If we have a tradition of accepting the Constitution as the prime pillar of the "Rule of Law", one should seek answers on the management and mobilization of RNA within article 118 (1), (2), (3) and (4) of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal 1990. A disloyal force would have not been successful in suppressing the Tibetan Khampa guerillas by conducting sporadic counterinsurgency operations. Other duties of the RNA include conducting fair elections, participation in United Nations peacekeeping operations around the world, wildlife preservation and many others as aid civil power. Comparing the efficiency of RNA with NGOs and other private sectors, questioning its strength with baseless assumptions and showing jealously of the RNA welfare fund earned by their sweat and toil, certainly should not be the debate and issue of the day.

The incidents at Dolpa and Lamjung have been instrumental in exposing the diversionary tactics, deceptive measures and conspiracy against the people and state. Coincidentally, the resignation of the Home Minister citing moral responsibility on the one hand, and commencement of dialogue regarding the mobilization of RNA by parliamentary parties on the other, show conflict within the government itself. The Defence Ministry has opted for peaceful settlement whereas in the emergency cabinet meeting, the government contemplated mobilizing the army.

Previously, the government turned a blind eye to the rise in "The Threat Barometer" due to the Maoist uprising. The spring of 1990 witnessed the ending of the 30-year old Panchayat regime. Nepalese voters have twice lent support to the legacy of the Nepali Congress, which they had once lost in 1960. Unfortunately, the party has failed to demonstrate its democratic credentials and has gained a reputation for exclusion of moral values, ethics and norms, required to deepen democracy and to preserve the democratic way of life, in its decisions.

The development of a new process of decision making against the spirit of the movement of the people began in 1990. The actors could neither prove it a historical necessity nor fulfil the aspirations of the people after the restoration of democracy. National security and democratic issues today have become less obvious and more problematic. Money politics has a stronghold in influencing almost every sphere of life. There is debate everywhere as to who the real culprits are (in terms of democracy) and in whose name power holders claim to rule (in a secure nation). This issue arose after the Maoist uprising in Nepal became a central question like in other third world countries. There is an unbridgeable gap between the new democratic lords and the larger sections of society. The first are in the race of kaun banega crorepati and the latter are wondering about their next meal.

Peace or security lies in the minds of people. The central theme of ‘democracy’ and ‘national security’ lies in liberty and security. Following several confrontations between police and Maoist warriors at Dunai and Lamjung, the government seems to be embarrassed by the moral aspect of the problem. No matter who have resigned or been rendered destitute, some 1500 Nepalese people have lost their lives, with casualties numbering far higher, leaving behind widows and orphans. Both warring factions claim it as "the principle of necessity" and "the principle of humanity" which history will prove in times to come.

In order to restore law and order in the country, we need to make "progress on a narrow bridge within the societal structure between the haves and the have-nots" rather than blame the RNA. Before opting for the use of maximum force, a round table dialogue for alternatives should be given serious consideration. "Insurgency begins from the barrel of a gun" but seldom has it been resolved through its application. The following issues may be more complicated due to use of excessive force with modern weaponry against our own countrymen.

Two types of restraints are concerned in combat behaviour, "Absolutist and utilitarian." Absolutist principles forbid doing certain things to people, rather than bringing about certain results. Murder and torture are the most seriously prohibited acts. Utilitarian principles are concerned with consequences. One should try to minimize evil. In short, the distinction between absolutist and utilitarian principles is what one is allowed to do to people and what merely happens to them because of what one does.

Absolutist restrictions are organized in two clusters of prohibitions: whom, when and how RNA will kill where the innocent people may not be subject to hostile treatment; while others will be considered as legitimate targets only under certain circumstances. Noncombatants are granted immunity at all times from any attack directed at them. Yet, all parties consensus remains undecided towards the use of armed forces.

The utilitarian double effect is illegitimate in its consequences and includes deliberate damage to civilians. According to the double effect principle, an act might be legitimate according to utilitarian principles even if it involves the foreseen but unintended death of noncombatants. The act, must still meet the somewhat vague requirements of proportionality regarding the benefits to surpass the evil of the unintended damages this brings upon noncombatants.

In such a state of affairs, naturally a few questions may arise:

-On the innocent, undisputed, unidentified and indiscriminate deaths of all civilians accounted for so far, has Nepal conceived on the likely emergence of an international isolation? If not, the government ought to think about this.

-If social deficiency occurs due to international isolation, how can our country face these two dilemmas (insurgency and isolation) at the same time?

