tharu betrayed the entire Tharus and signed the agreement with the government without taking into confidence the mood of the Tharu community.

Lekhi and Laxman rebuke such allegations.

The Sunrise Post dated March 21, 2009, printed interview with Lekhi. Thanks Sunrise.

Below the excerpts: Ed.

TGQ1: Your Tharu community waged a movement for long in the recent days against the recently promulgated government’s Ordinance which assimilates your community in the category of the Madhesis. What were the gains of the said movement? Some even say that your agreement with the government is likely not to be addressed by the government. Your comments please.

Lekhi: The genuine demands that we had been voicing since long has been well addressed by the fresh agreement between the Tharu community and the government. The present agreement with the government now fully recognizes the distinct Tharu identity, linguistic pattern, tradition, historical and cultural practices and above all the political rights of the Tharus.

To be candid, the clause 1 of the fresh agreement clearly sates that the government henceforth recognizes the separate identities of the people living in the hills and the indigenous population including those of the Tharus. In effect, these people have their own and distinct culture and traditions and thus their demands have now been fulfilled.

What has also been agreed upon that by affecting effecting certain amendments in the interim constitution which caused immense damage to annihilate our separate identities by such an amendment will be corrected through yet another amendment? This means that the interim constitution will now again be amended in order to ensure our unique identity that we possess in abundance.

Be it known to all that neither we are the followers of Madhesh nor we are Madhesis. We are at best entirely different from others and are Tharus.

Well! We don’t claim that all of our demands have been met with for all time to come. However, still, the historical movement that we have had in the recent weeks has some way or the other addressed some of our genuine concerns.

Neither a movement of the sort what we have had can address all of our issues and concerns.

What we have talked this time is that we were neither Madhesis nor the inhabitants of what is called Madhesh. We have just wanted to sound that we are Tharus who possess a distinct identity and that we be not assimilated into any other ethnic domain. We just wanted to establish our historical roots and cultural patterns that are definitely different than others.

The fresh agreement has provided a sort of slap to all those who wanted to incorporate the entire castes and ethnic tribes into one particular community. The Ordinance which had damaged our separate identity and Madhesised the entire belt remains now shattered.

Some demands are yet to be addressed.

TGQ2: So when the agreement you think will come into effect? Why not you the Tharus raised this issue when the Interim Constitution was amended? You could have raised your reservations then? Why was the delay? Your comments please.

Lekhi: Well! The Constituent Assembly will resume its proceedings by March 29, 2009. The government at time of signing of the agreement with us has assured that the demands of the Tharus will be brought to the attention of the CA upon completion of all the needed and the required procedures as is demanded. The onus now lay with the government for the fulfillment of the agreements that has already been agreed upon.

What remain yet to be seen is how the parties take this and how the government convinces the political parties. How the lobbying is carried out by the government in this regard will be equally important to watch in the days ahead.

Indeed we have had raised this issue the day the first amendment of the interim constitution included the word Madhesh as such, however, our protest in this regard went unheeded.

The tragedy has been that unless some dozen vehicles are not burnt and agitation not sponsored the government in Nepal does not listen to the issues and concerns of the people.

Thus we were forced to do the same what others have done in order to get their demands addressed. And we did it and thus got our demands met with by the government.

TGQ3: Why your community is aggressive towards the Madhesh? Recently we have learnt that you have agreed to allow the government to write Tarai and Madhesh together instead of what was Madhesh only in the past? Will you explain please1

Lekhi: Yes! Indeed there are Madhesis in Nepal. Even in Kathmandu you can notice the presence of Madhesis. Like wise they are also in Pokhara and in Tarai as well.

But there is no such territory in Nepal which could be taken as Madhesh. Neither Madhesh was yesterday nor it exists today and at best nor would it come into existence in the future as well.

If Delhi houses some one million Nepali citizens, will then that allow the Nepalese to constitute a mini Nepal right there? It can’t be made so. This applies here as well.

To tell you frankly, there is no word as such which is Tarai-Madhesh in our agreement that we have signed recently. Albeit that was the proposition of the government at time of the agreement. We haven’t accepted the word Tarai-Madhesh in the agreement.

TGQ4: The Madhesi community after a prolonged agitation had managed to incorporate the word Madhesh in the interim constitution after the first amendment. Will now the Madhesh parties will so easily accept the use of the word Tarai ?

Lekhi: We just wanted to establish the unique and the distinct identities of the Tharus, Muslim and other indigenous people. The Madhesis while raising the issues concerning ensuring of their own rights tried to intrude upon to the rights of the others sects, ethnicity and tribes. We objected to their efforts at minimizing our exclusive and genuine rights. We have rebuffed their design by waging the prolonged agitation recently.

Who say what and does what should be not of our concern.

TGQ5: The Tharu agitation has come to an end. During the agitation some other political groupings also extended their support to your agitation. Will such a support continue in the future as well? Tell us why your society is being dubbed as anti-Madhesh? Your remarks please.

Lekhi: Those who supported us have their own demands. How they do it, it is their way to decide.

Yes! The Tharus have various organizations and all have their own identity and functioning style. But when it comes to the crunch, we all become one and fight in a united manner.

The Tharu Welfare Society, let me tell you frankly, does not believe in the armed movement. We don’t extend our support to those who raise weapons. We adopt peaceful means.

Definitely not. We are not against any particular caste or for that mater a community. Our fight is just to guarantee the rights of the Tharu community which has been denied by the State so far.

This is a wrong calculation and thus I refute such allegations.

2009-03-25 09:08:22
Source: Telegraphnepal.com.np

The day of the generals

2009-04-04T00:07:00.000+05:30

SHYAM K.C. While presenting his party's vision of a new constitution last week, the Maoist party chairman told a Constituent Assembly (CA) committee that his party was for multi-party democracy and that it was committed to generally accepted human rights norms. As if to illustrate the sincerity of their leaders' pledge, Maoist-aligned groups took out demonstrations in different parts of the city to protest against the Supreme Court order regarding the tenure extension of some senior army officers. Similar protests by the Maoists were reported on Thursday in Nepalgunj. (The Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister said that the judiciary and the army stood in the way of “democratisation”, obviously meaning that kangaroo courts and the Maoist-aligned army should replace the existing judiciary and the national army.)
The Maoist protestors must have been incensed by the court's audacity to overrule a decision taken by a government elected by the people. After all, can't a government elected by the people do what it deems fit or proper or right? In most cases, decisions free of corruption and emotional underpinnings will ensure that the rights of the people are safeguarded at all times, and that no government decision infringes on the rights of the citizens, whether such citizens are employed by the government, private firms or corporations.

Did the government break an established precedent when it refused to extend the term of office of six brigadiers?
Not long ago, when a long-term lease on a piece of land owned by Nepal Industrial Development Corporation (NIDC) and used by a five-star hotel as an approach road ran out, NIDC wanted to reclaim possession of the land and close the road. The Supreme Court was moved by aggrieved parties, and the court ruled that the approach road should continue to be used as usual. Did not NIDC that owned the land have any right? Why did the court rule against the legitimate owner of the land? (There is a similar case about a closed path and road to the east of Sundhara. The Employees Provident Fund took possession of the land, and those trying to protect the Sundhara area have yet to move the court to legally open up the closed footpath and road. Surely, if a property used as a road for 25 years can continue to be used as a road, then the path and road used by the common people for over 100 years deserves at least the same treatment, if not more.)
The Supreme Court has had the distinction of upholding the basic rights of the people who have to face the colossal giant called the government. This is true not only in the post-1990 period but also during the panchayat era when the government, probably dissatisfied with the political leanings of some of its employees, had served them notice terminating their service. Some of these notices were upheld, but in many cases where the termination was not in accordance with the prevailing laws, rules, regulations and precedents, the employees had come out victorious against the all-powerful government. If such things can happen during the iron rule of the panchayat era, is there any plausible reason as to why this cannot or should not happen in a liberal democracy led by the most liberal of liberals, the Maoists?
The Maoist-led government has faced a series of reverses at the apex court. A media report said that the court ruled against the government in as many as six different but major cases. This may be due to the fact, as the prime minister admitted while addressing the nation sometime ago, that the Maoists and their coalition partners were not as experienced in governing as some other parties, like the Nepali Congress. But it must not be forgotten that the apex in any country is the last hope of individual citizens against the wilful imposition of the powerful on the weaker sections of the populace.
An individual waging battle against a powerful government is unthinkable, but the apex court in a democratic country makes the unthinkable possible. The court is also the last resort for those in the military who believe that they have been wronged by the military or by the government. The army and police personnel also have individual rights like any of us. The apex court sees to it that the individual, no matter how weak, gets his or her justice and that the government, simply because it is rich (thanks to taxpayers' money) and powerful (thanks to the army and police and other security agencies) cannot do what it wants throwing all accepted democratic norms and practices to the winds.
In a democracy as opposed to monocracy (or even mob rule, if you will), decisions are not taken based on personal likes and dislikes nor out of personal grudges. But there are rulers who do so, and the one place where the victims can be protected against their whimsical decisions is a court of law. Whether true or not, reports have been in the air for some time that the defence minister and the army chief do not see eye to eye on many issues, and that the government decision not to extend the terms of office of six brigadiers stemmed from this decision. But if the government took the decision throwing precedents to the winds and on the basis of personal likes and dislikes of individuals, such a decision certainly made the day for the generals.

Posted on: 2009-03-29 22:53:48

The shortage economy

2009-04-04T00:06:00.001+05:30

BY SUKHDEV SHAH

The phrase 'shortage economy' was coined during the 1980s to describe the extreme shortages of consumer goods in socialist economies of the Former Soviet Union (FSU) and Eastern Europe. After an initial good start in the 1950s and 1960s, centralized planning in these countries started to develop bottlenecks that hindered production, fostered emergence of unused capacity, and created shortages of consumer items of all sorts. Shortages became extreme during the 1980s, as reflected in the long queues for basic consumer goods such as clothing and food items, health and education supplies, and of smuggled foreign goods. The depth of shortages in these countries -- most notably in FSU countries -- was captured in the popular joke about low productivity of government workers: a typical worker in FSU countries spent more time standing in queues than working in the office!
Such shortages occurred partly because of central planning that could not sensibly plan for the production of thousands of items to match consumer demand, and partly it reflected government intentions to create shortages of consumer goods to increase saving.

Achieving parity between demand and supply is almost automatic in a market economy -- or capitalist enterprise system -- which does the equilibrating job by making use of the price signal that helps eliminate the shortage.
However, the centrally planned system does not trust the market and, instead, it tries to replace it with officially fixed production, to be sold at officially fixed prices. Of course, planners have to work with insufficient information to get at correct market-clearing prices, which is seldom achieved. This led to the shortage of some goods at the same time that unsold inventories of other items piled up. Consumers also had to wait for years to get a phone connection, find a living space, and purchase a car!
Nepal's case is different!
Nepal's economy is facing shortages of many items but consumer items are not one of them. Except for the occasional shortage of petroleum products -- most of the time for reasons beyond government control --supplies of most goods and services available from private shops and businesses are plentiful. Also, foreign goods and currencies are available on demand in the private market, without having to wait in long queues or go through the black market. Most likely, the socialist economies of Eastern Europe and FSU would have survived and even prospered had they ensured adequate supplies of consumer items at prices private producers and businesses found profitable.
However, Nepal's economy is being undermined by a different kind of shortage, generally not faced in ex-socialist economies. This is the shortage of public goods, comprising such basic items for day-to-day living -- drinking water, electricity, roads, bridges, sewer system, trash management, transport, health, education, public security, and clean environment, to name a few. Because of the nature of such public goods -- need for large investments, economy of scale, common accessibility (non-exclusiveness), inability or difficulty of collecting user charges, and their impact on overall quality of life -- they cannot be provided by private enterprises which, in large part, are motivated by earning a profit.
Given that the provision of public goods, in most part, is in the public domain, adequacy of their supplies, as well as quality of their delivery, reflect, more than anything else, the government's commitment -- or lack of it -- to serving public interest. If the government is unwilling or unable to carry out such functions, it can be considered a failure -- it even looses the right to govern, at least in a moral sense.
We all are aware of the scarcity of public goods faced by the Nepali population and abysmally poor quality of the ones that are provided -- electricity, drinking water, public hygiene, road transport, health and education and, most significant of all in the post-monarchy Nepal, poor law and order situation. Looking at the scarcity of public goods faced by the Kathmandu population -- electricity, drinking water, extreme level of pollution of air and waterways -- one can scarcely believe that the government exists here in any meaningful sense.
Shortages of life-sustaining public amenities have not occurred overnight; rather, this has evolved over years and decades -- through revolutions and regime changes. However, there is no record of serious efforts made by any government to foresee the crisis and prevent unabated deterioration of living conditions for valley residents, whose number is believed to have zoomed from just one million 30 years ago to over four million at this time. Electricity, water, and waste-disposal infrastructures that were created just for one million people have changed very little over many decades. Speaking more generally, almost total neglect of investment in key public sector amenities has been the single reason for rapid deterioration in the qualify of life for Valley residents and in most of the urban areas of the county. Of course, much of the countryside has remained untouched.

Plan priorities!
Nepal has adhered to the techniques of development planning now over half a century, backed by sizeable investment of government money and foreign aid resources. However, the impression one gets is that the core structure of the economy is unaffected, and remains overwhelmingly rural and subsistence-based. In many ways, it looks as though that the economy has followed its own natural course -- making use of traditional technology to sustain life at the very basic level for a growing population -- very much like Robert Malthus envisioned two centuries ago. The reason for this failure is simple -- the wrong plan priorities.
There is a misconception in countries regarding the government's responsibility for meeting people's basic needs -- that of gaas, baas, kapaash (food, shelter, clothing); in the context of India, prior to the upsurge of double-digit growth in the last decade, people wanted the government to simply meet their food needs: Bhookh lagi hai roti do; nahin to gaddi chhor do [we are hungry, give us food; if not, vacate the thrown.]!
Such demands or expectations from governments may be alright -- even desirable -- in heavily economies, where the government owns the means of production and has centralized decision-making. In these economies, most of incomes earned by workers and households came from wage employment, overwhelmingly from government jobs, which they spent on government-provided goods and services. Public facilities -- education, health, transport, electricity, water, and sanitation services -- were provided free of charge or at highly subsidized rates.
However, in free -- or largely free -- market economies, the government is not expected to meet all -- or even most -- of the economic needs of people, except in emergency situations occasioned by natural calamities. The market system in these countries -- although not perfect -- does a pretty remarkable job allocating resources to their best uses and setting prices at levels that clear the market. Government interventions in the market are generally ineffective, tend to create artificial shortages, and breeds corruption among government officials. As noted above in the context of the situation in the Kathmandu valley, despite the scarcity of many consumer items, their uncertain supply source, and absence of any centralized distribution network, most goods are available in the market and cases of sustained scarcity of any item seem quite rare.
This is only one part of the story though -- evidence that the market and, indirectly, the private sector are doing alright, even under difficult circumstances. This is not at all so in the provision of public goods and services, which is the core function and responsibility of government. Looking at the available evidence -- scarcity of water and electricity supplies; conditions of roads and bridges; lack of public sanitation and pollution control, absence of law and order -- it would be difficult to dispute the fact that they represent the extreme form of government failure. One can say that such failure underlay the poor quality of life for most population and contributes to a lack of public trust in the government.
Government planners then must narrow down the approach to planning to areas strictly in the public domain, and drop such high-flying ideals as comprehensive planning and all-rounded development of the country -- themes that have been repeated in each plan implemented since 1956! The narrowing of plan objectives will require the government to focus its investments only on a few critical areas. At the present time, such areas can be limited to the establishment of law and order, infrastructure development, and environmental protection -- strictly Adam Smith's-type prescription for limited Government.
From the list of infrastructure items, we can eliminate “mixed” items such as health and education that can better be handled by the private sector, which does indeed happen in the Kathmandu valley and in most urban areas of the country. We can also leave out agriculture and industry sectors from the list of government priorities, since private producers can use available resources and technology in a more efficient manner than when mandated by government dictat.
The above reasoning leaves only a few infrastructure items -- in addition to law and order and environmental protection -- that need to concern government planners. Looking at the present needs of society and assessing the strength of linkages to the rest of the economy, critical areas for planned development can be whittled down to no more a few -- electricity, transport, water supply and sanitation. These core development areas are clearly in public domain and, more importantly, they have strong linkages with the rest of the economy.
We can envisage -- taking just one example -- of a five-year water development plan targeted to supply drinking water to the entire population and irrigation water to all farming areas in the country. What miracles can this do to lift the country's productive potential and improve public health? Another five-year development plan devoted to power sector and roads development can perform similar miracles. Such focused development of our infrastructure -- along with environmental protection and an improved law and order situation -- will work as an elixir for our long-dormant economy and give credibility to the government's effort to alleviate poverty and improve living conditions at the grassroots.

(The writer is an economist based in Washington DC)

Posted on: 2009-04-01 00:08:24

Is politics imploding?

2009-04-04T00:05:00.000+05:30

BY ABHI SUBEDI

Nepali politics in less than one year has opened up many avenues of change. But judging by some developments over the months, we can make wild speculations about its future. But the hope that a new era of stability, equality, freedom and prosperity will alight like a glorious morning on the Nagarkot heights from a special clear sky once the elected jumbo Constituent Assembly (CA) writes a new federal republican constitution of the land is slowly fading. But we should approach this problem without harbouring any preconceived notions about any political parties or organisations, and close or not-so-close friends of this land.
Some of the landmarks of the chaos are the virulent battles among the youths of this land. We ordinary teachers who have witnessed the dynamics of youth for decades have always warned that the seeds of belligerency planted by political parties among the young people of this land will grow to such an extent that political party leaders will have to define their actions according to the degree of casualties that the youngsters inflict on each other in the skirmishes that will happen on a regular basis.

An example is in order. The assassination of a member of the United Marxist Leninist (UML) Youth Force member Prachanda Thaiba in Butwal allegedly by a Maoist YCL cadre on March 26 has even threatened the very existence of the coalition government. The Maoists are asking the UML and the Nepali Congress (NC) not to politicise this event, but nothing short of “decisive action” against the killers is likely to save this uneasy alliance.
The CA session opened in Kathmandu on March 29 with a note of obituary, just a day after the prime minister of the beleaguered government Pushpa Kamal Dahal Prachanda left for a visit of the Nordic countries to curry economic and trade favours that Nepal needs urgently for its economic stability. It is commonplace to hear the litany of what happens when the prime minister leaves the country at a time when it is plunging into chaos. But the CA has commenced like a wartime parliament where the predominantly male voices in the House create a choric song with contrapuntal variations of different styles and modulations. The CA session this time is going to be a pandemonium, one can guess. Parties want to settle scores with the Maoists who will get a chance to review their own occasional misfires. Some parties are overtly expecting this session to pull down the Maoist-led government and create a new coalition. But that will not bring a more stable government and far less a more stable situation in the country. The country can slowly plunge into civil war, at worst.
Implosions have begun to occur; ideological boundaries of simulation and reality kept up by Nepal's social democrats and communists are getting erased. They have begun to curry the favour of external powers to replace that loss. The psychological projection of India as a power that can put leverage on the political parties to change the power equation here is one example. Former monarch Gyanendra tried his own round of this psychological game by meeting Hinduism stalwarts like Narendra Modi, L.K. Advani and others in the third week of this month. This visit of Gyanendra clearly and timely organised by his supporters and Hindu parties was a reactionary exercise more than anything. Just see the reaction of the people here and also there appears to be the motto of this visit.
Indian writers and journalists asked me mind-boggling questions at the Agra SAARC writers' meeting in the second week of March about the possibility of restoring the Nepali throne to the erstwhile king's grandson for the sake of unity in a chaotic land. Girijababu's concurrent visit was linked to the former king's visit. I said that there could be no such political possibility at all. I even spoke publicly about that. Ironically, by overreacting to Gyanendra's India visit and his meetings with Indian politicians, the political parties and the media are giving him and his men what they have precisely wanted to achieve from this visit.
Nepali politicians and the people know very well that it would be a futile attempt to revive the influence of the Hindu monarchy in Nepal either as a symbolic institution or a symbolic presence in the form of a party favoured by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and other Hindu parties of Nepal and India. For India, Hinduism is a social construct, which, in the postcolonial context, has become a subject of political study. The Hindu nationalist movement known as Sangh Parivar was created concurrently with the secular Congress party in the 20th century. Though Hindutva could not gain tremendous influence, it remained an important religio-political construct in Indian politics.
In Nepal, the Hindu aristocracy has a different historicism. When Jung Bahadur Rana visited Britain and France in 1850 as a so-called “Hindu prince”, which is an interesting postcolonial study of mimicry, the British colonial rulers did not have much idea of what a Hindu religious designation would be like. They established Hindu as a religious group only 21 years after Jung's “'Hindu prince”' visit to Britain, i.e., after the census of 1871. The Indian Hindutva used and has been using strong rhetoric, terror and violence to create its niche. The leaders of the BJP that formed the national coalition government in 1998 made no secret of their camaraderie with the RSS and Bajrang Dal that carry the legacy of Sangh Parivar.
The confusions that the politicians in Nepal and India make about the so-called symbolism of the Nepali monarchy (of the past) is that the people of this country through a very powerful political process and consensus have overthrown a feudal order, and with it the institution of so-called Hindu monarchy. They have shown the world that the Nepali political experience and history does not need to emulate the Indian politicised Sangh Parivar legacy of Hinduism in Nepal. The monarchy was not in any way related to that Indian Hindu political experience, and for the Indian Hindutva politicians to try to use a very Westernised erstwhile monarch to contest the Maoists, the leftists and other republicans would be a futile political exercise. Any future Indian government will find it worthwhile to establish links with the leftist political parties and the NC on a pragmatic basis to solve political problems not only in Nepal but also in India and Bhutan. And the seasoned Indian politicians know that reality very well.
The political parties of Nepal are mainly responsible for the political chaos that reigns in the country now. However, what they cannot escape is their existentialism. They are united by agreements; they are brought together by the CA; they have put their heads together over problems that they can solve only jointly. I feel that the politics of Nepal is not changing; it is only seeking new dynamics. But the problem is that political leaders are not showing magnanimity, openness and democratic commitment that are in short supply in Nepal now.

Posted on: 2009-04-01 00:07:19

Unlike Indians the Chinese keep up with their words and promises

2009-04-03T23:59:00.000+05:30

Mohan Baidya Pokharel ‘KIRAN’

Senior Leader, United Maoist Party

On Threat of A counter Revolution

The people want to see a complete change. There are nevertheless, great challenges ahead of us in our fight for the preservation of our nationalism and total freedom. Mainly, the threats are emerging from the reactionary camps and foreign forces. In this situation, it is still not very clear if the people will emerge as victor. Thus we see that the threat of a counter revolution is still looming large. We are not afraid of the prevailing situation, I think it is rather, we have analyzed the situation quite well. And, also we are completely aware of the ongoing and possible conspiracies against us. We believe that the possibility of a counter revolution remain intact until we draft the new constitution. To clarify more, there is also the presence of reactionary forces in the Constituent Assembly who are conspiring through various means.

On Nepali Congress

The NC has both positive and negative sides. To stand against the monarchy and the stand for republic declaration is the positive part of the NC. But the major question where will the NC stand in the process of drafting the new constitution? In the Ethnic, Gender and Regional issues where will the NC stand, it will perhaps determine the inclination of the NC? To tell you frankly, over the issues of Nationalism and Republic, NC has been still stuck with the status quoist mindset. Surfacially, the NC also seems to be democratic outfit but internally it is not so. Thus we have been watching it very carefully.

On Foreign Interference and India

Clearly, the foreign interference is at an all time high. However, it is completely a false allegation that we came into the peace process with the foreign support. There was the Indian support in the Peoples uprising, there were other forms of support as well. Altogether, it does not and should not mean that we have no moral to raise the issues of national interest now.

There has been the tradition that Nepali politicos reach agreements in New Delhi. The 2007 B.S. agreement was reached in New Delhi. However, the 12-Point Agreement reached between the Seven Parties and the Maoists in New Delhi was made in the interest of Nepal itself but not in the interest of New Delhi.

Nevertheless, now, India is doing all it can to extract “compound interest” out of the 12-Points Agreements made in New Delhi. It is also visible.

Security wise, relation with neighbors is based on mutual trust. One must respect the other. The relationship is based on certain values. But, India has been adopting different principles. If our identity is threatened we will not remain silent. This is it. We must raise the issue of abrogating all the past unequal treaties with India including that of 1950 Treaty. Similarly, issues of land occupation in Susta, Kalapani, Pashupatinagar must also be raised. In the issues of Citizenship, water-resources and Security—we must stop abiding by the long drawn Indian strategy.

The world has changed lot, India must thus also revise its strategy and sign treaties with Nepal on equal basis. We want to have good relations with India but that relation must remain free from coercion.

On Strong ties with China, fears in India

Unlike Indians, the Chinese, on the other hand, keep up with their words and promises. The Chinese policy of non-interference is well practiced even as of today. Whereas the Indians have been using the transitional period in Nepal for their benefit, occupying our lands and unnecessarily interfering in our exclusive affairs. The Chinese would never do that. China is clear in its intent whereas India is still unclear.

On Broader Democratic Alliance

Our administration is set with either the erstwhile Panchayati or multi-party period mindset. Old mindset is still prevalent in our administration. We still practice old laws and regulations. However, the Maoists are the ones who advocate in favor of building new structure by demolishing the old redundant ones. Basically, this is what the people also want from us. But, we have been trapped by those plagued with old mindset and we have been paralyzed. Look at the difficulty, we have to continue with the old setup, yet have to bring something new as well. Unless we remove the old, how can we build a new one? We must need a breakthrough at this point. We are searching for the path where we can push our agenda. The people have sacrificed their blood for change but not to retract.

On Performances of Government

In reality, we are also not satisfied. There are various reason for this, however, it is also not that the government has already tied its hands and sitting in an idle mood. We are doing our best to make the government becoming more effective as demanded by the people at large. But, the UML- our partner, is taking on the turtle stance.

But, since we are already in government, the possibilities are either we fail or we succeed. Let me guarantee, we will not fail. And, it is not that we have to stick to power for long, we can take on the road to yet another revolution. If we can’t bring changes while being in the government, we will adopt revolutionary measures to achieve our set goals and objectives.

On whether Mohan Baidya has surrendered to Prachanda?

I have not surrendered to any one, Prachanda is our party boss thus I respect him. On ideological grounds, I have never surrendered. We always move ahead holding healthy debates and discussions. We have already devised our new strategies to run the party affairs. We did not limit ourselves to the “Democratic Republic”, we took the line to establish typical kind of Democratic Republican order. We favor a Peoples’ Federal Democratic National Republic. While adopting the line, no one has been defeated, the party has won. The People’s desire has been fulfilled.

We want our form of republican order immediately. The old model of republic can not address the problem of the people but only the peoples’ republic can which is what is our ultimate goal.

(Dristi Vernacular Weekly, 17 March 2009)

“To Have A Federal Structure Or Redefine The State Boundaries Based Upon Janjatis Is A Dangerous Situation” - Sona Khan

2009-04-03T23:55:00.001+05:30

Senior advocate of Supreme Court of India SONA KHAN is a well known lawyer of the region. As Nepal is in the process of constitution making, Khan addressed a gathering at CONCOI. Khan spoke to KESHAB POUDEL on various issues regarding federalism and constitution making process. Excerpts:

How did India come up with pluralistic constitution?

Without the presence of Dr. B. R. Ambedkar in the constitution committee of India, I don’t think the preservation of pluralism would have been as effective as it survives today. The role of Mahatma Gandhi and Nehru with vision cannot be ignored. But the master were not the people but were these two elite gentlemen who had the opportunity to be educated in the western system and they brought the concept of justice and equity along with them.

Why is the state so important?

One of the purposes of the existence of the state is to deliver equity and justice in an equitable fashion. There is the crux to preserve the dignity of the individual. How do you go about it is the frame work whether that is parliamentary form of government or presidential form of government is immaterial. The ultimate aim of the state is to deliver the dignity to individual in just and equitable manner.

How is it possible to have absolute pluralism in a country with so many castes, and so many people with different persuasion of culture?

That is the craft of the constitution. Various constitutions have been tried and western society has found just an easy way out. They conceptualized the secularism minus religion. They thought they have created a civil society and they have brought everything out of the religious sanctity. But, this is not so in south Asia. In South Asia religion and culture is the way of life. We cannot live without religion and culture. I am talking about the concept of pluralism in the South Asian constitution.

How would they like a society to consider and explore the possibilities of preserving the common heritage and common culture?

Here it is very important to understand that the ownership of the pluralism belongs to no political section of the society, religion, castes or creeds. It is a collective property of the nation and that collective ownership evolves upon all of us the possibility to preserve it with the state duty.

How important are pluralism and harmony?

I would humbly, with great respect to all of you, say that pluralism has to be recognised but at the same time the harmonious aspects should be respected to survive as a sovereign republic democratic notion. One would need to generate harmony. That harmony will come by bringing to preserve your individual rights by recognizing the pluralistic culture. In the case of India, for political appeasement purposes often pluralistic constitution is very handy. The supreme court of India has been playing very important role to sustain the constitution by interpreting.

How do you see the impact of globalization in all this?

The globalization which will determine the global forces determines their own equity, I don’t know what can happen in Nepal but in India very soon our politicians will be irrelevant. Why? Because the economic forces will generate another dharma and that dharma will be superior than the political agenda. Political agenda so far has been only catering to the narrow vision of the political parties. They have not gone above the party politics. They interrupt the country which is the paramount Dharma. In my opinion globalization and gender issue are undergoing a very definite change. Since the globalization will convert the burden of state into a social capital. The hunger and poverty which is the burden of the state will be harnessed into the social capital by the economic forces.

What about the effects of migration?

The migration of labour forces from one part to another would provide employment and access to economic resources. May be standard differs from one place to another. But at least, it takes care of hunger and poverty. The importance of that part is recognition of that pocket. Road, water, housing, health care and education are primary role of the country. Any regional and national party which is unable to provide this will not last for too long. Now the water cannot be pursued by the concept of Janjatis solidarity, religious solidarity or regional solidarity. The consumers set the condition for globalization. The availability of goods and comfort change the mindset. That is the phenomenon and no one can stop it.

How do you see the WTO in the context of globalization?\

The WTO norms which are part of international federalism are alluding to it. These elements are more important legal tool including the convention of international law and various other protocols which the governments of today have necessary to agree and enter. And the moment they agree and enter, the country is part of all these laws. Once the concerned government signs such protocols and conventions, they are the part of law of particular countries. But there are certain aspects which cannot be changed. For example, the fundamental rights cannot be amended, new rights may be added. Preservation of pluralism is important. The guarantee of pluralism is the guarantee of understanding and delivery to the constitution.

How do you see the concept of federalism?

Indian experiences are different. For example, the Sri Lanka and France have different federal structures. Indian federalism started with unitary federalism. The federalism has two forces - there is gravity towards the center or gravity towards the autonomous state. Both have their own merits and demerits. In my opinion, the interest of the country is paramount. The purpose of federalism is to deliver the mandate of the people and others. Functioning of the government should be proper.

