Nepal’s rejection of UN offer is just the latest in a long, long chain of depressing events

-Gert Meinecke, Charge d’ Affaires, Royal Danish Embassy, Nepal

He does not mince words. He is straight forward and puts his perspectives in his own special manners which is little bit different than others.

He is Gert Meinecke, the Charge d’ Affaires at the Kathmandu based Royal Danish Embassy. Mr. Gert Meinecke took up the Kathmandu assignment in September 2001 and since then he as a non-partisan observer watching the unfolding events in Nepali politics.

Prior to his Nepal posting, the Danish diplomat served the "Peace and Stability" section of the Danish foreign ministry.

A student of Contemporary Modern History and development Studies from the Roskilde University, Denmark, Mr. Meinecke joined the foreign service as back as in 1991. His foreign assignment prior to Nepal include working as First Secretary at the Danish embassy in Pretoria.

He has also served as Junior Professional Officer at the UNDP. He is also considered to be an expert on the relations in between the less and the highly developed countries.

Visibly, the Danish diplomat is not that much happy with the kind of events that have been unfolding in Nepal since he arrived in this country.

He says his country possessed "zero tolerance" on matters of corruption. This should explain perhaps how he has been taking up the stories of corruption cases in Nepal which comes out in print on practically on a regular basis. On donors role, he says it is up to the recipient nation to remain alert on how the money received in donations are being put to use.

Similarly, on the Maoists issue, he does see the root causes for the insurgency which could have brought the insurgency to this dangerous dimension. However, he would wish all political forces to converge and an all embracing solution is arrived at. "The key is that any governance process must by its very nature be inclusive, not exclusive", reiterates Mr. Meinecke.

On so many topics, he tends to differ with the prevailing general analysis and forwards his own modest solutions to arrest the Nepali crisis.

In more ways than one, his expressions in the following paragraphs will attract the interest of the readers of the Telegraph.

Last week, we approached this suave diplomat for an exclusive interview. Below the results: Chief editor.

TGQ1: Strengthening democracy, preservation of Human Rights and good governance are some of the areas you concentrate for your cooperation in Nepal. In what state you find all these in Nepal at the moment especially after October 4 Royal moves? Your comments, please.

Mr. Gert: "I think that very few people would disagree that the areas you mention are in a depressing state at the moment."

"Democracy remains suspended, human rights abuses by both the Maoists and the Security Forces have caused Nepal to slowly but firmly moving higher and higher on the list of countries with the most human rights abuses."

"In the middle of this national tragedy, it would appear as if none of the political powers in this country are genuinely interested in ending the suffering of the Nepali people."

"The government’s rejection of the UN offer of mediation in the conflict is just the latest in a long, long chain of depressing events."

TGQ2: Maoists conflict has drawn the attention of the world. All talk of conflict resolution. However, conflict continues to take its heavy toll. What say you of our insurgency? What in your opinion could have been the root cause of the conflict and do you have any suggestion as regards its possible solution?

Mr. Gert: "There is little doubt that the systemic inequalities in the Nepalese society, which gave – and continues to do so - rise to social and political exclusion was originally part of what produced the armed conflict in the first place.

"An important question, however, is whether this is still what fuels the conflict? To answer my own question, I don’t think so. This does not mean that there is no need to address what is popularly referred to as the ‘root causes of the conflict’, but rather that addressing the systemic inequalities of Nepalese society will not in itself end the armed conflict."

"Addressing these inequalities is definitely necessary in order to avoid the armed conflict from resurfacing. However, before we can start talking about ‘preventing the armed conflict from resurfacing’, we need to silence the guns so to speak."

"My view is that any development process is about change, and change is more often than not conflictual exactly because there are political forces who do not want change. From a governance point of view the challenge is to ensure that society has mechanisms which can deal with conflict resolution – that is resolving conflicts of interests – in a way that is perceived as being fair and just by the different parts of society. The key is that any governance process must by its very nature be inclusive, not exclusive"

"This also points to an important lesson learnt from the past peace processes. With the range of issues that have been opened by the conflict, it seems clear to me that a successful peace process requires active involvement of all political and social forces. A peaceful solution can only be sustainable if it is based on broad consensus on the very same issues that triggered the conflict in the first place."

TGQ3: In Nepal too often services directed towards the poor have not produced good results. As a representative of a donor nation how do you view this situation? Is it just there is something wrong at the policy making level or the donor nations themselves prefer not to monitor service delivery process? And also tell us have they met the goals targeted? Media talk of corruption in donor aided projects. Do you sense that donor’s money being siphoned to certain big political-bureaucratic pockets?

Mr. Gert: "There is little doubt that the donors have taken part in the process, which have led to the current state of affairs. However, it is important to emphasize that any country, and that includes Nepal, has the sole responsibility for its own development." "Before Nepal starts assuming that responsibility – incl. what has gone wrong in the past – you will not be able to resolve and address the real issues: i.e. how Nepal can carve out its own future. Ownership is not something that it is given to you. Ownership is something you take."

