I n d e p t h    A n a l y s i s
Maoists Bundh Date Meaningful!

Kathmandu: How Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba's government will dissolve and reconstitute the crucial local level bodies will be watched. Minister Khum Bahadur Khadka has promised "all-party" representation. Expectedly perhaps the UML's predominance of the elected bodies will be compromised. This will perhaps antagonize a UML opposed to this move for obvious reasons. How this will affect the UML's readiness to go to the polls thus will also have to be watched.

The all-party promise of course is likely to exclude the Girija party amidst the claim by Deuba that his is the lone congress. Although Deuba's all-party move will obviously be directed to edge out his congress rivals. Its effects on the UML's predominance of the local bodies will no doubt create reservations in the UML. Viewed in the background of the UML's prior commitment to oppose the dissolution, how Deuba's all-party move will prevail thus will demand more than cursory scrutiny.

Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba is certainly in a belligerent mood. He holds the reign of the government. The parliament is dissolved. The local level elected bodies are to be dissolved. In essence, he and his cabinet are the only elected personnel in office at the moment. He has thrown the gauntlet for elections.

This belligerence will matter in the sense that its success will depend on the response of his opponents within and outside his party.

So far, this opposition has been pointing out Nepal's insecure environment as a deterrence to the holding of the elections. They have launched a campaign already to tarnish the results of the yet to be held elections by claiming that the prevailing situation will make any election results unfair.

This partisan response gives the advantage to none other than Deuba. Firstly, he is in the government; secondly, his argument that elections and nothing else can revive civil society against the insurgency holds; thirdly, his promise to provide the necessary security for civil society to go back to the democratic process is logical; fourthly, neither the election commission nor the security organs have challenged Deuba's veracity since it is these two organs that must shoulder the task of the elections, it renders opposition reservations rather redundant. It is these that make the Deuba action credible.

It is thus not surprising that this rising credibility must be challenged by Deuba opponents. It is not surprising therefore that Deuba must be linked to the Royal Palace. It is not surprising again that this linkage should be considered anti-democratic. To boot, it is not surprising that the congress-Girija and the UML have in their own separate ways threatened to launch another democratic movement demanding amidst the insinuations that the Palace distance itself from Deuba. How this is to be done in the constitutionalist milieu is a mystery in itself but it is such mysteries that make Nepali democracy provide clues to political standpoints that provoke, for example, the new Maoists call for yet another Nepal Bundh scheduled two months from now. In the midst of confusions, the Maoists date perhaps provides the lone surety that, by that time, the situation will be so aggravated as to secure, directly or otherwise, UML and Girija participation in the "new democratic" movement.

Stop playing with fire!

Kathmandu: Deliberate or otherwise, knowingly or even unknowingly, the Nepalese leaders are playing with "fire". Those playing with fire mostly belong to the congress camps which recently witnessed more than a vertical split.

The process of playing with this fire started right the day after former prime minister Girija Prasad Koirala had to quit the prime ministerial chair a year ago. In having forced to quit the prestigious chair, Koirala smacked a foul play of the Royal Palace which it was not. In effect, the UML in close cooperation with the Deuba-Bhattarai combine of the Congress managed Koirala's ouster.

To recall, President Koirala sensed that the Palace and the Army were not cooperating with him when he tried his best to mobilize the army when he was himself the prime minister. An already annoyed Koirala hastily concluded that the Palace and the Army will not support him in his lifetime when he witnessed that the Army got itself mobilised under the prime ministership of the incumbent prime minister Sher Bahadur Deuba-his nearest and dearest political foe.

The developments which later followed after the sudden termination of the parliament and the vertical split in the congress and the manner his rival Deuba pushed the country's politics his way following the dissolution of the parliament all put together were sufficient enough for Koirala to calculate that the Palace one way or the other sided with his rival which in his calculation were all aimed at depositing democracy as a gift to the palace or at least all these posed greater threats to democratic system.

In the process, after the dissolution of the parliament chip-congress president Koirala has made several stinging remarks against the Palace and the Army apparently to satisfy his own soul. His clique men too have been indirectly threatening the monarch of dire consequences should the Monarch act as a shield to Deuba. To recall, Ram Chandra Poudel when in power had told that the Maoists were close to Nirmal Nivas- the residence of the present King in Maharajganj. However, Poudel came out unscathed.

