Peace under the gun?

The news about the government and the Maoists making a breakthrough on the issue of arms management took everyone by surprise. The Kathmandu Post (Oct 31) quoted an anonymous leader involved in the negotiation and reported that a breakthrough acceptable to the government, the Maoists and the international community had been reached.

However, the recent interview given by Maoist leader Ram Bahadur Thapa "Badal" to Nepal Magazine states otherwise. He flatly refuses any possibility of the Maoists agreeing to the disarmament, demobilization, reintegration (DDR) formula put forward by the United Nations (UN). His perception of DDR as a means to force the Maoists to surrender raises serious doubts about him toeing the line with the Maoist supreme leaders, Prachanda and Dr. Babu Ram Bhattarai, on the issue of arms management. The brewing suspicion of him leading a splinter Maoist rebel group holds ground more than ever now and should not be understated.

A flurry of statements from the Maoist and SPA leaders in recent days have led to waxing and waning of people's expectations for a durable peace and stability. The marriage of convenience between the SPA and Maoists during the April revolution had instilled a ray of hope for a lasting peace and stability among the conflict-ridden Nepali citizens. However, with each day's passing, both peace and democracy seem to be an elusive dream.

As long as the Maoists maintain their goals inflexible and provide conflicting signals, there is a strong possibility that talks may soon hit the wall. Their refusal to disarm may prove to be a stumbling block in the ongoing peace process. When a party involved in negotiation puts forward inflexible goals, overlapping bargaining ranges fail to emerge and negotiations can break down prematurely.

At this point in time, the Maoists are trying to prove that they can hold out longer than their opposition during both negotiations and war. They understand that the longer they can stall negotiations, the more likely they are to convince the SPA government to capitulate.

The Maoist leaders are reluctant to disarm militiamen because while divulging secret weapons depots might facilitate settlement, it will simultaneously leave them vulnerable to intimidations and attacks. They know that the people and security forces that they have intimidated during this decade-long insurgency will lash out at them at the first chance they get.

Thus, the Maoists are trapped in a Catch-22 situation when it comes to the issue of disarmament. If the Maoist leaders agree to complete decommissioning of weapons, they will be making their militiamen dangerously vulnerable to annihilation; if they refuse to do so, they would be triggering the very security dilemma they hope to avoid.

Insurgency resolution is always a complex matter, no matter how simple and straightforward it may look from outside. It is complex not because of conflicting objectives, but because of conflicting perceptions of the issues involved and the complicated relationships between adversaries.

Resolving the Maoist insurgency requires more than agreeing to a ceasefire. An extension of a ceasefire is not a guarantor of peace. Successful resolution of the Maoist conflict warrants complete disarmament and demobilization of Maoist militiamen, integration of militiamen into the mainstream of society, and building an interim government capable of accommodating insurgents' interests. However, the formation of an interim government including the Maoists should be based on the complete disarmament and demobilization of Maoist militiamen.

Disarmament and demobilization of Maoist militiamen is crucial because a free and fair Constituent Assembly (CA) election is not possible without complete disarmament of Maoist militiamen. If they are not disarmed, the Maoists will definitely try to capitalize on people's fears. It would be naive to think that the demagogues, with their pathetic human right records, would act like Boy Scouts during the CA election.

In addition, if the CA election is held without disarming the Maoist rbels, it will be dominated by concerns about peace and security. Furthermore, the voters will be forced to use the limited power of their franchise to appease armed insurgents with a hope that this will prevent rebels from heading back to the jungles.

Thus, successful disarmament and demobilization of the militiamen is extremely important in enhancing confidence in the electoral process and guaranteeing fair election results.

Peace and democracy cannot flourish under the gun. The mad rush towards the formation of an interim government without addressing the core issues--- disarmament and demobilization of armed rebels --- would be a futile attempt towards a lasting peace and stability. The solution based on power sharing without taking care of the core issues remains incomplete. Forcing unwilling and contentious factions together in any kind of power-sharing structure is not a lasting solution and is bound to fail in the long run.

If we look at the world's history, it becomes evident that settlements based on power sharing without taking care of disarmament, demobilization, reintegration (DDR) issues eventually fail and lead to renewed war. For instance, failure to disarm combatants led to renewed conflict in Angola.

