Nepal Army lobbies to remove itself from UN supervision

[Saorsa]

The Nepal Army is lobbying for the UN Mission in Nepal to be ended. The government is recommending that the UNMIN stay, but with a mandate to supervise only the PLA and not the NA. These proposals, if carried out, will mean the end of the peace process. The UNMIN is the international neutral body created to oversee the peace process - to lobby against it is to call for a return to war, or more accurately for Maoist surrender.

I'm going to write a blog post explaining in depth why recent events are so significant in the next few days, but this is a very, very big deal. Espescially in light of the growing calls for revolt within the Maoist camp.

Panel for extension, new mandate

POST REPORT

KATHMANDU, AUG 28 -

An expert panel formed by the caretaker prime minister to advise the government on the future of the United Nations Mission in Nepal (UNMIN) has recommended the government to extend the tenure by another six months, but with a reduced mandate.

The recommendation comes amid fierce Maoist opposition to changing UNMIN’s terms.

The advisory panel that includes bureaucrats of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Ministry of Peace and Reconstruction (doesn’t include Maoist representatives) has suggested a mandate revision—to allow UNMIN to monitor only the Maoist army.

It said that in the changed political context, the Nepal Army should no longer be kept under the UN’s supervision.

“We have given our suggestions and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs will now draft a letter that will be dispatched to the UN Security Council,” said Retired Lt. Gen. Balanada Sharma, a member of the advisory panel.

The panel has also suggested the government scrap other responsibilities given to UNMIN during its inception in 2007. The current UNMIN mandate includes management of arms and armed personnel of Nepal Army and the Maoists’ People’s Liberation Army, assisting parties through the Joint Monitoring Coordinating Committee in implementing the agreement signed during the peace process, assisting in the ceasefire monitoring and providing technical assistance to the Election Commission for conducting the Constituent Assembly elections.

“We have suggested the government to draft a new request exclusively to monitor Maoist combatants,” added Sharma.

The UCPN (Maoist) has been objecting to the government’s idea of revising UNMIN’s current mandate, saying such a move would be a “serious blow” to the peace process.

http://www.ekantipur.com/the-kathmandu-post/2010/08/28/top-story/panel-for-extension-new-mandate/212100/

[scarletghoul]

Wow :blink: How powerful is this 'advisory panel', how likely is the government to go by this recommendation ?

[Saorsa]

It doesn't *have* to, but the Congress are calling for the UNMIN to leave entirely and the UML are likely to back this proposal. It may very well pass.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Advantages & Disadvantages of the possible outcome:

Advantages:


Would garner mass support within rural Nepal again;
Would have a big chance in gaining power over the government;
Would collect urban supporters as well when gained through the peace process;
Would gain the support of both the Afghan & Indian Maoist Parties once again;


Disadvantages:


Would lose a good number of urban support gained through the peace process;
Would put the party members at risk again, & those in support of them - urban & rural.


In my personal opinion, armed struggle seems the most likeliest of winners when it comes to advantages to the Party & those who support it.

[scarletghoul]

The Maoists probably wouldn't have much trouble regaining the rural areas (I'm not aware of any substantial drop in support there); the main implication of a new war would be fighting for Kathmandu, and that's not likely to be very pretty. That's the key thing to consider. After all, the main reason the Maoists joined the peace process was to avoid a 'bloodbath' in Kathmandu.

[The Vegan Marxist]

The Maoists probably wouldn't have much trouble regaining the rural areas (I'm not aware of any substantial drop in support there); the main implication of a new war would be fighting for Kathmandu, and that's not likely to be very pretty. That outweighs most of those advantages you list...

When the Party embraced the peace process, numbers were lost in support from those in the rural lands. Though, a lot of support was gained through the urban areas of Nepal as well, as we could clearly see during May day.

[scarletghoul]

A lot of the May Day supporters were bussed in from rural areas, I think. No doubt their urban support has increased a lot, however there's still a lot of anti-maoist forces strong in the capital.

[The Vegan Marxist]

A lot of the May Day supporters were bussed in from rural areas, I think. No doubt their urban support has increased a lot, however there's still a lot of anti-maoist forces strong in the capital.

This may be true, though correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't those of the rural land have to leave for a while back to their homes due to coming storms? Though, even with a good amount of those leaving to attend to their homes & stock, a vast majority of the party remained on the streets of Kathmandu.