-If threats continue on the already existing geopolitical position, then what means should we adopt to be effective in resolving the new loads of added problems? How would the state safeguard its democratic values and national security in such a state of affairs? Would it not prove to be another Sri Lanka?

-If the present threats are multifaceted, why can’t the government launch multi-sectoral operations to eliminate these threats simultaneously including cleaning the rotten part within Singha Durbar? Are the rulers ready to prove themselves by applying "the rule of law" rather than "the law of the rulers?"

Can we develop "A doctrine of complex emergencies" so as to keep "the nation in uniform" rather than "a nation in arms", before the possibility of inviting a third party under the pretence of humanitarian intervention? Are there still some options left to safeguard our country from being another Somalia or Bosnia of South Asia?

By Razen

Only a few among the thousands of ancient monuments in Nepal are fortunate enough to sleep under the army’s protection. The pagoda of Taleju Bhawani, built by King Mahendra Malla in 1564 AD, in the historic royal palace complex of Kathmandu is one among them. The Taleju temple is one of the excellent examples of the Gurkhas’ accountability to their duty.

The security is so tight that even the local citizens are allowed to enter the temple premises only once a year during Dasain.

Even foreign heritage experts and tourists are all barred from enjoying the gift of the eminent monarch. I was lucky enough to grab the opportunity and was delighted to see the monument, enlisted in the World Heritage List, for its commendable and exemplary preservation.

A huge tree was flourishing at the base of the temple — giving a balanced potpourri of natural and cultural heritage site scenario. Adorned with the maker’s statue, the pillars and tiles of the pagoda are covered with lush and healthy grass. The stone steps have caved in and are changing their position and the terracotta doors are turning into semi-abstract modern sculptures. Some bells could produce sound , while others don’t have handles — you need a stone to gong them. The brick pedestals are almost in ruin, yet strong enough to carry the piles of the stale junk, piled up over several years.

The heavily carved wooden doors might have been the best among the pagodas of Kathmandu. Now, the doors display cracks, moss, and insect moles. The struts with images of goddesses (some have got their hands amputated) are entangled with cobwebs and more.

On top of this, the idols in the torana of the highest temple of the capital are missing! I’ll bet, no thief can reach the restricted area without the army’s permission and they can never let a thief climb the elevated temple and steal the idols of archaeological importance. Missing idols no longer make phenomenal news, here. And in the Taleju temple too, the torana idols are not the only stolen images. Asking for proof? Sorry, photography is not allowed in the royal courtyard.

At least one or two among the sixteen surrounding small temples are in good conditions — a breath of satisfaction, indeed.

However, all the shelters made for the gun-carrying army guards next to the temples are safe.

Want to read some ancient inscriptions? Some are in bad shape, some painted with layers of fungi and lying in some odd places. They are not important because the guards can’t read them.

Don’t worry. The temple has been reconstructed and conservationists have even added new touches to its beauty. The carved doors are pierced, nailed down and wired so that electric lamps can illuminate the temple. Some portions of the steps and walls have been cemented and some additional cemented pillars have stood up for electric lights. Summing up the scene, we see only those parts of the courtyard are healthy which have been reconstructed in modern ways for the army. If so, why should we be hypocritical? Can’t we destroy all the monument and convert the whole courtyard into a barrack?

Initially, Prime Minister of India Atal Behari Vajpayee, leading the liberals, emerged tall. He had his way. Even RSS ideologue K N Govindachari had to resign from the post of secretary-general of the BJP because he had forfeited Vajpayee’s confidence. Govindachari is the one who had described Vajpayee as a mukut to warn that his liberalism is a mask to hide the RSS face. Not only did Vajpayee get rid of him, he also put his own man, Bangaru Laxman, at the head of the party. Vajpayee ticked off the RSS again when he said in public that it had nothing to do with BJP.

Everything was going his way. The hardiners -- the RSS -- took their own time to hit back. They chose the occasion, when Vajpayee strode over dissensions in the party, after a successful tour to the US. In his hour of triumph, he was made to face the fact that the RSS was supreme. The organisation could not dilute Hindutva for the pottage of his liberal image.

The message came in the shape of Sushma Swaraj’s induction into the cabinet. Only the other day had she denounced Vajpayee at BJP’s Nagpur session. He has not expanded the cabinet without any reason in the past. He had no option this time. The RSS was in the picture.

