Endangered Pluralism

The violent protest in front of the venue of the “Miss Nepal” contest last week has made it clear that xenophobic brand of nationalism is on the rise in Nepal. It came as no surprise when the Maoists joined other leftists groups and demonstrated in front of the venue where the contestants were competing for the coveted crown. Krishna Bahadur Mahara, a Maoist ideologue and the information minister, had publicly acknowledged that he is both personally and ideologically, against the beauty pageants. If he could, he would have stopped the recently held “Miss Nepal” contest from taking off.

Despite vehement opposition from the leftists and the radical feminist groups in Nepal, the beauty pageants are organized year after year and operated within a greater context of generalized and widely accepted misogyny. It may be hard for freedom-loving, open-minded people to comprehend why the leftists and the radical feminists are hell-bent against things such as “beauty pageants,” which do not infringe on anyone else's personal rights.

Richard Wilk's claim may be helpful in understanding why the political left and the radical feminists hate beauty pageants and vehemently oppose it. Wilk says the pageants make sense of everyday life in this global order by creating common categories of difference. Furthermore, under the watchful eye of television, beauty pageants are engaged in ideological labor that undermines the presumptions of a global capitalist order, which is extremely distasteful to the political left.

The political left and die-hard feminists are totally against the beauty pageants and think such contests demean women and corrupt Nepali culture. They think beauty pageants as subordination of women to the status of sex objects in the new economy of global consumerism. What these leftists ideologues and the so called “hard core feminists,” who if allowed, would reduce the women's status to a vessels for reproduction fail to understand is that the norms that these beauty pageants promote are not even remotely as obsolete as they like to believe. What they seem to undermine is the fact that the beauty pageants do reflect contemporary culture, one in which the political left and the feminist groups pay lip service to women's right.

The leftist groups pose to be progressive and claim to be the champions of the women's right issues, but in fact they try to control the freedom of women. They fear that events such as beauty pageants would free women from socio-cultural bindings and subsequently lead to the liberation of their subjects. They tirelessly talk about equality and human rights of women but their sister organizations such as Youth Communist League (YCL), in the name of moral and cultural policing try to deprive women of their rights to indulge in things they like and want to participate in, and infringe women's right to choose. Thus, the Maoists and the other leftists groups are hiding their real willingness to subjugate women in a cloak of good intentions. If the leftists and the feminists really vouch for liberation and upliftment of women, which they claim to be the case, they should take on more pressing issue such as marginalization of women and work towards weakening the patriarchal structures, which is the main culprit behind women's backwardness.

The never-ending opposition of beauty pageants by the leftists and the so-called “women rights” groups reflects the problematic politics and the desperateness on the part of the feminists to align with the leftist groups to ensure the momentum of their fizzling movement. In the name of retention of culture, what the leftists and the feminists in Nepal are trying to do is stereotype the image of Nepali women. They want to project Nepali women as weak and submissive. For them, reinforcing the fundamentalist viewpoint of women as subordinate pays and it pays heavily. If women start perceiving themselves strong and independent, the very slogan of liberation of women that the leftists and the feminists have been cashing in so far becomes redundant and untenable. Thus, what the liftists and the feminists in the name of opposition to commoditization of women are trying to do is promote their own version of “cultural nationalism” as a substitute for the state-sponsored ideology of secularism in Nepal.

The powerful rhetoric of “cultural nationalism,” which the political left preaches, when set against the so-called hegemony of Westernization, becomes emotionally appealing to the millions of leftists and the feminists who perceive westernization of Nepali society as an inherent threat to their political future. So far the political left has been tremendously successful in manipulating the anti-western sentiment propagated by the leftist media and the polity under the deceptive garb of cultural retention to propagate their political ideology. The protest against beauty pageants is one of many such manipulative moves that the political left uses to promote the notion of “cultural nationalism,” which contributes towards securing its goal of establishing a proletarian communist state.

Beauty pageants draw a lot of flak from the leftist groups and the feminist groups who object to, basically because they cannot see the beauty contests further than the judgment of woman's appearance and promotion of glamour. The beauty pageants should be viewed as an event showcasing women's talent rather than an event showcasing beauty, sexism, vulgarism etc. Beauty lies in the eye of the beholder.

