Last peace process in retrospect

By Ameet Dhakal

KATHMANDU, April 26 : Amidst confusion and uncertainty, the government and the Maoist negotiating teams are sitting for the first round of formal dialogue on Sunday.

On the eve of the Peace Process II, The Sunday Post revisit the last peace process in an attempt to assess what went wrong then leading to an abrupt collapse of the dialogue. Here is a blow-by-blow account of how the three rounds of dialogues ended in a deadlock, triggering a bloody-war.

August 31, 2001:

During the first round of dialogue, held at Godavari Resort, Lalitpur, Chirinjivi Wagle, Coordinator of the five-member government negotiating team, requested the Maoist dialogue team to immediately halt all types of pressure tactics, including the use of force to facilitate the environment for dialogue. Krishna Bahadur Mahara, Coordinator of the three-member Maoist negotiating team, assured the government that the Maoists would immediately abide by the government call.

The government also asked the Maoist to put their demand in writing in the next round of dialogue. The first round ended issuing a joint press release that said both the sides were committed to find an amicable solution through dialogue.

September 14, 2001:

The government and the Maoist negotiators exchanged their demands and responses in writing during the second round of dialogue held at Tiger Tops Jungle Resort in Bardiya district, some 700 kilometres south-west of Kathmandu.

The 31-point Maoist demand list, poorly typed and hand-edited at least a dozen times, outlined three categories of demands: First, the things government should do to create a conducive environment for talks; second, the major political issues; and finally, the issues of public concern. The document also asserted that the dialogue should mainly concentrate on political issues.

The Maoists raised three major contentious political issues-First, the constitution should be abrogated and people be given the right to prepare new constitution; second, dissolution of the then parliament and the government to form an interim government; and finally, institutionalization of the "republic evolving in people’s heart."

The government, in its written response, flatly rejected the demand for abrogation of the constitution and the idea of "institutionalizing republic", but expressed flexibility in dissolving the parliament and forming an interim government. The meeting was inconclusive, still, both the sides agreed to carry forward with the dialogue.

November 13, 2001:

On the eve of the third round of dialogue, Prachanda, the Maoist supreme commander, issued a public statement dropping Maoist’s demand for the republic. Abrogation of the constitution and election for constituent assembly, then remained the major sticking point.

The government continued to insist that there were enough room for amendments and evolution of the constitution; therefore, the demand for constituent assembly was irrelevant.

Within few hours into the talks, the situation grew tense, Mahara walked off the negotiating table, talked to the Maoists leaders over phone and left the venue. So tense and frustrated the Maoist team was, that it left the venue even without informing the government side-no formal handshake, no goodbye.

On November 23, Maoists guerillas simultaneously attacked army barrack in Dang and a police post in Syangja killing 14 army men and 37 policemen.

Why did the Maoists leave the dialogue so abruptly and attack security forces?

There are two popular theories — "betrayal theory," promoted by the state and "preemption theory," forwarded by the Maoists — about why the last peace process failed. The Maoists, as the first theory goes, were never sincere about the dialogue then; they double-crossed the state in the name of talks and bought time for a grand preparation of the D-day that came in the form of a daring assault in Dang and Syangja.

"If they were sincere about the peace talk, and if there wasn’t a frantic preparation for final assault under the cover of dialogue," questions Mahesh Acharya, former Defense Minister and a member of the government negotiating team during the Peace Process I, "How could they attack Dang within few days after they unilaterally abandoned the talks?"

If they were sincere about their demand, argues Acharya, they had the option, after the first cease-fire, to take their issues to the public; win the people’s hearts and minds, and create public pressure upon the government.

According to the "preemption theory," the government was pilling up arms in three major military barracks namely, Surkhet, Ghorahi and Mangalsen in the mid- and the far-west and was planning to encircle the Maoists rebels and quash them by force.

" We had no option," said Krishna Bahadur Mahara, the chief Maoist negotiator during Peace Process I, "But to pick up arms to defend our revolution." It was, added Mahara, largely a preemptive offense to foil the impending army assault.

Maoist revolutionaries, universally, pick up arms to overthrow the "old regime" by force and establish a new one in its ruin. Here in Nepal, too, the Maoists dumped the ballot option in 1996 in a belief that time was ripe for an armed revolution.

