The experience of Nepal

Editor-in-Chief: Mir Shakil-ur-Rahman

If you ever wish to experience the power stemming from the unity of the people, then this is the best time to visit Nepal. It's ecstatic. The powerful are powerless, be it the king of Nepal, the military, the American ambassador or the Indian ambassador. The people are leading the politicians and the political parties for a change, and have a sense of optimism which one can only hope would last. The driver dropping me at the airport on my way back said it all: he was a Maoist supporter but had been driving a taxi for the past 20 years. He said nothing would change for him even after a change in government following the much anticipated elections to elect a constituent assembly and a government but his country would transform for the better.

Politics is widely regarded as a struggle for power. Some naive persons, such as myself, also see it as an opportunity to serve the lot of the poor and improve the general state of affairs in our country if not worldwide. The present talks to reach a settlement amongst the ruling seven party alliance in Nepal, led by Prime Minister Koirala, the Maoists and the king should be seen in the context of a struggle for power by all concerned, disregarding the claims to the contrary.

The king of Nepal literally shot himself in the foot by dissolving the parliament and suspending the constitution. The major components of the seven-party alliance were sharing power to an extent with the monarchy, the army and bureaucracy and are obviously resisting hard retaining whatever authority they can. The military was all along a major player and sharing a major chunk of power with the king and now finds itself pushed to a corner thanks to the follies committed by the king. The judiciary and the bureaucracy hold on to what they had earlier; and presently appeared satisfied that the future dispensation would not disturb their status.

The irony is that power is supposed to belong to the people of Nepal but they had none until April 2006 when they showed to the world that authority and influence could also be snatched when the masses unite. The people should be saluted for this valiant and united struggle and they can rightfully be proud of it for generations. However, Nepal is standing at a crucial juncture at this point in history and it could either succeed at this stage and prove to be another Switzerland in the making, or may commit a folly and remain stuck in a quagmire, just like the struggle following 1990. The tragedy is that the fate is presently not in the hands of the masses but its leaders.

It may be wishful thinking to hope that these rich and mostly corrupt leaders for once would only think of Nepal and its people and not in terms of exercising and retaining power for themselves. Maoists may say that the people are the source of power but their practice is based on the postulate that power stems from the barrel of a gun. The ultimate aim of the Maoists in the negotiations, and even subsequently, should be to achieve a level plain playing field in a multi-democratic set up. If the people of Nepal vote them to power they should be given their rightful share and should never be treated as a pariah and an outcast. Such a field could be accomplished through electoral reforms involving holding regular free and fair elections, a truly independent election commission formed on the pattern of one existing in India, and lack of army's interference in the country's polity. And if the Maoists lose, they should respect the peoples' verdict with grace and play their important role as the opposition.

The seven-party alliance may find it difficult to share the democratic field and may apprehend that the Maoists could even win a free and fair election. But they should agree to it in the greater national interest. Most of the alliance partners, led by the Nepali Congress, have been exercising power for decades now and they have failed to eradicate the rot and decay permeating the Nepali polity. It is perhaps time for fresh ideas and faces. The Maoists may fail if given power and may thus be exposed to the electorate. As opposed to this, they may succeed in improving the lot of the masses and giving the country new strength. It may surprise many but the Maoists are likely to win in a fair election; they are only weak in the Terrai region which are plains bordering India. Now isn't this a perfect test to check out President Bush' love and interest in democracy and freedom. We have seen it before in Palestine when Hamas unexpectedly won against all odds and this is yet another check. How would he react if Taliban win the next Afghani national elections?

The military in Nepal must be commended for behaving so far in a restrained manner in such a tense and crucial environment in the country's history and one can hope that it would continue to exercise restraint.

The king of Nepal has a crucial role to play at this junction. He hopefully realises that there is hardly any chance for him and his successors to ever be exercising the same kind of power that he was enjoying prior April. The best he can hope and negotiate for is a ceremonial role for himself, and the institution of monarchy in general, on the pattern of some of the European countries like Britain and even Thailand. And if this is unacceptable to the major political players, then he should agree to step down in the greater national interest in return for a package and look forward to a positive role for himself in the history of Nepal.

Nepal is a sovereign country and not as small a nation-state as is sometimes led to believe due to it being sandwiched between two giants. Its population and area are bigger than many of the major European powers. It has a lot of potential.

It should never agree to external powers interfering in its internal affairs, be it political or economic, even if the powers are India, China or the United States. The present talks amongst the major players in Nepal should not be interfered by outside powers for the one very important thing that: all Nepalis regardless of their affiliation may always and ultimately be concerned with the greater national interest of their country. None of the foreign powers will ever be worried about Nepal on this score. They are attentive to their respective national interests and this may be the very reason that they are interfering in Nepal's internal affairs.


The writer is an advocate of the Supreme Court of Pakistan. Email: aj@jillani.org

Source: - http://www.thenews.com.pk/print1.asp?id=32659