|PROMETHEUS|
3rd July 2005, 08:25
Washington Times: Nepal’s king hit by fallout from royal coup
Nepal’s king hit by fallout from royal coup
By Chitra Tiwari
Source: The Washington Times, 2 July 2005
WASHINGTON — Nepal’s King Gyanendra is facing consequences he did not expect when he carried out a royal coup Feb. 1, putting Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba and his Cabinet under house arrest and imprisoning hundreds of other political figures, imposing restrictions on the press, communications, telephones and the Internet, and sending the army and police into the streets.
Gyanendra had been flexing his muscles against the democratic parties since becoming the king in June 2001. He blamed the parties for instability in the country leading to the expansion of the nine-year-old Maoist insurgency that seeks to topple the 237-year-old monarchy.
Riding on the bandwagon of the Bush administration’s “war on terror,” the king thought he could force the political parties and his international benefactors — the United States, Britain, the European Community and India — to rally to his side in his own fight against Maoist “terrorists.”
The tide, however, turned against him. The international community, which had advised the king there was no military solution to Nepal’s insurgency and that he should make peace with the political parties to fight the Maoists, not only condemned the coup but also embargoed arms shipments to the Royal Nepalese Army (RNA).
Lacking support from the West and India for his Feb. 1 takeover, Gyanendra went on a political-diplomatic tour to Indonesia and China in April and to the Persian Gulf countries in June seeking legitimacy for his regime.
While China, Pakistan and other lesser players in Nepal have said developments in the kingdom are an internal matter for Nepal, support from major donors — Washington, London, Brussels and New Delhi — is still on hold. All say their support for Nepal depends on the king’s handing over power to the people’s representatives.
The political parties, dashing Gyanendra’s hopes they would rally behind him, are increasingly belligerent toward the royal regime. In May, the country’s seven parties — including the two largest centrist ones, the Nepali Congress (NC) and the Unified Marxist and Leninist (UML) — formed an alliance to fight the royal autocracy until a full-fledged democracy is established.
The road map issued by the seven-party alliance calls for the restoration of the parliament dissolved in October 2002, formation of a parliamentary committee to negotiate with the Maoists on the technicalities of a Constituent Assembly, and formation of an interim government including the Maoists to conduct elections for the Constituent Assembly. Support from the seven-party alliance for the Maoist agenda of a Constituent Assembly, however, is not unconditional: They want the rebels to lay down their arms and join the mainstream.
But observers say this idea is fanciful, indeed suicidal, not only for the rebels but for the leaders of the other parties, because the army and police would have suppressed pro-democracy demonstrations had there been no Maoist People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to defend the parties.
Maoist leader Pushpa Kamal Dahal, also known as “Prachanda,” described the alliance proposal as “double-edged and seeking credit without collateral.” But he also welcomed it as a “step forward,” and urged his cadres to support any struggles by the alliance against the monarchy.
These developments followed meetings in May and June between Nepali political leaders and the Indian government as well as opposition leaders in New Delhi. The Maoists, too, sent two senior leaders — Baburam Bhattarai and Krishna Bahadur Mahara — to New Delhi, where they reportedly assured Nepali parliamentary leaders that the Maoists are also committed to multiparty democracy.
The two Nepali Maoists were reported to have met Indian leaders secretly to tell them of their commitment to multiparty democracy and assure New Delhi that Maoists in Nepal mean no harm to India.
Analysts say the country has clearly tilted toward the idea of a Constituent Assembly as proposed by the Maoists, which had been unacceptable for the parliamentary parties before the Feb. 1 royal coup. Critics say the king himself pushed the parliamentary parties into the Maoist camp and that Gyanendra is digging his own grave.
The growing tilt of parliamentary parties toward the Maoist agenda of a republican Nepal via a Constituent Assembly shows the country is heading toward abolishing the monarchy. Instead of trying to win the parties back to its side, the royal regime threatens to label the party leaders “terrorists” if they ally themselves with the Maoists.
The developing alliance, though informal, has become a matter of concern for the United States and India, whose policies emphasize an alliance between the king and parties to defeat the Maoists.
