'We Do Not Want To See Nepal Become A Totalitarian State '
-- Ambassador Moriarty
The US ambassador JAMES MORIARTY is leaving Nepal shortly at the end of a three-year tenure. He has been the most controversial American ambassador since the establishment of diplomatic relations between Washington and Kathmandu . Some hailed the out-spoken diplomat for what they say as calling a spade a spade, while some others accused him of crossing the limits of diplomatic norms. As he prepared to leave, ambassador Moriarty spoke with SUSHIL SHARMA of the BBC Nepali Service. Excerpts of the interview broadcast last week:
How do you assess your three-year tenure as an ambassador of the world's only super power?
It has been very exciting. It had been a period of a very important transition for Nepal towards peace, prosperity and democracy. These values are in accordance with the basic interests of the US in Nepal
In total, how would you described your tenure – a success, a failure or so so?
Oh, it had been a brilliant success (laughs). On a serious note, I must say that our success is measured on whether Nepal has moved towards peace and prosperity. I think, Nepal is on the right track.
Many believe you had been a miserable failure. You tried to bring the king and the mainstream political parties together, but failed. You tried to prevent the alliance between the Maoists and the parties, you again failed. Then, you tried to prevent the Maoists from joining the parliament and the government. In vain, again.
Perhaps there were people who had a better vision in some respects than me. I desired that the king should side with democracy. It would have been better. A national consensus on democracy would have been lot better for Nepal. But it did not materialize.
So, weren't you a miserable failure?
I am often criticized because I keep on saying that the absence of war does not necessarily bring peace and that violence must totally end.
How did you feel like over such criticism? You became the most controversial ambassador ever.
Probably I would have felt that I had not been doing my job if there had been no such criticism.
Due to such criticism you were in a constant media spotlight. Would you regret missing it once you leave Nepal?
I am happy to have become a media star. I would not regret missing it. But my biggest concern even after I leave would be whether or not the peace process succeeds. I hope, it would succeed. I will continue to have a close watch on the developments in Nepal even from far away.
Given the prevailing situation, how do you see the prospects of peace and prosperity?
Certainly I see a good prospect if the constituent assembly elections are held in free and fair atmosphere.
Well, that is a big IF?
May be. But I believe that the people and the government of Nepal and the external actors should move towards that direction. They should speak up to say that violence can not be tolerated and the commitments must not be broken. This should not be left to one individual. In any case, I am about to leave. It is up to the Nepalese people to speak out.
There is still fear about anarchy despite elections. Do you have such apprehensions too?
That fear points to the uncertainty prevailing presently. All should work to remove this uncertainty.
Lately, a number of speculations have been doing rounds. Like, a Maoist takeover, a military coup or a royal comeback. Do you see any such possibility?
All these depend on the degree of the unity of other parties and the Nepali people and the consensus on holding the elections.
What is your assessment as the ambassador of the super power?
You caught me in a good day. I believe that the Nepalese people will not let anyone spoil the future of Nepal.
But many still suspect the intentions of the Maoists. You are one of them. But you rule out a Maoist takeover?
Maoists are not that strong enough. If the people and the political parties do not let them, the Maoists can not take over.
What about the possibility of a military coup?
The Nepalese army has repeatedly vowed to remain under the control of a democratic government and remain loyal to it. I do not see any reason to doubt them. I have not seen any evidence of a military coup.
And a comeback by the king?
The king may have wished it. But he does not have power to fulfill it. The military is no longer loyal to the king as it used to be. The king has no popular support. So, I don't see the king staging a comeback.
How do you see the future of Nepal without a monarchy?
This is up to the Nepalese people to decide. There are countries with monarchy and there are also countries without monarchy.
Of course, this is something to be decided by the Nepalese people. My questions is: irrespective of what the people decide how do you see the future of Nepal without a monarchy?
It is not necessary that a country would drift without a monarchy. So, if the Nepalese people decide to get rid of monarchy, they will find ways to cope with the new situation.
How will the US cope with such a situation?
As I said, we have no opinion on whether or not the monarchy should be retained. I have no personal relations with the king either. If the people decided to remove the king, it would not affect my work even if I were to continue here.
What is the US' strategic interest in Nepal given the rivalry between the two nuclear neighbors?
We have a long-term historical interest in Nepal. Situated between the two big and most populous countries Nepal is a very important piece of territory. That Nepal should not become a factor of instability in the region is what constitutes our strategic interest here. Our concern is that if Nepal degenerates into instability the entire region could become unstable. Another of our strategic interests is to see to it that Nepal does not become a totalitarian state exporting revolution to the neighborhood, because that also breeds instability in the region.
What would be the US' reaction if stability eluded Nepal even after the constituent assembly elections?
Great disappointment! But even then we would continue to assist Nepal to bring it on the road to peace and prosperity.
Lastly, what would you describe as the most memorable experience or incident of your three-year tenure in Nepal?
Obviously that day when the king backed down and it became clear that the parties would regain power, the parliament would be re-instated and the peace process would begin.
