Nepal's Government Agrees to Pay Maoist Fighters in Camps

Liam Cochrane

Nepal's government has agreed to begin making monthly payments to Maoist former rebels now living in U.N.-supervised camps. In return, the Maoists will allow the United Nations to resume efforts to verify the former fighters' identities, and check for child soldiers in the camps. Liam Cochrane reports from Kathmandu.

For seven months the former fighters of Nepal's Maoist party have stayed at 28 camps across the country, as part of a peace deal made last year.
Under the deal the Maoists agreed to abandon their armed rebellion and join an interim government and parliament.
The United Nations has registered more than 31,000 Maoist fighters, but has yet to verify that all troops are over 18 years old. It also wants to check to be sure new fighters were not recruited after the peace process began.
Last month, the Maoists blocked U.N. verification until conditions were improved in the camps and salaries were paid to their fighters.

Nepal's Cabinet decided Monday to give a monthly allowance, equal to $46, for each Maoist fighter in the camps, which are also known as cantonments.
"I think we have solved a major problem with cantonments," said Krishna Bahadur Mahara, the spokesman for the government and also a senior Maoist leader.
Mahara said the monthly payments would be given to all 31,000 Maoists currently in the camps, not just those verified by the U.N. to be legitimate soldiers.
The Cabinet decision on allowances could mean a breakthrough for the U.N. verification process - a key part of last November's peace deal.

"UNMIN has been ready to do this process now for the last couple of months, so this would be very good news and we would seek to meet with the Maoist leadership very soon so that we can iron out the details and commence that process," said Kieran Dwyer, the spokesman for the U.N. Mission in Nepal.
The United Nations says it can begin verification within days. Final arrangements must first be cleared by the Joint Monitoring Coordination Committee, a body made up of representatives from the U.N., Nepal government and Maoist army.

Source: Global Security.Org, May 21, 2007

Nepal: The Koiralas’ Crown Compulsions

For Prime Minister Koirala, seizing that middle ground between the monarchy and the Maoists became the first order of business. By playing off the palace and the Maoists against each other, Koirala succeeded in bringing the former rebels into government.

Sanjay Upadhya

Contrary to all outward appearances of ambivalence, the Nepali Congress appears to have cemented the centrality of the monarchy to its identity. Each new reiteration by Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala of the inevitability of a republic has encouraged some of his closest associates in the party to articulate the crown’s continued relevance with greater clarity.
This affinity, to be sure, does not stem from an underlying affection. Shared class characteristics, as the Maoists like to point out, may be responsible to some degree. If anything, political pragmatism is the prime compulsion for the Nepali Congress.
The precise details of the April 24, 2006 compromise between the Seven-Party Alliance and King Gyanendra – if there was one in the first place – remain under wraps. For Prime Minister Koirala, seizing that middle ground between the monarchy and the Maoists became the first order of business. By playing off the palace and the Maoists against each other, Koirala succeeded in bringing the former rebels into government.

In formalizing the postponement of the constituent assembly elections after roping in the Maoists, Koirala exhibited, more than anything else, his vaunted party-building skills. Maoist chief Prachanda saw where things were headed. Sensing a trap, key associates began to feel they might be better off staying out power. In retrospect, the feverish bargaining over rank and portfolios right up to Koirala’s departure for the SAARC summit in New Delhi provided a convenient cover for all the protagonists.
Prachanda has been making obligatory allegations of betrayal to fortify his flank within. The Maoist chief understands how perilous the peace front of his “people’s war” can be. Despite all the other good things his Young Communist League is doing, the bad ones are hogging the headlines. For the country, it no longer matters how deep the internal split in the Maoists really runs. The nationalism and revolutionary planks in their platform have decayed the fastest.

In the legacy-building stage of his political career, Prime Minister Koirala may have grasped Nepal’s broader options. Vignettes from his previous stints in power must be swirling around him. Facing massive street protests against the Tanakpur accord in 1992-94, Koirala certainly did not relish those pleas by some normally sympathetic Indians for New Delhi to distance itself from the man. The escalation of the Maoist insurgency, the political instability preceding the Narayanhity Massacre and the wider convulsions it created must have encouraged deeper introspection.
After King Gyanendra took over full executive powers in October 2002, Koirala and the Nepali Congress, like much of the mainstream, were at the nadir of their popularity. While other leaders geared up for the looming collision with the palace, Koirala considered his own vulnerabilities. When the palace-appointed government purportedly agreed with Maoist negotiators to limit the army to a five kilometer radius of the barracks, Koirala became the first leader to criticize this infringement of state sovereignty.

