If Maoists crisis lingers on, the country is bound to become a battleground for external elements

Professor Mohan Prasad Lohani, Ex-President, Nepal Council of World Affairs, NCWA

A Professor of English at the Tribhuban University, Dr. Mohan Prasad Lohani was in the early 1990s the Royal Nepali Ambassador to Bangladesh and concurrently to the Maldives.

Prior to his Ambassadorial assignment in Dhaka, Prof. Lohani was Deputy resident representative for nepal at the United nations, New York.

He was also the first founding Executive Director of the Institute of Foreign Affairs, an affiliate of the Nepal's Foreign Ministry.

Dr. Lohani also had an opportunity in the past to head the Nepal Council of World Affairs, NCWA.

We sought with this distinguished diplomat his opinions on contemporary national events last week.

Below the results: chief editor.

TGQ1: To start with, how you Dr. Lohani as an acclaimed Nepali diplomat find the present state of Nepali diplomacy given the allegations that we have had more failures than successes?

How do you evaluate Nepali diplomacy in handling issues of bilateral concern and our performance in tackling issues at the international level?

Dr. Lohani: Thank you for your compliments and for the opportunity to be interviewed in your esteemed weekly after a gap of nearly 5 years.

Diplomacy is an art or skill to realise the objectives of our foreign policy. I believe in the old dictum that foreign policy is an extension of our domestic policy. If our home front is weak, we may not be strong and effective on the foreign policy front. This has been the case in Nepal during the last few years when political instability has become the order of the day. I consider this instability the main culprit for our failures or lapses in diplomacy. During the last 13 years following the political change in 1990, most of the time Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) has been headed by the Prime Minister himself. Even today, although we have a Minister of State for Foreign Affairs, the Prime Minister himself is in charge of this portfolio.

Most of our diplomats are certainly qualified and professionally competent, but it is their duty to carry out instructions from the headquarters which, in our context, is MOFA headed by a Minister. Bureaucrats are not decision makers; this is the job of the political leadership. How can you expect, the Ministry to be assertive and effective when the government in power, elected or appointed, changes so frequently. Let me share my own experience with you. I was Executive Director of the Institute of Foreign Affairs for 3 years (1998-2001). During this period, I saw six foreign ministers in MOFA. While one of the Foreign Minister (I don't want to name him here) was planning to reinvigorate the Institute by revamping its training and research programs, he was very soon out of office as the government he represented had resigned.

What is important is continuity in policy. Although it does not imply a major shift in our foreign policy, a new face in the Ministry requires some time before he acquaints himself with the programs and performance of his Ministry. In brief, while the importance of proper training and acquiring professional skills in bilateral and multilateral diplomacy cannot be minimised, political stability is the sine qua non for the successful and effective implementation of foreign policy decisions.

TGQ2: With SAARC still to achieve tangible results, the five members of the SAARC have joined BIMST-EC. In what ways it could affect the growth of the SAARC? Also tell us what benefits Nepal can bag from her entrance into the BIMST-EC? Don't you think that such activities might offend the countries left out into the cold?

Dr. Lohani: SAARC is observing next year the 20 years of its existence. During this period, while a number of decisions and recommendations including major studies and reports have been approved, the Association, as you have rightly pointed out, has yet to achieve tangible results with a visible impact on the life of the common man in the region. South Asian leaders have reaffirmed, at each summit, their commitment to the objectives of SAARC and emphasized the need for effective implementation of major decisions already taken at previous summits. SAARC must be reactivated at all levels so that regional cooperation becomes a reality rather than an exercise in rhetoric at the time of the annual summit.

BIMST-EC, which was originally conceived and initiated by five countries of South and South –East Asia, consists of seven members today, namely, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Myanmar, Nepal, Thailand and Sri Lanka. This association recently held its first ever summit at Bangkok. The rationale of the regional grouping, as Prime Minister Deuba who led the Nepali delegation to the Bangkok summit observed, lies in the promotion of economic cooperation in the region surrounding the Bay of Bengal. He added: "All our rivers originating in the Himalayas ultimately flow into this Bay. A land locked economy Nepal has a major economic and environmental stake in the overall development of the region." The Bangkok Declaration identifies core areas of cooperation in technology, trade and investment, human resource development, transport and communication, energy, tourism and fisheries. These areas have also been identified by several SAARC summit declarations. We are told that BIMST-EC will pay special attention to the problems and needs of land-locked and least developed countries like Nepal in the region. The only two countries left out of this regional grouping are Pakistan and Maldives. Pakistan, as we all know, is geographically close to Central Asia and has shown keen interest in joining the organization of Central Asian Countries in improving its economy including trade and investment.

There is nothing wrong in establishing linkage with extra-regional organizations, provided such linkage does not weaken SAARC and dilute its objectives and progammes. Nepal can benefit a lot in such areas as hydropower generation, transport infrastructure building and trade and tourism promotion through its association with BIMST-EC. Again, the real test of success for this regional grouping, as Thai Prime Minister Thakskin rightly observed, lies in building the economies of seven countries so that they become more than a "small blip" on the radar screen of the rest of the world.