Until August 2001, the beginning of the Peace Process I, the Maoists were moving from strength to strength - demolishing the remote police posts, adding to their arms and ammunition stocks, recruiting more and more enthusiastic youth rebels in their People’s Army, and rapidly expanding their control in the country’s hinterlands.

Interviews and articles by the Maoists leaders then, citing party’s internal assessments, claimed that they were moving closer than ever to overthrowing the old regime. The international situation, till then, was also not as harsh on them as it seems now - India had largely overlooked their presence and activities in its territory; United States was too myopic to see beyond its borders before September 11. Why then the Maoists, who abandoned ballot for bullet to overthrow the regime, all of sudden, would genuinely sit in the negotiating table without testing their guerilla might?

"We opted for arms in 1996 not to overthrow the regime by force but to make our voice heard," said Mahara, adding, "No one listened to our legitimate demands then-neither the regime nor the civil society and media, so we took up arms out of compulsion." If the state had listened to our demands in 2001, we would not have retreated to jungle, he said. Daman Nath Dhungana, one of the facilitators during the last peace process, however, argued that the talks failed because both the sides lacked sincerity then. "Both the government and the Maoists were in a warring mood and were just engaging each other while consolidating their military strengths."

They were just using the "premature talks," held under the civil society’s pressure, to win popular support for the eventual use of force that they were planning, added Dhungana. "Thus, it is wrong to blame only one of them for the failure; both of them were equally responsible."

Three forces must work together for peace: Dr Bhattarai

Post Report

BIRATNAGAR, April 26 : On the eve of the first round of formal talks between the government and the Maoist rebels, Dr Babu Ram Bhattarai, the chief Maoist negotiator, today said that the only way to resolve the problems facing the country was to resume negotiations between the three forces - King, Maoists and the parliamentary parties.

Making his oft-repeated remarks loud and clear once again that the nation is currently in a state of "strategic balance" between the three forces in question, he called on the parliamentary parties to prepare themselves for the round table conference and work towards establishing lasting peace in the country.

He alleged that the government was not serious about peace talks and was conspiring against the rebels to curtail the on-going peace process. The government, he said, was buying time but some how managing to pull on and working to stall the whole process. "This is a pratibidrohatmak (a kind of conspiratorial) strategy," he added.

Most importantly, he said that the Maoist negotiators would push for the agenda of an "interim constitution" and an "interim government" to overcome the crises that have surfaced in the current "state of constitutionlessness". "We will stick to this demand, and we want national consensus to see this happening," he added.

Other issues high on the rebels agenda, according to him, are "non-interference" by the army in the state affairs, participation of more and more people chiefly minorities and women in the process of governance.

Eight killed, several hurt in road accidents

By Ganesh Rai & Saraswati Karki

DAMAK, (Jhapa), April 26 : In a tragic road mishap today, at least eight commuters died while two dozen others were seriously injured when a bus numbered Me 1 Kha 362 met with an accident at Sanishchare-1 of Morang district along the Mahendra Highway. Around 150 passengers, some of whom were seated on top, were aboard the ill-fated vehicle.

The bus heading from Ilam to Biratnagar was ferrying commuters who were going to attend a mass meeting to be addressed by the Maoist leaders in Biratnagar. The incident occurred when the driver of the bus was attempting to overtake another vehicle but it led to break failure.

The bus rolled thrice and landed 30 feet off the road killing five passengers on the spot. The rest breathed their last on their way to Mangalbare Hospital.

Five of the critically injured were admitted to BP Koirala Hospital in Dharan, according to Dr Nabin Dhakal at the hospital. The rest are undergoing treatment at Amda Hospital, Damak.

However, only five of the deceased have been identified, according to police. They are Natra Thapa, 25, Jivan Dahal, 22, Debendra Centuri, 17, Suren Ekten, 30, and Man Bahadur Khapangi, 48. Mahendra Shrestha, the driver of the vehicle is at large, according to Mahendra Shrestha, the Sub-Inspector of Police.

Meanwhile, according to reports from Bara, eight passengers were hurt, four seriously when a truck numbered Na. 1 Kha 1666, heading from Pathlaiya to Birgunj met with an accident near Lalka bridge of Birgunj-Pathlaiya section of the road today afternoon.

King committed no wrong: Speaker

Post Report

NARAYANGADH, April 26 : Speaker Tara Nath Ranabhat today claimed that the king has not yet committed any constitutional mistakes while assuming executive power through royal take-over on October 4.

