mikeldunham

Mikel Dunham’s Interview with the Prime Minister of Nepal, Pushpa Kamal Dahal, aka “Prachanda”

 

 November 16, 2016

 

  

Since 1990, when Nepal adopted a multi-party democracy, there have been 24 prime ministers – basically a new prime minister annually for the last two-and-a-half decades. It’s hardly a recipe for a stable government, let alone a nascent democracy.

 

The shift has been a violent one. In 1996, a communist insurgency was launched by a little known Maoist group led by Pushpa Kamal Dahal aka Prachanda, (his nom de guerre). Prachanda rapidly amassed an army of armed rebels, who fought the government’s security and military forces for the next ten years. More than 15,000 Nepalis died. The government put a “wanted dead or alive” $64,000 bounty on Prachanda’s head. By 2005, it became obvious that Prachanda’s “People’s Liberation Army” would never defeat Nepal’s army. So he joined hands with the country’s bourgeois parties to bring down the enormously unpopular King Gyanendra.

 

In April 2006, a country-wide uprising called the “19-Day Revolution” forced the king to step down, clearing the way for Prachanda and his Maoist party to enter into the legitimate political arena. In 2008, national elections were held and to the surprise of almost everyone the Maoists won the elections. Prachanda became the first prime minister of the newly named Democratic Federal Republic of Nepal.

 

Prachanda’s tenure lasted but nine months. He resigned on 4 May 2009 after he failed in his attempt to sack the army chief, General Rookmangud Katawal.

 

In the interim, six prime ministers have come and gone. In August of this year, Prachanda was once again elected prime minister. This time, the challenges of ruling Nepal were, perhaps even more daunting than during his first tenure: He inherited the task of rebuilding a Nepal that had been ravaged by the horrendous earthquake of 2015.

 

Five days ago, 12 November 2016, I had the opportunity to be the first American journalist to interview Prime Minister Prachanda since he came to office. It was at his Kathmandu residence, Baluwatar.

 

.....

 

DUNHAM: Thank you for fitting me into your busy schedule, Mr. Prime Minister. For the last four days, Americans have been preoccupied by one thing and one thing only: the U.S. election resulting in the victory for President-Elect Donald Trump. I have to admit that Trump’s success came as a complete surprise to me, as it did to most Americans, including Republicans. The divisive tone of the long campaign, the anger and the aftermath has forced Americans to re-think what their country represents. All bets are off as to what will happen next. But the dramatic shift in government is going to have an impact on the entire world. How would you characterize Nepalis’ reaction to Trump’s victory?

 

PRACHANDA: Thank you very much. It is not only surprising for all the media and intellectuals of America, but people all over the world are surprised by the results of the American election. As the prime minister, I have already congratulated Donald Trump. As a curtesy. It is my duty. Anyway, as you say, the result of the American election is not only concerning for Americans, but also all over the world.

It clearly indicates some sort of new trend going on in the world. The traditional democratic status quo is going to be – according to my analysis – it is going to become a narrower, more nationalistic reality. Something like that. It is going to be along the lines of a more conservative era. In that sense, it is neither a positive nor an encouraging development. That is my observation.

 

DUNHAM: First, we witnessed Brexit, and now this, and in France, Marine Le Pen, leader of the far-right National Front party sees Trump’s victory as a sign of new hope for her party. Likewise, the far right Netherlands leader Geert Wilders sees Trumps’ victory as an omen for his personal success – not to mention the undercurrent of Neo-Nazism in Germany and a far right movement in Italy. It does appear this pattern is making headway throughout the Western world.

 

PRACHANDA: Exactly. And I am saying that the pattern is emerging not only in America and Europe, but everywhere, including in South Asia.

 

DUNHAM: South Asia?

 

PRACHANDA: Yes. The pattern in India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, everywhere, we can see that this kind of trend is developing, which indicates a narrow nationalistic conservative movement that is gaining momentum.

 

DUNHAM: Your country suffered a tumultuous earthquake in April 2015. I was here at the time and saw the devastation firsthand. Many Americans were deeply moved by the catastrophe. They really cared. And even if they didn’t know much about Nepal – home of Mt. Everest, end of story – they did empathize with the strife and damage they saw on TV and donated money to help rebuild your country. But a big question for donors is: Why has it taken so long for the Nepal Reconstruction Authority (NRA) to distribute relief aid? What is behind the delay? And now that you are back in power, how can you facilitate the process, get it moving forward?

 

PRACHANDA: This is a very sensitive issue, you know. First of all, I want to convey our heartfelt greetings to all those who supported us in that devastating earthquake. Not only this or that country, but all over the world – they have supported us in our relief and rescue operations and even in the reconstruction process.

But unfortunately, here in Nepal, we could not manage to accelerate the process of reconstruction. According to my observation, the major problem we are facing is the political transition, you know. We are in an historic period of transition. Just last year, we declared the new constitution through the Constitutional Assembly and we are facing the problem of implementing that constitution. And the political stability has not been achieved fully and completely. Therefore, the political situation was made more difficult by the earthquake.

Immediately upon assuming the role of Prime Minister, I tried to focus my attention on the reconstruction process. And I gave a deadline that, within 45 days, the first round of support should be disbursed into the hands of the people, the victims of the earthquake. My observation is that the indications are now positive. I think that things will soon change in a positive direction. 

 

DUNHAM: So you think that the international community will see progress by the beginning of next year, January 2017? Will we see substantial distribution of funds and aid?

 

PRACHANDA: I think so.

 

DUNHAM: Also, there were a lot of countries that pledged money but – as of yet – have not followed through with handing over their pledged donations. That’s very disappointing.

 

PRACHANDA: Yes. We are in continuous discussion with those countries that pledged help but have not yet delivered. We may make some changes in our regulations, norms and values for the reconstruction. I’m in the discussion and I am very much hopeful that, within this interaction, we will be able to create a more positive and enthusiastic atmosphere for donors.

 

DUNHAM: Let’s talk about the new constitution. This morning, I read that on November 15 you plan to table the amendment, which has been holding up a full-fledged implementation of the constitution and really needs to be done in order to move forward with the democratic process. In terms of time restraints, you only have fifteen months to get all of this accomplished.

 

PRACHANDA: Yes. Yes.

 

DUNHAM: It’s a tremendously complicated situation that Americans don’t understand. There are almost 300 laws that have to be passed before the implementation can be completed. You have to delineate the local and state boundaries. You have to hold elections. You have to appease the Madhesi political parties, which is another big hurdle. How realistic is the fifteen-month time-table? What are the main challenges you face in order to get all of this accomplished?

 

PRACHANDA: Yes, the situation is more complicated than people might think. It’s not so easy to accomplish these three rounds of elections within fifteen months. There are many challenges. But I believe that we can organize the election and accomplish the implementation of the constitution within the fifteen-to-sixteen-month timeframe. Later today, I am going to have a final discussion with the parties in power and even with the opposition party and other small parties, and I intend to finalize the draft of the amendment of the constitution. Whether or not there will be an agreement, I’m going to register the resolution for the amendment. And through this process, I believe the Madhesi, Tharu and other peoples who are demanding the amendment of the constitution will support our efforts, although they may not agree completely, although there may be some reservations and notes of dissent. And ultimately, the amendment will pass through parliament, at which time I will declare the local elections first.

 

DUNHAM: Let me ask a cynical question: Do you think that parliament is really motivated to pass this as soon as possible? New elections may result in them losing their seats in parliament.

 

PRACHANDA: I think they are motivated. But, even if parliament cannot pass the amendment by a two-thirds majority, Madhesis and Tharus and janajati will participate in the election. That has already been agreed upon. Therefore, I am very much hopeful that I will be able to organize the election of the local bodies, to be held in March or April of 2017. And I’m planning to have the provincial and national elections held at the same time. It is not impossible. It can be achieved. It can be organized.

 

DUNHAM: You are optimistic.

 

PRACHANDA: Yes, we’ll have only two rounds of elections – first the local elections and next the provincial and national elections – and there is sufficient time. No problem. And as you asked earlier about the election-related bills, some of them have already been passed and others are in the parliamentary process. Therefore, there will not be a law-related problem.

 

DUNHAM: As you may know, I started coming to Nepal in the late 1980s –  

 

PRACHANDA: Yes, and thank you very much for your positive concern about the whole political, economic and cultural aspects of Nepal. I want to thank you for your concern.

 

DUNHAM: It’s been continually fascinating to watch the changes in Nepal. In 1990-91, for instance, I witnessed the big shift from the panchayat system to the multi-party democracy. Then the aches and pains of implementing a democracy, followed by the Maoist insurgency, the resultant power-grab of the government by the then-King Gyanendra, followed by the Janaandolan II of 2006 [the “19-Day popular uprising], followed by the ousting of the king, the declaration of a republic in 2008, and now the promulgation of a new constitution.

I think most Americans have the idea that, if you want to establish a democracy, it’s more or less a matter of flipping a few switches. As I’ve witnessed in Nepal, it takes a lot of hard work and it takes many years for a new democracy to run smoothly. And the obstacles are not just always internal ones. Throughout this process, Nepal also has had to contend with the needs and wishes of its powerful neighbors, China and India.

Take India, for example. Of particular interest is the build-up of Indian security forces along the southern Nepali border. Would you say their build-up is justifiable?

 

PRACHANDA: The question you have raised is a very sensitive and delicate issue one. First of all, I agree with you that there are so many ups and downs and twists and turns in the last two decades that Nepal has passed through. It is also something very unique. We had an insurgency for ten years that took thousands and thousands of lives. And that created a tremendous historical political change in Nepal – from autocratic monarchy to a federal democratic republic, in political terms.

Sometimes I say that it is a miracle. As the leader of the insurgency, I took part in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA). I signed the agreement. And I participated in the competitive democratic election. I became the leader of the single largest party. And I became the first prime minister of the Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal in 2008. This was surprising, you know. This was something very unique and just like a miracle.

In my first term as prime minister, I had very little experience about this multi-party democratic competition and all the dynamics of this democratic system. According to my judgement, it took me nearly one decade to understand the dynamics. Now, I’m fully confident that I can move ahead and understand the dynamics of the system.

At the same time, (as you raised the issue of Nepal’s relationship with India and their presence along the border area), we have a very unique geopolitical situation, which you understand very well. We are in between India and China, two giants. And we are landlocked. Not exactly landlocked, but India-locked from the east, south and west. Because of that, we must have a good understanding and working relationship with India. Without it, it very difficult to safeguard our independence and move forward to economic prosperity.

At the same time, we should have to work on new options and alternatives for Nepal. If we are solely reliant and dependent on India, it will not help us, ultimately. We are trying to create a conducive atmosphere to have some new alternatives with China and other parts of the world. There should be some trade, transit, whatever possible with countries other than India.

 

DUNHAM: Last year, Nepal signed an agreement with China to buy a significant amount of petroleum. Has that agreement been completed?

 

PRACHANDA: The agreement has not been completed. We are trying to develop the protocol of that agreement. The process is moving forward. I am for moving forward and completing that agreement.

At the same time, we are trying to have a good understanding with India. Without having a good diplomatic understanding with India, it is very difficult to balance all these things. Previously, when I was in the insurgency, I was leading the “People’s War”. At that time, India deployed their SSB [border security force] along the border area. Now that we entered into peace process, we have witnessed a huge democratic transformation. But unfortunately, the Indian deployment along the border has not been withdrawn.

 

DUNHAM: Has the Indian deployment increased?

 

PRACHANDA: Not exactly increased. It is as it is. But we want to have a good understanding with India and through different channels, we are in interactions. I am very hopeful that, ultimately, we will have some sort of new agreement about the border issues and problems. These will be solved by mutual understanding. Recently, for instance, I visited Delhi and had a very good interaction with the leadership of India. I am very much hopeful.

During that same trip, I visited Goa for the BRICs and BIMSTEC summits. [In economics, BRIC refers to Brazil, Russia, India and China, which are all deemed to be at a similar stage of newly advanced economic development. BIMSTEC is the acronym for The Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation, an international organization comprised of

Bangladesh, India, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Bhutan and Nepal]. I experienced a very positive and fruitful discussion in Goa.

But to answer your question: I am hopeful that within a short span of time, we will be able to create a more positive and trustworthy atmosphere along the Indian border area.

 

DUNHAM: In terms of international relations, I don’t think India helped its image, when it imposed a strangling embargo on Nepal right after the 2015 earthquake. I experienced that firsthand. I was working as a consultant for an American NGO called Operation USA, based in Los Angeles, which is building a school in Fyakse –

 

PRACHANDA: Where is that?

 

DUNHAM: Fyakse is in Dhading District. The school is almost finished. Operation USA –unlike many NGOs helping in the reconstruction of Nepal after the earthquake – had no problem pursuing a project that was away from the Kathmandu Valley. This was important to me because I wanted to select an isolated area otherwise overlooked. I was here trying to facilitate the construction of the school at the time of the embargo and saw – up close and personal – the additional hardship this put on the Nepali people: On top of all their other problems, now they faced the cutting off of petroleum imports, which created a multitude of problems including getting materials to sites that were undergoing reconstruction. My point is that there have been many instances in which the Indians have been very heavy-handed when dealing with Nepalis. They certainly haven’t won the hearts of most Nepali people.

But some of their concerns with Nepal are, I think, understandable. They are concerned about Pakistani terrorists coming through Nepal in order to enter India illegally from the north. Also, there are indications that, from time to time, suspected Pakistani terrorists have been spotted in Nepal. Do you think the Indian government needs to be concerned about the possibility of Pakistani “bad players” – of using Nepal as their transit country?

 

PRACHANDA: I think that in the whole of South Asia, the relationship between India and Pakistan is very sensitive. And it has implications throughout South Asia. Always, we are very much concerned about it. We want to create the atmosphere of trust and confidence between all the nations here in South Asia. I think that India may have some serious and genuine concerns over their security issues. We have always tried to address that genuine concern. But Nepal can’t be blamed. Always it is asserted that terrorists are coming from Pakistan and through Nepal. We cannot say like that. We are also having good relations with Pakistan. This is their job and we do not want to be engaged in that issue.

I will say this: We do not want to let our soil used by any terrorists, whether they be from Pakistan or from any other country that might be against either India or China. We want to create a positive atmosphere to address that genuine concern of India and China. Do you understand?

 

DUNHAM: Yes, I do understand. And in terms of the northern border of Nepal, you have beefed up security up there. To prevent people from crossing out of Tibet into Nepal. You are having to play two games at the same time. The one in the south and the one in the north. You’re trying to maintain a peaceful relationship between India and China.

 

PRACHANDA: Exactly. That has been dictated by our history and geography.

 

DUNHAM: You can’t redraw the map.

 

PRACHANDA: Exactly. You understand this very well.

 

DUNHAM: One last question. Do you have upcoming plans to visit China as Nepal’s Prime Minister?

 

PRACHANDA: I’m in discussion with China’s leadership about that. But first I want to invite and welcome the President of China here, in Nepal. The last time that I had the opportunity to discuss this with him, I invited him, not only in the diplomatic and delegation setting, but also during our one-to-one conversation. He said that it was possible that he might come as early as January or February of next year.  And I am always ready to visit China.

 

DUNHAM: Thank you very much for taking time out to meet with me, Mr. Prime Minister.

 

PRACHANDA: Thank you very much for your positive concern for the overall development of Nepal. And you love Nepalese people. For a long time. This is great.

 

 

.............................................................................................

 

 

 

Maoist Prachanda becomes Nepal’s 8th Prime Minister in Eight Years

 

August 3, 2016

 

Today, former communist rebel leader Pushpa Kamal Dahal aka “Prachanda” officially became Nepal’s new Prime Minister, which makes him the 24^th prime minister in the last 26 years, one of the key reasons contributing to Nepal’s ongoing instability.

 

The parties that supported his election included Nepali Congress, Sanghiya Gathabandhan, Madhesi Janadhikar Forum-Loktantrik, Rastriya Prajatantra Party, among others. Out of 573 votes cast in the parliament, 363 were in favor of Prachanda.

 

It was a foregone conclusion, since Dahal was the only candidate. This is Dahal’s second time as prime minister.

