| |
Foreign envoys play politics in Nepal
By Rita Manchanda
KATHMANDU
- Nepal's diplomatic community is clamoring for an
active role in mediating the Himalayan kingdom's
eight-year Maoist insurgency struggle, as violence from
the conflict continues.
Multilateral donors are
insisting that to take development to the grassroots,
where it is most needed, Maoists, who control the rural
areas, need to be involved. However, the palace-army
ruling clique and the Maoists say that Nepalese need to
sort out their own affairs.
King Gyanendra's
refusal to meet Britain's special envoy for Nepal, Sir
Jeffrey James, when he visited at the end of September,
signals the palace's unwillingness to hear what the
diplomatic community has to say about the need for
rapprochement with the agitating political parties to
isolate the Maoists.
"The continued lack of
representative institutions at the national and local
level will seriously erode the principles and practices
of parliamentary democracy," James warned.
But
the palace seems to be in no mood to sack the king's
nominated government, led by Prime Minister Surya
Bahadur Thapa. The political parties have been agitating
since the king intervened on October 4 last year,
dissolved parliament, and took over power.
The
triangular nature of Nepal's polity - the monarchists,
the political parties and the Maoists - has enabled "the
Maoists to tactically exploit the five months agitation
of political parties to win concessions from the king",
said an ambassador who declined to be named.
Consequently, after the seven-month old
ceasefire and peace process fell apart in August, the
ambassadors of the United States, Britain, India, China
and even Pakistan, in a very public show of diplomatic
activism, met the top leaders of the two major political
parties in the dissolved parliament, the Nepali Congress
and the left party UML, to encourage a united front of
all the "constitutional forces" against the Maoists.
Meantime, Nepali officials rebuked the meddling
by the US, Britain and Indian ambassadors. "We take the
suggestions, goodwill and efforts of friendly countries
in a positive way, but it would be much easier for us to
resolve the present crisis if they would confine their
activities to diplomacy," said an official.
The
political parties welcome a proactive diplomatic
community. Sarita Giri of the Nepal Sadbhavana party
feels optimistic because "we [five parties] are united
and the foreign community this time is taking the
political parties more seriously".
For the
political parties, however, the more immediate crisis is
the constitutional one that for them undermines the
legitimacy of the current government.
"Once the
representatives of the people are back in power, the
Maoists challenge can be addressed," emphasized Subhash
Nemwang of the UML. "The Maoists repeatedly called for
direct talks with the king, because this government has
no representative authority, its unconstitutional," he
said.
However, the Maoists' Baburam Bhattarai
has said that it would make no difference which "puppet
regime" was in power, as real power is wielded by the
king and army.
Ironically, the palace and the
Maoists agree that foreigners should leave Nepal alone.
Maoist leader Prachanda has written to UN Secretary
General Kofi Annan to stop all "foreign armed and
otherwise interventions in Nepal and let the Nepalese
people decide their own future".
Indeed,
Prachanda has recast the revolutionary struggle as "a
national war of liberation" because of the involvement
of foreign powers, especially the US, which critics say
has turned the Royal Nepal Army into a "Royal American
Army".
Bhattarai has singled out the US as the
spoiler of the peace process and castigated its
"imperialist designs" on Nepal as reflected in
ambassador Mike Malinowski's remarks to a Nepali
fortnightly.
The US government "will step in
when we see freedom violated and our interests
threatened", Malinowski said. "We have our interest and
the interest of our friends in mind so where we can help
out and where we are asked to help out, then we will."
Britain, too, is anxious to help. British
special envoy James emphasized Nepal's lack of
procedural skills in conflict resolution as contributory
to the failure of the talks. "There is much
international expertise available on conducting peace
processes and that could be made available to Nepal," he
said. "Of course it's up to Nepal to decide."
The latest to join the chorus is the charge
d'affaires of the European Union, Rudiger Wenk, who
warned that the European Commission's assistance program
of US$9.38 million might be jeopardized unless the
government shows a willingness to address the conflict
as the situation was worsening. "I had made it known
repeatedly, but without any concrete result," he said.
In October last year, the EU had approached the
Nepalese government with an offer to act as mediator.
The European parliament had voted a motion offering the
appointment of a special envoy for Nepal to mediate
among the conflicting parties.
With
international donors accounting for about 75 percent of
the development budget and budgetary support assistance
from the World Bank and International Monetary Fund
needed for Nepal to put resources in the security arena,
the international community has substantial clout in the
country.
What do the Maoists think? Robert
Needham of the Association of International NGOs notes
that despite the shrill anti-foreigner rhetoric from the
rebels, grassroots programs on the whole have continued
despite a clear pullback from field operations.
Another representative of a large agency,
preferring anonymity, spoke of the increasing pressure
of extortions, vulnerability to the whims of local
Maoist commanders and a blockade imposed by the security
forces that restricts the transport of food, medicines,
cement and pipes.
At the beginning of Dashain
festival season this month, 10 international agencies
published an appeal to be allowed to continue to do
development and humanitarian work, identifying basic
operating guidelines.
(Inter Press Service)
|
| |
|
|
 |
|