How do you see federalism under the basis of caste and ethnicity?

To have a federal structure or redefine the state boundaries based upon Janjatis is a dangerous situation. You are abdicating your responsibilities or state to bring them to mainstream. It is easy for politicians but it is not conducive for the country. Because they will be happy for the moment for the autonomy but what are they going to do with that autonomy. The reason is not driven by patriotism or nationalism or regionalism but reasons are driven by economic forces. Each country has to craft and fascinate its own system. But however the ultimate key will be to make sure that you are able to be around the mainstream of development. Supposing Nepal wishes to exercise its national identity as Nepali. If you start to say, I am just Janjati and not Nepali, it may come down to people. It is not in the larger interest. What cab the Janjatis autonomy deliver in today’s context of globalization. It is only going to deliver psychological satisfaction.

What is important then?

The important thing is delivery of dignity. Janjatis are after all the citizens of Nepal. Do you think they are going to be happy with the identity without any education provision made for them or without any job provision made to them, surplus of land or reclamation of land, local sustainability, without fertilizer or without water for irrigation? Identity serves very limited purposes.

How do you satisfy all?

For example, schedule cast and schedule tribe banks have purpose to deliver the loan as micro credit banks did in Bangladesh. The purpose remains same whether you give name of schedule cast bank or micro credit bank. The description has to be differed. However, the identity base is a very dangerous thing.

If ethnic federalism will not work, what federalism is going to work?

You can list the Janjatis in constitution itself so that identity is preserved. Recognize them in constitution which was not recognized in earlier. Have a separate commission to look at them but not an ethnic commission. You have to clothe it and you have to find out your own wordings. For example, justice at door step. You have to make temple of justice. Like the case in Philippines and Indonesia, they have their own system. In South Asia, all the countries have various castes and ethnicity. Don’t encourage them to destabilize the government. You need to allocate fund to generate the goodwill. We have divided the states on various models. For instance, the Uttar Pradesh is a very big state and there is now Uttaranchal State. Jharkhand comes out from Bihar. I want to share with you the case of Punjab. For instance, Haryana was never a state as it is today when India became independent. There was referendum to see who is Punjabi or other speaker. Many people said they don’t speak Punjabi so they created Haryana. It is actually the economy which determines the state.

Source: Spotlight, VOL. 28, NO. 24, March 20, 2009

Nepal elects its first President

2008-08-01T12:49:00.000+05:30

In a historic move, the Constituent Assembly (CA) in Nepal elected the first President of the country--Dr Ram Baran Yadav of the Nepal Congress, backed by the Communist Party of Nepal-UML and Madhesi Janaadhikar Forum (MJF).On July 21, Dr Yadav secured 308 votes defeating Ramraja Singh, a Maoist-backed candidate, who secured 282 votes.

The election result had in fact become apparent when at the last moment, a new alliance of NC, UML and MJF emerged to challenge the Maoist plans to get their candidate elected.

The newly-elected President, Dr Yadav hails from a small village of Safai in Dhanusha district in south-eastern Nepal. Most of his schooling and higher education was completed in Kathmandu. He later studied medicine in India, completing his MBBS from Calcutta Medical College and MD from Post Graduate Institute of Medical Research (PGIMR), Chandigarh.

Despite a successful medical practice, he chose the political life and entered the Nepalese politics in the 1960s as a student leader. He led the anti-Panchayat demonstrations against King Mahendra. Since then, for more than three decades, he participated and spearheaded every pro-democracy movement in the country.

During the first general elections in 1990s, he was elected from Dhanusha constituency as a Nepali Congress candidate. He served for two terms in the government as Health Minister. He was the general secretary of NC before being elected as the President.

The presidential election has set the country’s political discourse on a sharp turn. The defeat of the Maoists’ candidate has changed the political dynamics in the country. The failure of the Maoists to work up a consensus on the presidential candidate and the sudden emergence of a rival coalition indicate a confrontational politics in the days ahead. Maoists have accepted the results of the presidential election, they see a foreign conspiracy in the outcome. They believe that it was part of the conspiracy to keep them away from forming the government.

The Maoists, rolling high after the unprecedented victory in the elections, have suddenly turned reticent about their participation in the government. The Maoist leaders maintain that they have lost the moral ground to stake claim for leading the new government. The victory of the NC presidential candidate has given a major blow to the Maoists who won the largest number of seats in the April assembly elections. Presumably, their decision to stay away from heading the government was not an unexpected move.

It is obvious that the new alliance of the NC, UML and MJF enjoys a majority in the House as compare to the Maoists and its chances of forming the new government have certainly brightened after Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala’s resignation. The Maoists, however, can stake the claim being the single largest party in the Assembly. Senior leaders of the alliance are keen to work with the Maoists and have approached them. It is too early to figure out the alliance’s objectives in first defeating the Maoist candidate and then making efforts to persuade them to lead the government.

These developments have certainly undermined the consensual politics which was emerging after the April elections. The political parties should review their rigid stands and work towards creating a New Nepal as they had promised to the people during the campaign. The Maoists should take the lead in playing a constructive role and take the initiative in forming the new government. They should refrain from creating any obstacles in the peace process and avoid delaying the Constitution drafting process.

There is an urgent need for the political parties to stay on the path of consensual politics and avoid confrontation among themselves, to steer the country through the tough times ahead.

Source: Observer Research Foundation, July 26, 2008

Koirala lets Maoists form government

2008-05-28T10:19:00.000+05:30

Ending the month-long political stalemate and uncertainty, Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala invited the Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist Chairman Prachanda, also the leader of the single largest party in the Constituent Assembly (CA), to form a new government. But Koirala urged the Maoist chief to form the new government in accordance with the Interim Constitution. The Maoists applauded Koirala’s step and welcomed his move for creating a favourable political atmosphere.

Apparently, the three main parties- Maoists, Nepali Congress (NC) and CPN-Unified Marxist Leninist (UML)—evolved political consensus and found a way out of a problem which has been dogging the formation of the new government. However, issues like amendment to the Interim Constitution, nomination of 26 CA members and appointment of ‘ceremonial President’ remain a matter of serious concern. Senior NC, UML and Madhesi Janaandhikar Forum (MJF) leaders had earlier agreed for a common stand on future power sharing but came out with pre-conditions at the negotiating table. The amendment proposal, which allows the removal of a government through a simple majority in the CA, is being strongly opposed by the Maoists. Eventually, even if they agree to the amendment, it is unlikely that they would give up both the posts of PM and President to other parties.

Source: ORF, May 27, 2008

Maoists to adopt liberal economic policy

2008-05-23T14:56:00.000+05:30

The CPN-Maoists are clear about their economic agenda: they want an economic miracle in Nepal within 10 years. To achieve this objective, they have promised to adopt a liberal economic policy to boost the country’s economic development and revive the dormant industrial sector. Adopting a pragmatic approach, they have invited private and foreign investment in the country's economic development. They called upon the business community to join hands with the new government in creating a new Nepal and make investments in the country without any fear. They would be focusing on strengthening domestic industries and adopt policies aimed to boost production by promoting domestic resources available in the country.

This approach might lessen the fears of the Nepali business community which had been wary of the Maoists victory in the elections. The general fear was that a Maoist-led government might try to nationalise the private sector. The Maoist leaders were quick to dispel such notions in a series of meetings they had with the business community. The Maoists denied any such move. The Maoists, for the time being, are more concerned about fulfilling the people’s mandate and work towards creating a new Nepal which they had promised to the people during the elections. They are acutely aware of the immense challenges meeting such expectations would require. They are actively seeking the support of the private sector and foreign investors. At this critical juncture, their objective is to promote investments by attracting private investors and achieve an inclusive economic progress.

Source: South Asia Weekly, May 18, 2008

Prachanda on Indo-Nepal relations

2008-05-20T10:08:00.001+05:30

Chairman of Nepal's Maoist party Prachanda speaks on the changes that will be brought about in Nepal after his party’s historical victory and its implication on Nepal’s relations with India. In an exclusive interview with Karan Thapar in Devil's Advocate programme in CNN-IBN, Prachanda speaks about the impact of Maoist victory on Maoists in India.

Karan Thapar: Mr Prachanda, because the Maoists are a relatively unknown entity, there are many people in India who are apprehensive about your coming to power. Can you understand their concern?
Prachanda: Yes, I think so because during the emergency, the kind of image and the propaganda that was there in the country was different. But we were always committed to multi-party competition and peace at that time. However, people did not know about our new political developments then.
Karan Thapar: So you are a prisoner of an image?
Prachanda: No not exactly.
Karan Thapar: But a little. People have a misunderstanding about your attitude.
Prachanda: That could be called a communication gap or something like that. Slowly and gradually, people understand our commitment to multi-party, peace and other things.
Karan Thapar: What sort of relations will you be looking at with India?
Prachanda: A new relation on a new basis. The new base has been laid down with the understanding from Delhi. A new unity with Delhi is already in process.
Karan Thapar: When you say a new relationship, do you mean a better relationship?
Prachanda: Exactly, a new relation means better relations, understanding and cooperation.
Karan Thapar: And closer to New Delhi?
Prachanda: Exactly. Yes, we want to come closer to New Delhi on the basis of new relations.
Karan Thapar: How does this equate to what you keep saying that you want equidistance from Delhi and from Beijing? To people in India this sounds as if you are demoting the relationship with India to the level of relationship with China.
Prachanda: But I always said that there is a special relationship with India, geographical and cultural, and therefore we should have a special relationship with New Delhi. No one can ignore this historical, geographical and cultural fact. What I am saying is that we will not side up with one country against the other. We will maintain equidistance in political sense and not in terms of cooperation and other things.
Karan Thapar: The culture, history, and geographical relationship that Nepal has with India, will remain intact?
Prachanda: Yes, it will remain. It is a historical fact and we will have to strengthen this relationship.
Karan Thapar: Let me discuss some problems that may arise. You said that you want to abrogate the 1950 Indo-Nepal treaty and you want to renegotiate it. What are the aspects of the treaty that you don’t like?
Prachanda: Our people have put forward this concern that they feel that the treaty lacks inequality and that it is not beneficial for Nepal. We thus want to review all the points of the 1950 treaty. And we want to revise it according to new necessity.
Karan Thapar: The 1950 treaty guarantees the open border with Nepal and it also says that people of Nepal have national citizen status in India. Do you want to revise it and rework that?
Prachanda: Not exactly right now. There are other provisions that we want to discuss in detail.
Karan Thapar: So you want to retain the open border and you want to retain national citizen status of people, but there are other provisions?
Prachanda: There are others which I don’t want to discuss right now in detail.
Karan Thapar: Is one of them the defence purchase provision which requires Nepal to consult Delhi and only then acquire arms. Is that one?
Prachanda: That also should be reviewed and should be made according to the necessity of the 21st century.
Karan Thapar: Let me tell you what your colleague, Babu Ram Bhattarai told Nepal Telegraph on May 10. He said it was only because of the open border that Nepal could not achieve economic prosperity. Do you agree with him?
Prachanda: In the transitional phase, right now with the processes going on, it is not correct.
Karan Thapar: So this view is not correct?
Prachanda: Right now it is not correct.
Karan Thapar: He expressed this roughly just a week ago.
Prachanda: I will have to discuss with him. I do not know in what context he said it.
Karan Thapar: One of the problems in renegotiating the treaty is that India may use the opportunity to look for better terms. Does that work for you? You want better terms for Nepal. India may want better terms for itself.
Prachanda: It is beneficial for both sides to review the treaty and upgrade it according to the new necessity. When Rana resigned, a lot of changes have come in Nepal and there has been a lot of change in India. Thus the 1950 treaty should be upgraded according to the new necessity.
Karan Thapar: You also said that you want to review all the other treaties to see what revisions or further enhancements can be made. Is that a decision to revoke the other treaties and renegotiate them or simply the desire to review them?
Prachanda: Yes, I want to have a general review on all the treaties. But specifically I want to review the 1950 treaty.
Karan Thapar: The 1950 treaty, you want to change, but others you want to just review generally?
Prachanda: Yes, we want changes in the 1950 treaty, others may be okay, or may be revised, but we want to generally review them.
Karan Thapar: People in India after they hear you, will say that Mr Prachanda on one hand wants a new and a better, closer and a stronger relationship, on the other hand, he wants to revoke the 1950 treaty, review all other treaties and he wants equidistance from China and India. Aren’t these two things contradictory?
Prachanda: It is not contradictory. According to me it will help in better relations, will strengthen relations, and have close cooperation with each other. By review, we mean, both sides will be there, and we will review the historical treaty to upgrade it and revise it according to the new necessity.
Karan Thapar: You also say that India can also look for new advantages and gain?
Prachanda: Yes exactly.
Karan Thapar: However, the problem is that when both countries start reviewing things, and when you start revoking treaties and you start changing relations that have been there for 50 years, you can end up creating problems and damaging Indo-Nepal relations. Does that not worry you?
Prachanda: No, that will not happen. When your intention is to strengthen relations for betterment, how can it then sabotage relations or even destroy them.
Previously, India vouched for a two-pillar theory and that monarchy should be there in Nepal. However, now that there will be no monarchy and many political changes will take place, then there has to be a change.
Karan Thapar: So you want to re-negotiate the relationship.
Prachanda: Yes.
Karan Thapar: So you are saying to the Indian people and government that I don’t want to renegotiate the relationship to destroy it.
Prachanda: Yes, and we want to strengthen relations by re-negotiating.
Karan Thapar: And you are saying that India should be looking to renegotiate also to look at advantages for itself.
Prachanda: Yes.
Karan Thapar: You are happy with that?
Karan Thapar: The fact that nearly 30,000 Nepali Gorkha soldiers are employed by the Indian Army. The Army has seven Gorkha regiments comprising 43 battalions. This is seen in India as an unbreakable link that binds Nepal with India. You want to stop this, why?
Prachanda: Yes, we want to discuss this issue. We don’t want to stop it right now. We want to review the whole history of the development and the implication on both countries. What kind of relation is created through this institution is what we want to review. We want to review and discuss it.
Karan Thapar: You said a very important thing. At this stage you don’t want to stop the Gorkha recruitment by the Indian Army. You want to review it and discuss it. At the moment you are not seeking to stop recruitment?
Prachanda: Yes.
Karan Thapar: Why do you want to review it? What is there to discuss?
Prachanda: I think this will be debated in our constituent Assembly. It is an important topic. Now we are about to draft a new constitution and that will guide us for Nepal’s vital interest.
Karan Thapar: In your eyes, do you see Nepali Gorkhas who get employed by Indian Army or the British army as mercenaries. Is that why you don’t like it because it is mercenary behaviour?
Prachanda: These are historical questions. We will have to review it in that perspective.
Karan Thapar: Today, tens of thousands of jobs are guaranteed by Indian Army and another 5,000 by the British army and other than that there are almost lakh of people who get pensions. You want to eradicate poverty and unemployment. Then why touch this. This is a source of employment. Why affect it?
Prachanda: Here in Nepal there was feudal autocracy as a political system. Now that we are changing that into a democratic system, and we are looking at rapid economic development so that our youth don’t have to look for employment in other countries. We want to change the political and economic scenario.
Karan Thapar: There is no danger that within a month or two you would stop recruitment?
Prachanda: No. It is also because we are right now in a transitional phase.
Karan Thapar: So what ever happens will happen gradually and slowly after debate and discussion.
Prachanda: Yes.
Karan Thapar: In 1996, when you drew your 40-point programme, you called for a ban on Hindi films. Is that also a part of your agenda still?
Prachanda: Right now the situation has changed as we participated in elections and we will lead the peace process and we will draft a new constitution. We are not going to put this question forward in that way.
Karan Thapar: So right now, there is no likelihood of ban on Hindi films?
Prachanda: Yes, you are right. Right now it is not possible because we have so many other compromises and consensus with so many political parties. We have to go forward in a particular way.
Karan Thapar: So you have no problem if Shah Rukh Khan’s film or Amitabh Bachchan’s films come to Nepal?
Prachanda: They are coming to Nepal and we have no ban right now.
Karan Thapar: And you have no problem with Manisha Koirala acting in Hindi films?
Prachanda: No, not at all.
Karan Thapar: Will you be looking to India for support and help in removing you from the terror list that the US maintains.
Prachanda: After the elections, I had a direct contact with USA, and I had a serious discussion with the Ambassador of US and I think that India has already helped us with the elections and constituent assembly. So, this way they have already helped us.
Karan Thapar: Can they help further. Can India speak to US President George Bush and ask him to stop treating the Maoists in Nepal as terrorists?
Prachanda: We may expect this, but we can't request India to do so.
Karan Thapar: Why can’t you request them?
Prachanda: I think we have direct access with the US.
Karan Thapar: But you would like India to do it?
Prachanda: We expect it and hope that India can create conducive atmosphere.
Karan Thapar: So you expect it and hope India listens to this interview and takes a hint.
Prachanda: Yes, exactly.
Karan Thapar: What will you think will be the impact on Indian Maoists by your coming to power in Nepal?
Prachanda: I think a strong message has already gone. After the elections, there was a wave in favour of our policy. After the elections, a Maoist has sent a letter to me congratulating me for this historical victory in elections. I think there will be a serious discussion and debate within the Maoist circles in India and we have already given a message to not only Maoists in India, but to all over the world.
Karan Thapar: Looking at your own experience in Nepal during the last two years and six months in particular, would you advice the Indian Maoists to give up the peoples war, to join mainstream, to use the ballot rather than the bullet as a way of acquiring power?
Prachanda: I think that I cannot directly address them, but our behaviour and our policy and our practices give out the message of the power of ballot.
Karan Thapar: One of the top Maoist leaders in India, Azad in an interview to The Hindu has said that the Nepali Maoists are unlikely to succeed and that the Nepali Maoists will soon realise that they have made a mistake.
Prachanda: Right now, the same person Azad has sent a letter congratulating me and that he thinks it is a very serious victory for the Maoists. I think it is before and after the elections, that he has evaluated it in a different way.
Karan Thapar: Many people think, Comrade Azad, as you call him, is saying two things. He says one thing to you in the letter and praises you and on the other hand, says another thing to the press and sounds sceptical and cynical. Is he double-faced?
Prachanda: Is there a written statement somewhere?
Karan Thapar: Yes, it is in The Hindu on Friday.
Prachanda: I see. I have not gone through that interview and statement.
Karan Thapar: So right now you are not aware that Mr Azad speaks with two voices. He says something to you and something else to the others. Does that worry you or disillusion you?
Prachanda: No, I have to go through that statement in detail. I cannot blame anything on anyone.
Karan Thapar: At the moment you will reserve your judgement.
Prachanda: Yes.
Karan Thapar: The party in India that is most worried about the Maoist victory is the BJP, which says that you will be anti-Hindu in your behaviour and actions. How can you reassure them that this is not going to be the case?
Prachanda: This is an illusion. We are not anti-Hindu or anti-Buddhist or anything like that. We are committed to a secular political system and state. We are also continuously upholding the religious freedom and we understand the phenomenon of Hinduism in Nepal.
Karan Thapar: If the BJP is to win the elections in 2009, is there a possibility that the relations between India and Nepal can suffer?
Prachanda: I do not think so. Even BJP is a very serious party of India. They will understand the dynamism and change in Nepal and will come forward according to the changed situation.

Source: CNN-IBN, May 18, 2008

Maoist optimist

2008-05-06T06:41:00.000+05:30

SD Muni

When South Asia is experiencing a fresh democratic wave and peoples' power, Nepal's Maoists should be seen as a powerful, positive manifestation of rising popular aspirations

Almost none among the competitors of Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) — CPN (M), rival parties like the Nepali Congress (NC) and the Communist Party of Nepal-United Marxist Leninist (CPN-UML) expected them to emerge as a dominant political force in the elections to the Constituent Assembly. Similarly, almost none among the international community, including India and China, expected the Maoists to perform so well as they have done. With the results, the process of coping with the newly emerged reality has begun.

There are conflicting voices among the political parties on working with the Maoists, within or outside a coalition government. There are strategies being crafted and redefined by the members of the international community to begin engagement with the Maoists so as to nudge them on the democratic roadmap and ensure that Nepal remains stable, peaceful and friendly.

There is no dearth of forces and factors within Nepal and outside that would want to see the Maoists goof up in governance and falter in Constitution- making, thereby get discredited and erode their newly acquired credibility and legitimacy. Such forces may be in for shock and surprise again. They have yet not objectively assessed the degree of prudence and resilience that the Maoists leadership is capable of and have been displaying regularly.

This is clearly reflected in the post-election promises by the Maoists: to work with all other political parties, deal with King Gyanendra softly — even while showing him the exit, respect the role of private business and industry in carrying forward new Nepal's economic agenda and seek a constructive engagement with the international community, particularly India.

The Maoist leadership is acutely aware of their internal political constraints in dealing with the unfolding challenges before them. Such constraints are inherent in the exploded aspirations behind the mandate in their favour, in the 10-year-old insurgency and impatience of their militant cadres who find it painfully slow to come to terms with the complexity and patience of the democratic competitive processes. Besides, the Maoists are short of absolute majority in the newly elected Constituent Assembly.

In looking at Maoist Nepal's unfolding relations with India, three myths carefully nursed so far — out of ignorance or vested interests — need to be shed off. The first is that they will soon become instruments of either the Chinese or Pakistanis to create security nightmares for India, as the discredited monarchical regime in Kathmandu had been used to in the interest of its own political survival. The China of Deng Xiao Ping and his successors have been embarrassed by all those who glorified Maoism. The China of Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao was an ally of the monarchy in Nepal and instrumental in crushing the Maoists militarily. The Maoists cadres seeking shelter or sourcing arms and herbal trade in China were chased away by the Chinese soldiers.

China is fast making up for its past slips and trying hard to cultivate the Maoists. But Chinese success would depend more on the failure of the rest of the international community — rather than artificially using the rhetoric of Mao's thoughts. The Maoists would accept a friendly and cooperative relationship with China but not at the cost of India's interests, that is, if India treats them with respect.

The second myth is about close operational links between the Nepal Maoists and Indian underground Naxalites. India's home ministry establishment has repeatedly denied the depth and relevance of such links. The Maoist and Naxalite leaders have openly exchanged bitter words during the past couple of years. The Maoists have declared that their political agenda has been fulfilled by the election results and what remains is their agenda of economic revolution in Nepal. Fanning the Naxal insurgency and helping them achieve power in India was never the goal of Nepal's Maoists. In meeting the challenge of their economic revolution, they cannot afford to alienate India by cozying up with the Naxalites.

The third myth is about Maoists being anti-India. Not many people know that the Maoist leadership has been ardently seeking understanding and goodwill of the Indian political class since 2002. They have been wanting engagement with the Indian leadership. Their 'anti-India' demands, including the revision of the 1950 Treaty, are not only their original issues but a compilation of such demands made by successive regimes and political parties in Kathmandu.

Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee has done well to reach out to the Maoist leadership soon after the flow of election results. India is hopefully taking the Maoists as a popular force, as the architect of a politically vibrant and socio-economically progressive Nepal. What the Maoists need from India is their acceptance and recognition as the leaders of a confident, self-respecting neighbour which is willing to build a mutually advantageous and cooperative relationship in areas ranging from economic growth, security concerns and people-to-people exchange.

India has earlier indicated its willingness to discuss the treaty of 1950 with Nepal. India changed its treaty text with Bhutan without hurting its long- term security interests. If need be, there should be no difficulty in doing the same with Nepal.

The Maoists know that their economic agenda cannot move forward without creative harnessing of the country's potential resources including hydro-power. They know that this cannot be done with out cooperating with India, and this is India's need as well. They also know that a growing India is an opportunity in the areas of trade, investment, technology and human resources development. In building cooperation, India should ensure a fresh approach. The old policy mindset has to be set aside in writing a new chapter of close relations with South Asian neighbours like Nepal.

India's approach towards the Maoists will considerably influence the attitude of the international community. With the arrival in Kathmandu of the new US ambassador, Nancy Powell, signs of change in the US assessment are already visible. After the elections, the US ambassador has assured that American assistance and cooperation with Nepal will continue even when it is ruled by the Maoists.

Even before the elections, President George Bush had expressed the desire that the Maoists will hopefully work in cooperation with other political parties, thus accepting to deal with them as partners in the government. Former US President Jimmy Carter held talks with the Maoists leaders after the results and accepted that keeping the 'terrorist' tag on them is not a correct approach. The UK and other European Union members have also shown strong inclination to engage with the Maoists.

Indian and international engagement with the new Nepal and its Maoist leadership is desirable and necessary in the interest of Nepal's stability and mainstreaming of the Maoists. The Maoists know that if they have to consolidate their power base among the people of Nepal, they have to deliver on the promises made. And this cannot be done without generous and sustained support from the global community.

Today, when South Asia is experiencing a fresh democratic wave and peoples' power, Nepal's Maoists should be seen as a powerful, positive manifestation of rising popular aspirations. Harnessing these aspirations to build strong democratic institutions within and extensive cooperation among the countries of South Asia is in the mutual interest of both the international community as well as the Maoists of Nepal.

The writer is Senior Visiting Fellow, Institute of South Asian Studies, Singapore, and former Indian ambassador to Laos

Source: Hardnews, May , 2008

India's choices are limited

2008-05-03T09:39:00.002+05:30

Paul Soren

Of the two demands already delivered to Delhi by the victorious Maoists, revision of the 1950 treaty seems more reasonable and India has no option but listen to the new powers in Kathmandu. But the other one, banning Gurkha recruitment in the Indian Army, would be counterproductive for Nepal.

The India-Nepal "Peace and Friendship Treaty of 1950" has always been a bone of contention between the two neighbours. Extensive discussion at different forums and platforms have been held and the issue analysed from all possible angles. Of late, the Nepali and Indian media have been widely fomenting the debate over the reviewing of the treaty.

The issue gained prominence after the recently concluded Constituent Assembly election, where the Maoists emerged as the single largest party and deemed to head the new dispensation. Maoist chairman Prachanda, in his first foreign policy statement, strongly articulated the need for reviewing of the treaty with India in the changed political context. Also, the Maoists wish to end recruitments of Gurkhas in the Indian Army, regulation of the India-Nepal border, restrict Indian vehicles entering Nepal and renegotiate the Mahakali treaty of 1996 on water resources. After the shift in political events in Nepal, the Indian establishment has been left with no other choice but cede to the long overdue demand of the Nepalese.

At the outset, Maoists always termed the treaty being 'unequal' and alleged it only served India's interest. The Maoists have expressed resentment over the treaty and said it questions Nepal's sovereignty. In their 40-point demands presented to the Government, the Maoists had demanded abrogation of the treaty. The demand for reviewing the treaty is not new and Nepal has always expressed discomfort over it. From the mid-1970s, demands for its amendment have been periodically raised. In the mid-1990s, Nepal's first Communist Prime Minister, Man Mohan Adhikary, insisted on reviewing of the treaty and sought greater economic sovereignty.

Apparently, the premise of relations between the two countries is governed by treaties signed with the Rana rulers of the 1950s. It is the foundation on which India-Nepal relations are built, as it addresses the security and economic imperatives of both countries. But Nepal has serious reservations on Clauses V, VI and VII of the 1950 treaty and has often termed it 'unequal'. According to the treaty, neither side shall tolerate any threat to the security of the other by a foreign aggressor and compelled both sides to inform each other of any serious issue or misunderstanding. It also provides equal opportunities for people on both sides to invest in business and other projects.

However, the treaty restricts Nepal to purchase military equipment from any third country without India's consent and stresses the need to do it through Indian territory. Over these years, these accords have strengthened the bilateral relationship between the two countries. It provided people of both sides economic and other benefits. But the Nepalese are in favour of reviewing the treaty based on modern and equitable principles.

The treaty is not completely lopsided but the existing ambiguities should be addressed through mutual consensus. The broad spectrum of relationship on political, economic and people-to-people contact should not be ignored. Due to the geographical closeness, open border system and close social interactions of people from both sides has led to a situation of mutual interdependence. This has pressed both sides to remain responsive and supportive of each other's concern. Complete scrapping of this treaty would result to uneasiness and suffering for people of both sides.

Nepal is undergoing acute poverty and any new dispensation there would find it hard to bring radical economic reforms in a short period. Therefore, Mr Prachanda's wish to see an end to Gurkha recruitment might probably not be seen as a right move and cause resentment. After tourism, the sector from which the country gets most remittances is from Gurkhas serving in India. Lakhs of retired Gurkha personnel depend on Indian Army pension. Besides, complete regulation of the border would bring stringent law and this would deprive people from both sides to travel freely across the border to earn their livelihood.

Currently, India has no option but to agree for reviewing the treaty under the present circumstances. India has responded aptly but it should not ignore her national interests. As India has numerous interests in Nepal and concerns tend to be apprehensive over any political developments in Nepal and especially instability in Terai. Equally, Nepal feels vulnerable if its national integrity is threatened by external concerns. This situation tends to put both sides on separate paths.

The recent statements from the Government that it is ready to review treaties with Nepal are an indication that India is willing. Also, it is time for India to chart a new era of bilateral relations by engaging constructively with the new Nepali establishment which has a popular mandate. India should also allay the apprehensions of Nepali people of pursing a 'big brotherly attitude' and show readiness to address some of the irritants embedded in India-Nepal relationship.

There is also a need to deal with the bilateral issues at various levels with a much broader spectrum to make it more meaningful.

Source: The Pioneer, May 3, 2008

India misses crunch time

2008-05-03T09:38:00.001+05:30

Baleshwar Agarwal

The demand for revising the India-Nepal treaty is being foolishly entertained by India. At this rate, Nepal may be lost as a dependable ally.

The Maoist victory in Nepal, even though indecisive, is the end of an important chapter of India's relations with that country and the beginning of a new one marked by great uncertainty. I have been a follower of Nepal affairs since 1951, when I went there as a young correspondent to cover the Mahasamiti of the Nepali Congress. The country has gone through many deaths and rebirths since then, but this is an altogether new situation for me. The emptiness that I feel in my heart is perhaps a small manifestation of the national mood in India on seeing a Communist, demonstrably anti-Indian and pro-Chinese dispensation take over in Kathmandu. In the past, India counted in Kathmandu, whatever the vicissitudes overwhelming that country. But now, India is the diminutive.

At this historic crossroads, the role played by the Indian Government is most unfortunate. New Delhi seem to have lost the influence it wielded in Kathamandu through six decades. It can no longer leverage its economic and political clout. Yet, what is not easily realised is that possibilities still exist for India to play an important role in the process of appointing the next Prime Minister and important members of his Cabinet.

I will come to that later, but first, something most unfortunate and unanticipated has happened this week which, in the context of the emerging situation, diminishes India's prestige in her own backyard. The Maoists, who have got only 29.3 per cent of the vote, are being feted by New Delhi as the unquestioned rulers of Nepal. The new Indian Ambassador, Mr Rakesh Sood, has announced that New Delhi would be willing to work with a "Maoist Prime Minister". Whatever the Maoists want, even if voiced to the reporter of a TV channel, is being given the highest importance in the Indian capital. Foreign Secretary Shiv Shankar Menon has given the Maoists their much-needed credibility boost by publicly agreeing to talks on the India-Nepal Treaty.

