Nepalnews.com Mercantile Connumications Pvt. Ltd.

Just a week after the visit of US president George W. Bush to South Asia , Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs DONALD CAMP visited Nepal . Since October 4, 2002 , Camp has already visited Nepal several times pursuing the process of reconciliation between the King and the political parties. Like in the past, this time, too, Camp had similar message to Nepal . Excerpts of his press meet compiled by KESHAB POUDEL:

I have been in Nepal since yesterday (March 8) to consult with our embassy, government officials and political party and civil society leaders. I also had an audience with King Gyanendra. It has been a constructive visit. As you know, president Bush and prime minister Dr. Manmohan Singh discussed Nepal during the president’s visit to India last week. As the President noted, the two statesmen agreed that “the Maoists should abandon violence, and that the King should reach out to the political parties to restore democratic institutions.” The succinct statement is the policy of the United States toward Nepal . Ambassador Moriarty has said this publicly in recent weeks. I have reiterated my president’s message in all my meetings here in Nepal . We firmly believe that the Maoists must abandon violence and the King must reach out and reconcile with the parties if we are to see a peaceful, prosperous, and democratic Nepal . I have brought the President’s message to the King. I have not been asked to deliver any sort of message from the King. I am not aware how the King will act. I would be glad to describe the American policy towards Nepal . It is not appropriate and I don’t want to characterize what the King said in our conversation.

I think we have to be realist about this. Certainly, that is our concern and I also mentioned that all the friends of Nepal want this. If Maoists want to do so, it will be a big step. It will also give them an opportunity to play role as a constitutional force in elections. The president Bush has made it very clear that the Maoist responsibility is to end their violence if they want to be accepted as a legitimate political party in Nepal . I don’ have any inside information about the Maoist intention. They should come into the political engine. To that they need not only forsake violence in words but also be prepared to do so through actions. Maoists deserve to be termed as terrorists as long as they behave like in the past. We don’t have any hesitation labeling them terrorists because of their actions like killing, maiming, destroying public property. Frankly speaking, they are working against the Maoists and I hope Maoists can change their ways. As far as our part is concerned, we will certainly support anything to end the violence.

Ambassador Moriarty speaks as a representative of the United States here in Nepal .

The pressure of international community is jerking well. The message is the international community is united and the friends of Nepal around the world firmly believe that the democracy needs to be restored in Nepal , and this is very critical requirement. For the United States specifically, president Bush speaking publicly on this subject is indication of the importance he attaches in this issue and shows the importance that the United States government attaches to this issue. First of all, I would say that President Bush’s visit to India was successful as the talks were held in wide range of issues including Nepal . In this case, we share the quick restoration of democracy.

I think we have been very clear on view that all political detainees should be released. I requested very much but the government did not allow me and ambassador to visit UML leader Madhav Kumar Nepal . On the question of pressurizing the political leaders, I certainly did not really do anything. Certainly, as ambassador Moriarty said in the past that political parties need to play constructive role in this country. They are important components of the democracy. I repeatedly told that the King, as President told in New Delhi ; needed to reach out to political parties. Nepalese need to work out the timetable for reconciliation. I say simply that Nepal needs to return to democracy and democracy should be restored as soon as possible. We don’t have timeline.

I would say that the situation dynamic has not changed dramatically in the last one year in my perception as an occasional visitor to Nepal . The basic things are there. The King has proposed a roadmap with an ambition to take back Nepal into democracy and parties have fall back. That basic dynamics and the public position of the players have not changed. I must say that the dynamic of Maoist aspect of the situation changed in the last few months after signing the 12 points understanding. That is something that has changed dynamic of Nepalese politics. But it does not change our views that democracy needs to be restored and the King needs to reach out to political parties. The parties are hopeful that the pact helps Maoists to abandon violence and return to peaceful political process. Should that work out, and then I would have to say that is something to be applauded. We excuse for being skeptical to respond.

We believe that the restoration of democracy is important aspects to confront the insurgency. I didn’t say that I am highly optimistic about quick return to democracy in Nepal . We are hopeful that democracy will be restored. We have no ground on public commitment on the parties. We are optimistic.

We express our views on recently concluded municipal elections, which was just as a hollow framework. Without the participation of the parties, one cannot really expect that they can be free and fair. If the next general elections is held without the participation and support of the political parties, it is hard to see how it can restore democracy in the country.

After meeting with the King and the political parties, I am not sure whether to express optimism or pessimism. I think we are hopeful. We have no assurance that there will be a breakthrough. I wish I could say more and I could say I am optimistic but what I can say is I am extremely hopeful. I met with the leaders of several of Nepal ’s major political parties. I wanted very much to meet with the leader of UML. It is well known that he is in house arrest. We requested the opportunity to call upon him and the government denied our request. We are certainly continuing to hope that Nepal and all of political detainees will be released.

I am not expert on Nepal but I am interested observer. Ambassador Moriarty and staffs give frequent advice on situation. Yes, we have regular consultations with the government of People’s Republic of China on full range of issues. It is natural that the situation of Nepal is an issue for further dialogue. We have consultation in before and we expect to hold such dialogue in the future with China . The supply of arms by Chinese is widely rumored. The question regarding the arms supply by China should be directed to Beijing rather than us.

It is too early to say what stand US will take in Geneva . Our report shows deteriorating human rights situation in Nepal . The February 1 actions contributed to deteriorate the human rights situation here. With the support from Nepal last year, it helped to create UN Human Rights High Commissioner’s Office in Nepal .

We are in no position to impose a dateline for reconciliation between the King and the political parties. Certainly our position has always been democracy restored in Nepal as soon as possible. It is urgent need of the country to confront the Maoist insurgency and back for peaceful, prosperous and democratic Nepal . Any group, whatever their political alignments and whatever their connections to palace and other actors in this country, they are committed to constitutional process and peaceful cooperation should be allowed to participate. This is certain basic essence of democracy. This is obviously a question for Nepal .

I was able to talk to with number of people including the King in certain political issues in this country. They clearly appraised the views from Washington DC on the situation in Nepal . We hope for the improvement of the situation. We are reiterating the President’s message.

I consider there are two policy and legal aspects. From the policy point of view, we have made a decision that we cannot have a kind of cooperation with Nepal since February 1 last year. We would like to the return of the situation of pre February 1 where we were contributors to the security assistance. We were providing security assistance in the past and that is something we are not prepared to do this time. The second legal aspect is that the Leahy amendment prohibits to finance security assistance to Nepal until Nepal has returned to democracy and certain conditions on human rights have been fulfilled.