 |
|||
|
|
|||
|
| LETTERS |
Talk For Peace Although an overwhelming majority of Nepalis are in favor of peace, the rigid stance adopted by the Maoist rebels could thwart the possibility of the talks succeeding ("Negotiating The Non-Negotiable", SPOTLIGHT, September 7). Both the government and the rebels must put the concerns of the people ahead of their own agendas and do their utmost to reach an expeditious compromise. In fact, by continuing with violence, the rebels are defeating their own objective by obstructing the development process. The talks between the government and the Maoists should, therefore, be guided by the concerns of the majority of the people. Shishir Basnet Hidden Agenda By calling for the "institutionalization of republic" the Maoists are trying to weaken the only remaining strong institution of the country: the monarchy ("Negotiating The Non-Negotiable", SPOTLIGHT, September 7). Thrown off balance by the palace killings, the institution of monarchy was already in problem. Now this sinister demand by the rebels is causing further aggravation. Any sane Nepali would not want to hurt the monarchy. Hitting the symbol of national unity could jeopardize Nepal’s nationhood. The Maoist leaders must understand the importance of this basic institution, which was recognized even by their guru Mao Zedong. Their sudden attack against monarchy smacks of a wider conspiracy to undermine Nepal’s independent identity. Jeevan Gurung No Solution There seems to be no common ground between the government and the Maoists ("Negotiating The Non-Negotiable", SPOTLIGHT, September 7). How can the government accept the rebels’ demand for a republic? And how can the rebels step down from their extreme positions on the negotiating table? There can be no compromise in between. The government has no authority to trample with the basic principles of the constitution, whereas the Maoist leadership cannot afford to make compromises that could spark a backlash from their cadres. The talks, therefore, may have been doomed from the start. Rakesh
Lamichhane Dishonesty By Rebels Although the government is showing maximum restraint by avoiding confrontation with the rebels during the dialogue period, the latter are indulging in extortion and displaying their weapons ("Negotiating The Non-Negotiable’, SPOTLIGHT, September 7). This clearly implies that the rebels are not committed to what they promised to the government. In the end, this situation would be favorable to the government. In case the talks fail, a large majority of people would blame the rebels and would even support security forces’ operations that would eventually follow. The September 21 public program called by the rebels in Kathmandu is a provocative act. Although the constitution does not bar any party from holding peaceful programs, the rebels are exploiting this to organize a rally of armed groups. This must not be allowed in the heart of capital. If the Maoists are sincere about building peace through dialogue, they must call off the program. Otherwise, the consequence could be fatal for Nepalis. Dinesh
Shrestha Drunken Demand The demand by the Maoists’ sister organization to ban alcohol shows how insensitive they are to the livelihood of the people ("Tipsy-Turvy", SPOTLIGHT, August 31). Although nobody can reject their argument that alcohol is the cause of many social problems, there can be no quick solution to this. You cannot just order industries to close down overnight and throw hundreds of thousands of people out of their jobs. The examples around the world, too, show that banning alcohol is not as simple as it is made out to be. In fact, in a country like ours where liquor is required in cultural festivities, a ban makes little sense. Suraj KC Internationalize The Issue The article "Scarcity of Seriousness" (SPOTLIGHT, August 31) underscores how strong our position vis-à-vis the Bhutanese refugee issue is in terms of international law. It is clear that if we can advocate our case in the international court of law, we could stand to obtain even compensation for being forcibly asked to host refugees from a third country. Our diplomats and officers must study this point of view and pursue it to gain the upper hand in future talks on refugee repatriation. In case Bhutan fails to see our point, we must go for full-fledged internationalization of the issue. Otherwise, the talks would just drag on forever. Sashi Kumar
Chalise Pertinent Indeed The article by MP Roop Jyoti ("Some Pertinent Questions On Land Reforms", SPOTLIGHT, August 31) raised some very genuine issues regarding the land reforms announced by the government. Indeed, where would the government bring the huge money that will be required to transfer the ownership of lands to landless people? How can it guarantee corruption-free distribution of land? Besides, as Dr. Jyoti pointed out, the whole rationale of land reform would crumble if the landless are distributed meagre plots. Will somebody answer his questions, please? Janak Sharma |
Send your feedback to the
editor: spotligh@mos.com.np |
