Speakers: Amb. Bek Bahadur Thapa & Dr. C. Raja Mohan

The seminar focused on major issues in Nepal after the restoration of democracy in the country. The following questions were addressed: What really happened in Nepal? What will be consequences till the period of convening the Constituent Assembly? And, what are the implications for India?

Amb. Bek Bahadur Thapa

Nepal is in a very critical situation, which is unfolding by the hour. From 1950, whenever there is a change in Nepal, New Delhi has been involved. In the past, traditional or feudal or conventional forces made use of the failure of the newly emerged forces, and to strengthen and regain their position. But this time, the curtain has fallen rapidly and heavily on the conventional forces and surprisingly, radicalism has gone beyond the control of the present Nepali leadership.

In 1990, the new rulers failed to satisfy the people's social, political and economic aspirations. Subsequently, governance weakened, leading to the strengthening of the monarchy and allowed it to become a major player. As a result, a section of the people took to guns and started an insurgency and occupied the political space with their radical ideologies. A large part of the countryside came under the control of the Maoists. The two major conflicting parties - the Maoists and monarchists - pushed the political parties in to the background. Corruption, partisanship, nepotism, personal and party interests came to the fore at the cost of national interests.

Understanding the difficulties in the political process, local and international alliances tried to bring the extremist forces in to the national mainstream. In this context, the 12-point agreement was signed between the political parties and the Maoists with the help of elements in India. But, the monarchy and its supporters have aggravated the situation, in which national and international actors have played a major role.

Recent incidents have brought both the extremist forces to the mainstream to benefit the country from not only its neighbours, but globally too, and made it a responsible member of the global community. Despite the extreme pressure and threshold position, the political parties and the Parliament have been performing slowly but steadily towards keeping the people's aspiration and responsibility. The global community needs to seriously look at Nepal because it will be extremely difficult to manage the critical situation in the near future. The political parties are likely to have major problems in addressing issues of displaced people, rehabilitation, reconstruction and other governance measures.

The time has come to carve out a framework for cordial relationship between India and Nepal by understanding complexities and realities of the issues. In recent times, there was enormous amount of media and international attention on Nepal. This has resulted in hijacking the agenda before it is formulated. It might take Nepal to a pre-1990 situation. In this context, it would take some time to refine policies and formulate a framework for action. Nepal is in the final stages of political transformation and it is hoped that it can defend itself and establish an effective government.

Dr C Raja Mohan

The current issues in Nepal can be placed in three categories: Larger implications on South Asia and future of India's role, future direction of the political process in Nepal and challenges for India's foreign policy towards Nepal.

While looking at the issues around South Asia, disappointment is widespread against non-governance and inactive governments, which has significant implications. Recent events in Nepal exemplifies that the revolutionary forces have been bringing decisive structural change in terms of the balance of power in different segments in the system. It is now very important to look at the methodology of power shift from one party to the other. Similarly, there are serious doubts over the Maoists' intentions. It appears that they are essentially waiting for an opportunity to grab power. Now, the important issue is whether political parties have the capacity to hold talks with the Maoists. The removal of the King has obviously given power to the political parties, but the effectiveness of transfer of power through elections and Constituent Assembly will be another major concern. Most of the peace talks have collapsed over the question of disarmament and decommissioning. At present, important issues are control over the coalition parties in power, managing Maoists' arms, inclusive peace talks and conditions for reconciliation.

The change in Indian strategy has created a base for transformation in Nepal. Until last year, India's policy was to bring the mainstream forces, political parties and the King together and put pressure on the Maoists. After realising the difficulties in bringing parties and the King together, India decided to bridge the differences between the Maoists and the parties in November 2005. Yet, the international community, including India, was not prepared for revolution that emerged in the country. Now the guiding principle for India would be to maintain the primacy and supremacy in any future operations or policies inside Nepal. If Nepal has changed decisively and fundamentally, India's manipulative policy will not work anymore. It has to formulate a set of positive and enduring policies.