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for South Asian Affairs Donald A. Camp visited Katmandu June 26-28, where he met Gyanendra and several other government and opposition leaders. Addressing a press conference in Katmandu, Mr. Camp reiterated the U.S. position that the king’s actions of Feb. 1 were a big step backward for democracy. He said Washington has delayed a shipment of M-16 rifles to Nepal, adding, however, that the U.S. engagement with the RNA “continues.” Mr. Camp described the Maoists as the most serious and immediate threat to a peaceful, prosperous and democratic Nepal.
Meanwhile, U.S. Ambassador James F. Moriarty appears to be lobbying Congress to release military aid. Addressing a seminar at the East-West Center in Honolulu on June 23, Mr. Moriarty asked: “Should we give $2 million of security assistance this year or $500 million to refugee camps scattered throughout India in the not-too-distant future?
“That’s the choice we have to make,” he said.
While maintaining its “twin pillar theory” of reconciliation between the king and the parties, New Delhi has maintained communications with Nepali Maoist leaders. Concurrently, part of the Indian intelligentsia increasingly discounts the threat of a Maoist takeover in Nepal to India’s security.
Satish Chandra, a former deputy national security advisor in India, wrote recently in a newspaper analysis: “Should [the Maoists] come to power as a result of our denial of arms to the king, they are unlikely to be unfriendly to us.”
Analysts dismiss the idea that a king-party alliance can defeat the Maoists. They argue that the Maoists had disabled the government even when the king and parties got along before the October 2002 dissolution of parliament. Since the Feb. 1 royal coup, the king has lost the support of parties that favored a constitutional monarchy — and, so the analysts say — hope in Washington and New Delhi of reconciliation between the king and the parties is misplaced.
Gyanendra, who does not see monarchy’s future in a constitution drafted by a Constituent Assembly, remains uncompromising. He has defied world opinion that a military victory against the Maoists, who now control nearly all of Nepal except a few cities, is not possible.
Analysts say Gyanendra is under the illusion that he can establish peace in Nepal and consolidate the waning monarchy through a head-on fight with the Maoists.
For this, the RNA needs more arms and ammunition. Because they are not forthcoming from the United States, Britain and India, the royal regime published tenders in mid-May and again on June 17 inviting bids to buy arms from the open market, triggering concern in India.
Analysts are keenly watching to see how private companies could supply arms to landlocked Nepal without India granting them use of its air space.
Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have been pressing Nepal’s past arms suppliers not to resume the arms flow, calling attention to RNA brutality toward civilians in counterinsurgency operations. In a June 15 report, Amnesty International said it had received reports that “soldiers who were suspected of involvement in extrajudicial executions have subsequently benefited by being deployed on U.N. peacekeeping duties.”
On the military side, the battle between the RNA and PLA is taking a growing toll on the civilian population. Since the RNA began to “fight the guerrilla like a guerrilla,” armed soldiers travel in civilian buses in contravention of the laws of war, and the PLA has begun blowing up civilian buses that might hold troops. [My emphasis.]
In the five months of Gyanendra’s direct rule, the violence has taken the lives of more than 1,100 people, mostly civilians killed as “suspected Maoists,” adding to the total of 12,000 deaths since the beginning of the insurgency in 1996.
Despite government propaganda claiming that the Maoists are weakening and that the RNA is gradually re-establishing its position, press reports say the guerrillas, despite losing some battles, have become bolder. In June alone, PLA battalions inflicted heavy casualties on the RNA in seven armed encounters around the country and captured several dozen automatic weapons.
Analysts say the party cadres demanding an end to monarchy have become increasingly lenient toward the rebels, and many party leaders now say that absolute monarchists are the main impediment for democracy. They say that in post-monarchy Nepal, the Maoists will have no choice but to respect multiparty democracy and participate in politics.
