The decade-long Maoist insurgency devastated our economic and human resources. Moreover, they cost us our political maneuverability.
By Bhupal Lamichhaney
Sanjay UpadhyaFive months have passed since the People’s Non-Violent movement forced Nepal’s King Gyanendra to dissociate himself from state power, reinstate Parliament, and return Sovereignty to the people. The euphoric optimism of the first days of freedom made way for many positive decisions in favor of the peace process. However, certain vital decisions accepted too hurriedly regarding the Maoist conflict did not heed ground reality. These particular decisions link directly to the present state of confusion and mistrust.
Regarding the Maoists, what has really changed in the past five months to prove their good will? Yes, we hear lots of Maoist lip service to the peace process, but what evidence has surfaced that their violent agenda has ceased? Maoist leadership has yet to denounce publicly violent methods to achieve political gain. Maoist cadres have yet to cease violent actions against innocent civilians. If the Maoists truly accepted the peace process and multi-party system of government as they said, they have an obscure way of showing it. What is not obscure, however, is their continued hurriedness to implement rulings in their own favor.
To date, observing the antics of Maoist leaders at the peace table, one wonders if they have the maturity to be part of Nepal’s multi-party Government at this time. Euphoric hope coupled with a pressurized situation, not only resulted in misreading Maoist intention, but also a hurried agreement to power-share without disarming the so-called People’s Liberation Army. Should Nepal fall into the prison of Maoists ill intention, one can easily imagine the national devastation that will follow.
We continue to see the actions of Hezbollah and Hammas in Lebanon and Palestine. It may not be fully justified to compare the Maoists of Nepal with them, but one can find similarities too. Hezbollah is a state within a state as the Maoists claim for them. How much Hezbollah, Hammas and the Maoists are proxies of other nations in the region and how far they can maneuver by themselves is debatable. However, many nations do not recognize them as legitimate political forces. Recently we observed how Lebanon brought devastation upon itself as the consequence of an inability to disarm Hezbollah. Can we not have a similar situation erupt in Nepal if the Maoists become part of the government without disarming their so-called PLA? Can a political party with heinous intent and a history of punishing innocent people be trusted without publicly denouncing violence?
If the Maoists are searching for a face-saving means for keeping their armed PLA as a bargaining tool, at least they should not delay in passing a political resolution within their party stating violence is no longer acceptable as a means for political gain. What makes them so reluctant to say they believe in nonviolence? Democratic political parties do not keep a brutal armed force to win the hearts and minds of the people. Therefore, many people believe it was never the Maoists intention to settle political issues peacefully. Rather people see them engaged in formulating tactical strategies to regroup in order to shatter the nation’s remaining capabilities.
The tactic of the Maoist party seems to be to control the government with armed militia and conduct CA election.
The decade-long Maoist insurgency devastated our economic and human resources. Moreover, they cost us our political maneuverability. The Maoist party, supported by Indian intelligentsia, cemented their differences after Maoist leaders made a Pilgrimage to Delhi. In addition, because King Gyanendra never initiated dialogue in the country among our political key players, the 12-point understanding between the Maoists and the SPA leaders was formulated in Delhi as well. Finally, after Nepal’s friend, the former King of Kashmir, Karan Singh visited King Gyanendra as special envoy from Delhi; King Gyanendra returned sovereignty to the people. Even now, we have yet to regain our former capabilities. Hurried decisions at this critical juncture are foolhardy at best.
The Maoists seem very hurried to dissolve the hard-won parliament and join the government without abandoning their arms. The Maoist leadership and their cadres seem out-of-sync with the national interest. Their singular positioning shows not only irresponsibility, but also a blatant breach of 12-point and 8-point understandings. Why are they in such urgency? Is this a newer expression of their old ambition to control state power with guns?
The tactic of the Maoist party seems to be to control the government with armed militia and conduct CA election. This kind of election will definitely not allow people to use their conscience freely without any fear. We have seen phony elections conducted by the Maoists at some villages during their bloody insurgency. Can the election of CA be peaceful with armed PLA roaming around every pooling booth? The tactic how Lenin without majority in the CA took control of the Russia with the arm forces is perhaps the reason for such hurriedness.
In this context, will actions hurriedly taken, as many naive political pundits of Nepal prescribe to dissolve the parliament and form the interim government including the Maoist before disarming the PLA, be beneficial to the nation?
Bhupal Lamichhaney lives in the US and is associated with Breath of Peace International and was a former vice-president of HURON. He can be reached at [email protected].
(Editor’s Note: Nepalis, wherever they live, as well as friends of Nepal around the globe are requested to contribute their views/opinions/recollections etc. on issues concerning present day Nepal to the Guest Column of Nepalnews. Length of the article should not be more than 1,000 words and may be edited for the purpose of clarity and space. Relevant photos as well as photo of the author may also be sent along with the article. Please send your write-ups to [email protected])