Comments:

1. It is important to question whether India's policy towards Nepal has been on the right track or not. It has not improved in terms of relationship between the countries. It is urgently required to formulate a broader understanding keeping in mind the ground realities.

2. The Maoists have evolved with a more attractive and radical ideology and have finally made a strategic alliance with the seven-party coalition. They have not given up their idea of a republic, but they might not insist on it for some time. Once the Constituent Assembly removes the King, the situation would allow the Maoists to acquire power, which will be a more sensitive issue for India. Although China has not supported the Maoists, there are chances of China using Nepal against Indian interests if the Maoists come to power.

3. According to a sociologist perception, Nepal has been experiencing a sort of decompression. Does one have the time to sort out the problems and allow a gradual decompression? The Maoists have not given up their earlier modalities of operation such as extortion, donations, punishments etc. Governance has not been established in major part of the country. At this stage, prolonging the problems might indeed aggravate the situation with adverse implications for India.

4. The Maoists have expressed their willingness to stop the armed struggle and participate in the democratic political process, hoping that this way they are going to dominate the future Constituent Assembly. If the political parties prove to be unpopular in the coming years, the rebels might repeal the ceasefire agreement and take over power in the country.

5. Even when the government has not said anything about the peace process, the Maoists have initiated this with the release of their 12-point roadmap. As they have mentioned about an interim Constitution, India could assist to draft the new Constitution replacing the inconsistencies in the 1990 Constitution. Secondly, weakening the Nepalese Army would allow the Maoists to take over power easily. Thirdly, Nepal should acknowledge the Indian position while considering international involvement in the country.

6. The parties are still weak, divided and their capacity must not be overestimated. The proclamation would not have been announced, if there were no protests on the streets. The Maoists are moving very well in their agenda by engineering the roadmap. Therefore, it is a question of time before the Maoists take over power.

Questions:

1. Is the army still with the King? Is there any possibility of a counter-revolution by the army?

2. How long will the alliance between the Maoists and the political parties sustain?

3. Is there anything that the international community, including India, can do for Nepal in terms of finding a peaceful solution?

4. What are the Maoists real interests? Will they evolve into mainstream politics in the future?

Answers

According to reports, the army and security force chiefs have expressed their support to the Parliament and there is very little chance for them to go against the people's will. The Nepalese Army has never acted independently. By and large, it abides by the Constitution. Therefore, there will be no political or power ambition for the Nepalese Army if we look at its past behaviour and experience. The real change of Indian policy towards Nepal took place in 1990, when it sided with the people. But the hangover of the 'big brother' attitude of India must be overcome.

The country is under a sense of insecurity and fragile in terms of political stability because of the growing radical ideologies of different actors competing with each other. The critical challenges need to be addressed in Parliament and a national consensus evolved with the assistance of India.

The situation is unfolding on an hour-to-hour basis, and the difficulties of transition are unavoidable. There is a need for a change on India's monopolistic attitude over Nepal and sincerely acquire a mature policy of accommodation. It is important to leave the Nepali Parliament to decide what Nepal requires. China has been maintaining a steady policy towards Nepal and it would continue in future as well.

If the democracy is the meeting point for the monarchists, Maoists and centrists, there is a hope that the genuine 12-point agreement would bring the Maoists to mainstream politics. But still, the rebels continue to carry arms, which is the major concern for internal and international forces. There is a need to manage the transition with wisdom, courage and sense of accommodation from the concerned parties.

Concluding Remarks

There are two messages that come out loud and clear from the discussions. First, there is a fear of the ascendancy of the Maoists, particularly from India because of their alliance with Maoists on the Indian side of the border. The other message is the problem of transition.

It seems that the threat posed by the Maoists is exaggerated. When the rebels were capable of taking over the palace and declaring a Marxist republic, they did not do that, but responded with ceasefire and a high sense of commitment to the multiparty system. Now, they have joined the political parties and proceeding with the transition with a deep sense of responsibility. The political parties and the people have been both reacting responsibly with spirit in this crucial transition period in the country.