• Chitra Tiwari, formerly a lecturer of political science at Nepal’s Tribhuvan University, is a Washington-based analyst of South Asian affairs. He can be reached by e-mail at [email protected]
SOURCE: http://insn.org/?p=1424
Nepal’s king hit by fallout from royal coup
By Chitra Tiwari
Source: The Washington Times, 2 July 2005
WASHINGTON — Nepal’s King Gyanendra is facing consequences he did not expect when he carried out a royal coup Feb. 1, putting Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba and his Cabinet under house arrest and imprisoning hundreds of other political figures, imposing restrictions on the press, communications, telephones and the Internet, and sending the army and police into the streets.
Gyanendra had been flexing his muscles against the democratic parties since becoming the king in June 2001. He blamed the parties for instability in the country leading to the expansion of the nine-year-old Maoist insurgency that seeks to topple the 237-year-old monarchy.
Riding on the bandwagon of the Bush administration’s “war on terror,” the king thought he could force the political parties and his international benefactors — the United States, Britain, the European Community and India — to rally to his side in his own fight against Maoist “terrorists.”
The tide, however, turned against him. The international community, which had advised the king there was no military solution to Nepal’s insurgency and that he should make peace with the political parties to fight the Maoists, not only condemned the coup but also embargoed arms shipments to the Royal Nepalese Army (RNA).
Lacking support from the West and India for his Feb. 1 takeover, Gyanendra went on a political-diplomatic tour to Indonesia and China in April and to the Persian Gulf countries in June seeking legitimacy for his regime.
While China, Pakistan and other lesser players in Nepal have said developments in the kingdom are an internal matter for Nepal, support from major donors — Washington, London, Brussels and New Delhi — is still on hold. All say their support for Nepal depends on the king’s handing over power to the people’s representatives.
The political parties, dashing Gyanendra’s hopes they would rally behind him, are increasingly belligerent toward the royal regime. In May, the country’s seven parties — including the two largest centrist ones, the Nepali Congress (NC) and the Unified Marxist and Leninist (UML) — formed an alliance to fight the royal autocracy until a full-fledged democracy is established.
The road map issued by the seven-party alliance calls for the restoration of the parliament dissolved in October 2002, formation of a parliamentary committee to negotiate with the Maoists on the technicalities of a Constituent Assembly, and formation of an interim government including the Maoists to conduct elections for the Constituent Assembly. Support from the seven-party alliance for the Maoist agenda of a Constituent Assembly, however, is not unconditional: They want the rebels to lay down their arms and join the mainstream.
But observers say this idea is fanciful, indeed suicidal, not only for the rebels but for the leaders of the other parties, because the army and police would have suppressed pro-democracy demonstrations had there been no Maoist People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to defend the parties.
Maoist leader Pushpa Kamal Dahal, also known as “Prachanda,” described the alliance proposal as “double-edged and seeking credit without collateral.” But he also welcomed it as a “step forward,” and urged his cadres to support any struggles by the alliance against the monarchy.
These developments followed meetings in May and June between Nepali political leaders and the Indian government as well as opposition leaders in New Delhi. The Maoists, too, sent two senior leaders — Baburam Bhattarai and Krishna Bahadur Mahara — to New Delhi, where they reportedly assured Nepali parliamentary leaders that the Maoists are also committed to multiparty democracy.
The two Nepali Maoists were reported to have met Indian leaders secretly to tell them of their commitment to multiparty democracy and assure New Delhi that Maoists in Nepal mean no harm to India.
Analysts say the country has clearly tilted toward the idea of a Constituent Assembly as proposed by the Maoists, which had been unacceptable for the parliamentary parties before the Feb. 1 royal coup. Critics say the king himself pushed the parliamentary parties into the Maoist camp and that Gyanendra is digging his own grave.
The growing tilt of parliamentary parties toward the Maoist agenda of a republican Nepal via a Constituent Assembly shows the country is heading toward abolishing the monarchy. Instead of trying to win the parties back to its side, the royal regime threatens to label the party leaders “terrorists” if they ally themselves with the Maoists.
The developing alliance, though informal, has become a matter of concern for the United States and India, whose policies emphasize an alliance between the king and parties to defeat the Maoists.