That statement became part of a wider dynamic that ultimately shut the door on a palace-Maoist deal that would have bypassed the parties. The bonus Koirala sought – and may have succeeded in getting – lay in plugging that vulnerable hole Tanakpur exposed.
Last year, when Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh welcomed him to New Delhi as a South Asian statesman, Koirala must have found it hard to suppress that chuckle inside. For someone who had a hard time scheduling meetings with then-premier Atal Behari Vajpayee during the early years of the anti-palace movement, this was quite a leap – and illusory.
Koirala was too close to his illustrious brother not to have experienced the exasperation B.P. Koirala felt in the late 1960s before abandoning efforts to renew relations with Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. During the eight years B.P. was imprisoned at Sundarijal, time had not stood still.

B.P.’s subsequent years in exile must have occasioned ample review of his brief tenure as Nepal’s first elected premier. When Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru declared in parliament in November 1959 that any external aggression on Nepal and Bhutan would be treated as an aggression on India, B.P. felt compelled to respond.
Speaking in the Nepali legislature, Koirala said he took Nehru’s statement as an expression of friendship, but added that Nepal, being a fully sovereign and independent nation, decided its external and home policies without ever referring to any external authority.
Over a week later, Nehru affirmed he agreed entirely with Koirala’s interpretation, but not without disclosing the secret letters that had been exchanged with the 1950 Treaty. Of course, B.P. did not have the benefit of hindsight to see how his battle with the palace would only set the stage for a larger phenomenon that would marginalize the Nepali Congress for three decades. If B.P. considered exile in Sarnath a lot like Sundarijal, who could have understood this better than his youngest brother.

In his current tenure, Prime Minister Koirala has become a changed man. He is an ardent champion of China’s entry into the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation as a full member. The prime minister appeared unconstrained in seeking the new Chinese ambassador’s help on ensuring smooth petroleum supplies as the Indian Oil Corporation began tinkering with the taps.
In the cryptic maneuverings that pass for Nepali politics, these moves may be devoid of real substance. Yet coming from Koirala, the symbolism becomes starker. It was not too long ago, after all, that he flew straight into New Delhi from talks in China, left alone to battle the diplomatic fallout. Unlike B.P. Koirala, age has made this prime minister less susceptible to external “penalties” for flaunting his independence. This allows him greater leeway to build his legacy.
The logical question here is whether Koirala can impose his views on a party that largely considers itself the principal victim of the palace. Koirala is the Nepali Congress. Those who broke away under Sher Bahadur Deuba in mid-2002 had an opportunity to prove otherwise. The country recognizes how far anti-Koirala-ism has worked. For most of the younger Koiralas competing for the family mantle, the monarchy remains a pivot. Party members who disagree are most welcome to find another tent.

This brings us to another area where the Koiralas have proved particularly adroit. By allowing the communist factions monopolize the so-called “progressive/left” banner, the Nepali Congress can blur the distinction between the Unified Marxist Leninists and the Maoists, especially in those crucial western eyes.
When the Maoists relentlessly blame international power centers for conspiring to retain the monarchy, the Nepali Congress can afford to nod in affirmation and sit back. Prachanda and Co., by their own logic, have a long way to go toward establishing the scope and structures of republicanism as a viable alternative. Prime Minister Koirala, meanwhile, can continue uttering those obligatory republican sentiments.

Source: Nepalnews, May 22, 2007

Road To Economic Progress

Amrit P. Shrestha

What the modern industry needs is better infrastructure. Traditionally, infrastructure services across the world were provided by governments in limited areas like airports, electricity and roads. Today infrastructure must improve in all parameters, which requires immense financing through external and internal channels. Without basic infrastructure development, no sector can achieve any sort of target. To keep the wheels of the economy running, countries must make enormous progress in attracting private investment in the infrastructure sector, as the government alone cannot invest huge amounts in it. In order to send the right signal to international investors, there is a burgeoning need to create sophisticated infrastructure in selected key cities and projects as seen in Beijing, Shanghai and Kuala Lumpur, which have emerged as the investor's choice in the last three decades.

