By: Aruni Mukherjee
February 14, 2005

Crisis unfolded in this little Himalayan kingdom last week, as King Gyanendra sacked the government of Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba for a second time in nearly as many years and imposed a state of Emergency. Troops marched into the streets of the capital Kathmandu, apparently to secure the nation against a raging Maoist insurgency. This has prompted serious concerns being expressed by Nepal’s neighbours, especially its big southern neighbour India. A Foreign Office spokesperson mentioned the crisis to be ‘of grave concern’ to India and a ‘setback for democracy’. India and the US have long lobbied to push the King to allow for more representative government in Nepal, and the former links its own Maoist problems to their brethren in Nepal.

Human rights have taken a plunge in Nepal ever since the extreme left wing insurgency began. Both sides have been accused of committing hideous atrocities over the years. This week troops surrounded the house of political party leaders in Kathmandu, and reports of soldiers firing on demonstrating students have also been coming in. As the King tightens its grip on this country, all forms of dissent are being crudely suppressed. The Maoists on the other hand have been charged with various kidnapping sprees, most notably that of children, to groom them as fanatic revolutionaries against the regime. The fighting has been especially vicious since August 2003 when the Maoists pulled out of a seven month truce.

Nepal continues to face a dilemma over its fundamental constitutional arrangement. The Maoists want an independent committee to be set up to forge a constitution with an option for abolishing the monarchy. Naturally the royalists would have none of this. International opinion has generally been sympathetic to the cause of the republicans, but aghast at their chosen means to achieve this end. However, the pro-King lobbies have argued that if the US can support the dictatorial regime of Saudi Arabia or Pakistan, it has no moral ground to push for democracy in Nepal. India faces its own dilemma in this context. On one hand, it has long pushed for the democratic elements in Nepal and it would naturally like to see at least one of its absolutist neighbours turn democratic, a cause long lost in Pakistan. However, on the other hand India does not want to side with the Maoists, for it is fighting its own battle against these elements in many of its southern and eastern states. India has in the past trained the Royal Nepalese Army and provided the royal forces with military hardware in return for democratic concessions from the monarchy. Last week’s debacle therefore comes as a disappointment for India’s plans.

If the civil war continues to rage in Nepal, by 2006 it will have completed a decade of en masse turmoil, which has left over 10,000 dead and many missing. It has been argued that the Maoists fear to face the will of the people, as they took their movement underground in 1996 after winning only 9 out of the 205 parliamentary seats in Nepal. The rebels retort claiming that the elections were rigged. So far Nepal continues to be haunted by absolutism, whether royalist or Maoist, the truth is hard to uncover.

Aruni Mukherjee