By Dhruba Adhikari
KATHMANDU-- If the absence of war alone can be considered a sign of peace, then Nepal could provide a basis for optimism. But ground realities here suggest otherwise.
A recently released index from Foreign Policy depicted Nepal as 25th most likely nation to become a failed state, out of the 60 most vulnerable countries. The group found that conditions in Nepal are not as bad as Somalia, Afghanistan and Uganda, but more disturbing than in Lebanon, Burkina Faso and Colombia.
But Nepal's beleaguered Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal does not like to present himself as the leader of a trouble-torn country, with a work style that more suggests "business-as-usual". He departed the country on Sunday evening for New York, where he is scheduled to address the United Nations on Saturday.
A recently released index from Foreign Policy depicted Nepal as 25th most likely nation to become a failed state, out of the 60 most vulnerable countries. The group found that conditions in Nepal are not as bad as Somalia, Afghanistan and Uganda, but more disturbing than in Lebanon, Burkina Faso and Colombia.
But Nepal's beleaguered Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal does not like to present himself as the leader of a trouble-torn country, with a work style that more suggests "business-as-usual". He departed the country on Sunday evening for New York, where he is scheduled to address the United Nations on Saturday.
Maoists are at the forefront of Nepal's upheaval. Unlike during the April uprising of 2006, when they abandoned a decade-long armed insurgency and entered the world of "competitive politics", the Maoist cadres are now carrying out attacks - both verbal and physical - on their rivals, leaving innocent people vulnerable and helpless.
The cadres are obviously executing orders from the Maoist leaders, who have publicly spoken about the need for another round of Jana-aandolan or popular movement. The chairman (and former prime minister) Prachanda and his deputy Baburam Bhattarai have begun arguing that a final push is needed to wipe out the remnants of feudalism associated with the monarchy, which was abolished in May 2008.
A manifestation of the Maoist resolve and determination to topple the "puppet regime" led by Nepal since May this year has surfaced on the streets of capital, Kathmandu and other parts of the country in recent weeks.
Much wrath is focused on President Ram Baran Yadav as well as Prime Minister Nepal and the ministers in his cabinet. They are greeted with black flags whenever they appear at public functions.
Maoists often try first to prevent such functions by placing roadblocks and engaging security personnel in fist-fights. If thisdoes not work, they sneak into the program venue and create chaos, pelting stones at the dais, shouting slogans and waving black scarves at the guests.
Last Wednesday, Maoist youths displayed insulting behavior towards Yadav when he was on tour at Lumbini, the birthplace of the Lord Buddha, as comrades in Kathmandu made the primeminister their target while he was conducting a university convocation. There, some dressed as gown-wearing graduates and threw stones on the stage as they jeered the prime minister. (The premier has faced the criticism that he is an "unelected leader" as he was twice defeated in April 2008 polls, but was made a nominated member of the assembly from where he was selected to the present post.)
The police briefly detained the protestors, including the daughter of Maoist leader Baburam Bhattarai. Although no serious injuries were reported, it was a serious enough incident to challenge the state authority under the present dispensation.
Guns have not been used in any noticeable way thus far, but credible threats to use them abound. "Guns will be used to confront guns," said Bhattarai in a recent public meeting in his home district of Gorakha, in the western hills.
In the meantime, there was highly charged atmosphere as a war of words ensued between the prime minister and Maoist leader Prachanda. In Prachanda's view, the prime minister is like "a hangman". The prime minister countered by describing Prachanda as a "bloodthirsty tyrant".
The prime minister has tried to look confident as well as tough, despite the fact that some of his senior colleagues in his party, the Unified Marxist Leninist (UML), are not supportive of his belligerent approach towards the Maoists.
Earlier, the Maoists said they would boycott public functions, beginning on September 6, to be attended by the president, the prime minister and ministers. They have said the boycott is in protest against a nominated member being prime minister. They say the elected members - the Maoist former rebels emerged as the largest political party in a 2008 election for a special constituent assembly after their 2006 ceasefire - are being denied the opportunity to lead the transitional government entrusted with supervising Nepal's constitution-writing process.
Maoists have also made the boycott "active" by using disruptive measures. Suddenly, the state security apparatus looks overstretched in protecting the politicians in power. The Maoist leaders are trying to convince the public that whatever is being done is for the establishment of civilian supremacy, as opposed to military supremacy.
Yadav and the premier are being controversially dragged into this. The contention is that the president took an unconstitutional step by issuing an order to rescue the Nepal Army chief, who was sacked by the prime minister for having defied legitimate government orders.