According to Margaret Antsee, the UN special envoy to Angola, "Any lasting solution of a long-standing civil war depends on a satisfactory resolution of the military element." Thus, complete disarmament and demobilization of Maoist militiamen should be the central component of efforts towards re-establishing legitimate governance, lasting peace, and a well-functioning democracy.

If peace talks are on the verge of breakdown, the Maoist fear of annihilation can be subsided through a firm commitment from the third party. The UN can mobilize peace keeping forces in the field to actively punish violations and protect disarmed Maoist militiamen. This will ensure that the Maoist security concerns will not be negated and will promote their willingness towards disarmament.

The ongoing peace negotiations may fail, not because the Maoists do not want peace, but because they cannot solve certain tenacious bargaining problems. If the Maoists want to establish themselves as a political force, they should view disarmament and demobilization as an important step towards both confidence-building among the parties and the development of new institutions and procedures of decision-making that are necessary for sustaining peace and democracy.

The Maoists should move away from their current competitive-bargaining strategy and adopt a softer cooperative-bargaining strategy. This is mainly because competitive-bargaining strategy assumes a "win-lose" situation. As neither the Maoists nor the government want to be perceived as a loser, this strategy does not lend itself to the compromises necessary to bring an end to the conflict; no substantial progress can be made as such. Cooperative-bargaining is based more on a "win-win" mentality and is geared more towards focusing on benefits for the parties involved.

Peace and disarmament

Six months after the April revolution, a gloomy prognosis has replaced the historic euphoria. The turtle pace of peace negotiations forced those hopeful of permanent peace and stability to celebrate the Dashain festival amidst confusion and uncertainty. Despite signing multiple agreements with the government, the Maoists have not deviated an inch from their ideology: violence makes everything possible. Their excesses continue unabated. They still engage in kidnapping, extortion, forceful indoctrination, coercive recruitment, torture and murder of innocent civilians. Fear and frustration out of subjugation has made our poorly governed and bleakly maintained nation even more vulnerable to negative outbursts.

With their continued actions, the Maoists are trying to malign the credibility of security guarantees that a government is supposed to provide to its citizens. It is an attempt to generate public impatience with the government's inability to maintain law and order. Maoists' documented pattern of behavior reflects that, for them, it is struggle at a different level.

The Maoists are trying to overwhelm the system without provoking the Nepali Army. Their myopic goal is to extort as much money as possible so that they can become a larger and more organized force to overwhelm the system. The Maoist threat of violence is nothing but a tactical move to achieve the end of violence without incurring any loss at the hands of the Nepali Army.

The time is ripe for the Seven Party Alliance (SPA) to ascertain where Maoist interests lie. Despite the government's relentless effort to appease the whims of Maoists, the Maoist actions show that they want complete dominance over the Nepali politics rather than share the limelight with SPA. SPA might have accepted the Maoists as their partner but the Maoists are yet to accept SPA as a friendly political force.

Although the Maoists have easy access and refuge in urban areas with the help of seven party alliance, they still deny access to political activists belonging to other parties in rural areas. All that the Maoists want at this point is to consolidate their base and garner support in urban areas without losing an inch in rural areas.

The Maoists have outperformed the SPA politicians in media campaigns. The government has miserably failed to actively communicate with the general population in order to manage expectations, build support, and allay suspicions. There seems to exist a disconnect between the people's aspirations for peace and stability and the actual ability of the political leaders to deliver. The people are not yearning for modern cars, luxurious houses, lavish vacations and other trendy gizmos: rather, they could be well-content in a simple life, free of violence, corruption, and living in inferno.

The SPA leaders should move away from fear's paralysis and put the Maoist leadership in defensive with active media campaigns. They should push for complete disarmament of Maoist militiamen. This is crucial for the ultimate survival of political parties and establishment of permanent peace, security and stability.

Many peacekeeping missions undertaken by the United Nations in conflict-ridden countries since the late 1980s failed mainly because weapons harvesting of combatants was not done properly; at best, it could be regarded as having been done very poorly. Thus, long term peace and stability of our conflict-ridden society largely depends on well-structured peace building negotiations between warring sides, humanitarian and infrastructure tasks to support local populations, and the permanent disarmament and demobilization of Maoist militiamen; failure to do so will render permanent peace a distant dream. This is mainly because uncollected weapons and unemployed ex-militiamen can easily reintegrate into society and pose a threat to long-term peace, stability and democracy. Failure to manage arms, which are the prime source of Maoists' fiefdom, can and will have a negative impact on the success of ongoing peace efforts, the consolidation of peace, and the prevention of future conflict from possible break away factions of the Maoist party.

