I n d e p t h    A n a l y s i s
The King must now make new move

Kathmandu: Focus on the government-Maoists exchange of letters and the increasingly harsh conditions being placed by both in the letters come in contrast to the mild, resilient tones of exhortative speeches by both seeking to sit for the talks. One wonders whether this is result of serious manipulations preventing talks from actually taking place and encouraging a breakdown that is likely to result in the resumption of hostilities. If this happens, it is one front.

The other front is already open. Five agitating parties show their token presence on the streets in relay hunger strikes calling for the recall of the now dissolved parliament. Party cadres in the media retain their presence in publicizing their hostilities against the October 4 Royal move. Party cadre in the class and professional organizations instigate a breakdown of essential services in the semi and the non-government sectors.

A third front is likely to be opened. The lack of direction and determined action might encourage a slide in the partisanized civil service reflected perhaps at the government level itself at this crucial point. A Thapa cabinet that can neither woo the participation from the agitating parties nor take the talks with the Maoists ahead may be provoked to attempt to secure a "liberal" image by calling for the reinstatement of the dissolved parliament citing the lack of motion in the responsibilities its has undertaken.

This highly abnormal fluidity encouraged, in part, by government itself becomes ground for suspicion of a ploy to isolate the monarchy which remains the focus of the current change. The Maoists insist that they want to talk to none other than the King. The agitating parties blame the King for regression. The people at large want a definite direction from the King.

It is clear that this abnormal situation should not be allowed to prevail. Having exhausted the liberal options of constitutionalism, the King must either go back or forward. Going back will be costly for the constitution and the political process. Going forward will mean a heightened opposition of the political parties who have monopolized political organizations over the decade. Since such a step will have to determinedly look to the restoration of the parliament through the elections ignoring the agitating parties’ bid to claim a monopoly in an election government. Experience over the past decade has made the public more than aware that the agitating parties have risked constitutionalism repeatedly to claim the privilege of a government that conducts the polls. It is this awareness that keeps the public away from the agitation while seeking a solution from the monarch.

Maoists serve a four-day ultimatum: Accept conditions well within Thursday or face consequences

Kathmandu: Tighten your belts. Things have apparently become upside down. The war of letters in between the "Old regime" and the "New regime" has already taken a new and unprecedented frightening height. The last letter presumably from the side of the Old regime will probably sent to the managers of the New regime in a day or two or event at the earliest.

The fate of the nation certainly depends now on how the Old regime seduces the New regime through its response to the letter recently sent to it by the latter. The country is left with only two options: embrace a civil war or go in for permanent peace.

Fortunately enough, both the parties almost on the verge of war have exhibited their longing for peace but have said it in their own suitable and convincing manner.

Those who have read the content of the last letter sent in the name of the government by the Maoist quarter do not take much time in concluding that the men in the New Regime want peace or will contribute to peace restoration albeit only on their dictates.

The Maoists clearly wish to press the government side very hard so that the former yields to their demands and not surprisingly therefore they have allowed the government only four days to respond. The letter is almost in the form of an ultimatum which must have puzzled the brains of the men now handling the affairs in Singh Durbar.

The deadline of the ultimatum expires on Thursday-that is tomorrow. Failing to respond to the Maoists conditions and that too positively by Thursday would mean, the Maoists letter asserts, the unilateral breaking of the ceasefire agreement reached in between the two warring sides some six months ago.

"We will not be held responsible for the consequences arising thereafter", maintains the letter which is no less weighty and powerful than a bomb itself.

What went wrong? Who played the villain? Which force(s) on earth brainwashed the friendliest insurgent leaders in the meantime? Will the talks resume given the harsh conditions put for by the rebels? Will the government accept the demands or for that matter the conditions in toto put forth by the Maoists and work for the restoration of permanent peace in the country? How the political parties other than the Maoists will react if the government accepts the demands of the Maoists? And finally, how the international community that is generally anticommunist will react to the Maoists recent political overture? Will it allow the peace process to continue the Maoists way?

