Dirgha Raj Prasai
Dear editor, News Blaze.
I read the report -‘Human Rights to Be Second-In-Command in Nepal’s Army’ by ORCHAR. We, Nepalese people are anxious reading the biased report of the Chief of the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights-Nepal (OHCHR-Nepal), about the promotion of Major General Toran Bahadur Singh to lieutenant general and second-in-command of the Nepal Army despite widespread opposition. Why is it that OHCHAR-Nepal cannot understand the reality of the Nepal Army.
I am political analyst, although, I know Major General Toran Bahadur Singh is one of the honest man in our society. He is always supporting the Human rights on all fronts. The promotion is not controversial. So, respectfully, I suggest, not exercising in futility. So, I request for the correction of the mistake of ORCHAR. As we all know, the main objective of UNMIN is to establish peace in Nepal, but UNMIN have been found working against the peace process in Nepal. Nepalese people had expected that the UN’s role would be impartial. But the UN could not remain neutral.
The UNMIN listens only to the Maoist rebels and the corrupt leaders of the so-called big party and totally disregarded the aspiration of the majority of the Nepalese people. By hatching such conspiracy of the UNMIN teams are working to push Nepal into a bloodier civil war and conflict. So, UNMIN & ORCHAR’s misunderstanding is the main cause of the crisis in Nepal.
Two years ago, UNMIN’s military chief Jan Erik Wilhelson damaged the neutral role of the UN and propping up the rebel forces. Does it indicate his neutral role and his effort to establish peace in the country when he participated in the function or even become the guest of honors accepting salute from the Maoist rebels at the function organized by the Maoists on the day they attacked the Nepal Army’s barrack, killed so many army men and looted weapons.
When the National Army is inside the barrack, does it indicate the establishment of peace as he tried to present the Maoist militia at par with the National Army? It is all clear that all the YCL are Maoist militias and except a few hundred all those who are in the Maoist cantonments were new recruited and untrained bunch of people. Earlier, they said that their number was only 8,000. But later, the UNMIN and the Maoists worked together to present their number at (32,000 19,600 (confused) A few people have prevailed inside the UNMIN.
The Maoists and the UNMIN have only put old and out of order weapons in the cantonment and they kept all modern weapons and those they had looted from the army and the police with themselves. How can there be a lasting peace in such a situation? Isn’t it that they are trying to play with the future of Nepal? Then, ORCHAR can’t judge?
From the very beginning, UNMIN has been demoralizing the Nepal Army and supporting Maoist and its rebel by allowing them to keep the weapons with them in the cantonment and let them start the youth force (YCL), who can be the law and order itself as they used to do during their revolution. Nowhere in the world, would a country be able to protect its sovereignty by making the national army weak and powerless? As Nepal is a sovereign country, Nepalese army is free to do anything for the country.
But, UNMIN is going to demoralize the sovereign Nepal’s Army.
UN General Secretary Ban Ki-Moon also misguided from UNMIN and Ban Ki-Moon has urged for a national government participated by the Maoist. And he asked the government for not recruiting new personnel in the Nepal army and also not providing lethal arms to the Nepal army, a national security force. The national army can’t compare with the Maoist’s army. Now, in Nepal, we have two kinds of army- the national army and the Maoist’s army. Can we imagine two kinds of army in a country? Why UNMIN and ORCHAR are not responsible for the overall management and supervision of Maoist army and their movement?
Dirgha Raj Prasai
Former Member of Parliament, Nepal.