Busting all the myth surrounded with emergency, the Maoist insurgents killed over 130 security personnel in a single night in Achham and Sarlahi last Saturday. This not only exposed lack of coordination and serious flaws in the country’s security apparatus, it also brought to surface the threats to national sovereignty and security of this Himalayan kingdom. Preoccupied with their `power game,’ Nepalese politicians neither have courage to point toward the source of this insurgency nor any strategy to deal with it

By BHAGIRATH YOGI

Not only local people of Achham, local administration also knew it was going to happen. Chief District Officer, Mohan Singh Khatri, repeatedly apprised his superiors in Kathmandu about growing Maoist activities in the district and their continuous build-up. An all-party delegation from the district met Prime Minister and Defence Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba in the capital and urged him to reinforce security in the district. “But, he (Mr. Deuba) said, he did not have any more soldier to be sent to the district,” recalls Ram Bahadur Bista, a ruling Nepali Congress lawmaker from Achham.

Finally, the fateful night came last Saturday (Feb. 16). Little before mid-night, hundreds of Maoist rebels surrounded district headquarter of Mangalsen and airport tower at Sanphebagar targeting key installations. As if they were fighting a war in an enemy territory, they set fire on almost all the government offices at the district headquarters, butchered security forces, looted a local bank and killed innocent civilians (See: Box). They withdrew to safety only next morning after firing a few bullets at the Royal Nepalese Army chopper that reached the site only after almost all of the soldiers had fallen.

Government and private buildings in Mangalsen : Ghastly aftermath
Government and private buildings in Mangalsen : Ghastly aftermath
The death count: 55 soldiers, 77 policemen, three government employees including CDO Khatri and two civilians (including wife of an intelligence officer). Five more policemen were killed when the insurgents attacked a police post at Lalbandi along the East-West highway in the eastern terai district of Sarlahi.

The latest attack by the Maoistsóthe biggest one since they launched so-called ‘people’s war’ on February 13, 1996óexposed the myth that security situation had improved in the country after the proclamation of the state of emergency and mobilization of the Royal Nepalese Army to contain the rebellion. “Prime Minister (Sher Bahadur) Deuba is fiddling while Nepal is burning,” charged Pradip Nepal, a lawmaker from the main opposition CPN (UML) in the parliament Monday. Added Pashupati Shumser Rana, an Rstriya Prajatantra Party MP, “The Prime Minister and his cabinet members are busy cutting ribbons in the capital when the country is going through such a crisis.” Premier Deuba attended at least four functions on Sunday, as security officials were counting the dead bodies in Achham, and even flew briefly out of the capital to attend a convocation ceremony. The ‘special meeting’ of the cabinet that met more than 18 hours after the carnage asked the security agencies “to adopt all security measures with immediate effect.”

Political leaders : Are they serious?
Political leaders : Are they serious?
Intelligence Failure

The latest attacks not only highlighted ‘intelligence failure’ on part of the security agencies, it also exposed poor coordination between security wings and inability of the army to send more reinforcement in time. The attack also demonstrated that the Maoist military organisation is still intact and fully functional.

“The Achham episode shows that there have been serious security lapses. Why did the government not act in time to avert such disaster?” asked Rajendra Pandey. Only two weeks back, hundreds of Maoist guerrillas had stormed a police post at Bhakundebesi in Kavre district, some 40 km east of Kathmandu. 16 policemen, including police inspector Tikaram Pandey, were killed in the Maoist attacks. The police post was set up to provide security to the on-going construction works of Banepa-Sindhuli highway being constructed with the Japanese assistance.

The Hidden Agenda

First popularly elected Prime Minister of Nepal, late B. P. Koirala had laid foundation stone of the Banepa-Sindhuli highway in 1960. But when his government was dismissed in a royal coup, the then ‘nationalist’ Panchayat regime did not dare to re-start the construction of the all-important road, that would provide an alternate link to Kathmandu with southern town of Hetauda— throughout three decades. Then premier G. P. Koirala persuaded the Japanese government to assist in the construction of the all-important road that would serve as a lifeline in the impoverished area. By killing the policemen manning the construction of the road, Maoists have once again proved whose interests are they fulfilling, say analysts.

Over the last four years, the so-called revolutionaries have destroyed over 50 repeater stations of the state-owned Nepal Telecommunications Corporation (NTC) worth Rs 163 million. Over the last few months, they have destroyed power stations at Bhojpur and Tumlingtar, among others. The construction of Karnali highway remains at standstill due to the Maoist insurgency and the rebels are also said to be disrupting the construction of Hilsa-Simikot road, being constructed under the World Food Program grant, that would link the remote northern area with Tibet autonomous region of China. So, in whose interest are the so-called Maoists doing all these things?

Perhaps, Nepal’s vulnerability has been the main reason for this ‘camouflage operation’? In his article “Geopolitical Considerations,” (compiled in the book “India’s Northern security, 1986), Dr. K. R. Singh, professor at the Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, wrote: “Nepal is, militarily, a very vulnerable state. Its armed forces are grossly inadequate. It has no airforce worth against a major power like China. In such a case, Nepal becomes militarily a porous frontier between India and China. The excellent communication network, constructed of late in Nepal, adds to this indirect threat to India’s security.”

Dr. Singh further maintains that “as long as Nepal does not develop an autonomous defence capability it will be like that of Belgium; a trigger for a larger conflagration. If Nepal aspired to be ‘Switzerland,’ it must not only acquire an adequate defence capability but also play a role, which is not seen as antagonistic by either of its close neighbors. As long as that doesn’t happen, Nepal will remain a dangerous void in India’s security and no amount of claims of neutrality by Nepal can fill it.”

