India-New Nepal relations which are special due to the open border, cultural affinity and kinship, require recalibration to accommodate each other’s interests and concerns
Gopalji Gurung is Kathmandu’s unknown strategic thinker. Ask him why Nepali Congress President Sushil Koirala is currently in India on Union Government’s invitation following visits in the last four months of Maoist supremo Prachanda, Nepali Congress and Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist-leninist) former Prime Ministers Sher Bahadur Deupa and Madhav NepalIJ India wants to distribute its eggs in different baskets by engaging all stake-holders. Ask him whether the second election in five years to a Constituent Assembly — which is a world record — will be held on November 19 this year, and he says, “There are three views. Yes, no, and should be held but may not”. The majority is in the ‘yes’ court. This is backed by the establishment, India, European Union and others including, suprisingly, China.
Elaborate security preparations have been made with Nepal Army, armed police and police is ready to deal with spoilers, and violence which is expected from the breakaway Maoists, led by Kiran Mohan Baidya and the Tarai-based terrorist groups, which are principally of nuisance value. Prachanda Maoists, the mother group that spearheaded the peoples’ war are hoping to talk the Kiran lot into elections in the larger effort at power consolidation. A letter has finally been sent to Mr Baidya inviting him for unconditional dialogue by the four-party high level political committee which is guiding the ad hoc election caretaker Government.
The nay-sayers contend that without resolving the differences that broke up the previous CA and settling new electoral issues, elections will come a cropper. At least, it will yield a democratically-elected Government, they concede. Present estimates expect the Prachanda Maoists to emerge as the single largest party with UMl a distant second, followed by NC and Madhesi parties. According to Himal magazine, surprisingly, Mr Sushil Koirala is the favourite for Prime Minister, upstaging Mr Prachanda and his party’s senior leader and former Prime Minister Babu Ram Bhattarai.
Most want an election to end the impasse but are pessimistic about it. The Kiran people are expected to be the principal spoilers obstructing and boycotting instead of contesting election. Mr Baidya says an armed revolt to capture power is necessary but impossible under present circumstances. But he is flexible. A return to the mother party, which at one time was ruled out by Mr Prachanda himself, is possible though not probable. Some sort of an electoral alliance could be on the cards. Mr Prachanda, a proven manager of internal dissent, is wary about Mr Bhattarai’s intentions and wants to make up with Mr Baidya. The real differences between Mr Prachanda and Mr Baidya, his mentor, is less ideological and more to do with loaves of power and perks which have not been equitably divided. Power is a big aphrodasiac.
The Kiran line is that the split was due to Mr Prachanda abandoning the people’s struggle. Further, very likely there will be no election; even if election is held, there will be no Constitution; and even if a Constitution gets written it will not solve the people’s problems. Mr Gurung says the three conditions stipulated by Mr Baidya — round-table conference, change in date of election and resignation of Prime Minister as Chief Justice — are negotiable to placate Mr Baidya and work around them. In short, there is light at the end of the tunnel. According to the presidential decree, election ought to be held by mid-December. Any change of date beyond this deadline will require a fresh presidential ordinance.
The twin problems confronting Nepal are the absence of a strong leader like the late and legendary Girija Koirala who could force a political consensus and ensure formation of a stable Government. Dismantling monarchy without installing an alternate political pillar has created instability and a political void which has been occupied by external forces.
Constitution-drafting has hit a cul de sac. Since 1728, says Mr Gurung about 800 Constitutions have been written of which 50 per cent failed. Whereas political stability is paramount for a sound Constitution, Nepalese politicians have jostled for power, Government-formation and appointment of Prime Minister — rather than focus on the constitutional process. Reverting to the 1990 Constitution, which late Foreign Minister Rishikesh Shah described as ‘mischievous’ because the King retained real power, is an unlikely option. As political parties do not wish to be seen to be making compromises on their stated positions on federalism, it is best left to an experts’ group and/or a referendum. The Maoists who yielded on integrating Armies prior to completion of the Constitution, are committed to Madhesis, marginalised groups and jan jatis who were their main support base for ethnicity-based federal structure. They can’t back down.
After prospects for election and a new Constitution, India figures prominently in the Kathmandu discourse. This is nothing new, only its crescendo has risen. The Indian embassy and intelligence agencies are accused of interference in Nepal’s internal affairs, ‘adventurism’ (whatever that might mean) micromanaging the elections and drafting of the Constitution. Substantiating Indian interference, the names of former Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran and academic SD Muni, who is known to be close to Mr Bhattarai, are commonly cited; their writings and pronouncements of how New Delhi aided or obstructed the Maoists with having their way. Neither the Indian embassy nor intelligence agencies (read Research &Analysis Wing) are reported to be in touch with the estranged Baidya people who are known to be anti-India and against Indian expansionism. They want Nepal’s sovereignty and strategic autonomy back. The Kiran-ites wear Nepali nationalism on their sleeves and, therefore, their current overtures towards monarchy which was regarded as the symbol of Nepali nationhood. The anti-India sentiment, more contrived than real, evaporates at the open India-Nepal border. That is why during the 10-year long civil war, Nepalese fled to India, not Kathmandu or China, explains Mr Gurung.
The Nepal Army, once derided, is the only institution regarded as legitimate and therefore, respected. Maoist leader CP Gajurel said, “We should talk to the Army about the election imbroglio” and many other political leaders have claimed support of the NA. Monarchy may be drawing curious crowds but is nowhere near being restored. China is now the number two country after India and has spread its wings in every nook and corner including domestic politics.
India-New Nepal relations which are special due to the open border, cultural affinity and kinship, require recalibration to accomodate each others’ contemporary interests and concerns. Vital for transition to New Nepal is election to CA, and New Delhi and the only partially transformed Kiran-ites mending their relations, says Mr Gurung.