Speaking at a programme organised by Editor-Publishers’ Federation here in Chitwan, Speaker Ranabhat said, "It was not the king’s intention to reign the country directly. The October 4 royal move was a process to govern the country as per the spirit of the constitution."

He also held political parties and the people in power responsible for this situation.

Commenting on the political parties’ demand to return the executive power to the parliament, Ranabhat said that the executive power is naturally enshrined to the king in the absence of parliament and cabinet.

Raising serious doubts over the Maoists’ demand of the election to the constituent assembly, Ranabhat said that the process would establish autocratic authoritarianism. He suggested that the necessary amendment in the constitution by the all-party government including the Maoists would give better outlet to the current crisis.

Parties gear up for May 3 rally

KATHMANDU, April 26 (PR) - The meeting of the movement managing committee held today has finalised the path through which the respective parties’ demonstrators would pass on May 3, before converging at the Open Air Theatre.

While the Nepali Congress (NC) rally would commence at RNAC headquarters, the respective rallies of the CPN-UML, Nepal Workers and Peasants Party (NWPP), People’s Front Nepal and Nepal Sadbhavana Party (NSP) would emanate from Ratna Park, Maitighar, Sundhara and Bhadrakali, it was announced today.

The meeting was attended by Tirtha Ram Dangol and Bhimsen Das of the NC, Krishna Gopal Shrestha and Yogesh Bhattarai of the CPN-UML, Govind Duwal of the NWPP and Mahendra Anand of the NSP. The next meeting of the managing committee will take place on April 28 at the office of the Kathmandu unit of the CPN-UML.

Writing on the wall: The roots of the Maoist rebellion

By Suman Pradhan

KATHMANDU, April 26 : It used to be fashionable to blame the country’s democratic politicians for creating the conditions for the violent Maoist uprising. Conventional wisdom had it that, had the post-1990 politicians and governments paid sufficient attention to the countryside, refrained from corruption and nepotism, and worked towards political stability, then the Maoists wouldn’t find such a fertile ground for their rebellion.

All of that is true, of course. But today, after seven years of conflict and nearly 8000 lives lost, many experts are arguing for a new look at the insurgency that goes beyond just blaming the politicians of the post-democratic years. In the process they are uncovering issues that lie at the heart of the Maoist rebellion - issues which stretch decades, even centuries, back into the troubled history of this nation.

This ferment of ideas and theories kicked up by the rebellion is certain to have far-reaching implications on how Nepal evolves and how, indeed, many Nepalis come to view themselves and their country in the future. Social scientists are today asking: has Nepal’s experience - whether democratic or otherwise throughout - its nearly two-and-a-half centuries of existence as a state, been exclusive or inclusive? Were ethnic, religious, linguistic, cultural, regional identities sacrificed on the altar of a singular national identity, creating grounds for future conflicts? The answer, according to numerous experts, is yes. And this is why the insurgency has gathered so much steam.

Though emerging as a communist rebellion modelled along the lines of Peru’s Sendero Luminoso, the home-grown Maoist leadership quickly co-opted the burning religious, ethnic, cultural and linguistic issues that had simmered just beneath the surface for ages and meshed it with the class struggle theory of communism. A potent mix, as it turns out.

"To see the insurgency as a purely communist rebellion against multi-party democracy is to miss the point altogether. The Maoist movement has turned out to be a peculiar one in the sense that it’s an amalgamation of the Janata Vimukti Peramuna communist rebellion and the Tamil Tiger uprising in Sri Lanka," says Dr Anup Pahari, a US-based social scientist, who is here to attend a conference on the roots of the insurgency. "It has taken on both of an social-justice agenda and ethnic-cultural angle."

Dr Pahari may have a point. In three days of discussions in Kathmandu, social scientists and other experts from Nepal and abroad came up with a range of issues, which they say have simmered beneath the surface since Nepal’s unification.

"The emergence of ethnic identities in Nepal is not the arrival of a new phenomena but rather the expression of what had been latent," argues Dr Harka Bahadur Gurung. "The identities that remained submerged during the Shah and Rana regimes and suppressed during the Panchayat period are being asserted in the new democratic polity...The social ferment emerging in today’s Nepal is the outcome of suppression during the past regimes. Monopolistic social norms of the state are being questioned and established pattern of dominance being challenged by activist groups based on ethnic, linguistic, religious and regional allegiances."