By far, the biggest disappointment for me was former National Security Adviser Brajesh Mishra's statement, given in an interview to Karan Thapar on April 29, in which he seemed to prepare the ground for the Foreign Secretary to recognise the Maoists' demand for treaty revision. It was strange that Mr Mishra, with his immense experience as a diplomat, did not even wait for the formal request to be delivered by the new Government in Kath-mandu. What was the reason for his decision to be so pro-Maoist? Only time will tell.

It is highly improbable to me that the Maoists would keep pressing their demand for revising the treaty. Nepal has more to lose than gain from the exercise because as it is the treaty is heavily tilted in her favour. The first Government of India had been extremely generous to Nepal. Today, India is home to more than six million Nepalese. Suppose India should now ask for an end to the era of free immigration for Nepalese? In the past, Man Mohan Adhikary, the first Communist Prime Minister of Nepal, had also voiced this demand. But, after some time, he stopped talking about it. Good enough for India.

Meanwhile, on the ground, Prachanda's chances of being Prime Minister are as good as any other contender's. Mr Sher Bahadur Deuba is the last India-friendly politician of any consequence. Mr Girija Prasad Koirala is, after all, a pro-India leader despite his reduced circumstances. The need of the hour is that India should recognise that anybody is preferable to the Maoists who represent a grave threat not only to India's security, but also the entire region.

It is for this reason that India should put its weight behind the other contenders for prime ministership.Mr Sher Bahadur Deuba,is enjoying the United States' support. Washington has rightly stood its ground that the Maoists are terrorists and refuse to be awed by their victory. Despite their 120 seats in the First-Past-the-Post system, the Maoists are still short of a majority. In the Proportional Representation system, the Maoists stand to get just 100 seats out of 335. The PR system will give a huge number of seats to the Nepali Congress, the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist-Leninist) and the three "Madhesi" parties. If they come together, then Prachanda would have to sulk as the Leader of the Opposition. Moreover, the CPN(UML) is unlikely to ever join the Maoists in any arrangement.

Why is India not seizing the situation? This is the biggest mystery. The two legs of any nation's foreign policy are national interest and ideology. Taking the latter first, there is every indication that Nepal is headed towards a dictatorship, and that too of the most brutal kind. As far as national interests is concerned, under no circumstances would having a Maoist Prime Minister favourable to India. Like Communists everywhere, their fundamental loyalty lies towards the fulcrum of world Communism, China. There was a time when Beijing dismissed Prachanda and his gang as romantic adventurers. Even in their wildest imagination the Chinese did not bargain for a Maoist victory in the Constituent Assembly election. But, now that the impossible has happened, China will not lose any time to play the "Communist" card to give Prachanda the respectability he so desires in the Communist pantheon. The manner in which Nepal suppressed Tibetan opposition to the Olympic torch relay should open India's -- and the world's eyes -- to the possibility of Nepal being reduced to a vassal state of China.

The situation in Nepal is going from bad to worse. People are leaving Kathmandu with their accumulated savings because nobody wants to continue life under a Communist regime. Business owners are transferring their funds to India. Prachanda is hoping to stem the tide by promising to run a "capitalist" economy, but there are few believers. Anti-India sentiments are bound to get a boost very soon because India has banned rice exports, followed by Bangladesh. Prices have touched absurd levels and the poverty of Nepal has become exacerbated. So, India should look at the possibilities.

Nobody won the Constituent Assembly election. It is still a political logjam in Kathmandu. The time is ripe for New Delhi to launch a new diplomatic initiative. But, at this dark moment, nobody appears to be willing to listen.

-- The writer is Secretary-General of Antar Rashtriya Sahyog Parishad and a reputed expert on India-Nepal relations

Source: The Pioneer, May 3, 2008

Lunatic diplomacy

2008-05-03T09:35:00.000+05:30

Arabinda Ghose

Even before a new Maoist-dominated Government of Nepal could formally take office, we have before us the spectacle of regional superpower, India, bowing in deference to every whim and fancy of the self-proclaimed masters in Kathmandu. This week, we saw a succession of important personalities in Government and the strategic community of Delhi issue significant statements in agreement with Communist supremo Prachanda's wish that the India-Nepal Treaty of Peace and Friendship, 1950, be "revised".

Foreign Secretary Shiv Shankar Menon created a new precedent by agreeing to Prachanda's suggestion even before he could be sworn in as Prime Minister and draft a formal letter to the effect that Nepal wishes to replace the 58-year-old document. As usual, the rest of the strategic community fell in line. Even the redoubtable Brajesh Mishra, the National Security Adviser in the Vajpayee Administration, did not question the legitimacy of Prachanda's claim and helped create an ambient atmosphere for Mr Menon to make his acceptance speech.

Saturday Special, which has made Nepal a special area of focus for the past two years (devoting seven issues to the troubled nation), sees this as continuation of the blunders committed by the Manmohan Singh Government since 2005. The External Affairs Ministry must be aware that the formation of a new Government is an extremely uncertain and tricky affair and there is still some uncertainty whether Prachanda would be Prime Minister. Yet, everybody who is anybody on Nepal seems in a great hurry to kowtow to the man whose election victories has not freed him from the terrorist tag. They are using every forum to wax eloquent on India's readiness to convert Prachanda's wishes into commands.

In the lunatic world of jholawala (world) diplomacy, whispers abound that 'big brother' India has beaten Nepal into submission over the past six decades with an 'unequal' treaty. Hence, the great romantic hero, Prachanda, is justified in demanding 'equity'. But to anyone going through the text of the 10-article treaty and the letters exchanged over it on July 31, 1950, and signed in Kathmandu between Mohun Shumsher Jung Bahadur Rana of Nepal and the then Indian Ambassador, Chandreshwar Prasad Narayan Singh, it would be amply clear that the treaty is heavily balanced in favour of Nepal. And for good reason.

No Indian would have ever opposed the provisions of the treaty, because it treats Nepal as a friend and much more. Yet, ever since democracy was re-established in Nepal in 1990, every new Government that takes over in Kathmandu, raises the bilateral temperature by demanding either the abrogation or revision of this treaty. As a correspondent of various newspapers and news agencies in Kathmandu for over a decade, I have lost count of the number of times politicians there have raised the ridiculous demand, only to forget about it after settling down comfortably in office.

Of course, there are provisions with the potential to raise eyebrows. Article V says: "The Government of Nepal shall be free to import, from or through the territory of India arms and ammunitions or warlike material and equipment necessary for the security of Nepal. The procedure for giving effect to this arrangement shall be worked out by the two Governments acting in consultation." The reality is that Nepal does not import any armament without India's knowledge in consideration of India's security needs. Yet, in 1988, Nepal imported anti-aircraft guns from its northern neighbour, China, without bothering to intimate India.

Article VI says: "Each Government undertakes, in token of the neighbourly relation between India and Nepal, to give to the nationals of the other, in its territory, national treatment with regard to participation in industrial and economic development of such territory and to the grant of concessions and contracts relating to such development". However, in para 3 of the letters exchanged, it has been stated: "The Government of India recognise that it may be necessary for some time to come to afford the Nepalese nationals in Nepal protection from unrestricted competition. The nature and extent to this protection will be determined as and when required by mutual agreement between the two governments". This is an example of how the treaty is tilted in favour of Nepal, which sensible people of India support wholeheartedly.

Yet, for unknown reasons, this treaty continues to be demonised. In 1970, when a new Trade and Transit Treaty was due between the two countries, there was much frenzy generated in Kathmandu against its proposed provisions. Demonstrations were organised routinely in front of the Indian Embassy in support of unclear demands. Resultantly, the negotiations were postponed and a scheduled film festival was cancelled. Similar outbursts were observed prior to the finalisation of the Trade and Transit Treaty of 1990 as well. At that time, too, one heard that the "root cause" behind Nepal's poverty was the 1950 Treaty -- an instrument of Indian 'highhandedness'.

It must be stressed that in the past, the demonstrations had had taken place when Nepal was under a monarchy. A former Indian Ambassador famously commented on one occasion: "Not even a leaf can flutter without orders from the palace". But today, Nepal is on the path of becoming a federal democratic republic. One hopes the unseemly debate over the treaty issue will be forgotten and a new relationship with respect for each other's sovereignty and national interests is established for our mutual benefits.

Source: The Pioneer, May 3, 2008

No respite in violence

2008-04-08T10:16:00.000+05:30

Paul Soren

With the election date coming nearer, violence between the parties has witnessed a steady rise, especially in the eastern and Terai region, threatening the electoral process itself. The government claims to have tightened the security situation but there are no signs of it on the ground. Even the political parties, the Election Commission (EC), international observers, civil society and members of the international community have expressed concern over the rising violence. The EC discussed the issue with senior leaders of the three major parties; Nepali Congress president Girija Prasad Koirala, Communist Party of Nepal-Unified Marxist Leninist (UML) general secretary Madhav Kumar Nepal and Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist (CPN-Maoist) chairman Prachanda. The commission urged the leaders to refrain from violating the code of conduct. The commission warned of serious consequences if the elections were to be deferred due to violence. The leaders assured their cooperation for holding the elections peacefully. They signed a 10-point agreement on April 1 to abide by the code of conduct and restrain from making provocative statements. They directed their cadres to refrain from anti-election activities. They formed a committee comprising members from civil society to monitor incidents of violence and violations of code of conduct. A three-member task force has also been formed with leaders from the three parties to oversee the implementation of the new agreement.

But there are already visible signs that despite such assurances, there is no sign of the party workers adhering to the code of conduct. The newly-formed civil society committee and the task force failed to prevent the Maoists- affiliated Young Communist League (YCL) cadres from openly flouting the code of conduct and preventing other parties from holding election campaign in their strongholds. Interestingly, the UML and NC cadres are also toeing the YCL line. Besides, some armed groups in the Terai are out to sabotage the election process. Repeated incidents of blasts inside a mosque premises in Biratnagar and serial blasts in Kathmandu on April 5 are indications of a worsening law and order situation merely five days before the elections.

Source: South Asia Weekly Assessment, ORF, April 8, 2008

Fate of monarchy linked to Nepal's poll

2008-04-08T10:08:00.000+05:30

Dhruba Adhikary

KATHMANDU - Nepal on Monday appeared like a country finally heading towards an election of historical significance later this week. There is visible enthusiasm among voters - an atmosphere that was not to be found a week ago when candidates in the 601-strong Constituent Assembly conducted their campaigns amid fear and insecurity. Just days ago, uncertainty surrounded the poll, which is expected to pave the way for the Himalayan kingdom's transformation into a republic. After two postponements since last June, the interim government finally approved a date, April 10, and directed the Election Commission to make necessary preparations. Thousands of poll observers, including from Western countries, will be closely watching the voting for which over 17 million Nepalis are eligible. There are about nine thousand candidates for the election - to be based on a mixed system of first-past-the-post and proportional representation.

The men and women contesting the elections have had differing experiences, from disinterested crowds to candidates in far-flung districts being killed, abducted and intimidated, mainly by young militants associated with the Maoists. In April 2006, the Maoists agreed to be a political party - the Communist Party of Nepal - and joined electoral and competitive politics. The Maoists continue to draw widespread criticism for their cadres' crude and deadly behavior, ignoring their pledge to abide by provisions of the peace accord they signed to formally end a 10-year armed insurgency which claimed over 13,000 lives. Villagers in remote areas have complained that Maoist cadres routinely visit them and threaten retribution if they do not vote for their candidates and parties. Maoist cadres have made hundreds of villages inaccessible to other parties, forcing them to confine their campaigns to district centers. Responding to these complaints, the top Maoist leader publicly issued a directive for his group to behave like Indian non-violent spiritual leader Mahatma Gandhi for the remaining days of the campaign. His cadres at the village level, however, do not appear to have been paying attention.

Threats and hurdles

What happened on March 29 in Biraatnagar, the home town of interim Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala located in the southeast, provided an example of how precarious the law and order situation is across Nepal. Within hours after Koirala addressing local authorities on enhancing security services in the region, powerful bombs exploded at a neighborhood mosque, instantly killing two persons and inflicting serious injuries on others. The incident added a communal dimension to the existing problems in the Hindu-majority country. In its pre-election report issued on April 6, the special United Nations mission in Nepal alluded to a "climate of fear in which candidates and voters function". While appreciating pledges by leaders of three parties - among the seven political parties in the interim alliance - to conduct the campaign in a peaceful manner, the UN report continued to express frustration, saying that "these commitments need to translate into reality on the ground - which has too often not been the case". As if to prove this perception, Maoist leader Pushpa Kamal Dahal (also known as Prachanda) last week canceled all of his public engagements outside the capital for security reasons.

Ironically, he is also the head of the "People's Liberation Army" and is usually surrounded by scores of armed personnel around the clock. It is odd to see the Maoist leadership scared to move around in a country in which they say is 80% under their control. "Death has come to haunt its greatest purveyor," wrote a newspaper columnist. Prachanda's decision came in the wake of threats from some two dozen armed groups in the Terai region, mainly bordering the Indian state of Bihar, which have said they would disrupt the April 10 polls by "eliminating" candidates. Some of these groups are said to have political agendas and demands that their regions be declared autonomous with a right to self-determination. It is a widely held belief that New Delhi is behind this separatist movement. Meanwhile, political rivalry between the main contesting parties remains acrimonious.

Both the Maoists and the Communist Party of Nepal (UML), the more moderate of the two, depict the Nepali Congress, the party with centrist credentials, as a supporter of the status quo (meaning support for the monarchy) , even if the Congress leadership has agreed to their republican agenda. The Congress sees the Maoists as a party of anarchists. But the dual between the UML and the Maoists has been strikingly bitter, with each accusing the other of being royalist. Nobody knows what Gyanendra, whose days even as a "suspended" king are numbered, would have said about these verbal battles. But is Gyanendra still in a position to move or shake Nepal's political course at this decisive phase? Apparently not.

The country's army has ceased to be "royal" and there are no other visible domestic forces to salvage the monarchy, even in a ceremonial form. Krishna Prasad Bhattarai, a former prime minister and Koirala's rival while he was still in the Nepali Congress, is the only political personality of any standing to say that the monarchy is still needed. But since Bhattarai is no longer politically active, it is unlikely his statements will make any direct impact on the ongoing political process. Two of the 54 political parties in the fray have said openly they are in favor of a ceremonial monarchy. One of them is the Nepal National Development Party, which is headed by a Nepali citizen of Japanese origin, Takashi Miyahara. He thinks Nepal can take Japan as a role model and stresses that people forgave their emperor despite the loss of 2 million lives during World War II.

Some of the world's top 10 countries, he contends, are monarchies, such as Japan and in Scandinavia. Gyanendra has publicly said he has no plans to leave Nepal. Instead, the palace last week sent out customary cards with New Year's greetings from "Their Majesties the King and Queen". Nepal's new year, 2065, begins on April 13. Nepal's interim constitution and concomitant agreements between the seven political parties that make up the ruling coalition stipulate that the first meeting of the newly-elected assembly will "implement" a proposal to declare Nepal a republic. And the assembly has to meet for its maiden session within 21 days after the announcement of the last election result.

In election commissioner Neelkantha Upreti's estimation, all results will be out within three weeks of the poll, provided no re-polls are required. In other words, the 240-year-old monarchy which has remained a symbol of Nepal's stability will be relegated to the history books in a matter of weeks. Will Gyanendra quietly wait for that day without making a final attempt, be it overt or covert, to save his throne? Some politicians in the coalition have said they suspect the palace is behind the recent spate of violence. In private conversations, very few prominent politicians, including the Maoists, see the monarchy disappearing easily. They know they themselves are primarily responsible for the anarchy and chaos the country has witnessed since the successful pro-democracy movement of April 2006.

They are also aware they have alienated a large section of the population by declaring Nepal a secular state without putting the issue to a popular test. Similarly, leaders in the coalition hurriedly pushed through a citizenship law in the interim legislature, subsequently granting Nepali citizenship to about 4 million aliens, mainly Indians. Even the Maoists, who always claimed to be more nationalist than others, did not raise any objection while the "liberal" law was being enacted. "Maoists, too, showed that they are no different from others when it comes to vying for New Delhi's favor," said Somnath Ghimire, editor of Yugsambad, a Nepali language weekly. Widespread fear and indifference could lead to an unexpectedly low turnout of voters, with some estimates claiming it could be as low as 25%.

In the absence of a law requiring a minimum percentage of voters, even such an election could be declared valid by Nepal's election officials and endorsed by international observers. But will it achieve the political legitimacy needed to complete the current transitional process? This is a question that might be asked, among others, by Gyanendra, who earlier told the media the people alone had the right to decide the fate of the monarchy. Additionally, it is as yet unclear which of three main parties is likely to emerge as the winner. Some analysts say that despite splits and mergers, the Nepali Congress stands a chance to lead the other parties. Others believe the UML has brighter prospects.

The Maoists are not being viewed as the main winners. However, this is a prediction the Maoist leadership refuses to accept. Prachanda has publicly thundered that the Maoists will not accept the results if his party is denied victory, and thereby a chance to introduce revolutionary reforms. According to Prachanda, his party will take such a result as a conspiracy, compelling it to restart the armed insurgency. One senior Nepali Congress leader told Asia Times Online that the Maoists want to be in a win-win situation - either winning the majority and accomplishing the dream of "taking over" the country, or staying out of election without being seen as the main villain. Worrying trendsInstitutions tasked with analyzing emerging trends have made no secret of their concern. The latest report by the International Crisis Group predicts the post-poll period will be more "difficult and dangerous". In the words of the group's Asia program director, Robert Templer, "The turbulent aftermath would require cooperation and forward planning from the main parties." Will that be forthcoming if the Maoists decide to reject a defeating poll verdict and boycott the elected assembly thereafter? Recent events in Kenya and Zimbabwe do not offer encouraging messages. One school of thought has it that while communist slogans may be attractive to poor, illiterate and credulous people, the West-dominated international community would hate to see - or recognize - a Maoist regime in Nepal, which shares borders with Tibet, and thereby China. The US, for instance, has yet to remove Nepal's Maoists from its official list of terrorists. For the moment, the great electoral exercise remains on the threshold, although a section of Nepal's intelligentsia continues to view the mission as an enigma.

Source: Asia Times Online, April 8, 2008

Maoists fear losing elections

2008-04-03T12:58:00.000+05:30

Paul Soren

The Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist (CPN-Maoist) has warned of another phase of revolution if the party was not voted to power. While campaigning in the eastern part of the country, Maoist chairman Prachanda and other prominent leaders have strongly articulated that the party will not accept defeat in the coming Constituent Assembly elections of April 10. Prachanda said “the pro-palace elements, Communist Party of Nepal-Unified Marxist Leninist (UML), Nepali Congress and some foreign powers are conspiring against the elections``. The Maoists believe that anti-national elements in Nepal were making efforts to prevent them party from winning.

The Maoists have realised that the elections would not be a cake walk for them as their support base has reduced over the past few months. They are now getting restive and engaging in anti-election activities. The cadre has been defying the Election Commission’s directive to follow the election code of conduct. The Young Communist League affiliated to the Maoist party has been indulging in violence during the campaign. In remote areas, they are intimidating and preventing common people from attending political programmes of rival parties. In all, the Maoists seem to be in a desperate mood to win the elections and are likely to use any means to achieve their objective.

Source: ORF, South Asia Weekly Report, March 30, 2008

China keen to re-engage with Nepal

2008-03-13T10:51:00.001+05:30

Paul Soren

China last week supported the April 10 Constituent Assembly (CA) elections and reaffirmed its support to the peace process and economic assistance aimed to bring peace and political stability in the country. Of late, China has begun taking a keen interest in the unfolding political developments in Nepal. On March 2, Chinese Assistant Minister of Foreign Affairs He Yafei led a nine-member delegation to Nepal. During their three-day visit, the delegation met with Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala, Chief of the Army Staff General Rukmangat Katuwal, Foreign Secretary Gyan Chandra Acharya and participated in the 7th consultative conference of Foreign Ministers of the two countries.
Although China had sent several high-level official delegations to Nepal last year, it was the first official foreign ministry delegation to Nepal. Through these visits China aimed to revive the dormant relationship between the two countries, stagnated primarily due to Nepal’s internal political instability and the active-presence of foreign powers in the region. China also promised to extend road and railway network and supply fuel to Nepal. The proposed rail link connecting Kathmandu to Lhasa will put the Chinese in a more advantageous position. This will reduce Nepal’s over-dependence on India. Furthermore, China promised to expand cooperation with Nepal and support Nepal’s cause in regional and international forum, including SAARC.
Earlier, China maintained a distance from the democratic forces and preferred to align with the monarchy. However, in the changed circumstances, China was keen to engage with the democratic forces and the new political dispensation. It would like to have a dispensation in Kathmandu which would benefit China’s national interest and support its policies on Tibet and Taiwan. More importantly, China would like to see the Indian influence and growing western presence in Nepal reduced.

Source: South Asia Weekly, March 9, 2008

Strife ends in Nepal’s Terai region

2008-03-13T10:50:00.002+05:30

Paul Soren

With signing of an eight-point agreement reached between the government and leaders of United Madhesi Democratic Front (UDMF), an alliance of three Terai parties, Madhesi Janaadhikar Forum (MJF), Terai-Madhesh Loktantrik Party (TMLP) and Nepal Sadbhawana Party (NSP), the year long strife in Teria has partially come to an end. The UDMF also announced to withdraw its 16 day long agitation. The prevailing confusion and apprehension over holding of timely elections to the Constituent Assembly (CA) has also disappeared.

On February 28, 2008, Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala and UDMF leaders Mahanta Thakur, Rajendra Mahato and Upendra Yadav signed a pact in the presence of members from civil society, human rights and media. In addition, the government also signed a four-point agreement on March 1 with the Federal Republican National Front (FRNF), an alliance of nine ethnic groups. However, some affiliates of the FRNF, including Madhesi Jaanaadhikar Forum–Madhes (MJF-M) and Republican Madhesi Front (RMF) are dissatisfied with the agreement. The two Madhesi groups have further warned to intensify their agitation.

Apparently, the government has been able to address key demands of Madhesis which they have been deprived for over more than five decades. According to the pact, the government agreed to recognise Madhes and other federal states as autonomous region, provide equal representation to Madhesis in all sectors, proportional representation of Madheis in army, implement previous pact with MJF, compensate and provide medical treatment to people injured during Terai agitation and give martyr’s status to those killed and has agreed to talk to armed outfits from Terai. The cabinet meeting endorsed the agreement and asked the Election Commission (EC) to extend the deadline for election procedures.

In fact, the Terai problem seems to be resolved but this is only partially. In central Terai, security situation is fast improving and gradually returning to normalcy but agitations in eastern Terai remains a challenge. Similarly, the armed factions from Terai have not shown much inclination to participate in elections. Though, the government is trying hard to reach out to these groups but their response has been lukewarm. Eventually, if talks do not materialize with these groups it is certain that they will try to impede the election process. There are also few elements hatching conspiring against the elections and trying to derail the peace process. Likewise, security scenario in some parts of Teria still remains a matter of grave concern. The EC has also requested the government to tighten up security in some eastern hilly districts. However, despite all these hurdles and stumbling blocks, the government and parties look determined to hold the elections. The political parties have intensified campaign and mobilizing support for their respective parties. It is expected that this time the elections would not be deferred rather it would be held to provide a future roadmap for new Nepal.

Source: South Asia Weekly, March 2, 2008

Terai crisis may delay elections

2008-03-13T10:49:00.000+05:30

The continuing crisis in Nepal’s Terai region poses a serious challenge for holding of timely elections to the Constituent Assembly (CA). The week-long general strike called by the United Democratic Madhesi Front (UDMF), an alliance of three Terai parties, Madhesi Janaadhikar Forum (MJF), Terai-Madhesh Loktantrik Party (TMLP) and Sadbhawana Party (SP) has only aggravated the situation. The UDMF has been pressurising the government to address six of its major demands, including, a separate Madesh province with right to self-determination. They threatened to boycott elections if their demands are not met. Subsequently, the Federal Republican Front (FRF), an alliance of ethnic groups in eastern hills has launched agitations pressuring for their demands. Apparently, the two separate agitations is Terai, has raised serious doubts of holding the elections on stipulated time.

The strike has adversely affected normal life in the region and Kathmandu valley. Many of the industries located in Terai have closed down due to shortage of raw materials. Most of the educational institutions have shut down and transport remained off road. The supply of basic necessities has been largely affected due to blockade of vehicular movement. There is an acute shortage of fuel and this impacted vehicular movement in Kathmandu. There are also stray incidents of violence and clashes reported between security forces and demonstrators in different parts of Terai.

The FRF’s acceptance to sit for talks has given some respite to the government. The government tried hard to strike a deal with UDMF leaders to hold elections on time. Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala and Seven Party Alliance (SPA) leaders invited UDMF leaders for talks. This week, a series of meetings took place between UDMF and SPA leaders to find a political outlet. The government assured UDMF leaders that elections will address most of their grievances. Initially, the Madhesi leaders responded positively to government’s offer. However, the talks did not yield any results and the UDMF decided to continue with their agitations. Though, the government and other parties are gearing up for elections but the security and election scenario in Terai does not look favourable. Even, the Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP-Nepal) has decided to boycott the April 10 election. It is obvious that elections will not take place if, the Terai parties continue with their agitations and security situation does not improve.

Source: South Asia Weekly, February 24, 2008

India reiterates support for Nepali elections

2008-03-13T10:47:00.000+05:30

India reiterated her support to Nepal for holding timely elections to the Constituent Assembly (CA) and expressed confidence that the elections would be held on April 10, 2008. Spelling out her position India also stated that it does not support any type of secessionist movement in Nepal. Rather India wants to support Nepal in her attempts to accomplish her democratic goals. In a goodwill gesture and to express solidarity to the Nepali government, the Indian National Congress (INC) party, key constituent in the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) sent a four member high-level delegation to Nepal. The delegation was led by Divijay Singh, accompanied by Veerappa Moily, Dr Shakeel Ahmed and Jitin Prasada. The delegation was assigned the task to take stock of political situation in Nepal and to extend India’s support to the Nepali people.

In Kathmandu, the delegation met with the Nepali Congress (NC) President and Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala, Home Minister Krishna Prasad Situala, Minister of Peace and Reconstruction R C Poudel, Speaker of House, Chief Election Commission CEC), senior leaders of all political parties including the Maoists, leaders of agitating Terai parties and civil society representatives. The delegation extended all possible support for timely election. India also offered to mediate between the Nepali government and agitating groups in Terai, if both parties agreed to it. India hopes that the demands of the Madhesis and other agitating groups to be addressed within the framework of agreed principles.

Over the years, India has played a crucial role in assisting the Nepali government and parties in resolving political problems. During times of crisis and confusion it has been able to broker peace between conflicting parties. Thereby, India will continue to remain a major player in Nepal.

However, unfolding of events, deepening political crisis and eruption of violence in Terai remains a serious concern for India. It is concerned over the deteriorating security situation in Terai which might impinge upon India’s own security in states along the India-Nepal border. Besides, it is apprehensive that if the elections are delayed further the country will experience more chaos.

Source: South Asia Weekly, February 17, 2008

Maoist’s making tactical move

2008-03-13T10:45:00.000+05:30

The Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist (CPN-Maoist) is making desperate attempts to pressurise the Nepali government and to intimidate political rivals before the April 10 elections. Last week, in a major political decision, the Maoist party announced the revival of the United Revolutionary People's Council (URPC) people’s government. The Maoists re-constituted URPC central committee and appointed senior leader Dr Baburam Bhattarai as convener and Krishna Bahadur Mahara and Dev Gurung as deputy-conveners.

On February 6, Maoist party held a meeting of the URPC and decided to revive the people's government and resolve people’s problems at the district and local level. The Maoists claim that this will assist in holding of smooth elections and also extend support in development related works. Subsequently, the Maoists also announced to initiate model joint development projects in eleven autonomous regions.

According to the Comprehensive Peace Accord (CPA) signed between the Seven Party Alliance (SPA) and Maoists in November 2006, the Maoists had agreed to dissolve their parallel government. The recent announcement of reviving local government is a gross violation of previous peace agreements. The Maoists decision has also drawn criticism from several quarters. All major political parties strongly reacted to it and raised suspicion over the Maoists move. The parties termed the decision as violation of the peace accord and other understandings signed in the past. The United Nations Mission in Nepal (UNMIN) assisting in managing the arms and monitoring peace process termed the decision violation of earlier accords and questioned the rationalization behind it.

Over a period of time, the Maoists have lost their popular support base across the country and there is a growing realization that they may fair badly during the elections. Thereby, the Maoists are attempting to maneuver the local government by reviving their local body. Though, the Maoists have rhetorically stated to cooperate and participate in elections but their recent move has left scope for suspicion about their sincerity towards the peace process and elections.

Source: South Asia Weekly, Febryary 10, 2008

King Gyanendra breaks long silence

2008-03-13T10:43:00.000+05:30

Paul Soren

Finally, emerging from a long isolation, King Gyanendra spoke out his mind. He said his silence was not a sign of withdrawal or defeat but action. He argued that he remained silent so that the peace accord signed between the Seven Party Alliance (SPA) government and Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist (CPN-Maoist) could succeed. Last year, in a significant decision, the SPA government and Maoists had stripped the King of all his executive powers, privileges and seized all his royal properties.

On January 30, in an informal interview with Hari Lamsal, editor of a vernacular Nepali weekly Rastra Bani, the King said the Nepali people have a large heart and can accommodate all Nepalis including the monarchy. He also refuted rumors of fleeing the country and asserted that the Nepali people were aware of the significance of the institution of monarchy and will not undermine it. In his interview, King Gyanendra urged people to gauge the current political situation in the country and said they must peak out rather than keeping quiet.

Interestingly, the King claimed to have reached a secret understanding with the political parties. He declined to provide full details about the deal but said the parties know about it and if it didn’t work out then he will come out in public. The King’s statement at this juncture is a calculative move; he is testing the waters and gauging people’s reactions. Interestingly, some section of the Nepali people, pro-monarchy parties and some political leaders are also in support of the institution of monarchy in some form or the other. Recently, the Interdisciplinary Analysts (IDA) group carried out a countrywide survey and reported that over 49.3 percent of Nepalis supported the continuation of the institution of monarchy in some form in the new set-up. Are these developments an indication that monarchy might just come to stay in Nepal, albeit only a shadow of the glorious past?

Source: South Asia Weekly, February 2, 2008

All attention on the Army

2008-02-26T14:25:00.000+05:30

Being one of the two primary institutions that founded the Nepali State, the Army bears a moral, historical, and institutional obligation to salvage the faltering state. Now, the question remains: when and with which partnership will the Army act?