Peace and stability warrants strengthening the power of the government, which can only be possible when the Maoist militiamen are disarmed completely. Thus, complete disarmament of the Maoist militia is crucial to reducing the potential for escalation of the insurgency, and as a part of conflict resolution and post-conflict reconstruction.

However, disarming the Maoists is not an easy task for the United Nations or any other international agency that might be interested in negotiating peace. This is because the Maoists do not have any incentive to tell the truth about the number of weapons they possess, and Maoist commanders will definitely try to covertly retain weapons and troops in case things do not go their way. For the Maoists, who can collect huge sums of money through extortion and by exercising fiefdom, conflict's familiar pattern is a safer bet than peace, which is altogether a new leap into the unknown and uncertain future.

The Maoists are hesitant to surrender their weapons because weapons possess economic as well as security values for them. With virtually non-existent employment opportunities and a lack of marketable skills among the Maoist militiamen, there are no real incentives for them to lay down their arms. The willingness to completely disarm on the part of the Maoist militia will largely depend on the government's ability to guarantee employment opportunities, food security, and the personal safety of Maoist militiamen.

One of the ways to deal with this is to secure overseas employment opportunities for the Maoist militiamen. By doing so, the government will not have to bear the burden of providing them jobs in the armed forces. The country can benefit through increased remittances and it will provide the Maoist militiamen with first-hand experiences of earning money through a fair and legal means while instilling in them a sense of respect for private property which they currently lack. In addition, the possibilities of ex-militiamen organizing themselves and starting insurgencies reduce drastically.

The Maoists should move beyond their rhetoric and begin to see disarmament as part of a wider political process aimed at resolving underlying and structural sources of conflict. Conflict is a vicious cycle and the sooner one can achieve an end to this recurring circle of violence, the better it is. This is mainly because conflict is a highly persistent condition. Societies caught in a vortex of conflict have a high probability of remaining in conflict.

Sebastian Mallaby rightly points out the nature of conflict when he notes, "violent conflict might become self-sustaining, because war breeds the conditions which make fresh conflict likely". What Maoist leadership should not underestimate is the impact of war weariness on their militia. If war stretches on for too long and the militiamen perceive victory to be unachievable, they may gradually lose their continued will to fight.

With the international community against them and having militiamen "burn out," the Maoist leadership might be deprived of the fair deal that they can negotiate now to find a timely and safe resolution to the conflict.

Counteracting Maoist Strategies in Nepal

After the April uprising, the mood of general public seems to be upbeat. People have begun to see a silver lining in the otherwise murky cloud. With the eight point pact between the government and the Maoist rebels, bloody insurgency that took lives of approximately 14,000 people seems to be coming to an end, hopefully a logical one.

However, even after the eight point pact, kidnappings and extortion of innocent citizens have not subsided. Kidnappings and extortions by the Maoists continue unabated.

Thousands of homes of internally displaced citizens padlocked by the Maoist insurgents are yet to be unlocked. Their lands have been distributed to create an utopian society and movable assets used up. Despite such atrocities, the current government seems to be reluctant to vigorously raise the issue and force the Maoist leadership to do something about it. The Maoists as usual have not been sticking to the agreements whole heartedly. This is not the first time they have breached an agreement. If one can get away with crimes, why bother about its judicial ramifications? It makes perfect sense.

While the Maoists seem upbeat about their political future, the government appears helpless, feeble, and in disarray. For now, its main agenda seems to be keeping insurgents happy, contended, and engaged. However, with Maoists' chairman blowing hot and cold on politicians, Nepalese Army, and the king concurrently, the political landscape is dangerously tilting in Maoists' favor and may not remain the same for long. Keeping the Maoists engaged is necessary but not enough to ensure the dominance of democratic forces. With an increase in dominance of CPN-Maoist in national politics and supposedly end of the monarchy after constituent assembly, what will the Nepali political landscape look like? With an increase in Maoist dominance in Nepali politics, members of UML and other splinter communist groups that share the same common minimum values may desert their parties and readily join the Maoist bandwagon. That will push social and liberal democrats towards oblivion. Their very existence may become questionable.

