National 2 (Spotlight Weekly)

In Limbo

The excitement that came with the announcement of the cease-fire is fast dwindling away with the same old complacency setting in among all political players

By SANJAYA DHAKAL

After seven years of bloody conflict that took the lives of over 7,000 people and destroyed property and infrastructure worth more than US$300 million, the government and Maoists declared a cease-fire on January 29, raising a glimmer of hope for peace in this troubled Himalayan Kingdom. The truce, second one after the failed peace talks in 2001, came amid widespread demand to end violence.

Pun : Tough negotiations ahead

Although the truce has been in effect for two weeks, there seems to be no headway on negotiations. The political parties, as usual, are yet to evolve a common agenda. "Apart from providing lip service that they are willing to lend their hands in restoring peace, they have not done anything," said a political analyst.

The government looks like it made the truce agreement in haste without planning on how to deal with its aftermath. "The ad hoc manner in which the government is acting is ridiculous," says a western diplomat, not wanting to be named. Minister for Works and Physical Planning Narayan Singh Pun, who is credited with bringing the two sides to the truce agreement, has been running around the jails and coddling the Maoist inmates who demand to be released "so that there will be a conducive environment to peace".

On February 10, Minister Pun, who is also the chief government negotiator, had to visit the Nakhkhu jail in Lalitpur where he had to assure the Maoist inmates who were threatening that it would be a breach of truce if the government forces kept on re-arresting the freed comrades.

In the absence of code of conduct, the two sides are acting randomly. The Maoist leaders, in their recent write-ups in newspapers, have began demanding that the government publicize the whereabouts of those missing and release their cadres from various jails, scrap the anti-terrorist act and send back the troops to barracks. They have pegged these demands as being central to building an environment for talks. The government seems to think otherwise. "We have already withdrawn the terrorist tag, red corner notices and award for their heads. Now the Maoists should come for constructive talks and not engage in useless tactics," said a senior government official.

The Maoists have formed a five-member negotiating team headed by their chief ideologue Dr. Baburam Bhattarai. The government is, however, yet to name its full team. Prime Minister Lokendra Bahadur Chand has said that he will consult with other political parties before making new moves.

However, compounding the whole problem, the political parties, still nursing their October 4 wounds, have started clamoring for transparency in the peace talks and casting doubts on the cease-fire. "Although no one can deny there should be transparency, one should remember that peace talks cannot be held in the open. There has to be a degree of secrecy given the sensitive nature of the dialogue," said the analyst.

Top politicians at a meeting hosted by UML : Divided they stand

The example of how the peace talks is proceeding in neighboring Sri Lanka should give all an idea on the dos and don'ts of the negotiation. It has been a year since there had been cease-fire in the island country and yet the two warring sides have not reached any concrete political solution to end decades long conflict there.

Making peace is no child's play. The Nepalese people, who used to take peace for granted, are gradually realizing this hard reality after the seven years of brutal insurgency in their country. Two weeks after the government and the Maoists agreed to observe cease-fire and engage in peace talks, the cart seems to have gotten stuck. The much-touted roundtable conference of all parties seems still distant.

Though experts in conflict management say that peace-making is a slow process, the absence of any forward movement in the two full weeks has forced people to think otherwise. The cease-fire announcement came after much public pressure. "People were tired of seeing the bloodbath of their own countrymen. There were national as well as international pressure to end the cycle of violence. And both the warring parties, too, were weary after long and seemingly endless fighting," said a human rights activist.

Experts say that the way to go forward is to first agree on code of conducts and then begin to untie the easier knots first and keep the tighter ones for later on. "In this way, the level of confidence among both sides will increase and will make it that much easier for them to tackle knotty issues," said an expert. "Most importantly, any peace talks have to be all inclusive with representatives of all responsible actors taking part."

The cease-fire has provided one last opportunity to the Maoists to prove that they are honest about their commitments towards the well-being of this country. "If the Maoists back out from this talks just like in 2001, they will lose credibility not only in Nepal but also abroad," said the diplomat.

This time the Maoists had come for talks amid mounting international pressures as well. Apart from UN and several other multilateral agencies, many western governments, too, had been asking them to end the violence. "Western governments, particularly the American government, were seriously pondering on labeling Maoists as international terrorists. If they do not engage in constructive talks and agree for negotiated settlement this time, they will be surely branded international terrorists. And this will do them no good. The world after the 9/11 is a totally different one. There is far less acceptability towards using violence for political gains and perpetrators of such violence also have to fear international courts of justices," said the political analyst.

The resolve of the international community is evident by the fact that British government despite welcoming the truce agreement has expressed its commitment to continue providing assistance to strengthen the government security apparatus. The American government, which is spearheading the global war on terror, is equally serious about bringing peace to this country and has already hinted it would be forced to include Maoists in the list of international terrorists if they do not mend their ways.

Neighboring countries like India and China have already welcomed the truce and hoped that this will pave way for enduring peace in the country. India, which is troubled by a herd of terror outfits including Naxalites who have close links with Nepalese Maoists has already beefed up its security in Indo-Nepal border with the objective of checking their cross-border movements. India Today, an influential weekly magazine, in its February 10, 2003 issue advocated that Indian government needs to "give full military assistance, short of sending troops, to thwart the Maoists".

Amid all these developments, it would be better if both the Maoists and the government realized the gravity of the situation and move toward resolving the problems and ending the mindless cycle of violence. The peace talks, therefore, must succeed as the alternatives means only destruction and devastation. In realizing the peace, Maoists have more responsibility as they will now have to prove their honesty, which was marred when they unilaterally backed out of 2001 peace talks and attacked military barracks in Dang. Any repetition of such action will spell disaster to this country.