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.