I n d e p t h    A n a l y s i s
Parties’ pressure role in Nepal happenings

Kathmandu: Focus this week will be on the merits and demerits of the party positions regarding current events. The supposed all party meeting that brought four parliamentary parties together to patch up a united image of a boycott of the government call for an all party meeting compounds their initial standpoints on the legitimacy of the government. His Majesty the King’s call for cooperation and participation of the political parties in the current government was summarily ignored on grounds of constitutionality by the political parties. As a result, despite calls for their cooperation and participation by the government, their (parties’) public posture inhibits them from appearing to cooperate. Unfortunately, this has had to inhibit their participation in the current events, in effect, sidelining them from the current mainstream. Their efforts to jump back on the political mainstream have been rebounding.

The fact is that the major political parties have had no role in running the country for nearly four months now by their own choice. The people at large, while having been made glaringly aware of this by their own public standpoints, are also clear that the major developments since the King took over have affected the public positively at the grassroots. Given the rampant corruption and widespread bad-governance faced by all, the public are aware that the positive change in society has had no contribution from these major political parties. It is now, in this sense, more than evident to the public that major political parties who ruled the roost four months ago were the sole contributors to the malgovernance of the past years. What is more, their opposition and negative contribution to the current developments has only served to erode public confidence further.

In this sense, outside of continuing to loose their grip on the masses who are clamoring further for better governance from the incumbent government as well. The mainstream political organizations appear to be isolating themselves further from the positive events of the recent days. It would seem only political that they claim a role in the government-Maoists talks to which they have no contribution and , yet, it would seem a matter of compulsive action for them to deny the acknowledgement of government by participating in government calls for an all party meet.

If, then, one would see logic in their non-participation, it is not quite possible to infer that the parties will allow themselves to be bypassed at their own cost. For government, domestic and international demands to seek partisan participation regarding the Maoists insurgency will have been met by the public call. The parties’ themselves who can’t participate because of their public standpoints do so at the risk of significant political loss in the new mainstream. It is thus easy to increase their public visibility and try and gain back their efficacy. The search, thus, for possible "triggers" to regain for them their credibility would not be altogether out of place.

One most possible such trigger is the approaching Student elections. TU conventions at partisan demands don’t allow postponements of the elections for more than two years. The Maoists student organizations brazenly threatened harsh reactions in the event the scheduled elections take place ignoring the government-Maoists talks, the current ceasefire and the slow process of the release of the incarcerated Maoists students. The student wings of the mainstream parties who, aware of the Maoists disadvantage currently, threaten agitation in case the polls are postponed, are likely to take a united stand in disrupting Nepali academia on grounds of the TU decision for postponement. In doing so, the political parties will have riled up the students who compose the spearhead of political action in Nepal. They will also have effectively influenced the course of the Maoists-Government talks.

This is, of course, one likely scenario. The other is perhaps building in the background. Rumblings in the Indian press and the political establishment there often carry a message of Indian muscle on Nepali happenings. Of a sudden, the Maoists have turned "Royal Rebels" in the Indian media and senior politicians see Pakistani hand in Nepal. How these are designed to gain for the political parties in Nepal their lost credibility among the masses remains to be seen.

Political Parties wish to assert their "missing role"

Kathmandu: The confrontational mood of the parties having their representation in the now dissolved parliament continues against the King unabated.

Such a mood, to recall, is in existence from October 4 last year when the monarch summarily dismissed Sher Bahadur Deuba’s government and replaced it with Chand’s government through the use of Article 127 of the 1990 constitution.

The very installation of the Chand government by the King, the disgruntled political parties say is unconstitutional.

The King remains undeterred. So do the political parties. Thus the tussle that began last October is on with no sign of it coming to an end.

The confrontational mood of the political parties got further intensified when the Chand establishment brokered a ceasefire with the Maoists rebels which came as a bolt from the blue to the major political parties who felt that a sort of conspiracy is being hatched by those who managed the present ceasefire in order to sideline the role of the major political parties.

"The ceasefire announced by the government and the Maoists is mysterious in that the hasty manner it was announced smacks foul and unless the whole affair is made transparent, we will presume that the two forces with Guns were all set to side line the major parliamentary parties from the rest of the processes that is to ensure a permanent peace in the country", say the NC and the UML, the two main political parties who have been visibly "opposing" tooth and nail the government-Maoists ceasefire announcement.

