Nepal beset by chaos and conjecture
By Dhruba Adhikary
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.
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 this does 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 prime minister 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 prime minister'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.
Maoist members 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 dismantling the 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.
Dhruba Adhikary is a Kathmandu-based journalist.
(Copyright 2009 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please
contact us about
sales, syndication and
republishing.)
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
