I n d e p t h    A n a l y s i s
Collision course inevitable in Nepal!

Kathmandu: The show of strength of the parliamentary parties expected this Friday in the all-party mass rally will be an indicator. Despite massive investments in the move, cadre presence alone will not reflect the public nonchalance and inhibitions on their public move. One positive sign, however, is in the evident realization that the parties must conduct such public activities to retain the already lost public focus. It is another matter that even such activities have had to be conducted, and will be, under massive security umbrella.

It is these security exercises that retain public attention. With massive Maoists losses under security pressure and mere publicity seeking political statements emanating from the public sector, public search for solutions remain outside our parliamentary peripheries. This is more so in the light of contradictions underscored in political party demands for dialogue when government appears insistent on the need for the Maoists to surrender prior to any dialogue.

The contradiction indeed lies even more emphasized in the light of recent Army statements supporting the government standpoints specially in the light of the Army statements going a step further and talking of the options to the Maoists after such a move on their part. The army has categorically stated that issues such as "general amnesty" and the likes can only be taken up seriously upon sincere demonstration on part of the Maoists to lay down arms. Significantly, the partisan media appears ignorant of the insinuations of such statements from the security sector.

Growing schisms between government and the parliamentary parties regarding the Maoists apart, is equally significant that the army issue forth statements regarding the funds for their campaign. These appear prompted by desperate statements from the finance ministry which would seem ignorant on its repercussions on the anti-insurgency move.

All in all therefore the past weeks appear only to have widened the schism between the public and political parties. Unless a logical conclusion is arrived at soon its repercussions on society will only naturally be more severe.

Frustrated political brains talk of alien forces intervening in Nepali affairs

Kathmandu: Nepal's political leaders out of frustration have begun talking absurd.

Understandably, the country's political initiatives have slipped out of their hands. In addition to this, they have lost credibility in the eyes of their own voters. People now clearly exhibit their hatred against their own leaders for obvious reasons. Under such frustrating situation if Nepal's political leaders' talk absurd and make "jocular and irrelevant" comments with a view to regain the lost credibility and trust should not surprise any sensible citizen of this beleaguered nation.

In effect this has happened. Frustrated Nepali leaders now see the "probability" of alien forces making their inroads in Nepal.

President Koirala, for example, upon return from his Delhi pilgrimage now sees the chances of foreign elements intervening into Nepalese politics should the Deuba led government dilly-dally the resumption of the now stalled talks with the Maoists insurgents.

President Koirala has been making such "funny" statements in the recent days. Only on Monday, he made such comments in front of his cadres in Nawal Parasi district.

Not very surprisingly the UML leader Madhav Nepal subscribes to president Koirala's assumptions.

Unconfirmed reports have it that Madhav Nepal even reportedly claimed that he saw an "unclassified document" that forced him to conclude that Nepal had already become the play ground of alien forces.

Surprising though it may appear, but then the fact is that such grave statements from two different political quarters started emanating, fortunately or even unfortunately, immediately after Koirala's India trip. Thanks the UML which "unconditionally" toed the Koirala line.

Is it a mere coincidence? Intellectuals say it could not be a mere coincidence.

Now let us see what brought Koirala and Madhav Nepal together.

An American team of seven trainers come here some time back. They proceed to western region probably enjoying the support of concerned Nepali authorities. The purpose of the trip apparently were to study the topographical situation of the area where the Nepali army had been fighting with the insurgents and that's all. The team perhaps also wished to exchange views on how to face the challenges in case of an attack from the other camp.

The fact is that the American team came three weeks back. Nepali leaders found it opportune to blow up the matter at this juncture and that too giving it a notorious political twist.

The general conception here among the intellectuals is that the blowing up of this matter out of proportion could be that some "interested" quarters, within and without, should have hinted Nepali leaders to make hill out of a mole.

If the assumption of the Nepali intellectuals were to be believed then what could be said that there were certain forces in the country and beyond who apparently got annoyed with the mere presence of seven American personals in Nepal.

If a total of seven American heads could pose a threat to Nepal's sovereignty, then it would be advisable to the men airing such statements to suggest their own government to suspend all the international flights which "unnecessarily" is bringing in hundreds and hundreds of such similar white faces each day. The incoming tourists could pose even greater "security threats" not only to Nepal but beyond as well.

Talking of America and its undeclared "interests" in Nepal, what could be said of them is that the US side primarily and singularly wishes Nepal's "nascent democracy" taking deep roots. Secondly, the terrorism factor could have brought the Americans here in their bid to assist Nepal to get rid of this menace. Understandably, after the September 11 events in the US, the latter has vowed to contain this menace and in the process explicitly wishes to support this nation.