After constituent assembly when monarchy is undone, what happens if the Maoists do not gain majority in parliament? Will they resort to persuasive politics and try winning mind and hearts of ordinary citizens whom they frightened and intimidated for one and a half decades? Big brains churning out political strategies for SPA should be pondering upon these questions, sooner the better.

If the Maoists lose elections and become a minority group in the parliament, it is very likely that some of their leaders will again head out to jungles and resort to guns to maintain their fiefdom or they may resort to guns and rig their way to the power. It is all together a different question whether or not they will be able to hold on to power in the current geopolitical settings for long. Either of these two routes is alarmingly dangerous.

Prime Minister Koirala's instance on ceremonial monarchy is very insightful. It may not be a very popular or politically correct thing to do now, but it is the right thing to do. Politicians like Koirala should demonstrate the courage and do the right thing rather than cruising in with popular opinion. Having a ceremonial king may not be a popular idea but it serves the people's interests. It will provide international community a base and a space to operate in case communist groups go out of whack and follow Cuban, North Korean, or for that matter Venezuelan path.

Mere signing agreement does not mean anything. It is not only about bringing the Maoists on-board and keeping them engaged. The SPA should work towards retaining their lost grounds by proving themselves strong and visionary.

They should try defending their existence and redefine their strategy in order to gain public confidence in them.

Even after the 12-point pact, 25-point code of conduct and the eight-point agreement, Maoists' brutality continues unabated. It is propagating the perception of lawlessness. But establishing the rule of law and maintaining security is very important for the success of any peace process and beyond. Failure to establish the rule of --- and maintain --- law and order effectively has left East Timor in a lurch.

The government should not ignore Maoist atrocities or any other criminal groups. We may choose to ignore lawlessness, but the only thing we can hope after that is social unrest, untold bloodshed, and the end of our dreams.

A well functioning legal system is in everyone's best interest. It provides an arena in which citizens can hold politicians and civil servants to account. In addition, it helps citizens protect themselves from exploitation by rich and powerful, and help resolve conflicts in an amicable manner.

A rule of law is central to the realization of constitutionally guaranteed rights and is important to achieve the broader goals of development and poverty reduction.We had a well functioning parliament a decade ago. It did not take very long for things to go out of hand and we risked ourselves of becoming a failed

state. Be it an irrational thinking of bunch of leftist radicals that thought power comes from the barrel of gun or incompetent politicians who think they could get away without serving their constituents and enriching themselves. The decade old insurgency brought us nothing but made us to realize that the armed struggle is an incorrect approach. Sanity has finally made a come back, better late than never, and let us hope it prevails.

Nepal is confronted with significant challenges and seemingly intr-actableproblems. Corruption and weak adherence to the rule of law are the biggest blems. Political will to address governance and ensure economic development is central to the Nepal's future.

Challenges for Civil Society in Nepal

More than dozens of innocent civilians have been killed by the Maoists after the revival of parliament in April. The Maoists hacked to death NC cadre Sushil Gyawali in broad daylight in Bardia. They attacked and injured over eighteen people, including lawyers, journalists and pedestrians while they were demonstrating against the Maoist atrocities in Bara. Raj Kumar Kusiyat was abducted from his house in Sunsari district.

These are some of the Maoist atrocities that surfaced in the media in the last couple of weeks. All these cases have one thing in common -- the perpetrators. The perpetrators in all these cases were the Maoists who believe in Mao Tse-tung's "power comes from the barrel of a gun".

While the Maoist atrocities continue unabated in post-April Nepal, the human right activists are nowhere to be seen as they were during King Gyanendra's heydays -- crisscrossing the globe attending talk programs and delivering lectures on human rights abuses taking place in Nepal.

Shouldn't they be protesting against the Maoist atrocities and pressurizing them to denounce violence? However, it is not the silence of human rights groups that surprises me the most but the silence of the "official" civil society that vehemently opposed and helped bring down King Gyanendra's despotic rule.

Civil society can and has played a significant role in safeguarding human rights, peace building, and democratization in different parts of the globe.

In countries such as South Africa, Mozambique, Mali, the Philippines, Guatemala, Liberia, and Northern Ireland peace, reconciliation, and democratization became possible in part due to the relentless effort and neutral stance of civil societies.

