Imperative for restoring peace in Nepal

The formula, which envisages the return of a constitutional monarchy, is no longer acceptable to the people. They want to end the monarchy, whose notorious role in subverting the country's nascent democratic order is still fresh in people's mind, and establish a People's Republic.

The struggle, as such, goes on in Nepal, despite pressure on the pro-democracy forces from international community, curfew, and shoots on sight orders. Such open and resolute defiance by the people against the ruling elites is, indeed, a new phenomenon in Nepal's history.

It seems that the people of Nepal simply have had enough. They are determined to bring a positive change in their centuries old system of deprivation and suppression. They now are willing to make whatever sacrifices are needed -- emotional, economic, or physical. There is no evidence in history that such uprising of the people can be suppressed through force and brutality. The latest development in Nepal, as such, has raised serious concerns for all.

Nepal's political woes are a grim reminder to the political leadership of the developing countries that no matter how laudably they talk about the development of their respective countries, its premise remains elusive if the state is not committed in establishing inclusive political system encompassing every segment of its population. In another word, thanks to the influence of globalization, global democratization and human rights, there is now a need to restructure the state.

The task, however, becomes insurmountable if the nature of the state blocks the channels that are required to achieve the goal. Unfortunately, in case of Nepal, the leadership of the country, until very recently, failed to visualize the need for such restructuring despite the fact that theirs is a country of great diversity of cultures, languages, races, ethnic groups, religions and socio-cultural values.

Nepal, historically, has been a highly centralized and authoritarian state with state power concentrated in the hands of its high-caste ruling elites. It was only during the third wave of democracy in 1990 that Nepal got baptized in a democratic order. Prior to 1990, the state practically encouraged exploitation, suppression, oppression and subjugation through censorship and large scale human rights violations. The minorities, marginalized and women were the special targets.

But even in the post-1990 period, the political, economic, ecological, linguistic, religious disparities and problems of Dalits, Adhibasis/Janajatis, Terai people Madhesi/Tarai Basi, Madhesi Dalits, Madhesi Janajatis, Madhesi Muslims and Madhesi Muslim Women were not or could not be addressed due to the unitary nature of the state and the existing majoratarian system.

The state's failure to address the grievances of the minorities and marginalized and vast majority of rural poor, who have remained excluded from the system, generated language and ethno-political movements demanding reasonable share in all layers of decision-making. These groups challenged the existing nature of the state and its incapability in promoting and protecting their interest.

The need for restructuring the state, thus, became imperative and three fundamental issues -- Unitary vs Federalism, Hindu State vs Secularism, and Proportional Representation vs First-Past-The-Post System -- needed to do the task, began to be hotly debated. Idea of an alternative structure including inclusive democracy, federalization, secularization, proportional representation (PR), equal treatment to all religions, ethnic groups and sex gained currency and more or less a consensus developed among the main stream political parties, Communist Party of Nepal (CPN-Maoist, the Civil Society Organizations (CSOs), linguistic, ethnic and minority movements with regards to the agenda of restructuring the state. The King, who is a crucial factor in Nepalese politics, remained opposed to such emergent pro-people agenda.

Needless to say, such endeavors are indeed difficult, especially in a state which has not gone through the historical process of modernization and where centuries of suppressed people including the minorities, women and marginalized have been mobilized to voice their hopes and aspirations without having proper democratic institutions. It should be mentioned here that such difficulties are being experienced by most developing countries for similar reasons.

In case of Nepal, the task became all the more difficult when in 1994 the country's nascent democracy faltered. The folly (considered to the biggest folly in Nepal's constitutional history) was to keep one faction of Communist Party of Nepal (CPN) led by guerilla chief Prachanda out of the electioneering process. In 1996, Prachanda resorted to an armed confrontation with the state and since then has won some stunning and strategic victories. Since then Nepali state has been caught in a conflictual situation: conflict between the King and seven political parties (who are struggling in the street for the restoration of democracy); armed conflict between the state and the Maoists (who are using arms against the state in the name of people's war); and ethnic conflicts of various types.

King Gyanendra's response to the resolution of all these conflicts has been to do away with Nepal's fledging democracy in 2002 in the pretext of politicians' inability to contain the Maoist insurgency and to usurp all state power in his hands in 2005, again using the same pretext. When dialogue, negotiation and compromise were needed, without which no conflicts can be resolved and open and free polity, cannot be established King Gyanendra's high-handedness and policy of brutality and suppression has back-fired and made the people all the more united and resolute.

Even the Maoists have thrown their support behind the current movement. King Gyanendra's repression has taken its own course and given rise to an unprecedented defiance and violence. People of all segments now want the end of monarchy in Nepal. The fear is that state may annihilate whatever existing institutions there are in the country if the present state of seizure continues. In another word, Nepal is running the risk of being a failed state, posing a threat to its own and South Asian security.

As such, the need of the hour is to restore immediate peace in Nepal. What it required is a negotiated settlement acceptable to all, including the Maoists, and the present formula falls far short of such expectation. It would be naive to expect that people would settle with a constitutional monarch, who, in the past did everything possible to undermine people's rule.

The international community, especially US, must realize that their support for the King, even after his assumption of absolute ruler in 2005 on the pretext of containing the Maoists, was not wise. And now their insistence that people accept a constitutional monarch would be equally unwise. The international community must respect the wishes of the Nepalese people and support their endeavor to assert their will.

Two things should be done: first, the King must go; second, have an agreed formula through dialogue, compromise and negotiation among the various contenders of the powers, including the Maoists. All efforts must be done to bring the Maoists, who now control a large chunk of territory and are popular in those areas for their pro-people policies.

Nepal is today at a critical juncture of its history. Any wrong step would spell disaster for the country and South Asia. It is critical for the world and South Asia that Nepal does not turn into a failed state. It should be discerned that the last thing the world needs is another failed state, especially one with powerful Maoist militia and a terrain that would ideally suit warlords and terrorists.

The international community must also realize that Nepal is situated in between two Asian giants and it would be naive to rule out the possibility of friction between the two over what happen in the country. Violence and conflict must be stopped immediately according to the wishes of the people so that Nepal may begin its arduous journey for a stable, prosperous and peaceful polity. The sooner peace is restored in the country the better.

Dilara Choudury is Professor, Govt and Politics, Jahangirnagar University.