National 1 (Spotlight Weekly)

Games They Play

The chiefs of the ruling and opposition parties raise the bogey of foreign interference at a time when a global war on terrorism is going on

By A CORRESSPONDENT

Nepal ( left ) with Koirala : Strange statements

It is not that they do not understand the crux of the problems the country is facing today. However, the warnings of foreign meddling voiced by Nepali Congress president Girija Prasad Koirala and CPN-UML general secretary Madhav Kumar Nepal have raised a key question. Why have they suddenly become so concerned about the activities of so-called "foreign elements"? The two leaders, who have never found time to speak about Nepal's geo-strategic vulnerability in the past, are pleading the cause of Nepal's northern neighbor.

This is not the first time Koirala or Nepal has pointed out the threat of foreign activities in the country. Following his meeting with Maoist leader Prachanda and Baburam Bhattarai in Silguri, India in August 2001, the UML general secretary declared that the Maoists were backed by India. (He later clarified that the word he really meant was "buck up"). Koirala went a step further and accused both New Delhi and Narayanhity of supporting the rebels.

It was not a coincidence that the two leaders made those statements while peace talks between the government and the insurgents were under way. Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba criticized Koirala and Nepal, saying their comments were clearly intended to disrupt the peace process.

Although this time Koirala and Nepal have projected themselves as advocates for China, the story beneath the surface is more complicated. "We don't face any security threat right now from Nepal. We can defend ourselves," said a diplomat in the Chinese Embassy on condition of anonymity. "We have already expressed our support for Nepal's efforts to wipe out terrorism."

Until Deuba's visited New Delhi to request his Indian counterpart Atal Bihari Vajpayee's help in quelling the Maoist insurgency, neither Koirala nor Nepal addressed their earlier accusation. Moreover, nobody bought the idea that growing Maoist activities in Nepal might invite retaliation from the northern neighbor.

After the United States decided to provide some logistical support to the Royal Nepalese Army, Koirala, Nepal, other communist leaders and human rights activists suddenly raised the issue of growing foreign activities and threats to Chinese security.

Although these leaders are not as ignorant as they sometimes sound, the timing of their statements has surprised many. Their affinity for China did not appear when Chinese Premier Zhu Rongji visited Nepal last year. What prompted them to speak about shadowy foreign activities in Nepal now? It is not difficult to understand.

The comments in favor of peace talks with the Maoists and against foreign activities come after the UML leader's visit to Bhutan, a protectorate of India, and the Nepali Congress president's visit to New Delhi. "The government must start negotiations with Maoist. Prolonging the war against terrorism will only invite foreign intervention. That will be disastrous," said Nepal.

The United States has clearly told the world that it will not tolerate any kind of terrorism and will not make distinctions between perpetrators of terror and those who harbor them. The United States has pressed Pakistan to stop its support to militants waging war in Kashimir. Nepal's Maoists can be no exception.

It is significant that Nepalese leaders have suddenly raised the issue of peace talks at a time when the country might be very close to exposing the backers of the Maoists. Despite continual atrocities and killing of their party workers by Maoists, Koirala and Nepal seem to care more about the rebels, as if they are the backers of Maoist.

Otherwise, there is no reason for meaningless statements at a time when Deuba is on his way to United States to seek moral and economic support for Nepal's fight against terrorism. "It is not difficult to judge what has prompted the Koirala-Nepal duo to speak such nonsense," says a political analyst.

As India and China have expressed their support for the kingdom's fight against terrorism, nobody can understand how Koirala and Nepal realized that a small amount of equipment provided by the United States would amount to foreign interference.

After the September 11 terrorist attacks, the United States has realized that any form of state-supported or spontaneous terrorism would have far-reaching consequences around the globe. If terrorism and anarchism flourishing in Afghanistan could hit a country as far away as the United States, are not growing lawlessness and terrorism in Nepal a threat to its northern and southern neighbors?

If any of two regional power tries to disrupt the initiative taken by the sole superpower to wipe out terrorism, they would have to face direct confrontation along the more than 1400-km border. If Koirala and Nepal are

true friends of our two neighbors, they must speak about the dangers of burgeoning violence in the foothills of Nepal and its long-term security implications for the Gangetic plains of India.