TGQ3: Don't you Dr. Lohani think that Nepal's sheer inability in internationalizing the Bhutanese refugee crisis and also make India aware of its role in tackling the Maoists issue prove the failure of our diplomatic acumen?

What should be done so that both the issues wherein India directly or indirectly is involved gets sorted out?

Dr.Lohani: The Bhutanese refugee issue, as I have already pointed out in my earlier articles published in some English dailies of the country, is no longer a bilateral issue between Nepal and Bhutan. Nepal provided them shelter on humanitarian ground as they entered our territory through Indian Territory more than 12 years ago. India was, thus, the first entry point of asylum for refuges from Bhutan. I firmly believe that this crisis can be resolved with Indian cooperation. India, an emerging great power and also a regional power, is a common friend of both Nepal and Bhutan. It should help its small neighbors in tackling this long lingering issue through its good offices. Besides, the refugee issue as I see it has already been internationalized, since European Union and other donor agencies have continued to put pressure on Bhutan to allow the refugees to return home with dignity and honor.

Likewise, we need India's goodwill and cooperation in combating the Maoist insurgency. India has recently admitted that arms smuggling has happened through the Nepal-India open border. The outgoing Indian ambassador Mr. Shyam Saran is also reported to have stated that the problem of Maoist insurgency faced by Nepal does not respect national boundaries. In this context, it is encouraging to note that India has recently taken steps to deploy the Special Security Bureau (SSB) on the border to control cross-border arms and explosive smuggling India has also rounded up some prominent Maoist leaders and handed them over to Nepal, while some are still in Indian custody. The Indian gesture of cooperation has been appreciated by Nepal. Of course, India seems to have realized, although belatedly that the Maoist insurgence is a threat to the security of both Nepal and India.

TGQ4: For NC under Koirala regression continues. For the UML it is a partially corrected regression and for Sher Bahadur Deuba it is not a regression at all now with his appointment as prime minister.

It is bit confusing. What it is in effect? How the laymen should take the present political scenario?

Dr. Lohani: First of all, I have some difficulty in accepting the contention that regression, which implies Royal intervention in a negative sense, has taken place. We should not forget that it is Prime Minister Deuba who had recommended, on the advice of other political leaders, to His Majesty King Gyanendra in October 2002 to invoke Article 127 of the constitution, as the Prime Minister had been unable to conduct elections in time. It may be noted that His Majesty the King is, apart from being a symbol of national unity, also the custodian of the constitution of the kingdom of Nepal. The monarch has made it repeatedly clear that he is committed to multi-party democracy, and as such he is keen to hand over power to elected representatives as early as possible. The newly appointed Prime Minister and his coalition team have been mandated to maintain peace by holding talks with the Maoists, bringing them in the political mainstream and by conducting parliamentary polls in a peaceful manner not later than April next year.

It is my considered opinion that the mainstream political parties of the country should not waste time over the so-called polemics of regression and concentrate, instead, on the real issue, which is resolution of the Maoist problem through a negotiated settlement. The political parties and their leaders cannot escape the blame for creating the present crisis through their own irresponsible political demeanor and lack of respect for democratic culture, norms and values. His Majesty the king is seriously concerned over the ongoing conflict in the country and has called upon all concerned to solve this problem by rallying behind the genuine spirit of patriotism and reaching a national consensus. If the crisis lingers on, the country is bound to become a battleground for external elements.

TGQ5: The Deuba establishment is rejecting Prachanda's preference of UN mediation. Civil society members also appear divided on this count.

What factors could have prompted Prachanda to go in favor of the UN and the government to reject the UN role in sorting out the Maoists issue? Given this dilemma, peace appears remote. What has got to be done now in order to restore peace? Any wise counseling from your side would be highly appreciated.

Dr.Lohani: The issue of UN mediation has certainly provoked a national debate. The Maoists seem to be insisting on UN mediation for international recognition as well as for guarantee of security during peace talks. The government, on the other hand, does not consider it necessary to seek UN or any other international mediation as the Maoist issue is an internal problem involving a rebel group with some grievances of a political as well as socio-economic nature which can be solved through our own efforts. This is also the viewpoint of some of our neighbors like China. The Chinese ambassador, in a recent talk programme, categorically stated that Nepal has the capacity and resilience to deal with the Maoist insurgence without outside involvement.

Asked whether India is opposed to UN mediation, the outgoing Indian ambassador told the media that it is for Nepal to decide whether such mediation is necessary. In my opinion, UN can play the role of a facilitator rather than mediator in the peace talks. However, we need active UN involvement and cooperation after the peace deal between the state and the Maoists has been signed. UN may play a constructive role in sorting out the insurgents' arms and retraining including rehabilitation of their militia and other displaced people.

The role of all responsible forces of the country including monarchy, political parties, the civil society and human rights organizations is crucial to the peaceful settlement of the nine-year old insurgency that has hit hard all aspects of national life and is likely to plunge the country into a prolonged civil war resulting in further bloodshed and destruction of national property.

Headline | Opinion | Dateline | National |  Editorial | Letter | 2nd Impression | Views | International | Tête-à-tête with Amandine | Past