UN should now explain its role in government-Maoists talks

-Keshav Raj Jha, President, Nepal Council of World Affairs,

It should have been 1967 that I joined the Foreign Ministry of His Majesty's Government. I qualified myself after getting through the Public Service Commission examinations. Prior to this, I have had a stint in the teaching sector as well.

As a student of Political science, I began teaching political science at the Saraswati campus. Later it was at this campus, my intimate contemporaries suggested me to join the foreign ministry and build a career. Thanks their sparkling idea that I became a career diplomat and had a spell of well over 32 years in the ministry and got an opening to serve Nepal in various capacities. I am happy to bring to mind that I could make a payment in whatever modest way I could in the enhancement of Nepal's prestige and popularity abroad.

During my diplomatic career, I was the DCM in Germany and for a concise period I also acted as the Charge de' Affaires there. Later I was posted at the Washington D. C Royal Nepal Embassy again as the DCM followed by my shift in New York wherein I got associated with the Economic and Social Council, ECOSOC, and became the first Nepali diplomat to represent the country at the Council. It should have been around 1980.

It was here that got myself open to the elements to the domain of multi-lateral diplomacy and remained instrumental in representing Nepal with regards to the anti- apartheid get-together and even of the signing of the Seal Law that was held in Jamaica.

Later when I was the accredited Royal Nepalese Ambassador to Paris, I was concurrently the Permanent Representative to the UNESCO.

I have the feeling that since the restoration of the democratic order in the country, Nepal appears to have not played the role which she could have played in order to augment its international reputation and status in the comity of nations. Foreign policy matters apparently never got prominence, as it should have been during all these years. The fact is that it was ever kept in a low profile. The reason could be that after 1990, the charge of the Foreign Ministry ever remained in the holds of the Prime Minister who did not or could not provide due weight to this aspect and hence the miserable performance. We could not beseech our case aggressively apparently fearing how some countries in the neighborhood would react to our diplomatic advances in the international fora. All these put together, we endured several setbacks to the extent that even tiny Bhutan far outshined our diplomatic shrewdness. It was the lack of political direction that we could not expose ourselves to the international society. After 1990, we have had a different democratic picture but then we could not move in the right direction which made us to take a back seat at various international caucus and summits. This part is very heartbreaking, to say the least.

As a senior civilian of this country, I am really vexed over the situation of the country as it stands today. After 1990, the Nepali leadership should have had a sort of accord that they will not fight until the country took off the ground in practically all the sectors. Look at our tragedy that well within thirteen years of our democratic order, we already have thirteen prime ministers. This does speak of the country's political stability and the political behavior of our leaders. We had a system that is considered to be one of the best but the lack of "political culture" has made us all to keep on guessing what would happen next? All that we witnessed along these democratic years is the game of chair. This is nauseating aspect of Nepali politics. The energy that our leadership wasted in the foul game of chair could have been otherwise spent on enhancing country's standing abroad. But then yet with all these painful signs, I am still upbeat about the future of Nepal. Let me hope so.

Thanks Almighty that there has been a sort of realization in and among the political parties and its leaders that they did commit mistakes and at times political blunders while in power. Let me hope that the leaders now put country-first in their priority list and not that what they have been doing now. They must now act in an accountable manner.

As regards the Maoists issue, I think that sooner or later the insurgents must join the national political mainstream. With the support of the United States, United Kingdom and India, we will surely overcome this problem. Things are proceeding in the right direction to the extent that Kofi Annan, UN Secretary General, too has exhibited attention in Nepal's issue and has been sending his emissaries to Kathmandu to explore the possibilities in what ways the UN could be of support in tackling this issue.

However, the UN System must now spell out its method on how she wishes to link itself with the Nepali issue? As a facilitator? As a mediator? Or as a guarantor? I think the UN must come out clearly in this regard. Fortunately, we at the Nepal Council of World Affairs have invited Kul Chandra Gautam, Assistant representative at the UN, New York, to make a presentation and put the UN views in this regard next month. Confusion abounds in Nepal's political circle. No body knows in what capacity the UN is intending to be of some support to Nepal? It is time that the UN explained its would-be-preffered-role and put to rest the confusion in Kathmandu.

I am not hesitant in telling you that unless India comes to the scene, the issue of the insurgency will remain intact. However, it is up to Nepal to decide what role we should allow India to play. Let's seek India's good offices only.

I am amazed to learn that the Maoists leadership attach great significance to its peace-talks with the congress leader, Koirala.

As President of the Nepal Council of World Affairs, let me disclose today that we have three landmark events for the next year. Firstly, it would be the fifty years of Nepal's entry into the United Nations system next year. Secondly, it is again the fifty years of the establishment of Nepal-China diplomatic relations. Thirdly, it is the fiftieth anniversary of the Bangdung conference. All these three separate events have had its impact on Nepal in many ways than one. We are organizing all these events in a befitting manner. While observing these events, we will certainly get an opportunity to judge our own diplomatic failures as well successes bagged over the past five decades in the foreign policy front. What we gained and where we failed will have to be review.

Headline | Dateline | National |  5 Question  | Editorial | Letter | 2nd Impression | Views | International | Tête-à-tête with Amandine | Past