National 4 (Spotlight Weekly)

“All Constitutional Forces Should Come Together”

— Michael E. Malinowski

Michael E. Malinowski, the U.S. ambassador to Nepal is an old friend of Nepal. He was in Nepal about a decade ago as the Deputy Chief of Mission of his embassy. The Nepali people take him as a good friend and well wisher. He spoke too SANJAYA DHAKAL of SPOTLIGHT on various issues concerning Nepal and other topic as well. Here are some excerpts :

When the Maoists have unilaterally broken off the peace talks and gone back to the killings, loot and arson, what, in your opinion, must HMG/N do now – use force or still solicit the Maoists to come back to table?

I think they need to do both. Clearly, the first responsibility of any government is the protection of its society. So, there has to be use of government resources to protect society. The second point is that they should continue to leave the door open to negotiations. Because the goal of using force is to bring them to the negotiating table.

The Maoists have had two meetings with two governments but both times they exposed their insincerity by breaking off the talks unilaterally. In these circumstances, do you think one could really take their words seriously?

This question goes to the heart of the problem and that is the lack of the Maoists’ credibility. Clearly, both times they have used the ceasefire to their own advantage. During the second ceasefire, they actually showed themselves in terms of breaking the rules of engagement continually – extortion, intimidation of political workers, killings continued throughout the ceasefire. Clearly, both times they used the ceasefire to build up their strength. That being said, I don’t think you could preclude the chance of negotiations. You just walk into it with your eyes wide open.

How do you look at the third round of peace talks between the government and the Maoists?

The government made a good-faith effort to engage with the Maoists. I believed the package of reform proposals, for example, that they presented during the third round of negotiations offered a solid foundation on which to begin discussions on how to help the most vulnerable members of Nepal’s population. The Maoists, as you know, unfortunately refused even to discuss the proposals – which to my mind calls into question their supposed commitment to help the oppressed. They also continued their campaign of violence throughout the ceasefire. That said, the government was right to try to negotiate with the Maoists because this terrible conflict can only be resolved through negotiations.

What, do you think, has forced the Maoists to take up arms against the state?

I don’t think they were forced into taking up arms in this case. Here they were in a new democracy that was still finding its way and one wished they would have used the democratic process to try to promote their agenda – their legal agenda, if they have one - and to address whatever grievances they perceived. The democratic system was there to be used. But they chose not to use it and instead embarked on a campaign of both violence and terror – thereby trying to impose their will on society as a whole through violence. That is not acceptable to any society let alone a democratic society that has its channels for groups to express their grievances or to redress their grievances through the political system. Resorting to armed struggle to force your views on the government and/or general population is called terrorism, and that’s exactly what the Maoists are engaged in. If the Maoists have a vision of how Nepal should be that is different from how it is now, they should articulate that vision to the Nepali people and see, in a free and fair election, how many share that view. So, I don’t think they were forced, in any way, to violence. They chose the path of violence and terror.

When communism has been discarded in other parts of the world, why does it flourish in Nepal?

History has shown the great failure of communist theory. I think those who still proclaim themselves as communists around the world not only in Nepal, should look at their tenets in light of the realities of 2003. The Maoists, on the other hand, are trying to impose very much of a foreign ideology on Nepal. An ideology that’s been rejected all over the world except for a few fringe groups. There are groups in India, Europe and even the United States who still proclaim themselves as the proponents of this very outdated and failed ideology. One can only look at countries like Cambodia where it was imposed for a time and see the terrible failure of this type of political theory. Other countries have tried out communism as a political reality, such as the former Soviet Union and have come to realize that it is not a sustainable form of government and leads to economic disaster. The Sandinista movement in Nicaragua, for instance, did topple the corrupt previous government and ruled the country for 10 years using fear and torture, before they in turn were ousted. When you talk to Nicaraguans – even former Sandinistas – today, they tell you that in 10 years the country lost 50 years of economic and developmental progress. Communism only seems to flourish as a utopian theory but fails in practice.

You suggested that peace talks must be explored. Is that the only way left to the government now? Do you think the government should still persist with the talks?

I think we always should seek for peaceful ways. But again the government does have the responsibility to protect society. The whole idea of combating the Maoist is to try to bring them back into society. Most of the cadres that are being “abused” by the so-called Maoist leaders are young people who are 14, 15, 16 years old. Those people should not be viewed as enemies. They are all Nepalese. We, friends of Nepal, want to see those people come back into Nepalese society, to give up violence and become productive members of a democratic society. For those reasons, we think that peace talks always have to be an option. On the other hand, if somebody is kicking you in the head; you have to defend yourself. The goal now is to put pressure on them, not only in terms of force but also in terms of international support for the government of Nepal and international condemnation of the tactics of the Maoists, to bend their backs into the negotiating table.