Political analysts who have been closely watching the government’s overtures in the recent days at inviting the major political parties for making the impending talks with the Maoists a success, remain puzzled at the negative stance taken by the political parties towards the government’s gestures which now forces them to conclude that " one outcome of the purported peace talks has been a sense of being forlorn that seems to grip the political parties".

To quote Bihari Krishna Shrestha, a senior anthropologist of the country, "the recent refusal of most of them (the political parties) to participate in the all-party meeting convened by the Chand government on grounds of it being ‘unconstitutional’ indicates that they would like to find themselves at the helm before they would do anything to help resolve this national crisis".

We have reasons to believe in the analyses of Mr. Shrestha because both the NC and the UML have been demanding their role in the whole affair by being in the corridors of power and strength. For instance, while on the one hand, a crazy Koirala wishes the reinstatement of the dissolved house so that he could manage a resounding come back to the Lauda Chair kept in the Singh Durbar premises and stage yet another scam of the Lauda dimension, on the other hand, a newly communist turned capitalist UML led by Madhav Nepal prefers an all-party government which he hopes to head in case that becomes a reality so that he could offer yet another prestigious gift of the South West China Airlines dimension to the country and continue to bargain with the Maoists on its terms.

The fact is that both Koirala and Madhav Nepal would never wish a happy come back of the Maoists rebels into the country’s political mainstream for if they enter into the mainstream it is these two parties which ruined the nation mercilessly would find it very difficult to win the hearts of the voters at the elections.

More specifically speaking, it is the UML which will loose its votes at the grassroots for understandable reasons. In addition to that the congress will loose in the sense that the Maoists cadres possess the capability and the sharpness to convince the illiterate voters that it is the congress in particular and the UML in general which brought the nation to this abyss.

The fact is also that the Maoists might not sweep the elections at least for the time being, but what is for sure is that its presence at the elections will benefit the RPP for understandable reasons.

UML sources, however, claim in private that what if the monarchists and the Maoists clandestinely forge an alliance to outmanuever the congress and the communists in the impending elections.

They wish to remind that what if the present Monarch too opted to toe his father King Mahendra’s line wherein it was supposed that the late King quite often used the communists against the congress and vice versa.

But assuredly, the Maoists must not be a sort of that stuff who could so easily be used by some force and in effect the republicanists rarely join hands with the monarchists.

Be that as it may, visibly the congress and the communists appear perplexed for having been totally sidelined by both, the government and the rebels, and seem very anxious to assert their missing role in the present day’s changed political context. But the manner they are presenting their views is exposing them to the extent that one fine morning the lay men might dub them as to have been working in collaboration with some alien forces that wishes to see an unstable Nepal.

To avoid such possible criticisms which could be in the making itself, the congress and the communists, opine intellectuals, must clarify as to what to do with the already announced ceasefire? Should it be rolled back and throw the country to yet another bloody-war? Or should the country proceed to guarantee a sort of permanent peace-the guarantee of which is not possible without their active participation at the talks.

Koirala’s utterances against King becoming more and more personal

Kathmandu: Nepalese intellectuals fail to understand as to what has happened to president of the Congress-Girija Prasad Koirala of late more so after the royal step of October 4, last year.

He speaks of a grand design to sabotage the gains of the popular movement; he daringly tells his activists that he would expose the architects of the said design; he smacks foul in the announcement of the ceasefire; he smells a sort of conspiracy in the ceasefire announcement to thwart his "broader democratic alliance", a theory propounded by president Koirala which his own close aides have failed to understand; he sees a threat to democracy when the Chand government prepares the background for the talks with the Maoists rebels; he concludes that the King of late has been leading the group which prefer the reversal of the system; and above all, president Koirala envisions the Maoists-government talks as nothing but a ploy to undermine the role of the major political parties which fought for the restoration of the system back in the 1990s.

On top of that, what comes to the fore is that Koirala’s recent utterances being made against the monarch appear more personal than political one.

Why is this vengeance then? What makes Koirala to go wild at times?