 

Analysts dismiss the idea that the regime change indicates any agreement within parties as to how the nation should move forward. Rather, it is regarded as a move of convenience – stalling for time. A deal is already in place to change the prime minister nine months from now. 

 

Nepali Congress leader Sher Bahadur Deuba is expected to take over from Prachanda before Nepal holds a general election at the beginning of 2018.

 

Prachanda and Deuba are unlikely political allies.

 

Deuba headed the cabinet that offered a bounty of 5 million rupees ($50,000) for Prachanda in 2001, at the peak of the insurgency. Two years later, Maoist guerrillas shot up Deuba's convoy in west Nepal, but he escaped unhurt.

 

 

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

 

 

Major change in Nepali government: Oli out, Prachanda back in

 

July 25, 2016

 

 

Yesterday, CPN (Maoist Centre) Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal aka 'Prachanda' announced that he was all set to make a comeback as Prime Minister of Nepal, a week after the Nepali Congress and Madhes-based parties pledged to throw their weight behind him.

 

The resignation of Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli earlier in the day paved the way for Prachanda to become the 39th Prime Minister of the Himalayan nation.

 

He got the coveted post in 2008 for the first time when the Maoists became the largest party in the Constituent Assembly but the stint did not last beyond one-and-half years.

 

Though the Nepali Congress and the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist Centre) had moved a no-confidence vote against Oli, which was due for continued discussion followed by a vote thereon in Parliament on Sunday, Oli announced his resignation minutes before the discussion -- begun on Friday -- recommenced.

 

According to the constitutional provisions, President Bidhya Devi Bhandari will call on Parliament to install a consensus-based government within seven days, which seems a difficult proposition as the second largest party -- the Oli-led Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist-Leninist) -- is all set to stay in the opposition.

 

The single largest party, the Nepali Congress, has already extended its support for Prachanda and signed an agreement that the former Maoist leader will lead the government for the first nine months.

 

Thereafter, Prachanda will hand over the leadership to Nepali Congress President Sher Bahadur Deuba.

 

 

As per the agreement, Prachanda will hold local elections that have not been held for the last 20 years, while Deuba will hold elections to the provincial assemblies and Parliament during the remaining nine months.

 

 

………………………………………………………………………………………….

 

 

Profile: Nanda Bahadur Pun, former commander of Maoists’ rebel army named Nepal’s new Vice President

 

October 31, 2015

 

Nanda Bahadur Pun, (better known during the 10-year civil war as  “Comrade Pasang”), was elected today as Nepal’s new Vice President.

 

He is 50 years old and a member of the Central Committee of the Maoists’ party UCPN.

 

Until today, Pun has never held public office, despite his party being in power twice in the last seven years. He has a secondary education.

 

Pun was born on 23 October 1965 in Bhanbhane, Rangsi VDC-9 of Rolpa. He is the son of Ramsur and Manasara Pun, the fourth among seven children. 

 

In 1981, while still a teenager, Pun became involved with radical student politics. He joined the All Nepal National Free Students Union (ANNFSU) “Sixth”. The ANNFSU, founded in 1965, is a politically based student organization, associated with the pro-China trend of the Nepalese communist movement.

 

In 1979 ANNFSU split into two groups: the ANNFSU (Fifth), which was tied to the Communist Party of Nepal (Marxist-Leninist), and the ANNFSU (Sixth), which was connected to the Communist Party of Nepal (Fourth Convention). Pun joined the latter.

 

During the 1980s, Pun became a district committee member of the Communist Party of Nepal (Unity Center). In 1990, he became the first district president of the newly formed Young Communist League (YCL). This was an armed front of the Unity Center formed to aggressively counter activities of the then ruling Nepali Congress party, which was filing cases against Pun’s party.

 

When the party divided in 1994, Pun sided with the wing that would become the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist). The YCL – at that time known as Ladak u Dal (Fighting Force) was then converted into a militia.

 

The Ladak u Dal took part in the launching of the “People's War” with the night attack of a police post in Holeri on 13 February 1996. Pun was there, acting as an assistant commander under Barsha Man Pun, aka “Ananta”. 

 

Click here for my 2011 interview with "Comrade Ananta"

  

Nanda Bahadur Pun’s rise through the Maoist military ranks was steady and rapid.

 

In 2001, when Ladak u Dal became the “People’s Liberation Army” (PLA), Pun was made commander of the first battalion. He takes credit for having been involved with most of the PLA’s major attacks in Western Nepal against security forces – a decade-long conflict that resulted in the deaths of more than 16,000 Nepalis.

 

Pun was named chief commander of PLA in 2008, two years after the Comprehensive Peace Accord (CPA) was signed.

 

As part of the peace agreement, the ex-guerrillas were sequestered in cantonments scattered across Nepal – at least in theory – until the soldiers’ re-integration into society could be established.

 

Maoist leadership demanded that their high-ranking commandos be given officer status in the Nepal Army (NA).

 

The NA rejected this out-of-hand because their officers training and education met the highest international standards, while the guerillas had received virtually no professional training during their 10 years of underground fighting. The Maoists pressed back, insisting that Pun be given the rank of general in the NA, to no avail. The NA’s insistence on maintaining internationally-accepted army standards prevailed.

 

In the end, Pun took voluntary “retirement” and turned his attention to the political arena.

 

In November 2013, national Constituent Assembly elections were held in Nepal. Pun ran for a slot as a UCPN-Maoist party candidate in the Kathmandu-4 sector. Pun lost to the young and very popular Nepali Congress party leader Gagan Thapa.

 

Interestingly, shortly before the election, Pun posted a 23-minute self-promotional video on youtube entitled Who is Nanda Kishor Pun ‘Pasang’?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Click here for Pun's youtube video 

 

 

 

 

 

Pun has sought to be taken seriously as a political force ever since. He doesn’t shy away from self-promotion. In 2014 alone he posted 10 videos of himself on youtube. 

 

In Nepal, the Vice-Presidency is vested with little real responsibility other than functioning as Head of State in the absence of the President. Likewise, the President’s role is primarily ceremonial, most often being described as the “protector of the Constitution.”

 

It is the Prime Minister who wields the real power in Nepal’s government.

 

Health-wise, it should be noted that Vice-President Pun has suffered failure of both of his kidneys. Up until now, he has declined going abroad for treatment, preferring to get medical help within the boundaries of Nepal.

 

The election results showed that Pun had beat out his Nepali Congress opponent, Amiya Kumar Yadav 325 to 212, a solid margin of 113 votes. Lawmakers from Madhesi parties protesting against the new constitution abstained from voting.

 

Unlike former Vice-President Prachanda Jha, Pun is outspokenly anti-Indian.

 

 

………………………………………………………………………………..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mikel Dunham's new book project praised by the International Climbing and Mountaineering Federation

 

December 2, 2014

 

LINK HERE FOR ARTICLE

 

LINK HERE FOR PROMOTIONAL VIDEO

 

 

.............................................................

 

 

Prachant Jha’s “Battles of the New Republic: A contemporary History of Nepal”

 

June 7, 2014

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Posted yesterday by Sri Lanka Guardian

 

Prashant Jha's book, released today, 'Battles of The New Republic: A Contemporary History of Nepal' tells the story of the country's transition from war to peace, monarchy to republic, a Hindu kingdom to a secular state. The following extract details how India Research and Analysis Wing plays a critical role in Kathmandu politics:

 

 

2003-05: I asked a former RAW [Research and Analysis Wing, India's overseas intelligence organization] official, who was well acquainted with Nepal’s affairs and even served as the organization’s head at one point, about India’s initial engagement with the Maoists. Sitting on the top floor of one of Delhi’s premium hotels, he said, ‘My organization’s engagement with the Maoists began in 2003. It was also the time when they were in talks with the king’s nominated government back in Nepal.’ But didn’t declaring the rebel group as terrorists and supporting Nepal’s security forces, yet keeping channels of communication open with the Maoists and allowing the top leaders to stay in India, reflect conflicting objectives at best and devious intent at worst? The Palace, generals of the army, and a dominant section of the NC [Nepali Congress party] saw Indian ‘doublespeak’ as the primary reason for the Maoists’ success, and blamed Delhi for covertly supporting the rebels. The former intelligence official responded, ‘This is not true at all. We had links, we had communication. But that is the nature of intelligence organizations. We keep in touch with the enemy and we establish channels so that if at any point, our policy-makers shift tracks, there is a pathway to implement it.’

 

 

He may have been right, about agencies developing ties and relationships with actors across the ideological and political spectrum. But there was surely more to it if the engagement was happening with a group that was supposedly hostile to India’s interests. Analysts have long pondered the connection between India and the Maoists.

 

[...]

 

It was also a time when everyone was talking to everyone else in Nepal. The RAW official I spoke to emphasized this point and argued that India could not be behind the curve. ‘We knew the Palace and Maoists had been in touch in the early years of the war and still retained contact through intermediaries. We knew that both factions in the NC — Sher Bahadur Deuba and Koirala — kept channels open with the Maoists. We knew that various Left leaders had met Maoists in India. We had consistently asked all parties and the Palace to work together against the Maoists, but they just did not understand the gravity of the situation. It was clear to us that, eventually, a political solution would need to be found. In statecraft, you build up leverage when you can.’

 

Those who were then serving in the Indian establishment take great pains to emphasize that being in touch could not be construed as support. And as proof, they point to how several Maoist leaders were arrested in India during that period. C. P. Gajurel ‘Gaurav’ was picked up in Chennai when he was travelling on a fake passport to England. The party’s ideologue, and Prachanda’s political guru, Mohan Vaidya ‘Kiran’, was arrested in Siliguri. The Maoist leader from the Madhes, Matrika Yadav, was arrested and handed over to Nepal. (Yadav’s arrest seems to have been a result of a difference in outlook between the IB [India's Intelligence Bureau] and RAW. The RNA [Royal Nepalese Army] had passed on information about Yadav to an IB official who was visiting Nepal with an Indian minister’s entourage; and a RAW functionary once mentioned to me how IB had ‘messed up’ by arresting a key source.) Upendra Yadav, who was known to be close to the Maoists, though his exact relationship with the party remained ambiguous, was picked up, but then mysteriously let off. Suresh Ale Magar, the ethnic theorist for the Maoist party, was arrested and so were Ram Karki, who had served as an important link of the party with India’s radical movements, and Bamdev Chhetri. Cases were filed against many Maoist cadres. It became a lot more difficult for the top leadership to travel in India as compared to the late 1990s.

 

[...]

 

The arrests caused a ripple within the Maoist organization. Despite the sporadic communication his party representatives had with Delhi, Prachanda was now convinced that the principal contradiction of the people was with the ‘expansionists’, meaning India. Worried about their safety, both he and Bhattarai returned to Rolpa in 2004 and began living in their base areas. Prachanda even announced that they would eventually have to fight a war with India, and called for trenches to be dug for that purpose. Bhattarai was uncomfortable with the rhetoric, for he continued to view the Palace and the monarchy as the key problem, the enemy which needed to be vanquished, not India. The tension had historical roots, with different schools of the Nepali Left prioritizing either ‘nationalism’ or ‘democracy’.

 

* * *

 

2009-10: Like many other Nepalis, I was angered by India’s policy, actions and behaviour in that period. Having covered the political process day in and out, I had seen the depths to which the Indian establishment had plunged to isolate the Maoists, with little regard for the notions of sovereignty, democratic norms and processes, or political ethics. India’s actions appeared to confirm long-held apprehensions in Nepal that Delhi was not comfortable with any domestic force with a sizeable mass base, and one which refused to take dictation from the babus of South Block. Delhi’s desire to be in control of events and actors in Kathmandu has often preceded any other objective. In 1960, the Nehru-B. P. Koirala relationship had become uneasy when Koirala had struck out and asserted his strong and independent personality. In the 1990s, minor incidents disrupted India’s ties with the NC which eventually benefited the Palace. And now, India had a problem with the two forces who had been most successful in the 2008 elections—the Maoists nationally, and the Madhesi Janadhikar Forum (MJF) in the plains. It seemed India really wanted pliant agents, and was just not mature enough to deal with autonomous political agents in a neighbouring country.

 

[...]

 

I asked a thoughtful RAW official why they could not let go and allow domestic processes in Nepal to play out, irrespective of outcomes, without meddling. ‘If you have an open border, there has to be a special security relationship. We could have lived with a Maoist dictatorship if it was 5,000 miles away but, across an open border, we cannot risk it.’

 

What India was attempting with the Maoists was not a simplistic strategy of isolation, though. It was emulating a highly sophisticated tradition of statecraft it had practiced, with mixed results, in Kashmir with the Hurriyat Conference and, in the Northeast, with the National Socialist Council of Nagaland (Isak-Muivah). Engage, coerce, divide, frustrate, exhaust, corrupt, lure, repeat the cycle, and give nothing. It had never stopped talking to the Maoists even when the war of words was at its worst. It had isolated them to show them the high costs of not listening to advice. It had encouraged Baburam Bhattarai as a counter to Prachanda in order to sharpen the divisions within the party.

 

It had created a situation where the leadership could deliver nothing to the cadre, frustrating them and increasing the gulf between the top and the bottom. It offered inducements and showed the benefits of cooperating and playing along with the existing political-economic networks. And it kept up the strategies until the incentives for the other side changed, and caused a transformation in its behaviour which suited the establishment.

 

[...] this time, India was intervening not in favour of universal values but to influence outcomes in a fragmented but democratic political landscape. There was no reason for Delhi to play favourites among Nepali politicians, for no one—including the Maoists—had harmed India’s security interests. They could have let domestic political processes take their own course instead of preventing a natural equilibrium from emerging. For a neighbour to actively intervene in order to try and kill another country’s elected institution, and target one political force, went beyond any acceptable norm of inter-state relations.

 

But the Nepali Maoists, despite this baggage, had come around to the new political reality. They had participated in the elections and won legitimately. Despite sporadic incidents, they had allowed a free and extremely critical press to flourish. They had given up their base areas and opened it up to political competition so that other political parties could operate there. They had dissolved their parallel courts and had agreed to have their former army put into cantonments. Prachanda had resigned when faced with an uncomfortable political situation, and was making a bid to return to power by gaining a majority on the floor of the house.

 

*

 

2011: There was also a change of personnel in the Indian establishment. And as we had seen in 2005-06, individuals played a major role in shaping policy. Sanjeev Tripathi had taken over RAW in January 2011, and he was understood to be in favour of reengaging with the Maoists. Alok Joshi had taken over as special secretary who looked after key neighbouring countries. Joshi had served as the station chief in Nepal between 2008 and 2010. A product of JNU, and an Indian Police Service officer from the Haryana cadre, he had sharp political sense and knew the lay of the land in Nepal.

 

RAW did not believe in giving the Maoists a blank cheque and recognized the importance of challenging them in order to get them to deliver on commitments. But it could also see that the experiment of keeping the Maoists out of power had perhaps outlived its utility, and the Indian position needed revision. It argued to the national security advisor, Shiv Shanker Menon, that the Maoists should be given ‘one final chance’.

 

Rakesh Sood had left Kathmandu for Paris, and the new ambassador, Jayant Prasad, had not yet arrived in Kathmandu. A soft-spoken, brilliant diplomat, with uncanny political sense and a commitment to basic democratic ethos, Prasad had an old Nepal connection. His father, Bimal Prasad, a former professor in JNU [Jawaharlal Nehru University], had been India’s envoy to Kathmandu in the early 1990s and had a reputation of being close to the NC. But Jayant Prasad had visited Nepal only once during his father’s tenure and carried little baggage. A ‘free-thinker’ in his student days in JNU, where he distinguished himself academically, Prasad could empathize with broad socialist and Left political thinking, but carried no dogma. While Prasad did not take charge till August-end, Sood’s departure had already helped to partially detoxify the India-Maoist relationship.

 

Prachanda had met senior Indian intelligence officials during his trips to various Southeast Asian cities through the summer of 2011. In early August, they met in Kuala Lumpur where Prachanda once again committed to completing the peace process as soon as the Maoists led the government. He briefed them on internal tensions within the party, and said that after Khanal resigned, the Maoists would put forward Baburam Bhattarai as the party’s prime ministerial candidate. Indian officials are learnt to have told him that they would not object if the Maoists observed all democratic processes and mustered a majority on the floor of the house. This was a significant meeting in rebuilding the relationship between the two sides. While the mistrust was deep, both sides were slowly inching back to the more nuanced approach they had with each other between 2005 and 2008. To borrow Prachanda’s metaphor, the warmth may not have returned, but there was a thaw. A rapprochement was on the horizon.

