& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

NEPAL: Between democracy deficits and insecurity

DR. ABDUR ROB KHAN
NEPAL is caught between democracy deficits and insecurity arising from persistent Maoist insurgency. At this point of time, it may be a little bit academic to ask: which is the cause or which is the effect? it remains a puzzle why Maoist insurgency is besieging Nepal at this vantage point of time when globalization, market forces and liberal multi-party democracy are the order of the day. The insurgency is doubly puzzling when it is by and large homegrown and its links with the outside world are tenuous at best. When Maoists struck security outposts in western Nepal in 1996, skeptic observers asked the question: can such insurgency survive? But the insurgency has by now spread into 73 out of 75 districts of Nepal, capable of engaging the armed forces in the heart of Katmandu and declaring unilateral cease-fire to suit the need for regrouping and consolidating their position.
Democracy deficits in Nepal arise basically from some structural factors. since multi-party democracy was restored in Nepal, regime stabil-
ity has been precarious as the political parties soon got engrossed in unhealthy rivalry. The first structural factor has been the deeply entrenched monarchy, which only unwillingly conceded to reduce its role to one of constitutional monarchy. The process got a rude shock following the massacre of the royal family and assumption of the mantle of monarchy by the brother of the assassinated king, Gyanendra. A further setback was when the King dismissed the Prime Minister and assumed executive powers. since then, the political parties have failed to realize their demand for restoration of democratically elected government. A second structural factor has been caste and ethnic differentiations, which continue to lend a feu-dalistic social order to the Nepali society. The benefits of development activities have hardly percolated to the lower caste and other ethnic groups. Political wranglings in Nepal continue divided even on tactical issues as far as peace talks with the Maoists are concerned.
Of course, in the twists and turns in Nepali politics, the Maoists are also changing tactics. Their original demands were abolition of the monarchy and election of a constituent assembly to draft a new constitution for a Nepali republic. With the Nepali King Gyanedra, assuming executive power, the Maoists seem to shift their
position by expressing their preference for the monarchy and suggesting an interim all party government.
However, the Maoists are reported to be suffering from internal splits. Very recently, two sister organizations of the Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist (CPN-M) - the Kirant Workers Party (KWP) and Madhesi National Liberation Front (MNLF) -announced their decision to severe their association with the Maoists and steer an independent course. After this split, the ongoing Maoist insurgency is believed to have entered a new phase.
Last month, newspapers had reported the killing of half a dozen Maoists in far-western region after an internal dispute broke out among them. Following the amnesty offered by the previous government, over 800 Maoist cadres deserted the insurgent group and surrendered to the security forces.
The impact of these developments on the Maoists' operational and organisational capacities, however, remains an open question. They have nationwide network and ideologically indoctrinated workers.
Meanwhile, the Government
claims that it has also somewhat blunted the Maoists' military capabilities. "Over the past few months, the Royal Nepalese Army has weakened the Maoists' military strength, " claims satchit sumsher Rana, former chief of the Royal Nepalese Army.
Nevertheless, the Maoists continue to demonstrate their prowess. On July 27, they injured 22 civilians with a landmine in the heart of Nepalgunj city, 450 miles west of the capital. Despite the split, evidently, the Maoists continue to hold and demonstrate their influence in the Terai. Moreover, The Maoists also declared a three day bandh in the Dhading, Nuwakot and Rasuwa districts on July 28, 29 and 30. Three trucks of food grains belonging to the World Food Programme were looted in Achham district, on July 3. On July 5, twelve police personnel and a civilian died in a roadside ambush by the Maoists on a police vehicle in Parsa district, which borders india. A clash between the Maoists and the security forces in Kache area of salyan District - 350 miles west of the capital - resulted in the death of 11 security personnel and 11 Maoists on July 6.
With the split in the CPN-M, the prospects of the peace process could also suffer further. The split has come at a time when the Government and leaders of major political parties are reviving efforts to restore negotiations with the Maoists. The split in the Maoist Front could mean that the
Government might now have to deal separately with multiple forces pulling in different directions. Although the CPN-M is still by far the most powerful organization, the Government cannot ignore the two other groups in case peace negotiations commence.
The prospects for such negotiations, however, are receding after the initial euphoria following the appointment of a new government on June 2, 2004. The sher Bahadur Deuba Government had promised to end the conflict through talks. Unfortunately, subsequent developments do not bear such optimism, and in a statement released on July 20, 2004,
Maoist 'Chairman' Pushpa Kamal Dahal alias Prachanda explicitly ruled out the possibility of an immediate cease-fire, criticizing the Government for stating that it cannot negotiate beyond the country's current Constitution. Prime Minister Deuba has also recently rejected the option of declaring a unilateral ceasefire.
Leaders of the Alliance that constitutes the Deuba Government, however, continue to pressure the Prime Minister to take 'bold initiatives' to bring the Maoists to the negotiating
table. "The Government must declare unilateral cease-fire," demanded Madhav Kumar Nepal, General secretary of Communist Party of Nepal - United Marxist Leninist (CPN-UML), "The Government needs to initiate the efforts."
Leaders of other major parties have echoed similar views. "You cannot judge the Maoist leaders on the basis of their press statements. They will sit on the negotiating table in case we provide credible security to them," said former Prime Minister and Nepali Congress leader, Girija Prasad Koirala,
Other leaders also remain strongly optimistic about such an eventuality. "The efforts made by us to restore peace are going on. There will be a major breakthrough in this regard soon," declared Deputy Prime Minister Bharat Mohan Adhikari. Civil society representatives and human rights activists continue to press the Government and the Maoists to immediately announce a cease-fire and re-engage in a peace process. "if the Government and Maoists both exhibit due seriousness, fruitful talks are likely," says Padma Ratna Tuladhar, a former facilitator of the talks between the state and the rebels.
At this stage, bringing the Maoists to the negotiating table appears to be a far from easy task.
The author is Director, BIISS, Dhaka