Do you think the posture of the government, at the moment, is rather defensive and that it is encouraging the Maoists to be more aggressive?

The Maoists have put some plans in place. They are very dark plans like assassinations and indiscriminate bombings. My God, we saw a school child killed the other day. This shows that the Maoists do not have any compunction against taking life. Now, the government, of course, has to defend. One would hope that they would also be able to start taking the fights to the Maoists – again, in an effort to bring pressure on them to give up the violent options and come to negotiating table. And when the negotiations resume, we hope it will resume, then it will be the responsibility of the Maoists to establish their credibility so that duplicity does not appear again.

In what way can the international community build up the pressure on the Maoists? Till now they have supported the government but it has not pressurized the Maoists.

I have often said that there are four areas that have to be advanced in order to get the situation back under control. The first one is on the political side. We hope that legal forces can become more cohesive. In this I mean the government, the palace, parties and elements of civil society need to come together to face the Maoists in a more effective manner. That, of course, has to be done by the Nepalis themselves. Then, we have to look at why have some of these people felt so grieved that they want to pick up the gun. So, the educational, social and developmental aspects of Nepal have to be improved. People have to be given more opportunities. The international community can and has been helping in this front. The third is on the security and again the first goal of any government is to protect its people. There has to be increased security in the country. We and other friends are helping with that. The fourth area is on the international side. The international support for the constitutional forces and international condemnation of the Maoists. I would urge that all people who are interested in a democratic Nepal whether they be leaders of various governments, whether they be military officials of various governments or whether they be economic development officers, all have the same message to the Maoists – stop the violence, stop the terror, come back into the system, put forward your proposals in the democratic arena. I would hope that all people who want to support Nepal are giving that message to the Maoists so they make no mistake how the world views their movement and their tactics.

Do you believe this message is going to the Maoists? Are they taking it seriously?

I don’t know. You will have to ask them. But clearly, they have decided to go on the war path. It is up to them. They broke the ceasefire. And believe me, everyone knows that they broke the ceasefire and they were planning to do it before they even sat down at the table in Nepalgunj and in Dang. So, the onus of breaking the ceasefire and returning to violence clearly is on them.

Quite a large section of people here believe that the Maoists have links with international revolutionary movements and terrorist organizations. Do you think it could be true?

If you go by what they say in their own website and their position and propaganda, they do have links with these ultra groups around the world. Now whether those links are significant, in my view, probably not — because these movements are extremely weak and scattered. But the Maoists may view that they have some type of international juggernaut behind them. The view of the world by the Maoists is a bit strange. The fact that they adhere on to this old discredited philosophy shows that right from the start – they don’t quite understand how the world works.

Do you think the Maoists are getting support from any external forces?

I don’t have any information on that. I think when they came above ground during this last ceasefire they were unpleasantly surprised by how little support they were able to garner from the Nepalis themselves, from civil society, or from the international community.

A hungry man needs food more than political ideology. What do you think must be done to strengthen the faith of poor Nepalis in democratic ideology?

I think education is one way. Nepal is a very difficult country. It has got highest mountains going one way, deep rivers, and ravines going the other. It is difficult to get from here to there. So, it has always been a difficult country to transport, to communicate and to govern. The history of Nepal shows that Nepal was a fairly closed society up until 1951 with low literacy rate. And then another area is demography. The fact that that there were 8 million people in 1963, which has gone up to 24 million now. It also puts great strain on the system. You can counter that through development work, education and policies that donors have done working with HMG over the years. In light of the current situation, we in the US have increased our annual budget from something like $24 million last year to $38 million this year, which will again hopefully go up next year. So we have stepped up efforts to try to get to the root causes that manifests into insurgency. We strongly believe in education as a key to address economic and political ills at the grass-root level. This education must encompass civic education as well as practical education on health, maternal and child nutrition, agriculture and income generation. The government also must demonstrate that it can provide and maintain services in the most remote parts of this country – areas which have been typically underserved for a variety of reasons.

The Maoist insurgency in Nepal could be equated with terrorism. With your commitment to eradicate terrorism from the world, have you given serious consideration to the situation in Nepal as it can affect you sometime or the other?

You are absolutely right. We denounce terrorism wherever they may be. One of the reasons that we have given attention to Nepal is because of the tactics used by these so-called Maoists. Again, last week they killed a small kid who was going to school. What people are these who do things like these? They think in a very different way than most people do. Their callous disregard for human life is something that all right-minded people should oppose.

What do you think about the agitation of the five political parties at this critical juncture?

I would like to see the legal forces come together. Certainly, people have the right to free assembly, free speech, freedom of association and right to make their positions clear – this is what democracy is all about. But I do think that if these programs are done, they be done in a manner that do not cause greater problems for security people, who after all are stretched in trying to provide security to the average Nepali on the street. Certainly, people have the right to express their positions. But one would hope, because of the situation, that they are done in a careful manner.