Moreover, American Ambassador Malinowski has clearly told the other day that his country "neither wishes to have a base in Nepal nor possesses any hidden desire to prompt Nepal to act against its neighbors".

The Nepali army too supported Ambassador Malinowski's statement. Now the question arises: whom should we trust? The Army's clarification or President Koirala's off-the-cuff remarks?

Koirala's statement made Monday has come after Ambassador Malinowski clarified his country's position. This means that Koirala is yet to digest Ambassador's remarks.

Talking of the UML's similar comment what now could be concluded is that the UML still considers the United States of America as an "imperialist" power. The fact is that the UML had split some four years back which paved the way for the formation of the now almost defunct ML. One of the reasons for the split was, it was said then, on how to take the US? As an imperialist power or not? The Bamdev side preferred to dub the US as an imperialist power.

More so if the US exhibits its interests here then hopefully we have other equally competent forces loitering around us in disguise who will act like a "counter-intelligence". Nothing to panic but yet one has to remain alert. We must improve our own intelligence capabilities prior to blaming others for extracting political mileage.

Is it a mere coincidence again that after the entrance of Bamdev in the mainstream UML, the US is being attacked by the party?

The possible internal dynamics of "talks" and "no" to talks

Kathmandu: Insurgent leader Comrade Prachanda finally appears to have yielded and now has hinted that he is for the resumption of the talks with the government.

An adamant Nepali prime minister rejects Prachanda's proposal for talks and hints that he will go in for a long and protracted battle with the insurgents come what may. His mood is apparently to fight to finish. In the process Deuba has become aggressive when he says, talks? What talks? Talks with whom? No talks unless the other side lays down arms.

This explains so many things.

Let's analyze Prachanda's changed stance, if it were. What factors could have acted in the meantime that forced the Maoists supremo to go in for talks again?

Firstly, Prachanda could have sensed the mood of the national population who basically favor peace at all circumstances. Secondly, he could have given second thought to his ongoing campaign considering the voices of the HR activists; civil society members; responsible citizens and more so from the political paraphernalia.

Thirdly, the insurgent leader must have taken into account the colossal losses incurred in his side in the recent weeks and days and hence to minimize further losses could have thrown the card of talks. In doing so apparently comrade Prachanda also wished to hint the peace loving national population that he and his armed band can't dismiss outrightly the people's growing concern.

Fourthly and perhaps more importantly, the political establishment where the top-hats of the insurgency are talked to reside at the moment should have told point blank the insurgent leaders not to embarrass them any more as they had already arrived at an agreement with Nepal and had assured the latter that they would now not allow them, read the insurgents, to act against Nepal from their territories.

( To recall late B.P.Koirala was told point blank by the then Indian Prime Minister, Mrs. Indira Gandhi that should the former wished to reside in India he then was obliged to support her political moves. Late Koirala reportedly supported Mrs. Gandhi's opponents at time of the 1975 emergency in India. However, a patriotic Koirala preferred to enter his own motherland despite the fact that the panchayati establishment created a havoc against him-editor)

What ever may be the cause of Prachanda's changed stance, his offer for talks should be welcome provided it is genuine.

Now let's analyse what makes Deuba so aggressive and reluctant to talks.

Firstly, he is fully and unconditionally backed by the nation's apolitical army. This becomes clear from the Army's fresh statement wherein the army explicitly rejects talks with the Maoists.

Secondly, Deuba enjoys international support and that too unconditionally. More so and perhaps more significantly, he is being supported by major Western democracies including Britain and EU members. On top of it all, the lone super power, the US, which felt the brunt of terrorism last September, is all set and prepared to help Nepal in cash and in kind both. In the process, an encouraged Deuba is at the moment in America and will be in the UK. This trip will not only strengthen the hands of Deuba politically speaking but will also enhance his "lame-duck image" in the comity of nations.

Thirdly, Deuba could have calculated that since the military is bagging unprecedented successes after successes over the insurgency and hence could have concluded that talk at this period would send wrong signals here and abroad as well.

Deuba calculates apparently that sooner or later the insurgent leaders will have to bow down and in his thinking the time was round the corner.

Fourthly, Deuba perhaps thinks that continuation of the battle with the insurgency will some how or the other yield political benefits to him in the sense that his rivals will at least not dare to destabilize his "chair". Guess work only.

All said and done, Prachanda's offer for talks should be taken seriously. The government too change its firm stance in order to facilitate the prevalence of peace in the Kingdom which has already become a lost commodity.

Peace is peace and war is a war. What is implied in this message is perhaps self-explanatory.

Politics slips out from the grip of politicians!

Kathmandu: No wonder that a proposal forwarded by congress top hat gets outrightly rejected by an equally competent congress authority.

