|
The democratic process in Nepal has again hit glitches, with political players resorting to flexing their muscles and seriously endangering national integrity. Even after the cessation of hostilities by the major armed group, the CPN (Maoists), Nepal has not settled down. Although the Comprehensive Peace Agreement of 2006 signaled a new era and successful Constituent Assembly elections in April 2008 gave a verdict in favor of consensus politics, the Nepali political parties have yet again reverted to forming and dismantling governments. This is what had eroded people's faith in democracy in the 90s which gave rise to the Maoist rebellion in 1996.
The Maoists emerged as the single largest party in the Constituent Assembly but their nine month rule under Chairman Prachanda was barely enough to take the fragile peace process to its logical conclusion. It was also because of the disastrous decision taken by Prachanda cabinet to sack the then Chief of the Army Staff Gen. Katuwal that led to major coalition partners to suspect that the Maoists were going ahead with their agenda of a totalitarian communist dictatorship. Gen. Katuwal has since retired but the Maoists are now on the streets demanding the resignation of the Prime Minister and an unconditional apology from the President who made an unconstitutional move to ask the COAS to continue in office. The numbers game played inside parliament became favorable for another coalition to emerge in the leadership of Madhav Kumar Nepal, the leader of CPN (UML) which is a centre-left party.
The issue of integration of Maoist combatants into the security forces, federalism and political system are major hurdles for the Constituent Assembly. Most important is how to manage the 19 thousand combatants who are stationed in UN cantonment sites. Maoists want an early integration of their 19,000 cadres into the Nepali Army, a proposition that the Army vehemently opposes. Much of this slipshod has also been created by the erroneous wordings of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement in which it was agreed to integrate the Maoist combatants into the security forces. The Army feels that security forces could also mean police or other paramilitary units.
There is also no consensus under which basis should the future federal states be created -language, region, religion, ethnicity, geography, etc. The old parties, specially the Nepali Congress, still adhere to the Westminster model of parliamentary democracy, while the Maoists want a presidential system in which the president is elected directly by the people.
The crisis in the Terai on the other hand has a direct bearing on the integrity of Nepali nationhood. Dozens of armed groups, gangs and goons have emerged in the Indo-Nepal border asking for a divergent array of demands and this is not only a law and order problem but also has a political dimension. To make matters worse, the Maoists have now vowed to go for violent street protests. The implications of this agitation are already being felt. Tourists have started to cancel their visits to Nepal although this is the peak tourist season.
The peace process is stuck again. The defense minister has talked of mobilizing the army if the agitation becomes violent while a NC leader has talked of dissolving the Constituent Assembly altogether. The country is anxious that the present government may even go to the extent of declaring a state of emergency and mobilize the army, an eventuality that no Nepali is willing to digest as they have witnessed more than 10 years of bloody civil war.
The peace process which started after the parties and Maoists signed the 12 point agreement in 2005 has run into a stalemate. This crisis can only be resolved after all the forces in the country begin talking with one another for the common objective of safeguarding the sovereignty and territorial integrity of this small South Asian state where democracy is still a fledgling.
|
Show/hide comments
Show/hide comment form
