 |
Kathmandu Saturday March 09, 2002 Falgun 25, 2058.
|
How not to fight Maoist
insurgency
By SHYAM KC
The Deuba government has been tussling with the
violent Maoist insurgency for almost eight months now with results not upto the
expectations of the people. And this is not surprising. How can we expect results from the
field when those who should be controlling events are at loggerheads with each other? Next
door in India, we have seen how the traditionally squabbling Indian opposition and ruling
parties came together as one man when tackling the question of terrorism. But at home, we
have the main opposition party, the UML, putting forward constitutional amendments as a
pre-condition for voting with the ruling party to extend the state of emergency. And we
have the champions of liberty and freedom, such as the United People’s Front, the
United National Front and the Workers’ and Peasants’ Party, voting against the
extension because that will infringe upon the "freedom" of the people and
inconvenience them as if the Maoists and their own ideologies would provide greater
freedom to the people.
The conditionality with which the UML lent its
support to extend the state of emergency is surely something that everyone will rue. This
is not because constitutional amendments are not necessary but because the government (and
Nepali Congress)-UML deal looks so much like behind the scenes horse trading - you do this
and only then will I go along with you on that issue. Now the UML from the top brass to
the lowest workers are talking about immediate constitutional amendments. And on the other
side, the NC president is busy formulating policies that will bring down his own party’s
government. For it is inconceivable to him and his advisors that Deuba, who brought him
down in July, should continue in office even a day longer. With cronies, some of them
known to be corrupt, surrounding him the NC President does not seem to know that his party
and the main opposition are hand in glove in helping to boost the sagging Maoist morale
and demoralising the security forces. It would be interesting to note how these leaders
would react if only they were to listen to the people in the streets and how they feel
about what they are doing. It might help the nation if the leaders of all political
parties who claim to represent the people were to go out and listen to the voices of the
people, especially those belonging to the middle class, instead of just listening to their
cronies and yes-men. Things would have been different today. A house divided certainly
cannot tackle a problem like the armed Maoist insurgency.
This in brief is how not to fight the violent
(and now more and more terror oriented) Maoist insurgency. It took the government an
extension of the state of emergency to decide that it will resort to austerity and is not
to hold any parties except some "diplomatic bashes". That it took the state of
emergency and diversion of funds to security needs for the government to decide on
austerity is really beyond comprehension. For austerity is something an improvised country
like Nepal should have undertaken ages ago and should not have been dictated by the
emergency. Even now one wonders if government spending has come down in any significant
way. When the government allows those in office, whether ministers or bureaucrats, to
become soft through easy and comfortable living, anyone motivated enough will have no
difficulty in overcoming feeble government resistance. No wonder therefore that government
security forces fall easy prey to the Maoists.
And then there was the hue and cry created by a
couple of Nepali Congress members of parliament because they were stopped by security
personnel at the gate of Singh Durbar. One was immediately reminded of an Indian TV
programme in the aftermath of the 13 December terrorist attack on the Indian parliament.
Indian ministers and members of parliament strongly advocated putting in place tougher
security measures including measures to thoroughly check those entering the parliament
building. Agreeing with the need to do so, a number of participants in the programme said
ministers and MPs attach too much importance on themselves and have grown arrogant because
of their status. They predicted that there would be complaints because of these factors. I
don’t know the situation in India after that but exactly as predicted elsewhere,
there were complaints from the two parliament members. And the government run by the party
belonging to these legislators is to take on the Maoist insurgency. Surely not a way to
fight a complex insurgency. The security personnel must to do their duty whether they have
to stop the king, the prime minister or their own chiefs. When security personnel carry
out their duties, they should be subjected to praise not slander.
And then we have the chieftain of the ruling
party who while claiming that the state of emergency was imposed by the army and not the
government had no hesitation in voting for extension of the emergency period. If he was
convinced that it was the army which directly or indirectly forced the emergency, who
forced his own party to extend it? Koirala seems to be indulging in outlandish allegations
to gain media attention which he seems to be doing. And then, of course, we have the UML
leaders from MK Nepal to KP Oli downwards who say there is no need for emergency to
mobilise the army and yet go ahead and vote for the emergency extension. There is nothing
wrong in politicising everything – it could not be otherwise because the bread and
butter of our politicians depend on politicking since they have no other way to earn their
living - yet this kind of a situation does create a schism in the country that not only
divides the nation but could make it disintegrate. And of course, it helps the Maoist
cause. But do our leaders care?
Other Stories
|