"The concept of ‘partnership’ is a cornerstone in Danish development policy. With partnership comes responsibility for us as a donor, but certainly also for Nepal as a recipient. Without this basic reciprocity of trust and responsibility the foundation for our partnership disappears…."

"The donors and Nepal must together be better at monitoring what for and how public funds are spent. Not only for the sake of ensuring that the donors’ taxpayers’ funds are spent appropriately, but more importantly because Danish development assistance is a grant to Nepal, to the Nepalese people – not to the people who happen to hold political power at any given moment in time. This is basically about public accountability and ensuring that things work"

"Above all, corruption deprives the population of financial resources for development and social improvement. It reflects an unacceptable neglect at political level of the apparent needs and aspirations of the people"

"We have – and let there be no doubt about that – a zero-tolerance policy when it comes to corruption. We also realize that curbing - not to talk about ending - corruption is a very difficult process, and this is exactly why Denmark is supporting the CIAA in doing its job, and doing it better."

"Have the Danish-assisted programmes met their targets? Some have and others not. The point is that we – and here we are again talking about Nepal and her donors - must constantly strive make our assistance more targeted, more relevant and more efficient. This we can only do if we involve the people we want to assist. Inclusion is not only desirable, it is necessary."

"Danish programmes are by their very nature national programmes, working through national institutions. As such Danish development assistance has obviously been greatly affected by the armed conflict."

"As I mentioned earlier, we believe that addressing the ‘root causes’ of the armed conflict is necessary to prevent it from resurfacing – and we also believe that these ‘root causes’ must be addressed using national and local institutions. The biggest mistake would be to think that donors on their own can do the job for Nepal."

TGQ4: What could have been the reason that Nepal so far has remained unable to repatriate the Bhutanese refugees despite much hue and cry? Is it due to Nepali diplomacy being terribly weak or the reluctance of Nepal’s friends, in the immediate neighborhood and abroad, to support the Nepalese case in a true spirit? What impressions you could collect from your two trips to the refugee camps? Your opinions please.

Mr. Gert: "I personally visited the refugee camps about a month ago. What I saw was people living under a lot of stress, uncertainty and fear. I also observed a rather high level of frustration. People who have not so far been represented in the so-called bilateral process."

"To my mind the lack of refugee representation in the bilateral process is one of the main reasons why the process has not been able to produce results."

"This is not about the Nepalese case or the Bhutanese case. This should be about the refugees’ case. Neither side in the bilateral process has demonstrated any great concern for the well-being of these people. Any solution to this problem requires that the refugees’ concern and considerations are taken actively into account and addressed. Otherwise the end result is more likely going to be that the problem ‘just goes away’ but doesn’t get resolved. And then we must ask ourselves whether this is a just and reasonable response to the reality of the people in the camps?"

"I would like to echo a recent statement by the EU Commissioner Poul Nilsson. He warned the governments involved about what he called the Palestinian experience. The first generation of refugees upholds the hope that one day they will return to their home and their land. The second generation – or some of them – give up and turn to violence and terror. Fortunately, we have not reached that point yet. But the risk is there. There is an obvious element of conflict prevention in an early solution to the refugee problem"

TGQ5: As a non-partisan observer, how you take Nepal’s current political situation? Do you see any light at the end of the tunnel? If yes, then how?

Have you any suggestions to make in this regard so that Nepal is back on its path from wherein it is alleged to have been derailed? Your comments please.

"Yes – I do. Perhaps because I’m an optimist by nature. But also because I think that the recent signing by Government of a document that reaffirms its commitment to human rights is a much-needed step in the right direction. The challenge now is to ensure that what is so far only a piece of paper, turns into something of concrete and practical value to the people of Nepal. Denmark will continue to follow closely the area of human rights, and has together with the other EU countries offered its assistance in helping the government in this area."

"At the same time, we would like to see the Maoists reciprocating by publicly and irrevocably committing themselves to those human rights and humanitarian law standards that they – despite their own claims of the opposite – have been blatantly violating."

"Human rights must constitute the basic ‘rules of the game’. If you are not prepared to respect human rights, then any talks of a political, participatory system are illusory. Believing that the government will fulfill their renewed promises, the next step would be to take immediate steps to establish a cease-fire – to silence the guns. Only then can we genuinely start talking about addressing the ‘root causes’ of the conflict."

"Whereas we see a role for the present government in negotiating a cease-fire, it is clear that peace-talks – i.e. negotiations on some of the underlying political issues – require much broader participation. A participation that must have a minimum of public legitimacy. We believe that the formation of an interim, multi-party government is needed urgently. An integral part of peace-talks with the Maoists would obviously have to include discussions on when and how you can consult the Nepalese people, be it through general elections, a referendum on key issues or any other way of ‘hearing the people’s voice’."

"There is at present much talk about elections. As a democracy, Denmark obviously believes that elections are essential. However, elections are a lot more than casting a vote. Elections are a process, which goes beyond the election date itself. I simply cannot see how it would be possible to have free and fair elections without basic respect for human rights and a cease-fire."

Headline | Opinion | Dateline | National |  Editorial | Letter | 2nd Impression | Views | International | Past