 

Would it finally enable the successful accommodation of the Maoists into the formal power structure? Would it help integrate the Maoist combatants into the NA [Nepalese Army] — an issue which was at the heart of the tensions over the UN’s role in Nepal, over General Katawal’s dismissal, over the Maoists’ re-entry into government, and the yardstick for whether the rebels had indeed transformed into a democratic force? Would it finally push forward the Constitution-writing project, which had been in limbo as power games overwhelmed Kathmandu politics? Would the renewed engagement between India and the Maoists bring back the focus on the core political goal of restructuring the Nepali state and Nepali nationalism?

 

* * *

 

The NC was now in panic mode. Ambassador Sood had completed his tenure in Kathmandu and had left a few months earlier. This had weakened the voice of the MEA within the establishment, which was more averse to giving the Maoists a chance. RAW, on the other hand, had veered towards allowing the Maoists another chance. They had not encouraged the Madhesi parties—but the ‘agency’, as Kathmandu politicians called RAW, had not discouraged them either. Left to domestic factors, the NC realized that there was little that would stop the Madhesi parties from choosing the more attractive option.

 

The NC now used all its political capital to get India involved on their side. The former party leader, and now President, Ram Baran Yadav, shared a personal equation with finance minister and old political warhorse Pranab Mukherjee—the only senior political leader in Delhi who really paid attention to Nepal. They spoke to each other in Bangla—Yadav had attended school in Calcutta. President Yadav warned Mukherjee that the Maoists’ return to power would be dangerous, and they must help stop the Madhesis from voting for Bhattarai.

 

An Indian embassy official, upset with the [Nepali] President’s attempt to undercut the local mission and reach out directly to the political leadership, told me about this conversation and said that it had rattled Delhi. Surya Bahadur Thapa, the former prime minister who had excellent ties with Delhi’s political and bureaucratic elite, called up his interlocutors with a similar warning. Thapa’s grandson Siddhartha had become a close friend and, over coffee at Babar Mahal, Siddhartha expressed deep unease at the evolving Indian stance, as they saw it. Shekhar Koirala, G. P. Koirala’s nephew who had played an active role in the run-up to the signing of the 12-point Understanding, shared cordial ties with National Security Advisor Shiv Shankar Menon. They had known each other since Menon’s time as a joint secretary handling Nepal in the mid-1990s. Koirala called up his old friend, urging India to get the Madhesis to support Poudel. He warned India that having the Maoists in power at this time would ensure that they remained in office if the CA ended without a Constitution having been finalized and that would have adverse consequences for Delhi. I met Koirala in the CA [Constituent Assembly] compound a few days later, and he confirmed to me that he had reservations about India’s position and felt that Delhi was making a mistake.

 

 

Delhi seems to have become worried by the multiple messages from friendly interlocutors. The political section of the Indian embassy now got into the act. They warned the Madhesi parties that the Maoists would deceive them, that their commitment to federalism was opportunistic, and that the parties of the plains must reconsider their options. The pressure could either have been born out of a desire to show to the NC that India was doing its bit, or born out of a genuine policy line to block the Maoists once again. Delhi ordered RAW, which was more open to the Maoists, to step back from the process.

 

 

CLICK HERE TO ORDER YOUR COPY TODAY

 

 

 

 

…………………………………….....................………………………………

 

 

 

 

Nepal’s 2013 Election Results: Maoists big losers while Centralists prevail

 

November 27, 2013

 

Results of Nepal’s elections for the second Constituent Assembly were declared on November 25. The Nepali Congress (NC) emerged as the single largest party, winning 105 of the 240 seats under the first-past-the-post category. By comparison, the NC won only 37 seats in the 2008 elections.

 

Second place goes to the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist-Leninist), better known as the UML, with 92 seats, a party that won a mere 30 seats in the previous election.

 

The Maoists received a drubbing. Their party, which prevailed in the 2008 elections with 120 seats, limped in this time with a humiliating 26 seats.

 

And no one was a bigger loser than Prachanda, leader of the Maoists, who couldn’t even win a seat in the Kathmandu constituency – although he did win a seat, by a narrow margin, from the southeastern distict of Siraha. Meanwhile, three family members – his brother, his daughter and his sister-in-law – were handed defeats as well.

 

The day after the elections, Prachanda called a press conference and pronounced that rigging had taken place all over the country, that is was an international conspiracy and that he demanded that the vote-counting process be halted immediately, otherwise his party would boycott the second Constituent Assembly.

 

The international community was unimpressed by Prachanda’s conspiracy theory. India, the United States and the European Union congratulated Nepal for conducting elections in a free and transparent manner – significantly helped by beefed-up security forces – and urged Prachanda to concede defeat and accept the poll results.

 

Even China made a significant diplomatic gesture, which indicated its approval of what it perceived as transparently held elections: Yesterday, the Chinese Ambassador to Nepal, Wu Chuntai, called on Nepali Congress Vice-President, Ram Chandra Poudal, and conveyed his best wishes for future improvements in peace, stability and development works.

 

Prachanda faced dissidence within his own party as well. A high-level Maoist meeting was convened on Saturday, during which the party's two deputies - Baburam Bhattarai and Narayankaji Shrestha - did not buy Prachanda's idea to boycott the Constituent Assembly. The party's agenda was still relevant, Bhattarai said in a statement. "I still believe that the agenda put forth by the UCPN-Maoist regarding the progressive transformation of the state and economic prosperity still holds true," he added. Bhattarai said his party "would opt for a legal battle in the cases involving poll irregularities in some constituencies" and launch a struggle through the assembly to implement its agenda.

 

The other big losers in the elections were the Madhesi parties. MJF (Loktantrik), a regional party from the southern plains, managed to get just four seats and its splinter party MJF (Nepal) won two. Before the split, these two parties had won 52 seats in the Tarai-Madhes region bordering southern neighbor India.

 

Elections to the Constituent Assembly were held under two categories -- first-past-the-post and proportional representation. A total of 240 seats were allocated in the first category and 365 seats in the proportional representation category. Counting for the second category -- proportional representation – is still underway.

 

The remaining 26 seats in the 601-member Constituent Assembly will be nominated by the newly created Cabinet at a later date.

 

 

……………………………………………………………………………..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Amid skepticism, high turnout for 2013 Nepal National Election

 

November 20, 2013

 

 

 

Yesterday, voters lined up hours early to elect the 601-member assembly that will act as a parliament and establish a government until a charter is ready. This was in spite of 33-party alliance led by a breakaway Maoist faction, which called for a boycott of the election. At least 30 people were wounded in small bomb blasts in the run-up to the vote.

 

The total number of voters who registered for this election declined to 12.1 million from 17.6 million in 2008, perhaps due to a mounting disappointment of politicians – regardless of party – and their lackluster performance during the last five years.

 

A previous attempt at writing a constitution after the 2008 election, which was dominated by Maoists, failed. Political parties were unable to agree on the form of government and the number of states to be carved out of the ethnically diverse country. Nepal had five governments in as many years as politicians formed and broke alliances.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nevertheless, early calculations are that between 60 and 70 percent of the legal voters made it to the poll booths, regardless of renegade Maoist threats. This could be due, in part to the deployment of large numbers of police and army personnel. The Nepal Army had not taken part in security arrangements during the previous election.

 

India also contributed in security. It donated 764 vehicles to the Nepal government to ensure a free and fair election. It also sealed the India-Nepal border to thwart threats and violence unleashed by the CPN-Maoist alliance to disrupt the polls.

 

Preparations were also improved. This was the first time that elections were held with voters’ identity cars. Election materials reached all of the 18,400 polling booths well in advance. The government mobilized 200,000 security personnel, including the 60,000 soldiers.

 

Still, there is a widespread feeling among the voters that political instability will continue to plague Nepal in the near future.

 

Voting results may take a long as a week to be fully accounted for, particularly in the isolated mountain regions.

 

 

 

……………………………………………………………………….

 

 

 

 

Nepal Army determines ranks and percentages of former Maoist combatants

 

April 30, 2012

 

Yesterday, the Nepal Army granted the post of officers to 71 former Maoist combatants as part of a reconciliation program to integrate the ex-rebels into armed forces.

 

At a press meet organized at Nepal Army headquarters, Nepal Army has disclosed the ranks of the former Maoist combatants who opted to be integrated into the state army.

 

The proposed directorate with the strength of 4,000 personnel will be comprised of 35% former combatants and 65% Nepal Army (NA) personnel.

 

NA Major General Ram Krishna Adhikari will head the directorate, the NA said.

 

According to the arrangement, the NA has granted the post of officers to 71 former Maoist combatants who went through training under Nepal Army while the remaining 1,373 combatants will be accommodated to various posts of Nepal Army.

 

On completion of Nepal Army's training one of the officer will be made Colonel and two of them will be made Lt Colonel, according to the Nepal Army headquarters.

 

 

 

……………………………………………………………………………

 

 

World Organisation Against Torture condemns Maoists’ human rights violations in Nepal

 

 

March 8, 2013

 

URGENT APPEAL – HOW YOU CAN HELP

 

 

The Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders, a joint programme of the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) and the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), requests your urgent intervention on the following situation in Nepal.

 

The World Organisation Against Torture (Organisation Mondiale Contre la Torture, OMCT) is the world’s largest coalition of non-governmental organisations fighting against arbitrary detention, torture, summary and extrajudicial executions, forced disappearances and other forms of violence. The global network consists of almost 300 local, national and regional organisations, which share the goal of eradicating torture and fostering respect of human rights for all.

 

Brief description of the situation:

 

The Observatory has been informed by reliable sources about the physical assault against Mr. Yadav Prasad Bastola, Executive Director of Human Rights Alliance[1], Central Office, Kathmandu, by four alleged Maoists cadres who beat him with iron rods more than 40 times, accusing him of attempting to jail and prosecute Maoists cadres for human rights violations committed during the conflict period (1996 - 2006) by writing articles and organising programmes on human rights violations and impunity in different parts of Nepal, as well as about threats against several members of Accountability Watch Committee (AWC), namely Ms. Mandira Sharma, Chairperson of Advocacy Forum-Nepal, Mr. Subodh Pyakhurel, Chairperson of the Informal Sector Service Centre (INSEC), Mr. Kanak Mani Dixit, a journalist and editor of Himal magazine and other publications, Mr. Sushil Pyakhurel, Chair of AWC, Mr. Charan Prasai, Coordinator of the Joint Forum for Human Rights, and Mr. Kapil Shrestha, both members of AWC.

 

According to the information received, on February 28, 2013, Mr. Yadav Prasad Bastola was returning home from Birendranagar municipality, Surkhet district, where he had organised a workshop on “Impunity and Post-conflict Justice” on behalf of Human Rights Alliance the day before, when he was seriously assaulted by four unidentified persons at around 7.30 pm in the jungle of Srinagar in Vidhyapur Village Development Committee (VDC)-05, 30 minutes away from his home.

 

Reportedly, two of the men, who had covered their faces with masks and had been following him for some time already, stopped Mr. Yadav Prasad Bastola and asked him if he was a human rights defender. The latter confirmed, and asked them if they needed his support. One of them then said: “Aren't you the person who is trying to jail the Maoists?” The men caught his hands and neck, and were joined by two other unidentified persons. The attackers said: “You write against Maoists and travel different parts of Nepal organising programmes against Maoists. You write accusing us of being involved in human rights violations during the conflict period. You are trying to jail us”. The men hit Mr. Yadav Prasad Bastola four times on his back with iron rods. One also tried to hit him on the head, but Mr. Bastola managed to protect himself with his hands, leaving his left wrist injured. As the men continued beating him with iron rods, he fell on the ground. He tried to protect his head with his hands, bending on his knees and elbows, but the men continued beating him and kicking him with their boots. While beating him they said, “You write against Maoists party to support the Nepali Congress and CPN-UML Parties. We will kill you here”. Luckily, as two motorcycles suddenly came towards the group, the assaulters ran away towards the jungle, and Mr. Yadav Prasad Bastola managed to run towards a nearby village, where villagers called the police. Some villagers and policemen took him to a local hospital in a stretcher, where he received first aid. At around 10 pm the same day, a police van took him to Deuti Nursing Home, Surkhet district, for further treatment. On March 1, 2013, he was discharged from the hospital.

 

On February 27, 2013, a local newspaper, the Pahichan Daily, had published an article written by Mr. Bastola on impunity in an extra-judicial killing of a man from his VDC named Surya Prasad Poudel by Maoists cadres during the conflict period in Nepal. The article had focused on the need to provide compensation to the victim's family members and to investigate thoroughly the conflict era crimes.

 

On March 1, 2013, Mr. Yadav Prasad Bastola filed a First Information Report (FIR) at the District Police Office of Surkhet. According to the police, an investigation is currently in progress. Moreover, the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) of Nepal subsequently condemned the serious assault on Mr. Bastola.

 

Furthermore, the Observatory is also concerned by threats that were issued recently through the media against several members of AWC, a forum of leading human rights defenders fighting against impunity in Nepal, by the Maoist mouthpiece magazine Lal Rakshak (Red Defender), the blog Krishnasenonline, and various other local Maoist-affiliated papers and FM radio stations.

 

In the article published in the edition for January-February of Lal Rakshak, Ms. Mandira Sharma, Mr. Subodh Pyakhurel, and Mr. Kanak Mani Dixit were accused of “going against the Maoists, Maoist political agenda and change”. Other defenders named were Mr. Sushil Pyakhurel, Mr. Charan Prasai, and Mr. Kapil Shrestha. They were accused of being traitors, enemies of the people, peace spoilers, and dollar mongerers, among other insults, and the article encouraged that “people's action should be taken against them”[2].

 

This appeal was repeated in a number of local Maoist newspapers, including in Gandaki Awaj published from Pokhara on January 21, 2013 under the headline (translated): "Real face of Kanak, Subodh and Mandira". A newspaper Taja Khabar published from Rupandehi on January 22, 2013 repeated the same story with the headline (translated): "Dollar-mongers search murderers". A similar article was published in an online news portal Onlinekhabar. Furthermore, the appeal for “people’s action” was also broadcasted repeatedly on Maoist FM radio stations around the country. On Krishnasenonline, the main Maoist news portal, Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) - UCPN Spokesperson Agni Sapkota commented that “some NGOs supposedly working for human rights are acting against national interest”. He added that these NGOs “prefer dollars to nation and nationalism” and that “for green dollars, some people have called imperialist Britain to have Colonel Kumar Lama arrested”, naming Ms. Sharma and Advocacy Forum as being responsible for Mr. Lama’s arrest.

 

Those threats indeed come in the context of the arrest of Mr. Kumar Lama, a Nepali army colonel who was charged with torture by the authorities of the United Kingdom on January 4, 2013 under universal jurisdiction law, as well as of five Maoist cadres in Dailekh district, Nepal, who were charged with the torture and murder of Dekendra Raj Thapa, a journalist, in 2004[3]. Members of AWC were instrumental in getting the UK authorities to arrest Mr. Lama as well as in filing the Dailekh case.

 

Actions requested:

 

Please write to the authorities in Nepal, urging them to:

 

i. Guarantee in all circumstances the physical and psychological integrity of Mr. Yadav Prasad Bastola, Ms. Mandira Sharma, Mr. Subodh Pyakhurel, Mr. Kanak Mani Dixit, Mr. Sushil Pyakhurel, Mr. Charan Prasai and Mr. Kapil Shrestha as well as of their relatives and all human rights defenders in Nepal;

 

ii. Carry out a thorough, impartial and transparent investigation into the above mentioned facts in order to identify all those responsible, bring them before a competent and impartial tribunal and apply to them the sanctions provided by the law;

 

iii. Put an end to any act of harassment against Mr. Yadav Prasad Bastola, Ms. Mandira Sharma, Mr. Subodh Pyakhurel, Mr. Kanak Mani Dixit, Mr. Sushil Pyakhurel, Mr. Charan Prasai and Mr. Kapil Shrestha, and all human rights defenders in Nepal, and ensure in all circumstances that they are able to carry out their legitimate activities without any hindrance and fear of reprisals;

 

iv. Conform with the provisions of the UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders, adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on December 9, 1998, especially its Article 1, which states that “everyone has the right, individually and in association with others, to promote and to strive for the protection and realisation of human rights and fundamental freedoms at the national and international levels”, and Article 12.2, which provides that “the State shall take all necessary measures to ensure the protection by the competent authorities of everyone, individually and in association with others, against any violence, threats, retaliation, de facto or de jure adverse discrimination, pressure or any other arbitrary action as a consequence of his or her legitimate exercise of the rights referred to in the present Declaration”;

 

v. Ensure in all circumstances respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms in accordance with international human rights standards and international instruments ratified by Nepal.