Chiran Jung Thapa

Rookmangud Katawal
Once again, the Army has become the centre of attention. First, it was the Chief of Army Staff (COAS) General Rookmangud Katawal's salvo against the integration of the Maoist rebels that caused a stir. Then immediately following his remarks, the Maoists accused the Army of plotting a "democratic coup." And now, the hottest debate underway is about the idea of mobilizing the Army to provide security for the putative Constituent Assembly elections (CA).

It was the COAS' non-accommodative remarks that started the wave. Hinting at the issue of Maoist integration into the Army, General Katawal had strongly opined that no politically indoctrinated individual or group should be inducted into the national army. While the Prime minister and most other political leaders concurred with Katawal's sentiments, the Maoist boss - Pushpa Kamal Dahal aka Prachanda lambasted Gen. Katawal questioning his authority to make such remarks on integration.

But the fussing did not stop there. The Maoist retorted by making an even more sensational allegation. Dahal and his second-in-command - Baburam Bhattarai accused the Army of plotting a "democratic coup." Dahal has even claimed that the foreign powers were hatching a conspiracy to install a military-backed government like in Bangladesh and Pakistan.

Repeatedly, Maoists have proved themselves to have mastered the art of crying wolf. But, some reckon that their allegation could possibly hold some semblance of merit this time around.

The element that has provided some weight to the Maoist allegation is the induction of Sujata Koirala (the daughter of the Prime minister) into the cabinet. Ms Koirala was recently appointed as a minister without portfolio. Given her ailing father's dwindling abilities, many reckon that she is taking charge of his portfolios - which happens to include defence. And it is said that her relationship with the Army top brass has warmed up quite a bit in recent times. Apparently, she was also in Delhi at the same time when Gen. Katawal was there. These turn of events added weight to the Maoists’ claim that her lucid preference for constitutional monarchy has resonated well with the Army top brass and a “democratic coup” is in the offing.

But even before the dust settled, Army was again dragged into the limelight. This time, it was about mobilizing the Army to provide security for the putative elections. Although the Army has remained tight-lipped over the issue, all divisional commanders were recently called into Headquarters to discuss the issue. As for the political leaders, they have been voicing their preference to mobilize the Army almost on a daily basis.

The Army has become the primary choice for the security provision because it is still the largest and the strongest security apparatus in the country. At a time when the security situation has deteriorated critically and that the other security apparatuses have become utterly debilitated, Army remains the only robust hope for the purpose.

Army's power
Perhaps the main reason why the Army has received so much attention is because of its undeniable power. A recent report, released by the Brussels based International Crisis Group (ICG), positions the Army as the most powerful institution in Nepal. There is more than a grain of truth in ICG's assessment. With a total strength of six divisions comprising of 95,000 personnel, the Army is certainly the largest and the most powerful public institution.

The Army derives its power not just from the sheer numbers, but also from the public faith in the institution. According to the most recent nationwide survey titled "Nepal's contemporary situation" conducted by Sudhindra Sharma and Pawan Kumar Sen, the Army enjoys the highest public approval rating amongst the primary government institutions (legislative parliament, Cabinet, Civil service, Nepal Police, and Judiciary). Even the NGOs, Civil society, and Human rights activists’ were unable to override Army’s approval ratings.

Another opinion poll conducted by Nepalnews/Nepali Times had yielded similar results. In response to the poll question, "In light of the recent developments what is your opinion of the Nepal Army?”, 79% of the respondents indicated that they held the army in positive light.

The public’s faith on the Army stems mainly from its unfaltering discipline and cohesiveness. Unlike the blatantly brazen violations of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) committed by its signatories, the Army has strictly abided to all its terms and conditions. And the Nepali people have taken notice to this fact. Also, until date, the Army has remained remarkably subservient to the Transitional Governing Authority’s (TGA) authority and staunchly adhered to the constitution. In stark contrast to the fissiparous political parties that have all endured splits at least once in their political history, the Nepal Army has remained intact and very loyal to its chain of command too.

It is also the financial capability that has provided the Army with an additional oomph. Not only does it receive a budget allotment from the government, but it also earns a substantial amount from the UN Peace keeping operations (PKO). As the fifth largest troop contributor, the amount the Nepal Army rakes in from the PKOs is almost equal to the amount it receives from the national budget. One estimate even has it that about thirty percent of the capital circulating in Nepal's financial markets comes from the Army's funds.

But the variable that makes the Army so potent and powerful is undoubtedly its fighting prowess. Despite having fought an onerous insurgency for years, the Army still appears indefatigable. Although some have denigrated the Army for its inability to crush the insurgency, others have credited the institution for preventing a complete military takeover by the rebels. Many political pundits also believe that it was primarily the Army’s unyielding resilience that compelled the rebels to shift their strategic gears and opt for the Delhi compromise.

In the transitional period, analysts reckon that the Army has actually increased its potency. Pointedly, the number of personnel in the Army stands at its peak. Training has been made more frequent and more rigorous. It is even believed that it has greatly strengthened the capability of its special forces which comprises of one airborne battalion and one Ranger battalion.

Even more tellingly, the previously throttled supply of military hardware has resumed. The COAS' recent trips to India and China are believed to have revitalized the military ties. Presumably, COAS’ trips have opened more doors for military hardware procurements. Some Nepali news agencies have even reported sightings of two US Air Force C17 Globemasters, delivering a large consignment arms and ammunition to the Army at Tribhuvan International Airport. In sum, what makes the Army irrefutably powerful is a combination of pubic faith, financial capability and its fighting prowess.

Army's impending role
Today, most eyes rest on the impending role of the Army. Will the Army take the risk of absorbing the rebels? Will it completely severe its conjugal ties with the institution that is attributed for its naissance? Will it be mobilized to provide security for the putative elections? And more importantly, what would happen if it tilted in favour of one political force?

It remains to be seen as to how the Army’s role will play out. But, one thing is unmistakably certain: the Army is greatly perturbed by the rising insecurity and especially alarmed by the eroding state sovereignty. As it considers itself ordained with the task of safeguarding national sovereignty and territorial integrity, it is easily discernable why the downward spiral trend has been unsettling.

But more importantly, it has seemingly sensed its inevitable role. It has detected that the burden of cleaning up the political slag will once again be heaped on its shoulders. Either by being mobilized to provide security for the elections or deployed against the anti-establishment elements, it foresees itself springing into action sooner or later.

The Army, however, faces another formidable task as well. For the Army, more challenging than defusing the stray UXOs (unexploded ordinances) and IEDs (improvised explosive devices), will be the task of striking a balance between its historical institutional values and forces of modernity. Since other political forces have harped about the institution's conjugal relationship with the Monarchy, it has had to repeatedly counter these jaundiced outlooks. But by conforming to the universal norms like human rights, democratization and operating under a civilian authority, it is increasingly dispelling most doubts.

At a time when pervasive threats are undermining the existence of the State, however, many believe that it would be foolhardy for the Army to overlook the significance of its entrenched historical values and ties.

Source: Nepalnews, February 25, 2008

Pragmatism Must Prevail

2008-02-25T12:12:00.000+05:30

The much-awaited parley between the government and the United Democratic Madhesi Front (UDMF), an alliance of the Terai Madesh Democratic Party, Madhesi Janadhikar Forum and Nepal Sadhbhawana Party (Mahato), failed to yield the expected results the other day. The people who were eagerly waiting for the fruitful outcome of the meeting throughout Friday were once again disappointed when the media reported that the meeting ended inconclusively. The people, badly hit by the indefinite closure called by the UDMF from 13 February and curfews across the Terai, had expected that the meeting would end their woes and pave the path for the constituent assembly elections as they knew well that both sides had done adequate homework before sitting at the table. But it could not happen as there was no agreement on the UDMF�s demand for �one Madhesh, terai, one province�, which is impractical and against the national integrity. With the inconclusive outcome of the meeting, the Nepali people as well as the economy of the country are sure to suffer more. The movement of people and essential goods like fuel and food has already been affected throughout the country by the indefinite bandh. The serpentine queues of vehicles in front of the petrol pumps are a common sight in the valley. Moreover, the failure of the meeting has put the entire peace process at risk as it would be incomplete without holding the CA polls in the absence of peace in the Terai or in any part of the country. This has created some amount of uncertainty. If the seven political parties and the UDMF do not sort out the outstanding issue immediately, there is a danger that the CA polls, the process of which is already underway, might have to be postponed possibly for the third time. Therefore, UDMF should be more serious about the safe and bright future of the country and give up the demand which the present interim government cannot fulfill. It wold be the most logical step in order to free the nation from the present chaotic situation. No one should forget that dialogue is the best weapon to arrive at a solution to any problem. At the same time no one can compromise on national integrity and the wellbeing of the people at large. It is time that flexibility be resorted to in taking the country on the forward looking path in the interest of the people and the country.

Source: The Rising Nepal, February 25, 2008

Strike, Scarcity Linger RJP

2008-02-25T12:08:00.000+05:30

Ritu Raj Subedi

Life in the capital city and elsewhere is becoming more difficult with the acute shortage of fuels, increasing load-shedding and skyrocketing prices of essential commodities. Crisis triggered by the short supply of POL products and irregular electricity has triggered other problems: dwindling water in the taps and chaotic transport services. Power cut has hampered the water supply body to pump out groundwater and distribute it. Absence of cooking gas and kerosene has made the condition of housewives pathetic. Travelling in the public transport equally offers one with harrowing experiences. The widespread shortage of everything is a glaring example of the failure of current governance system in the transitional period. Despite this unbearable situation, the public has not revolted against the government. This sense of greater endurance is a testimony of Nepalese for the greater cause of the nation, namely the constituent assembly elections.Legitimacy It is common knowledge that the existing fuel crisis has been unleashed by the Terai bandha that was called less than two months ahead of the CA polls. At this time, any activity that obstructs the polls process can be interpreted as anti-election move. The legitimacy of the incumbent government largely rests on its capacity to hold the elections as scheduled. However, the alarming thing is the demand of the agitating groups to establish a separate Terai province. This disruptive demand must have sent a chill down the spines of the people and forced them to be patient at the time of crisis because no genuine Nepali can accept such a demand. To meet this key demand, the Terai groups are giving continuity to closures across the southern belt crippling general life from east to west. Whatever the outcome of the negotiation between the government and the UDMF, the strike has created doubts over the election. At the same time, the move of UDMF has ironically consolidated the unity of Seven Party Alliance (SPA). The three major parties � Nepali Congress, CPN-UML and CPN-Maoist �,which are often engaged in squabbling over trifle issues, have evoked a unified and coherent voice in addressing the Terai issues. The chiefs of the three parties have discussed the Terai�s problems and held common stance on the matter. The SPA unity is vital to conduct the polls and subsequently to draft a new constitution. Many have raised eyebrows on the moves of the Front when its leaders defied the government�s call to solve the issue through talks and issued conflicting remarks regarding the election. On one hand they claim the Terai strike has been organised to make the CA polls a success. On the other, they argue the CA polls can�t be held until their demands are met. The contradictory statements have cast doubt over the sincerity of Madhisi leaders in backing the resolve of the nation to hold the polls that will formally abolish monarchy, restructure the state and institutionalise the federalism. Giving a sudden U-turn, Rastriya Janashakti Party (RJP), a pro-palace group, decided not to participate in the elections on the pretext of the ongoing Madhesh agitation. The dramatic move by its chairman Surya Bahadur Thapa has taken all by surprise. This has generated questions: Does his step support the ongoing political process or has a negative connotations? Is he a genuine sympathiser of Madhesi people? What did he actually do for the welfare of Madhesis when he was the prime minister several times? He led the governments under the Panchyat system for years that often played pahades against madhesis. Divide and rule was the mantra of the panchayat regime. Thapa was its skilful executer. Known as �a pancha in crisis,� Thapa, in the capacity of the then prime minister, earned notoriety when his government allegedly rigged Nepal�s first referendum in favour of partyless panchayat regime in the late 80s. To this end, But, the move of ex-soft pancha at the crucial hour of Nepalese politics will only help those waiting to fish in troubled waters. ChallengesIf there were any connection between Thapa�s poll boycott and UDMF�s refusal to register its closed list of candidates at the EC office for the proportional election, it will be a wake-up call for the SPA that there are formidable challenges on the path of the CA polls. Amidst the widespread uncertainty, over three dozens political parties have submitted their closed list to the EC. This has certainly aroused the hope that CA polls process will go on as scheduled and meet the key deadlines. Realising the gravity of situation, the EC has extended the period of submitting the closed list by today. By participating in the polls, Madhesh will not lose anything but strengthen its position through the restructuring of the state.

Source: The Rising Nepal, February 25, 2008

SPA, UDMF finally reach deal

2008-02-25T12:06:00.000+05:30

KATHMANDU, Feb 25 - The government and the protesting United Democratic Madhesi Front (UDMF) struck a crucial deal Monday morning ending the 12-day Madhes movement and clearing the deck for Constituent Assembly elections slated for April 10.
The two sides reached compromise on the key UDMF demand - One Madhes One Pradesh - which they said would be decided through the Constituent Assembly. They have agreed to form autonomous Madhes state and other autonomous states.
However, both sides were struggling till 3 am Monday on proper words to be mentioned in the draft.
"We have agreed on autonomous Madhes state. But we are still discussing proper words to reflect the desire of Madhesi people regarding the autonomous Madhes state," said Hridayesh Tripathi, a Madhesi leader, who was present during the meeting, held at prime minister's residence, Baluwatar.
The government and UDMF have also agreed to recognize all those killed in the course of the Madhes movement last February as martyrs and provide their families with proper compensation.
They have agreed to amend the Election Commission Act, which provisions that any political party which secures at least 20 percent result or more under the First-Past-the-Post (FPTP) system must prepare an inclusive list of candidates for the proportional electoral system.
"We have agreed to increase the provision from 20 to 30 percent," said Tripathi. The UDMF had demanded that the provision should be increased to 50 percent.
He said the final draft of the agreement will be ready by Monday morning.
Jayaprakash Gupta, coordinator of Madhesi People's Rights Forum (MPRF), a constituent of the UDMF, said, "It is a big setback to tarai movement because the agreement is not constitutionally binding."
He said the government didn't agree to incorporate the issue in the constitution. "The Constituent Assembly will not have legal powers to recognize the tarai as autonomous Madhes state," he said.
He said the government also refused to make group recruitment of Madhesi people in the Nepali Army.
The UDMF had called an indefinite strike in the tarai from February 13 demanding that the government fulfill their six-point demand.
Earlier today, Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala, UML General Secretary Madhav Kumar Nepal and Maoist Chairman Prachanda had held a separate meeting at Baluwatar and reiterated their commitment to conduct the CA poll on April 10.
The three leaders had also agreed to persuade UDMF to participate in the CA poll to decide the issue of one Madhes one Pradesh. Following the Baluwatar meeting, UML General Secretary and Maoist Chairman Prachanda held a separate meeting at the UML central office in Balkhu and discussed the issue.
After developments in Kathmandu, the government arranged a helicopter to bring Upendra Yadav, MPRF chairman, from Simara Sunday evening.
Yadav and other Madhesi leaders including UDMF chairman Mahantha Thakur and Sadbhawana Party Chairman Rajendra Mahato held a special meeting at about 11 pm before sitting for a formal meeting with the government at Baluwatar.
Prime Minister Koirala and Home Minister Krishna Prasad Sitaula held negotiation with Madhesi leaders.
Meanwhile, NC leaders Bijaya Kumar Gachhadar and Saratsingh Bhandari have urged the government to settle the Madhes issues soon. In a press statement, jointly issued Sunday, the leaders said the CA poll is not possible without addressing the issues of Madhesi political parties. The leaders, however, are not so clear on the issue of one Madhes, one Pradesh.
Similarly, Rastriya Prajantra Party (RPP), in a separate statement, demanded that the government immediately hold a roundtable to address the issues raised by Madhesi, Tharu and other indigenous leaders.

Source: The Kathmandu Post, February 25, 2008

Mockery Of Democracy

2008-02-25T12:03:00.000+05:30

Narayan Prasad Wagle

The new threat to democracy does not come from tyrants as they can be fairly distinguished and removed from power by the people. It comes rather from the political groups that pretend to be democratic and keep sucking on the blood of the people. This is a new trend all over the world. As we could see in Pakistan, Musharaf ruled Pakistan in the guise of democracy, which many Pakistanis detested as a military democracy, and it was clearly manifest in the defeat of his allies in the recent election. The Bhutanese government has begun to exercise pseudo democracy to further strengthen the grip of the royal regime over the freedom loving people. TyrannyNepal, as one of the least developed courtiers of South Asia, has shown symptoms of the same disease. With the fall of the Rana regime in 1951, every succeeding ruler claimed to be democratic. Even the tyrannical Panchayat rulers feigned to be democratic, holding some sort of election periodically. They claimed that the democracy it expounded was in consonance with the soil of Nepal. Fortunately, it was dismantled after almost three decades of rule. With the restoration of democracy in 1990, people hoped that their quality of life would improve in a real democracy. However, it is confined to a closed set of elite people, and the benefits of the so-called democracy could not reach the oppressed, the marginalised and the poor. The political parties used democracy to enjoy power. As a result, the country got bogged down in conflicts.With the hope of changing their status from being victims to the sovereign, people came to the streets and defeated the king's ambition of establishing a dictatorial regime. They came to the streets pursuant to the promises of the political parties and the Maoists to correct past mistakes and renounce violence. Nearly two years have passed since the April uprising. The daily lives of the people have become extremely difficult and painful. Violence continues to be perpetrated in the name of the people. The INSEC year book on human rights reports that violent groups in the Terai killed half a thousand people while the government killed nearly three dozens during the period. The government could not prevent the violation of the basic right of the people to live. Rather it became a part of such violation. This clearly shows that the interests of the political groups are very different from those of the people. Otherwise, how could they kill so many people without much hesitation? The senseless general strikes have been a routine feature of the new Nepal. The sufferings these strikes incur on the people are intolerable. They are virtually made prisoners without access to health care, education and other basic needs. Of course, the political groups have the right to demonstrate peacefully for their cause. But do they have the right to kill people for their benefit? It is crystal clear that a group's demands may be supported by a portion of the population. But how can they violate the rights of all other people? In recent times, people have had little access to such basic needs as cooking gas, petrol and kerosene and services like electricity due to the inefficiency of the government compounded by the blockade and senseless general strikes in violation of the basic norms of humanitarian law. As a consequence, essential services like hospital services have also been affected. People who expected law and order, rule of law, better employment opportunities, a favourable business environment, social justice and stability are being hit hard daily. They are being exploited by the political interest groups, some of which are even more accountable to external powers. Some groups are relying on racialism to further their interests, which is clear from the fact that class is not tied with ethnicity while making provisions for the enlistment of the marginalised people. As we know, it is racism and interests of the great powers that create an unending cycle of violence.Compare these developments with the peace loving people of Nepal with so much religious and ethnic tolerance. Some political groups are hell-bent on destroying the assets of the Nepalese people while bringing down their standards of living. As everyone accepts that democracy is for the people, by the people and of the people, the present scenario of Nepal shows that it is against the people, by the elite and feudals and of racism and great power subservience. This is a mockery of democracy, which is more dangerous than tyranny.Illegitimate interestsTherefore, the responsible political parties must act lawfully to reverse this trend if they really want to consolidate democracy in the land of the Buddha. They must refrain from making it just an instrument to legalise their otherwise illegitimate interests and prevent others from doing so. The immediate step in this regard is to hold the Constituent Assembly election, which is a benchmark of democracy

Source: The Rising Nepal, February 25, 2008

Confused donors

2008-02-25T12:02:00.000+05:30

Once a conflict is over, aid agencies seem paralyzed. Instead of sending help, they send study groups. There is often a lag of years before moving from humanitarian relief to real economic development. By the time such help actually arrives, it is often too late: war has been re-ignited," said Jeffrey D Sachs, an influential economist, about post-conflict countries. His perception has become painfully familiar to Nepal. This was the message that came from the two-day Nepal Donor Consultation Meeting that concluded in Kathmandu last Friday. The government expected the aid agencies to fork out substantial amounts of money to boost the economy in the post-conflict scenario, while the donors gave the message that they were unwilling to support economic reconstruction until there was complete political stability and full democracy, from the local to the central levels.
The donors' rebuff seemed to show that they didn't realize that Nepal could not afford to wait in addressing the immediate development and economic challenges to keep the hard-earned peace. What is the use of the aid after the scenario that the donors desire emerges? When there is functional democracy and complete political stability, the government does not need to depend on aid. At that time, the confidence of the private sector will have been high, and their investments can be channeled into reenergizing the economy and creating new jobs. It is right now that the government most urgently needs the support of its development partners to fulfill the people's expectations and aspirations. On the other hand, the donors did not systematically distinguish post-conflict settings as it requires a distinctive approach. They didn't know that it should not be simply development as usual. The donors talked about helping the fragile peace process, but no concrete effort was initiated. It would have been generous and a real support for the peace process if the donors had come up with proposals and assistance to accelerate the pace of development and growth through quick-impact programs.
Look at the ground realities. The adverse economic situation, a painful consequence of the war, is obvious. Capital — physical, human and social — has been destroyed. And Nepal's ability to rebuild itself is limited by weak institutions, scarce human and financial resources and economic fragility. Under these circumstances, financial support from the international community appears to be the only chance for Nepalis, who are dazed and bereft of hope, to mend their lives. The government also has to play its part perfectly. The implementation side should be strengthened. Improving the morale of the private sector, expediting reforms to improve the business environment including the functioning of state mechanisms, greater accountability, transparency and fighting corruption are some things that the government must not overlook. With better policies, better priorities for reform and bigger and better-timed aid, it is possible to restore the post-conflict economy considerably and more rapidly.

Source: The Kathmandu Post, February 25, 2008

Need For Dialogue

2008-02-25T12:00:00.000+05:30

The meeting of the Seven Party Alliance (SPA) has outright rejected the demand of 'One Madhes: One Province' put forth by the agitating United Democratic Madeshi Front (UDMF), saying that neither the SPA nor the interim government had the authority to fulfill the demand that undermines national sovereignty and integrity. The parley between the SPA and the UDMF remained inconclusive on Friday when the latter continued to stick to its demand for 'One Madhes: One Province'' though the ruling parties agreed to meet all the other demands of the UDMF. All the SPA leaders after much discussion have reached a consensus that the government would accept all the other demands except the impractical one of 'One Madhes: One Province.' When the SPA and the government did not agree to meet one of the six demands, the UDMF leaders have threatened to continue their strike, which has already affected life across the Terai. No doubt, the present government is there only to hold the elections to the Constituent Assembly (CA) so that democracy and peace could be institutionalised in the country. It lacks authority to meet any demand that jeopardises national sovereignty and integrity. When the interim constitution has already declared Nepal a federal republic, it is inappropriate to come up with a demand for a particular province. In fact, Madhes does not belong to the elite Madhesi people, who are now launching the protest and strikes. It is the land of the people who have migrated from the hills, the Tharus, the Dalits, landless squatters and backward people who have been victimised by the people of the so-called high caste people of Madhes. Moreover, the Thraus, the indigenous people of the Terai oppose the demand of the UDMF. Indeed, it is a big irony that Nepal, which was never colonised by any power after its unification, is now in the verge of disintegration due to the inappropriate demands put forth by the different ethnic groups, including the Madhesis. The government and the ruling parties should discourage people from putting such up such demands that push the country towards disintegration. In fact, the government as well as the parties both in power and outside should work in a way to hold the CA polls within the stipulated time so that the people can have a new constitution drafted by their own representatives, which will, in turn, decide the fate of all the Nepali people, not of the people of a particular area.

Source: The Rising Nepal, February 25, 2008

Target: Election

2008-02-25T11:59:00.000+05:30

On Saturday, the SPA did the only right thing it could do on the demands for a single state of ‘Madhesh’ and the right to self-determination. It rejected the demands by concluding that neither it nor the government nor the interim parliament had the mandate to decide on such an issue as would impinge profoundly on national integrity. It left the decision, therefore, to the Constituent Assembly, which is slated for election only six weeks away, on April 10. Out of the six demands put forward by the United Madhesi Democratic Forum (UMDF), four could be addressed even before the election, according to SPA leaders. These two demands, they said, could not be met also because these required constitutional and legal changes just ahead of the election. The front’s demand for exemption from the requirement for inclusiveness on proportional representation from the existing 20 per cent to 30 per cent still needed agreement, it was reported.The agitating Tarai groups did not submit their closed lists of candidates under the proportional representation system yesterday too — the date had been re-set specially with a view to enlisting their particiaption in the election, as they had ignored the original day). However, Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala yesterday asked the public to rest assuredthat the Tarai crisis would be resolved in a day or two. The nation would applaud any suchbreakthrough so long as it did not compromise or threaten to compromise Nepal’s vital interests, such as its sovereignty and territorial integrity, or maintained the fairness principle in the political processes and a level playing field for all political parties. By these criteria, the two demands — one single Tarai state and self-determination — are out of the question — now and in the future.Even the front’s push for greater non-inclusiveness privilege is an example of the heads-I-win-tails-you-lose approach. While it has sought ‘proportional representation of Madhesis’ in all areas of governance, the front wants itself to be exempted from this need to include others. Other communities in the Tarai seem to be slowly waking up to the dire implications of ‘one Madhes, one state’ and ‘self-determination’. For instance, the Tharus, who are among the original Tarai inhabitants, have staged protests, warning the government against yielding to these ‘separatist’ demands. Nepal has remained a unified nation for about two and a half centuries. While even those countries in Asia that became larger relatively recently through the union of separate states have not granted these rights to their provinces or states, raising these demands in Nepal has naturally raised general suspicion about the protagonists’ motives. Jana Andolan II has provided all the groups with undreamt-of rights and powers, and the approaching CA election aims to institutionalise these gains and provide more. In this context, continuing the agitation, which enters its 13th day today, appears to be directed against the CA election itself. The SPA and the government need to demonstrate that the election takes place on schedule, come what may.

Source: The Himalayan Times, February 25, 2008

Nepal at a crossroads

2008-02-25T11:57:00.000+05:30

Joginder Singh

Nepal evokes memories of a country full of beautiful scenery, high mountains and spiritual places. Till recently, the King of Nepal was regarded as god. However, the image of King Gyanendra has taken a beating, thanks to Maoists who have bullied the seven-party alliance into submission. Moreover, neither the King nor his crown prince has done anything to win the hearts of the people. In all fairness to Maoists, they have never hidden their ambition of removing the monarchy from the centrestage of Nepali politics.
Instead of begging and appealing to the King to become a titular head, Maoists went straight for his head. If they have their way in the election scheduled for April 10, the days of the King are numbered. Maoists have been -- and they still are -- in the forefront of a movement to abolish monarchy.
Nepal, one of the few monarchies in Asia and the only Hindu kingdom, has a population of 26.3 million, which is less than the population of Mumbai and Delhi put together. However, it has an area of 147,181 sq km. In Nepal, a landlocked country, tourism is the primary source of income.
During my recent visit to Nepal, I tried to gauge the ground reality in that country. One thing which came out clearly was that people were afraid to express their opinion openly. When pressed the most they would say was that all political leaders are keen to amass wealth for themselves.
In Nepal, petrol and diesel are being sold at Rs 50 per litre; after some time, even their availability will be a problem. Due to strikes, bandhs and non-payment of previous dues to Indian suppliers for petroleum products, 10 litres a day is the petrol sold to cars and five litres to two-wheelers. There was an interesting slogan put in the market in Nepali language, "Petrol chhenna, mitti taail chhenna, paani chhenna, bijli chhenna, sarkar chhenna" (there is no petrol, no kerosene, no water, no electricity and no Government).
There are power cuts in India, but the day I reached Kathmandu the power was off between 7 pm and 12 pm. I was told that we would have electricity between midnight and 5 am, and again between 9 am and 1 pm next day. This would be followed by no electricity between 1 pm and 5 pm and the cycle would continue till further notified.
When one visits Nepal, one is back to the candle age even in the best hotels. You need candles in the bathroom, in your living room and even dressing room. Normally, it is considered stylish to have a candlelight dinner. But it is not comfortable to live for eight hours in the hotel with candles lighting your room.
Due to political uncertainty, along with lack of basic facilities like water supply and electricity, many foreign companies are treating Nepal as a punishment posting. No wonder hardly any new industry has been set up in that country; worse, even the present ones are facing difficulties in their functioning. The first annual report of the RNA Human Rights Cell, 2006, has recorded 10,725 abductions and 72 killings by Maoists during the past six months of the year. It has also recorded 65 cases of explosion, 40 cases of extortion and looting and 30 cases of threats issued by Maoists. More than 12,000 civilians, Maoists and security personnel have been killed in that country since the rebels began their 'people's war' in 1996.
India, mostly for wrong reasons, occupies the front page of Nepal's media. The kidney scam king, Amit Kumar, who was recently arrested in Nepal, hogged the limelight in that country. On his arrest, Nepal Police recovered Euro 145,00, $ 18,900 and a bank draft of Rs 936,000. He was also guilty of possessing foreign currency -- the amount recovered from him was above the ceiling prescribed under Nepal's laws. Had he been convicted, he would have got up to 10 years of imprisonment and a fine of Rs 2 lakh. But at India's request, he was deported to New Delhi.
Today, Nepal stands at a crossroads. This strife-ridden nation is all set to implement a new 'deal' worked out between the current interim Government and Maoists. One of the conditions for arriving at the understanding is to abolish Nepal's more than 200-year-old monarchy after the election to the new Constituent Assembly is held on April 10. In the election, the electorate will also decide whether Nepal will become a democratic republic or retain ceremonial monarchy.
So far Prime Minister GP Koirala is the only SPA leader who has openly expressed his support for ceremonial monarchy. But now in the interest of peace, he has agreed to its abolition after the Constituent Assembly election. Most people in Nepal, however, will be happy to see King Gyanendra go, but not the monarchy.
Maoists may sweep the election as their writ runs in rural Nepal. Most people will vote for them to avoid any reprisals. The handful supporters of retention of constitutional monarchy will not be able to stem the anti-monarchy drive of Maoists. Of course, what Nepal does with monarchy is its internal matter, but a friendly Government in our neighbourhood is in our interest.
Bordering China and India, Nepal offers a geo-political advantage to any country that is influential there. Though one does not foresee any major conflict in the near future, India feels that the military capability of China will increase if it gets a foothold there. Also, we have to be respectful of the sentiment of the people of Nepal.
Winston Churchill once observed: "The monarchy is extraordinarily useful. When Britain wins a battle it shouts, 'God save the Queen'; when it loses, it votes down the Prime Minister." Only the future will indicate whether Churchill's statement is relevant to Nepal or not.