It would be nice if Koirala himself clarified his blunt allegations against the King who at best is listening to the blistering attacks being made on his personality.

Analysts opine that reading Koirala’s off-the cuff remarks against the King it appears that the septuagenarian leader wishes to hit the media headlines if his wild utterances could in any way irritate the monarch to the extent that he ordered Koirala’s arrest.

The monarch appears less interested in elevating the ranks of a political leader who himself is loosing his credibility in the eyes of his cadres and then ultimately at the grassroots with each blistering attacks made on the King.

The fresh attack on the King came when Koirala visited Inaruwa, a town close to Biratnagar, last week.

It is here at this gathering that Koirala made these remarks: (sic)" If people’s rights are to be curtailed; if the gains of the 1990 movement are to be scrapped and if the 1990 constitution are to be trampled, and that if the country is to be pushed towards a reversal, then that would mean the non-existence of the institution of the monarchy.

Not only this, president Koirala also made it clear that "if one carefully analysed the events that followed after October 4 move of the monarch, it leads us to conclude that the monarch himself has assumed the role of the one who preferred the reversal of the system".

In the same vein Koirala also made it abundantly clear that his party would boycott the round table conference if it were summoned by the King.

And many more such attacks on the King, Koirala made on that occasion.

Analysing Koirala’s utterances what also comes to the fore is that in the recent days he has developed a sort of personal enmity with the King and that he is deadly against the monarch and that he was ready to pose challenges of any dimension to the King and his would be moves in the coming days.

Is he talking sense? Or is he talking nonsense? Could be both.

The moot question here arises as to why Koirala is hell bent against the present announcement of a ceasefire with the rebels? What factors and which forces make him to speak on these negative lines? Is he really concerned for the system and its consolidation? Is he really worried over the possibility of a ploy of the government-Maoists talks that could later minimise their role in the future?

Unless he clarifies what he prefers to call a "grand design", the people will take his speeches as if it were a cry in the wilderness and nothing more than that.

Till he clarifies, we wish to quote yet another impression of a TU scholar. Mr. B.K.Shrestha who says of Koirala in his own words: " Then, there is Grand Design (theory of) Girija Prasad Koirala who flies off to Delhi every once in a while more or less in the same manner as that of the Sikkimese politicians immediately before the "Sikkimization" of Sikkim". (See the Himalayan Times dated Feb.18-ed).

The fact is that Koirala would love bouncing back to power. If he is allowed to do so, the designs would vanish; things will become instantly constitutional and perhaps he will praise the King for his graciousness in having offered him the chair he loved most.

In sum, this is Koirala’s politics.

However, the fact is that such personal vengeance would harm the country’s politics more than what Koirala could have ever imagined. Informed sources opine that the King might touch upon Koirala’s utterances in his own subtle manner when he will be making a speech on the occasion of the National Democracy Day, today. Others say that the King might announce some thing more that would have its long-term impact in the ongoing politics of the country.

Our own interpretation is that the Palace should once invite Koirala and do away with his suspicions which he has been nurturing since October 4, last year. It would be fitting , say political scientists, that Koirala too makes efforts in this direction and patch up the differences that are both political and personal ones.

India prefers a role in Government-Maoists talks!
Will Nepal be allowed to take up Veerapan’s issue ?

Kathmandu: India’s foreign secretary, Kanwal Sibbal, has hinted that his country would wish a sort of "mediatory role" in the Government-Maoists talks should the Nepali side approached his country for such a role.

Mr. Sibbal also candidly said that if the talks were to yield positive results, both the King and the political forces must work together and that if there exist any differences in between these two established forces, the conflict will not come to an end.

Mr. Sibbal made these plain but very significant observations while addressing a seminar recently held in New Delhi which was participated in by a host of Nepali politicians and media men.

There are reasons to believe now that why India exhibited its displeasure on the sudden announcement of a ceasefire in between the government and the Maoists rebels. That the Indian establishment was displeased with the sudden Nepal happenings came to the fore when it managed some write ups to get printed in newspapers that are considered to be very close to the establishment there and that too after the ceasefire was announced in Kathmandu.

That India wished a role in the whole Nepali affair becomes evident from the fact that a personality of the stature of Mr. Sibbal says so.