These were some of the pertinent questions that have been boggling the minds of the informed intellectuals and apparently the international community based in Kathmandu as well.

Be that as it may, our analysts have concluded the following upon going thoroughly the content of the letter sent to the government which fortunately we too have in our email box.

The conclusions, in short, are as follows:

Firstly, the Maoists have tentatively concluded that it is the Royal Nepal Army that is impeding the talks. They have also said that what is the guarantee that the RNA would comply to the agreements reached in between the two regimes even if they resume the talks. The insurgency believes that the RNA in the meantime has equipped itself with the necessary arms and ammunitions to cope with any eventualities should the talks fail. Implied is that the government allowed the RNA to enrich itself with arms while they were not allowed to do the same. The gist is that the Maoists consider the RNA as their number one enemy.

Secondly, the Maoists have concluded that the RNA is being trained, armed and advised by the United States. The letter maintains that the government committed a Himalayan blunder by signing an agreement with the US on containing the threats of terrorism. The insurgency believes that the US engagement in Nepal, real or imagery, and its hob-nobbing with the RNA is solely aimed at curbing the insurgency and nothing more than that and hence they seek an immediate withdrawal of the US men from the Nepali territory. The leaders of the insurgency conclude that the US is their number two enemy. However, the letter does not speak of other "powers" which have all along been meddling in the Nepali internal affairs. Theirs singling out of the United States is loaded with meaning in the sense that some countries in the South Asian region do not wish to see the presence of any powerful country in Nepal on any pretext. Their anger with the United States is only but natural for it is the US which has put the Maoists insurgency in its list of the terrorists of the second category. It is this listing of their insurgency that must have irritated the insurgency leaders.

Sources close to Maoists say the insurgency presumes that the RNA is slipping in to the hands of the United States which neither India nor China will accept. But is that possible? After all the RNA is a traditional Nepali army that has a track record of sticking to nation, national interests and the preservation of national sovereignty.

Thirdly, their ire mixed with love is for the Nepali monarch. The ire is in the form that they conclude that it is the King who wields real powers and that the government led by S.B.Thapa is simply a dummy and hence can’t legitimise the agreements reached after the conclusion of the talks. The insurgents wish that the King make a proclamation and assuring the nation that whatever Thapa government decides at the table will be binding on him as well. The agitating parties, coincidentally, too have been talking on the same line. However, the leaders of the insurgency appear more than eager to see the King in person and to have a tete-e-tete. Their desire to see the King could have two meaning: firstly, they wish to talks straight to the King and push their demands and wish to know the King’s mind on their proposals; secondly, they wish to do so because whatever they have been demanding with the Thapa government is a political thing that is directly related with the curtailment of the King’s present powers and hence they probably wish to see the personality who is being affected by their demands. Implied is message that if they meet the King, much could be sorted out. But how the King reacts to this is yet uncertain. The King has been told to go in for a health check-up. Is it that the Maoists have planned to see the King while he is abroad? A guess work only.

Some cynics conclude that the Maoists wish an active monarch for, according to them, a constitutional monarch if attends the talks or meets the rebellions would mean that he too wishes to become active. The fact is that the letter is very tough having harsh conditions which presumably the government can’t address on its own.

Fourthly, the insurgency would like very much to study the political agenda of the government prior to the resumption of the third round of talks. In saying so, the Maoists apparently wish to feel the pulse beat of the government on their own political agenda. This is very obvious.

Nevertheless, a ray of hope is there. The Maoists haven’t stated that they will not sit for the talks. They will sit for the talks provided the government acted their way.

The situation is grave. Dark clouds have started hovering over Nepali sky. All that the national population would say is "wisdom must prevail on both sides".

Let’s wait how the government responds to their ultimatum that will expire this Thursday.