This has almost become a tradition in the congress. Thanks the tradition is still maintained.

When Deuba proposed talks with the Maoists, prime minister Koirala, to recall, rejected. Now Koirala is in favor of talks with the insurgents, prime minister Deuba aggressively rejects.

This means that congress politics and more so the national politics has slipped out of the grips of congress president. If it is so then it is really a matter of serious concern for president Koirala.

However, the fact is that the national politics is either in the hands of the prime minister or remains with the army. The army in the recent days has issued statements in series in its bid apparently to dispel or to clarify certain matters made against it by certain political quarters. The army has been forced to do so, it is widely felt.

The fact is also that Koirala's initiative of the ambiguous Broader Democratic Alliance, BDA, got lost in the recent firings in Rolpa. His controversial BDA plan vanished in the thin air in the midst of army's statements which have come in series in the recent weeks and days.

In the process UML leader Madhav Nepal's vague agenda on constitutional reforms got lost amidst the offer of talks with the Maoists and no to the talks.

The fact is that the majority of the population wish a solution to the current Maoists imbroglio rather than delving upon the widely rejected BDA and constitutional reform plans respectively put forth by the Girija--congress and the entire UML leadership.

The people at large took both the two separate initiatives as a song sung in a wrong season.

Nevertheless, both have not forgotten to utter their separate agenda as and when they were given political platforms.

But yet very convincingly both Koirala and Madhav Nepal strongly believe that it was time that the government resumed talks with the Maoists insurgents.

While Koirala maintains that since the Maoists insurgents have already been cornered by the international community and hence talks with them would yield positive results. He however, does not reiterate that the Maoists should attend the talks after laying down the arms. This is where he differs with his own colleague Deuba.

On the other hand, UML leader Madhav Nepal advises the government not to cap the possibilities of talks with the other warring camp, but also suggests the Maoists to lay down the arms prior to the talks with the establishment.

On the contrary, the government led by Deuba is against the talks.

Nevertheless, the opposition parties including a faction of the congress are awaiting the next parliamentary session in order to harass Deuba with their demands which were totally ignored by Deuba previous session.

While UML would want to see Deuba agreeing to its constitutional reform agenda in the impending session, the Koirala camp would naturally wish to cut the feathers of Deuba as in the eyes of this camp the latter had become more popular than the man who should have replaced him long time back.

The fact is that Deuba managed the eleventh SAARC Summit to happen in Nepal immaterial of his "'dull" performance. Deuba managed Colin Powell to visit Kathmandu. Deuba did manage the military to get mobilized which Koirala couldn't. More significantly, Deuba is meeting the US president Bush. On his way back he is also meeting Prime Minister Tony Blair.

Understandably, Deuba's rivals can't tolerate so many feathers in Deuba hat and that too all at a time.

The next session will be challenging for incumbent prime minister indeed.

But by then Deuba too will have strengthened his internal position. Possibilities galore both way.

Assessing Army's fresh statement!

Kathmandu: The Nepali army perhaps for the first time has scathingly criticized the Maoists insurgency.

A recent statement issued by the military head quarters says, among other things, that the offer of talks that have originated from the Maoists quarters is nothing but a fraud and that it is simply futile to resume the talks with the insurgents unless they lay down the arms prior to the talks.

In the same vein the military has said that the Maoists insurgency must apologize not only from those who have been the victim of their violent attacks, but should do the same with the entire nation.

The army statement further says that the insurgents must surrender unconditionally and that they at the moment have been cornered by the entire peace loving global community.

"The military is very close to success"', adds the statement.

A close look at these expressions forces one to conclude that the nation's army is encouraged by the successes bagged by it during the recent days. This also indicates that the nation's armed forces have taken very seriously the violent attacks on them in the past and would wish to give a befitting reply.

What is very important of it all is that the statement of the nation's military force does talk of the possibility of granting "general amnesty" to the Maoists insurgents.

This is a new development which perhaps has come out for the first time in public. Neither the political parties, nor even the government side had ever hinted of this entirely unexpected possibility.

Regarding the general amnesty, the army statement says: (sic) "The talks with them should concentrate only to decide whether to take penal actions against them or provide general amnesty".

This means that should the insurgents time permitting seek pardon from the state, the military would not oppose.

The statement also makes it clear that the strength of the Nepali military force were alone sufficient enough to deal with the Maoists. This is apparently a rebuff to a section of the political sector which underrated the strength of the Nepali army and had suspected the government's motive stating that the establishment might bring in foreign army to contain the threats of the Maoists rebels.

Be that as it may, the idea of granting general amnesty to the rebels could be one option in the hands of the establishment should the other camp desire so.

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