 |
Kathmandu Friday February 08, 2002 Magh 26, 2058.
|
No ifs and buts for the army
By NAGENDRA CHHETRI
Nepal is suffering from violent insurgency
groups which choose to be called Maoists. Examining their six year old activities in
various remote parts of Nepal, these can never be compared to the ones the Maoists carried
out in China during their revolutionary career. Each insurgency is unique although there
could be some similarity amongst them. Past experiences show that insurgencies are most
likely to occur in those countries where there is inherent social division based on
economic, racial, cultural, religious or ideological differences, leading to a lack of
national cohesion. Insurgencies thrive in countries that are economically weak and lack
efficient, effective, stable or popular governments. In Nepal rampant corruption in higher
circles, ill governance at all levels, political instability and economic mismanagement
have created bigger and wider cracks which gave birth to the Maoist insurgents. Out of the
seven kinds of disgruntled like anarchists, egalitarians, traditionalists, pluralists,
separatists, reformists and preservationists, the Maoists in Nepal are the most extreme.
The Nepalese Maoists started fitting into the anarchist group in the latter half of the
forth year and now after the imposition of emergency and army mobilisation, as their chain
of command broke down, communications got disrupted and control systems dismantled, they
went one step further and started behaving like criminals. It is quite possible that the
leadership lost control over the cadres who started taking personal revenge as well as
independent action without considering the future impact and consequences. An anarchist
group is potentially the most dangerous form of insurrection which sets out to eliminate
all existing political and institutional structures and the social fabric associated with
them.
The government declared the emergency and
mobilised the army according to the provisions of the constitution. After two months of
emergency, three hundred and fifty terrorists killed, and many weapons and ammunition
recovered; the terrorists are still not defeated. But many people have started raising
their voice against the emergency and the security forces operations. The Maoists are
lobbying for withdrawal of emergency and a halt to security forces operations. But large
numbers of Nepalese would like to see the terrorists, killers and looters hunted down to
the absolute end. They must not be given any respite and must be brought out from their
caves and hideouts. Why? Because they are the parasites of this nation. Within three
months the war would be far from over. Combat should and will continue till the terrorists
are finished. But what our leadership should understand is that the only way to draw the
swamps that breed terrorism is to give indications of good governance to begin with.
People at least must feel the difference between the emergency and the normal
administration. Every individual throughout the country must see that the public
functionaries are punctual, efficient and effective in shouldering their respective
responsibilities, and are also accountable.
Right now the functionaries are not taking
responsibility, it seems, and neither are they accountable. For example, there are
complaints from security personnel these days over the shifting of all kinds of
responsibilities to them from many quarters. When representatives from NGOs, INGOs and
political parties approach offices concerned either to visit the operational areas or
release terrorist suspects, they are asked to go to the army and do the needful. But here
what must be understood is, there is no marshal law in force in this country. All security
forces including the army are operating under the constitutional orders of the elected
civilian government. This country is very much run by and is functioning under a
democratic government. Therefore every operational responsibility lies with the democratic
government. Since the emergency was declared by an elected civilian government as per the
provisions of the constitution, the security forces will remain under the strict control
of the elected government.
Another hitch that has surfaced in the course of
the emergency and military operations is the total lack of understanding of each other’s
problems, operational limitations, working system, military and civil administration, the
extent of authority that each can exercise, the rules of engagement with which the
security forces can operate and the overlapping in-betweens. This is because there is a
lack of understanding of the civil-military relationship. The army is a highly
professional, disciplined and regimented instrument of state authority. There is no
"ifs and buts" for the army. There is only "do or die". Gathering of
intelligence, secrecy of planning, and accomplishing a mission within the given time
framework are the highest priority for the security forces. A military commander can
hardly compromise on these issues. If this urgency is not understood, it will not only
hamper the operational aspect of the security forces, it will also create confusion and
chaos at the policy formulation level. One hears that the National Security Council
Secretariat is being activated to coordinate intelligence, consult experts on major
national issues and bring together divergent views in order to provide options to the
executive so that there is a continuity in the policy planning and its implementation. One
of the first tasks for this secretariat could be to identify that no-man’s land
between civil-military action and draw the lines on civil-military relationship for the
smooth functioning of all government agencies in the operational areas.
As it is plainly understood, security forces are
not the end of the terrorist problem. It is only a means or an instrument of the
government for creating conducive conditions for the democratic government to negotiate
from a position of strength and influence. Although a marching army is not the end to the
problem, the Maoists must surrender to the security forces with all the looted arms,
ammunition and public property (i.e money from banks) so that the government would be
ultimately and morally forced to recommend a general amnesty by the King. For the King,
any one who dies in this insurgency is a Nepalese citizen. Nothing else would be more
painful to him than someone losing his or her life. Therefore he would certainly grant an
amnesty to end violence and bring peace to his nation.
Many are complaining that the army is not
conducting sharp, punitive, offensive action against the Maoists. According to the top
army brass, they are seriously concerned about fundamental rights and international
conventions. If they go on the offensive there are bound to be unwanted incidents of
innocents being killed and back lashes which no one wants. Also it would be against the
interests of a democratic set up. Those who are crying foul should be able to sacrifice
their material ease and comfort in the fool proof security of air conditioned rooms in the
capital and visit the remote jungles and hills of Rukum and Rolpa, and stay their at least
for a few weeks to help security forces with information to separate the sheep from the
goats. Thus instead of criticising anybody, be at the actual spot and try and bolster the
morale of the troops as well as re-enforce the unflinching faith of the disillusioned
people in the democratic institutions of the country.
The security forces must not be deterred from
separating innocent people from terrorists which is most difficult and dangerous under the
prevailing circumstances. It must be a very difficult decision to make when one sees one’s
buddy bleeding to death to stop using even his lethal weapons for revenge. But the
leadership must not forget that the use of minimum force for maximum gain is the governing
principle of such uneasy operations. Although the Maoist leadership is out of the country,
far away in a safe area, they must understand the gravity of the situation and surrender
without any pre-condition and accept the monarchical democratic system of government for
the sake of a larger national interest. They must now lend their hand for economic reform
and political stability. Leadership from all walks of life must understand that
insurgencies easily arise when state authorities are unable or unwilling to redress the
legitimate demands of significant social groups. No society or nation can tolerate
anarchists which are out to destroy and eliminate all political structures and the social
fabric associated with them.
Other Stories
|
