Nobody stands to gain by defaming the Nepali Army

By Chakra Shrestha

Since the political developments of April when the House of Representatives was reinstated we have been made to believe that the country has entered a new dawn of democracy. A democracy, where in we have the right to freedom of expression and thought and inclusive politics through national consensus and debate. At least, that is what we have been made to believe. However, as political events unfold; this perception has been dampened and given space for pessimism against the backdrop of optimism resulting from the political agreement between the Seven Party Alliance (SPA) headed government of Nepal and the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoists).

Consider a hypothetical situation where in our Prime Minister and Defense Minister called the Maoist militia “murderers of innocent Nepali people who tortured and raped women and used the point of their guns to extort money from the rich and the impoverished” at a live press conference in Rolpa in the presence of the highest Maoist leadership. What would be the reaction of the Maoist leadership is anyone’s guess.

Irrespective of how small and weak the country’s army may be in confronting its neighbors, it must have the right to raise its voice against objectionable and derogatory remarks and defend its institutional image. If the political class can make compromises and show gestures to appease the Maoist leaderships, it would only be right for them to show respect and honor to the country’s army.
It is without doubt that the SPA led government exercised maximum possible restraint and the country’s head of government and Defense Minister showed statesmanship not to involve in confrontational rhetoric after the summit meeting with the Maoists on 16 June this year. However, it is also true and unfortunate that the Maoist leadership’s comments were seen as mere amusement for members of the cabinet and the political class who were present at the live press conference when the Maoist leader Pushpa Kamal Dahal slurred the country’s army of being nothing more than murderers and rapists. As silent but conscious spectators to the unfolding of political developments, we now have an idea of Dahal’s leadership skills and statesmanship qualities. We also saw the political and leadership ethics of the once enigmatic Maoist leader when he gave his first interview to a national television (Kantipur Television) when he referred to our Prime Minister as “Girija” when journalist Sohan Shrestha throughout the interview addressed him not by his first name or his alias name, but saluted him as “Chairman”. Was this a case of lack of media grooming.

If the 16 June political summit, Dahal’s subsequent comments on the country’s army and the army’s objection to the slanderous allegations six days later could be used as a scale to gauge our patriotism; then we could argue that the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist-Leninists) and its leadership have come out with flying colors. The party, which was once skeptical of the army when on the streets and opposition advocated strongly for the army’s right to defend its image and self-respect. While the CPN-UML leadership defended the army’s democratic right to defend its integrity and self-esteem, other parties represented in the government stayed silent observers to appease the Maoist leadership as if they were in agreement with the Maoist accusation.

Unfortunate it may be, but leaders like Mahantha Thakur of Nepali Congress and Deputy Prime Minister Amik Scherchan gave political colors to the army’s restrained self defense. They appeared courageous before the Maoist leadership to accuse the army of trying to foil the peace process by involving in the politics of press releases. But it is understandable where Sherchan’s allegiance lies considering the fact that despite being Nepal’s Deputy Prime Minister representing the entire Nepali population, he chooses to salute the Maoist leader Pushpa Kamal Dahal as “Comrade Prachanda” at public forums. Political leaders have argued that to defend the army is the responsibility of the government, but the question is what is it that still prevents the government from defending the army’s image regarding the Maoist leader’s malicious accusations? If Amik Scherchan holds the caretaker portfolio of Defense Minister, why does he still choose to stay silent and not object to the slur against the country’s army?

It is true that there have been numerous incidents of human rights violations involving the country’s army and yes, there have been cases of rape and manhandling involving our soldiers. The way forward to address the issue of disappearance and rape is by bridging the confidence gap between the political class and the military to redress the army’s mistakes in the past. The political class must be credited for taking the initiative to win the confidence of the armed insurgents to come into mainstream politics but they should also be damned for discriminating and humiliating the country’s army at the cost of unwarranted political appeasement on the negotiating table. The army leadership no doubt appears to be committed to democracy and reconciliation and this was underscored a day after the King reinstated parliament. The army Chief went on record on CNN to state that the army could take in some Maoist militia into its ranks in the changed political context. The process of assimilation could take time but his comments could be seen as the first and instant sign of the army’s genuine desire for reconciliation.

There continues to be skepticism against the army but analyzing media and political discourse, they must also be credited for not making any comment so far on the 12 point agreement between the SPA leadership and the Maoists signed in New Delhi, the political developments since April this year, the 25 point cease-fire code of conduct and the 8 point agreement between the SPA led government and the Maoist leadership. Hence, it would appear that the army has remained a silent national spectator under the authority of the government, but we cannot expect them to put their heads on alter of silence when its institutional image and integrity is attacked. Contrary to unfounded accusations that the army is against the peace process and involved in politics, the military leadership has repeatedly committed itself to follow the directives of the government.

As the country moves towards a progressive democratic Nepal, each national institution should have the right to defend its image and integrity through the freedom of expression and thought as with the rights of all sovereign citizens of this nation state. The army should not interfere in politics and must make genuine strides to amend its damaged image resulting from the consequences of war. But irrespective of how small and weak the country’s army may be in confronting its neighbors, it must have the right to raise its voice against objectionable and derogatory remarks and defend its institutional image. If the political class can make compromises and show gestures to appease the Maoist leaderships, it would only be right for them to show respect and honor to the country’s army.

(A freelance journalist, Shrestha is also an independent communication consultant working in the development sector. 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])