Is Peace In The Offing?

The recent agreement, though taken place in alien land, injects a hope to restore peace

By KESHAB POUDEL

The CPN-UML general secretary Madhav Kumar Nepal – who visited Indian capital New Delhi twice in a short span of time and who is in the process of making his third visit any time soon, has declared that the insurgency in Nepal will wind up soon.

Koirala : Will the talks bear fruit ?

“Maoists have expressed commitment to participate in democratic exercise by accepting coexistence of other parties and by abjuring violence,” said Nepal, who had also met Maoist leaders in the past in Indian city of Siliguri and Lucknow. “We will disclose details of the deal between the Maoists and seven party front within a month,” said Nepal addressing a press conference in Butwal, 300 kilometer west of Nepal.

Nepali Congress leader Girija Prasad Koirala, who revealed that he had telephonic talks with Maoists in New Delhi, too expressed that peace will return soon. After rooting out all democratic forces from villages, the insurgents seem to have agreed to join hands with Nepal’s plural political forces to restore peace. Although the first target of insurgency was the parliamentary political process and the main victim was Nepali Congress- the largest liberal democratic party – which was at the time of revolt in the government with a bright prospect of leading the nation through several elections. And now the liberal political party has to sacrifice all its interest for the sake of peace. Past experiences of other countries have shown that such conflicts always operate through under cover.

A lot of confusion prevails throughout this time about the insurgency’s real purpose and real designers despite such a tremendous loss of lives and destruction of properties. Ways and means to tackle that problem have always been in debate but unfortunately no consensus and concerted solution had evolved. The first opportunity to deal with this challenge was with the Congress-led governments of Sher Bahadur Deuba, Krishna Prasad Bhattarai and Girija Prasad Koirala but they ended up with dismal results. In between, there have been changes of governments under the leadership of Lokendra Bahadur Chand and Surya Bahadur Thapa but no one succeeded to bring the insurgents to fruitful dialogue. After drastic change of October 4, 2002, the command over the government, unwillingly and unwittingly, had shifted from the seat of parliament to the Royal Palace.

The February 1 proposed solution of the Palace had some edge over the conflict but its greatest lost is the loss of goodwill from internal as well as external democratic opinions. US ambassador to Nepal James Moriarty, one of the greatest supporters for Nepal as well as its democratic process, has correctly observed saying that Nepal is at the cross roads.

Nepal can turn towards progress as well as destruction. On the one hand Nepal has a very peaceful and progressive prospect, on the other hand there is a bleak future of a conflict ridden area where two most powerful Asian countries have a chance to come into a devastative collusion. After more than one decade long conflict and chaos in Nepal, suddenly hectic activities were centered in Indian Capital city of New Delhi.

It reminds one of the comment of late Leo Rose, an American scholar, in his illustrious book Democratic Innovation in Nepal, in which he writes that the fight was going on not in the hills of Nepal but in the halls of New Delhi, referring to the 1951 revolution of Nepal when the King, Rana and organized political forces made a settlement. The recent activities show that the history seems to have repeated with a different perspective.

The senior leaders of all agitating political parties of Nepal, too, seem to be in hectic scheduled shuttling back and forth from New Delhi. One may wonder how much access they have with the real information of the power playing and how much effective their voices could be at such moment. “Covered operations are rarely put into table talks and uncovered street gossips do not make any agenda to deal with. Perhaps, their presence was needed as a political covert but the main contestants of the conflict had their own ways to reach into an agreement,” said a political analyst.

“Since long there have been a strong viewpoint in Nepal that the conflict in Nepal is a reflection of a regional conflict under a skillfully designed cover. One can simply wish that this was not the fact. If it was simply an internal matter, then why all Nepalese political actors minus Palace and all major power like USA, UK, UN and India, within conspicuous absence of China, in the regional peace process are working together. It is more interesting to observe dramatic convergence in New Delhi following soon after the SAARC Summit in Dhaka where King Gyanendra held hour-long one-to-one talk with Indian prime minister Dr. Man Mohan Singh and Nepalese foreign minister Ramesh Nath Pandey held a long meeting with India’s National Defense Council advisor MK Narayanan,” added the analyst.

Interestingly, when hectic political activities are taking place in Nepal and India, King Gyanendra is traveling with his own delegation far from South Asia in African states. Bangladesh could have been most natural and reasonable place to hold any such political dialogue, as a close neighbor of Nepal and medium-size defensive military power, to hold any kinds of political dialogue for resolution of conflict of regional nature.

No body knows why the meeting was held in India. For a long time to come, Nepalese politicians who went to India on the pretext of health check up may not have to answer all these questions. It is told but never presumed to be believed that political leaders had not met the Maoist leaders but had a crucial telephonic conversation there.

“I did not meet Maoist leaders but I had telephonic conversation with them,” said former prime minister Girija Prasad Koirala. “Maoists agreed to join mainstream politics giving up their arms.” A thin veil over the events does not make it believable.

Despite all these suspicious assumptions, one has to take this event in New Delhi with all its seriousness. Leader like Girija Prasad Koirala, who has spent his whole life as a committed democrat yet with a moderate program, has not gone for nothing to discuss or just to hang around the streets of foreign capital to an extent he has seen as an activist who justifies the means by the ends he pursues. He must have been convinced that his small contribution may cause greater embarrassment but that may yet bring the greatest result in the ending of ongoing deadly conflict.

Even his critic and first vice-chairman of the present council of minister Dr. Tulsi Giri said in his interview to Samaya weekly a month ago that Girija Prasad Koirala would be treated as a national hero if he brings permanent peace in the country.

All rhetoric and high sounding political statements have little meaning - what counts most is the effect and net result of the whole exercise. Not only the politicians who have backing of popularly elected leaders of the parliament but also traditional and true friends and donors of democratic countries have been able to generate some hopes in the crisis. Despite several imposing and conflicting situations, reasonable persons in Nepal have a hope that the conflict has come to an end.

Let it not be a real wishful thinking. Let it be completed by all means with the help of anybody, at any place and at any moment. Peace is the first requirement of this country and this region too.