Koirala coterie suspects the very intentions and the motives of the constitutional monarch when the latter approved Deuba's recommendation for a dissolution of the parliament which this coterie claims to have received approval in the late night which is what should not have been done by the monarch.

Analyzing Koirala blunt comments made pertaining to the constitutional monarch what becomes pretty clear is that Koirala's struggle is now is not with his arch rival Deuba but with the nation's constitutional monarch who according to Koirala had been siding with Deuba.

"If there is no congress, there would not be monarchy either", said a infuriated Koirala the other day.

If Koirala for his own declared reasons is attacking the constitutional monarchy then equally frustrating is the fact that the Deuba camp too is bringing up the references of the constitutional monarchy which at times appears that those have been brought solely to shield their camp from the attacks of the other camp.

For instance, the government's attorney general only recently said that the dissolution of the parliament became a reality simply because the King too wished so. This is a blatant case of bringing the monarchy into unnecessary controversy.

Be that as it may, both the sides albeit diametrically opposed ones, have been unnecessarily dragging the institution of the monarchy into a political controversy which is not a creation of the monarchy at the first place.

Intellectuals opine that the institution of the monarchy if dragged into political controversies for long might retaliate in a form that perhaps the congress men like Koirala and Deuba even might not have in their imagination.

The congress-K and congress-D must conclude now that the monarch after His successful visits to both India and China is a very strong personality.

Indeed this strength the monarch has gained by default simply because the leaders of both the countries now understand that who is what in today's prevalent disturbed political context of Nepal. Naturally the neighbors, North and South, will not put their bet on sinking horses! Add to this the Nepali population's growing detachment with the leaders of the country and the Nepali army's continuing unconditional loyalty for the country's monarch.

It is this growing detachment of the people which only adds to the monarch's strength.

Koirala or for that matter Deuba or even leaders of their sorts must now forget that the lay men would rally in their favor should a major crisis grip the country in the near future. Gone are the days, say intellectuals, when the lay men used to get swayed by the eloquent lectures of their leaders which in effect were not.

The message is perhaps clear.

Treaty between India and Bhutan, 1949

Kathmandu: Upon repeated requests from within and without, we are pleased to print the full text of the treaty signed in between India and Bhutan in the year 1949. We hope that this will largely benefit the regular readers of this weekly here and abroad: Chief editor.

The treaty as follows:

The Government of India on the one part, and His Highness the Druk Gyalpo's Government on the other part, equally animated by the desire to regulate in a friendly manner and upon a solid and durable basis the state of affairs caused by the termination of the British Government's authority in India and to promote and foster the relations of friendship and neighborliness as necessary for the well being of their peoples, have resolved to conclude the following Treaty, and have for this purpose named their representatives, that is to say, Sri Harishwar Dayal representing the Government of India, who has full powers to agree to the said Treaty on behalf of the Government of India and Deb Zimpon Sonam Tobgye Dorji, Yang-Lop Sonam, Chho Zim Thendup, Rin-Zim Tandin and Ha Drung Jigmie Palden Dorji, representing the Government of His Highness the Druk Gyalpo, Maharaja of Bhutan, who have full powers to agree to the same on behalf of the Government of Bhutan.

Article 1: There shall be perpetual peace and friendship between the Government of India and the Government of Bhutan.

Article 2: The Government of India undertakes to exercise no interference in the internal administration of Bhutan. On its part the Government of Bhutan agrees to be guided by the advice of the Government of India in regard to its external relations.

Article 3: In place of the compensation granted to the Government of Bhutan under Article 4 of the Treaty of Sinchula and enhanced by the Treaty of the eighth day of January, 1910 and the temporary subsidy of Rupees One Lakh per annum granted in 1942, the Government of India agrees to make an annual payment of rupees five lakhs to the Government of Bhutan. And it is further hereby agreed that the said annual payment shall be made on the tenth day of January every year, the first payment being made on the tenth of January 1950. This payment shall continue so long as this Treaty remains in force and its terms are duly observed.

