Home arrow Archives arrow Round the World arrow Round the World 2008 arrow Trying Time for Nepal:INDIA FOR MULTI-PARTY DEMOCRACY, by Monish Tourangbam,25 November 2008
 
Home
News and Features
INFA Digest
Parliament Spotlight
Dossiers
Publications
Journalism Awards
Archives
RSS
 
 
 
 
 
 
Trying Time for Nepal:INDIA FOR MULTI-PARTY DEMOCRACY, by Monish Tourangbam,25 November 2008 Print E-mail

Round The World

New Delhi, 25 November 2008

Trying Time for Nepal

INDIA FOR MULTI-PARTY DEMOCRACY

By Monish Tourangbam,

School of International Studies (JNU)

The new and “confident” Nepal that Premier Pushpa Kamal Dahal alias Prachanda tried to showcase during his visit to India seems to be struggling to keep its house in order. The evolving nature of Nepal’s polity and the roadblocks ahead forms an important part of New Delhi’s assessment of its policy toward the nascent Republic. The just commenced visit of India’s External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee assumes importance in this context.

New power equations developed in Kathmandu as a result of the Constituent Assembly elections earlier this year and the Maoists entered the Government corridors after leading a violent and prolonged armed insurrection for nearly 12 years.

When the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoists) won the elections with an unprecedented mandate, much of the international community, including India was caught unawares. But, steadily New Delhi woke up to and made diplomatic overtures to put together a coherent response to the winds of change in the neighboring country that has strategic importance for our regional and larger foreign policy calculations.

The Maoists’ manifesto promised to overhaul the entire power-structure. In fact, the erstwhile ‘Himalayan Kingdom’ is now the ‘Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal’. But, the road of transition is far from over and the journey ahead will definitely not be a bed of roses.

The stability and the security of Nepal will always form an inevitable part of New Delhi’s foreign policy calculations. India’s primary concern will still be on issues regarding bilateral relations but at a time when Kathmandu is trying hard to put the peace process on track, India should seriously consider playing a more active role of mediation.

Complacency should be the last thing in the minds of Indian policy-makers looking at the power struggle and other issues of transition in Nepal, especially when growing inter-party and intra-party differences is seriously threatening to derail the peace process.

No doubt, the elections have brought a sea change in the political landscape of Nepal. The monarchy has been shown the door and is redundant to the point of becoming a relic. An elected Government is functioning and trying to define a new direction for the new Republic. A two-year time frame has been set to draft a new Constitution for the country and according to reports; the Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal could be unveiled on 28 May 2010. The unprecedented mandate given by the Nepali populace to the new Government seems to have brought in a new lease of legitimacy and stability absent before.

But, the peace seems elusive in the face of bitter in-fighting and the issue of accommodating numerous aspirations of various groups. And a ‘Himalayan task’ lies ahead of various parties and individuals involved who have to negotiate and bargain hard to bring about a compromise.

The Nepali Congress (NC) President Girija Prasad Koirala has said his Party would not accept the Constitution, if it is written without consensus with the NC. Moreover, there remains the uphill task of accommodating various armed groups operating in south Nepal’s Terai region.

It is unfortunate that a trust deficit between the NC and the Maoists is seriously undermining the prospects of the peace process. If the NC accuses the Maoists of being intoxicated with power and flexing its muscle during negotiations, the Maoists accuse the former of being unsporting in defeat and driven by Koirala’s ambitions. A consensual alliance between the two brought about the monumental elections, but the unprecedented triumph of the Maoists and the subsequent power-sharing negotiations have soured the relations.

The embittering relations between the two major Parties have negatively impacted upon the important issue of army integration and management. Two years have elapsed since a peace agreement was signed but Nepal still has two armies --- the Nepal Army and the Maoist Peoples Liberation Army (PLA). The ambiguous nature of the peace accord has only added to the complexity of the problem.

The accord talks about integration without going into the details leaving lots of space for differing interpretations.  While the Maoists opine that integration is the way to democratize the erstwhile royal army, the NC argues against it on the grounds that it would unnecessarily politicize the army.

The more fundamental sections of the parties have radical opinions, which might only prove more divisive. While the dogmatists Maoists demand full-scale integration, the NC right-wing leaders are totally against the integration process.

In an interview to the Nepali Times, the integration to the peace process said, “It is the backbone of the peace process. It is as important as the writing of the Constitution and both are directly linked with the peace process. There are some vested interests that don't want integration and want to derail the process. It is this that is hindering integration. This is a difficult issue, but not one that is intractable. One just needs to follow the clauses in the comprehensive peace accord.”

“Integration is not just about merging the two armies; we have to see it as a part of wider security sector reforms. We have to redefine our security strategy and terms of reference of the security agencies and their chain of command. The PLA is a guerrilla army, and the National Army needs guerrilla capability. The Nepal Army has a long history of professionalism, but was also feudal. So we are talking about an integrated army that has the best of both,” he further added.

Moreover, reports of a possible rift in the Maoists leadership are not helping matters. Serious differences have been developing between Nepalese Premier Prachanda and Maoist hardliners, including Mohan Vaidya on whether to consolidate the democratic Republic or pursue a Communist- style dispensation, with the former guerrilla Chief finding it difficult to get his views on the multi-Party system endorsed.

Prachanda has presented three options in his document: the 'Federal Democratic Republic' to be pursued immediately, 'transitional Republic' for the transitional period and the ‘people’s Republic’ as the ultimate goal of the Party. But Party’s hardliners, currently in majority, are not satisfied with his ideological document.

Although, Party leaders may deny the seriousness of the row, the division within the Party is open and in public. At the least, it is likely to impede Prachanda’s area of maneuverability and thus have a bearing on the future course of direction.

The debate and the negotiations raging in Nepal are a natural but crucial part in the evolution of the new Republic that can make or mar the achievements so far. At this juncture, it is imperative for India to keep its eyes and ears open.

Clearly, India should play a more active role of mediation in trying to bring the NC and the Maoists to deliberate practically on the contending issues and arrive at a pragmatic compromise. While speaking to the Nepali media in Kathmandu Foreign Minister Mukherjee expressed India’s support to the people of Nepal and reiterated its commitment to multi-Party democracy in Nepal. --- INFA

(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)




 

 

< Previous   Next >
 
   
     
 
 
  Mambo powered by Best-IT