Saturday, January 07, 2006
Op-Ed
In Nepal it is a three-horse race once again
As the Maoist ceasefire ends, Yubaraj Ghimire argues that the king cannot delay reaching out to pro-democracy forces much longer
An experiment with peace by Nepal's Maoists worked quite satisfactorily for four months. The average of ten killings a day dropped down to less than one, and tourist traffic into the country increased by 15 per cent as guns fell silent in Nepal during the period. But on January 2, the Maoists declared an end to the truce and announced resumption of violence, asserting that "the right to revolt against the feudal tyranny is our biggest human right". In the first three days, there were about half a dozen explosions in different parts of the country, including one in western Mahendra Nagar in which three security personnel were wounded.
Maoists had declared the ceasefire unilaterally for three months on September 3, a week before King Gyanendra was scheduled to embark on a visit to the United States where he was expected to solicit international support for his campaign against "terrorism". US President George Bush sent across a humiliating message to the king around the same time to the effect that he would be among eight heads of state not to be invited during a reception he would be hosting if the king did not restore democracy. Adding salt to injury, major political parties wrote to the UN secretary general not to entertain the king as the legitimate representative of the country as "he had unconstitutionally appropriated executive power".
The international community's cold reception to the king's overtures had a visible impact on Nepal's internal politics. Maoists and seven pro-democracy parties opposing the king's takeover on February 1, 2005, found common cause under the banner of anti-monarchism. Maoists could not have achieved this rapport without putting their arms into disuse. In fact, the truce led to the two sides signing a 12-point charter of understanding on November 22 in Delhi, pledging to work together for a "democratic republic" within the framework of a multi-party parliamentary system. They agreed on the need for an elected constituent assembly which would decide on restructuring the state apparatus and design a new constitution to replace the one launched 14 years ago, following the end of the king's direct rule in 1990.
In fact, there had been doubts in political circles as well as in the international community about the Maoists' sincerity in professing allegiance to the peace process. Even the parties which had signed the memorandum of understanding had made it clear that they could not work together with the Maoists so long as they did not renounce violence permanently.
But now these parties are blaming the king more than the Maoists for the end of the ceasefire. King Gyanendra consistently turned down appeals from all sides - the UN, India, US and European Union included - to reciprocate the ceasefire and give peace a chance. The king's only concrete commitment to returning Nepal to democracy was to hold elections for 58 municipalities in the country on February 8, and then to the House of Representatives in April 2007.
The point is that the monarch makes little attempt to hide his hatred for major political parties, and that accounts for the reaction of these political parties. They have decided to boycott the elections. Maoists have said they would target candidates and government officials on election duty. Political parties say that they are committed to a sustained political movement for the establishment of a "full-fledged democracy" - while leaving space for a truly constitutional monarch.
Why did the government not reciprocate the ceasefire even when the Royal Nepal Army suggested to the king that "we should turn the situation to our advantage"? There are many theories floating around, but the one which sounds most plausible is that the king, surrounded by his coterie, is in a vengeful mood. He is apparently confident that the military solution alone will contain the "terrorists". Dr Tulsi Giri, vice chairperson of the council of ministers, even claimed that the Maoists felt forced to declare a ceasefire because "the government has broken their back".
Moreover, in the government's assessment, the understanding for the ceasefire was between the Maoists and the seven parties only, with no role provided for the government.
The international community has expressed frustration over the end of the ceasefire, an expression that is certainly not charitable to the king, and it has been reiterated that the conflict does not have a military solution. It has been followed by repeated appeals for a ceasefire by both sides, and cancellation of the proposed municipality elections, so that the king and political parties can initiate a substantive dialogue.
King Gyanendra has in months past assured UN Secretary General Kofi Annan that he is seeking a return to democracy. He said as much to Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh during their first meeting after the takeover way back in April 2005 in Jakarta. He repeated the same thing in Dhaka when they met at the SAARC summit. But he was more assertive - it was his model of democracy that he wanted to restore. Polls would be held under his regime, no matter whether major parties participated or not.
Meanwhile, the Royal Nepal Army with around 82,000 personnel is feeling the crunch as India and pro-democracy countries have stopped the regular supplies of ammunition. The government recently got 18 truckloads of arms and ammunition from China, but there are doubts whether the requirement can be matched from the north alone.
There is still no sign of political dialogue with the political parties and steps for the restoration of democracy. If the king does not change, that would be a sign that he is putting at risk Nepal's monarchy, an institution that is 237 years old. His unpopularity is rising by the day.
Nepal is at the crossroads. Which way it goes from here will depend on whether the king reaches out to pro-democracy forces, or augments the crushing power of the RNA with arms supplied by China.
Yubaraj Ghimire is a Kathmandu-based journalist
© 2005: Indian Express Newspapers (Mumbai) Ltd.