Article 4: Further to mark the friendship existing and continuing between the said Governments, the Government of India shall within one year from the date of signature of this Treaty return to the Government of Bhutan about thirty two square miles of territory in the area known as Dewangiri. The Government of India shall appoint a competent officer or officers to mark out the area so returned to the Government of Bhutan.

Article 5: There shall, as heretofore, be free trade and commerce between the territories of the Government of India and of the Government of Bhutan; and the Government of India agrees to grant the Government of Bhutan every facility for the carriage, by land and water, of its produce throughout the territory of the Government of India, including the right to use such forests roads as may be specified by mutual agreement from time to time.

Article 6: The Government of India agrees that the Government of Bhutan shall be free to import with the assistance and approval of the Government of India, from or through India into Bhutan, whatever arms, ammunition, machinery, war-like materials or stores may be required or desired for the strength and welfare of Bhutan, and that this arrangement shall hold good for all time as long as the Government of India is satisfied that the intentions of the Government of Bhutan are friendly and that there is no danger to India from such importation. The Government of Bhutan, on the other hand, agrees that there shall be no export of such arms, ammunition etc. across the frontier of Bhutan either by the Government of Bhutan or by private individuals.

Article 7: The Government of India and the Government of Bhutan agree that Bhutanese subjects residing in Indian territories shall have equal justice with Indian subjects, and that Indian subjects residing in Bhutan shall have equal justice with the subjects of the Government of Bhutan.

Article 8.1: The Government of India shall, on demand being duly made in writing by the Government of Bhutan, take proceedings in accordance with the provisions of the Indian Extradition Act 1903 (of which a copy shall be furnished to the Government of Bhutan)0 for the surrender to all Bhutanese subjects accused of any of the crimes specified in the first schedule of the said Act who may take refuge in Indian territory.

Article 8.2: The Government of Bhutan shall, on requisition being duly made by the Government of India, or by any officer authorized by the Government of India in this behalf, surrender any Indian subjects or subjects of a foreign Power, whose extradition may be required in pursuance of any agreement or arrangements made by the Government of India with the said Power, accused of any of the crimes, specified in the first schedule of Act XV of 1903, who may take refuge in the territory under the jurisdiction of the Government of Bhutan, and also any Bhutanese subjects who, after committing any of the crimes referred to in Indian territory, shall flee into Bhutan, on such evidence of their guilt being produced as shall satisfy the local court of the district in which the offence may have been committed.

Article 9: Any differences and disputes arising in the application or interpretation of this Treaty shall in first instance be settled by negotiation. If within three months of the start of negotiations no settlements is arrived at, then the matter shall be referred to the Arbitration of three arbitrators, who shall be nationals of either India or Bhutan, chosen in the following manner:

One person nominated by the Government of India;

One person nominated by the Government of Bhutan;

A judge of the Federal Court, or of a High Court in India, to be chosen by the Government of Bhutan, who shall be Chairman.

The judgement of this Tribunal shall be final and executed without delay by either party.

Article 10: This Treaty shall continue in force in perpetuity unless terminated or modified by mutual consent.

Done in duplicate at Darjeeling this eighth day of August, One Thousand Nine Hundred and Forty-Nine, corresponding with the Bhutanese date Fifteenth Day of the Sixth Month of the Earth-Bull Year.

Harishwar Dayal, Political Officer in Sikkim

Deb Zimpon Sonam

Tobgye Dorji

Yang-Lop Sonam

Chho-Zim Tandin

Ha Durung Jigmie

Palden Dorji

Deuba under attack from all corners!

Kathmandu: Prime Minister Deuba said the other day that the Maoists counterassault will come to an end well within a month or so.

What prompts or encourages him to declare so is a big question indeed?

Informed sources say that it could be the finalization of some of the technical details of the "extradition treaty" between Nepal and India for which apparently the Indian external affairs minister is all set to pay a visit here shortly.

But is it that easy as laid bare by prime minister Deuba? Absolutely not, opine sources.