Regional Rivalry

Cold war may have been over in rest of the world, but not in South Asia. Despite being rich in natural resources, an economically poor and politically vulnerable Nepal has been trapped in growing ambitions of its neighbors. While China has always stood strongly in favor of a prosperous and stable Nepal, Indian military planners have found it hard to digest this Himalayan kingdomóthe oldest nation-state in the region– as a sovereign nation.

“Nepal and Bhutan lie within the natural defence perimeter of India. They have now become important factors in our security perspectives regarding our northern border,” wrote Group Captain S. G. Chitnis, in his article “The Himalayan Kingdoms” in the same book, India’s Northern Security. ” China looms large on our security horizon. The problem, therefore, needs to be viewed in its entirety, covering in the main Nepal, Bhutan, Tibet and China. The independent status of the two Himalayan kingdoms poses considerable political, military and diplomatic problems for India.”

Nepal was “punished” by its powerful southern neighbor when an Indian Airlines plane was hijacked from Kathmandu on the Christmas eve in 1999 by suspending IA flights for six months. It was only after then foreign minister Chakra Bastola succeeded in persuading Indian establishment that the flights were resumed.

From trade to diplomacy, India’s “security concerns” have been the determining factor in its relations with Nepal. Post-September 11, Indian Foreign Minister Jaswant Singh termed Nepalese Maoists as terrorists. Leader of the main opposition, Madhav Kumar Nepal, along with top leftist leaders, travelled to Siliguri, India to meet Comrade Prachanda, alias Pushpa Kamal Dahal, chairman of the CPN (Maoist), last year. Despite India’s repeated assurance that it would provide every possible support to Nepal in its fight against insurgency, Nepalese government hasn’t been able to furnish evidence about Mr. Prachanda and company enjoying safe haven in Indian territory and request for their repatriationóin the same way India is doing with Pakistan in the case of Dawood Ibrahim and others.

Source of Insurgency

In the last five decades, all types of insurgency in Nepal have been originated in India. Late B. P. Koirala, while in India, withdrew his armed rebellion against the then Panchayat regime and called for ‘national reconciliation’ with the monarchy. Late King Mahendra crushed the “Jhapa movement” inspired from the Naxalite movement in India in the seventies.

Ram Raja Prasad Singh of Janabadi Morcha also launched an insurgency from India against the Panchayat regime. The Maoists, too, launched their insurgency with ‘anti-India’ rhetoric but over the last six years have been cautious enough not to do anything that would harm Indian interests in Nepal.

Analysts say with its limited resources Nepal would not be able to contain the Maoist rebellion unless the common, open border with India is regulated. “Nowhere in the world can the insurgency be controlled by keeping the border open,” said Dipta Prakash Jung Shah, member of National Assembly (See: Interview).

While the Maoists were overpowering ill-equipped police posts in different parts of the country over the last few years, so-called Kathmandu-based intelligentsia was busy arguing that the insurgency was on outcome of poverty and rampant corruption. As the Maoists continued to recruit unemployed youths in their ‘people’s army,’ the government simply failed to provide them with any alternative. As police posts were withdrawn from the insurgency-hit areas, the Maoists ran parallel administration and local people had no other alternative than bowing to them. As premier Deuba proposed a peace initiative last year, Maoists prepared for a big offensive as shown by their attacks at Dang, Syangja and Solukhumbu in November last year.

Tackling the Insurgency

The Nepalese Government has ordered its security forces to redouble their efforts to crush the country’s Maoist rebels. “The government has instructed all security agencies to launch immediate offensive and defensive operations against the Maoists,” said Jayprakash Prasad Gupta, Minister for Information and Communications.

The latest Maoist offensive has also raised questions about the effectiveness of the three-month old military campaign against them. The Defense Ministry said the insurgents used sophisticated weapons looted from army barrack in Dang while attacking at Mangalsen. Its obvious that they will use the same weapons, including those looted from Mangalsen barrack, in future assaults.

“Compared to the preparedness and motivation of the Maoists, the army personnel seemed to be less prepared,” said Prof. Dhruva Kumar, a strategic analyst at the Center for Nepal and Asian Studies of the Tribhuvan University. “It has been felt that the government too did not exhibit th seriousness as needed.”

Despite such shortcomings, while fighting a brutal insurgency at the home front for the first time, Royal Nepalese Army needs supportólogistic and otherwise, say analysts. “The Army, as an institution, hasn’t received encouragement from the political leadership over the last three months,” said Rajendra Dahal, editor of Himal Khabarpatrika. “At the same time, the army leadership seems to have failed to inspire the soldiers at the ground.”

Addressing the Parliament on Monday, premier Deuba admitted that deployment of army and police alone would not resolve the problems raised by Maoist insurgency. “The move will have to be backed by wide ranging political, social and administrative reforms,” he said. While the motion to approve the state of emergency is likely to be passed by the parliament in the new circumstances whether Mr. Deuba — known for his lackluster performance– will be able to provide a decisive leadership the nation wants at the moment remains to be seen.

Terrorized by Maoist tactics, mobilizing popular support to fight the insurgency is not going to be an easy job. “The government needs to create an environment and appeal to the masses for their support,” said Dr. Panna Kaji Amatya, professor of political science at the Tribhuvan University. “The problem is power should be a means for development. But, in our case, power has been the end for the political parties.”

According to Prof. Amatya, it is the duty of the government to cultivateinternal cohesion. “When there is no internal cohesion, it may be vulnerable to external forces bent on destroying our internal cohesion. So, political parties should be vigilant and aware in raising our internal strength.”