Kathmandu: Friends of Nepal have suddenly become restive.

Nepal’s major donor countries have concluded that it was time to serve a sort of warning to the men handling the affairs of the state in this Himalayan Kingdom that if they opted to run the country beset with political and constitutional problems, it would be difficult for them to continue with their developmental assistance as usual.

Not very surprisingly then the members of the European Union having their diplomatic representations in Nepal should approach the incumbent Prime Minister to voice their serious concern on the ongoing Nepal situation.

In fact. Monday afternoon, the EU members headed by French Ambassador to Nepal, Monsieur Claude Ambrosini went to see Prime Minister Thapa at his office and told in no uncertain terms that they were not happy with the scheme of things going on in this country of late and that they hoped that the deteriorating situation be arrested and democratic processes brought into action.

A press note released by the French embassy in Kathmandu on behalf of the European Union does speak about the violations of Human Rights cases from the government and the Maoists side both; does spell out that the EU was concerned over the continuing political and parliamentary crisis in the country and moreover does hint that the members of the Union would wish to see the prevalence of peace in the country at the earliest and that it would be pleased if the country went for the polls both at the local and parliamentary levels soon.

The message is there for Nepali establishment from the developed West.

A close analysis of the EU statement released Monday evening does indicate that the members of the Union some how or the other believe that the government side was no less, comparatively speaking, in violating the Human Rights abuses. “The EU calls on Government of Nepal to take urgent steps to significantly improve the observance of HR in conformity with its international obligations as signatory to International HR conventions and declarations”.

In saying so, the EU apparently wishes to hint the Nepal government that, firstly, it should ” significantly improve” the observance of HR cases which implies that the EU is not that happy with the explanations offered by the establishment side which says that it has been their effort to minimize such violations. This further could be analysed in a manner that the EU will be more than happy if Nepal as a nation-state acted responsibly in this regard and abided by the international conventions she has already signed in this regard.

On top of all these implied messages, the EU remains suspect of the Doramba, Ramechapp, killings of the Maoists at time when the last peace talks with the Maoists were on in Kathmandu. That the EU remains unsatisfied with government explanations on Doramba killings gets reflected from what the press release has to say: ” The EU points out that the Ramechapp incident which occurred in August 2003 remains to be clarified in accordance with the international standards”.

The EU thus grills the government in this regard.

This is not all. The EU also “urges” the rebels to observe HR in conformity with the existing international HR Conventions and declarations.

Here is an idea from the EU to both the Maoists and the government: “As an immediate step in support of the observance of HR by both the parties to the conflict in Nepal, the EU presses the GON and the Maoists to sign the HR accord proposed nationally by the National HR Commission.

However, the EU expects the Nepal government to take the first step to “indicate that it acknowledges its obligations”.

The EU press statement also talks about the “establishment” of a “multi-party government”. This perhaps means that the existing government does not represent a government to which they could call or accept a multi-party set up. However, the EU statement does not tell as to whose government and with whose participation in the government could be a multi-party in their assessment. Are they saying a government sought by Madhav Nepal? Or they been talking of a government under Thapa with other political parties’ participation?

However, when they are talking of the establishment then they must have talked of a government that is yet to be “established” with multi-party participation.

The EU statement indicates that the EU members were eager to see elections being held in the country at both the local and national levels. In saying so they apparently hint that the country can’t be run with “unrepresentative” government of the sort of the one now in power. However, the statement does imply that the elections should be held “as soon as the security situation permits”. This clearly means that the EU considers the situation not suitable for elections at least for the moment?

For the security situation to come under control so that the elections could be held, the EU statement “strongly encourages the GON and Maoists to enter into a cease-fire agreement and to initiate a “peace process”.

Thus the EU statement is a mixed bag of warning to the government on the HR abuses and a hint to the shying political parties to accept the elections if the security situation permitted. The statement that urges the rebels to initiate a peace process is also no less important.

The team included Rudiger Wenk, the chief of the EU delegation in Nepal and members from other EU countries based in Nepal.