But then yet Deuba's wish for a dilaogue with the Maoists leaders is some what encouraging. This notwithstanding, Deuba has apparently tried to bring about a rift in the insurgency when he said that the talks were possible with them but the government side would prefer to talk with those who count in the Maoists camp. He in saying so hinted that he was ready for talks who possessed guns in the other camp.

"The talks are possible only with the militant leader Ram Bahadur alias Badal", said the prime minister Deuba recently in Pokhra. This means that Deuba now concludes that Dr. Bhattarai and Prachanda possessed no authority in the insurgency. If Deuba thinks so then he is incorrect perhaps.

A statement sent by the Maoists' United Revolutionary People's Council dated July 13 has yet again reiterated that the party remains committed to its demand for an interim government and the election to the constituent assembly.

The statement bears the name of Dr. B.R.Bhattarai whom Deuba presumes to have been sidelined already by Ram Bahadur Badal.

The press note released by the insurgency in essence highlights the procedures in steps and in series through the use of which they wish to make the September 16 Nepal Closure a success.

Accordingly the period beginning July 17 till 31 will be the days for the propagation of the Nepal Bundh; similarly, from August 11 till August 26, the party will concentrate its efforts on arranging lecture programs and demonstrations; likewise from August 27 till September 5, the nation will observe blackouts and "stop-wheels".

Beginning September 6 till September 15, it would be the days for initiating penal actions. On top of it all, on the evening of September 15, a nationwide blackout will be observed beginning 8 till 8.30pm in the evening.

September 16 will be a Nepal Bundh day.

All put together what could be said is that the insurgency is not yet a spent force as the government under Deuba apparently has calculated.

The timing of the Maoists Bundh is meaningful because it would be the time when the state of emergency will have ended and the political parties will be free to express their grievances against the government.

What if all the forces converged against the government and clandestinely supported the Maoists Nepal Bundh? There is a possibility of this because the Koirala camp in particular and the UML in general are pretty annoyed with the incumbent government for their own respective reasons.

If Koirala's anger against Deuba and the Palace remained intact till September 16 then what is for sure is that the former would prefer to support the Maoists call and this he would do only to embarrass his political rival Deuba. The UML is annoyed because Deuba did not extend the tenure of the elected bodies at the local level which means that the UML's strength at the grassroots has suddenly weakened. May be out of frustration the UML could also support the Maoists call. This it could do keeping a comfortable distance with the Maoists.

All put together, Deuba is under attack from all possible corners.

Best advice to him would, say intellectuals, be to resume the dialogue process with the Maoists and assure a free and frank elections and restore normalcy in the Kingdom.

If the Maoists wish to disturb the elections, they can do so easily despite the best and sincere efforts of the Deuba led establishment and the nation's all time obedient security forces.

Kathmandu: The Charge de' Affaires at the Indian Embassy in Kathmandu, Mr. Ashok Kumar, surprised many a brains here when he only recently divulged that most of the present day Nepali leaders knew the whereabouts and the hideouts of the Maoists leaders talked to be residing in his country.

According to Mr. Ashok Kumar, the Nepali leaders meet the Maoists leaders as and when they make a trip to India.

In effect Mr. Kumar also said that should the Nepali leaders passed on information regarding the whereabouts of the Maoists leaders residing in India his government would immediately arrest them and hand over to Nepal.

Two things become clear from Mr. Kumar's hair-raising assertions. Firstly, the Nepali leaders were in constant touch with the Maoists leaders supposedly residing in India. This they deny upon returning Kathmandu. Secondly, the Indian government also now wished to come heavily down against the Maoists insurgents currently residing in their territories. This also means that the Indian government now concludes that it is politically far better for them to side with the Nepali establishment for so many declared and undeclared reasons.

This sudden change in the attitude of the Indian government has surfaced immediately after King Gyanendra's freshly concluded India visit.

To recall, New Delhi has already arrested a few Nepali Maoists under what is called as POTA-prevention of terrorist activities act.

The sudden change in Indian stance is meaningful indeed. It assumes greater significance in the context of Indian foreign minister Yashwant Sinha's impending Nepal trip.

National | 5 Question  | Editorial | 2nd Impression | International | Past