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for South Asian Affairs Donald A. Camp visited Katmandu June 26-28, where he met Gyanendra and several other government and opposition leaders. Addressing a press conference in Katmandu, Mr. Camp reiterated the U.S. position that the king’s actions of Feb. 1 were a big step backward for democracy. He said Washington has delayed a shipment of M-16 rifles to Nepal, adding, however, that the U.S. engagement with the RNA “continues.” Mr. Camp described the Maoists as the most serious and immediate threat to a peaceful, prosperous and democratic Nepal.
Meanwhile, U.S. Ambassador James F. Moriarty appears to be lobbying Congress to release military aid. Addressing a seminar at the East-West Center in Honolulu on June 23, Mr. Moriarty asked: “Should we give $2 million of security assistance this year or $500 million to refugee camps scattered throughout India in the not-too-distant future?
“That’s the choice we have to make,” he said.
While maintaining its “twin pillar theory” of reconciliation between the king and the parties, New Delhi has maintained communications with Nepali Maoist leaders. Concurrently, part of the Indian intelligentsia increasingly discounts the threat of a Maoist takeover in Nepal to India’s security.
Satish Chandra, a former deputy national security advisor in India, wrote recently in a newspaper analysis: “Should [the Maoists] come to power as a result of our denial of arms to the king, they are unlikely to be unfriendly to us.”
Analysts dismiss the idea that a king-party alliance can defeat the Maoists. They argue that the Maoists had disabled the government even when the king and parties got along before the October 2002 dissolution of parliament. Since the Feb. 1 royal coup, the king has lost the support of parties that favored a constitutional monarchy — and, so the analysts say — hope in Washington and New Delhi of reconciliation between the king and the parties is misplaced.
Gyanendra, who does not see monarchy’s future in a constitution drafted by a Constituent Assembly, remains uncompromising. He has defied world opinion that a military victory against the Maoists, who now control nearly all of Nepal except a few cities, is not possible.
Analysts say Gyanendra is under the illusion that he can establish peace in Nepal and consolidate the waning monarchy through a head-on fight with the Maoists.
For this, the RNA needs more arms and ammunition. Because they are not forthcoming from the United States, Britain and India, the royal regime published tenders in mid-May and again on June 17 inviting bids to buy arms from the open market, triggering concern in India.
Analysts are keenly watching to see how private companies could supply arms to landlocked Nepal without India granting them use of its air space.
Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have been pressing Nepal’s past arms suppliers not to resume the arms flow, calling attention to RNA brutality toward civilians in counterinsurgency operations. In a June 15 report, Amnesty International said it had received reports that “soldiers who were suspected of involvement in extrajudicial executions have subsequently benefited by being deployed on U.N. peacekeeping duties.”
On the military side, the battle between the RNA and PLA is taking a growing toll on the civilian population. Since the RNA began to “fight the guerrilla like a guerrilla,” armed soldiers travel in civilian buses in contravention of the laws of war, and the PLA has begun blowing up civilian buses that might hold troops. [My emphasis.]
In the five months of Gyanendra’s direct rule, the violence has taken the lives of more than 1,100 people, mostly civilians killed as “suspected Maoists,” adding to the total of 12,000 deaths since the beginning of the insurgency in 1996.
Despite government propaganda claiming that the Maoists are weakening and that the RNA is gradually re-establishing its position, press reports say the guerrillas, despite losing some battles, have become bolder. In June alone, PLA battalions inflicted heavy casualties on the RNA in seven armed encounters around the country and captured several dozen automatic weapons.
Analysts say the party cadres demanding an end to monarchy have become increasingly lenient toward the rebels, and many party leaders now say that absolute monarchists are the main impediment for democracy. They say that in post-monarchy Nepal, the Maoists will have no choice but to respect multiparty democracy and participate in politics.
• Chitra Tiwari, formerly a lecturer of political science at Nepal’s Tribhuvan University, is a Washington-based analyst of South Asian affairs. He can be reached by e-mail at [email protected]
SOURCE: http://insn.org/?p=1424