Kathmandu: Despite the Himalayan efforts of the agitating political parties to defer the Kathmandu meet of the Nepal Development Forum sine die, the international donors, however, rebuffed their appeal.
In doing so the international donors did in no uncertain terms sided with the Nepal’s Government that was in place at the moment.
” It’s a matter to be decided upon by the government and we consider it the internal affairs of the Nepal government”, is what the international donors communicated to the agitating political parties who had made a fervent appeal for a postponement of the meet forwarding the reasons that since the government under Thapa were an “unrepresentative” or even a sort of “illegitimate one” and hence the meet be deferred until a legitimate government assumed the office in Sigh Durbar.
The donors exhibited their mood in favor of the meet as per schedule.
However, in doing so, the international donors did recognize Thapa set up, as not only a representative one but also put their stamp on its questioned legitimacy.
The donors’ changed attitude towards this government is in contrast with their subdued voices being expressed against the government at the unofficial levels.
But then yet, the donors yet continue to express their dissatisfaction over the long absence of the local and central elected bodies. They also express concern over the tussle that is going on in between the King and the political parties for over a year or so.
With all the reservations intact, the donors still have come to attend the meet beginning today.
The successful conclusion of this meet will automatically add one more feather in the cap of the Thapa set up which had begun trembling when it learnt of the opposition appeal to the donors to shift the meet indefinitely. However, that did not happen and wisdom prevailed hinting at the fact that for the donor community the country and its people counted most.
Analysts prefer to push some suggestions to the donor community meeting today in Kathmandu.
Firstly, the donors should tell the State to patch up their differences with the political parties. Secondly, the “reform process” must continue at a faster rate so that its impact is felt on the population; Thirdly, the donors must tell the State that they will not “tolerate” embezzlements and “inefficiency” at the development projects run under their donations. Fourthly, the donors should see to themselves that their projects go to the western region-the region that remained neglected for decades and decades thus facilitating the growth of the insurgency. And finally, the donors must indicate the government that they demand “good governance” and delegation of authority to the villages and districts.