Source: The Pioneer, February 25, 2008

Two suspicious of polls

2008-02-21T10:56:00.000+05:30

Yubaraj Ghimire

As the countdown for the April 10 election to the constituent assembly begins, the most powerful leaders are busy distorting the main intent of the whole exercise. The election, deferred twice in the past, is meant to elect the constituent assembly that will chart out Nepal’s future constitution as well as the model of government that people will elect through another election later.
But Kathmandu’s walls are painted red with graffiti by Maoist cadres saying ‘let us elect Prachanda as the first President of the Republic of Nepal’. Prachanda, chairman of the Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist (CPN-M), himself has stated that he will be president now at 55 and remain there for another 20 years during which Nepal will transform into one of the developed countries in the world. But the hidden message is simple: that once he is in power, Nepal will usher in a one-party authoritarian rule where change of government through the ballot will be impossible. After all, the CPN-M has also made it clear that their role model is Kim Jong II of North Korea.
Pitted against Prachanda is the octogenarian G.P. Koirala, the interim prime minister who is also discharging duties of the head of state, with King Gyanendra in a state of suspension. Koirala, in fact, began behaving like a king soon after Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh called him a ‘legendary leader’ of South Asia, ignoring Koirala’s vices — mainly corruption.
When the interim constitution said the prime minister will also discharge responsibilities of the head of state, it was not meant to make him into an all-powerful dictator, but simply to get him to do jobs like accepting the credentials of ambassadors, something the king had been doing earlier. Koirala, however, went beyond that expectation. He literally curtailed the king’s right to religion even as in the individual domain and began acting like a ‘Hindu monarch’ during major Hindu festivals. He ignored the fact that Nepal’s revived parliament had made it a secular state from a Hindu kingdom, and that the head of state or government was no more expected to associate with one or the other religion. But he couldn’t resist the temptation to be like the king. In his personal life, he has avoided observing any Hindu rituals, even when his parents died long ago and his two sisters-in-law died within a year recently.
Politically also, he wants to introduce the Koirala dynasty in the politics of Nepal. He recently inducted his only daughter, Sujata Koirala, as a minister without portfolio in the cabinet. He never concealed his wish to make her prime minister — preferably when he is still alive — despite the fact that Sujata is one of the most controversial personalities in the Congress party, sometimes, a synonym of corruption. Interestingly, Koirala’s daughter has stated time and again that she is in favour of monarchy being retained in one or the other form. Her party has however, adopted a pro-republic position during its last general convention.
In a party with a monolithic leadership, Koirala has been able to give a message that like the all-powerful king, he or his daughter are above the party discipline and norm. That’s why no one from the party has so far questioned or demanded action against his daughter. There is speculation that should the April 10 election be called off like it has been twice in the past, given the prevailing law and order situation, Koirala knows that his days are over, along with that of the present coalition arrangement. As radical Maoists are sure to try to capture power through the gun once again, Sujata hopes to rally monarchist and democratic forces around her, with her father loaning his residual support base of the Congress party to her.
In fact, there is a visible amount of deceit and dishonesty both in what Koirala and Prachanda have been doing —both are taking a pro-election position, although, both know elections do not suit their ambitions. Moreover, with acute shortage of fuel and total dislocation of essential services in the country — that has triggered mass anger against the present government — Koirala knows his fate if elections are held. Prachanda has already given too many excuses to call them off by letting loose his supporters on political opponents, and by painting the campaign as a poll for a future president.

Source: The Indian Express, February 21, 2008

Terai turmoil may delay Nepal polls

2008-02-18T13:26:00.000+05:30

NEW DELHI: The uncertainty surrounding Nepalese Constituent Assembly elections continues with prime minister Girija Prasad Koirala refusing to meet one of the key demands put forward by Madhesi leaders for a separate province in the Terai region. Amid fears that the elections — scheduled to be held on April 10 — could be postponed again, Mr Koirala, after two rounds of discussions with the Madhesi leaders, has announced that he would not accept the demand for a Madhesi province, one of the six demands put forward by the Madhesi leaders. Mr Koirala said this would affect Nepal’s sovereignty and integrity. Madhesi leaders have said they would continue their general strike until their six-point demands are met. In this scenario, it would be difficult for the government to hold elections. At the same time, Nepal watchers say that a postponement of poll is also likely to suit certain sections of the political dispensation. The Maoists would be satisfied with the continuation of the current political arrangement and could even use the Madhesi issue to push for a postponement of the elections. Nepal experts say Maoists fear that they could get marginalised in the elections and their agenda subverted by other parties, particularly the Terai regional parties. They are currently deemed to be unpopular with the people, and of the 83 seats that they acquired in the Nepali Parliament they might not be able to retain even half, political watchers there say. The Maoists have also not completely integrated into the mainstream and continue to foster a militia of new recruits. “The elections depend on the Terai situation. In the Terai region political parties have to some extent lost their base to the Madhesi regional parties,” said Paul Soren, junior fellow at the Observer Research Foundation. Madhesis have long been marginalised in Nepal and have had no political voice. A section of the Nepali Congress, which has traditionally been strong in Terai, is also against elections being held. They are not sure about how they would fare in the elections in other areas. And a small, almost negligible, section within the CPN (ULM) also wants the polls to be postponed. However, the concerned parties are wary of coming out in the open as people want elections. The government is also under pressure from the international community to hold elections on time. India sees the Constituent Assembly elections as a fundamental next step, and feels that the democratic process will lose legitimacy if it is postponed again. New Delhi has been urging Kathmandu to resolve the Madhesi issue through dialogue. Political calculations aside, Nepal watchers point out that the Koirala government would find it increasingly difficult to hold elections with one-third of the country agitating. “There is a real problem quite apart from whatever might be political calculation. From the point of view of the administration, how do you hold an elections with one third of the country in revolt. It’s not just political compulsion,” said professor P R Chari, research professor at the Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies. He added: “I’m convinced you can’t hold elections (if the Madhesi issue is not resolved). It is physically impossible, elections require peaceful conditions.” But another postponement would also affect the credibility of the political parties in the eyes of the people of Nepal, and arrest Nepal’s march towards full democracy.

Source: The Economic Times, February 18, 2008

Ethnic unrest threatens Nepal elections

2008-02-18T13:23:00.000+05:30

KATHMANDU (Reuters) - Nepal must address the demands for autonomy of its ethnic Madheshi people or risk more violence and another postponement of twice-delayed elections, the leader of a Madheshi group said on Monday.
Violent protests in the Terai, or Madhesh, region in Nepal's southern plains have clouded a peace deal between the government and former Maoist rebels, which ended the Maoists' decade-long rebellion against the monarchy in 2006.
At least 45 people have been killed in violent street protests in the past year. But Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala has vowed to press ahead with the elections in April, Nepal's first national vote since 1999, despite the crisis.
"If it goes ahead with elections by force, the Terai problem will take a different course," Upendra Yadav, chief of the Madheshi People's Rights Forum, which organised most of last year's protests, told Reuters in a telephone interview.
"Armed groups will get a space to play and a secessionist movement could develop."
Many Madheshis want the region, which is home to nearly half of the country's 26 million people, to become a largely autonomous state within Nepal, and want a greater say in the running of the central government.
"If this is not done elections in the Terai are not possible," Yadav told Reuters. "The government does not want to resolve the problem and it wants to continue to suppress the Madheshi people."
Nepal is due to vote for a constituent assembly on April 10. The assembly is expected to prepare a new constitution, make laws and formally declare an end to nearly 240-year-old monarchy.
Since the Maoist rebellion ended in 2006, more than two dozen rebel groups have begun a low-intensity insurgency in the Terai.
Analysts say the government must act quickly and engage the Madheshis before the situation slips out of control. But Yadav ruled out an early meeting.
"Protesters are being shot and killed," he said. "How can we hold talks in this atmosphere?"
On Sunday, police shot at Madheshi protesters in the southwestern town of Nepalgunj as the crowd pelted them with stones.
Police said one demonstrator was killed and dozens of others were injured, the first fatal incident since an indefinite Madheshi strike began last week.
Schools, shops and factories have been forced to close, while oil supplies have been disrupted.

Source: Reuters India, February 18, 2008

Nepal’s Green Party not to contest CA election

2008-02-18T13:22:00.000+05:30

We are not brave enough to contest the forthcoming election to the constituent assembly as we know we will be dubbed as royalists and thrashed by the cadres of the so-called big seven parties of Nepal, if we venture into the election campaign.
The founder president of the Green Party Nepal, Mr. Kuber Sharma said this at a press conference cum lavish cocktail dinner hosted by the party on Monday.
The Green Party Nepal is the splinter of the Nepali Congress Party formed almost a decade back succumbing to extreme Koirala hegemony in the NC camp. Mr. Sharma himself served the Nepali Congress as a Parliamentarian in the early democratic years. He got elected from his home constituency from Saptari district.
Mr. Sharma however, said that his party was not shying away from the CA election but it was a life saving formula for his party candidates.
"We are not ready to commit a suicide", Sharma further said.
“What difference will it make even if we win the election…in a country where non-elected representatives rein supreme over the others, thus there is no point in forwarding our candidacy for the CA poll?”, he continued.
I am not as brave as Prachanda- the Maoists chairman, to declare myself the first president of the republic of Nepal, Mr. Sharma further said.
Making public the views of his party on the ongoing Terai crisis, Mr. Sharma said the Terai agitation has no future at all.
Few miscreants are enough to make the environment nasty; resorting to peaceful means can however, ensure broader participation of the Madhesis in the State Structure, Mr. Sharma said.
On the issue of possible India links in Nepal’s Terai crisis, Mr. Sharma said that India may not dare to split this country as it might boomerang on it ultimately.
“India itself is primarily a troubled nation; the fresh ethnic cleansing campaign in the state of Maharastra is a proof of that, the voice of dissension coming as it does from the northern states of India are all but a sign that India itself is in sheer trouble”, Mr. Sharma added.
Follows the Press Release issued by the Green Party Nepal on 17 February, 08.
“The old order changed yielding place to new” wrote Alfred Tennyson, the English poet about two hundred years back. Nothing could be truer. Our people too have been — struggling for a change. And a couple of years back came a great change but the politicians who grabbed power could not rise up to the occasion. Their self oriented policies, their unbridled ambition to stay in power sine die, their authoritarian behavior and intense intolerance of the opposition, their naked corruption, their insensitive and inhuman attempts towards the demolition of our national heritages, culture and religion have impelled us — the Green Nepal Party to raise our voices against such behavior and appeal to our aggrieved patriotic sisters and brothers of our country to join us to save our dear motherland from dishonor and destruction. The acute shortage of power, the petroleum products ,even drinking water, skyrocketing prices of daily necessaries, the total absence of law and order, the chukka jams and bandh, the continuous loots, murders, extortions and abduction have not only made life of the common man most unsafe and miserable but turned it into absolute hell. The violent insurgency by the proponents of racialism, federalism amid regionalism has weakened the solid structure of our national unity. In these circumstances no sane Nepali will risk life to go to polling booth to cast the vote. Even before the nominations are filed the big parties are disturbing the election campaign of other parties. Big parties are using their muscle and money power on the one hand and talking about sharing of seats among themselves on the other. For that reason our party is demanding dissolution of interim parliament and Government and to form a neutral Government to conduct free, fair and impartial election. The interim government has not been able to govern. The village and district development committees are not able to carry out development works. The Country is trapped in economic crisis. In view of the increasing risk to the lives of voters and candidates our party will not participate in the election. Despite the absolute imperativeness of elections to the constituent assembly it is impossible to hold the election on 10th April, 2008 in such a chaotic situation. Moreover, the servile behavior of our statesmen has turned our proud nation into a vassal state of our big neighbor in the south and this has got to be corrected at the earliest. As such we all must join hands to change the government. I trust you all will not hesitate to come forward immediately to defend the sanctity and sovereignty of our dear country. Finally we must say that we remain strongly committed to continue our peaceful campaign in favor of Multi-party Democracy, clean politics and clean environment.

Source: Telegraph Nepal, February 17, 2008

Breakfast in Nepal, lunch in India, daily

2008-02-18T13:21:00.000+05:30

The border between India and Nepal is more than 1,750 kilometres long. For most of its length, you can walk across for dinner, and go back for the night and breakfast — completely unchallenged by anybody.
Last December, a clutch of young Maoists from Nepal crossed over into India in Bihar and planted their party flags, staking a claim to the area. Again, they were not challenged — on either side of the border. That’s how easy it is to cross this border.
But a breakfast or dinner is the last thing on the minds of millions of people who cross this border every day. And many of them are criminals like the kidney racket kingpin Amit Kumar. Or terrorists.
India has 7,000 km of seacoast, and shares 14,000 km of land borders with six countries. Portions of the land frontiers are fenced and impossible to breach. But the rest are invitingly porous for those who want to cross over.
Terrorists use Nepal to stage operations in India. Northeast militants are headquartered across the border in Bangladesh. Many evade arrest in India by simply slipping into Myanmar. Smugglers, of course, thrive.
And then there is the border with Pakistan which could be anything from porous to ant-proof depending on where you are. While the border in Punjab is fenced and electrified, it’s open in Rajasthan and in parts of Jammu & Kashmir.
Hindustan Times reporters take a fresh look at these borders, at the people on either side, the security arrangement — or the lack of it, in a series of reports from the frontier towns and villages.
In the first of this series, Manish Tiwari writes about how the security forces are fighting a losing battle on the Indo-Nepal border in Bihar. “It has become a dangerous place to live in,” a resident of the area told Tiwari.

Source: Hindustan Times, February 17, 2008

Nepal: The Coming April Crisis, and India’s Role

2008-02-18T13:17:00.000+05:30

Sharply contending parties in Nepal agreed to have the future of the country contested in a elections for a constituent assembly. This has given rise to huge debate within Nepal, and among its people, over what kind of future to have, what kind of state and social system. Various forces (including the pro-Indian Nepalese Congress party NC) have repeatedly postponed and impeded those elections — leading the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) to point out that the future can also be settled by other means. There are (as several commentators note) two undefeated armies in Nepal — one belonging to the government, the other led by the Maoists. Currently the elections are scheduled for April — and there is great tension over whether they will be sabotaged again, and (if so) what will follow. India is accused of helping torpedo the elections by stirring up secessionist forces in the Terai, the strategic agricultural border area in southern Nepal. Possibilities include renewed Maoist armed uprising, broad mass protests, a crackdown by the Nepalese military, continued stalemated crisis and possibly an invasion by the powerful nearby Indian army — or various combination of these things. A piece from the Nepal Times follows.

Plan A…. India Doesn’t Seem to Have a Plan B on Nepal
by PRASHANT JHA in NEW DELHI (India’s Capital), Nepal Times: Sat Feb 16, 2008 5:39 am (PST)
New Delhi is confused and frustrated about continued uncertainty over elections in Nepal.
Nepal watchers here are convinced that missing the deadline yet again will mark the collapse of the peace process. They say they are working on politicians in Kathmandu to get their act together, but admit their leverage is limited.

An exasperated official told Nepali Times : “We can’t do much if Kathmandu’s myopic political class doesn’t want elections. They will create new excuses, and this time the excuse seems to be the Madhes.”
Indian agencies are said to be in touch with all Madhesi groups, but deny India is instigating trouble in the Tarai. “Why would we want to prolong instability and bloodshed in the Madhes when its first negative fallout is on our own side in Bihar and UP?” asked one official.

Delhi has alerted the Bihar authorities about the presence of Madhesi militants, but officials say without more engagement from Kathmandu it is unlikely that Patna will step up the heat on the extremists.
The policy thrust now is for a quick fix on the Madhes to enable polls to go ahead. It is a difficult balancing act of backing the larger process while maintaining influence over Madhesi groups. India is happy with the unity and alliance of Madhesi groups and the distilled six point demands.
“The government must sincerely reach out to the Madhes, and Madhesi groups shouldn’t allow themselves to be used as a pretext to cancel polls. They should consolidate and get votes,” said a senior diplomat, summing up Indian policy.

India is also keen on an understanding between the NC and Madhesi groups to strengthen ‘democratic forces’ so they can stand up to the Maoists. On her recent visit to Delhi, sources said US ambassador Nancy Powell warned her interlocutors that the Maoists were bullying their way through the process. There is concern here that the Maoists will use the YCL to intimidate voters and rig elections.
India doesn’t seem to have a neat Plan B in case elections do not happen. But one top policymaker told us, “We don’t even want to think of that scenario…it will be like a civil war.”
Meanwhile, the king is lobbying hard in Delhi to retain the monarchy. Son-in-law Raj Bahadur Singh was in town this week meeting the BJP’s Rajnath Singh and Jaswant Singh, among others. The message is that the Maoists plan a power grab, and only the monarchy can counter it. The royals were pleased about BJP prime ministerial candidate L K Advani launching a blistering critique of India’s Nepal policy last week.
Nepal is high on New Delhi’s agenda these days. Minister for External Affairs Pranab Mukherjee personally tracks Nepal and speaks regularly with Prime Minister Koirala. The visit to Kathmandu this week by senior Congress leaders Digvijay Singh and Verappa Moily is described here as testimony to the importance Sonia Gandhi attaches to the situation in Nepal.

Source: Nepal Times, February 16, 2008

Crisis continuum

2008-02-16T16:26:00.000+05:30

S D Muni

No one disputes the fact that the fate of Nepal's peace process hinges precariously on the election to the Constituent Assembly scheduled for April 10, 2008. While the Government leaders continue to promise that free and fair election would be held, the ground reality is not at all encouraging. Even the Election Commission has expressed serious reservations regarding the security situation, particularly in the Terai region. If the election is again postponed, all the interim arrangements -- the Government, Parliament and the Interim Constitution -- would lose credibility. The disruptive forces, trying to sabotage the election will get emboldened and the prevailing non-governance will get worse. The international community which has put very high stakes in facilitating Nepal's smooth transition will get alienated, further complicating the prospects of peace and stability in Nepal.

The challenge to smooth election come from three sources: The Madhes agitation (Terai region), the monarch and the Maoists. The recently emerged United Madhes Democratic Front (UMDF), headed by Mahanta Thakur, is agitating for the acceptance of their six demands before they can participate in the CA election. The Government has accepted federalism and assured representation to Madhes in administration, including the Army.

But what has been conceded falls far short of the expectations. Though there is scope for further accommodation, it is virtually impossible to concede all the demands before the election. The questions of autonomy and self-determination are linked with similar demands raised by other groups. The demand for the full electoral representation to Madhes cannot be met without redrawing constituencies and that means indefinite delay in election. The continuing agitation of the Madhes parties is not allowing smooth campaign in the Terai to the ruling coalition.

There are violent and unruly groups outside the UMDF which have not been reined in by the Government. Some of them are even demanding secession. On the whole, the situation in the Terai is chaotic, violent and insecure. Elections can be held only with the use of heavy force, which will neither be credible, in the absence of Madhes participation, nor free and fair.

While, Madhesis' fear that they will not get their demands met adequately after the CA election, the monarch fears that he will lose whatever he has as soon as an elected CA comes into being. Non-governance of the ruling coalition, tension among the allies and turmoil in the Terai have combined to encourage the King to "break his silence" and debunk the interim Parliament's decision to declare Nepal a "Republic". The opinion polls show greater acceptance of the monarchy, not necessarily him as the King. Through funding of the Terai and ethnic agitations and sporadic violence, King Gyanendra is trying his best to get the election atmosphere vitiated. His cronies in various ruling parties, including the Maoists and the Madhes agitating groups, along with the traditional royalist parties, are all helping him in his agenda.

The Maoists had got the November 2007 election postponed under the fear that they would be marginalised. They have overcome those fears, collected adequate funds, united the scattered Left groups under their banner and also regained some support among the ethnic groups. They have also been hobnobbing with the erstwhile royalists. The party organisation has been geared to face the election and Maoist leader Prachanda has even spelt out his ambitions to be the first President of the 'Republic of Nepal'. The problem with the Maoists, however, is their persisting resort to strong arm methods through their Youth Communist League (YCL) cadre and their refusal to vacate captured property. Other political parties fear that the Maoists will rig the election through YCL wherever possible.

The hurdles in the way to smooth election can be easily overcome if the Government has a firm resolve. The ruling coalition parties, particularly the Nepali Congress, the Maoists and the Communists (United Marxists Leninists), are locked in an internecine power struggle, trying to outwit each other. Inherently insecure of the outcome, each of them want to ensure that election yields power to them. They have decided to launch a united campaign in favour of free and fair election but without any real zeal or enthusiasm.

In such a situation, hope lies only with civil society groups and the international community. The civil society groups need to reactivate themselves to the level they did during the Jan Andolan-II. The international community, by all indications, is seriously pushing the Government towards a credible CA election. India has even encouraged its political parties to visit Nepal to boost morale. There are, however, allegations that sections in India, both within and outside the Government, are conniving with the Terai agitating groups as well as the royalists to derail Nepal's peace process. The possibility cannot be ruled out that isolated mavericks in the Indian establishment are cultivating the Terai card to ward off the eventuality of the Maoists emerging as dominant players in Nepal.

Source: The Pioneer, February 16, 2008

Prachanda's dream and the stuff of kings will not mix

2008-02-16T16:22:00.000+05:30

C K Lal

On February the 13th, Maoists celebrated the 13th anniversary of the armed rebellion in Kathmandu with the pageantry befitting a proletarian party seeking to establish a "people's republic". Presumably, such a state will be patterned after North Korea, the sole surviving model of a Maoist republic in the world. Under the benign gaze of Chairman Prachanda, Nepal will then probably begin building better presidential palaces than the gawky Narayanhiti or jinxed Diyalo Bangla constructed by kings. The Maoists will be careful not to emulate the official residence of the prime minister at Baluwatar, reputed to have been intentionally designed by royal astrologers and architects with a flawed feng shui to ensure that its occupant never serves a full term.Unfortunately for Comrade Dahal, nobody in Kathmandu takes his presidential dreams too seriously. The buzz in town is that royal representatives have succeeded in persuading the Indian establishment about the necessity of keeping some form of kingship in Nepal. The delegation of ruling Congress (I) from New Delhi scoffed at all such rumours, but there was no mistaking the body language of Digvijay Singh, a former jagirdar himself, who is believed to be a close confidante of the Uncrowned Empress of India — Sonia Gandhi.StrangleholdImmediately upon his arrival at the Tribhuvan International Airport, still named after the grand-father of suspended king Gyanendra, Diggy Raja pointedly told the media that the success of the peace process depended upon everyone faithfully implementing past agreements. What we don't know is that the Sujata Koirala model of cultural monarchy may have been a part of the quadrilateral deal between mainstream parties, Maoists, monarchists and their Indian mediators in New Delhi. If that was so, the future of Constituent Assembly(CA) elections rescheduled for April 10 is probably still uncertain.Speaking at an interaction early this week, Maoist ideologue Baburam Bhattarai urged royalists not to obstruct the polls. His party will have to do more than that to ensure that the elections are held at all. There is no way entrenched interest groups will let an election happen that is sure to dismantle their stranglehold over Nepali society and the state.Royalty"If the King is nationalist, he should help in smooth conduct of the election," Bhattarai reportedly told the audience. BP Koirala had said something similar prior to the referendum in 1980. Events proved how naïve he had been by not learning from history. In the past, almost every hereditary ruler of Nepal, at least since the time of Jang Bahadur, has bowed and scraped before imperial agents in Calcutta and New Delhi to protect their privileges and keep all possible challengers in check. Kings and princes are pragmatic people; they know that nationalism is for the rabble, not for nobles.Gyanendra knows that had Indians not backed his grandfather, he would have been the king in 1950s. He also knows that almost every Rana prime minister and their progenies had to find shelter in India once their time was up. Clearly on the instigation of someone else, Gyanendra overplayed his hand with February 1, 2005 power grab. But that doesn't mean that he hadn't kept his channels of communication with the Indian establishment open. It seems CA elections are impossible unless some space for the suspended king is found in the new scheme of things to come.The idea of the "Baby King" floated by Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala is a non-starter. Egyptians tried that with King Ahmad Fu'ad, aged 7 months. The baby reigned for less than a year and became the last monarch to ascend the Egyptian throne. With Hridayendra, son of Crown Prince Paras, as Baby King, royalists will have no use for the likes of Girija or Sujata in Baluwatar. At best, they will be politely asked to leave the country, on health grounds of course.The concept of cultural monarchy holds better promise. Long after privy purses of ex-royals were abolished, the Maharaja of Mysore and King of Tehri Garhwal still preside over colourful Dusshera processions. When a young Chogyal was "crowned" in Sikkim, all legislators of the tiny state of India dutifully lined up to offer him khada. In tribal societies, chieftains fulfil an emotional need of identifying oneself with real or imagined glories of the past. Perhaps this is what Herbert Spencer had in mind when he opined that removing monarchy is like snatching the favourite toy from a shrieking child.There are models of rulers without realm. Dalai Lama presides over the Tibetan community spread all over the world. The Syedna is the spiritual leader of all Bohra Muslims with power and prestige worthy of a king. Prince Aga Khan is the hereditary Imam of all Ismaili Muslims. Most Rajputs still defer to the Maharana of Udaipur even though he is just another hotelier in Rajasthan. It's probably possible to have a mention of something like "Emperor of Nepali Jati" or "Gorkhali Samrat" in the interim constitution and give him — or her — the status equivalent to a minister of state. His or Her Majesty can then continue to do business and pay taxes like everyone else. People will be happy to greet them on temple doors and Buddhist stupas.FacilitatorUnless something is done quick time, the D-day of CA elections will turn out to be a mirage once again. The list of political bigwigs doubting elections is impressive. The challenger to Koirala's prime ministerial throne in Nepali Congress party is ex-premier Sher Bahadur Deuba. This is what he says, "The elections cannot be held in the current fragile security situation." Shekhar Koirala, the octogenarian prime minister's nephew, concurs, "As the securitysituation is deteriorating, holding the polls is impossible." Home Minister Krishna Prasad Situala warns that the country will get into a deeper crisis if elections are not held on schedule. Prachanda threatens to launch a stir if polls are once again scuttled. Who are these worthies talking to? They need to be part of the solution rather than add to the mounting problems of Prime Minister Koirala.The last agreement between warring parties of Nepal was reputed to have been facilitated by Sitaram Yechury. Probably the new agreement will require the initiative of Rajnath Singh of the Bharatiya Janata Party, an outfit that has been backed by kings of Nepal since its Jan Sangh days. The Royal Palace in Kathmandu is eagerly waiting for the arrival of a BJP team in the country.The writer is a commentator and columnist based in Kathmandu.

Source: Mail Today, February 16, 2008

A Dangerous Hurry

2008-02-16T16:19:00.000+05:30

Bhaskar Roy

If their role models are any indication, Nepal's Maoists seem to be moving swiftly to install a regime based on terror in our neighbourhood. Nepal's Maoists, or the Communist Party of Nepal -- CPN(M) -- appear to be in a tearing hurry to establish an iron grip on the country's Government, Parliament and other institutions through threats, muscle power, forced indoctrination and a "second revolution" if they are not allowed their way. It should be of serious concern that the Maoists propose to celebrate the birthdays of Kim Il-Sung, known as the 'Great Leader' of North Korea, his son and the current dictator Kim Jong-IL, known as the "Dear leader" and even North Korea's national day.

It would be quite understandable if Prachanda and his Cabal demanded only the stopping of observing the Nepal King's birthday as a national holiday. That is already happening, anyway. It would have been more encouraging if the Maoist leaders adopted some of the late Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping's policies of moving forward. Equally, if not more important, Deng worked forcefully to rid China of the personality cult.

North Korea, or as it calls itself the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK), never had any democracy and the people have been rendered utterly poverty-stricken, almost Zombies, with no voice whatsoever. On a walk through the streets of Pyongyang one can see posh restaurants with glass doors, stores stocked with food, but not a soul inside them. These are shows for the few foreigners who get a visa to enter Pyongyang. The displayed food go to the most senior cadres.

The elementary indoctrination book used by the CPN(M) in their schools and for the slave labourers has big pictures of Prachanda. Mao Zedong's Red Book had only Mao's photograph. In North Korea, the only photographs are those of the "Great Leader" and the "Dear Leader".

Mao kept one moderate leader with him, to try and repair some of the most critical damages wrecked upon the state by his Red Guards and the "Gang of Four". This man was Premier Zhou Enlai. Since Zhou never coveted the top position and remained personally loyal to Mao, he remained safe. Even then, Mao spied on Zhou to ensure that he was not being betrayed. Mao, the 'Great Helmsman' needed somebody on his side permanently.

Who is Prachanda's Sancho Panza? The party ideologue, Baburam Bhattarai, is seem to be performing Zhou Enlai role for Prachanda. But Bhattarai is not half as astute as the wily Zhou. There have been rifts between Prachanda and Bhattarai, some reported to be serious. This would suggest Prachanda is not as powerful as Mao and that Baburam has his own power group within the party.

Mao Zedong was a preceptor of the Maoist, especially Prachanda. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP), however, dismisses any connection with the Nepalese Maoists and have only declared the CPN(M) adoption of the adjunct "Maoist" is not accepted by Beijing. Though the Madhav Nepal-led CPN(UML) is China's closest fraternal party in Nepal, Beijing has not desisted from engaging the top Maoist leadership.

What would be most uncomfortable to China is the CPN(M)'s apparent open admiration of the North Korean dictatorship. To the CCP, the CPN(M) is trying to swim against the stream, inkling towards Pyongyang's Korean Worker's Party (KWP). China's relationship with North Korea is no longer the old "lips to teeth" relationship. It is only strategic compulsions that forces Beijing's support to North Korea.

The movement against King Gyanendra, which ultimately led to the abolition of the monarchy, should in itself be a lesson for megalomaniac politicians. Gyanendra came to the throne through a yet unexplained massacre of the royal family allegedly by the heir apparent to the throne. He quickly showed his driving greed for absolute power, but was brought down by his people. One wrong decision to yoke the people destroyed a 200-year-old proud dynasty.

The Maoists have been recently accused of transgressing the 23-point agreement. The Nepal Congress vice-president and Minister, Ramchandra Poudel, has pointed to the violent methods still adopted by the Maoists. Former Prime Minister and NC leader, Sher Bahadur Deuba, and other senior leaders have accused the Maoists and their youth arm, the Young Communist League (YCL), of atrocities that could put the scheduled April 10 Constituent Assembly (CA) polls in jeopardy. In fact, the largest Left party, the NCP (UML), which made moves to establish some common cause with the Maoists, are having second thoughts.

Prachanda has yet to make any serious move to return the confiscated property of civillians. If this is being done in the name of Communism then such land and immovable property should have been distributed among the poor and landless peasants long ago. Instead the Maoist cadres continue to enjoy their properties like warlords. Given the track record of the Maoists, it does not appear that their demand to have their fighting cadres absorbed in the Nepalese Army is out of an intent to accommodate the PLA into proper working engagements. There are other motives, perhaps. The then United Nations Mission in Nepal (UNMIN) has set a formula for absorption of a part of the PLA in the Nepalese Army. The rest are to be paid a stipend of Rs 3,000 a month till alternative employment is found for them. This has not satisfied Prachanda and his comrades.

The Maoist leadership may be trying to sell the idea that Mao's "long marchers" subsequently became China's official Army after the success of their revolution. But there are crucial differences. China's millet-and-rifle soldiers commanded by officers who were mostly trained in the Soviet Union. The Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) was a disciplined force, and their commanders were real military strategists of whom many professional armies in the world would be proud of. They did not get absorbed into any other army after liberation.