Beauty pageants are innocuous. It helps winners catapult their careers in an upward motion. Their participation elevates their status so they are likely to succeed in their future endeavors. Besides, the winners of the pageants participate in promoting social issues and issues related to nature conservation, which in itself is a great thing.

The leftists and the feminist groups need to drop the obsession with women's bodies and what women do with it. They should stop viewing women as vessels for reproduction and putting women's right to bodily autonomy on the chopping block. The true liberation of women will take place only when they can freely decide on what they want to do with their body. The time has come whereby we, Nepali citizens, rise against the cultural and moral policing by the leftist and the radical feminists. The talibanisation of Nepali society in the name of “cultural nationalism” is simply unacceptable.

Lessons Learned, Challenges Ahead

With the formation of the interim government along with the CPN (Maoist), a new era has just begun. It has spiked up people's aspirations for peace, stability and democracy once again.

However, from the current location of Nepali politics, there are two roads ahead with two different end points. The first one leads us to a stable, prosperous, and thriving democracy, whereas the second one leads us to chaotic, lawless and illiberal democracy. Where we will end up depends upon how sincerely the political parties in power act in the coming days. Furthermore, it also depends upon whether or not the new faces inducted in the interim cabinet are honest, competent and visionary.

The future of the major political parties and many politicians are at stake. As the country's political landscape has tremendously changed, none can tell for sure if these men and women sworn in as ministers will be running the ministries ever again in their lifetimes. Thus, it is the time for these men and women to prove their worth and win the hearts of the people who hold the keys to their political future. If they fail do so, the people will seal their fate. People's votes in the changed political context may not be as easily available as they have been in the past.

The mainstream political parties that participated in the previous general elections and their cadres should stop themselves from looking back at how many seats they were able to pick in the previous general elections. This will only inflate their ego only to be deflated.

The political landscape is no longer what it used to be. Now, there are several players on the ground. Which party would better address the people's concerns is the gigantic shift in the people's perception.

Nepal's journey to successful, inclusive democracy is still thorny. The politics is not yet devoid of the threat from the regressive forces which still love to fish in the troubled waters. The monarch, who is politically very calculative, but dumb as a door knob when it comes to assessing people's love for freedom is, down but not out.

The king might not have given up his despotic aspirations. On the one hand, the newly formed Eight Party Alliance (EPA) government needs to checkmate the shrewd king, who might try to fulfill his autocratic aspirations as he did in the past. On the other hand, the EPA government needs to restore peace, maintain stability, and ensure the economic prosperity of the masses that have a hard time making ends meet. So, the challenges that lie ahead for the EPA government are of Himalayan proportions and political rhetoric will be of no use while solving the real life problems.

The current government should strive towards achieving the goals stipulated in the Common Minimum Program (CMP). Any failure to do so would be disastrous. It will further deepen the crisis to the extent that it will be extremely hard to deal with. The road, thereafter, will only lead to anarchy and none will have the legitimacy to control it.

For a few, who have already warmed ministerial chairs, but failed to deliver results in the past, it is time to reinvent themselves. For the newcomers, it is time to quickly learn the tricks of the game that suit the changed political climate and meet the people's expectations. The Nepali citizens, who had the power to bring down King Gyanendra's despotic regime, which had the backing of 90 thousand strong army men and thousands of Armed Police Force and Nepal Police personnel in uniform, may not stay silent for long, fearing the covertly stored weapons to administer political control, if the promised fruit of Jan Andolan II is not delivered.

As the political landscape of the country has been tremendously altered, no one at this point in time can foretell which political parties will be accepted or rejected by the voters in the upcoming elections. The mainstream political parties --- the Nepali Congress (NC) and the United Marxist Leninist (UML) which were succeeded in garnering the support of ethnic minorities --- may not enjoy the same support this time around.

There exists both crisis and opportunity. The big political parties, which prefer an individual, Krishna Prasad Sitaula, to the ethnic groups and undermine their demand for the resignation of the Home Minister, even when he fails, may run out of the required political fuel to bring back those who are currently warming the benches of the parliament to the parliament again. So, this may put a full stop on those who are now representing the major political parties.