Maoist’ harsh conditions come as a bolt from the blue

Kathmandu: The fresh Maoists response to the government made public Monday afternoon has created ripples in the political circle. Presumably, the response from the Maoists side must have jolted the government and the mainstream political parties as well.

The fact is that the Maoists letter released Monday demands full guarantees from the King, the Army and the establishment now led by Thapa.

Undeniably, some of the conditions put forth by the Maoists are not only difficult to comply with but could have its impact felt in the mainstream political parties if the demands were met with by the government prior to the resumption of the much awaited third round of talks.

The fact is that the political parties now in agitation whom the Maoists prefer to call as "status quoists" too appear reluctant in accepting some of the harsh conditions put by the Maoists given the strategic balance existing in between the three forces e.g. the Palace, the political parties and the Maoists. In their opinion, if the government accepts the conditions of the Maoists in toto, the delicate power balance will have shattered whose ultimate political benefit will go to the bags of the Maoists.

The political parties also appear scared of the Maoist designs, if any, for the insurgency has recently predicted that if the agenda and directionless agitation of the five parties continue for long might bring about a split in the agitation making half to support the regression and the rest toeing their cause of the forward looking movement.

This prediction in effect has stirred the leaders handling the agitation. Their suspicion grows more when they see that the agitation is becoming more and more weaker by every passing days to the extent that the leaders have devised a new face saving formulae: to halt the agitation till the monsoon is over. This means that the agitation will remain in media headlines for full three weeks henceforth.

The gist is that the political parties internally have concluded that they can’t linger the agitation for good. They have concluded that the people this time around have not supported them and will perhaps continue to do so unless the leaders in the agitation repented for their past Himalayan blunders. The other reason could be that they felt that if the agitation continued then the chunk of the political benefit might go to the bags of the Maoists who of late have applied a new pressure tactic to force the State to yield to their dictates. Matured leaders in the agitation also apparently have hinted their leaders that it was time not to sit in the opposition to the king but instead a time to shun the differences with the King and strengthen the hands of the establishment.

Good or bad, the mainstream political parties prefer the constitution be changed that addresses the issues raised by the Maoists. This means that they would prefer to go with this constitution. The Maoists reject their preference and wish the drafting of an entirely new constitution that goes their way. The tussle lies here.

The mainstream political parties apparently have also felt that the Maoists recent strong posture could have been the result of their growing differences with the King, which the Maoists wish to cash to the hilt.

Be that as it may, while the political parties wish the King to yield to their demand but would not prefer a King yielding totally to the demands and the conditions pushed for the talks by the Maoists in the recent days. However, the fact is also that the Maoists have appealed separately the leaders of the UML and the Congress to be of some support to their cause in the context of the fresh letter. This means that the Maoists if seduced could forge a front against the King whose corollary would be that the existing power balance will go in favor of the political parties and the Maoists.

But then the political parties appear puzzled over the Maoists keen desire to see the King in person. This stance makes them to suspect the very motives of the Maoists for the parties feel that if the Maoists and the King came closer would mean yet again the change in the existing power balance.

This means that each force of the three would wish the one among the remaining two to come closer and change the strategic balance.

In the process, the Maoists have already forwarded their wish that they would remain ever obliged if the political parties supported their cause. If this happens would mean exerting of an extra pressure on the monarchy and his government in order to extract greater concessions. Nevertheless, the ground reality is that the political parties can’t exceed their political limits and join heads with the insurgents. Their quarrel is with the King but not with the monarchy. This is what Koirala has been saying. At best the political parties could remain friendly with the insurgents till the monarch yielded to their own political demands.

The conclusion: the existing power balance has got to be maintained. Any slightest change in this delicate power balance would push the country to an abyss. A tripartite compromise is a must. No other option is left. The King is also suggested to act fast before it is too late.

The UML leader talks sense this time

Kathmandu: Of all the political leaders in the country, the UML leader is talking sense, say analysts.

It is not only because he is well abreast with the country’s problems but apparently also possesses certain infallible remedies for the country’s ailments.

