SPEAKING FREELY Nepal: Time
for compromise By Sanjeev M
Sherchan
Speaking Freely is an Asia Times
Online feature that allows guest writers to have their
say. Please click hereif you are
interested in contributing.
NEW YORK -
For more than a month now, the capital Kathmandu and
other parts of Nepal have been rocked by daily
pro-democracy rallies and anti-monarchy demonstrations.
The five opposition parties have been demanding either
the full restoration of the parliament dissolvend in
2002 or the formation of an all-party government, which
would then oversee fresh elections and try to bring the
Maoists back to the negotiating table. At times, the
pro-democracy demonstrations have even gone as far as
demanding a republican state and abolition of the
monarchy in Nepal. Recently, even previously disengaged
professionals have joined the fray, demanding an end to
attacks on press freedom and in support of the ongoing
pro-democracy movement. This is reminiscent of the
People's Movement of 1990 that incidentally restored the
multi-party democracy and brought an end to 30 years of
the one-party autocratic Panchayat system.
In an
interview with Time magazine (January 2004), King
Gyanendra maintained that the reason he removed the
popularly elected government of Sher Bahadur Deuba in
2002 was, in essence, to prevent further deterioration
of the Nepali state. More than a year and a half later,
nothing could be further from the truth. Nepal still
does not have an elected government; the Maoists
insurgency is still raging across Nepal; the democratic
parties have been sidelined, while the country grapples
to stem the deepening social, economic and political
crisis with no immediate breakthrough in sight. Nepal is
without a doubt in a worse state now than it was 18
months ago when the king assumed executive power and
installed his handpicked government.
To make the
matters worse, the ruling Rashtriya Prajatantra Party
(RPP) has compounded the political impasse by resorting
to force and highhandedness to disrupt the surging
pro-democracy movement. The RPP government had banned
all political gatherings (the ban has now been lifted);
declared Kathmandu and Lalitpur riot-affected areas,
arrested political leaders as well as scores of party
members and journalists, and severely cracked down on
protesters. Ironically, even the RPP, to which Prime
Minister Surya Bahadur Thapa belongs, has now come out
in the open, demanding an all-party government. This is
indicative of, more than anything, the lack of faith in
the king's appointed government. The king, meanwhile,
has ignored the demand of the five political parties and
does not seem eager to either restore the 2002
parliament or make way for an all-party government.
In the same Time magazine interview, King
Gyanendra also stressed, "? the people of Nepal want to
see their king, they want to hear from him." And to
demonstrate his point, he traveled across the country to
gauge the pulse of the nation, but more likely to assess
the public opinion of his popularity versus that of the
political parties. The king was greeted warmly at
various programs throughout the country (that was to be
expected since these programs were organized by his
supporters), while the capital continued to suffer from
daily protests, rallies, clashes between the police
force and demonstrators, further disrupting the lives of
the average citizens.
During the course of his
visits, the king had ample opportunity to make himself
visible and heard. We can only hope that he was equally
receptive and empathetic to the genuine grievances and
concerns expressed by the people about the situation
unfolding in Nepal. It would serve the country well and
more importantly, the king himself if he also listens to
the legitimate grievances of the people and tries to
understand why the political parties are infuriated with
his moves, which they see as his attempt to undermine
their utility.
We all know that the king is not
the only one to blame. The political parties and their
leaders must also shoulder their share of responsibility
for the worsening situation in Nepal. The political
parties have squandered many opportunities in the last
13 years to rise above petty politics and put the people
first. Nepal's democratic experiment has been fraught
with inconsistencies, instability, and rampant
corruption. It has failed miserably to fulfill the hopes
and aspirations for economic prosperity, equal
opportunities, and a greater political voice for all.
But, the Nepali polity is still maturing and to
discredit it by penalizing the very democratic process
is foolhardy.
King Gyanendra has on several
occasions pledged his support to multi-party democracy
and constitutional monarchy in Nepal. The time has come
to let his words translate into action, to stop blaming
the political parties and leaders for all the country's
ills, and to make way for an all-party government as the
first step in restoring democracy and securing peace and
prosperity in Nepal. For the political parties, the time
has come to let bygones be bygones (stop demanding
restoration of Deuba government of 2002), discontinue
daily street protests to reciprocate the king's
compromise (if he stops playing one party against
another, agrees to the formation of an all-party
government and does not violate the norms of the
constitutional monarchy) and uphold "Rashrtriya Mel
Milap" (national reconciliation), the policy of the late
B P Koirala. Only then can we all look forward to a
peaceful resolution of the current political imbroglio,
address the Maoist insurgency, and solve the pressing
social, economic, ethnic and other needs of the country.
King Gyanendra and political parties, please note.
Sanjeev M Sherchan is program officer
for South and Central Asia Programs at the Asia Society.
These are his personal views.
Speaking
Freely is an Asia Times Online feature that allows guest
writers to have their say. Please click hereif you are
interested in contributing.
