Democrats are from Venus and Maoists are from Mars

Ever since the euphoric end of the April uprising and the suspension of Maoist hostilities, matters in Nepal have progressed (more or less) in a positive direction. The King failed and has been punished for his arrogance; the Maoists have agreed (in theory) to arms management and are being rewarded with a certain degree of legitimacy; members of the SPA (the NC, NC-D and UML in particular) felt humiliated and have now exacted their retribution on the monarch.

At the highest level of abstraction, this is a succinct summary of post-April 2006 transformations in Nepal. It’s a pretty hefty list of accomplishments considering where Nepal was before February-1 so jubilation from all quarters (political and non-political) should be the norm.

Contrary to this expectation, the only groups that are unconditionally rejoicing are the Maoists and their affiliates. The reason being, no matter how Nepali intellectuals want to rationalize it, what has unfolded in Nepal is an unquestionable Maoist victory.

Arrogance, Greed, Obstinacy and Shortsighted Retribution

The position adopted by those who advocated a “peace at any cost” approach, has been simple. Their risk perception remained skewed by an understandable but oversimplified worldview. It was a vision that sold easily and continues to yield political capital.

This position proposed the monarchy as the root of all evil – a feudal institution that had refused to modernize, an anachronistic mode of governance that continued to inhibit democratic instinct and a 240 year old institution that had continued to suppress the Nepali people through traditions rooted in religion and a military that exhibited unquestioned loyalty to the crown.

Although to large extents, the accusations against the monarchy were valid, the majority who rallied against the institution did so with short-sighted emotion, malicious intent and a sense of personal humiliation, yearning for swift revenge. These were the very assets that proved to be potent allies for the Maoists, whose designation transformed overnight from “terrorists” to “political allies” of the mainstream parties in Nepal.

To the benefit of King Gyanendra’s critics, he obliged their criticisms by embarking on a path with no plan in sight, by serving as the vanguard of a 240 year institution that by allegation, was meant to disrupt civil liberties and suppress democratic institutions.

Instead of acting as the ultimate protectorate of the constitution and a source of national identity and cohesion, the King stumbled down a unprescribed path of blunders by failing to foster political unity. To the contrary, the politics that emerged from the palace proceeded to plunder the little unity that remained, at an unprecedented rate.

Disillusioned Intellectuals and Silenced Convictions

But this isn’t where the story ends. In fact, this is just the beginning of a different chapter in Nepal’s contemporary history of political upheaval, tensions and general chaos. The potential end of the monarchy marks the end of the Maoists’ struggle. This “revolution” will undoubtedly be used by the Maoists (and their intellectuals abroad), to rationalize the unrelenting application of violence (in the pursuit of political gain). The end of the monarchy also marks the end of a natural hedge against left-wing extremism in Nepal (and South Asia-at-large).

It is also not inconsequential that the end of this institution marks the end of activism by those who found it convenient to oppose an extreme that was guaranteed to attract them adulation. But now, this same self-righteous, holier-than-thou lot refuses to rally in opposition against the other extreme – an endeavor in which failure (at least for now) is virtually guaranteed.

Despite lofty claims of convictions and democratic allegiance, none of the grand opposition needed to ensure the establishment of liberal democracy in Nepal, is currently at play. Most regrettably, the political forces one would expect to rally against leftist extremism are in a state of ideological disarray; the non-political forces that once vowed to oppose tyranny (independent of its origins), are busy coddling and condoning Maoist aggression, fooling themselves that the indoctrination of Maoists into the mainstream will disproportionately make the Maoists more democratic (as opposed to the making the mainstream more leftist).

The Illusion of Centrist Politics

Aside from its declaration on paper as representing Nepal’s “centrist” focal point, the Nepali Congress remains divided and marred by internal feuding on the succession of its party leadership. As before February-1, the NC’s leadership is fractious and inefficient. Power within the party is undemocratically centered on one man – Girija Prasad Koirala – who by any measure of rational thinking is one of the most controversial figures in Nepali politics. (A hero today, Mr. Koirala was known to have hijacked a plane in his day, which gives us all hope that tomorrow, Mr. Dahal may also “save” the country during another era of need).