Infrastructure needs three key inputs - large amounts of money, skilled manpower and selected projects. Governments must realise that the only way to become the nation's doorway to economic zoom is to give new thrust to infrastructure development. Thus, the Essential Facility Doctrine has been recognised by most of the developed and developing countries. Australia, Singapore, South Korea and India have been adopting the doctrine. Investment requires long-term funds with a long payback profit period. More importantly, Public-Private Partnership (PPP) is a signal to investors in general that the policy framework is sound and environment conducive for investment. Such models have to be initiated in key sectors like roads, airports, power and tourism. Nepal lacks the necessary physical infrastructure to qualify as an international investment centre. Investments must have easy access, and there should be well-developed infrastructure within acceptable parameters. At present, we must have suitable strategies to convert challenges into opportunities. Better infrastructure helps in alleviating poverty and expanding the industrial base because accessibility to services improves as a result of it.

Currently, GDP's contribution to infrastructure development is less than 4 per cent, which is less than the share of our neighbouring countries. Actions must be accelerated on the following track, to help build trunk infrastructures in the country. First, Modernisation or industrialisation require massive expansion of national highways, airports, electrification and telephones linking every village with the urban areas. Ground water exploration, minor irrigation, water supply and sanitation are other priorities. Highways form the economic backbone of the country. Likewise, rain water harvesting and human resources management must be developed, which is sorely lacking in the country. Given the size of the country, air travel has become the swiftest mode of transport. Hence, Nepal should take bold steps to expand and upgrade its airport infrastructure. Second, among the bottlenecks to achieving growth in the country is electricity supply. Power and its allied sector play a crucial role in economic development. Electricity is the lifeline of our lives as its use ranges from mundane applications to complex tasks and operations. Our productivity is affected because of this.

Third, the tourism industry could gather momentum if the government plans innovative promotions. Tourism should introduce new products such as monsoon tourism, helicopter tourism and the like. Such programmes will attract visitors, especially from India and Europe. With Nepal becoming a business hub especially for tourism, regional disparity can be minimised upto a certain extent. Likewise, growth of tourism will help enrich the lives of traditional workers and artistes. Unfortunately, lack of roads, accommodation, safety measures, well established communication systems and hospitality management centres are some of the hurdles in its promotion. Fourth, building IT Parks in important cities can offer a unique confluence of advantages - robust physical infrastructure, power and data connectivity and trained technical manpower. All this will effectively reduce the operational cost. Fifth, there is a need to hand over the entire infrastructure development to the private sector with no political interference. There should be no bureaucratic controls over enterprises. They should not be asked to get approval for minor decisions.

Sixth, an act to form an independent Infrastructure Authority, similar to the National Highways Authority in India, Afghanistan, Laos and the Philippines, has to be announced without delay. Meanwhile, a vision paper with priorities and national consensus must be flashed, emphasising on infrastructure development to attract investors and also to make the entire cycle of investment, productivity and wealth creation sustainable.Seventh, special packages of tax incentives must be introduced as a tool to encouraging private enterprises or an undertaking engaged in the development of infrastructure facilities. This is particularly important for infrastructure developing companies. Human developmentMost importantly, the overall environment needs to be free from prevailing corruption and petty-mindedness. For the common man, good economics is all that he cares. The government should accelerate the process of human development by delivering services in electricity, transport, water and sanitation that the poor need in order to live and participate in economic growth. A leader of outstanding merits, efficient bureaucrats and a graft-free culture are the invisible infrastructure to race with the modern world. Let us start from a good today to a better tomorrow.

Source: The Rising Nepal, May 22, 2007

Foreign policy: A realistic approach is needed

Madhav Shrestha

Nepal’s foreign policy is continuing on its old path despite the dramatic changes that have been experienced in the region and beyond. Notwithstanding the dramatic political changes at home, there seems to be no visible indicator of which direction the new Nepal needs to take in order to achieve its twin goals of security and socio-economic development. Time is ripe for Nepal to decide its course of action in its external dealings in light of the developing regional and international scenario in the last one and a half decade. Regrettably, the domestic political scene is fuzzy and unpredictable.

Experts on international affairs believe the world is now less politicised and more interconnected as a result of technological advancement. Eminent authors like Jacques Derrida, Michael Foucault, Jacques Lacan and Slavoj Zizek are noted poststructuralists who have highlighted the forces of technology replacing politics in interstate relationship. They imply depoliticisation sustained by technology that guides the management of foreign policy, initiated by technical experts in tandem with bureaucrats.

But the world would never be depoliticised till the decision-making power remains under the grip of politicians. True, the behaviour of the key political players in foreign affairs is now more influenced by non-political elements. But politics is still a highly important ingredient in international affairs. An eminent writer, Jenny Edkins, thinks so because visible fights between democracies and non-democracies are a reality now. This is undeniable under the globally prevailing circumstances. A weaker country like Nepal with a fledgling democracy has to look into the intricacies of interstate relationship. This is imminent as Nepal needs to make its external journey both pragmatic and expedient to keep up with the evolving trend.

