NEWS

WIRES

OTHER

Nepal: Foreign Assessment & Domestic Ground Realities

By Shashi P.B.B. Malla & Chandra Bahadur Parbate

The latest 'Executive Summary and Recommendations' of the prestigious 'International Crisis Group' (ICG/Asia report No. 128, February 26, 2007) once again highlights the fact that international observers frequently misread the signs in developing countries, impose their own world view and purposely engage in wishful thinking.

The above report sets out from the wrong premise that the formation of an interim legislature incorporates mainstream political parties. In the case of Nepal, the formation of this 'interim legislature' has been seriously flawed from the very start. This body is fully controlled by the cabal of the Seven Party Alliance and the Maoists (SPA+M).

Some political parties are not even represented and the whole membership is lopsided. No opposition is tolerated. The PM and the government ministers are above criticism, and no vote of no-confidence can be placed. The Maoists flaunt the very tenets of an independent legislature by carrying arms. It is, therefore, a pipe dream to expect that this legislature will "maintain leadership-level consensus while building a broad-based and inclusive process... (and ensuring) long-term popular legitimacy."

The developments of the last week have again highlighted the complete disarray of the political leadership and the Maoists. The United Nations Mission to Nepal (UNMIN) has advised that the total number of Maoist combatants registered at seven main and 21 satellite cantonment sites stands at 30,852, whereas the total number of weapons submitted by the Maoists is 3,426. In the light of these findings, the deputy prime minister and minister for foreign affairs, K.P. Sharma Oli (United Marxists-Leninists), has strongly questioned the amount of weapons officially declared by the Maoists. The Chairman and Great Leader, Comrade Prachanda tried airily to explain away the 'missing' arms by stating that most of their weapons were swept away by flooding rivers and raging fires! As Oli said, "The statements like the arms they (the Maoists) had used were swept away by the river are ludicrous, and by their behaviour they have not been able to assure the people that there is a free and fair environment in the nation."

But then why is the SPA-leadership not recognizing the irrefutable fact that the Maoist leadership wants to take everyone for a ride? Why are we allowing ourselves to be fooled all the time? The Maoists give a hoot for public opinion and sentiment; they are a law unto themselves. It is, therefore, most surprising that Koirala and Prachanda were voted "the most popular politicians" in a so-called 'nationwide poll' (which has definitely been blatantly manipulated) of the biased and India-oriented "Annapurna Post".

The ICG (unlike the SPA-leadership), however, takes the Maoists at face value and accepts their declarations lock, stock and barrel. At first the Maoists were very vociferous regarding their demands for a constituent assembly (CA). But now they have turned luke-warm. At the present state of affairs, as a direct result of the Maoists' attitude, it cannot be guaranteed that these elections would be 'free and fair', take place on time (June 2007), or even be held at all. The Maoists have now changed tack, and are using their vaunted pressure tactics to proclaim a 'democratic republic' prematurely, i.e. against democratic, legal and constitutional benchmarks. The latter might suit the Maoists just fine, given that truly free elections might not yield the outcome that they would like, especially if this republic is as democratic as all the other former socialist 'democratic' republics.

The ICG calls upon the international community to put pressure on all sides to abide by their stated commitments and global norms and to provide technical assistance for the electoral process. But it is a foregone conclusion that this will not yield much. As in many other parts of the world, 'the international community' has failed to react, and we should not expect much.

It seems that the ICG looks at developments here through western, rose-tinted glasses. In the process of decisively altering the traditional power structures (also a Communist-Maoist demand), it feels that this will encounter resistance from "conservative institutions" - not just the palace (forgetting that the monarchy is still seen as a symbol of unity, and can - together with the army - be a powerful vehicle of national integration), but also elements of the army (the only stabilizing force today), judiciary (the only independent and functioning constitutional arm or 'estate') and bureaucracy (which has been thoroughly politicized by SPA). At the same time, the ICG has recognized that only "a handful of SPA and Maoist leaders have controlled closed-door negotiations", and that this "process has concentrated on building elite consensus at the expense of intense political debate or extensive public consultation."

Considering that it has come to this assessment, the ICG contradicts itself by stating that warnings of a 'new dictatorship' are exaggerated, although "the peace process has so far delivered an oligarchy of party leaders rather than a popular democracy." When a small group of people control the government and the state without a popular mandate, and without a viable opposition, then despotism and tyranny cannot be far off. It cannot be explained away by calling it loktantra or total democracy. The ICG itself concedes that ad-hoc pre-negotiations of important issues has already undermined the constitutional process and that "no new constitutional order will gain legitimacy unless it visibly incorporates public input." Unfortunately, under the present regime we are a long way from this target.

In spite of the turbulence all over the country and specially in the south, the ICG gives a 'stable' slate to the current state of affairs, i.e. the country is ostensibly not in a state of crisis or conflict. In fact, the SPA-government has adopted an ostrich-like attitude vis-a-vis the burning Madhesi problem, and has become a victim and prisoner of the Maoists' "tried and tested tactics of intimidation and coercion." The UML has attempted a 'liberation blow' from the deadly embrace of the Maoists. In frustration, in view of the Maoist antics regarding arms management, the minister for culture, tourism and civil aviation, Comrade Pradip Gyawali has called on the CPN-UML cadres to seize the Maoists' weapons and submit them to the government! Such an enterprise is like chasing a chimera: first, the bulk of the Maoist weapons have already been hidden, and second, many of the UML-cadres are themselves Maoists by night, as the UML has been heavily infiltrated.

In another aspect, the ICG is absolutely on the wrong track when it asserts that "it is to the credit of Nepal's government and the Maoists that the peace process has largely been internally driven rather than internationally imposed." It is well-documented that India brokered the Seven Party-Maoist alliance in New Delhi, that India massively financially supported the mass agitation in April 2006, and that this had the backing of the United States, the UK, the European Community and the Scandinavian countries. All this induced regime change; but now these same countries look on helplessly at the inscrutable and uncontrollable hydra-headed monster of their own creation. And going by the dysfunctional policies of the present government, it can unreservedly be disputed that the key political players have in any way shown "a willingness to recognize and learn from past errors."

It is, therefore, to be expected that the well-meaning recommendations of the ICG to the government of Nepal, the Maoists, to the interim government (once formed) and the so-called mainstream political parties (i.e. the SPA constituents) will fall on deaf ears, because 'they have eyes and see not, and have ears and hear not.'

The writers can be reached at: shashipbmalla@hotmail.com