To top off this list of unending concerns, Girija Koirala is nearing the end of his biological tenure - a risk of catastrophic proportions (to both the peace process and national stabilization) were the inevitable to occur. Internal feuding appears to be the only contingency for this eventual outcome – yet another source of joy for elements that wish to see radical left wing politics, gain ground in Nepal.

For a man running the last stretch of human tenure, the prospect of a Nobel Peace Prize may outweigh the risk of losing national sovereignty – for as long as he dies in the knowledge that he was instrumental is bringing peace, what would Girija care if after his death, Nepal burnt itself to the ground? Mr. Koiriala is notorious for his shortsightedness – chalk up another point on the scoreboard for the leftists!

What was previously the Rastriya Prajatantra Party remain fragmented in three separate groups – a consequence of February-1 politics. Although murmurs of a democratic alliance have emerged from within the ranks of these smaller political entities, the larger and more natural balance to leftist politics (the Nepali Congress) has expressed little interest in serving to foster such a front. Once again, great news for left-leaning groups in Nepal.

While the realization that a “centrist” counterweight (to openly radical leftist politics) is insufficient may have crept into the NC leadership’s thought process, the alternative of advocating more conservative politics does not present itself as a credible option either.

The revival of palace politics at this point is a complete show stopper – an approach that Girja has suggested on several occasions and one that has been vehemently opposed by his own party’s leadership. These leaders correctly understand the usefulness of a republican slogan but do not understand that the slogan “belongs” to their newly crowned political competitors – the Maoists.

Enter the Maoists....

As the Maoists prepare for their victory parade on the 10th of November, in Kathmandu, in the heart of the NC’s support base, the NC struggles to convince its mid-level workers that it is safe to reignite political activities at the village and district levels – those who have faced the brunt of Maoist atrocities know better.

Putting aside grass-roots politics for a moment, a certain NC Member of Parliament can probably speak to the phenomenon of Maoist intimidation best. When this individual rallied within the Parliament, in opposition to Home Minister Krishna Sitoula’s dirty politics, the MP’s brother was kidnapped, held for ransom and was released (after a hefty extortion fee) on the condition that no further lobbying would be conducted, in opposition to the Maoists.

This is what Maoist politics is all about. One can hope and fool and dream and wish that the Maoist entry into mainstream politics will be event free; that the Maoists will embrace the democratic mainstream and that they will compete and participate in the democratic process with full commitment to the rule of law, respect for other political competitors and that their influence in politics will not kill the already ailing Nepalese economy.

The reality of the situation is that aside from total disregard for the notion of private property, demonstrated affinity for intimidation and violence (as levers to garner political support) and despite Prachanda’s confusing statement that Nepal’s Maoists have rejected Maoism and embraced capitalism (then why in the world was the 11 year insurgency fought?), there is neither practical (historical) evidence to cheer on the Maoist victory, nor is there any basis to laud seemingly positive commitments that the Maoists have made in theory.

Whatever the case may be, Nepal as of this day is as good as being a communist state. The NC initially bled the Maoists using state forces, the Maoists bled the nation in return and now the Maoists are back with a vengeance. And there is nothing (no army, no political force, no international assistance) to stop this nihilistic force from uprooting remnants of what they consider Nepal’s “feudal” structure – the heart of which is the Nepali Congress.

In celebration of their victory, the Maoists will bleed the Nepali Congress. It may not be tomorrow, it may not be in 6 months, but before Nepal goes into constituent assembly elections, the Nepali Congress will pay dearly for its short-sighted miscalculations and its overzealous pursuit of a false peace.

According to some, civil war on a scale previously not witnessed in Nepal, may now be inevitable.

To rational observers of Nepal’s politics, this is precisely why Nepali Democrats are from Venus and the Nepali Maoists are from Mars.