 

Addresses:

 

·      Prime Minister, Dr. Baburam Bhattarai, Office of the Prime Minister and Council of Nepal, Singha Darbar, Kathmandu, Nepal. Fax: + 977-1-4211286, Email: [email protected]

·      Inspector General of Police, Mr. Kuber Singh Rana, Police Head Quarters, Naxal, Kathmandu, Nepal, PO. Box No.: 407. Fax: + 977 1 4 415 593, Email: [email protected] / [email protected]

·      Attorney General, Mr. Mukti Nath Pradhan, Office of Attorney General Ramshahpath, Kathmandu, Nepal. Fax: + 977 1 4262582 / 4218051, Email: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

·      Chairman of the National Human Rights Commission, Mr. Kedar Nath Uppadhya, Pulchowck, Lalitpur, Nepal. Fax: + 977 1 5547973. Email: [email protected]; [email protected] 

·      H.E. Mr. Shanker Das Bairagi, Ambassador, Permanent Mission of the Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal to the United Nations Office in Geneva, 81 rue de la Servette, 1201 Geneva, Switzerland, Fax: + 41 22 733 27 22, E-mail: [email protected]

·      H.E. Mr Ram Mani Pokharek, Ambassador, Embassy of Nepal in Brussels, Avenue Brugmann 210, 1050 Brussels, Belgium. Fax : + 32 2 344 13 61. E-mail: [email protected]

 

Please also write to the diplomatic mission or embassy of Nepal in your respective country.

 

***

Geneva-Paris, March 6, 2013

 

Kindly inform us of any action undertaken quoting the code of this appeal in your reply.

 

The Observatory, a OMCT and FIDH venture, is dedicated to the protection of Human Rights Defenders and aims to offer them concrete support in their time of need.

 

To contact the Observatory, call the emergency line:

·          E-mail: [email protected]

·          Tel and fax OMCT + 41 (0) 22 809 49 39 / + 41 22 809 49 29

·          Tel and fax FIDH + 33 (0) 1 43 55 25 18 / +33 1 43 55 18 80

 

[1] The National Alliance for Human Rights and Social Justice - Nepal (Human Rights Alliance) is a Coalition of Nepali non-governmental human rights organisations dedicated to a cause of freedom, human rights, social justice, and peace in Nepal that was established in 1996.

[2] “People’s action” is a term that was used during the 10-year-long Maoist “people’s war” which ended in 2006. It denotes punishment to be meted out through direct action, i.e. through violent attacks.

[3] For more information on the case, see OMCT Urgent Appeal NPL 140113 issued on January 14, 2013:

Properties

Date: March 6, 2013

Activity: Human Rights Defenders

Type: Urgent Interventions

Country: Nepal

OMCT International Secretariat

PO Box 21, 8, rue du Vieux-Billard, CH-1211 Geneva 8, Switzerland

Phone: + 41 22 809 4939

Fax: + 41 22 809 4929

E-mail: [email protected]

 

...........................................................................................

 

 

 

Maoist YCL thugs beat up at least a dozen journalists and political opponents

 

January 31, 2013

 

At least 13 people, including six journalists, were injured in Banepa of Kavre district yesterday after a clash flared up between activists of the Young Communist League (YCL) and opposition parties. The YCL is the youth wing of the Maoists and have often been cited for violence in the past.

 

The clash ensued after YCL hoodlums, many armed with lathis and stones and bussed in from neighboring villages and districts by the Maoists, attacked journalists and activists of non-Maoist parties who had converged on Banepa to protest alleged misuse of state coffers by Prime Minister Baburam Bhattarai. Bhattarai was slated to a attend a Maoist district conference, which was to be held later that day.

 

According to Himalayan:

 

YCL men first hit Prakash Sundas, news coordinator of Radio Namobuddha, on his face before tearing his clothes into pieces and then fell upon Krishnachandra Banjara, a reporter for Abhiyan daily, [who was beaten] with rods because Banjara was wearing a black jacket. Bhola Thapa of Nepal Television, Ramkrishna Chapagain of Nepal Samacharpatra daily and Motilal Timalsina, executive editor of Chesta Weekly, were also injured in the clash. Grace FM’s Krishna Neupane, who was injured after YCL cadres beat him up, has been sent to Kathmandu for treatment.

 

YCL cadres forced Rajdhani daily reporter Keshavraj Poudel, Mountain TV correspondent Kapil Koirala and Kantipur daily reporter Manoj Basnet to delete photos from their cameras and threatened them with death ‘if they dispatched news against them’.

 

YCL activists also detained and beat up Basudev Sapkota of Anaikot. Seriously injured Sapkota has received bruises all over his body and is undergoing treatment in Banepa.

 

Nepali Congress Mahasamiti member Kunsang Lama of Khanalthok lost three teeth, while 63-year-old Homnath Adhikari of Rabiopi was wounded. NC Anaikot VDC unit president Ganesh KC, who received a major injury on his head with a stone, has been sent to the Capital for treatment. Other injured include CPN-UML district committee member Indra Bahadur Tamang of Sarsyukharka, UML area committee member Lila Bahadur Ghimire of Nala and Rupak Mahat of Panauti.

 

 

According to Republica, the approximately 700 YCL cadres were strategically dispersed along the road leading to the Maoist program venue. The peaceful demonstration, organized by opposition parties, which had planned to greet the prime minister’s motorcade with black flags, was foiled by the YCL attack. The violence occurred before the PM actually arrived.

 

It was also reported that YCL cadres issued death threats. According to Kantipur, “YCL threatened to 'finish off' Kantipur district correspondent Manoj Basnet. ‘Kantipur is on a mission to eliminate the UCPN (Maoist). We will not spare them and finish them off,’ YCL cadres vented their ire. “

 

After the incident, the Federation of Nepali Journalists (FNJ) condemned the attack on journalists and threats and promised to boycott all UCPN-Maoist events until the YCL assailants are detained by the police.

 

Similarly, the CPN-UML and NC parties have condemned the YCL attack on a peaceful demonstration and on the injured journalists.

 

 

……………………………….......................…………………………………….

22 journalists flee Western Nepal after Maoists cadres issue death threats

 

January 29, 2013

 

Last week, Reporters Without Borders condemned death threats made by cadres of the ruling Unified Communist Party of Nepal (UCPN) on January 23 against 22 journalists in the western district of Dailekh. The next day, the 22 local reporters were forced to leave the district, halting production at two daily newspapers and one weekly. Those behind the threats also ransacked the premises of the daily Hamro Tesro Aankha.

 

“The threats and attacks on media workers are particularly serious since they occurred in response to calls for justice for Dekendra Raj Thapa, a local journalist who was kidnapped and murdered by cadres of the ruling Maoist party,” the press freedom organization said.

 

[See my January 10, 2013 article on the murder case HERE]

 

“We urge the authorities to put an end to such threats and guarantee journalists the basic right to work in safety.

 

“The decision by the government to halt the investigation into Thapa’s murder is at odds with Prime Minister Baburam Bhattarai’s statement to journalists at the 43rd annual meeting of the Press Council when he reaffirmed his commitment to freedom of the press.

 

“The process of national reconciliation now under way does not mean truth and the fight against impunity should be abandoned.”

 

Party cadres threatened journalists who were protesting during a visit by the prime minister to Dailekh district. The party members publicly warned several journalists they could face the same fate as their colleague Thapa, murdered four years earlier.

 

Other UCPN activists forced their way into the editorial offices of Hamro Tesro Aankha and vandalised the premises. These attacks took place on the sidelines of violence between members of the ruling party and opposition groups who were demonstrating.

 

After a meeting the following day of the Dailekh chapter of the Federation of Nepali Journalists (FNJ), 22 journalists including the chairman of the local FNJ, Pushkar Thapa, and reporters and other staff from the newspapers Nagarik, Republica, Kantipur and Kathmandu Post, the TV station Avenues Television, and local publications and radio stations, concluded that their safety was no longer guaranteed and they should leave the district.

 

Their departure forced the dailies Dhamaka et Hamro Tesro Aankha and the weekly Sajha Pratibimba to halt production indefinitely, while the radio stations Dhruba Tara and Panchakoshi FM stopped broadcasting.

 

A few days earlier, on 12 January, Prime Minister Bhattarai defended the government’s decision to call off the investigation into Thapa’s murder, saying not all war-era cases could be investigated.

 

Referring to the ongoing investigation into the involvement of five Maoist cadres in the murder, Bhattarai said that, if all the cases were investigated separately, the ongoing peace process would be derailed.

 

 

......................................................................................

 

 

 

Fearing arrest for human rights violations, Nepal’s Attorney General postpones US visit

 

January 15, 2013

 

On Sunday, Mukti Pradhan, Nepal’s attorney general, cancelled a scheduled visit to the US, apparently out of fear.

 

Following the arrest of Nepal Army Col. Kumar Lama by the British police earlier this month – who was seized in the UK over his alleged human rights violations during the decade-long Maoist insurgency – the Maoist-led government seems to be taking precautions to protect its own from the international justice system.

 

The attorney general has been widely criticized in Nepal and abroad for exerting undue influence to stop prosecution of five Maoist workers charged with the 2004 killing of Dailekh-based journalist Dekendra Thapa. One of the named assailants confessed last week, saying that he and his henchmen had brutally beaten Thapa and ultimately buried him alive.

 

(See my article on the Dekendra Thapa case here.)

 

Nepal’s Prime Minister Baburam Bhattarai publicly criticized the arrest of his fellow party members for the crime.

 

Then, on January 9, the attorney general added further pressure to impede justice by personally blasting the District Public Prosecutor, Dambar Prasad Kafle, for having had the five men arrested in the first place. After “hurled abuses”, Pradhan threatened to fire Kafle if he did not change the confessional statement of the accused. [This is according the EKantipur, which quoted anonymous sources from the Office of the Attorney General (OAG) in a Jan. 11 article]:

 

“The Attorney General has abused the District Prosecutor and threatened to finish off three of his generations,” said a senior official at the OAG, requesting anonymity.

 

Sources further said that Pradhan also mounted pressure on the chief of the Surkhet Appellate Public Prosecutor Office, Man Bahadur Karki, “to not allow the case to move ahead.”

 

The OAG official also said that Pradhan is planning to transfer both Kafle and Karki “to influence the case.”

 

According to sources, Pradhan called Kafle again on Thursday and “coaxed” him by offering a “lucrative transfer and a foreign trip.”

 

“Pradhan on Thursday dictated (to Kafle) a draft of the statement to be recorded for the accused,” the source said.

 

Pradhan was scheduled to fly to the US on Jan. 13. He had been invited to speak at the University of New Haven in Boston.

 

Ironically, the college had invited Pradhan for a nine-day program on “strengthening the criminal justice system in Nepal.”

 

 

Pradhan received his a US visa on last Saturday, the day before his departure.

 

What changed his traveling plans?

 

According to the Kathmandu Post:

 

“A US Embassy official took a brief interview of the attorney general (AG) before issuing him a visa, which is rare,” an official said. “That probably sowed seeds of doubt in the AG’s mind. That seemed to have led him to call off the visit, perhaps anxious to avoid Col Lama’s fate in the UK.”

 

“Following the cancellation of the US trip, the AG remained tight-lipped about what made him do that,” said an official at the AG’s office. “He appeared tensed all day today, cancelled all his in-house meetings and kept to himself,” said another official at the office.

 

Sources said that when Pradhan reached office on Sunday, officials there warned him that he could meet the same fate as Col Lama. Worse, he could also be greeted with black flags upon reaching the US.

 

Earlier in the day, the NHRC summoned Pradhan and asked him why he was obstructing new investigations into Thapa’s murder and why he had ordered his local-level officials to halt recording statements.

 

Meanwhile, journalists in Pradhan’s home, Dolakha, have decided to boycott all his public functions in the district.

 

“He has abused his authority by ordering to put on hold the investigations into the killing of a fellow journalist. We were happy when he was appointed the AG, but we are now dismayed by his actions,” a statement issued by the Federation of Nepali Journalists, Dolokha, said.

 

According to one of the delegates, who was to fly with Pradhan to Boston, the trip was not cancelled but rather postponed: “He (Pradhan) informed me that we would head for the US on January 22 instead of today (Sunday). He said it was not appropriate to leave the country at a time when there is a political and constitutional crisis.”

 

Really?

 

Is the attorney general suggesting that after January 22, Nepal will no longer be in a political and constitutional crisis?

 

 

 

……………………………………………………………………………..

 

 

 

Maoists murder a journalist and Nepal’s prime minister attempts to block the thugs' arrests

January 10, 2012

 

On January 8, 2013, Nepali Prime Minister Baburam Bhattarai publicly criticized the arrest of five of his party members, who stand accused of the 2004 murder of radio journalist Dekendra Raj Thapa. He blamed human rights activists instead.

 

According to Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) – an independent, nonprofit organization promoting press freedom worldwide – police arrested the five men last week, based on a previous complaint filed by the journalist's wife. Four of them are district-level leaders of the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), which heads Bhattarai's coalition government, and the other is affiliated with the Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist, a breakaway faction of the ruling party, according to news reports.

 

Agence France-Press reported that one of the individuals, Lachhiram Gharti, confessed to taking part in the murder and to burying Dekendra Raj Thapa alive:

 

The arrests of the five men, whose detention came days after a Nepalese soldier was held in Britain on charges of torture, are the first in Nepal for crimes committed during the decade-long conflict that ended in 2006.

 

The five men, all middle-ranking cadres, have been charged with the abduction and murder of Dekendra Raj Thapa, a radio reporter and human rights activist who died in 2004.

 

Lachhiram Gharti, one of the accused, had confessed to taking part in the murder, Binod Sharma, an inspector in the western district of Dailekh, told AFP.

 

"He confessed to us that they kidnapped (the victim) under the pretext of a discussion on water supply and took him to a local school," Sharma said.

 

"They tortured him by repeatedly beating him and when he fell unconscious, he was brought to Gharti's home.

 

"Gharti told us that he gave a glass of water to him. After drinking it, he again fell unconscious... so they dug a pit and buried him alive."

 

 

 

The men are being held in the small western district of Dailekh while police investigate. It is still unclear whether formal charges have been filed against them.

 

Bhattarai said two days ago that the government did not endorse the arrests and that they were part of a plot by human rights activists to derail the peace process by reviving cases from the conflict period. Although the armed conflict in Nepal between Maoists and the government ended in 2006, the political climate remains precarious: There has been no parliament since it was dissolved in May 2012 and the opposition has been pressing Bhattarai's caretaker government for elections.

 

 

Both political parties--the UCPN (Maoist) and the CPN-Maoist--also issued statements asserting the men's innocence, news reports said.

 

"The pressure being exerted by Prime Minister Bhattarai and the parties illustrates the problem of impunity in Nepal, where political interference has prevented justice from being served in the murders of journalists," said Bob Dietz, CPJ's Asia program coordinator. "Police should be able to continue with their work of bringing killers to justice without being subjected to political pressure."

 

CPJ has repeatedly called on authorities in Nepal to ensure killers of journalists are prosecuted as a means to redress wrongs. The country ranks sixth on CPJ's Impunity Index, which tallies countries that consistently fail to prosecute journalist murders.

 

 

For more data and analysis on the precarious situation for Nepali journalists, as reported by CPJ, click here:

 

Committee to Protect Journalists' Assessment of Nepal

 

 

 

…........................................................................