During the April revolution, hundreds of thousand of citizens participated in mass rallies organized by the "official" civil society. Nepali citizens ignored and betrayed by politicians for decades had found a strong platform for citizen activism in the form of civil society.

However, the failure on part of "official" civil society to condemn the Maoist atrocities which is against the ceasefire code of conduct signed between the government and the Maoists has raised a question on the neutrality of the civil society.

The civil society of pre-April revolution era was the projection into the future of a vision that rested upon an emotional unity. However, the civil society of post-April revolution cannot and should not base itself on mere emotions. The leaders of civil society should strive hard on the building of carefully nurtured institutions, practical realization of ethical values, and involvement of the greatest possible numbers of people in public life.

The main task of civil society in post-April revolutionary era is to construct democratic mechanisms of stability that secure constitutional checks and balances, increase public awareness in the spirit of respect for law, and encourage citizen activism.

Civil society is a major component of democracy. It creates a much needed participatory space for the citizens. In Nepal where radical communist insurgency has taken a heavy toll, existence of an active and neutral civil society has an ideological function: as a component in a counter ideology to "authoritarianism".

The civil society has a greater responsibility towards safeguarding political freedom and legitimatization of a social space in which private property and economic institutions ought to develop independently without state's interference.

The obvious obstacle to democratization is the civil disorder, violation of human rights, and civil liberties. There has been an unprecedented upsurge in crimes, vandalism, and vigilantism in the last decade or so. Such social pathologies have tremendously eroded the levels of trust and social capital. The civil society now must work towards revival of the lost trust and societal capital that is necessary for democratic stability and societal well-being.

Both in the liberal and the socialist visions of civil society, the basic organizing principle is the same-human rights. The official civil society which once enjoyed tremendous public support and played an important role bringing down the autocratic regime may lose societal trust and support if it fails to voice concerns and protest against indiscriminate killings, tortures of innocent civilians, abductions, and extortions.

Indifference and passivity on part of citizens is the greatest threat to democracy. A democratic state cannot survive without active citizens.

Civil society does not act in opposition to the democratic state, but cooperates with it and helps achieve democratic stability. Instead of staying silent on the Maoist atrocities, the leaders of civil society should raise the concerns.

For the consolidation of democracy, we need a civil society whose members agree that we should all live together under a common system of rule making and enforcement. Human rights and democracy are inseparable and interdependent. Human rights standards underpin a meaningful conception of democracy and democracy offers the best hope for the promotion and protection of human rights and civil liberties.

The civil society should strive towards promoting truth, justice, and reconciliation. The parties involved in violation of human rights that took place in the last one and a half decades have not sought any kind of forgiveness. The victims of human rights abuses continue to suffer psychologically. These victims, most of which are internally displaced citizens do not even have a choice between either justice or peace because neither option explicitly or officially is offered to them yet.

Internally displaced citizens are still forced to live in subhuman living conditions. Their plight is still being undermined and ignored by both the government and the Maoists.

Like many post-revolutionary societies, political landscape in Nepal has evolved and changed tremendously in the past couple of months. Civil society should take a lead in promoting accountability and justice for past abuses.

It should assist in the long-term task of reconciliation. It would be extremely hard and in some case impossible for internally displaced people to forgive the Maoist cadres in their villages that forced them to flee their homes.

Nepal's future as a well functioning democratic state to a large extent rests on effectiveness of the civil society. The leaders of the civil society should not let public trust be eroded because when people are pessimistic and lose confidence, they withdraw from the effort to build a better life and community. Society begins to lose its talent and energy. The decade-long bloody insurgency has claimed thousands of innocent people and displaced millions of fellow citizens. We cannot and should not withdraw from the struggle of building our nation.

Role of Private Property

Recently, some members of Maoist-affiliated Trade Union ANTUF(R) physically assaulted a local businessman when he tried stopping them from writing graffiti on his private boundary wall. Instead of respecting the owner's right to exercise his private property rights, the Maoists indulged themselves in a brawl. What appeared even more disturbing is that the Maoists fined the owner and forced him to apologize for exercising the right that is granted by the law of the land.

Freedom in its entirety cannot be fully realized without private property rights. Of many reasons why communism failed was the inability to acknowledge the need of private property. It fails to reward those who excel, and fails to punish those who lag behind. There is no incentive for greater effort, neither in creativity, entrepreneurship or hard work.