NC may be the one that will be hit hard. Its traditional vote bank in terai has been thoroughly stirred. The Madhesis, who once predominantly associated with NC, are now attracted towards the Madhesi People's Right Forum (MPRF) and other political outfits. The future of NC seems to be in peril if the current insensitivity towards minorities' legitimate rights and genuine demands is not corrected by the NC leaders.

When it comes to UML, first it was the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), and now the ethnic forums that have started attracting its cadres. Instead of pushing for the Sitaula's ouster, which would have consoled its Madhesi cadres, UML silently joined its competitor, the CPN (Maoist) in its covert operation to keep Sitaula in the home minister's chair. That was a tactical blunder. Instead of acting smartly in order to keep its dwindling support base among ethnic groups intact, UML's silence on the issue of Sitaula's resignation and subsequent induction in the interim cabinet as a home minister again have further alienated the UML's Madhesi cadres prompting them to join ethnic groups and radical Janatantrik Terai Mukti Morchas (JTMM).

The two biggest political parties that garnered the most votes in the past elections appear to be the losers. However, at this point in time, it is hard to tell how big of a loss they will end up incurring. What the established political parties should quickly learn is that the mere showcasing of a few leaders from ethnic minority to prove that NC and UML are pro-ethnic parties may not work in the changed political context. The only way to win hearts and minds of ethnic minorities and keep them associated with NC and UML is to refrain from actions that disappoint the ethnic groups and meet their genuine demands. If a party can save itself from the future trouble by just not putting a politician in a particular ministerial chair, it should do so. It is politically a smart thing to do and will save the political career of many seating parliamentarians from the terai regions who got elected on NC and UML's tickets.

The parties that have chances of fairing well in the changed political landscape are the CPN (Maoist) and other smaller political parties. However, in order to take advantage of the changed political context, the Maoists have to first prove that they believe in peace, stability, and democracy. They have to ensure that they are not a threat to people's lives and liberty. For the Maoists, the road from mines to ministries might have been comparatively a quicker one, but where will the Maoists end up in the future largely depends upon how they project themselves now onwards.

In other words, the future of political parties will largely depend upon their actions and how they will position themselves on the issues detrimental to the peace and prosperity of the nation. For the big political parties, the challenge is to reinvent themselves, whereas for the CPN (Maoist), it is time it reformed.

As far as the parties of the former royalists such as Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP) and Rastriya Jansakti Party (RJP) are concerned, their preference to enjoy King Gyanendra's despotic adventurism as bystanders have seriously eroded their credibility as a democratic party. Instead of grouching too much, the lesson they need to learn is that people look for actions that favor democracy, not lip service. They too will have space in “New Nepal”, if the notion ever materializes, but they will have to earn it.

Dual citizenship: A win-win proposition

The Nepalis are not far behind when it comes to trotting the globe and exploring opportunities. Though they can be found in every corner of the world, in some countries there are many, whereas in others, a handful. However, no matter where they are and in what conditions they are living, they share one common characteristic-undiminished love for their country.

Every single Nepali citizen, who is living abroad, has either been contributing, or possesses the desire to contribute in some form. Whether it is by remitting money or by doing philanthropic work, the Nepali Diaspora is trying to keep the linkage with Nepal alive.

There are many expatriates who have spent their youth gaining valuable experience and making fortune in the West. These Nepalis now want to contribute towards the development of Nepal and upliftment of Nepalis languishing at the bottom of the pyramid.

However, this is only possible if the government provides a conducive environment.

One way of tapping this vast potential is by providing Nepali diaspora, who are living in foreign shores, their desired right to possess dual citizenship. In an era where the movement of educated manpower is no more considered brain drain but brain circulation, Nepal can tremendously benefit from opening the gate for Nepali diaspora through the provision of dual citizenship.

We live in a world whereby the concept of cultural retention has lost its relevance, and globalization has become a modern day cult. Emergence of multiple identities that did not exist before is now being welcomed. Thus, dual citizenship should not be considered antithetical to the ideal of loyalty to one's homeland.

India's former prime minister Moraji Desai's famous anti-dual-citizenship quip, that "no man can serve two masters," has no buyer in today's modern India.