 

 

 

 

HOW TO BUY LUMBINI: Prachanda inks deal with Chinese without consulting Nepal government

 

November 9, 2012 

 

On Wednesday, Nov. 7, 2012, Pushpa Kamal Dahal aka Prachanda, former military commander of rebel Maoist forces in Nepal, now chairman of the Unified Communist Party and chairman of the Lumbini Development National Directive Committee of Nepal (LDNDC), inked a deal with the China-backed Asia Pacific Exchange Cooperation Foundation (APECF) that will bring in a reported $3 billion to develop Buddha's birthplace at Lumbini.

 

Prachanda signed this Memorandum of Understanding with Xiao Wunan, executive vice chairman of APECF Foundation. Presumably, Prachanda took it upon himself to make the deal in his capacity as chairman of Nepal's steering committee. But leaders of other political parties, including Dr. Minendra Rijal, member of LDNDC and ex-Minister of Culture, challenged Prachanda’s right to sign the deal unilaterally.

 

“The issue was not discussed in the committee, and it has not authorized Prachanda to sign it in the manner he did,” Indian Express quoted Rizal.

 

Apparently, no one in Nepal’s government was privy to Prachanda’s deal with the Chinese. The signing of the MoU was behind closed doors. The media was not invited. No details of cost, development projects or time needed to complete the projects were provided.

 

The Prachanda-APECF connection has been controversial from the beginning—not only for its questionable motives, but for its furtiveness (if not its out-and-out dishonesty) as well. (CLICK HERE for details.)

 

Yesterday, GlobalPost’s Jason Overdorf pointed out:

 

… some see China's enthusiasm for Lumbini as part of a larger "battle for Buddha," pitting Beijing versus New Delhi in the quest to expand "soft power," or cultural influence, within the region.

 

In this struggle, India seeks to use its common cultural heritage to overcome China's ethnic ties to the overseas Chinese in Southeast Asia, and China seeks to limit the damage from its repression of religious freedom in Tibet and its incessant sparring with the Dalai Lama.

 

“This is part of China's effort to use Buddhism to gain an entry into Nepal, [and] to show to their Buddhists that they're showing equal attention to Buddhism outside the country,” Jayaveda Ranade, formerly additional secretary for East Asia with the Indian government, told GlobalPost of the Chinese proposal for the development of Lumbini.

 

… Prachanda was among the nine vice-chairs of the APECF foundation last year when it announced that the project was a done deal. But he had to backtrack following a protest from the Nepalese authorities, due to perceived irregularities in the way the agreement was forged.

 

Bizarrely, for instance, China's state-run People's Daily first reported that APECF had inked a deal with the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) to create a “special cultural zone” in Lumbini, only to be forced to retract the story when first UNIDO, then Nepal, denied any knowledge of the pact. Even weirder, it surfaced that not only Prachanda but also the controversial Paras Bir Bikram Shah Dev, Nepal's former crown prince, held positions on APECF's board of directors.

 

As GlobalPost wrote then: at nearly one-tenth of Nepal's entire gross domestic product, $3 billion was a stupendous sum — and, some suspect, a wholly fictional one: a carnival barker's cry, crude propaganda, or a “trial balloon” to gauge how Nepal might react.

..... 

 

Even the LDNDC came under fire from the Buddhist community. When LDNDC was created one year ago, Buddhist leaders pointed out that they had not been consulted, adding that, according to Outlook, the plan was “an attempt to commercialize the sacred place without their consent.”

 

One thing is obvious after Wednesday’s signing: Neither APECF nor Prachanda’s penchant for underhanded dealing is going to fade away. Quite the opposite: APECF and Prachanda keep raising the stakes, hell-bent on turning Lumbini, birthplace of Buddha, into a horrid theme park of gargantuan proportions.

 

 

…………………………………............…………………………………..

 

 

LUMBINI: The Tibet - Maoist - APECF connection

 

 

October 29, 2012

 

The following is an Oct. 26 DNA article written by Jayadeva Ranade, originally titled “A concerned dragon: China’s fresh overture to Tibetans”

 

As China prepares to usher in a new leadership at the 18th Party Congress scheduled to open in Beijing on November 8, there is mounting concern in senior echelons of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) at the rising resentment in the ethnic Tibetan minority.

 

Particularly worrying would have been the self-immolation on October 15, by the grandfather of the 10-year old Beijing-recognised VIIth Gungthang Rinpoche, which highlights the strained relationship between Tibetans and Communist authorities. A new feature is that recently thousands of Tibetans, disregarding heavy armed police presence, assemble at sites of the self-immolations to pray for the deceased and mark the spot.

 

[Note: Voice of America’s Tibetan service is reporting that Tamdrin Dorjee killed himself near the Tsoe monastery in northwest China’s Gansu province. Witnesses say after setting himself on fire, he shouted “long live Dalai Lama,” “free Tibet” and “let the Dalai Lama return to Tibet.” This latest protest raises the number of self-immolations in Tibetan regions of China to 55 since February 2009. The Tibetan government-in-exile says 45 of those cases have resulted in deaths.

China accuses Tibetan exiles of self-immolating as part of a separatist struggle. But representatives of the Dalai Lama say protesters are driven to self-immolate largely because they cannot tolerate China’s policies in Tibet.]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In a recent apparent bid to ease these tensions, Chinese authorities quietly sent an emissary and contacted Tibetan leaders in Dharamsala. Thinly cloaked as a venture of ‘Asia Pacific Exchange and Cooperation Foundation’ (APECF), a Chinese government-sponsored NGO manned by Chinese Communist Party (CCP) cadres, the initiative seeks to revive plans to consolidate and expand China’s presence in Nepal and ingress India and its border regions, ostensibly by encouraging Buddhist tourism in Lumbini in Nepal. At least one executive director of APECF has links to China’s military establishment.

 

CLICK HERE for extensive information on APECF's controversial bid for Lumbini

 

Xiao Wunan, a senior CCP cadre and executive vicepresident of APECF visited India and was received in Dharamsala on August 16 by the Dalai Lama, Lobsang Sangay, then ‘Kalon Tripa’ (prime minister) of the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA) and Ugyen Thinley Dorjee, who is formally approved by the Dalai Lama and Beijing as the XVIIth Gyalwa Karmapa, or head of the Karma Kargyu sect. Xiao Wunan was accompanied byGong Tingyu, a Deputy Secretary General of APECF and Simon Kei Shek Ming, reportedly a journalist of the Hong Kong magazine Yazhou Zhoukan.

 

During his meeting with the Dalai Lama, Xiao Wunan probably carried a personal message from a senior Chinese leader, possibly Xi Jinping. He could have informed the Dalai Lama that he was welcome to spend his last days in Beijing provided he gave up ‘anti-China’ activities and expressed support for the Communist regime.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Xiao Wunan’s meeting with Lobsang Sangay, elected head of the CTA, is significant. It suggests Beijing may be willing to talk to its representatives. Lobsang Sangay is also ‘known’ to the UFWD for facilitating contacts between Chinese academics and the Dalai Lama. Coincidentally, within a month of the meeting the designation of the Head of the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA) was changed from ‘Kalon Tripa’ (or prime minister) to the less controversial — from Beijing’s perspective —’Sikyong’ (or political leader).

 

Xiao Wunan’s meeting with Ugyen Thinley Dorjee reportedly ended abruptly when the monk took offence at the tenor of his questions. Xiao Wunan’s photograph with Ugyen Thinley Dorjee is, however, posted on APECF’s website.

 

Xiao Wunan also visited Nalanda when he met officials of the proposed university and assured financial assistance. In Delhi he met officials in the Ministries of Culture and Tourism. Returning to Kathmandu, Xiao Wunan disingenuously announced that APECF now has the support of the Government of India and would be organising three and four-day package tours for Buddhist pilgrims travelling from Lumbini to India.

 

Interestingly, Xiao Wunan separated from an official Chinese delegation visiting Kathmandu to visit India. The Chinese delegation included Zou Lanming, vice general manager of the Lanzhou-based China Railway 21st Bureau. Xiao Wunan’s presence could suggest China plans to extend the railway from Xigaze to possibly Lumbini, on the border with India. A month later Xiao Wunan announced that APECF had signed an MoU with UK’s Vertical Theme Park (VTP) Group for a Lumbini Cloud Tower project, with the Nepal Government’s approval.

 

Nepal’s My Republica on October 11, reported the Nepal Ministry of Culture, Tourism and Civil Aviation’s denial that it was aware of any deal to develop Lumbini as an ‘international peace city’. Prachanda, leader of the Unified Communist Party-Marxist Leninist (UCP-ML), however, continues to be a vice president of APECF.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Meanwhile the CCP’s policy governing Tibetans, of combining economic incentives with intense political persuasion, remains unchanged. In an unusually candid interview to the Party mouthpiece People’s Daily on September 21, 2012, Chen Quanguo, party secretary of the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR), enumerated the economic benefits extended to the people of Tibet. Disclosing measures to ensure ‘social stability’, he listed that 21,804 cadres had been sent to work in 5,451 administrative villages, that the Party had compiled complete sets of files and that 698 police stations had been established. All monasteries and temples now have photographs of the ‘four leaders’ (Mao Zedong, Deng Xiaoping, Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao), the national flag and a copy each of the People’s Daily and Tibet Daily. A project has also been started to ‘cultivate’ 100 senior monks and ‘guide’ Tibetan Buddhism to ‘adapt itself to socialist society’.

 

 

Jayadeva Ranade is a former additional secretary in the Cabinet Secretariat, Government of India.

  

 

…………………………………………………………………………….

Integration of Maoist ex-rebels completed - challenges remain

 

October 4, 2012

The following is an article written by PRASHANT JAH, published by The Hindu.

 

"One country two armies" situation ends in Nepal

 

Six years after the formal end of the civil war, Nepal’s “peace process” has concluded with the integration of a little over 1,450 former Maoist fighters into the Nepal Army (NA). The cantonments where the former combatants of the Maoist People’s Liberation Army (PLA) resided have closed down, Maoist weapons are under state control, and the PLA has ceased to exist ending the state of “one country, two Armies”.

 

In the past few weeks, the final phase of the integration process saw 1,388 combatants who had opted for integration pass through the NA-conducted selection examinations. They would join at the solider level. Seventy five other former Maoist fighters have cleared the written exam to join the NA at the officer level, though final results for them have not yet been announced since medical tests and interviews are to be completed. Officers are to go through a nine-month training course, and soldiers would undergo a seven-month course — both sets will also have an additional three-month “bridge course”.

 

Over the past five years, there has been a gradual reduction in the number of combatants in the cantonments. About 32,000 individuals had initially registered in the camps in early 2007. But the United Nations Mission in Nepal (UNMIN) verified only 19,602 of those as combatants and disqualified over 4,000 persons for being under-age or joining the Maoist Army after the ceasefire began. The “disqualified” were discharged from the cantonments in early 2010.

 

In November 2011, (click here) a seven-point agreement was signed between the parties, which stipulated that a maximum of 6,500 former combatants could be integrated in a specially created general directorate under the NA. In the first phase of regrouping, over 7000 combatants opted to retire with cash packages while over 9,000 opted for integration.

 

But in subsequent rounds, this number steadily dipped and finally, around 1,600 combatants and 116 officer-level former fighters chose to go through selection tests.

 

In April 2012, the Nepal Army had also taken charge of the cantonments as well as containers that included over 3,000 Maoist weapons. The NA is now making arrangements to transport the containers to army centres from the cantonments, which have closed down.

 

CHALLENGES

 

 

 

Minendra Rijal, a member of the Special Committee for the Supervision, Integration, and Rehabilitation of former combatants, said that the process was now complete, and highlighted the key challenge ahead. Speaking to The Hindu, he said, “It is now important that there be no relationship between the Maoist party and those former fighters who have joined the Army; they must see themselves like any other solider. At the same time, the Nepal Army too must not discriminate against those who have been integrated. That will be the yardstick for successful integration.”

 

There is some uncertainty about where the combatants would be accommodated in the Army structure, since a lot fewer combatants than expected will be getting integrated. The original strength of the proposed general directorate was 18,500 — with 6,500 former Maoists constituting 35 per cent of the force and the remaining 65 per cent personnel from the security forces. It was to have multiple responsibilities, and be headed by a Major-General.

 

 

 

 

 

“I don’t think there will be a general directorate now. There could be a directorate, which has limited responsibility, since its size will only be around 3,500 now,” says Deepak Prakash Bhatt, a member of the Special Committee Secretariat. The Maoist leadership has however insisted that a general directorate be formed in keeping with the agreement.

 

While there was an informal agreement that the senior-most rank to be given to the Maoists would be that of a colonel, sources say that going by years of service, several former Maoist commanders would be eligible only to rise up to a major. “Profession says major, let us see what politics determines,” said a key official involved closely with the process.

 

With over 15,000 trained and ideologically-influenced combatants opting to retire, there have been concerns about their future course of action. Among them, some have joined the radical Maoist splinter led by Mohan Vaidya ‘Kiran’, and are being organized into a semi-military structure. But most are, according to those who have closely worked in cantonments, returning to their families, setting up businesses and working with their old Maoist party.

 

.......................................................................

 

 

U.S. Removes Nepal’s Maoists from its “Terrorist” List. Bad Idea?

 

September 16, 2012

Kul Chandra Gautam is one of Nepal’s most distinguished international civil servants. He served as Assistant Secretary General of the UN and Deputy Executive Director of UNICEF. He was Special Advisor to the Prime Minister of Nepal on International Affairs and the Peace Process. He is a seasoned diplomat and civic leader and serves on the Boards of a number of international and national foundations and charitable organizations. Six months ago, he was also listed by Lalrakshak, the magazine backed by the UCPN (Maoist) Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal “Prachanda”, as an “enemy of the people” – a label many analysts equated to a loosely veiled death threat. CLICK HERE for my interview with Mr. Gautam, February 28, 2012

 

Three days ago, following the US lifting of the terrorist tag on Nepal’s Maoists, Mr. Gautam published his response in Republica:

 

“The Teflon Politicians” by Kul Ghandra Gaurtam           

 

The Maoists are ecstatic that the American government has just lifted the ‘terrorist’ tag from them. They never acknowledged or expressed any regret that they had ever used terror tactics. They claim that it was either a “misunderstanding” and their pro-people activism was misconstrued as terrorism, or a “conspiracy” by the world leader of capitalist-imperialist powers to defame a progressive nationalist movement fighting for social justice. In any case, the standard Maoist defence is that if they ever committed any violent excesses, it was their “compulsion”, not their “choice”. Now, the Maoists argue that the Americans have finally corrected their mistake.

 

The Americans––including the new US Ambassador to Nepal––would surely understand the Teflon phenomena. An American company, DuPont uses the brand name ‘Teflon’ for a ‘non-stick’ chemical in cooking pots and pans, much favored by America’s housewives and chefs. In politics, the term Teflon is used to describe a person who is impervious to even valid criticism and on whom no kind of blame seems to stick. Ronald Reagan was called the ‘Teflon president’ as he easily seemed to get away with all kinds of gaffes and mis-statements. He was a lovable actor and people forgave him for mixing up certain facts and figures.

 

Russian President Vladimir Putin seems to enjoy similar Teflon characteristics as many ordinary Russians overlook his authoritarian tendencies in their quest for progress with order and stability. Meanwhile, Nepal’s Maoists, and especially their leader Pushpa Kamal Dahal ‘Prachanda’, seem to have acquired an amazing Teflon characteristic as well.

 

Many Nepalis now recognize the deceptive nature of the Maoists when they speak about ‘people’s’ democracy, ‘pro-people’ Constitution, progressive transformation (agragaami paribartan), and even ‘peace, inclusion and social justice’ as their guiding principles. These days, the ordinary Nepali seems immensely cynical about these terms. But curiously, many Western friends of Nepal seem to continue to give the Maoists very generous benefits of doubt, even in the face of blatant and overwhelming evidence. Consider some of these examples.