The fact is that he is bit different than Koirala for the latter is not only arrogant but has practically developed a sort of personal enmity with the monarch and in the process talks any thing under the sun against the king. However, Madhav Nepal is different than Koirala in the sense that this particular leader undoubtedly wishes the King to yield but with a difference. While Koirala wishes by implication the King to apologise for his October moves and reinstate the parliament as per his demands, Madhav Nepal prefers the King to yield to their demands allowing room to the King to correct his moves.

The message in both the stances are same indeed but there is difference in style for the presentation of the agenda to the King.

Madhav Nepal the other day exhibited a statesmanship like political maturity when he said that the three forces that is the King, the political parties and the Maoists must now exhibit their flexibility in order to arrest the deteriorating situation of the country. In saying so Madhav Nepal was definitely hinting or speculating that the Maoists issue must get first preference and that to satisfy the Maoists demands, the three forces maintaining the power balance had to contribute their shares in easing the tense situation of the country.

Here lies Mr. Nepal’s political acumen.

The fact is that nation’s analyst conclude if the nation were to be saved from going to the brink of yet another civil war, it would be advisable to all to exhibit flexibility in their respective stands in the larger interest of the nation.

Moreover, Madhav Nepal is in contact with Dr. Babu Ram Bhattarai over telephone. The last call from Bhattarai to Mr. Nepal was on Sunday wherein the latter appears to have urged the former not to damage the prospects of the talks. However, Dr. Bhattarai is learnt to have sought the support of Mr. Nepal in pressing the Thapa government to yield to their conditions and Mr. Nepal apparently told Bhattarai that he would do so. Madhav and his colleagues in the agitation now conclude that Thapa government was now already a spent force and that the government must be sacked and a new all party government be formed that would not only initiate talks with the Maoists but will also conduct the elections.

Koirala lacks political vision or else he could have assured the Maoists that they too would benefit politically from the talks. He could have suggested the Maoists to attend the talks at any cost. He did not do so presumably with a hope that a change in government might enhance his own prospects in the next government.

Given the country’s fluid situation, what could be best said that if Madhav Nepal is allowed to handle the country’s affairs in an all-party government, he could perhaps bring about a change in the Maoists thinking as well who time permitting might join the nation’s mainstream politics. Madhav Nepal being himself a communist, it would be easier for him to convince the Maoists. Koirala, a declared communist hater can’t be the best choice at this stage.

But the million dollar question is: Will Thapa resign? Will the King accept Madhav as next Prime Minister? What about the Maoists and the reactions of the donor community? What if Madhav is the country’s prime minister in an all party government with Maoists participation? Sounds interesting indeed.

NRB not happy with the Irish management

Kathmandu: At a time when the act of handing over of the affairs of the Nepal Bank Limited on contract to the Irish management were being scathingly criticized by the nation’s intellectuals and the business community as well, the Nepal Rastra Bank, NRB, which brought in this foreign management in the country itself, has sought clarifications from the Irish managers to furnish plausible and justifiable reasons behind the dismal performance of the said management.

Clearly, the NRB did so under tremendous pressure from the people from different walks of life and also presumably assessing that the foreign management did little in giving a new lease of life to the ailing banking institution.

Sources in the NRB opine that the Nepal Bank Limited under the Irish people instead of making progress financially, the lopsided management has done more harm than good to the Bank as the foreigners appear least interested in improving the financial health of the financial institution.

"Whether there is improvement or not, it is immaterial to the Irish management. What is of tremendous interest to them is that they were regularly enjoying their hefty perks and salaries thus further dampening the prospects of the bank to improve", said a NRB official on conditions of anonymity.

To recall, a writ petition is already in the Supreme Court where some shareholders of the Nepal Bank have demanded that the court made null and void the contract with the Irish people.

The fresh clarifications sought by the NRB from the Irish people does indicate that the NRB as the country’;s apext Banking institution is not that happy with its own choice.

A belated repentance is not that bad.

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