In this context, observers believe that the underpinning components of (a) connectivity (b) commonality (c) conditionality and (d) compatibility are now the most important elements in the conduct of the foreign policy of Nepal as its relations with the internal community, and international and regional organisations are realistically related. Experts believe that ground realities instead of lofty ideals and assumed principles need to chart the course of foreign policy.

First, in execution of Nepal’s foreign policy, the highly realistic importance of connectivity, especially geographic and contractual, assumes top priority in its dealings with India and China. Of course, our historic connectivity with the UK and the US cannot be undermined. This element should indeed lay the foundation to build on our relations with those countries. There should be no emotive feelings while trying to achieve the primary objective of constructing appropriately designed contacts with them.Second, the need to see the commonalities between the problems of the underdeveloped and land-locked countries around the world is of no less concern. In reality, prevalence of poverty in other countries like Nepal naturally compels them to unite to make their voices heard in international forums. The united stance taken by the countries of similar socio-economic backgrounds could, in turn, help the developed countries see and help cure their festering wounds. Nepal together with like-minded countries should move ahead in initiating the policy to work together.Third, the question of conditionality should also capture the attention of those who implement the country’s foreign policy as challenges of terrorism, extremism and separatism remain as destructive forces hovering over the nations that vow to fight such evil tendencies.

Nepal, as a country suffering the consequences of such nefarious elements, should work towards making international alliance comprising the nations in similar plight in order to root out such ills. Alliance for such purposes should remain in place until forces with sinister motives are dead and buried.Fourth, the question of compatibility, if the above components are embraced, will hardly arise in the conduct of Nepal’s foreign policy as it does no harm to us or to any country which enjoys bilateral contacts with Nepal; nor will it restrict the option of any country to act independently as a sovereign and responsible political member. Nepal as an independent political entity need not deviate from what it has embraced for long, nor feel constrained to participate in the international forums gainfully. In the prevailing situation, these factors are cogent elements that Nepal should embrace, instead of deliberating on other non-realistic concerns, to steer its foreign policy towards the achievement of greater national interests. Nepal can safely conduct a consistent and coherent foreign policy with the adoption of these new elements on the basis of a realistic approach. There needs to be no deviation from Nepal’s independent stance as well.

Source: The Himalayan Times, May 22, 2007

Adventure Tourism

ADVENTURE tourism has been steadily gaining in popularity over the years. This form of tourism is a new concept, which a country like Nepal possessing immense potential for such tourism should be able to cash on. Nepal's lofty mountains have been attracting mountaineers from all over the world, thereby, contributing to raise the standard of people working in various expeditions. Besides the money accruing from mountain tourism has been percolating to the grassroots level benefiting the people who reside in the remote regions of the country. The mighty mountains will continue to lure mountaineers who cannot resist the challenge of ascending them. Besides the mountains the country is blessed with numerous mountain rivers considered to be among the best for rafters. For them there is nothing to beat the thrill of shooting the rapids of these exotic rivers. The tourists apart from enjoying the rafting will be able to sight various attractions en route such as the way of the living of the people residing by the riverside.

The lifestyle varies even in short distances. This and other things would make the experience of white water rafting in Nepal unique. It is now up to the tourism entrepreneurs to promote the rivers of the country for rafting. Should they succeed in doing so then this would be another form of attraction for adventure seeking tourists. What is interesting to note is that rafting is also slowly gaining in popularity amongst the Nepalese people. This should by all account be encouraged for this would not only provide the rafters kicks but also contribute to the equitable distribution of income. In this context, rafting a programme to promote rafting in the Trishuli River is being organized. The programme envisages giving a fillip to domestic and foreign tourism by exploiting the potential of rafting. Adventure tourism is now recognized as one of the important forms of tourism. Publicizing rafting in now a policy of the tourism industry. There are many rivers in Nepal famous for rafting. The rivers like Karnali, Kaligandaki, Trishuli, Bhotekoshi and Sunkoshi, among others, are considered to be among the best for adventure rafting. As there are many other rivers in the country, which are equally ideal for this purpose, they could also be opened for rafter. As the rivers originate in the high altitude Himalayas the flow of the water in these is of great speed. Thus, promoting rafting would help boost the local economy at the same time raising the national revenue.

Source: The Rising Nepal, May 22, 2007