Prachanda resigned immediately, in early May, from the primeminister's post in protest. No efforts, the Maoists argue, were made to address the issue they raised. On the contrary, they say, someone rejected by voters was made the leader of an artificial coalition of 22 parties and subsequently appointed prime minister. Opinions are divided and a court case is pending over the constitutionality of the presidential action.
Meanwhile, the Maoists have taken the case to the National Assembly, disrupting its proceedings for several weeks. They have registered a resolution there seeking a debate on the validity of the president's action. The speaker rejected the demand on technical grounds, providing them a constitutional option to initiate impeachment proceedings against the president.
The Maoists are not taking this course because they know they don't have the numerical strength, of two-thirds, in the 601-strong Constituent Assembly (which also acts as the interim parliament). Instead, they resorted to the controversial, although not unprecedented, method of stalling house business. Maoistmembers of the house, however, have not stopped collecting their allowances, even when they are not working.
The main task of the Constituent Assembly is to draw up a republican constitution to replace the present one, by the end of May 2010. Progress is visibly slow, and not only due to Maoist activities.
Inside the house, members are squabbling over the basis for creating federal units, official languages of the republic - and a move for legislative control of the judiciary, something unacceptable to all except the Maoists.
Last week, a question was raised about the national flag, which, some said, does not represent inclusiveness. "Are not the sun and the moon, depicted on the flag, giving light and shine to all ethnic communities without discrimination?" said Ganesh Pandit, who once worked as a member of parliament after the democratic restoration of 1990. Time, energy and resources are being wasted recklessly, accentuating the concerns of Nepal's friends and donors.
The issue of how to find an amicable solution before dismantlingthe United Nations-supervised cantonments where nearly 20,000 former Maoist combatants are sheltered is far from resolved. Whether a democratic statute can be drawn up and whether the election to be held afterwards would remain free and fair is a matter of serious concern to all stakeholders. The Maoists want their fighters integrated into the national army, but the army is hesitant to accept what is sees as a politically indoctrinated force into its midst.
Contemporary events and trends indicate that Nepal is unlikely to have a new constitution by the agreed deadline. All that the leaders of the main political parties appear to be doing now is to look for a convenient pretext so that blame for inaction can be placed on their rivals.
No one is serious about their original pledge to take the peace process to a logical conclusion. The pledge requires them to work together and not engage in a game played in peacetime politics, at least until the country has a new constitution.
The interim constitution has a provision to extend the life of the assembly up to six months in the event the country is placed under a state of emergency. There could be an attempt to invoke this provision as some of the members may be tempted to retain the perks and privileges they enjoy.
There is also a premonition of a "political accident" which could nullify the democratic gains made since 2006. The feared "accident" may result in presidential rule with the help of the army. Another possible option is direct rule by the army. Kamal Thapa, head of a pro-monarchist party, appears hopeful of even the restoration of the kingship. His party, Rastriya Prajatantra Party-Nepal, has four seats in the 601-member assembly.
The reaction of Nepal's immediate - as well as more distant - neighbors might be interesting should it be placed under another form of transition. Those placing importance on stability and order might not object. And those who are averse to seeing the Maoist phenomenon spreading in South Asia also may look at the development favorably.
Maoists often try first to prevent such functions by placing roadblocks and engaging security personnel in fist-fights. If thisdoes not work, they sneak into the program venue and create chaos, pelting stones at the dais, shouting slogans and waving black scarves at the guests.
Last Wednesday, Maoist youths displayed insulting behavior towards Yadav when he was on tour at Lumbini, the birthplace of the Lord Buddha, as comrades in Kathmandu made the primeminister their target while he was conducting a university convocation. There, some dressed as gown-wearing graduates and threw stones on the stage as they jeered the prime minister. (The premier has faced the criticism that he is an "unelected leader" as he was twice defeated in April 2008 polls, but was made a nominated member of the assembly from where he was selected to the present post.)
The police briefly detained the protestors, including the daughter of Maoist leader Baburam Bhattarai. Although no serious injuries were reported, it was a serious enough incident to challenge the state authority under the present dispensation.
Guns have not been used in any noticeable way thus far, but credible threats to use them abound. "Guns will be used to confront guns," said Bhattarai in a recent public meeting in his home district of Gorakha, in the western hills.