 

EXTORTION AND DECEPTION

 

When the UN Mission to Nepal (UNMIN) started verifying Maoist combatants, the party flooded the cantonments with nearly 32,000 cadres, many of whom were freshly minted “combatants”. Reportedly, quite a few of their hardcore combatants were kept outside the cantonments as members of their ‘civilian’ Young Communist League, some of them on ‘double duty’—registered in cantonments but serving in various party functions outside. UNMIN did disqualify some 10,000 fake combatants and identified 4,000 as child-soldiers and late recruits.

 

But the Maoists never acknowledged that they had done anything wrong, much less apologizing for their willful lying. On the contrary, in a recorded videotape at Shaktikhor camp, Maoist leader Prachanda gloated with pride about how they had fooled the UN into accepting 19,000 as certified combatants whereas their actual number, he acknowledged, was only 7,000-8,000 only. UNMIN’s response to this disgraceful deception was not an outrage but a plea that we should understand the Maoists’ statement in a “certain context.”

 

Although UNMIN confirmed that nearly 3,000 combatants in cantonments were child-soldiers, and the Maoist leadership tried to negotiate big cash grants from donors in their name, the party has never officially acknowledged that they ever recruited anyone under the age of 18 in violation of international conventions. For two years, the party leadership delayed the release and rehabilitation of these youngsters, giving them false assurances that in the end, the party will either ensure that they are integrated into the Nepal Army or given very generous allowances. However, these poor kids were ultimately dumped by the party with poor packages.

 

Then after four years of dilly-dallying, the Maoist party showed ‘extraordinary flexibility for the sake of peace and constitution’, which was much heralded by many Nepalis and the international community. During physical verification of the combatants to ascertain their interest in integration, rehabilitation or voluntary retirement with a handsome package, it turned out that many thousands of combatants were either “phantoms” or had deserted the cantonments long ago. But the party and its commanders were collecting their allowances regularly with fake signatures. The compulsory levy collected from the meager allowances of these poor combatants had mostly gone to a mysterious ‘party headquarters’ and was never accounted for. Credible reports indicate that the party leadership has thus extorted from the government treasury, billions of rupees.

 

Today, the UCPN (Maoist) is Nepal’s richest but least transparent political party in terms of its financial dealings. After an uproar from within its own ranks, the party has constituted investigative committees to look into personal property and finances of its leaders and commanders. The “agragaami” fanfare with which these committees were created, packed with the party leaders’ henchmen, will predictably absolve the party’s top leadership but hold some middle-level leaders guilty as sacrificial lambs. And once again, many will cheer the glorious party’s courage and ability to introspect and correct internal faults, compared to the opaque nature of other corrupt traditional parliamentary parties.

 

TEFLON LOGIC

 

How is it that in this day and age, a Marxist-Leninist-Stalinist-Maoist party that has not given up violence as a legitimate method of political change and ‘state capture’ by any means—through bullets or ballots—as its ultimate objectives can still project its image as a Teflon-coated ‘progressive and pro-people’ force?

 

Besides its following among many simple and poor folks or genuine victims of oppression who are looking for a savior and for whom the Maoist rhetoric can be very appealing, there seem to be two main reasons behind this. One, many of Nepal’s ethnic, regional and political activists, some civil society leaders, journalists and commentators are convinced that despite some of their excesses, the Maoists are or can be genuine agents for progressive change. Some tend to believe that even if the Maoists are insincere, they can be ‘used’ to neutralize traditional conservative forces to bring about progressive social change. Interestingly, this logic corresponds to the Maoists’ own design and calculation in the old Stalinist tactic of using independent intellectuals as “useful idiots”.

 

Two, after the end of the Cold War, Western countries are no longer worried about the ‘Communist menace’, which has now been generally replaced by Islamophobia. So, progressive-sounding dissident movements tend to enjoy a certain romantic appeal. And in their external relations, Nepal’s Maoists have been relatively successful in projecting their image of being widely misunderstood like the Scandinavian social-democrats.

 

BLIND FAITH

 

It is interesting to watch how certain groups of Nepali intelligentsia and analysts tend to have a deep impact on the thinking of international progressives. The combination of Western-educated intellectuals—who present all of Nepal’s problems as a simple case of the traditional Bahun-Chhetri Hill elites wanting to perpetuate their privileged position by opposing all progressive change that would empower marginalized groups––and Nepali intelligentsia tends to unintentionally support the Teflon Maoists, offering faith-based solutions like ethnic federalism rather than genuinely progressive affirmative actions.

 

Now that the more vocally extremist Mohan Baidya group has split from the UCPN (Maoist), it has become convenient for many such potential analysts to say that the mainstream Maoists are truly progressive social-democrats. Never mind that the UCPN (Maoist) too has officially kept ‘all options open’ as a revolutionary party that believes in the dictatorship of the proletariat.

 

None of this is to say the Maoists should never be given any benefit of doubt. Credit must be given where due. True democrats must be open to all peaceful dissenting views, but always with the wise caution of the old Gipper—‘trust but verify’.

 

[email protected]           

 

 

........................................................................................

 

 

 

Maoists demand Nepal revoke 1950 Peace & Friendship Treaty with India

 

September 12, 2012

 

The breakaway faction of the ruling Maoist party in Nepal submitted a list of 70 demands to the government on Monday and threatened protests if they are not fulfilled. A group of leaders belonging to Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist handed over the charter of demands to Prime Minister Baburam Bhattarai at the latter’s office in Singha Darbar.

 

The demands include nearly two-dozen concerning India like scrapping of 'unequal' treaties and deals and better regulation of the 1800-km open border between both countries.

 

Most points in the list are similar to the 40 demands submitted by Maoists to the ruling government in 1996 before launching the 10-year-long civil war that left nearly 16,000 dead.

 

Incidentally, it was Bhattarai himself who had submitted the Maoist list to the then prime minister Sher Bahadur Deuba in 1996.

 

The CPN-M, which split from Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) in June, has threatened to launch nationwide protests and even armed revolt if needed if the demands are not met.

 

"We won’t take up arms immediately, but won’t remain quiet either if the demands are overlooked," CPN-M vice-chairman CP Gajurel said after submitting the list of demands.

 

Among the demands are scrapping of the 1950 peace and friendship treaty between India and Nepal, the Bilateral Investment Protection and Promotion Agreement signed last year in New Delhi and two major hydro-power projects awarded to Indian firms.

 

Border regulation demands include better management, end to Indian 'encroachment' and bans on 'unauthorised' entry of Indian security personnel and cars bearing Indian number plates into Nepal.

 

Ban on Hindi films, closing of Gorkha recruitment centres in Nepal and end to direct financial assistance by India to projects in Nepal without routing them through the country’s finance ministry also find mention in the list.

 

The CPN-M list includes promulgation of a 'peoples' federal republican’ constitution and creation of federal units with ‘national identity’ as well.

 

Though the breakaway faction led by Mohan Baidya is unlikely to take up arms, there is a section within the party which wants to follow that path by enlisting former Maoist combatants who took part in the civil war.

 

...................................................................................

 

 

Nepal: US removes terrorist label from Maoists just as Maoist murder controversy intensifies against Maoist PM Bhattarai

 

September 8, 2012

 

The United States on Thursday removed Nepal's ruling Maoist party, which after a bloody, decade-long insurgency now heads a caretaker government, from its blacklist of terrorist organizations – this after almost a decade as a designated global terrorist body.

 

The delisting means that US organizations and companies can now conduct business with the Maoist leadership, and any property or interests that were frozen in the United States are no longer blocked.

 

But fresh testimony given in a New Delhi court implicates Nepal’s Maoist prime minister in a tawdry murder case, bringing into question the sagacity of the US State Department’s decision for leniency.

 

According to Yubaraj Ghimire, reporting in yesterday’s The Indian Express:

 

Prime Minister Baburam Bhattarai has landed in a fresh controversy as one of his closest political followers and a murder accused has testified before a court that he was hiding in Delhi under the instructions of the Prime Minister.

 

Nabaraj Basnet, a Maoist leader from eastern Nepal’s Okhaldhunga district, told the district court on Wednesday that he was living in Delhi for the past two years as Bhattarai had asked him to look for a safer hideout since police was looking for him in a murder case. In his statement recorded by the court, Basnet said Gopal Kirati, a former minister under Bhattarai and Balkrishna Dhungel, a Maoist central committee member, had asked him to kill one Chhabi Karki, a rival politician, in the district long after the Maoists joined the peace process.

 

Bhattarai is already facing a controversy after he threw his weight behind Dhungel, a murder convict, and protected him from being arrested and disqualified as a member of the Nepal constituent assembly.

 

Basnet’s surrender has added teeth to the opposition attack on the Prime Minister, which is clamoring for his resignation.

 

 

What was the reasoning behind the State Department’s lifting of terrorist label?

 

"At the time of the designations, the CPN(M) was engaged in a violent war with the Nepalese government," a State Department official told Agence France Press.

The party's "terrorist activities resulted in the death or disappearance of thousands of Nepali citizens, and resulted in the murder of two US embassy security guards."

More recently, however, it "has participated in democratic elections, has taken steps to dismantle its capability to conduct terrorist activities, and has demonstrated a credible commitment to pursuing the peace and reconciliation process in Nepal as the current head of Nepal's coalition government.”

The Maoists are now running the country as a "caretaker" government with no parliament and no real mandate after the legislature was dissolved when, despite years of wrangling, the political leaders failed to meet a May deadline to write a new peacetime constitution.

Nepal's Election Commission has also said it lacks a legal framework to hold elections which had been promised for November.

"Even six years after the political process began, Nepal's political culture remains tumultuous," State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell told journalists on Thursday.

"We continue to urge all parties to express their views peacefully, in accordance with Nepali law."

 

It was also clarified that both factions of the party following its June split had been de-listed. (The Mohan Vaidya ‘Kiran’-led Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist, which split from the parent party in June, has threatened to launch a struggle — and armed revolt “if necessary” — if their demands are not met. LINK HERE FOR DETAILS)

 

 

....................................................................................

 

 

Nepal Maoist radical faction threatens Prachanda-led Maoists

 

September 7, 2012

Prashant Jha article published yesterday by The Hindu:

 

Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist Chairman Mohan Vaidya 'Kiran' talking to media-persons at CPN-Maoist office, Buddhanagar on wednesday.

 

Sixteen years after Nepal’s Maoists presented a memorandum with 40 points to the then government before launching their ‘People’s War’, a splinter radical Maoist party has decided to present a list of 70 demands to the Maoist-led government.

The Mohan Vaidya ‘Kiran’-led Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist, which split from the parent party in June, has threatened to launch a struggle — and armed revolt ‘if necessary’ — if their demands are not met.

 

At a press conference here on Wednesday, Mr. Kiran accused the Prachanda-led Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) of “neo-revisionism”. “Instead of addressing demands they themselves had raised during the war, our own friends are now behaving like the ruling class.” He said while there had been some “achievements”, the country remained in a “semi-colonial, semi-feudal, and neo-colonial” situation, and a new “struggle” was necessary. Many of the issues listed in the new document are taken from the original 40-points agenda.

 

The new party has demanded the scrapping of the 1950 Nepal-India Treaty of Peace and Friendship; the 1965 bilateral security pact; the Mahakali treaty; the Small Development Projects supported by government of India in Nepal; and the Upper Karnali and Arun-3 hydropower contracts given to Indian companies.

 

It has called for “controlling and managing” the open border between the two countries; ending “border encroachment” in Nepali territory and “unauthorised” entry of Indian security personnel into Nepal; stopping entry of cars with Indian number plates; stopping Hindi and English cinema, video and publications; ending foreign investment in media; closing down Gorkha recruitment centres and “strictly controlling” all “anti-China” activities conducted using Nepal as a base.

 

In the third week of August, Mr. Kiran had met the chairperson of the royalist Rashtriya Prajatantra Party-Nepal, Kamal Thapa, and discussed co-operating on the issue of “nationalism and sovereignty”.

 

‘People’s Democracy’

 

Other demands revolve around “people’s democracy and livelihood”. These include: institutionalising a ‘People’s Federal Republican’ constitution by elected people’s representatives, federalism with “national identity”, full proportionate inclusion in state organs, drafting a new national security policy, relief and compensation to those who suffered in the ‘People’s War’, end of discrimination and untouchability against Dalits, employment guarantee, free and compulsory education till Class 12, land reform, and action against corrupt.

 

Mr. Kiran said while their struggle would initially be peaceful, they may adopt the armed method if their demands were not met. Analysts, however, believe that it is unlikely that the entire party will revert to an insurgency. But unconfirmed reports suggest that a section, led by a radical young leader Netra Bikram Chand ‘Biplab’, is organising former soldiers of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and collecting arms to prepare for a violent revolt.

 

Ironically, in 1996, it was the then ideologue Baburam Bhattarai who prepared and submitted the demands on behalf of the Maoists.

 

This time, in his capacity as the Prime Minister, he will receive a similar set of demands from his erstwhile colleagues.

 

 

…………………………………………………………………………………

 

Nepal’s Widening Polarization – Analysis by The Institute for Conflict Management

 

August 29, 2012

 

The following analysis published yesterday by South Asia Terrorism Portal, is written by Fakir Mohan Pradhan.

 

The uncertain calm in Nepal, disturbed by no more than occasional rumblings for the ouster of Prime Minister Baburam Bhattarai, received a jolt when at least 20 Political parties, mostly from the ruling coalition, announced the formation of an alliance – the Federal Democratic Republican Alliance (FDRA) – at a press conference at Hotel Radisson in the capital, on August 17, 2012. Led by the Unified Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist (UCPN-M) Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal aka Prachanda and its constituents, the alliance includes the UCPN-M, Terai Madhesh Democratic Party (TMDP), TMDP-Nepal, Madheshi People’s Rights Forum–Democratic (MPRF-D), Madhesi People’s Rights Forum-Republican (MPRF-R), Rastriya Janamukti Party, Sadhbhwana Party and the Nepal Rastriya Party, among others. Samajbadi Janata Party Chairman Prem Bahadur Singh was declared the spokesperson of the alliance.

 

The alliance, declaring itself in favour of federalist principles, aims to work towards ethnic-based federalism and the promulgation of a new constitution through the now dissolved Constituent Assembly (CA). Prachanda said the alliance has “long-term” and “strategic” importance and that it would continue until another election. He further stated that the alliance was prepared to hit the streets if a “conspiracy is hatched against identity-based federalism.”

 

 

 

The major opposition parties – Nepali Congress (NC) and the Communist Party of Nepal – Unified Marxist Leninist (CPN-UML) – and the newly formed Mohan Baidya-led CPN-Maoist (CPN-Maoist-Baidya) have come down heavily against the alliance, seeing it as an attempt to vitiate the political atmosphere by working against the politics of consensus. NC and CPN-UML see it as an attempt to prolong the life span of the care taker government and demand immediate resignation of the Prime Minister Bhattarai to pave the way for consensus government which would further the peace process.

 

The alliance was established because of a felt need to forge national consensus in favour of ethnic-based federalism and the promulgation of a new constitution through the CA. Prachanda argued that the alliance would negotiate from a position of strength, urging the NC and the CPN-UML to agree to identity-based federalism. The veiled threat in this argument was made more openly by Prachanda when he declared that political confrontation in the country in the days to come would be “between alliances”. Daring NC and CPN-UML to forge an alliance, Prachanda declared, on August 18, 2012, in Lahan, “Whether it is a fight or a deal, it will now be between alliances.”

 

The FDRA has put forward two options to end the current political impasse – either to hold election to the CA or to revive the dissolved CA.

 

Complicating issues, the CPN-Maoist-Baidya, created an alliance of nine fringe political parties – the Nepal Federal People’s Republic Front – on August 10, 2012, to unseat the Bhattarai Government. Baidya slammed the UCPN-M led FDRA, describing it as “a desperate attempt of the present Government to cling to power”.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In another development, marking the World Indigenous Day on August 9, 2012, Janjati and indigenous leaders unveiled the manifesto of a proposed indigenous people’s party – the Social Democratic Pluri-National Party – and vowed to complete the task of party formation within the next two months. The proposed party manifesto advocates single identity-based federalism. The party is expected to join the FDRA.