The number of countries joining the bandwagon of dual citizenship policy is increasing at a rapid pace. Countries such as Mexico, the Philippines, India, Colombia, Ecuador, Ghana and the Dominican Republic have a huge number of Diaspora living abroad. Each of these countries has allowed their citizens to possess dual citizenship, while recognizing that it has the advantages of broadening a country's economic base, fostering trade and investment, and an enhanced availability of skilled manpower.

The value of Dual Citizenship increasingly becomes a necessity as society becomes more global and integrated. Many countries around the globe have recognized the possible contribution of a diaspora to the development of their country, and these countries have made an effort to attract it.

The International Organization for Migration (IOM) has developed a program called Migration for Development in Africa (MIDA). This program aims at the transfer of vital skills and resources present in the African diaspora to priority sectors back home. It also aims at matching the profiles of migrants with the demand from African countries. MIDA is meant to channel the available skills, namely financial skills and other available resources of a Diaspora, to support development projects.

Over time, arguments against dual citizenship are becoming less compelling, while arguments in favor of dual citizenship are gaining grounds. With an ongoing rapid globalization, the political reasons that were once used to reject the idea of dual citizenship have lost their significance. Today economic and cultural arguments in favor of dual citizenship have more buyers than they previously did in the twentieth century.

When the developed countries such Canada, Australia, and New Zealand are liberalizing their immigration policy to attract skilled workers, we are happy with meager remittances. The successive governments, after the restoration of democracy in 1990, failed to acknowledge the need of contribution of Nepali diaspora in enhancing economic growth and development.

The government pays millions of rupees annually to foreign-born consultants to work in Nepal; however it fails to pay a comparable amount to the similarly qualified Nepali professional who is living abroad and willing to work in Nepal. In terms of employment opportunities, these Nepali professionals are discriminated against the Westerners in their own country.

Nepal stands at a crossroads, and the need to change is apparent. In fact, the need to seek individuals with expertise and experiences that are helpful in developing the country is greater now than at any other time in the history of Nepal as a sovereign nation. Thus, the call for a sustained economic development should not be dwarfed by the sheer jingoism of individuals who think that dual citizenship is antithetical to the ideal of loyalty to one's homeland.

Dual citizenship is a progressive action, and Nepal would do well in taking advantage of it. Through dual citizenship the growing numbers of Nepali Diaspora can benefit from opportunities overseas, while maintaining their cultural and economic links with Nepal. In addition, they can bring back to the Nepali community their valuable expertise, knowledge, and funds needed to foster economic prosperity and sustained development.

Nepal can learn from an Indian experience; for India's acknowledgement of contribution of Diaspora is clearly reflected in its recent steps to appease Indian Diaspora. India in 2003 founded the Ministry of Overseas Indians to deal with issues and policies related to Diaspora. It introduced a dual citizenship system in order to facilitate investment and prioritize the transfer of technical know-how from the Diaspora to India.

Another example of current dual citizenship laws is in Ireland. Ireland is one of the fastest growing economies in the world, and has tremendously benefited from "citizenship by descent" laws.

Many Nepalis settled abroad may want to return in a late-inning of their life, because in Nepal they can become "big fish in a small pond". There exists distinctive opportunities to make an impact. In addition, there are some opportunities that are distinct and unique, and which cannot be duplicated in the West. Many Nepali expatriates long to return to Nepal, not because they have failed, but because they are successful in their country of residence. It is their desire to contribute to their country of origin that lures them to take the reverse route.

Dual citizenship will provide expatriates to return and invest in Nepal, entice foreign investors, and enhance cross-border cooperation. Dual citizenship will facilitate the freedom of movement of Nepali settled abroad, allowing skills to move as opportunities arise in Nepal. It will permit an opportunity to well-educated children of Nepali diaspora born abroad, but want to contribute towards Nepal's development.

In addition, Nepal can benefit from the political and economic clout that Nepali diaspora possess, and which can be used in favor of their country of descent. Investments from Nepali diaspora can make our path towards sustainable development less bumpy. In a country like Nepal, where domestic sources of capital are scarce, investment and expertise of expatriates can be of tremendous help.

In addition to the economy, dual citizenship will help democratize the Nepali society. There are several thousand Nepalis. These people have lived and practiced democracy in countries where democracy is more institutionalized. These expatriates, and their siblings with their dual nationalities and exposure, could be of tremendous help when it comes to consolidation of democracy. They could provide a helping hand when it comes to navigating democratic Nepal through the twenty-first century.