To quote Mr. Sibbal: "Will the Nepali problems will be solved if India’s effective participation?; "Is Nepal prepared to offer such a role to India?

Moreover, Mr. Sibbal instructed Nepal to spell out its positions in these regards.

What is more than surprising and intriguing as well is the "convergence" of the ideas being floated here by the disgruntled political parties who wish their excessive say in the impending talks with the Maoists with those of the Indian establishment.

Mr. Sibbal, plainly speaking, is speaking the views being expressed by Nepal’s political parties who consider that the Nepali establishment totally neglected their political role at time of the announcement of the ceasefire some three weeks back.

The dangerous of it all is Mr. Sibbals’ expression wherein he opines that Nepal lacked transparency in its dealing with the other camp in order to bring about an end to the conflict.

And this is what the Nepali politicians have been reiterating since long. Is it a sheer coincidence or some thing else?

A careful analysis of Mr. Sibbal’s utterances brings few things to the fore: firstly, Indi is not happy with the ceasefire announcement; she would be more than willing to participate in the government-Maoists proposed talks if approached by Nepal; India would wish the issue being sorted out with the active cooperation of the political parties who feel they were sidelined at time of the ceasefire announcement; India would wish to signal the King as well not to proceed alone in this regard; and above all, the message from India is that unless the issue brings in an "effective" Indian mediation, the outcome of the talks even if it were positive, would be considered null and void.

To recall, it was India that declared Maoists as terrorists much ahead of Nepal declaring the same; it was India again which half-heartedly greeted the ceasefire announcement but concurrently instructed Nepal to provide the political parties their due role in the talks that would follow at a later stage; and now it is India that is seeking a role in the talks with the Maoists.

Informed sources opine that the convergence of Nepali politicians’ views with those of Indian establishment is not only meaningful but loaded with "meaning" as well.

It is time that Nepal’s foreign ministry, if it existed at all, came out with its own views regarding the possibility of any such Indian participation or not.

Intellectuals hasten to add on how India would react if Nepal’s foreign secretary too demanded an effective role in the Indian government-Beerapan talks? Stretching it further, how India would take Nepal’s desire to mediate in the Ram Janmabhoomi- Babri-mosque issue that has been continuing in India since decades and decades?

Khetan vows to support opening of Univarsity in Birganj

Kathmandu: It has already been established that Nepal’s major political parties used the students and the educational institutions in the last thirteen "democratic years" for their political purposes making the students as their political tools and thus ruined their future career.

While the politicians would wish to see their political stronghold increasing in the educational institutions, Nepal’s social sector on the contrary would prefer the increase in the establishment of a few more higher educational institutions in order to serve the country better.

The industrial sector also in this regard will not lag behind should the population of a particular area so desired came to the fore when Nepal’s noted Industrial wizard and social worker, Mohan Gopal Khetan, last week expressed his inner willingness to go in for the establishment of a University in Birganj, Bara district.

He however, made it abundantly clear that the proposal had to come from the population of that particular area.

Mr. Khetan made this solemn declaration while he was speaking at a program that marked the 22nd anniversary of Hari Khetan Multiple Campus last week.

"You the citizens of this area proceed, I am here to cooperate you financially for the construction of the University", divulged Mr. Khetan who flew to Birganj in order to attend the anniversary celebrations of the said Campus.

He also mentioned that his financial assistance to the Kathmandu University could be cited as an example for the KU now is taken for granted to be one of the best Varsities in Asia.

"I will fully and unconditionally support a proposal that pertains to the establishment of a Narayani University here", declared industrialist Khetan and bagged accolades from the attending gathering.

Are you going abroad?

If so, we are here to help you to attain more and more success. We have several products of Nepal. If you carry some with you, you will help to many. Please try once and experience for ever.

1-Trans Himalayan T.C Basantpur, Kathmandu: Tel: 230-o78

2-Teesa, Shop No. 215, Tridevi Marg. Tel: 227-961

3-Suruchi Jandicraft, Makhan, Opp. Suraj Arcade. Tel: 263-941

4-Nirdesh Handicraft, Taumadhi, Bhaktapur. Tel: 613-910

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