The most shocking practice of the Maoists are their "Labour Camps". Here poor people imprisoned are mad to work like slaves, with no pay and no freedom. They are also imparted forced indoctrination. The Prachanda Red Book is compulsory in some Maoist controlled schools.
Is Prachanda also trying to run a Gulag? While trying to camouflage his intentions periodically, he makes no secret of his willingness to repeat in Nepal some of the worst crimes committed on humanity by Communist regimes elsewhere.

Source: The Pioneer, February 16, 2008

Can Nepal's Rebels Help Rebuild?

2008-02-04T16:26:00.000+05:30

Ishaan Tharoor/Chitwan

Comrade Sandhya's voice trembles as she speaks of her father. "He was a major in the Royal Nepalese Army," she begins, cupping her chin with one hand while rearranging a neat schoolgirl plait with the other. "When he found out I had gone underground, he said I was no longer his daughter — only his enemy. The next time he wanted to meet me was on the battlefield."

That encounter, to Sandhya's relief, never came to pass. In 1996, as a 14-year-old student from a town north of the capital Kathmandu, she joined Nepal's Maoist cadres at the moment when their armed insurgency had just begun to take hold of this rugged Himalayan nation, long a magnet for foreign backpackers and adventurers. Her father's military income meant Sandhya did not grow up among the country's many poor, but she chafed under the rigid caste laws and gender norms that blunted her parents' ambitions and stripped her of the same opportunities as men. The Maoists, led by their talismanic leader Pushpa Kamal Dahal, a.k.a. Prachanda, promised her and thousands of others nothing less than a complete reordering of society, and Sandhya gave herself to the struggle, fighting as a soldier in a decade-long civil war that claimed over 13,000 lives and displaced countless more.

Today, Sandhya sits batting away mosquitoes in a sparse wood cabin, part of a sprawling Maoist cantonment in the southern district of Chitwan. She believes victory is at hand. A peace process triggered by mass protests in April 2006 against the autocratic rule of Nepal's King Gyanendra brought the Maoists into the political mainstream, paving the way for the extraordinary transformation of a country ruled for two and a half centuries by Hindu kings into a secular republic. Both the Royal Nepalese Army and the Maoist guerrillas — the civil war's bitter foes — returned to their barracks and camps with the stated intention of eventually reforming into one new national force. "We all want democracy. No one here wants to fight again," Sandhya insists. Even her father, who has since retired, has reconciled with Sandhya. "He respects my decisions now," she says. "He realized I was a figure of change."

Change can bring uncertainty, however, not just for Nepal but for other countries. Nepal, a country of 28 million, is sandwiched between the world's rising giants, India and China, who both have cast their eye over the Himalayan nation as a buffer against the other. Any unrest in Nepal — hostilities have been suspended, not buried — could spill across into its restive borderlands, particularly Chinese Tibet and the troubled Indian state of Bihar — developments that Beijing and New Delhi would view with alarm. Nepal's Maoists, moreover, are still on the U.S. State Department's list of terror groups. They have traded their guerrilla hideouts for plush offices in the capital, but had a fearsome reputation for committing violence when the armed struggle raged.

Indeed, the hatreds that fueled the civil war threaten even now to bubble over. Elections for an assembly that would draft Nepal's new republican constitution are slated for April 10, but only after much bickering and dithering. Nepalis of all stripes are losing faith in the seven parties, including the Maoists, that make up the country's feuding interim government and see corruption and cynical power-politicking stifling the nation's slow reconstruction from the ashes of war. Over a third of the population still lives below the poverty line.

As the politicians fiddle in Kathmandu, a hundred mutinies burn around the country: vigilante gangs run rampant in the countryside, while ethnic groups long marginalized under the monarchy have taken to armed uprising, especially in the southern lowlands of the Tarai where over 40% of Nepal's population lives. A cocktail of anarchist elements, militant factions and a growing separatist movement hold sway there and prove a daunting challenge with elections coming in little more than two months. "What happened in Kenya could happen here," says Jayaraj Acharya, a former Nepalese ambassador to the U.N., speaking of the ongoing ethnic conflict in the African nation triggered by disputed elections, which has claimed hundreds of lives. "Only here," Acharya adds, "it will be worse."

A False Dawn

The security situation in a nepal under cease-fire is dismal. During the civil war, both the Maoists and the Royal Nepalese Army held brutal sway over segments of the country, but now, as they wait in their camps, law and order has deteriorated. Reports filter in every week of kidnappings for ransom. Last December, a Swiss trekker was beaten up after refusing to pay money to a few rogue Maoists, a worrying sign for a country heavily reliant on the money brought in by foreign tourists. Many in Kathmandu blame the Youth Communist League (YCL), created by the Maoists less than a year ago, for much of the disorder. Red YCL banners around parts of Kathmandu urge Nepalis to report "suspicious, reactionary activity" to cell-phone numbers emblazoned on the cloth. As soon as night falls in the capital — which, as a bastion for the King's army, had been safe during all of the years of the civil war — the usually teeming streets grow deserted. "The police have no motivation at all right now," complains Kanak Dixit, editor of Himal magazine and an outspoken advocate of democracy. "There is an alarming surge in crime."

Public safety isn't the only challenge the interim government has failed to negotiate. Fiscal mismanagement has led to chronic fuel shortages across the country; lines in Kathmandu extend for kilometers and prices have tripled in less than half a year. Last week, protests against rising fuel prices shut down the capital. Kathmandu residents face at least six hours of power cuts a day. The government has been unable to raise Nepal's middling growth rate, which hovers around 2%, and funds many of its programs on an IV drip of foreign aid. Trade-union activism and general strikes, some suspect spurred in part by the YCL, disrupt factories in outlying areas and basic services in the cities. During Christmastime around Kathmandu, sanitation workers had been agitating for over three months. Piles of garbage festered around every cobblestoned corner of the city, visceral reminders of a deeper rot seeping into the nation.

"We live in a broken state," says Mandira Sharma, a leading human-rights activist. For the past five years, she and her NGO, Advocacy Forum, have investigated hundreds of cases of disappearances that took place during the decade-long civil war. To Sharma, both the Maoists and the Nepal Army are guilty of a catalog of atrocities, from forced recruitment to extrajudicial killings. Attaining justice for the victims (and compensation for the nearly 200,000 displaced) ought to be as important to the country's push toward democracy as elections. "But human rights don't seem to be anyone's priorities here," she laments. "The problem is a failure of political leadership."

Elections for a Constituent Assembly, which have thus far been canceled twice, became the focal point of political squabbling. The first date, June 17 last year, was missed for mostly logistical reasons. Nepal simply wasn't ready at the time to hold a fair and efficient poll. But the Maoists scuppered the next date, November 22, much to the chagrin of many Nepalis as well as the international community. Reneging on earlier understandings, the Maoist leadership grandstanded on a set of demands that included the outright abolition of the monarchy before its fate could be determined by popular referendum. When the other parties — including the establishment Nepali Congress, the party of the country's current Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala — refused to accede to the Maoist agenda, the Maoists pulled out of the government and plunged the peace process into a rancorous impasse.

"It showed how unnatural the alliance is between all the interests in the interim government," says Kamal Thapa, a royalist politician who served as Home Minister under Gyanendra. Up till last year, the Congress Party had always defended the idea of constitutional monarchy, a commitment enshrined by their party following similar protests in 1990 that curbed royal power. But the need to assuage the Maoists changed the equation. "The Congress has had to understand the new political reality," says C.P. Gajurel, a top Maoist politician, "and it has been difficult for them."

The Maoists see themselves as the agents of democracy in Nepal, stifled by the objections of reactionary, status-quo forces, while many in the Congress, let alone in factions aligned still to the ancien régime of the monarchy, doubt the radical guerrillas' commitment to any political scenario where they may not retain complete control. Despite a compromise thrashed out at the end of last year, which set elections for this April, observers expect conflict to be inevitable. "What more must we give the Maoists?" asks R.S. Mahat, Nepal's Finance Minister and a Congress Party member. "Their strategy is simply to create crisis. They are not honest."

This distrust speaks volumes of Nepal's present predicament, where parties spar over everything from the distribution of ministries to the appointment of ambassadors. "There is no genuine consensus at all," says Rhoderick Chalmers, Nepal expert for the International Crisis Group. Continued discord only strengthens the hand of the weakened King. Though the throne has lost much of its credibility under Gyanendra, many Nepalis still look to the institution as a source of stability and unity. "You can't legislate away the emotional link of the people," says Thapa. Others, including journalist Dixit, fear further squabbling and political anarchy could lead to a more ominous "right-wing backlash ... where royalist elements in the army would step in on the pretext of stability." Further heightening tensions, Prachanda, the Maoist leader, made noises as recently as November about returning the people's war to the jungle if progress toward a republic wasn't made. "Either through [the Maoists] or through the army," warns royalist Thapa, "we are going to see some sort of authoritarian solution."

The End of Kings

The threat of a coup may be exaggerated, but it points to perhaps the single greatest achievement of the Maoist insurgency: the unraveling of a national myth. Nepal came into being through the 1768 military campaign of King Prithvi Narayan Shah and his army drawn from Gurkha tribes in the hills near Kathmandu. Ever since, Nepal's polity has remained largely unchanged: its borders an approximation of the land conquered, its political élites tied to old families close to both the monarchy and the army, and its princely rulers all descended from the same messianic line. Power and legitimacy radiated outward from the palaces of Kathmandu into a highly hierarchical society in the countryside, where feudal mores and caste discrimination still hold sway. Propped up first by the British, keen to have a client buffer to the north of its imperial heart, and later India, this arrangement rarely had to fear outside interference and had remained roughly intact for more than two centuries.

Nepal's monarchy hammered the nail in its own coffin in spectacular fashion in 2001, when Crown Prince Dipendra gunned down 10 members of the royal family, including the much beloved King Birendra, and then allegedly shot himself. The attack, clouded by conflicting reports and conspiracy theories, sent shock waves around the world and plunged Nepal into existential crisis. With a centuries-old dynasty virtually eliminated overnight, in stepped the reigning King's brother, Gyanendra. As the Maoist insurgency raged, Gyanendra declared a state of emergency in 2005, arresting mainstream political leaders and assuming absolute power. But he could not quash the Maoists, whose influence grew apace in rural areas around the country. Rumors swirled depicting Gyanendra as a man given to superstition and mysticism, who would sooner look to the stars or a coterie of tantric priests for counsel than his political advisers. "He wanted control, he wanted to be a heroic savior," says a source close to the court, "but he had few actual ideas, if any."

Gyanendra's power play worked to the advantage of the Maoists. Their urban cadres and activists played a prominent part in the 19 days of mass demonstrations in April 2006 that ended King Gyanendra's absolute rule and led to the reconvening of parliament. The surge of popular goodwill at the time catapulted the guerrillas out of their jungle redoubts and into the international limelight. Prachanda, whose very existence had been in doubt only a few years before, appeared on televisions regionwide, saluting crowds and pressing the flesh. A King had been toppled, a war ended, and change in Nepal looked very much on the way.

The Way Forward

Little has gone according to script since the people-power protests 22 months ago. In November 2006, the Maoists committed to a peace accord with other prominent pro-democracy parties in Nepal and joined the new interim government that would rule until elections for a Constituent Assembly could take place. But the acrimonious squabbling that followed has dispelled many of the hopes raised by the success of the mass demonstrations. "We just felt so proud being Nepali then," says Sanjog Rai, a college student in Kathmandu. "The protests showed us how united we were and that feeling of brotherhood gave us real hope for a better future. Now we're stuck with politicians who have no vision and only care about keeping power."

There is a broad consensus among Nepal's strife-worn people that parliamentary democracy must come sooner rather than later. "A functioning government can't be in a permanent state of transition," says Bojraj Pokhrel, chief of Nepal's Electoral Commission. Now, Pokhrel will have to manage a staff of over 230,000 election workers spread across the mountainous country, some in polling stations miles away from local roads. Highways and bridges were routinely bombed during the civil war, making transportation in a nation with woeful infrastructure difficult at the best of the times. Still, Pokhrel is confident Nepal has the means to carry the elections out. "The people are all hungry for this," he says.

But they'll remain disappointed as long as the interim government's leaders fail to forge any meaningful political unity. "It's a testing time for them," says Acharya, the former ambassador to the U.N. "One wonders if they'll prove their statesmanship." The only indication that they will, most observers drily point out, is that neither the Maoists nor the Congress Party have any better alternative other than sorting out their differences and calming the many fractious forces that might undermine April's polls.

If they don't, the international community must do more to safeguard elections and move the peace process forward. Nepal's giant neighbors, India and China, both backed the monarchy during the civil war, supplying it with weapons and aid. India, which has close ties with virtually every faction in Nepal, eventually shepherded the peace process along, forcing the main political parties to come to terms with the Maoists. China has remained a bit more circumspect, letting India flex its geopolitical muscle while building bridges with the Nepali Maoists it shunned until not long ago and beefing up its hydropower investments along Nepal's glacial rivers. As the budding superpowers expand in influence and ambition, many see Nepal falling into the crosshairs of a new "Great Game" for the 21st century.

Beyond the turmoil and political intrigue looms the very real chance that Nepal might join the region's sorry list of failing states — populated already by Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Pakistan. Besides forging alliances and staging elections, the country and its politicians need to steel themselves for the thorny task of drafting a constitution that reconciles its feuding factions and enfranchises all its kaleidoscope of ethnic groups. "This is a crisis hundreds of years in the making," says S.D. Muni, a Nepal scholar formerly at Jawaharlal Nehru University in New Delhi. "Whole groups have never been in the political structure. You have to in effect create a new Nepal."

Back in Sandhya's Chitwan camp, the commander, named Biwidh, clings to such hope. From a poor, indigenous-minority family, he speaks urgently of peace and of the need for a competitive, multiparty democracy. A slight man with a scarred, weathered face, Biwidh looks much older than his 34 years, and describes his time spent warring in the jungle with primitive rifles and stones in hushed, quick breaths, as if he would rather forget about it. As Nepal lurches from one crisis to another, Biwidh says the soldiers in his camp are in a permanent state of readiness. "If the revolution must be fought again," he sighs, turning his head to the setting sun, "it will be."
— with reporting by Yubaraj Ghimire and Santosh Shah/Kathmandu

Source: Time Magazine, January 31, 2008

Nepal 2007: A Review of Political Developments

2008-02-02T10:49:00.000+05:30

Paul Soren

Overview

Nepal’s progress towards democracy and stability was marked by two historic developments: First, the decision by the Maoists to join the mainstream politics and become part of the interim government. Second was the abolition of the monarchy. The peace process advanced rapidly in 2007 following the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) by the Seven Party Alliance (SPA) government and the Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist (CPN-Maoist) in November 2006. The government’s promise to hold Constituent Assembly (CA) elections by mid-June 2007 was the first step.

This process was, however, seriously interrupted due to political disruptions, misunderstanding between political parties and Maoists, and the continuing Terai problems on Madhesh issue, which threatened to derail the peace process. The violent agitations in the Terai emerged as a new challenge for the new government which was struggling to cope up with the Maoists openly violating the peace accord by indulging in violent activities. On several occasions, the SPA and Maoists leadership were at loggerheads over political issues, delaying the elections at least twice raising questions about their credibility and intentions.

Political Transition

The year began on a positive note. On January 15, 2007, the interim government promulgated the interim constitution and suspended the institution of monarchy. The SPA and Maoists formed an interim government under Nepali Congress (NC) leader Girija Prasad Koirala. The Maoists participation in the government, marked a new era in Nepal’s history. The government announced a Common Minimum Programme (CMP) and announced to hold elections in June 2007.

In an equally important decision, the Parliament passed a second amendment to the interim Constitution authorising the Parliament to abolish the institution of monarchy by a two-thirds majority if the King conspired to disrupt the polls. Though, the King had been stripped off most of his powers, the Maoists ensured that the institution of monarchy was abolished. They feared monarchy may jeopardize the elections.

The government was also assigned the task to hold the assembly elections in June but it was delayed due to political confusion and lack of preparation on the part of the parties. Even the Election Commission (EC) said it was technically impossible to conduct free and fair elections on June 20 due to fragile security environment. Finally, after months of discussion it was decided to hold the elections on November 22. The Maoist Parliamentarians, however, chose to resign and put two important pre-conditions, declaration of republic and proportional representative system. They also called for a special Parliamentary session to decide on these issues. A special session was held and the Parliament passed both these resolutions with some amendments. A legislation was passed that enabled the elections to include a mixed-allotment system, combining first-past-the-post and proportional representation system, an important demand of the Maoists and several ethnic groups across the country.

On December 23, the SPA and Maoists signed a 23-point new agreement which cleared the way for holding of polls. The Parliament passed an amendment to the interim constitution declaring Nepal federal democratic republic. Another amendment increased the number of members from 497 to 601. Now, 335 members will be elected on proportional representation system, 240 members on first- past- the- post system and 26 members will be nominated by the Prime Minister. This provision is expected to accommodate aspirations of marginalised and deprived sections and provide them an opportunity to represent their political viewpoint. These steps clearly denote a forward movement in the political scene in Nepal.

Elections

The Constituent Assembly election is an issue of intense debate across the country. To some extent, the government’s inability to hold the polls on time and the postponement undermined the credibility of the interim government, the SPA and that of the Maoists. The parties were unprepared and were hesitant to seek public mandate. Even the Maoists, due to their declining public image and shrinking support base, mainly in the Terai, were apprehensive of participating in the polls. In fact, the major political stakeholders in Nepal were trying to avoid the elections. The situation worsened after the Maoist ministers resigned from the cabinet in September and put forward two conditions. The suspension of the elections only eroded the parties’ image and raised questions on the legitimacy of the government.

The postponement was received with varied degrees of reactions. The civil society came out strongly and demanded the resignation of the government. The government’s move gave an opportunity to the pro-monarchy parties to demand Koirala’s resignation. Even the international community was baffled by the government’s decision to defer the polls and expressed concern.

The parties in the coalition government and some from outside the alliance accused the leadership of delaying the process deliberately. The political environment turned ripe with charges and counter-allegations. A major share of the blame should be borne by the Maoists. It was their insistence on first settling their 22 demands---mainly two dealing with declaring Nepal as a republic and adopting fully proportional representative based election system—which only added to the atmosphere of uncertainty.

Since joining the interim government, the Maoists have always been actively involved in political decisions but suddenly they decided to backtrack from their earlier agreement. This move at a critical juncture was seen as part of their strategy and tactic to pressurise the government to accept their demands. A more flexible approach on the part of both the parties would have helped defuse the situation.

Seven Party Alliance

The Jana Aandholan of 2006 mandated parties to work jointly and find a plausible solution to the pressing problems of the country. It was therefore the responsibility of the SPA and Maoists to ensure a smooth political transition.. However, both the parties chose to ignore their primary responsibility and instead harboured dissimilarities on various issues and refused to resolve them in the larger interest.

The SPA’s behaviour had always been characterised by suspicion and partisan interest. They preferred closed-door decision-making to a more transparent process, making consensus-building difficult. This was aggravated by poor discipline within the parties, with individual politicians making provocative statements and pursuing personal vendettas. Opinions within the party were also divided over the issue of declaring the country a republic. Like Maoists, the SPA too were bent on cornering the spoils of being in power rather than consolidating the peace process.

Amidst fears of losing the polls, the SPA constituents-- the Nepali Congress (NC) and NC-Democratic-- reviewed their policies and initiated talks for unity. On September 25, leaders of both factions of Nepali Congress-Koirala and Sher Bahadur Deuba agreed to merge and become the single largest political party.

The Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist Leninist)--UML, the second largest political party was put in a Catch- 22 situation after several of its cadres expressed their willingness to join the Maoists rather than aligning with NC. At some point of time the UML was thinking of forming alliance of all the Left parties to counter the NC.

The SPA leadership was not able to deal with the important issues in a decisive manner. But to be fair, they did make attempts to bridge the gap between expectations and performance of the government. The alliance set up a task force, representing members from all seven parties, to finalise points of consensus and prepare the draft agreement. The taskforce recommended for a 20-point pact to end the current political stalemate and evolve an understanding on crucial issues like declaring the country as a republic and the shape of the electoral system. The SPA leaders succeeded in evolving an understanding and endorsed the new pact, and helped end the year0long political stalemate.

Maoists

The Maoists joined the mainstream politics with a political objective in their mind and their subsequent decisions and actions were part of this strategy. In February 2007, during the People’s War (PW) anniversary, Maoists Chairman Prachanda announced his party’s position on several major issues. He emphasized Maoists commitment to establish a republican state. He also reiterated their group’s decision to participate in the elections and cooperate with the democratic forces. However, in April 2007, the Maoists turned back on their promise and demanded that Nepal be declared a republic before holding the elections. This was mainly done to recover from the damage they suffered in Terai and to justify their decade-long armed struggle.

This stance dramatically changed the political situation in Nepal. The Maoist held their fifth plenum in August in Kathmandu which was attended by more than 2000 party members. The plenum unanimously passed political and organisational report of Prachanda with some amendments. The report also put forth two preconditions for the elections – an immediate announcement of the formation of a republic by Parliament and implementation of a Proportional Representation (PR) based electoral system. Subsequently, the Maoist Central Committee meeting also implemented the decision of the fifth plenum.

The Maoists were also concerned over their growing unpopularity and rising dissent within the party. The Maoists affiliated Young Communist League (YCL) was involved in various violent activities and their acts were roundly condemned across the country. The Maoists made initiatives to restructure the party to demonstrate their intension to transform it from a revolutionary group to a political organization. However, the violence unleashed by their cadres undermined their political alteration and the peace process. The Maoists pre-poll demand put a spanner in the electoral works as none of the parties were sure about the next course of political direction in the country. They made continuous effort to make the interim Parliament declare a republic. Gauging the political environment, Prachanda announced formation of a possible Left Front to contest the elections which was received with wider acceptance from all other Left parties. The aim was to counter the NC and other royalist forces. The UML came out openly supporting the Maoists demand for republic.

In September, the Maoists quit the coalition government after their demands for announcement of republic before the elections and proportional representation-based election system were not accepted. However, they decided not to burn the bridge completely and continued persuading the SPA leadership to accept their demands in the larger interest. Though Prachanda and senior Maoist leaders strongly advocated for the need to hold the polls under the proportional representation system, the Maoist cadre indulged in violence despite their commitment for peace. At one time, the Maoists strongly supported delaying the elections and proposed a new agreement with the SPA. These moves and rhetoric were mainly tactical move to put pressure on the government to meet their demands.

The Maoist withdrawal from the government was prompted by unhappiness with the implementation of the peace deal, pressure from their own cadres and a growing realisation that their electoral prospects may be poor.

Terai Trouble

The continuing crisis in the Terai region poses a serious challenge for the present government. The Madhesi groups have been demanding the restructuring of the state on federal lines; adopt proportional electoral system and delimitation of election constituencies on basis of population ratio and geographical conditions. Although many of the Madhesi grievances were genuine and needed to be amicably resolved, but the wave of violence indulged in by different groups undermined their objective. Over a dozen underground groups became active with their own set of agendas. Almost all of them strongly advocated violence as a weapon against the State to achieve their objectives.

The government's initiatives to contain the movement at initial phase resulted in worsening the situation and dramatically increased the Madhesi involvement. The agitating groups rejected the offer of negotiations from the government and continued with their violent agitation across the region.

The government was, however, successful in bringing the Madhesi Janaadhikar Forum (MJF) to the negotiating table. During the three rounds of peace talks, many key issues including the demand for federal structure, autonomy and proportional representation were discussed. In the last round, the government rejected MJF’s demand to dissolve the interim Parliament which provoked the group to warn that it would start another agitation. The government and MJF, however, decided to settle their differences and agreed to a 22-point deal on August 30. According to the agreement, the assembly will decide the character boundaries, and rights of autonomous states under a federal structure, on the basis of suggestions from State Restructuring Commission. In a positive note, the MJF renounced its demand for a fully proportional electoral system to cooperate in conducting the polls.

Apart from MJF, two other prominent armed factions-- the Janatantrik Terai Mukti Morcha (JTMM), one led by Jai Krishna Goit and another by Jwala Singh demanded a separate state for the Madhesis. These groups operate in the entire Terai region but are stronger mainly in the eastern part of Nepal. Their presence is visible in almost all the major industrial areas. There are also forces, with their hidden agendas, backing the monarchy and pro-royalist in fuelling the Madhesi uprising. The Indian Rightist groups are instigating the Madhesi uprising by fuelling religious sentiments. The World Hindu Federation (WHF), a Hindu fundamentalist group, Shiv Sena-Nepal, National Defence Force and Nepal Independent Youth Society (NIYS) are fuelling religious sentiments. The WHF, NDF and Shiv Sena-Nepal have expressed displeasure at Nepal's transformation into a secular nation. These fundamentalist groups in Nepal are being strongly backed by Indian Rightist groups. They have been demonstrating and demanding for return to pre-Jana Andolan period. All these forces intend to disrupt the elections and derail the peace process. The government continues to face difficult time in dealing with these armed groups, especially after it rejected the Goit faction's demand for a United Nations (UN) mediation.

As the year closed, the crisis in Terai only worsened. A group of Parliamentarians from Terai resigned from Parliament on December 10. This once again raised doubts about the elections. Senior Nepali Congress leader and Minister for Science and Technology, Mahant Thakur, along with three other influential Terai leaders, Hridayesh Tripathi formerly with (Nepal Sadbhawana Party-Anandi Devi), Mahendra Yadav of (Communist Party of Nepal-Unified Marxist Leninist) (CPN-UML) and Ram Chandra Raya of Rastriya Prajatantra Party resigned from the Parliament alleging the government and parties insensitivity and indifference towards resolving the Terai problems.

The Madhesi groups also showed signs of unity. The newly-formed Terai Madhes Democratic Party (TMDP) led by senior Madhesi leader Mahanta Thakur and the Joint Madhesi Front (JMF), an alliance of the Madhesi People’s Right Forum (MPRF) led by Upendra Yadav and Sadbhavana Party (SP) led by Rajendra Mahato, jointly warned to start a decisive movement if the government failed to fulfill their demand before the polls.

Role of External Powers

India’s contribution in facilitating the process of democracy in Nepal was apparent. India played a crucial role in bringing the democratic forces and Maoists together under a common platform which led to the signing of peace accord. India facilitated the evolution of a broader political consensus among different forces. During the time of political crisis and confusion, India brokered peace between various factions. The eruption of violence in Terai and the deepening political crisis concerned India most and it expressed serious concern over the developments.

However, India’s pro-active engagement has not been well received by some political stakeholders in Nepal. After the spurt in the Terai violence, some political leaders and the Maoists started accusing India of supporting a secessionist movement in the area. Though much of India’s policy has been reactive, it still continues to strengthen the bilateral relationship by providing economic assistance for development programmes, and for the preparation of polls. By and large, India will continue to be a major player in Nepal.

Some of the major external powers, namely the United States (US), United Kingdom (UK) and European Union (EU) have been towing India’s line. All these countries have promised to support the peace process and democracy for stability in Nepal. They have been unanimously voicing their support for the peace process and have been urging the government to hold the elections. Much of the support by UK and EU countries was focused on development projects linked with the peace process rather than military. The EU countries argued that the Nepali people’s aspirations for change will not be fulfilled unless there is development taking place.

The Americans, however, had a different agenda. The US government reiterated its stance to support the peace process and an early election. It, however, expressed serious concern on the Maoists role and their activities. They continued to perceive the Maoists as a threat to the evolution of democracy in Nepal. In the present circumstances, the US, UK and EU countries will continue to wait and watch the developments taking place.

China kept a close watch on the developments in Nepal. China established contacts with the interim government, parties and most importantly with the Maoists. In 2007, China sent several high ranking government officials and important leaders of the Communist Party of China (CPC) to Nepal to explore feasibility to strengthen ties with the present establishment. Through these high-level visits China tried to convince Nepal that it continued with its non-interventional approach. Besides, China promised to provide economic assistance, expand rail and road network and support the peace process and polls in Nepal. By and large, China initiated an assertive foreign policy and tried to engage actively in the political transition.

Source: ORF, February 1, 2008

Nepal's polls shrouded in doubt

2008-01-31T19:34:00.000+05:30

Dhruba Adhikary

KATHMANDU - Nepal's bid to end the current political transition through an election on April 10 is fraught with pitfalls and doubts persist among Nepalis as to the viability as well as usefulness of the exercise in the present climate of insecurity and deep-seated mistrust between important players. The Election Commission has been told by the interim government to make preparations to conduct the poll aimed at electing a 601-strong Constituent Assembly which is to write a new constitution. Leaders of the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) are enthusiastic about the election because they think their objective of transforming Nepal from a feudal monarchy to a republic will be achieved within months.

They have even projected their supreme leader, Pushpa Kamal Dahal (aka Prachanda or "the fierce one") , as the first president of the republic. The assembly, they expect, will endorse Prachanda's name once the constitution is promulgated. Maoists' impatience is visible in public forums organized to encourage the 17 million-plus voters scattered across the country of 25 million people. Another reason behind this newfound Maoist zeal could be their concerted effort to removed doubts that they will not be blamed if the election is postponed for the third time. The previous postponement, in November, was caused by them after they placed two demands as a precondition to the poll: that the interim constitution be amended to declare the country a republic and to change the traditional election system to a proportional representation method. The amendment was accepted, saying that its execution would be done by the assembly once it is elected; a compromise deal was made on the second demand by adopting a mixed method.

April 10 was chosen because the interim government, which has representatives from seven parties including the Maoists, decided to complete the task before the Nepali year 2064 is out - on April 12. And after a six-month extension of the United Nations mission in Nepal was approved, the UN Security Council on January 23 expressed continued interest in a smooth democratic transition for the country. However deep-seated mistrust among the seven parties about possible sabotage is the a major indicator of possible disruptions and violence. Then there are 50 other registered parties, some of whom are obviously pro-monarchist groups, that have been deliberately left out by the alliance of seven parties who claim that they alone worked to make the April uprising of 2006 successful. The uprising came to a climax on April 24, 2006, when King Gyanendra announced he was ending his 15-month autocratic reign, following 19 days of protests in the streets of Kathmandu and around the Himalayan nation. At least 18 demonstrators died in clashes with police during the "People's Movement".

The minister responsible for internal security, Krishna Sitaula, has issued a three-phased security scheme. However, the government is not mobilizing the 95,000-strong Nepal Army (NA) because the peace accord signed between the Maoists and the rest of the coalition partners requires NA soldiers to be confined to their barracks and Maoist combatants to UN-supervised cantonments. The combatants, whom the Maoists prefer to call members of the People's Liberation Army, number about 20,000. Despite preparations, people at large are not confident about the poll, primarily because of past betrayals and secondly due to lack of a general atmosphere of security appropriate for such a major democratic exercise. The law and order situation is precarious. Media reports of killings, abductions, beatings, looting and disruptions of traffic on highways are coming to the capital from all directions and imply that state authority in outlying districts is non-existent. Some of the district-based law enforcement officials even complained that Kathmandu often sends them orders to release criminals detained on homicide charges, because they happen to be workers for one of the coalition parties.