Capitalism thrives because it rewards ingenuity, capability, and hard work. In a capitalist society, individuals that are capable and hard working thrive while those who are lazy or unable to conform to the demands of society are less successful and lag behind.

Private property is in the best interest of a democratic society because it gives meaning to the very concept of freedom and libertarian principles of justice. Freedom and property rights are very closely related to each other. The right to do as you please with your private property is an integral part of ones' personal freedom. Thus, in a free democratic society each person is free to acquire property and do whatever he wants with it without any interference, as long as stretching of his arms doesn't hurt someone else's nose.

Secured private property rights provide the legal certainty necessary for individuals to commit resources to ventures. The threat of plunder or confiscation greatly undermines confidence in market activity and tremendously limits investment possibilities.

Secured property rights are extremely important for the exchange and the extension of ownership to capital goods. They help foster the development of financial markets that are prerequisite for economic growth and development. Since the inception of peoples' war, the Maoists have forcibly grabbed thousands of hectares of private land in an attempt of creating utopian society and haphazardly distributed among the poor like Robert Mugabe's henchmen did in Zimbabwe.

Haphazard distribution of someone else's property is a sheer violation of property as well as basic human rights. Wealth should be gained through fair competition rather than conquest. Conquest cannot be a legitimate basis for rights, because conquest is a denial of rights.

In addition, what the Maoists fail to understand is that distribution of land that is locked in the form of dead capital is not the solution to the mass poverty and backwardness that exists in Nepal. The poor will be unable to make the best use of the newly gained land and generate further wealth in the absence of capital that is required to buy seeds, fertilizers, pesticides, and farm equipment.

If the Maoists want to be the champions of the poor in a real sense, they should respect individual property rights and encourage ingenuity, hard work, and fair competition in the society. The poor in Nepal or for that matter anywhere in the world do not need land to lead financially secured life and break out of the vicious cycle of poverty. The poor already have innate skills to survive. All they need is capital to put their skills into practice. They should be provided with some capital so that they can put their skills into practice.

It is extremely necessary to remove the borders to trade so they are free to trade their most important property-labor with those who want it.

Despite the constant influx of development aid for the last five decades, approximately half of the country's population is still languishing at the bottom of the pyramid. The solution to the existing mass poverty that exists in Nepal does not rest on the availability of more aid from the West, but the introduction of policies that can integrate the wealth that already exists into the formal legal system and thereby into the global economy. So far, the ruling elites have failed to turn the despair of the people into hope and their uncertainty into a promise. Foreign aid myopia seems to have blind-folded politicians of our times. In the midst of our own poorest neighborhoods, crowded urban centers and remote hinterland, there are millions of dollars locked in the form of dead capital. What we lack is the way to grasp the means to unravel the mystery of how these assets can be transformed into capital.

The real problem lies in a kind of political blindness, which has kept politician from seeing what the real source of wealth is: Real property, or sound property rights? Once a society has a sound and well enforced property rights, it is bestowed with the secret of capital. The assets stored in the form of dead capital can then be used to generate loans and credit which in turn can create the much needed wealth. Nowhere in the globe has an economic system that is characterized as respectful to private property failed to lift the status of its citizens.

It was well-defined property right laws that helped Western countries convert informal property systems into formal ones and move from the Third World to their present First World status in the late Nineteenth and twentieth centuries. These countries prospered mainly because private property rights allowed citizens to use their property to create capital.

The challenges Nepal is facing as a nation are therefore to replicate this history. Thus, well-enforced property rights are the need of the day to create a new economic order providing the right incentives for massive economic growth to occur. It is of utmost importance because it acts as a mediating device that successfully captures and stores the mechanisms that are necessary to run a market economy.

One of the many challenges confronting the post-April revolution that Nepal pumped up with unmatched enthusiasm is to uphold private property rights and enforce these rights effectively. Inability to do so can seriously hinder the increase in productivity from available resources and in increasing the value of things that we possess. In the case of Nepal, it is not resources that are too scarce to lift the status of the poor and downtrodden. It is rather the political and economic institutions based on secure property rights and the rules of law.

Whither Nepal's Future

April revolution in Nepal has pumped up unmatched enthusiasm among Nepali citizens. Enthusiasm is most potent among those championing domestic political reform –constituent assembly. The April 2006 popular revolt ended King Gyanendra's increasingly authoritarian fourteen-month rule. However, the leaders of Seven Party Alliance and Maoists (SPAM) face significant obstacles.

