Yubaraj Ghimire - Nepal: A fragile peace
Every political actor
and power centre seems to agree that the country needs to be rescued from the
mess it is in. And each one has a cure ready, but for the others. No one seems
willing to introspect. Narayankaji Shrestha, vice-chairman of the ruling CPN (Maoist
Centre), met several Indian leaders in Delhi - Ram Madhav (BJP) to Sitaram
Yechury (CPM) - last week to tell them that “Indian interference in Nepal’s
internal politics must stop, and let Nepalis run their own politics”. In a way,
he was blaming India for the prolonged transition towards a constitutional
republic and most things - from politics to the economy - going wrong in Nepal.
But he also subtly warned Indian “friends” that more political mess ups will
bring the monarchy back.
The Communist Party of
Nepal-Maoists, a splinter group of the Maoist movement, led by Netra Bikram
Chand aka “Biplab” is currently holding its “secret national convention” in
far-west Rolpa, which is likely to announce a “parallel” government and
insurgency, something the Maoists did between 1996 and 2006. Over 17,000 people
died in the conflict.
Meanwhile, the
dethroned king, Gyanendra Shah, who of late has been issuing appeals to the
public “to make the leaders accountable for things going wrong and save the
country”, set out on a two-week trip to Madhesh to assess public mood and the
possibility of monarchy’s return, giving credence to the fear that Shrestha
expressed in Delhi.
Parallel to these
developments, Rastriya Prajatantra Party, a unified version of different pro-Hindutva
groups, held its first “unity conference” and left it for the national meet to
decide whether Nepal’s status as a Hindu kingdom must be restored. In the
ancient Janakpur city, India’s former ambassador to Nepal, Shiv Shankar
Mukherjee, said Thursday in a seminar attended by leaders from the Madhesh
region that democracy can not be institutionalised in Nepal until and unless
Madheshi issues are addressed.
Immediate amendment to
the constitution giving a larger share of seats to Madhesh in local bodies,
provincial and federal legislature as demanded is being resented by the main
opposition, the Communist Party of Nepal-Unified Marxist Leninist. The CPN-UML
wants the local bodies poll to held by the end of May, without amending the
constitution. Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal will have to decide by next
week whose side he wants to take. In the meantime, routine administrative
issues like who should be appointed the new police chief is dividing the Nepali
Congress, the biggest party in the ruling coalition.
Valerie Julliand, UN
resident coordinator, met Prime Minister Dahal Thursday, and expressed her
dissatisfaction over adequate powers not being given to the Truth and
Reconciliation Commission to investigate alleged human right excesses committed
by the state and the Maoists during the conflict. She also gave clear hints
that any move to withdraw the “heinous crimes” against any side of the conflict
will be against the practices that the UN believes in.
In the midst of all
these political developments, Nepal’s economy is showing signs of unprecedented
downslide. A 400 billion trade deficit in the first half of the financial year
and a banking system facing a liquidity crunch, which has forced the real
estate business to grind to a halt, have the potential to fuel further mass
fury and discontent. People may not care whether there is an election, but the
government and the political forces will be forced to account for their
failures. A strong political will and a serious effort is called for from the government
to deal with the situation, which is nowhere in sight. None of the political
actors have expressed willingness to introspect or own up responsibility for
the state’s failures.
Politics continues to
be largely power-driven, with principles and ideologies pushed to the backseat.
The Maoists are trying to forge an understanding with the main opposition, UML,
to stay afloat should the Nepali Congress withdraw support. However, what seals
the fate of these parties as well as the current constitution is a mandatory
provision in the document which says the federal parliament shall cease to
exist on January 21, 2018, and a fresh House, provincial legislature and local
bodies elected before that. With so many disagreements among parties, the
chances of the country missing the 2018 deadline are real.
However, there have
been no serious attempts to bring all the stake holders, especially the parties
and forces that expressed reservation over the way power and the
constitution-making process has been monopolised by certain groups in the past
decade, together. The peace process and political changes manifested in the
constitution both remain fragile. The renewed threat by a splinter Maoist group
to revive insurgency is a clear proof of that.