An election conducted in a security and authority vacuum can have neither legitimacy nor ability to institutionalize democratic polity," analyst Devraj Dahal told Asia Times Online. Conspiracies to abort the CA polls are another issue of concern. There is a strong suspicion that the "suspended" king is sure to use his courtiers and resources to thwart the poll - the outcome of which is not likely to please him and his 240-year-old monarchy. While fears of a palace-induced conspiracy grip all in the coalition, six of the partners are apprehensive about the seventh, the Maoists, as well. The Maoist commitment to competitive politics, they think, is little more than window-dressing, especially if Vladimir Lenin and Mao Zedong are Prachanda's role models. Other relevant questions include: Can small Nepal afford to have an assembly of 601 deputies to write a new constitution? Similarly, how can Nepal with its limited resource base create and sustain provinces and provincial legislatures - and all on ethnic lines?

Isn't the proposition of autonomy with the right to self-determination to the provinces an outright prescription for the disintegration of Nepal? These are some of the points being discussed by the country's intelligentsia; but neither Maoists, who sowed the seeds of division and inter-communal conflicts, nor leaders of other political parties, offer any convincing answers. One of the other hot subjects of debate was raised from the southern flatland, called Terai, which shares a porous border mainly with the Indian states of Bihar and Uttar Pradesh. Some of the Terai-based analysts see these separatist tendencies as the negative outcome of the interim Parliament's ill-conceived decision to declare Nepal a secular country, in May 2006. "Why wasn't Nepal allowed to retain its Hindu identity when over 80% of its inhabitants are Hindus?" wondered Chandrakishore, editor of Terai Khabarpatrika, a Nepali language magazine published from the southern border town of Birgunj. In his opinion, the bond of the Hindu religion had played a significant role in keeping hill-plain harmony intact and the elimination of that bond threatens its unity. The trouble in Terai is believed to have been fanned by elements deriving political support from New Delhi. This might seem to be a response made on the basis of an Indian perception the Napali Maoists, if not checked at Nepal's plains, could cross the porous border and enter Indian territory to assist Maoists (also known as Naxals) in India.

As voiced by Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, communist extremism has already become the biggest threat to India's internal security. If that is the case, it was sheer foolishness on New Delhi's part to assist Nepali Maoists to be a part of this country's establishment. Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala is said to be irritated by such signals, which are essentially based on inconsistent policies. In any case, the bulk of Nepal's external challenges come from India. In its report released on December 18, the Brussels-based International Crisis Group summed up New Delhi's approach in these words: "India ... appears to be using its influence in the Terai to pressure the parties and underscore its capacity to shape events." That Nepal must deliver the CA polls on time to complete the ongoing peace process is not disputed by anyone. Parties outside of the seven-party alliance also subscribe to the understanding that there is no alternative to the democratic exercise. UN representative Ian Martin told the media in New York last week that he was still optimistic, even though the security situation in districts of central and eastern Terai are not conducive for elections.

But Nepali leaders do not appear to possess the ability and vision needed for the task and most of them, including Koirala, have not been able to sacrifice their personal agendas for the sake of greater national interest. By appointing his daughter, Sujata, as the minister to look after the prime minister's office, Koirala has sent a message to the masses that he, like several other South Asian leaders, is keen to build a political dynasty. But if a dynasty was something that the Nepali people were looking for, they already had an established dynasty of the Shah kings. Or do they need a new dynasty, one for the "New Nepal"? New Nepal is a slogan handed down by the Maoists. Socially conscious citizens and Kathmandu-based diplomats also feel that Nepali leaders have one last opportunity to prove their worth. But each of them knows an election in the existing security atmosphere is not possible, but they all want that fact to be stated by someone else. The alternative to an election, informally floated, is to pass a resolution transforming the present unelected Parliament itself into the Constituent Assembly. But will such ingenuity be acceptable to the people at large? Are Nepal's friends and donors likely to approve this method as a medium to gain legitimacy? Doubts persist. Amid these speculations comes the idea of a coup. Maoist leaders have alerted the people about an impeding "democratic coup" , involving a group of civilians (not the king ) with the support from the army. Apparently, Maoists have a better alternative model in the shape of a "nationalist coup". Ultimately, it comes down to a choice between two types of military takeovers, in other words, Hobson's choice.

Source: Asiatimes, February 1, 2008

The Madhesis of Nepal

2008-01-16T13:15:00.000+05:30

K Yhome

Dramatic events in the past one year since the 2006 “April Revolution” in Nepal have been redefining the political landscape of the Himalayan nation in more ways than one. One important change is the visible rise of “marginalized” groups in national politics. The “excluded” groups - cutting across ethnic, religious and language lines - are demanding their due rights. In the midst of these changes is the rise of the Madhesis.2 This paper attempts to assess the response of the Nepalese government towards the Madhesi uprising, the shaping of the contours of the ethnic problem in the future, and its impact on peace in Nepal up in coming days and weeks and the prospects for peace in the country. The article ends with an assessment on India’s role in Nepal.

The Madhesis3

Madhesis are an important segment of the population in Nepal.4 They occupy economically the most significant region of the country with 70-80 per cent of the country’s industries being located in the Terai region. It accounts for 65 per cent of Nepal‘s agricultural production. Needless to say, the country’s economy depends heavily on the region. Strategically, the Terai belt constitutes the lifeline of Nepal. All the key transportation routes from India pass through this region, making it the gateway to the landlocked country. Almost all the country’s import and export takes place through this region. Given these factors, any disturbance in the region involving the Madhesis becomes extremely critical as it has the potential to seriously jeopardise the country.

With strikes, bans, and road blockades that continue to mark the unrest in Terai, economic activities have been brought to a virtual halt. Trade has been severely affected with goods worth millions of rupees stranded at border points and many manufacturing industries in Birgunj and Biratnagar shut down owing to crisis of raw materials. A recent report released by Nepal Rastra Bank, indicates that the country’s foreign trade recorded dismal performance during the first nine months of 2006/07, with 2.9 per cent fall in total exports. The report identifies the Terai unrest as one of the major factors for the poor performance of the export sector.

The size of the Madhesis has been a contested issue. According to the Population Census 2001 based on mother tongue for Village Development Committees (VBCs), the Madhesis population was 6781111.5 If one were to go by this figure, the Madhesis formed 29.2 per cent of the total population of Nepal in 2001. However, Madhesi political leaders, scholars, and activists have long questioned these figures. They claim that the Madhesis form 40-50 per cent of the total population of Nepal today. For instance, Jwala Singh, leader of the Janatantrik Mukti Morcha (JTMM-Singh) has claimed that Madhesis population is 14 million.6 While the truth is difficult to establish, one can safely say that the Madhesis constitute a major chunk of Nepal’s demography.

The Unrest in Terai7

Two issues need to be highlighted. First, the Madhesi issue is not a communal issue. Secondly, the Madhesi issue has not emerged in January 2007. The Madhesi question is not one of Madhesis (‘people of the plains’) vs Pahadis (‘people of the hills’). This misinterpretation of the Madhesi nomenclature by making it a community-based issue could have grave implications for the country.8 The Madhesi issue in Nepal relates to a movement against the state’s ‘discriminatory’ politics. It is a fight for recognition of rights - political, cultural as well as economic - and a struggle for equal representation and opportunity. 9

The current Madhesi protests began to surface in late 2006. The interim constitution became the rallying point, which the Madhesis claim, has failed to address the issues related to their rights. The trouble soon took a different turn when the country’s draft interim constitution came into effect on 15 January. Rapidly, the largely peaceful protests snowballed into widespread violent demonstrations, strikes and bans. Since then, the situation has only deteriorated. Three Madhesi outfits have been leading the agitations. The outfits are:

Madhesi Janadhikar Forum (MJF) or Madhesi Peoples’ Right Forum (MPRF) headed by Upendra Yadav. The outfit has been spearheading the ongoing Madhesi agitation in Terai. MJF’s main demands are: amendments to the interim constitution to include provisions for ethnic and regional autonomy with the right to self-determination and proportional representation based on ethnic population for the elections to Constituent Assembly (CA). Yadav has also been criticised from several quarters for his alleged ties with “palace forces”. The outfit’s student wing, Nepal Madhesi Student Front severed its allegiance in March accusing their leader of working with the “royalist” to subvert the CA elections.10 Interestingly, on April 26, the MJF submitted an application for party registration at the Election Commission and said that it will participate in the CA elections as a political party.

Janatantrik Terai Mukti Morcha (JTMM-Singh faction) led by Nagendra Paswan alias Jwala Singh. JTMM-Singh group is a breakaway faction of the Maoists that has been active mainly in Siraha and Saptari districts of Terai. The group spilt from JTMM led by Jaya Krishna Goit in mid-2006. The JTMM-Singh faction has been demanding for an autonomous and separate independent Terai state; equal participation of Madhesis in government security forces. In fact, on March 30, the outfit declared the Terai region a “Republican Free Terai State.”11 The group has been accused of fueling communal feelings between “people of hill origin” and “people of Terai region”, however, Singh reportedly claimed that his group is against the “system of unitary communal hill state power” and not people of hill origin.12

Janatantrik Terai Mukti Morcha (JTMM-Goit faction) led by Jaya Krishna Goit. Some of the conditions that the group has put forth for talks include declaring Terai an independent state, fresh delimitation of electoral constituencies based on populations, eviction of non-Terai officials and administrators from Terai region, among others. Both the JTMM groups want UN mediation in the talks. The group has been alleged of “divisive” campaign for its demand from industries to remove “people of hill origin” and replace them with Madhesi people or “people of plain origin” in eastern Terai region.13

Another outfit, Madhesi Tigers, a splinter group of the Maoists re-emerged in March after a long period of inaction. Madhesi Tigers is a splinter group of the CPN-Maoist formed a few years ago. Reportedly, its leader was killed in April 2005. According to the news reports, the Madhesi Tigers abducted eleven persons from Haripur area on March 1 but were released few days later.14 The past months have also seen emergence of new outfits. A group calling itself Terai Cobra has emerged in central Terai. Not much is known about this outfit. The first time it came out in public was on May 9, when it called a bandh in Bara, Parsa, and Rautahat districts in central Terai. Normal life was affected as markets and schools remain closed and traffic was disrupted.15 On 14 May, yet another outfit called Terai Army Dal, unheard of before, claimed responsibility of the bomb blast in Rautahat district that injured 14 people.16

Government Response

Has the government mishandled the Madhesi uprising? Arguably yes, if the worsening situation in the Terai is any indication. During the initial phase of violence in the Terai, the government perhaps failed to respond to the problem effectively. It was busy with other issues at hand, particularly, the peace process and the formation of government.17 The government’s indifference was compounded by differences between the government and the CPN-Maoist leadership (the Maoists joined the government in 1 April) over how to approach the problem. On 22 January a meeting of the eight-party alliance was called by Prime Minister GP Koirala to discuss the Terai situation. While the Prime Minister (PM) felt that the issues raised by the Madhesis and other groups can be resolved through dialogue, the CPN-Maoist chairman Prachanda and senior leader Babu Ram Bhattarai ruled out the possibility of dialogue with the Maoist splinter groups claiming that these groups were supported by “royalists elements and fundamental Hindu activists”.18

The Prime Minister’s address to the nation on January 31 and February 7, calling upon the agitating groups for dialogue evoked mixed reactions. While the PM’s address received positive response from some groups, it failed to improve the deteriorating situation. Under intense pressure from various quarters, the government formed a committee for talks with the agitators on February 2 under Mahanth Thakur, the Minister of Agriculture. Despite this initiative, the government was increasingly coming under criticism from both within the SPA and other political parties.19 Amid growing pressure from Madhesi and other communities, the government on February 2 decided to amend the two-week old interim constitution and assured the inclusion of all communities in the organs of the state.20 However, differences among the parties delayed the PM’s second address to the February 7. The eight-party alliance voiced its collective support to the PM’s address and signed a commitment paper that they were serious about the movement in Terai and would want to resolve it by addressing the Madhesi people’s demands and aspiration.

Meanwhile, the MJF responded positively to the PM’s second address by suspending their protest programme for ten days. On the other hand, the JTMM-Goit faction criticised the PM’s address. While the JTMM-Singh faction and the MJF initially showed willingness for dialogue, the JTMM-Goit rejected talks offer saying that the government has not created conducive atmosphere for talks. Soon the MJF followed suit and on 19 February, it said it would resume agitation alleging that the government did not show seriousness. The Thakur committee’s invitation for dialogue with the agitating groups never took off. Rather more conditionalities were put before the government to start the government for the dialogue. The interminable unrest in the Terai also pushed the NSP-A to take a tougher position, even threatening to pull out of the SPA if the government did not adopt the proposal to amend the constitution before March 6.

As though the rapidly growing tension and violence was not enough, the Gaur incident, in which a clash between the MJF and the CPN-Maoist aligned Madhesi Mukti Morcha (MMM) took place on March 21, 27 people were killed and many injured, further excerbated the tension.21 Reacting to the incident the eight-party alliance in a press statement said that the government must take stern measures against such acts and safeguard life and property of the people. In the wake of the Gaur incident and in the midst of CPN-Maoists demand to ban the MJF, the government prohibited any MJF programmes.

Efforts to curb the increasing violence remained ineffective as also the invitation for dialogue remained a non-starter. In the face of the deteriorating law and order situation, the government formed the Peace and Reconstruction Ministry and appointed a new three-member committee on April 11 headed by Ram Chandra Poudel entrusted with the task to hold talks with all the protesting groups. By appointing a new ministry and a new team for talk, the government wanted to send a message that it was serious about the issues raised by the agitators. In a significant development, the MJF and the government held their first formal talks on June 1 in Janakpur. It was reported that the two sides agreed on some of the demands raised by the MJF.22 However, a final agreement is yet to be reached.

While the government expressed its concern over the continued incidents of violence and called all agitating groups for talks, the situation in many parts of Terai remained chaotic with killings, extortions and strikes marking the protests. The violence has been taken a new direction with the rise in clashes between Madhesi outfits and Maoist sister organisations. This has further complicated matters.

Prospects and Recommendations

The situation in Terai remains grim with no signs of improvement. There is nothing to suggest that protests and violence will subside in the near future. Killings, strikes, demonstrations and clashes may continue. Even as the government insists on talks with the agitating groups, there has been a reluctance to address the core Madhesi problems and demands.

In the event of any outfit entering into an agreement with the government, the level of violence may be brought down. However, so long as other groups indulge in violent activities, the situation may only worsen in the coming weeks with serious implications, given the explosive nature of the issue. And now with new outfits emerging, the complexities are only growing for the government because even if any outfit enters into dialogue with the government, the possibility of dissidents joining the new groups to carry on their violent activities cannot be ruled out.
It is feared that the situation if allowed to deteriorate further, may result into ethnic riots. However, the recent incidents indicate that the danger seems to have been averted owing to the new dimension that the violence has acquired i.e. - the Madhesi vs the Maoists, which is as dangerous.
The urgent imperative is that all the agitating groups including the Maoists must desist from violence. The first priority of the government should be to seriously address the demands of the protesters. The Madhesi groups should not forget that their real cause is political. The present political situation in Nepal provides all ethnic groups the opportunity to resolve their problems amicably. Therefore, it would be folly on the part of the Madhesis to play the spoiler. The SPA and the CPN-Maoist also need to display more maturity.

India’s Role

India has been playing a constructive role in Nepal’s political transition. On several occasions New Delhi has expressed its desire to see Nepal resolve its internal problems and move towards establishing a stable democracy. On the development front, India has been engaged in education, infrastructure, and health projects in Nepal. Since India’s shares a long porous border with Nepal’s Terai, the trouble in the region is of great concern to it. Trade between the two countries depends on this region, as all the trading points are located there. Since violence has erupted in the Terai, India has shown serious concern over the volatile situation. Also of major concerns to India is the possiblity of the spill over of violence in Terai into India. The Indian government has been closely watching the developments in the Terai and has constantly been in touch with Nepal’s government.23

Notes:

1. The assessments in this essay are based on developments till June 2007.
2. Several other “marginalized” groups such as the Nepal Federation of Indigenous Nationalities (NEFIN), am umbrella organisation of 54 indigenous and ethnic groups, the Kirats; the Tharus; the Muslims among other groups have been protesting and demand the government to address the issues of ethnic groups.
3. The term Madhesi is derived from the word Madhesh meaning “mid-land” in Nepali and is defined as the lowland plains in the southern slopes of Nepal bordering Indian states of Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal and Uttaranchal. It refers to the Terai region (See Figure I). The foothill of the Chure hill is considered the dividing line between the Pahar (the hills) and the Madhesh (the plains). Hence, the people occupying the Terai belt are called Madhesis. The name is a generic term and also a topographic reference. The Madhesis include different cultural and linguistic groups - Maithili, Bhojpuri, Awadhi, Tharu, Hindi, Urdu, and other local dialects.
4. There is currently a debate in the academic discourse on whether all groups in the Terai can be considered Madhesis. I have argued elsewhere that a Madhesi “identity” has came about as a result of long state “discriminatory” politics. See “Constructing Identity: The case of the Madhesis of Nepal Terai” Paper presented at Social Science Baha conference on Nepal Terai: Context and Possibilities in Kathmandu on 10-12 March 2005.
5. This figure included all the mother tongues spoken in the Terai - Bhojpuri, Maithili, Awadhi, Tharu, as also Hindi, Urdu, Bangla, Rajbansi, Santhali including Punjabi and Marwari (though their share is marginal).
6. See “The Himalayan Times”, January 15, 2007.
7. The origin of the movement can be traced back to early 1950s. Several political parties and organisations - the Terai Congress in the 1950s; the Nepal Sadbhavna Council in the 1980s and later the Nepal Sadbhavna Party (NSP) in the 1990s - emerged at different point of time to fight for the Madhesi cause. All these organisations have fought against state’s “discriminatory” laws of citizenship and language as well as recruitment policies to the armed forces and bureaucracy. However, the problems persisted undressed under different regimes for decades. It was in this context that when the “People’s War” of the Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist (CPN-Maoist) emerged in the mid-1990s some sections of the Madhesis joined the Maoists, which had promised political, economic and social rights. With this background, an attempt is made to understand the current Madhesi agitations in Nepal.

8. K. Yhome, “Madhesis: A Political Force in the Making?,” Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies, New Delhi, Article no. 2058, 5 July 2006
9. K. Yhome, “The Madhesi Issue in Nepal”, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies, New Delhi, Article no. 2228, 2 March 2007
10. See “Nepal News”, March 25, 2007, http://www.nepalnews.com
11. See “The Himalayan Times”, March 31, 2007.
12. See “The Himalayan Times”, January 15, 2007
13. See “Nepal News”, January 19, 2007, http://www.nepalnews.com
14.See “Kantipur Online”, March 1, 2007, http://www.kantipuronline.com; also see “Nepal News”, March 4, 2007, http://www.nepalnews.com
15.See “Nepal News”, May 10, 2007, http://nepalnews.com
16.See “Kantipur Online”, May 15, 2007, www.http://www.kantipuronline.com
17. A source close to the government told this author in March that the government had initially “underestimated the potential of the Madhesi uprising.” For political reasons the name of the source is keep undisclosed.
18.See “Kantipur Online”, January 24, 2007, http://kantipuronline.com; also see “Nepal News”, January 23, 2007, http://www.nepalnews.com
19.NSP-A on February 2 announced that it would participate only in those meetings that discuss Madhesi issues. The traditionally “royalist” party, Rashtriya Prajatankri Party (RPP) accused the government of not been serious toward the real issue of the Madhesis and that the attitude has been fueling more crises in the country. See “Nepal News”, February 3, 2007, http://www.nepalnews.com
20. On February 5, top leaders of five political parties, namely the Nepali Congress (NC), CPN-Maoist, Communist Party of Nepal-United Marxist Leninist (CPN-UML), Nepali Congress-Democratic (NC-D) and NSP-A agreed on three major political issues: the interim constitution would be amended with firm commitment to a federal structure of governance in future; the election constituencies will be delineated in proportion to the population with special provision for sparely populated districts in the hill region; and to express commitment for representation of people from all castes and creed in state organ. See “Kantipur Online”, February 3 & 5, 2007, http://www.kantipuronline.com/
21. See “Kantipur Online”, March 21, 2007, http://www.kantipuronline.com
22. See. “Nepal News”, June 2 2007. http://www.nepalnews.com
23. A Nepali delegation met India’s Prime Minister and External Affairs Minister in New Delhi on January 30 where both the Indian leaders expressed their concern over the violence in Terai. Again, India’s External Affairs Minister reiterated India’s concern to a delegation of Nepali politicians when the latter called on him in New Delhi on January 31, 2007. See “The Himalayan Times”, January 31 and February 1, 2007. A Nepali delegation comprising senior leaders of the eight-political parties came to New Delhi on May 31 to held talks with Indian leaders, see http://www.nepalnews.com May 31, 2007.

Source: Indian Defence Review, Vol. 22.3, Decemeber 4, 2007

Barriers Of Dalits Inclusion

2008-01-14T16:40:00.000+05:30

Bharat Nepali

Nepali people are eagerly waiting to see the materialisation of the republic free from violence and unrest. The historic Jana Aandolan II (Peoples Movement II) 2062/063 gave the seven political parties and their leaders the mandate to work in the direction for materializing this dream of the Nepali people. However, the postponement of Constituent Assembly elections twice was disappointing. The parties within the seven party alliance were responsible for the postponement of the polls. Everyone expects that the polls won?t be postponed for the third time.

Efforts

Currently, political obstacles are gradually diminishing with the government?s genuine efforts to address the issues raised by various excluded groups. The issue of Dalit inclusion should not be kept apart in respect to the sacrifices and participation of the Dalits in the peaceful joint people?s movement. No doubt, the Dalits have suffered from discrimination and deprived of many facilities in the country and they want the CA elections to be held as soon as possible because they expect the CA will do the needful as regards their problems. Nepal is a country inhabited by various caste/ethnic groups with distinct cultures and languages and different religion persuasions. Dalits, as shown by the latest census, constitute around 14 per cent of the total population. They are discriminated by the so-called upper caste because of the deep-rooted belief fostered by the religion itself. Dalits are not only deprived from development opportunities but also from exercising their basic human rights. For bringing Dalits on an equal footing, special provisions are needed in every process of the making of the new Nepal. The issue of social exclusion is coming up as one of the major problems in the country. It is slowly getting magnified affecting the lives of Dalit, which is a matter of grave concern for all.

A study on ?Essence and Challenges of Special Provisions for Dalit Inclusion: An Institutional Analysis of Various Organizations? published by NNDSWO shows a sad situation of Dalits? participation and inclusion in the development field. A total of 36 organizations from government, NGOs, INGOs, bilateral and multilateral organizations jointly carried out the study to find out the essence and challenges of Dalit inclusion within the efforts and processes. The study obviously showed that the mandate of the organization were to contribute towards the promotion of human rights, establishment of equitable society and reduction of poverty.

Out of the 36 organizations, 37 per cent practice the programming approach of poverty reduction. It reveals that the executive board/management committee was dominated by the so-called upper caste people accounting for 36 per cent while only 1.7 % Dalits worked as members. The composition of staff according to caste and ethnicity shows a great disparity of Brahmin (24.58 %) to that of Dalits (4.5 %). Senior positions have been occupied by Brahmins (40.9 %), Chhetri (27.3 %) and Newar (22.7 %) among the INGOs. In government offices also the senior positions have been occupied by the upper caste Brahmin (77.8 %) whereas there were no Dalits. The fact is that the Brahmins have a larger pool of highly qualified and competitive people which the Dalits lack.

Organizations working for development need to provide strong commitment to improve the status of Dalits through the provision of positive discrimination. Lack of competent people for leadership among the Dalits, intra-Dalit discrimination, lack of awareness and narrow mentality, religious belief, superstition, rigid hierarchical social structure, poverty, inadequate policy implementation, lack of commitment and willingness from concerned authorities are the major barriers to develop and implement special provisions for the participation and inclusion of Dalits. While many government, INGOs, bilateral and multilateral agencies in Nepal have made effective efforts towards improving the situation of marginalized communities they serve, the truth is that Dalits still remain oppressed and excluded. The government and non-government sectors look less serious in trying to remove these foremost barriers.

The problem of caste discrimination is a fundamental barrier to poverty reduction, and social injustice and requires every political and social organization so as to increase the access of Dalits to resources and opportunities. Dalits will remain excluded if the problem of caste discrimination is not properly addressed. All the government and non government organizations working for the development of the society should increase the level of commitment and efforts for Dalit development programmes and should invest more in this area. They should implement measures to ensure the participation and inclusion of Dalits in its structure and contribute for the positive discrimination to benefit the Dalits. Therefore, there is a need to do more to sensitize the state and non-government sectors (NGOs, INGOs, bilateral and multilateral agencies) in promoting Dalit rights and bringing them in the national mainstream by removing barriers and creating conducive environment for Dalit inclusion.

Wide Gap

The gap between commitment from the decision-makers and implementation of inclusive policies remains wide within the organization, especially in the institutional and policy levels. Political parties and civil society organizations should play a vital role to increase the proportional representation of Dalits in the political process. Therefore, the need of the hour is to ensure the representation of the Dalits in the new Nepal which may definitely help to formulate the required plans and policies for their upliftment.

Source: The Rising Nepal, January 14, 2008

Two Armies: A War Of Words

2008-01-14T16:37:00.000+05:30

Shyam Bhandari

The Nepali media is awash with opinions, allegations and counter allegations on the question of the integration of the two armies - People's Liberation Army (PLA) and Nepal Army (NA). The whole thing seems to have been triggered off by Chief of Army Staff (CoAS) Rukmangud Katwal's reaction to the 23-point agreement chalked out between the Maoists and the government regarding the integration of the verified PLA personnel with the NA. Speaking to reporters at the airport before embarking on his China visit on January 8, the CoAS is quoted as saying, "In the name of institutionalising the peace process, any political 'ism' or ideology should not be introduced in the Nepali Army. The Nepali Army operates under the people's chain of command, and it should be kept untainted. There should be no political influence on the Nepali Army. Political influence on the Nepali Army will only invite bigger problems in the country."

This was immediately followed by Maoist leader Krishna Bahadur Mahara's reaction: "The army chief's statement is against the spirit of the comprehensive peace treaty (CPA) between the government and the CPN-Maoist. The statement is ill-timed and unfortunate." The PM is reported to have supported the CoAS's stand "all-out" on January 9, and denouncing it the very next day. The prime minister retorted to his usual lame excuse of "the media distorted my views", which could well have been the fallout of Prachanda's allegation the previous day that the prime minister's statement was against the letter and spirit of all the agreements signed so far.Add to that Sher Bahadur Deuba's ignorant revelation that nowhere has it been mentioned that the Maoist army will be adjusted in the NA in any accords, including the comprehensive peace accord, interim constitution and the latest 23-point agreement, and there could be nothing more confounding.

Justified

The CoAS may or may not be justified in his stand. What he has said may or may not be in the best interest of the country's future, if not the present. Not to overstate, the NA is the institution that has been free from politics. Those who distort the views of the army vis-୶is its desire of remaining free from 'isms' are doing injustice to an institution which has demonstrated time and again that it is on the side of the country and the people far more than any of the people's parties can claim in their wildest misjudgement of themselves. What better proof do we need than the fact that this institution has always stood quietly in the sidelines allowing the people's desires to take precedence even when opportunity provided for it to overstep its jurisdiction? How else can one explain the NA's readiness to side with democracy rather than the monarchy that it has served ever since its existence? The Maoists have every right to demand that the provisions in the interim constitution be implemented so that their former combatants can be integrated back into the society. Their demand is also justified as they have sought to stick to the demand that the government implement the provision in the interim constitution regarding the armies 'word for word'.

The Way Out

The Nepalese people have had enough of politicking in every imaginable place and entity, in the schools and colleges, offices and organisations, in the streets and what not. We have already witnessed what politicised students can do to the country, and we have experienced what blending the bureaucracy with ideology begets. As if that has not been enough, they are now talking of infesting the army with hardened, indoctrinated ideologues. Imagine the outcome in the long run - uniformed, gun-totting politicos dictating democracy to us in a New Nepal. All said and done, there is still the question of reintegration of the PLA members for which there are several options other than integrating them with the NA. How about creating an unarmed reconstruction and development force out of the former Maoists combatants? They could be entrusted with building roads, bridges, schools, community hospitals and other much-needed infrastructure. The government could pay them at par with the NA, while still saving huge sums on arms and ammunition that it would need to buy for them otherwise. This would also serve as a purgatory for the Maoists that so pitilessly destroyed the infrastructure of this country during their people's war.

Source: The Rising Nepal, January 14, 2008

Test of resolve

2008-01-14T16:36:00.000+05:30

The government on Friday announced April 10 as the fresh date for the election to the Constituent Assembly (CA). As they are used to postponements (first in June last year and then in November), it is not entirely surprising that many people appear still unsure that the event will come off on schedule. Many others, including politicos, are expressing doubts, whereas leaders of the three biggest parties - the Nepali Congress, the CPN-UML andthe CPN-Maoist - are striking optimistic notes. The CPN-Maoist, whose 22-point demand was the apparent cause of the deferral of the November 22 election, has decided to kick off its election campaign from tomorrow. The Election Commission has decided to implement the election code of conduct from the day after tomorrow. The new poll date has also given most of Nepal’s important friendly countries a measure of satisfaction — the US has already welcomed it.

But even then there is no dearth of doubters. Some may associate this lack of confidence with the SPA’s ‘lack of resolve’. Others suspect that as the monarchy will lose even its present suspended status with the election, its internal and external backers willnot look on but do their last bit to spoil the polls, by resorting to all possible means. The third principal source of doubt for many is groups like Janajatis and Madhesis who are pushing their various demands before the election, threatening to torpedo it unless they are satisfied. Particularly disturbing is the separatist overtones of some Tarai outfits. While the earlier agreements with them should be carried out, the government should not go on appeasing such groups.

What the government needs to keep in mind is that the various small groups in the Tarai have assumed oversize importance, because of its lack of timely and appropriate response. Unreasonable demands include the recall of all government employees not of ‘Madhesi’ stock from the Tarai, ‘right to self-determination’ and creation of the entire Tarai as a single state within the federal structure. Nowhere in South Asia, can such demands be fulfilled. Whether the election can be held on schedule will also depend, to a considerable extent, on how the government handles some of the Tarai or Janajati groups. Some Tarai groups have given the government the deadline of January 19 to meet their demands. The making offull proportionality a condition for the polls at this stage raises questions of intent. Its position should be to appeal to all groups to take part in the election. However, if any of them persists in boycotting it, let it do so, because it comes within democratic rights; but, under no circumstances can the government be expected to let anybody create the disturbancesto foil the CA election, for which the Nepali people have fought so long and so hard. If the government cannot keep the date this time, its claim to power will weaken, particularly of Prime Minister Koirala and the Nepali Congress, because they run the most important ministries and agencies necessary to hold the CA polls.