 

 

Meanwhile, on August 17, 2012, President Ram Baran Yadav rejected two election-related ordinances —Election to Member of the CA and Ordinance to Amend Some Existing Electoral Laws — recommended by the caretaker Government on July 27, sending a message that he would not approve ordinances that did not “satisfy” him or that lacked a minimal consensus among parties. The President’s office argued that the recommendation for the ordinance was rejected as they were not “relevant” in light of the formal announcement by the election Commission on July 31 to the effect that polls to CA on November 22 cannot be held.

 

Visibly dismayed by these developments, the Bhattarai Government was mulling over the prospects of resending the ordinances to the President on the grounds that it was within the constitutional powers of the Government to issue ordinances. However, better sense prevailed, and, on August 25, the Government decided not to bring any ordinance without political consensus. This has helped avoid a confrontation between the President and the Prime Minister, which has long been expected, but has been averted till now.

 

The FDRA is increasingly being regarded as an attempt to prolong the life of the UCPN–M-led caretaker Government, as well as muscle flexing by the UCPN-M. The political deadlock continues as NC and CPN-UML continue to demand the immediate resignation of Prime Minister Bhattarai, and the formation of a ‘consensus government’ under which the next election would take place. The UCPN-M, however, remains adamant that, before the resignation of the Prime Minister, contentious issues – especially that of identity-based federalism – must be solved. However, the demand for the ouster of the PM is getting louder, despite a defiant Prachanda’s declaration that the Caretaker Government would continue for 20 or 30 years, and even longer, if there was no consensus on identity-based federalism.

 

The FDRA is expected to be a prelude to come in handy for the UCPN-M, in case opposition parties take to streets to oust the Bhattarai Government. In the event of elections, moreover, the FDRA is expected to boost the chances of the coalition. The alliance is now trying to project the NC and CPN-UML as ‘anti-federalist’, though these parties contest such a projection. The CPN-UML has stated that it is ready for identity-based, but not single-identity based, federalism. It remains to be seen what the position of the Madhesh-based parties will be; these parties have been pressing for ‘One Madhesh, One Province’. They have, however, entered an alliance which is demanding single-identity based federalism, which militates against their ‘One Province’ demand.

 

Amidst the continuing deadlock , another crisis appears to be brewing. The ‘special budget’ that was brought by the Government through an ordinance, and approved by the President, provided funds for a third of the current year’s expenditure. If the political impasse is not cleared by then, a major crisis is likely, as the NC and CPN-UML are expected to oppose any further grants, to put pressure on Bhattarai to make way for a consensus government.

 

As a consequence of the current political crisis, one of the most contentious issues that had almost been resolved – the integration of People’s Liberation Army (PLA) combatants with the Nepal Army – has gone into limbo because of disagreements over meeting the Army’s selection criteria.

 

 

As the war of words continues, the major political parties reached an understanding on August 25, 2012, to refrain from a blame game and to hold a ‘serious dialogue’ to find a way out of the current political deadlock. Considering the belligerent positions of the major political formations and the UCPN-M’s present initiatives, both in the formation of the FDRA and to push through several ordinances, however, no early resolution appears likely. The NC and CPN-UML’s attempts to secure the dismissal of the Bhattarai Government through the President also militate against any negotiations in good faith. The grounds appear to be prepared for street mobilization – and the spectre of street violence cannot be far behind.

 

Fakir Mohan Pradhan

Research Associate, Institute for Conflict Management

 

 

Source details:

 

SATP, or the South Asia Terrorism Portal (SATP) publishes the South Asia Intelligence Review, and is a product of The Institute for Conflict Management, a non-Profit Society set up in 1997 in New Delhi, and which is committed to the continuous evaluation and resolution of problems of internal security in South Asia. The Institute was set up on the initiative of, and is presently headed by, its President, Mr. K.P.S. Gill, IPS (Retd).

 

 

.....................................................................................

 

 

NEPAL: Maoist Youths Set 3 Public School Buses on Fire

 

July 25, 2012

In theory, the YCL was eliminated from the Maoist system. But it would appear that thug activity, at least within the more radical faction of the Maoists, is alive and kicking.

 

Yesterday, three buses of a Delhi Public school branch in eastern Nepal were set afire by activists of the student's union affiliated to the breakaway hard-line faction of the Maoists, protesting against schools running under foreign investment.

The buses carrying 150 students of class XI and XII were en route to Dharan yesterday, when the radical Maoist student activists stopped it near Charkose Jungle area at Seuti Khola river and set them on fire.

The students were unharmed, at least physically. Their right to an education is another story.

 

The Maoist student union -- All Nepal National Free Students Union - Revolutionary (ANNFSU-R) is affiliated to the CPN-Maoist party led by hardliner Mohan Vaidya “Kiran”, who recently broke ranks with the Prachanda-led Maoists to form a more radical outfit. Delhi Public School Dharan is affiliated to India's Delhi Public School.

ANNFSU-R had also enforced a two-day shutdown in Dharan and Sunsari districts over the last two days to protest against schools operating under foreign investments, promoting foreign culture and charging high fees.

“It's a heinous crime to attack school buses despite the fact that schools are declared peace zone," Dil Kumar Ban, Chairman of Private and Boarding School Organisation Nepal (PABSON) said in a statement.

 

 

 

…………………………………………………………….

 

 

With eye on Tibet, Beijing leader graces Kathmandu with warnings and political snubs

 

July 3, 2012

 

 

Ai Ping – Vice Minister of the International Department of the Communist Party of China (CPC) and Beijing’s point man on South Asian affairs -- paid a weekend visit to Kathmandu. He conveyed China’s growing concern over Nepal’s governmental quagmire, the country’s economic instability and the dubious political promotion of ethnic federalism.

 

Obviously, it’s to China’s advantage to have a politically, economically and socially stable southern neighbor. But China’s core issue with Nepal remains unchanged: Tibet.

 

 

 

 

 

According to Beijing-based analyst Hu Shisheng, Deputy Director of the Institute of South And South Asian Studies in the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations, China fears that Nepal’s current impasse sets the stage for new free-Tibet activities.

The Clock Has Stopped in Nepal

 

June 28, 2012

 

The following analysis, "A Long Stalemate",  was written by Prashant Jha on June 27, 2012

 

On his return from Brazil on Monday, Prime Minister Baburam Bhattarai said he would hand over power to the next PM elected once a new parliament was constituted. Till then, this government would stay on. This was the clearest indication of the PM’s determination to stay on, and it sparked a predictable outrage among the opposition parties demanding his immediate resignation.

 The Maoist-Madhesi Morcha decision to continue and the NC-UML-Upendra Yadav-Kiran insistence of getting rid of the government is thus the defining hallmark of the political alignment. In this, two other figures stand out.

Condemned: Latest attempt by Prime Minister Bhattarai to repress Nepali Media

 

June 20, 2012

 

While Nepal’s prime minister and his two-dozen-member entourage enjoy a change of pace in Rio de Janeiro, media watchdogs have strongly condemned two recent incidents that took place in Nepal, one of which directly involves Baburam Bhattarai and a move on his part to censor free press:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Freedom Form/IFEX Alert

 

The government led by the Unified Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist (UCPN-M) grilled the state-run Nepal Television (NTV) management about the live broadcast of a programme involving opposition parties.

 

Prime Minister Dr Baburam Bhattarai personally questioned NTV General Manager Deepak Mani Dhital and Director Rajendra Dev Acharya saying, "Why did you broadcast live the programme organized by 22 opposition parties?"

With Nepal in freefall, the prime minister heads to Rio

 

June 19, 2012

 

On Monday, Baburam Bhattarai, Nepal’s Maoist prime minister, flew to Brazil at a time when the country is reeling from serious political and constitutional upheaval.

 

Bhattarai’s reason for flying to South America was to attend the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development – the Rio +20 Summit, to be held from June 20-22.

 

By going to Rio, Bhattarai has ignored his own party’s order not to make foreign visits because such a move is not in keeping with the situation in Nepal and plays into the hostilities of opposition parties.

 

But by Monday, Bhattarai may have come to regard his own party as one component of the opposition.

Official split within Maoist party announced

June 17, 2012

 

Baidya proposes revolt as line of new party           

by Kiran Pun

 

KATHMANDU, June 16: The Central Committee meeting of the dissident faction of the UCPN(Maoist) led by Senior Vice-chairman Mohan Baidya has endorsed a political document that proposes revolt as its main political line and terms the acceptance of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement one of the major mistakes.

 

The 17-page document prepared by Baidya will be presented at the national gathering of leaders and supporters of the faction starting from Saturday in Kathmandu.

Nepal: Chinese cynicism over Maoist leaders’ economic dream world

 

June 14, 2012

 

The political situation in Nepal is a train wreck and even Chinese media, which normally treads softly on Kathmandu’s politicos, reflects Beijing’s growing impatience with Maoist leadership.

 

In a Xinhau editorial published on June 11, “Who Smothers Nepali Dreams?” author Zhou Shengping lampoons Prachanda’s vision of turning Nepal in to the “Switzerland of Asia” and Prime Minister Bhattarai’s, “oft-told dream, a real dilly, that Nepal can be ‘a vibrant bridging state’ not only between India and China, but also of South Asia and East Asia.

 

“Time tests all,” the article continues. “Prachanda's dream turned into a very short- lived passion that decayed upon growing inter-and intra-party rifts, resulting in a jest of media critics thanks to deadlocked politics and stagnant economy. With lots of bureaucratic hurdles and without a stable investment environment, Nepal, one of the poorest countries in Asia stands foreign investment off.”

UN’s assessment of its own role in facilitating Nepal’s peace process

 

June 8, 2012

 

On June 7, 2012, the NY Daily News published an except from Karin Landgren’s introduction to “Nepal’s Peace Process at the United Nations”, Volume II. Ms. Landgren was the head of the UN Mission in Nepal (UNMIN) from 2009 to 2011:

 

On Friday, 14 January 2011, at 5:00 p.m., the UN Mission in Nepal (UNMIN) lowered its flag, closing down an operation that had lasted four years. I no longer exercise any official role with respect to Nepal, having left to take up functions as the Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Burundi. My perspective now is from an entirely different peace process, on another continent.

Nepal: A brief history and balanced account of the now dissolved Constituent Assembly

 

June 4, 2012 

 

By Anshuman Behera

 

The Constituent Assembly (CA) of Nepal was dissolved on May 27, 2012 after it failed to draft a Constitution within the stipulated time, even after four extensions. Amid protests and disagreements among the political parties, the former Prime Minister (presently the caretaker Prime Minister) Baburam Bhattarai announced fresh polls to be held on November 22, 2012 to give a logical conclusion to the drafting process. The blame game, as usual, is at its peak among the political parties.

Nepal Army takes charge of Maoist ex-rebels: Backstory

 

April 13, 2012

 

On Wednesday, Nepali soldiers moved into the cantonments where thousands of former Maoist rebels have lived since 2006, at which time the Maoists abandoned their 10-year revolt and joined the peace process. The government's chief monitor for the former rebels, Balananda Sharma, confirmed that army soldiers arrived at all seven main camps and eight satellite camps spread across the country.

Interesting review and analysis of Nepal’s governmental corruption

 

March 23, 2012

 

This week the Asian Human Rights Commission published a lengthy article on Nepali corruption written by Om Prakash Sen Thakuri. Below is a slightly condensed version.

 

The annual report of Transparency International (TI) on the perception of corruption index has listed Nepal 154^th out of the 183 countries around the world it has assessed. Nepal was ranked 121^st in 2008, and is the lowest placed South Asian country after Afghanistan. Nepal scored only 2.2 out of 10 where below 3.0 is considered a high percentage of corruption. Earlier this month, the Prime Minister admitted that corruption is rampant in Nepal. The Auditor General's Annual Report for 2011 brought to light the extent to which money laundering takes place in the government sector. According to the report, from the total amount of Rs 29,91,4,000,000 collected from the tax some 1,26,95,00,000 (Approximately US$ 15, 868,750) was not deposited in the state coffer during the last fiscal year 2010/11.

Prachanda’s son forced to return the Maoist government’s $250,000, which he was given to climb Mt. Everest

 

March 20, 2012

Prakash Dahal, the son of Maoist Chairman Prachanda, was forced Sunday to refuse $250,000 from his father’s government for a Mount Everest expedition after the offer sparked outrage and accusations of Maoist corruption.

Earlier in the week, Prakash had proclaimed that he and his 11-member crew were “going to climb Mount Everest for the country and its people to ensure peace and new constitution.”

But the brazen move made front-page news in all newspapers and led opposition parties Nepali Congress and Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist Leninist) to protest and demand a rollback.

Opposition activists burned effigies of Prime Minister Baburam Bhattarai and warned they would stage “massive” protests across the impoverished nation after details of the grant emerged. Maoist party chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal’s son, Prakash, told a press conference: “We want to return the money to the government, showing respect for the sentiments of the Nepali people.”

But in a bizarre afterthought, Prakash suggested that the ill-gotten money should be given instead to the families of the 16,000 killed in the country’s 10-year civil war, which ended in 2006. Critics complained that he was hardly in a position to dictate where taxpayers’ money should be channeled.

"This is the worst kind of immoral decision taken by this government. There cannot be any financial irregularities greater than this," said Ramesh Lhekhak, leader of the opposition Nepali Congress, accusing the Maoists of "nepotism".

"Many common people are forced to live in poverty due to poor economic conditions but the government ignores them and wastes money in an unmeaningful [sic] initiative like this."

"How could the government's decision to empty the state coffers for these new princelings help achieve peace and the constitution-making process?" National Students' Union coordinator Ranjit Karna was quoted as saying in the Kathmandu Post. "This is an example of institutional corruption."

This is not the first time that Prachanda’s son has garnered negative headlines.

 

 

On March 22, 2009, the then Prime Minister Prachanda and his Minister for Finance Dr. Baburam Bhattarai – the current Prime Minister – rushed to Dhulikhel to hold a meeting with the vice chancellor of Kathmandu University Dr. Suresh Raj Sharma. Prachanda’s son accompanied them.

However, while the two Maoist leaders were engaged in the meeting, Prakash got it into his head to invite all the security personnel and the Maoists’ party cadres present to join him in alcoholic revelry. The results of that party – a photo of Prakash passed out in the Dhulikhel hotel lobby – made front-page news the following day, along with the unflattering comparison to “the good old days”, when King Gyanendra’s high-rolling son, Prince Paras, embarrassed the monarchy on an all-too-regular basis. 

 

……………………………………………………………………….

 

 

 

LUMBINI, Part Ten: Himalayan Buddhist community wants its say too

 

March 15, 2012

 

For almost a month now, I’ve posted exhaustive interviews with experts and stakeholders in the development of Lumbini, a topic that has gained increasing international attention since a Chinese-funded development offer came to light in July 2011. The Hong Kong-based organization in question calls itself the Asia Pacific Exchange and Cooperation Foundation (APECF). It’s pedigree is nebulous; even its address and telephone number listed on its website have proven to be phony. Ex-Prime Minister and Maoist Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal “Prachanda” was named Co-Chairman of APECF, a detail that immediately raised eyebrows in regard to the appropriateness of a leader of a ten-year armed struggle taking the reins of a site that universally symbolizes non-violence. In the event, the gist of the controversial offer (now on hold, if not permanently debunked) was to pour an unprecedented three billion dollars into and around the Sacred Garden, where the historical Lord Buddha was born.

Regardless of APECF’s legitimacy, coming to terms with the finalization of a master plan before additional development resumes in Lumbini seems to have been ratcheted up in recent months. Only last week, it was announced that the UN’s General Secretary Ban Ki-moon would visit Lumbini on April 29, at the bequest of Prachanda and his recently-created “Greater Lumbini Development National Steering Committee.” And the three billion dollars, which probably never existed except in the fantasy world of Chinese businessmen – a staggeringly tantalizing sum for a nation in which three billion dollars equals 10% of Nepal’s annual GDP – has opened Nepal’s eyes concerning the very real value, (at least monetarily), of Lumbini as a tourism bonanza.

Experts and stakeholders recently interviewed by me include publisher-author KANAK MANI DIXIT, seasoned diplomat and civic leader KUL CHANDRA GAUTAM, internationally renown tourism consultant LISA CHOEGYAL, Greater Lumbini Development National Steering Committee member MINENDRA RIJAL, UNESCO Representative to Nepal AXEL PLATHE, Vice-Chairman of Lumbini Development Trust (LDT) ACHARYA KARMA SANGBO SHERPA, and long-time Lumbini archeologist KOSH PRASAD ACHARYA.