This should illuminate why Dr Baburam Bhattarai, the leader of the Maoist team which is slated to start peace negotiations with the government on Sunday, receives widespread applause in mass rallies and meetings whenever he proclaims the Maoists’ commitment to the "politics of inclusion" not exclusion. He has specifically called for a new political structure that goes beyond today’s mere elections, a structure which he argues will give "real representation" to all the groups in the country.

You would think that after seven years of violence, the long festering issues which have surfaced would be seriously discussed by the politicians. But so far, the discussions have remained

within the confines of academia. Individuals, politicians and political parties, it seems, are too engrossed with the shadowy three-way power game that has been continuing since last October when King Gyanendra sacked an elected government.

"The individual and collective political psyche so far prefers to ignore reality rather than face the changes that threaten Nepal’s democracy. The powerful defence mechanisms used by the politicians and power centres is denial," says Bishnu Raj Upreti of the International Policy Institute, King’s College, London. "They deny the seriousness of current situation, afraid to admit that their prevailing attitudes and practices are inappropriate and causing problems."

Much of this denial has to do with the complexities of the issues involved. For long raised on a staple dose of a singular national identity based on religion, language and geo-politics, people in positions of power today find it difficult to address the competing nationalistic agendas of the dozens of diverse groups within the country’s borders.

The post-1990 democratic leaders in particular find it odd, if not outright wrong, that the people should be wanting anything more than multiparty democracy which was won by the 1990 People’s Movement. But some experts have argued that though multiparty democracy ushered in an era of openness and greater freedoms, it never led to the sort of participatory democracy that could have slowed down the sense of marginalisation and alienation.

For these reasons, experts like Dr Harka Gurung call for a new model of participatory and inclusive democracy that takes into account the aspirations of all the groups in the country. "What Nepal needs today is polycentric nationalism that fosters a feeling of belonging among all nationalities...The country was unified only geographically, not socially and economically."

Nuke war experts issue call for end to conflicts

Post Report

KATHMANDU, April 26 : The regional conference of International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW) before coming to an end issued a call to end all forms of war, conflicts and exploitation in its 13-point Kathmandu Declaration today.

Saying that peace in not a mere absence of war, the declaration issued by the conference issues a call for social transformation, which it says could be achieved by active process of identification, participatory dialogue and analysis of all forms of determinants of war, conflicts and exploitation.

The declaration has also flayed military build-ups, nuclearisation, arms race and conflicts in South Asia, including perpetual tension between India and Pakistan. The declaration has also issued a call to end military withdrawal from Iraq, even as the UN fulfils its obligation to assist the Iraqi people.

All contesting parties in countries like Nepal and Sri Lanka have been told to resole the conflicts by dialogue with sincere commitment towards conflict transformation even as fundamentalism has been flayed.

The IPPNW has also expressed commitment to fight out trafficking and stockpiling of small and big arms, even as it has suggested drastic cuts in military spending and diversion of this saved money into social sector, including health and education.

Meanwhile, on policies governing economic development, the declaration says that IPPNW would oppose any top-down forced economic model that scorns life and legitimises unequal and unjust relations.

In fact, it has pointed out at the energy consumption pattern, for example saying that six per cent of the richest were consuming a third of the world energy and resources. It has also flayed rich nations for squandering away fossil fuel.

Quoting the World Health Organisation (WHO), the declaration lays stress on health as the basic right of the people. In fact, it has put up a demand that health be treated as stipulated in the Alma Ata Declaration.

Saturday storm injures 3

KATHMANDU, April 26 (PR) - At least four people, including a police personnel were injured in a half an hour storm in the Capital City late Saturday evening.

Bijaya Sedhai, a police personal on duty at Sitapaila police post, a pedestrian Om Narayan Sah at Tripureshwor and a motorcyclist Som Krishna Shrestha at Syayambhu Sanobhanjang area sustained injuries on head, hands and legs and were rushed to the hospitals. An unidentified 11-year-old boy who was slightly injured returned home soon after getting treatment at the Bir Hospital.

Sources at the Tribhuvan University Teaching Hospital said three injured were admitted Saturday evening. Similarly, Om Narayan Sah, a resident of Rautahat was admitted in Patan Hospital. Police said at least 11 trees and several electric posts were fell down in Balaju and Bafal. Road traffic was disturbed for several hours in the area. The Pulchowk road in Lalitpur was also disturbed due to the storm.