To put democracy back on track in Nepal, resolving the Maoist issue alone is far from adequate

-Shrish Rana, Senior Journalist

Shrish Rana is not a new name for the regular readers of the Telegraph weekly. Apart from this, Mr. Rana writes for various newspapers on a regular basis. Readers appreciate his analyses of the contemporary Nepali events.

He secured his Masters Degree in the discipline of Political Science from Nepal's Tribhuvan University long time back.

At the fag end of the now collapsed system, Mr. Rana was the Chairman of the Gorkhapatra Corporation.

Mr. Rana began his career as a journalist and worked for The Rising Nepal for quite some time. Later he brought out National Star weekly (English) which was short-lived.

Last week, we approached Mr. Rana for an exclusive tete-e-tete on contemporary national events to which he readily agreed. Below the results-chief editor.

TGQ1: How do you Mr. Rana assess the present political situation in the country given the apparent failure of the second round of Government-Maoists talks in Bardiya. What impact would this failure have on the overall maintenance of peace in the country and the mainstream politics of the nation?

Shrish Rana: I am not aware that either the government or the Maoists have termed the Bardiya talks a failure. What has been said by government is that their side was firm on the need to maintain the current constitution and the monarchy. I am also aware that the Maoists at a separate press conference unfortunately not covered by the official media claimed that the government had opted for a highly resilient position on these two key issues. I am also aware that both sides claim the need for a third round.

These are claims of course. What is evident in the aftermath of the talks is that government put its foot down firm favoring a month long ban on public demonstrations in Kathmandu Valley. It is also evident that, despite harsh words, the several meetings scheduled en masse by the Maoists for Kathmandu have been rescheduled and relocated outside Kathmandu. After so much hype and so much scare the reprieve granted Kathmandu denizens is difficult to de-link from the talks.

I don’t see the talks having a negative impact thus.

As for mainstream politics and peace, I would suggest that mainstream politicians have been taught a lesson by the Maoists who appear to have taken up the mainstream organizational methods to the more radical extents they have. In order for mainstream politics itself to contribute to strengthening democracy, they must not, as the Maoists have done by taking up arms on their own, misuse the government machinery and the education sector among others for petty organizational gains; also, they must not ridicule constitutional institutions and values in practice while theoretically upholding them. A little analysis will allow one to recall that mainstream politicians had so disturbed the peace in the country that the Maoist insurgency of five years evidently thought it convenient to capitalize from it by radicalizing the reaction.

TGQ2: The ghastly incident perpetrated by the terrorists on the United States on September 11 has apparently come as a blessing in disguise for the Nepalese government at this critical juncture. This gets reflected in the manner the government machinery has suddenly tightened the security system in the country. Do you think that the HMG/N henceforth will face the Maoists differently for obvious reasons? Your exclusive comments please!

Shrish Rana: A calamitous tragedy of such international proportions must surely have its impact felt in Nepal also. More than government alone, one would wish that Nepali society as part of the international community in this age of a shrinking world identify the causes and roots of radicalism accurately to be rid of this scourge effectively in order to allow society the reprieve and stability it needs for all-round development.

One would insist again that much of the source of societal terror is in the manner of convenient politics opted for by political organizations who have been taking the individual’s democratic right to organize to precipitous extents.

TGQ3: Nepal’s two top political stalwarts, Madhav Nepal and Girija Prasad Koirala, have recently blamed India as to have been backing the Maoists insurgency. Surprising though it may appear, there has been sudden deployment of the Indian Secret Service, SSB, at the borders. Do you think it to be a mere conjecture or a deliberate act on the part of India? Please enlighten our readers.

Shrish Rana: I have read reports of the question regarding the movement of troops close to our border in India taken up in parliament. I am not aware of government answers reported. More pertinent perhaps is that I am not also aware of our treaty commitments with India obligating either Nepal or India to inform each other of such movements and so one recalls the now shelved Zone of Peace proposal of the late King Birendra.

As for the other question, it speaks poorly of the credibility of our politicians that they should so allege India publicly when it suits their politics and leave the public wondering. It also attests to the actual state of Nepal-India relations when politicians should seek to raise the anti-India bogey in public whenever convenient. One would suggest that, given the state of Nepal- India relations, the open borders, the almost free movement of men and moneys to and fro and the strategic stakes at hand plus the repeated and well-demonstrated Indian penchant for hegemony in the region, almost all major mainstream parties as also the Maoists are vulnerable to Indian influence. There is nothing out of the ordinary in the statements, not even their sources.

TGQ4: The new constitutional monarch, King Gyanendra, is expressing his minds regarding the deteriorating state of affairs of the nation through the Nepali media of late. A section of the intellectuals consider it to be King’s desire to "assert" some of the roles as enshrined in the constitution. How do you take King Gyanendra’s interviews that have been appearing in the Nepali media of late in series?

Shrish Rana: I take the reported communications from the Monarch as reflecting the concern of his citizens and this is as should be.

What should be highly revealing in our context is the reaction emanating from our politicians who continue to politicize that sacred constitutional institution to suit their partisan purposes.

TGQ5: What would you suggest to both the Maoists and the government so that a sort of permanent peace prevails in the nation? Is it possible to form an interim government as demanded by the Maoists, which includes the leaders of the insurgency and proceed for another election wherein the insurgents too participate?

Shrish Raana: Is it possible to suggest anything new? Your suggestion of an interim government including the Maoists conducting elections is perhaps the mutually defined and ultimate goal of the talks. To recall, it is when the current Maoist leadership was shunned from government and dumped by the elections that they took to guns; their presence in parliament when sharing an electoral government was considerable. The nexus between being in government and sharing the electoral spoils is so blatant in Nepali politics that it ridicules democracy outright. As for peace and development, resolution of the Maoist problem can by no means ignore the need for all political parties to rise above their petty interests for sake of the nation and society. To put democracy back on track in Nepal, resolving the Maoist issue alone is far from adequate.

Headline | National | Editorial | 2nd Impression | International | Past