Maoists Threaten Prominent Nepalis and Former U.N. Officials

 

February 17, 2011

 

Inter Press Service News Agency (IPS) released a troubling report concerning two former U.N. officials based in Kathmandu and another well known advocate, who are now facing implicit death threats from Nepal’s ruling Maoist political party and have appealed to the United Nations for help and protection. The report was filed on February 15 by Thalif Deen.

Kul Chandra Gautam, a former U.N. assistant secretary-general and a longstanding deputy executive director of the U.N. children's agency UNICEF, and Kanak Mani Dixit, a former press officer at the U.N.'s Department of Public Information (DPI) in New York and currently a senior Nepali journalist, have been declared "people's enemies".

A third individual under threat is Subodh Raj Pyakurel, executive director of Informal Services Sector (INSEC), the largest non- governmental human rights organisation in Nepal.

All three have been blacklisted in a cover story in the monthly magazine Lalrakshak published by the ruling Unified Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist (UCPN-Maoist).

Disillusioned Maoist ex-fighters in Nepal: Their checks seized by their military superiors

February 16, 2012

As reported by BBC’s Sanjaya Dhakal from Kathmandu:

More than 7,000 former Maoist fighters in Nepal, who have begun demobilizing five years after they ended their armed revolt, have received money to help them return to civilian life. But what was supposed to be a harmonious transition has ended up mired in rancor.

The mood among the seven camps of former Maoist fighters has in recent days been somber and stressful.

Many of the former guerrillas who received cash under the voluntary retirement package are angry at the turn of events.

Maoist government scraps attempt to legalize seized property acquired during the 10-year conflict

February 11, 2012

 

On February 8, bowing to the opposition's demands, Nepal's Maoist Prime Minister Baburam Bhattarai announced that he was revoking his Cabinet’s decision to legalize the war-time transactions of property and land deals.

Earlier, the Supreme Court had issued an order to halt the Maoists’ attempt to legalize the land that they had seized. The Maoists' "Peoples Government" had acquired thousands of papers regarding purchase, sale and distribution of land and property during the conflict period, mostly by using force.

Maoist youths protest: Their party has betrayed them

February 8, 2012

This week, cadres of the Maoist-affiliated Young Communist League (YCL), based in Dhangadhi (far western Nepal), protested against their own mother party.

On Monday, they demanded that they be recognized as equivalent to the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) fighters and be provided the same financial packages as promised by the party in 2007 — a demand neither heard before nor registered anywhere institutionally.

After a half-decade, 7000-plus Maoist ex-combatants are released from Nepal camps

February 5, 2012

Nepal’s Maoist ex-combatants began leaving the cantonments they had called home for five years on Friday after receiving government checks as part of a plan to integrate them into society.

7,365 former fighters were released.

Each Maoist was provided with a check ranging from $6,357 to as much as $10,235.

According to a New York Times report:

“It is an emotional moment,” said Ram Lal Roka, a vice commander at the Dahaban cantonment in the Rolpa district. “I am returning to my society, ending 16 years of service in the P.L.A.,” he said.
Mr. Roka expressed sadness, despite his release, that the ultimate goals of the Maoists to transform Nepal into a Communist state had not been achieved. He said he was returning to society “without achieving any of the ideal.”

Groundbreaking Nepali Editorial on the Government’s pro-China policy toward Tibetan Refugees

January 3, 2012

Today, Republica published an editorial by Arun KR Shrivastav, which, as far as I know is a first in methodically questioning the wisdom behind the Nepali government kow-towing to China’s position on Nepal’s Tibetan refugee community. Highly recommended reading.

CHINA, TIBET & NEPAL: Until that Happens    By Arun KR Shrivastav

Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao’s upcoming visit to Nepal purportedly to put bilateral relations irreversibly in the perspective of Tibet is the last masterstroke by the outgoing leadership in China to link its relations with Nepal firmly and solely with the Tibet issue. The current leadership is scheduled to demit office in less than a year. Nepal has adopted a One-China Policy that accepts both Tibet and Taiwan as integral parts of China—a Chinese claim that rest of the world perceives as its insatiable aggrandizement boosted by its sheer size of population, geography and now the economy, ranked number two in the world. So, when it comes to bilateral relations or its worldview, Nepal has no opinion on any of the matters that the world finds wrong with China. And, with a Maoist-led government in power, the differences between the two nations on issues of ideology and therefore, the worldview, perhaps do not exist at all.

Nepal: Under new regime, murderers of journalists could go free

 

 September 17, 2011

On September 15, Nepal's new Maoist regime proposed pardoning killers of journalists. In response, the Committee to Protect Journalists wrote the following letter to Prime Minister Dr. Baburam Bhattarai:

 

 

Dear Prime Minister Bhattarai:

We are alarmed by recent reports regarding the planned amnesty of criminal cases pending from past political violence in Nepal and are writing to express our concern that people convicted of killing journalists could go free based on political decisions made by your government.

Nepal’s New Prime Minister: Dr. Baburam Bhattarai (with excerpt from Dunham's interview with Bhattarai)

 

 August 29, 2011

On Sunday, Nepal’s parliament elected Dr. Baburam Bhattarai – the Maoists’ second-in-command – as the nation’s newest prime minister. He is the fourth to hold the position since the 2008 national elections.

Bhattarai received a clear majority. He garnered 340 votes in the 594-member parliament – reduced from its original 601-seat membership because of recent deaths and certain MPs being stripped of membership on grounds of corruption – and his party clinched the deal by securing the last-minute backing of a bloc of five ethic parties from Madhes.

Nepal’s Tolerance of Governmental Corruption: Sapkota vs Dixit

 

The Case of a Cabinet Member accused of murder, the Prime Minister, and counter aggression leveled at journalist Kanak Mani Dixit

June 13, 2011

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nothing has brought into focus Nepal’s permissive attitude toward corrupt officials more blatantly than Prime Minister Jhala Nath Khanal’s recent appointment of senior Maoist leader Agni Sapkota as Minister for Information and Communications. Sapkota is accused by a long list of human rights organizations as being a leading party to the murder of Arjun Bahadur Lama in 2005. 

On May 24, in a letter jointly written by the International Commission of Jurists, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, the groups urged Prime Minister Khanal to reconsider Sapkota’s appointment since criminal investigations were pending against him. They also strong objected to Home Minister Krishna Bahadur Mahara’s maneuvering to withdraw human rights cases, including the case against Sapkota. The new home minister is also a senior member of the Maoist party.

The letter said in part: "The appointment of Sapkota, a member of the politburo of the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), while he is under police investigation sends a strong signal of government indifference to such serious allegations and reinforces the culture of impunity in Nepal."

Mikel Dunham’s interview with Maoist leader Barsha Man Pun “Ananta”

 

May 19, 2011

“The reason for my resignation was not because I wasn’t offered the Home Ministry, but, rather, it was because my party wanted me to concentrate on internal party business.”

 

Barsha Man Pun “Ananta” of the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) is a member of the Constituent Assembly as well as a member of the Maoist party’s Central Secretariat. During the ten-year insurgency, Pun served as deputy commander of the People’s Liberation Army. Although the armed struggle is over, Pun remains the PLA’s commander, responsible for overseeing Maoist combatants in the major cantonments spread throughout the country. 

Until two weeks ago, Pun was Peace and Reconstruction Minister in the UML-led government. It was widely known that there was a behind-closed-doors agreement between the Maoists and Prime Minister Khanal that Pun would soon be given the far more important position of Home Minister. 

But instead, the post was given to another Maoist leader, Krishna Bahadur Mahara. The last-minute switch, according to some sources, was because the other parties in the coalition government balked at having a Maoist military commander as Nepal’s home minister. 

If P.M Khanal was forced by the coalition government to name Mahara instead of Pun (in order to avoid controversy), he failed. 

Mahara returns to the limelight despite being involved in the vote-buying scandal last year in which he was taped during a phone conversation. He blatantly sought money from a Chinese businessman – votes that would have bought MPs’ support for Maoist Supremo Prachanda in the 2010 prime ministerial election. When the taped telephone conversation scandal was leaked to the media, Prachanda’s hopes of winning the election were, for all practical purposes, scuttled. 

Be that as it may, it seems unlikely that Pun will remain backstage for long. He enjoys a large support base within the Maoist party – something that cannot be said of Dr. Bhattarai and something that cannot be overlooked, when talking about a future Maoist-led government and its cabinet.

I interviewed Commander Pun at his home. The following is a translation from the original Nepali.

 

 

DUNHAM: The Kathmandu Post, on March 8, 2011 quoted you as promising that, “integration and rehabilitation of PLA combatants will be completed before May 28.” As the deadline draws near, that seems like an impossible promise to keep. What was your solution for the successful integration of the PLA combatants, and what were the main obstacles that kept you from achieving that?

Mikel Dunham’s Exclusive Interview with General Rookmangud Katawal (Rtd)

 

April 27, 2011

“I would be the last person to launch and run a political party. I have no desire, no interest and no intention.”

Few leaders in Nepal have drawn more interest and controversy than the recently retired Chief of Army Staff General Rookmangud Katawal. He received military training in Nepal, India, Pakistan, the United States and the United Kingdom. In 1988 he became the Chief Military Personnel Officer of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon. A graduate of the Indian National Defense Academy and the Indian Military Academy, he holds a Bachelor of Arts degree from Nepal's Tribhuwan University and a Masters Degree in National Defense from Pakistan's Quaid-i-Azam University. General Katawal is also the Distinguished International Honor Graduate of the US Special Forces Course, and earned the coveted Gideon in the U.S. Ranger Course. He is also a graduate of the Army Command and Staff College, Camberley UK, the Senior Command Course, India and the National Defence University, Islamabad, Pakistan. In 2006, he was appointed as Chief of the Army Staff (COAS) of the Nepalese Army. But the pivotal moment in his career came when he fiercely resisted group integration of Maoist rebels into the National Army after Prachanda became prime minister. Prachanda sacked him but, shortly afterwards, the President of Nepal overrode the decision and ordered General Katawal to resume his tenure as COAS. This resulted in Prime Minister Prachanda's resignation and a general collapse of the government.

 

DUNHAM: The last time we met was in 2009. The burning issue then was the integration of the army. Two years later it is still the pivotal issue. It’s a quagmire. In your opinion, how close are the political parties to agreeing on the terms of integration? 

Nepal’s Political Situation: Anatomy of the Maoists’ contentious YCL

 

March 7, 2011

This week, the Carter Center published a detailed report on the numerous youth wings associated with political movements in Nepal, and the resultant clashes therein. Although eleven youth organizations are mentioned, the bulk of the 31-page report concentrates on the activities of the Maoist Young Communist League, better known as the YCL.

Youth in Nepal have historically played a critical role in the country's democratic development. However, in recent years political party youth wings have become increasingly associated with aggressive activity, notably since the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) (UCPN(M)) Young Communist League (YCL) was re-activated in 2006. In the run up to the 2008 Constituent Assembly election, the YCL was implicated in extortion, intimidation and violent activities. Since the election, Nepal has seen the formation of a “Youth Force” by the Communist Party of Nepal - Unified Marxist-Leninist (CPN-UML) as a counter-YCL group. Additionally, there have been repeated allegations of YCL, CPN-UML Youth Force, and other party or identity group youth wing involvement in actions, which negatively affect the political, economic, and security environment in districts throughout the country. Nepali politics at the local level has never been entirely peaceful and there is certainly historical precedent of youth being mobilized as “muscle,” but the rising trend since 2006 has raised the attention of district administration officials, political party members, civil society, community members, international observers, and both domestic and international media.

The report is based on recent findings of Carter Center observers throughout the country, who have observed the post-election peace and constitutional drafting process since June 2009. The Center collected information on youth wings in 30 districts through interviews with political party youth wing members, district administration officials, political parties, civil society, and citizens. The Center‟s report looks into who joins political party youth wings, what they receive, and what their aspirations are after joining. It also addresses what kinds of activities political party youth wings engage in and to what degree these activities are in compliance with the peace process agreements signed by their mother parties. 

Jhalanath Khanal, Nepal's New Prime Minister: Breakthrough or Trojan Horse?

 

February 8, 2011

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jhalanath Khanal, chairman of the Communist Party of Nepal-Unified Marxist Leninist (UML), whose own party had unceremoniously pulled him out of the earlier elections for Prime Minister, captured a clear majority to clinch a decisive victory on February 3. This became possible only after Maoist Supremo Pushpa Kamal Dahal Prachanda withdrew his own nomination for the post. Khanal was sworn into office on Sunday, February 6.

The international community was quick to support and, in some cases, hail the election of Khanal as a major step to complete the faltering peace process. The UN, for instance, issued a statement saying that Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, commends Nepal’s parliament for this significant achievement and all Nepali Parties and leaders for their efforts to form a new government….this development will give a significant boost to efforts to fully implement their outstanding commitments under the Comprehensive Peace Accord and the interim constitution, notably the integration and rehabilitation of the Maoist combatants, democratization of the army and adoption of a new constitution.

Have the Maoist ex-rebels really been handed over to the Nepali government?

 

January 23, 2011

 

There have been two very important lowering-of-the-flags ceremonies in the last week in Nepal.

On January 15, The United Nations Mission in Nepal (UNMIN), which was established in January 2007, folded its flags and went home. The UNMIN had been tasked to monitor the 19,000 former Maoist rebels, who fought a decade-long war to establish a communist regime.

In late 2010, the Maoists lobbied hard for a UNMIN extension – to no avail. Many of the  opposing parties had come to regard the UNMIN as unrealistically sympathetic – if not hoodwinked – by Maoist doublespeak and, in one case, a video-recorded lie about the number of ex-combatants confined to the 28 cantonments. For the Maoists part, they blamed the Indian government for hastening the end of UNMIN presence in Nepal.

Some analysts predicted that the impact of the UNMIN’s departure would go well beyond the technical aspects of its work, that the crucial questions of how many Maoists would be integrated into the Nepal Army and how many would be rehabilitated for a non-military future had not even begun. Other analysts suggested that the UNMIN’s presence was merely a symbolic deterrent and had little meaningful impact on the peace process. Still others suggested that the UNMIN had diluted Maoist motivation to make hard and timely decisions on what to do with the sequestered ex-rebels. In the event, no one seemed to wither in despair when the UNMIN flag was packed away.

Extensive Analysis of the Irreversibility of Federalism in Nepal

 

January 14, 2011

 

The International Crisis Group is an independent, non-profit, non-governmental organization committed to preventing and resolving deadly conflict. Its approach is grounded in field research, with some 130 staff members on five continents working in over 60 crisis-affected countries.

 Its international headquarters are in Brussels, with major advocacy offices in Washington DC (where it is based as a legal entity) and New York, a smaller one in London, and liaison presences in Moscow and Beijing.

The organization currently has regional offices or local field representation in Baku, Bangkok, Beirut, Bishkek, Bogotá, Bujumbura, Dakar, Damascus, Dili, Islamabad, Istanbul, Jakarta, Jerusalem, Kabul, Kathmandu, Kinshasa, Nairobi, Port-au-Prince, Pretoria, Pristina, Sarajevo, Seoul and Tbilisi.

Yesterday, the International Crisis Group issued an Asian report called “Nepal: Identity Politics and Federalism” and it is, to date, the most comprehensive analysis available of Nepal’s attempt to transform itself from a unitary state into a federal one. 

The extensive briefing is divided in to three sections:

1) The history of identity politics in Nepal – from the Muluki Ain of 1854, to ethnic activism before 1990, to the “People’s War”, to current ethnic demands for federalism.

2) The politics of federalism from the standpoint of Maoist, UML and Nepali Congress politicos; the ethnic and regional activists’ focus; the less vocal but significant skepticism of former royals and the religious right; the organizational capacities of all the disparate groups.

3) The risks and opportunities of ushering in federalism.

The report is most revealing in its examination of the approaches of the major political parties, all of which contain opponents to federalism. It also looks at two key areas – the eastern hills and the central and eastern Terai – where demands for identity-based federalism are greatest. 

Here are a few excerpts, although a reading of the entire document is highly recommended.