The Kashmir problem is not only obstructing South Asia’s development but posing a potential threat to the peace and security of the whole region. This problem has affected our economy because due to this the whole region lacks peace and stability. How, do you think, should India and Pakistan resolve this problem so that our development is not hijacked?

This is a problem that has been going on for the last 50 years. It is something that needs to be solved between India, Pakistan and people who live in Kashmir.

How does the US government view India’s concerns over the token U.S. military aid to Nepal to fight out the Maoist insurgency?

We have a close working relationship with India here. I think we share the same aims: to help Nepal face the threat posed by the insurgency. We are working closely with India and the U.K. in our efforts to help the government of Nepal.

Do you think the fallout of the Iraq war poses scare of terrorism to the world?

We hope that the rebuilding of Iraq as a democracy will aid in the eradication of international terrorism. However, we are always prepared for the emergence of fanatics and terrorists.

In the last thirteen years, the political leadership has, in some manner, failed to deliver. The common man seems to be rather disillusioned, perhaps they want a change in leadership. Do you agree to this?

One of the elements of democracy is that people can choose their own leaders. Leadership in Nepal has to be chosen by people of Nepal, not by foreigners like me. But clearly we support democratic process here, however that turns out. If people choose leader A rather than leader B, that’s their decision.

Do you think the political leadership, at the moment, has failed to deliver?

I think there have been setbacks. When you have insurgency that has created such big problems to average people, there is blame to go around including blames for donors. But I think this is still very much a work in progress. Nepal is a young democracy. You had to expect that the things are not going to go as smoothly as one would like. You just have to keep the faith in democracy. And the people of goodwill will find their way to improve the condition of their country.

Political corruption is disillusioning our poor people in the efficacy of democratic regime. What must be done to stem political corruption in Nepal?

Again education is the key. Education of the government and political parties on principles of ethics in government; education of the populace on the unacceptability of such practices so they may no longer be tolerated, building the capacity of responsible government offices to prosecute corruption cases. We are encouraged by some of the tough actions taken by the CIAA to investigate and prosecute figures from the public and private sectors. Some critics see effective anti-corruption initiatives as a threat to their privilege, power and ability to divert the people’s scarce funds to private purpose. In addition to the good work of the CIAA, prosecutors and Special Tribunals, the role of the civil society will be critical. We applaud their efforts to advance a good governance and anti-corruption agenda. If champions of good governance in government are to withstand the attacks of special interests, a credible non-partisan coalition of civil society organizations will be an important ally. Recognizing the crucial role that good governance plays in strengthening democracy, USAID has agreed to provide $ 7.5 million for programs to support Rule of Law, Accountability and Anti-corruption over three years.

All our good friends like you want the democratic process to get back to track. Do you think it will be possible for the King, in the absence of the parliament, to appoint a caretaker government that can hold elections at the earliest possible moment?

That is the decision for the Nepalese, the king and the political parties. However way it goes, we will just expect that the tenets of the constitution will be adhered to. But what formula to use is really up to the Nepalese.

With our long porous border with India, there is a feeling that Maoist leaders have again gone back to take shelter in India. With your commitment to work with the governments of UK and India to solve the problem here, do you think you could put any kind of pressure on India to apprehend those Maoist leaders and turn them over to Nepal?

In terms of open border between Nepal and India, that’s Nepal’s and India’s business. I think it’s admirable to have a border that is not militarized. But you do have criminals going back and forth. So there has to be good cooperation between the two countries to not allow people who break the law in either country to pass through without getting secured by the security forces. But how that can be done and what arrangements are needed, is for Nepal and India to decide. We do know that Nepal and India do discuss these issues regularly.

Regarding the recent WTO meeting in Cancun, why do they keep on failing?

It’s unfortunate that it failed. But, in general, we still hold that the WTO is the vehicle that could improve the economic conditions of everyone around the world – developed or developing countries. That being said, there are different viewpoints on what arrangements should be there. Though this round failed, I understand that they will talk again in Geneva in five months. Dialogue on these issues is quite healthy. I don’t think this is a disaster. I think it is the right thing for Nepal to join the WTO. Nepal and Cambodia are the first developing countries that came in on their own and not through any pre-existing arrangements in the old GATT.

With the state of economy that Nepal has, do you really believe that Nepal can get any kind of benefit by joining the WTO?

I think so. We all will have to see how it goes. It is very early in the process as Nepal just signed the agreement a couple of days ago.

Do you believe that the United States, as the only super power, must keep on playing the role of international policeman?

We do not see ourselves as the policeman of the world, but will step in when we see freedom violated and our interests threatened. We have our interest and the interests of our friends in mind so where we can help out and we are asked to help out then we will.