Source: The Himalayan Times, January 14, 2008

CA election : Settle political questions first

2008-01-14T16:32:00.000+05:30

Shailendra Kumar Upadhyay

Once again the people have been assured by SPA government that Constituent Assembly polls would be held before the end of 2064 BS. This announcement has given people new hope. However, the Adivasi Janajati Mahasangh and the newly formed Tarai-Madhes Party have expressed dissatisfaction and blamed the government for ignoring their demands. This has compelled people to remain cautious and not get carried away.

The issues raised by Janajatis and Madhesis have to be addressed and resolved for holding of free and fair election participated by all sections of the population. Since failure to hold the polls twice has already tarnished the image of the government, further uncertainty would only add fuel to the question of its legitimacy and push the country towards anarchy. Therefore, certain tasks have to be accomplished before the ballot date.One of the main demands of dissident groups is an agreement about the rights of the units in the future federal state. In the Tarai region, there is demand for a single unit encompassing the whole Tarai region. There are also demands for a Tharu unit or units based on Maithili, Bhojpuri and Awadhi language-speaking areas. In order to resolve the issue, either a political conference of all stakeholders in Tarai (including the political parties) has to be held or a referendum should be called to determine the aspirations of the Tarai people.

Holding a referendum before the CA polls looks neither easy nor feasible; the only alternative is to hold a political conference. The other means could be holding a referendum simultaneously with CA election. It would put an additional burden on the Election Commission (EC) but would ensure larger participation of the people that would help the government take crucial decisions on the formation of new units composing a federal state. Since the interim constitution has already declared that the structure of Nepal would be federal, the constituent assembly has to determine the shape and size of federal units. An agreement among the stakeholders on the formulae for creation of new federal units, therefore, has to be found.

In the hilly areas, there seems to be an overwhelming desire among the public for the creation of federal units on the basis of dominant ethnic groups — that takes care of the language issue as well, as each ethnic group has its own language and culture. In the Tarai, however, the language issue and the issue concerning the cultural heritage of Tharu people remain sensitive. Naturally, in order to determine the aspiration of the sovereign people a mechanism has to be developed which does not hamper the constituent assembly election and also ensures peaceful, free and fair polls.

A new state structure in itself is not sufficient to build a new Nepal where all the citizens would have equitable share in policy-making and administration. The rights of an individual cannot be compromised on any ground. The essence of inclusive democracy is respect for the rights of every individual, no matter what community or group s/he belongs to and irrespective of the place s/he resides. There should be no move to evict any individual or group on any ground whatsoever and any such attempt must be punished as a criminal offence. The dominant groups would play the major role in the federal units but the minorities too would have their say as individuals and groups in a secure atmosphere. The issue of the right to self-determination has to be defined clearly and addressed in earnest. The people of each area under the federation ought to enjoy the right to determine the administrative, legislative and judicial apparatus, but not the right to secede, declare independence or merge with another nation. Abraham Lincoln, the most admired president of the then largest democracy, could not tolerate the act of secession by the southern states of the USA. The new units in the federation ought to have total control over their territories in all governance-related matters.Though we do not have sufficient time to linger in discussions, we have enough to convene a political conference on the limited agenda of formation of the new units and its basis and leave the details to be worked out by the constituent assembly in which all the stakeholders would have equitable participation. The need of the hour is to pay attention and show the willingness to accommodate the demands of Janajatis and Tarai in all seriousness.No amount of poll preparations will be enough to hold the election in peaceful, free and fair atmosphere unless the political questions are first resolved. The technical aspects of the polls have been laid out by the Election Commission well in advance, however the political aspects remain unresolved as yet. The only way to ensure polls is to motivate people to participate in the election with a clear mind that can weigh sensitive issues on their merit.

Source: The Himalayan Times, January 14, 2008

New hope for Nepal

2008-01-09T11:19:00.000+05:30

Paul Soren

The prolonged confusion and apprehension over holding of Constituent Assembly (CA) elections and the issue of monarchy was partially resolved when the Seven Party Alliance (SPA) and Maoists signed a 23-point new agreement on December 23, 2007. This is fourth major agreement reached between the SPA and Maoists after the Jana Aandholan of April 2006. The interim government also approved the new pact which it is hoped will pave the way for the CA polls.

The interim parliament also passed an amendment bill to the interim constitution, declaring that Nepal would be a federal democratic republic after the CA polls. This will finally lead to the abolition of monarchy during the first sitting of the constituent assembly. It has also cleared the decks for the Maoists to rejoin the cabinet. The ball is now in the Maoists court and they have to make a move. They have to keep their commitments and join the democratic process and also ensure that polls are held on time.

For the present the new pact seems to be a good deal as it has cleared some of the existing political uncertainties and hiccups. This appears to be a tangible roadmap for a New Nepal. However, there are a few key questions which need to be further probed before making any conclusive statement. Will the 23-point pact pave way for timely CA polls and end the ongoing political crisis? The major demands of the Maoists have been addressed but what is the guarantee that they will sincerely participate in the polls? Will the Maoists come up with new set of demands to obstruct the CA polls? More importantly, will it address the Madhesi concerns and accommodate their political ambitions?

Analyzing it positively, it indicates that the new pact should be able to end the political stalemate in the country. The new agreement has primarily addressed two of the major issues obstructing the peace process and delaying the polls. The Maoists ’ demand for a republic and proportional representation has been met. Though the second Maoist demand for a full PR system has been partially met but it could still be acceptable to them. Similarly, in an effort to bring inclusiveness in the polity, the interim parliament also amended the constitution and increased number of members from 497 to 601. Thereby, 335 members will be elected under the proportional representation system, 240 members on first past the post system and 26 members will be nominated by the Prime Minister. It is expected that the amended constitution will be able to accommodate aspirations of the marginalised and deprived sections of the country. It should provide them an opportunity to represent their political viewpoint.

Despite all these positive trends, the government has several daunting tasks to perform. Firstly, it has to address the Tarai problem because elections cannot be held if the Tarai is left burning. Secondly, the security situation in the country is worrisome and need to be improved. The government has to take into account all these critical issues and address them on priority basis. Further and this is very important, the SPA members and Maoists have to stay united and stop playing the blame game. They need to co-operate with each other and find viable political solutions to the various problems the country. They also need to evolve a consensus over these issues and take them to their logical end.

Essentially the new deal enables the Maoists to rejoin the interim government by addressing two of their major demands. The rising aspirations of the Nepali people for peace and stability, require that political players play a leading role in establishing peace. They should also cooperate with other parties in sustaining the peace process. The Maoists credibility, will determined by their seriousness and adherence to their commitments. Manipulative politics and rigidity have to be replaced by transparency and flexibility in finding solutions to problems. The Maoists need to prevent their cadres (especially the Young Communist League) from indulging in terror and unlawful criminal activities. Any further attempts to stay away from the polls or creating obstacles in the holding of polls will rebound on them.

Since the institution of monarchy – controversial and meddlesome in politics -- has always been a focal point of debate in Nepali politics there has always been a struggle for power between the monarchy and democratic forces. The Maoists were the latest entrants in to this struggle to abolish what they described as a feudal institution. The new pact would eventually lead to the removal of monarchy in the country. The resultant amended constitution has empowered the parliament to abolish monarchy if the government suspects that the monarchy is playing a spoiler hand or intends to thwart the peace process. However, the Maoists would ensure that the monarchy is wiped out completely from the Nepali polity. The bill eases the government’s burden as it can now attempt to hold the polls by mid-April 2008.

There are a few negative aspects of the new pact and amended constitution. The new agreement does not directly address the ongoing Tarai problem inviting criticism from opposition party members and agitating Madhesi groups and the SPA and Maoists have been accused of taking arbitrary decisions. They alleged that common citizens have been deprived of their rights in the decision making process. It is true that the SPA and Maoists have neglected Madhesi aspirations by not addressing issues raised by them. It appears that the new pact is meant only to appease the Maoists rather than finding a political solution endangering the country. The SPA and Maoists have completely ignored that stability in Tarai is a very critical element for holding of a successful election. The Tarai problem if left unresolved has the potential to further complicate the peace process and aggravate the situation. Therefore resolving the Madheshi problem should be of the utmost importance for the government and parties.

The new agreement is an opportunity for the parties and Maoists to end the ongoing political crisis and will be a feasible roadmap for creating a new Nepal provided the SPA and Maoists can give up their petty political interests and exhibit the political will to address some of these pertinent issues like the Tarai problem and avoid delaying the polls. Most importantly, the SPA and Maoists have to create a conducive environment for the success of the polls.

Source: Observer Research Foundation, New Delhi, January 7, 2008

Madhesis have a right to declare independence

2008-01-05T18:08:00.000+05:30

Former Minister of Science and Technology Mahanta Thakur left the interim government to form a new party. He began his career in politics as a student leader in the early 1970s. He contested the general elections from Siraha. After having been a member of the Nepali Congress for more than 37 years, Thakur left the NC at a time when the party needed him most. Thakur does not believe the government can hold the CA polls in mid-April because of the deteriorating law and order situation in the tarai. Thakur spoke with Puran P Bista and Kamal Raj Sigdel of The Kathmandu Post on the future political course of his party and his demand for greater autonomy with a provision for self-determination.

Excerpts:

Q: You have formed a new party right after the SPA agreed to hold the CA elections by mid-April. Is your new party prepared and in a mood to participate in the polls?
Mahanta Thakur: We are not against the government's plan to hold the CA elections by mid-April. But the people in the tarai want to see their issues settled first. Elections are a constitutional process to express your views in a peaceful manner; but having said that, the current situation in the tarai is not conducive to holding elections. Peace and security are prerequisites for holding the polls.

Q: You have also expressed dissatisfaction with the 23-point agreement struck recently by the SPA. Is this a prelude to your boycotting the CA elections possibly to be held in mid-April?
Thakur: We have not protested against the agreement. There is a burning problem in the tarai right now, but the SPA is ignoring it and going ahead with its own agenda with a one-track mind. This has created enough room for suspicion. All the major political parties are well cognizant of the problems in the tarai and what's going on there. There is state-sponsored terrorism. Incidences of extortion and abduction are daily affairs. Violence has increased. In such a situation, I think the general people of the tarai don't want the election to be held. First, there should be peace, the violence must stop, and the issues settled.

Q: You mean you do not believe the CA polls will be held in mid-April as the SPA is preparing to announce.
Thakur: That's what the people of Madhes have been saying. We are planning to visit the tarai and tour all the districts. And we will decide accordingly. We will collect information about the problem in the tarai by sitting down face-to-face with the local people. If the government and others cooperate with us and peace is restored, we can hold the elections.

Q: You have named your party Tarai-Madhes Loktantrik Party. How do you define tarai and Madhes? Who are the Madhesis according your definition?
Thakur: This is just an illusion. Both terms are being used interchangeably. There is no difference in their meanings. And there is no politics hidden behind that.

Q: When you define Madhes and Madhesis, do you include all the people of different origins and castes presently living in the tarai?
Thakur: We have always talked about the tarai and the hills in a holistic manner. We are talking about the 49 percent of the national population living in the tarai. We have raised overall issues. We have not talked about a certain caste, origin or religion.

Q: You mean you are raising a regional issue as opposed to a racial one.
Thakur: Yes. We have raised the issues of a geographical area, not of a certain caste or a certain party.

Q: Is this reflected in the way your party has been formed, for instance, in its membership?
Thakur: They will be incorporated in the organization in due course.

Q: You have been a devoted Nepali Congress leader since you joined politics. But you resigned abruptly and formed a new party. There are a number of parties with different ideologies already operating in the tarai. Can you, as an ex-NC leader, take them into confidence?
Thakur: All the parties are trying their best and want to solve the problems of Madhes and Madhesis. Since we all have a common goal, we have come together. Now we all agree that this problem should be solved peacefully. This is in the interests of the nation and the people.

Q: There are different parties in Madhes; some armed, some unarmed. How would you characterize them?
Thakur: Our party has stated clearly that all the political groups fighting for the Madhesi cause should come together. We are making efforts towards that end. If we advance together, there will be less problems for the people, they will get relief, also less effort will be required. We have publicly appealed to everybody to unite for the cause. As part of our campaign, we held consultations with the tarai parties before we established our party. We will have formal talks with them now that we have formed a party. Then we will go ahead with some coordinated programs. They have agreed informally that we need to act together.

And as for those who are operating underground, we have not yet talked to them face-to-face. But they have expressed their appreciation and welcomed our initiative through different media in the tarai. They have congratulated us. We have taken it positively. We will meet them and request them to join our peaceful movement.

Q: Judging by the fact that Upendra Yadav of the MPRF and several others did not attend your party's inauguration, it appears that your party will also become just another in the procession of parties that have emerged in the tarai. In such a situation, how will you be able to add new dynamism to the Madhesi movement?

Thakur: We will have formal talks with them to finalize matters.

Q: Do you think that the armed groups operating in the tarai will join open politics if the demands that you and other unarmed political groups have been raising are fulfilled?

Thakur: They are in politics even now. They are different only in their approach. Since they are raising political issues, we must say it is politics. It's only the way they are doing it that is different.

Q: Different parties in the tarai have been raising different demands. You have come up with your own. So what are your party's demands?
Thakur: We want complete autonomy. The local people should be involved in running the local administration. This is not happening at present. Everything is run by the center. The Madhesis do not see their reflection in the faces that are sent there to handle the local administration. For this reason, the people in the tarai do not feel ownership of the administration. They are not in a position which allows them to say, “This is our government, and it serves us.” What is lacking is participation and autonomy.

Q: Do you think all these demands should be fulfilled before the CA polls? How practical would it be in that case?
Thakur: The people of the tarai think that it would be better if these issues are settled before the CA polls. But I think the CA is also a valid process to get our demands fulfilled. A part of our problem will be solved if the election reflects our sizeable representation. I take the CA polls as an opportunity too.

Q: The recent 23-point agreement states that the CA will contain 601 members and that the tarai will be well represented. Don't you think that this new development ensures what you are demanding in advance?
Thakur: There have been discrepancies in what is said and written. But I said that the CA was also an opportunity. It is not that we can solve all the problems at once. We can also solve some of the problems by using that legitimate process. We think this is a legitimate process and we must accept it. Why should we avoid it? But there is no such situation in the tarai for holding the elections.

Q: What are the conditions that can bring you to the CA?
Thakur: People have been clamoring that we do not believe the government can hold the elections peacefully and that their demands will be fulfilled. So our demands, such as autonomous government and Madhesi participation in the local administration, should be fulfilled. And there is truth in our demands. Every time tarai issues are raised, they get sidelined. Though the government has made some commitments, nothing has been implemented in practice to this date. The posts of CDO, police chief and various administrative officials are still occupied by a single elite community. So the people are not convinced that the government will ensure equality and bring immediate changes in our administrative and judiciary systems.

Q: Would it be possible to reform overnight the entire system that was established by the Rana oligarchy and cultivated by the Panchayat system? How should the government revamp the whole system before the CA polls?
Thakur: The government should demonstrate its commitment by acts that will convince the people that their demands will ultimately be fulfilled. The people should be assured that there will be no more extortion. For example, the police come to innocent people's houses at night and intimidate them for no reason. They are subjecting the people to extortion. They take away people's guns even if they have a license.

Q: Don't you think that the CA is the right mechanism to solve all the problems?
Thakur: The CA is an issue that is raised time and again strategically. We were not the ones who postponed the CA polls. Neither can we do that. Now all the arrows are directed at Madhes. The seven political parties quarrel among themselves and the blame is placed on us.

Q: It is said that the NC has sent you to the tarai with this new party to undermine other parties such as the Maoists that have taken hold there.
Thakur: There is not a grain of truth in that.

Q: But how could you have left the NC? You have been a NC leader your whole life.
Thakur: I have left the NC. We have formed a new party.

Q: Like all the other armed and unarmed groups in the tarai, your party has also demanded the right to self-determination. What is this “right to self-determination” in plain language?
Thakur: Regardless of whether you write it down or not, it is there. But once stated, it becomes a legitimate right of the people. If the government continues to suppress the tarai, then it is the people's right to warn it that they have a right to self-determination. Till now we have been talking about living together. But if you suppress us any longer, we have a right to declare independence and live separately.

Q: Since everybody has agreed on establishing a federal republic, Madhes too will have its own provincial government. So who will be there to continue “suppressing” you in a federal system? Won't it make your demand for “right to self-determination” redundant?

Thakur: Yes, that is possible. There are examples we can draw from other countries. Suppression can continue even after a state has been granted autonomy. There are examples of states that have separated and declared independence, and also of some that have rejoined the federation.

Q: You mean self-determination similar to the Kashmiri demand?
Thakur: That is a different case.

Q: When you are talking about self-determination, does it indicate that we are heading towards disintegration?
Thakur: I don't think that guaranteeing a state all its rights can lead to disintegration. A community with such rights becomes stronger, thus there is no chance of it breaking up. When inequality exists, the chances of disintegration are greater. For instance, several independent countries came together to form the European Union. They are working together; they have a common currency and common market and share many things. Though there are instances of disagreement among them, they are working hard to stay together. The suspicion that the country could break up is only a fear.

Q: There are several castes and groups—for instance, Tharus, Limbus, Kirats, Brahmins, Chhetris and others - among whom some have been demanding their own states while others have been demanding their representation in state affairs. How do you address their concerns?
Thakur: We are raising overall issues. We have not raised a particular community's issue. Just like when the British Empire was pulling out of India, they were more worried about the problems of the suppressed community than the Indians themselves. They could not solve the problem of the suppressed community during their reign, and when it was time to leave, they worried how the Indians could solve them.

The colonial forces who were leaving India were more worried about it than the Indians themselves. That is what is happening in our country too. The government did not show any interest in solving the tarai's problems before, but now they are worrying about how Madhes can solve the problems and issues of other communities. They are focusing more on this. We are talking about the entire tarai. We are not taking about any caste or community. We are talking about 49 percent of the national population.

Q: Have you held talks with other disgruntled groups, such as Janajatis and others who are also legitimate political forces in the tarai?

Thakur: We are in the process of holding discussions with such discontented groups.

Q: Can you include them in your program?
Thakur: No, we are not raising caste specific issues [as the Janajatis have been doing]. We are talking about a geographical region. In this sense, I think all the issues have been brought together.

Source: The Kathmand Post, December 30, 2007

Maoist will have a very cordial relation with India: Dr Bhattarai

2008-01-04T11:11:00.000+05:30

Sarat C Das speaks to Bhattarai in Katmandu to understand the Maoists’ preparations for the election, their contribution to the peace process and willingness to make India a partner in the future development of the state.

Interview with Baburam Bhattarai, Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist)

Nepal is rife with speculation about Baburam Bhattarai’s assuming the office of deputy prime minister in the interim government as Communist Party of Nepal (UML) agreed to the Maoist proposal for proportional electoral system.

You strongly believe in Mao Zedong and draw inspiration from “Revolutionary Internationalist Movement” and Peru’s left wing extremist guerrilla movement. What is your real ideology?

Marxism- Leninism-Maoism-Prachanda path is the guiding force of our ideology. However, when you draw a parallel with other communist movements such as Peru, we would find us different in terms of our adherence to the Prachanda path. Knowing Prachanda path would bring you closer to the historical importance of our movement.

There are many groups, both active and defunct, by a common abbreviation CPN (Communist Party of Nepal). Do you think this would confuse the identity of CPN (Maoist) during the poll?

There are various ideologies that creep into the communist movement at different points of time; hence there are splits and counter splits resulting in so many parties. However, there are two major forces — one is the reformist communist party known as CPN (Unified Marxist-Leninist) which believes in parliamentary form of democracy and other one is the revolutionist communist party known as CPN (Maoists) which believes in the revolutionary path for the development of society. Any layperson knows both parties; hence there should not be any confusion.

Do you think CPN’s (Maoist) membership with Revolutionary Internationalist Movement and the co-ordination committee of Maoist parties and organizations South Asia have paved the way for its greater international acceptability?

Marxist ideology is an international ideology. All the revolutionary movements in the world express their solidarity with us. However, they don’t have any impact on the current political movement of Nepal. We are chalking our own strategies.

You claim that Maoists People’s war always aimed at establishing a “new democracy” in Nepal through a historical revolt against federalism and imperialism. Then why are you not contributing enough to the peace process that can lead to early democracy?

We think we have hugely contributed to this ongoing peace process and somebody who thinks it is otherwise he or she is totally wrong. Our ultimate goal is socialism and communism and we believe it can be achieved through various stages of the development of democracy. We are trying to achieve a federal democratic republic as an immediate need of the society. For this we armed the people’s war and then led them to a peaceful movement.

Maoists initial memorandum presented to then Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba on Feb 4, 1996 demanded the abrogation of Mahakali treaty with India on distribution of water and electricity. Do you still stand by this?

We are keen to redefine our relation at the international level. Nepal’s current diplomatic relation with India stems from a strong British legacy in India. The unequal treaty, imposed on us in 1816 following Anglo-Nepalese war, is still continuing. Hence, we want this legacy to be done away with so that we have mutually agreeable and beneficial relationship. We want the abrogation of some of the treaties such as on distribution of water which is one of our major resources. However, it does not mean we would have an antagonistic relation with India as we understand India is our most important neighbour and it is difficult to progress without its support.

The abrogation of Mahakali treaty is a 40-point demand. Do you want all these demands to be fulfilled?

We would like to sit down and discuss and find a way out.

How do you foresee Nepal’s relation with India post-election?

We have always had a good relation. Unfortunately people of both countries have been exploited by the ruling class for their selfish interest. I think we will have a very cordial relation.

India insists that Nepal Maoists must delink themselves from Indian naxalites to pave way for a better political relation!

We only have ideological and political links with them but no military links. And we would never have military links. Various communist parties of the world have similar political links among themselves. So what is the problem!

But you have alleged military collusion with some radical naxalite groups such as ULFA!

We have come across some news claming our association with ULFA which is baseless. We don’t have any association with them and we can never have since they don’t believe in Maoism. These are various nationalistic movements in their own rights and we have nothing to do with them.

What role do you visualise for the King now?

We are for a democratic republic in which there is no role for the King even as a ceremonial head. However, his existence in the country would depend on how he cooperates with the new political system. If he chooses to live as an ordinary citizen he is welcome or else he would call trouble for himself.

You are an alumnus of India’s Jawaharlal Nehru University, which is a bastion of communism. How much has JNU influenced you in your revolt against the establishment?

JNU has had a great influence on me. I learnt my Marxism there not only in theory but also in practice.

Let us visualize the scenario post-election in April. Where do you see yourself in terms of political achievement?

The way we have supported various movements in the country such as dalits, women and janjatis, we think we will attain the majority in the election. It is based on a real assessment.
Would you predict a date for the elections?We always want elections to happen at the earliest. As of now it appears to be in April.

Do you want independent international observers to oversee the elections?

It was we who wanted independent observers from UN and elsewhere to ensure a free and fair election.

Would you want India to become a part of the international observers during elections?

People from civil societies and human rights groups in India are always welcome to become a part of independent observers.

Are you chalking out a bigger political role for your wife Comrade Parvati as the country is going into polls?

I don’t chalk out plans for her. She has her own independent contribution to the communist movement in Nepal. In fact we met during the struggle. She is capable to chalk out her career and she has contributed a lot to women liberation movement in Nepal.

Are you planning to contest in elections?

Definitely, yes. Our chairman has already indicated that all our top leaders will be in the electoral fray.

Can you give an estimate of the number of Maoist combatants, militia, cadres, hardcore followers and sympathisers?

There are 30,000 combatants and another 20,000-22,000 will soon be added to this list following verification. There are 50,000-70,000 people in our cadre and our hardcore followers and sympathisers are in millions. We have nearly 200,000 people as our followers from the trade unions of Katmandu.

Is this huge following going to translate into votes?

We are confident of emerging as the party with majority in the election. However, it is a little early to predict the exact number of votes.

According to a UN report Maoists have procured some 85 percent of weapons from Police and RNA during their struggle against monarchy. There are reports that the loot is still continuing. Is it true?

After the ceasefire there is no arm struggle.

Source: Hindustan Times, January 3, 2007

A Chance Encounter With a Maoist Commissar

2007-12-29T15:59:00.000+05:30

It is notable that two years ago, before the ceasefire, the Maoists did not have any presence at all in Mustang due to the Royal Nepal Army’s occupation of a high foot suspension bridge below Ghasa that serves as the only entrance to the district below 5000 meters. Now the Maoists had a large visible office in Jomsom.

Neil Horning

Text of the interview with Pawan, the Mustang district in charge follows. I think it’s still a bit boilerplate.

1. The leadership has often said that the peace process was an unprecedented experiment for Maoism. In your opinion, what are the results of this experiment and the lessons to be learned?

When king Gyanendra used the Army to take power from the elected representatives We made the 12 point agreement in order to win back power with the help of all of the citizens. As we have been voicing the demands of the people, the old agreement was insufficient to fulfill these demands in the current situation so we are trying to make another agreement on the basis of a new consensus. The theme of this consensus must be to first announce a republic in order to uplift the different oppressed ethnicities genders regions and communities so they participate fully in the upcoming Constituent Assembly elections. For that the Communities of Women and Dalits must be given specific rights to participate in the interim government. Only then can the new Constitution be made in accordance to the will of the Nepalese citizens. This is the main aspiration of the Nepali Citizen today. Our party (Maoist) is always ready for that. Although we have joined the peace process, we are still integrating the strategies of People’s War and talks so there is less possibility of failure.

2. who do you think the public blames for the delay in the elections?

Since we started our People’s War to build the future of the Nepalese citizens we have waged the whole war for constituent assembly and we have written slogans on the walls saying “long live Republic, long live Constituent Assembly.” When we were doing this the Government [under the mainstream parties] arrested and even killed those people. And now the same people are blaming us for the delay. Shall we not remember that? Before the 19 day People’s uprising who was making the demands for Constituent Assembly and Republic? With this in mind, how can there be any confusion? Our 13,000 Martyrs sacrificed for Constituent Assembly and Republic so how can our party be against them? Therefore, those who were against them are the ones who are against Republic and Constituent Assembly.

3. What political development has most surprised you over the last year and a half?

Over the last year and a half we have concluded a huge ideological war. After the 12-point agreement we were able to isolate Gyanendra from the power of the Royal Army. Then we had the opportunity to speak freely among the Nepalese for whom we have been fighting for the last 11 years. As there is one army in this country of the government and one of the Nepalese citizens, we are able to force the government to give equal treatment to these two armies, as well as clear the charge made against us by the American imperialists that we are terrorists they had been popularizing to the world. Even now we are still trying to free the Nepalese government from the interference of European countries, America, and Australia who are exercising their hegemony. We are trying to balance the foreign strategies so we are not in the situation to be oppressed at their will. Our Party is the only party which is integrating all oppressed regions, ethnicities, genders, languages, cultures, all women and Dalits; understanding their sentiments in order to move them on the path of their liberation.

4. How have things changed for you personally over that time?

Things have changed so much since our last meeting because time is constantly moving [progressive]. According to that, human society is moving ahead. Therefor today’s Nepal is moving further ahead that yesterdays Nepal. In the same way, human society is becoming more conscious so there is a certainty of improvement. In the past there was an armed struggle of ideas. This category of struggle is not limited only to Nepal. It has become world wide because todays world has already become a fully integrated system. Finally, our ideological struggle is not only for Nepali citizens but rather for all the oppressed citizens of the world. Therefor, to have change in the politics of Nepal means to have change in the politics of the world.

Source: Blog for a Democratic Nepal, December 28, 2007

Nepal to be federal democratic republic

2007-12-29T14:07:00.000+05:30

3rd amendment clears deck for republic

The Interim Parliament on Friday passed a third amendment to the Interim Constitution, stating that Nepal would become a federal democratic republic after the Constituent Assembly poll. Parliament amended Article 159 of the constitution. The amendment reads: "Nepal will be a federal democratic republic." The amendment also says the decision would be enforced by the first meeting of the Constituent Assembly." The amendment provides for parliament, through a two-third majority, to abolish the monarchy before the CA poll if the government is convinced that the king is conspiring against the poll.

The amendment also formally transfers the position of head of state to the prime minister. A proposal by lawmakers from the three biggest ruling parties to make new arrangements for the appointment of parliament's general secretary and secretary, has been incorporated in the constitution. Speaker Subas Nembang verified the bill Friday evening, bringing the amendment into immediate enforcement.

This is the third amendment to the Interim Constitution in less than a year. The constitution promulgated on January 16, 2007 was amended for the first time in March following a month-long Madhes movement, and for a second time on June 13 after the government's failure to hold CA polls by mid-June. Altogether 270 out of the 321 existing members voted in favor of the amendment proposal tabled by the government early this week. This number mostly comprises members from the three biggest parties-Nepali Congress, CPN-UML and CPN (Maoist).

Only three members -- Pashupati Shumsher Rana and Krishna Pratap Malla of Rastriya Prajatantra Party and Pari Thapa of CPN (United) -- voted against the proposal. Four members, two each from Rastriya Janashakti Party and Sadbhavana Party, boycotted the voting. Surya Bahadur Thapa, Renu Yadav of RJP and Rajendra Mahato and Yagya Jit Shah of Sadbhawana boycotted the vote. Altogether 44 members, including former speaker Tara Nath Ranabhat of NC and KP Oli and Jhala Nath Khanal of CPN UML, were absent during the voting.

Earlier, the House rejected amendment proposals tabled by RPP, RJP, National People's Front and Sadbhavana Party. The proposals by RPP and NPF to drop the names of the seven parties from the constitution, reduce the proposed number of seats in the CA and let the first meeting of the CA decide the monarchy's fate were rejected by overwhelming majority.

Amendment draws flak

Most opposition parties and some ruling coalition members criticized the constitution amendment Bill tabled by the government for its failure to address the issues raised by Madhesi, Janajatis and other agitating groups. Former prime minister and Rastriya Janashakti Party Chairman Surya Bahadur Thapa and Rastriya Prajatantra Party Chairman Pashupati Shumsher Rana alleged that the amendment was a blatant assault on the people's right to exercise sovereign powers.

"Constituent Assembly elected through fresh a mandate of the people is the only body that can exercise the people's sovereign power," said Thapa. "If this crucial decision is taken by the seven parties then where does sovereignty rest on?" He also warned of severe consequences because of SPA's authoritarian attitude. RPP Chairman Rana also claimed that it was solely the responsibility of sovereign people who can decide whether to declare Nepal a republic state or not. Similarly, Pradeep Giri of the ruling Nepali Congress criticized his party for denying lawmakers a chance for intense discussions on the serious political issues. He said the amendment has failed to address the genuine demands put forward by Madhesi people, but lawmakers could not take up the issues.

Rajendra Mahato of Sadbhavana Party warned that parliament would be without Madhesi members if there is no change in the attitude of the ruling big parties. Likewise, Pari Thapa of CPN-United, Chitra Bahadur KC of National People's Front, Sunil Prajapati of Nepal Workers Peasants Party and Kaman Singh Lama of People's Front Nepal urged the government to ensure the CA polls by addressing the issues raised by Madhesi, Dalit, ethnic and backward communities.

Source: Kathmandu Post, December 29