If the situation is mishandled, and Nepali people conclude nothing has changed except the names at the top, Nepal could become seriously unstable and politically vulnerable to the external interference. In order to become successful, it is extremely important to know your potential. Thus, political leaders of SPAM should shed negativities, vengeance, and explore new opportunities.

It was easy to point mistakes of the royalist government, but to maintain a clean image and fulfill citizens' aspiration is not an easy task. Like in the past, Maoists have once again started exhibiting their dual character by not sticking to spirit of the ceasefire. Recruitment of cadres, killing of innocent people, and extortion have not stopped yet. An unprecedented rise in criminal activities and extortion has forced Dabur Nepal to shut down its factory in southern Nepal.

Industrial climate has deteriorated to such a level that industrialist have been seeking the government's intervention. While the country's economic backbone is suffering, the leaders seem to be busy bursting out anti monarchy venom rather than trying to address pressing domestic and security issues. When it is all said and done, people will start demanding for jobs and security.

With the closure of factories, not only the already high unemployment rate will spike further, but also the tax base will dwindle. Already poor and foreign aid dependent impoverished nation may become further unstable and malnourished. As far as Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala is concerned, he may be enjoying an unequivocal support from radical communists for now, but time is something that is certainly not on his side. His poor health may ultimately force him to exit politics. Thus, he has a responsibility of unifying divided congress party and strengthening his party's already weakened base.

Koirala's exit or absence may be the end of an era for social and liberal democrats in Nepal. No second generation leaders seem to have same stature and hold among the party cadres as Koirala does. So, what next? We may be heading towards a long haul of communist rule in Nepal which may turn out to be an authoritarian in nature.

When communism is seeing its slow but steady demise throughout the world, rise of communism in Nepal is in part because communists have been so far successful in selling dreams of equality, prosperity and ownership, and political bickering among the social and liberal democrats. Despite the fact that every communist economy in the world has failed, communists in Nepal have been so far successful in selling dreams.

Communist economy has not only failed, but miserably failed to support the country that tried it. The USSR is a history now, and Cuba is struggling hard to keep its populace happy with slow paced prosperity and high dose of ant-capitalist rhetoric. When it comes to red North Korea, it can not even produce enough food to feed its citizens. China is long past the communist economy stage, even if the rest of the government is as commie as can be. Forget about current level of development, it could not be able to feed its gigantic population with a communist economy.

When it comes to the right to differing opinion and personal freedom, communism has a belief system keeping the people in line. Killing non-believers is certainly an effective way to maintain control of those who don't accept the party line. For example, fate of journalist Dekendra Thapa and expulsion of Rabindra Shrestha and Anukul shows dictatorial face of a communist outfit. The minute you dissent, you are a traitor.

"Intra party feud and failure to deliver developmental benefits to oppressed, poor, and unemployed citizens by the social and liberal democrats created a political vacuum which socialist propaganda promptly filled. It was not hard to brain wash already disenchanted populace with socialist propaganda of equality and freedom from feudalism."

Freedom of expression tends also to be mediated by the state to maintain the 'integrity' of a communist regime. You can find a Marxist book in a US bookstore but it is impossible to find a Ludwig von Mises in a North Korean or Cuban library. After the reinstatement of democracy in 1990, social democrats dominated Nepal's politics with 114 members in parliament. None had thought that things would change so soon in favor of communists. After barely 16 years, country has gone all red. You agree it or not (depends on your political inclination), rural areas are completely controlled by radical communists (the Maoists) and urban areas by comparatively liberal communists (UML).

Intra party feud and failure to deliver developmental benefits to oppressed, poor, and unemployed citizens by the social and liberal democrats created a political vacuum which socialist propaganda promptly filled. It was not hard to brain wash already disenchanted populace with socialist propaganda of equality and freedom from feudalism.

So, this may be the last chance for social democrats that are at the helm of affairs in seven party alliance's government. Few things they may consider doing is (a) get Maoists on board and persuade them to submit there arms to credible institution (b) address unemployment problem (c) provide security to threatened industrial sector (d) establish rule of law, and (e) ensure economic development of rural areas. Do it, and do it right this time or else we may have a new authoritarian communist nation in the globe.