NATIONAL 4 - (Spotlight Weekly)

‘Maoist Problem Not A Threat To Multiparty Democracy’

— ALAN W. EASTHAM

ALAN W. EASTHAM, acting United States Assistant Secretary for South Asia, is the first high-ranking US official to visit Nepal after President George W. Bush took office in January. Eastham has a long experience in South Asia, including Nepal where he served as a counselor for three years. He also served in different positions in India and Pakistan. During his stay in Nepal, Eastham met King Birendra, the prime minister, deputy prime minister, and the army and police chiefs. After his meetings, Eastham spoke to the press. KESHAB POUDEL compiled the following excerpts from his remarks.

How do you see the recent statement of US Ambassador to Nepal Ralph Frank? Is it not interference in Nepal’s internal affairs?

Well, as far as the United States of America interfering in Nepal’s domestic affairs is concerned, the opposition has the liberty to interpret Ambassador Frank’s expressions of American policy in any way they wish, just as others are free to interpret them as well. However, I recommend taking it on face value as an expression of global US policy in support of democracy as the best instrument of governance and its support for good governance as a principle. It is a very plain way of speaking, reminding ourselves and the people of Nepal what the people of America stand for. You and your colleagues are also free to editorialize in any way you wish. The last line of the statement clearly leaves it the people of Nepal to decide what they want.

What is the stand of the new US administration on the Bhutanese refugees issue and how do you see the progress on verification after the visit of the US assistant secretary of state in December last year?

We are very pleased that Nepal and Bhutan were able to put together the joint verification team and to begin the verification process. We hope that it will proceed in deliberate speed for humanitarian reasons, as these people have been in an uncertain situation for many years. We fully support the process the two governments have begun to solve this problem with a cooperative and peaceful spirit. We continue to keep an eye on events to try to understand and to help in any way we can. At this stage, with the verification process proceeding at a very deliberate pace, I don’t see any cause for concern.

You have arrived in the midst of an opposition-led agitation against Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala. What did you discuss with the prime minister?

It will be highly presumptuous for me to describe in detail the conversation I had with the prime minister. We talked about all the issues that affect Nepal today. However, the concentration was on bilateral issues and the diplomatic process. I briefed him on United States policy towards Nepal. This was my first opportunity to meet the prime minister and I was very grateful to him for having received me. There is absolutely no connection between the current anti-government agitation and the timing of my visit. I don’t believe in timing diplomatic missions of these sorts to coincide with developments in internal politics. So, it is purely a coincidence. I have also business in India and Pakistan and I am going on to Central Asia.

How do you see the future of the democratic process in Nepal?

I also talked with His Majesty on US-Nepal relations and the process of democratization in Nepal. I have consistently said to the people I have met that there are few fundamental principles in American’s policy towards Nepal. In the first instance, we have supported, for nearly fifty years ever since we have established diplomatic relations, the independence, territorial integrity and national sovereignty of Nepal. We have also consistently been supporting Nepal’s economic development. We also support Nepal’s democratic development. With the events of 1990 and after we have been close observers and supporters of multiparty constitutional democracy that exists in Nepal. I have found in discussions in Kathmandu a great commitment on all sides and all parties to the democratic process.

What will be the policy of the new US administration toward Nepal? Do you see any significant changes in policy?

I don’t think it will change very much. I have been associated with this country for 20 years and there is one unique factor of US-Nepal relations that is worthy of notice. It is the tremendous power of people-to-people connections between Americans and their Nepalese friends. There are 4,000 people who have served in this country as Peace Corps volunteers. I know that a fair number of people still maintain connections, interactions and advocacy for Nepal. Such things I have not found in many other countries. This people-to-people contact is very strong. It seems to me that we can to better job in building these contacts and turning them into awareness about the unique culture, geography and people of Nepal in the United States.

What is the emphasis of US policy?

There may be some different emphasis in terms of global power. You may notice that there is a strategic review under way in the Washington. There is also review on India and Pakistan and on the issue of sanctions. The new administration will seek ways of having a better and more effective policy that supports US national interests and builds friendship. The world has changed a lot in the last 10 years. Nepal and Nepalese are going through a similar process.

How do you see the Maoist problem in terms of a threat to multiparty democracy?

Well, I don’t want to characterize it as a threat to multiparty democracy because I suspect that the multi-party democracy is resilient enough to deal whatever threat there might be from the Maoist situation in Nepal. I think that if one has political grievances and wishes a change in government, in a multi-party democracy, murdering policemen is not the way to go about it. There is a political process in this country. We would call for the Maoist to reject violence as a tool of politics and find a way in entering the political mainstream.

What is your stand on good governance?

Good governance is a fundamental principle of democracy, as democracy does not work without good governance.

Is there a possibility for the US to play mediator’s role in the Kashmir problem?

The new administration encourages a process of dialogue between India and Pakistan that accommodates and takes into account the wishes of the people of Kashmir. An American mediating role is not on the cards unless the parties wish us to be available. We would encourage India and Pakistan to conduct a dialogue with all of the concerned parties, with each other, as well as with Kashmiris. We believe that a way to settlement is dialogue. Nevertheless, India, Pakistan and Kashmiris will continue to move towards dialogue and reconciliation.