Sushma’s entry is also a victory for Home Minister L K Advani who is trying to acquire a new image -- neither that of a hard-liner like the RSS core, nor that of a liberal who would raise eyebrows in the RSS camp. He is collecting a group of loyalists around him. The recent changes in the cabinet add to the group’s strength.

Poor Law Minister Arun Jaitley was a victim of the cross-firing between Vajpayee and Advani. Jaitley was keeping both sides informed of what he did in his ministry and consulted them before taking any decision. Perhaps both wanted his exclusive loyalty. First, the portfolio of Disinvestment was taken away from him and then Information and Broadcasting. He should at least have been made a cabinet minister.

Maybe, he is a threat to the camp followers of both because he is a Prime Ministerial timber. That Vajpayee has been purposely pulled down goes without saying. But what the RSS has conveyed is that it does not like any effort to change the BJP’s anti-Muslim ethos. The way Vajpayee was pushing the party showed that he was prepared to lock horns with the Hindutva elements. This may not be possible. The problem with him and liberals outside the BJP is that they underestimate the RSS. It wants to control the political scene and sustain its identity.

Its agenda is the creation of a Hindu Rashtriya and it has been relentlessly pursuing the task of Hindu revivalism for the last 75 years since its birth. The BJP rout in the Gujarat panchayat polls, its bastion, has come in handy to the RSS. The Muslims and tribals have reportedly voted en bloc against the BJP. Since this has happened in the wake of the party president’s promise to rectify the mistakes committed against Muslims, the inference is that the Muslims have expressed their distrust through voting.

The BJP, with no cadre of its own, has no option except to move closer to the sinecure of the RSS. From all accounts, it is clear that the party has surrendered before the RSS. The hardliners have taken charge of assembly elections, scheduled for 2001 in six states including UP, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal and Assam. The candidates, who have maintained links with the RSS, will be preferred to those with liberal ideas. The RSS sanchalaks in the different states are busy preparing the list of candidates on that basis.

This alone is not enough. The RSS, as was seen in the recent past, is going all out to reinvigorate the thesis of Hindu nationalism. Both Christians and Muslims have been told to ‘Indianise’ themselves. The Christians have been asked to severe their relationship with the Vatican and Muslims with the Umah (a people or a community which transcends ethnic or political definition of nationalism).

The Vishwa Hindu Parishad seems to have got the green light to re-articulate its demand on building the mandir at the site where the Babri masjid stood before demolition. All this is meant to revive Hindu chauvinism of pre-Ayodhya yatra days to create "favourable climate" before the polls. The RSS honestly believes that the BJP is losing the sure Hindu vote by trying to appease the Muslims. The Hindu card has brought dividends to the party. The RSS wants to tread the same path and try to win back the electorate which, they believe, has got alienated because the BJP does not own Hindutva as firmly and openly as it did before forming the government.

The RSS is not, however, opposed to coalition politics. When means become an end by itself, they are reduced to a stratagem. That is how the RSS is going about. It is using the NDA constituents through the BJP to expand its base. Indian political scene is also emerging likewise. The Hindutva forces are gaining ground by using contacts of regional parties in the NDA. Regional parties too are reaping some benefit.

They are calculating whether the BJP’s limited vote in their area can tilt the balance in their favour. This happened in Andhra Pradesh. The Telugu Desam got a majority in the state. Some time the arrangement can have an opposite effect. The RSS was really worried over the threat by Trinamool Congress chief Mamata Banerjee on scaling down the prices of petroleum products. That it has turned out to be a damp squib has convinced the RSS that the NDA government will last for the rest of the term. Therefore, the hardliners want to pursue the Hidutva agenda with a vengeance.

I suspect that the RSS wants to have Advani in place of Vajpayee. Regional parties may go along with it because they only want a share in power at the centre and it does not matter to them who the Prime Minister is: Vajpayee or Advani. A few days ago when I met West Bengal Chief Minister Jyoti Basu at Calcutta, he endorsed my viewpoint. He said he had no doubt that NDA allies would eventually accept Advani in place of Vajpayee. "They are interested in power, not in person," he said. He has a point. I know of many NDA leaders, who have strong views on the RSS but they do not want to be without a share in power at the centre. If their animus against the BJP can change, why not against the RSS which controls the BJP?

True, the BJP wants a government of its own at the centre. Vajpayee was frank enough to say this at a conclave of Non-Resident Indians at New York that BJP will "build an India of its dreams" when it gets two-thirds of majority in the Lok Sabha.