In the meantime, there was highly charged atmosphere as a war of words ensued between the prime minister and Maoist leader Prachanda. In Prachanda's view, the prime minister is like "a hangman". The prime minister countered by describing Prachanda as a "bloodthirsty tyrant".
The prime minister has tried to look confident as well as tough, despite the fact that some of his senior colleagues in his party, the Unified Marxist Leninist (UML), are not supportive of his belligerent approach towards the Maoists.
Earlier, the Maoists said they would boycott public functions, beginning on September 6, to be attended by the president, the prime minister and ministers. They have said the boycott is in protest against a nominated member being prime minister. They say the elected members - the Maoist former rebels emerged as the largest political party in a 2008 election for a special constituent assembly after their 2006 ceasefire - are being denied the opportunity to lead the transitional government entrusted with supervising Nepal's constitution-writing process.
Maoists have also made the boycott "active" by using disruptive measures. Suddenly, the state security apparatus looks overstretched in protecting the politicians in power. The Maoist leaders are trying to convince the public that whatever is being done is for the establishment of civilian supremacy, as opposed to military supremacy.
Yadav and the premier are being controversially dragged into this. The contention is that the president took an unconstitutional step by issuing an order to rescue the Nepal Army chief, who was sacked by the prime minister for having defied legitimate government orders.
Prachanda resigned immediately, in early May, from the primeminister's post in protest. No efforts, the Maoists argue, were made to address the issue they raised. On the contrary, they say, someone rejected by voters was made the leader of an artificial coalition of 22 parties and subsequently appointed prime minister. Opinions are divided and a court case is pending over the constitutionality of the presidential action.
Meanwhile, the Maoists have taken the case to the National Assembly, disrupting its proceedings for several weeks. They have registered a resolution there seeking a debate on the validity of the president's action. The speaker rejected the demand on technical grounds, providing them a constitutional option to initiate impeachment proceedings against the president.
The Maoists are not taking this course because they know they don't have the numerical strength, of two-thirds, in the 601-strong Constituent Assembly (which also acts as the interim parliament). Instead, they resorted to the controversial, although not unprecedented, method of stalling house business. Maoistmembers of the house, however, have not stopped collecting their allowances, even when they are not working.
The main task of the Constituent Assembly is to draw up a republican constitution to replace the present one, by the end of May 2010. Progress is visibly slow, and not only due to Maoist activities.
Inside the house, members are squabbling over the basis for creating federal units, official languages of the republic - and a move for legislative control of the judiciary, something unacceptable to all except the Maoists.
Last week, a question was raised about the national flag, which, some said, does not represent inclusiveness. "Are not the sun and the moon, depicted on the flag, giving light and shine to all ethnic communities without discrimination?" said Ganesh Pandit, who once worked as a member of parliament after the democratic restoration of 1990. Time, energy and resources are being wasted recklessly, accentuating the concerns of Nepal's friends and donors.
The issue of how to find an amicable solution before dismantlingthe United Nations-supervised cantonments where nearly 20,000 former Maoist combatants are sheltered is far from resolved. Whether a democratic statute can be drawn up and whether the election to be held afterwards would remain free and fair is a matter of serious concern to all stakeholders. The Maoists want their fighters integrated into the national army, but the army is hesitant to accept what is sees as a politically indoctrinated force into its midst.
Contemporary events and trends indicate that Nepal is unlikely to have a new constitution by the agreed deadline. All that the leaders of the main political parties appear to be doing now is to look for a convenient pretext so that blame for inaction can be placed on their rivals.
No one is serious about their original pledge to take the peace process to a logical conclusion. The pledge requires them to work together and not engage in a game played in peacetime politics, at least until the country has a new constitution.
The interim constitution has a provision to extend the life of the assembly up to six months in the event the country is placed under a state of emergency. There could be an attempt to invoke this provision as some of the members may be tempted to retain the perks and privileges they enjoy.
There is also a premonition of a "political accident" which could nullify the democratic gains made since 2006. The feared "accident" may result in presidential rule with the help of the army. Another possible option is direct rule by the army. Kamal Thapa, head of a pro-monarchist party, appears hopeful of even the restoration of the kingship. His party, Rastriya Prajatantra Party-Nepal, has four seats in the 601-member assembly.
The reaction of Nepal's immediate - as well as more distant - neighbors might be interesting should it be placed under another form of transition. Those placing importance on stability and order might not object. And those who are averse to seeing the Maoist phenomenon spreading in South Asia also may look at the development favorably.
No comments:
Post a Comment