Dual citizenship will enhance Nepali expatriates' ability to transact and move freely, especially in and out of Nepal; and this would be a prerequisite for fostering trade and investment. In order to build a prosperous and democratized society we need to be forthcoming in employing enlightened, reasoning, and dynamic imagination.

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.

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.

Back to the square one: Does SPA have governance strategy?

It did not take very long for the gain of mass movement of 1990 to dissipate. Fifteen years and we are back to the square one once again chanting anti monarchy slogans, burning tyres, vandalizing public properties, and behaving more like goons than civilized human beings.

Our politicians seem to have learnt everything but Gandhian philosophy of non-violence from Indian leaders. Mahatma Gandhi hoped to win people over by changing their hearts and minds, and advocated non violence in all things. Gandhian philosophy which crumbled British Empire seems to have no buyers in the next door neighbor. Have we become more pessimistic over time and think a peaceful struggle for democracy against the tide? Or as a society, have we have become more egoistic? If we start valuing vendetta over morality, vendetta becomes our morality. We will start viewing things more and more from a teleological perspective: that as long as we are better off in the end; we have not committed an immoral act.

We can win hearts and minds of people through non-violent struggle. No guns or brick pieces are needed to bring the repressive, autocratic regime to its knees. Its foundation shall eventually crack due to its own misdeeds and repressive practices. Democracy in Nepal can and should be achieved through peaceful struggle and processes without destroying public properties. The era of nations achieving their independence through armed struggles and terrorist activities has passed. Thus it is not a matter of if but when.

Sooner or later we shall prevail as a democratic nation. However, our ability to strengthen democracy and keep it functional remains highly questionable. Moral bankruptcy among the political leaders was the major source of our failure in the past. Hopefully our leaders have learned a lesson this time. If not, Feb 1 shall repeat in some form or the other. It does not have to be royal take over. Thus, a million dollar question right now is: What would our leaders do differently than they did after the fall of Panchayat regime in 1990 that would strengthen democracy and make Nepal prosperous? Our ability to thrive as a prosperous and democratic nation solely depends on that. After 50 years of independence, Pakistan is still unable to solidify its democratic structure mainly because its leaders did not bother to take care of peoples’ aspirations.

Democracy in Nepal can and should be achieved through peaceful struggle and processes without destroying public properties. The era of nations achieving their independence through armed struggles and terrorist activities has passed.

If our leaders continued with their old habits, coming generations will have to fight for democracy again in future. This is mainly because failure to deliver development benefits and control corruption shall invite February 1st again and again in some form or the other. Insurgencies will easily flourish as impoverished societies are hot beds for insurgent movements. Thus, our leaders instead of engaging themselves in tongue lashing should come up with clear vision and plan about as and what they would do differently this time. Hard earned democracy did not last long because the rent-seeking coalition between business and politics served to fuel corruption and violence in the body politic of Nepal.

Easy money earned through illegal means was used to sustain a new class of political elites who remained immune from the forces of law enforcement because of their political status and connection. Nepal as a state was not driven by a clearly articulated vision of its leadership. Democratic structures started to tremble mainly because none of the prime ministers and their junior colleagues who held office in Nepal over the last decade appeared to be driven by a sense of mission to transform the society in a particular direction. The lack of developmental vision amongst the leadership in Nepal was compounded by their weak commitment to realize the importance of such a vision. Popular disillusionment occurred mainly due to the failure of the state to deliver expected democratization of local social relations and political authority, continuing poverty and a widening gap between have and have-nots, and widespread frustration with corruption at all levels of government.

Political parties should realize there mistakes and pledge non confrontational style of politics in a new democratic Nepal. This would help promote political dialogue to build a consensus behind a development agenda. Parliament should not be abused as an arena for rhetorical exchanges rather than a vehicle for political consensus building. Politicians should make a pledge in public that they will abandon their ill practices of the past and work for peace, prosperity, and stability in Nepal. Indulging in immoral acts of burning and destroying public property that we built through the tax payers’ money over the last 15 years is mockery of our own achievement.