(Courtesy: el Mariachi)
Is anyone wondering where UNMIN (and the JCC – Joint Coordination Committee) stands with the second phase of arms verification in Nepal?
On June 30, media reports indicated that close to 400 Maoist “combatants” (up to 12% of the total number interviewed) had been disqualified. The very next day, UNMIN refuted the media reports and claimed that an official release of the second round verification results is pending. The source of this delay was cited as a request by Maoist leaders to “study” UNMIN’s findings.
First off, in the case of verification, there should be no bargaining. The modalities of the verification process were debated (and agreed upon) prior to the process being initiated. So where the results (findings) of this process are concerned, there need be no further debate. The disqualification criteria should stand (as should the original number of disqualified personnel), irrespective of Maoist opposition, after the fact.
In other words, the Nepali public has a right to the information that UNMIN has collected and the verification results should be available to the public in as close to real-time as possible. There is no plausible reason why additional time to “study” UNMIN’s results should be requested and there is certainly no reason why such a ludicrous request should be honored.
Given the circumstances, it is understandable that certain sensitivities exist which require special consideration. However, the Nepali peoples’ expectation and right to transparency is an equally fundamental consideration and is something that UNMIN does not have the right to compromise. Especially not in the name of peace that in the absence of full transparency, becomes an increasingly false peace.
Explained differently, UNMIN should immediately cease to treat transparency as an issue of circumstantial convenience. If UNMIN continues in this fashion, the independence of the entire verification process comes into question and along with it, the very basis for UNMIN’s mandate in Nepal.
At a minimum, the Nepali people deserve detailed access to the number of combatants originally disqualified by UNMIN and a full transcript of discussions between UNMIN officials and Maoist leaders. Such documentation should explicitly outline the basis for Maoist objections and the reasons for concessions offered (if any) by the state (and/or UNMIN).
If for example, UNMIN’s mandate does not include specifics on accounting for formerly documented Maoist combatants (who since the first phase have left UN cantonment sites), the Nepali people need to know what these numbers are.
If materially significant (over say 5% of the total), the Nepali people deserve to know whether Maoist combatants leaving cantonment sites qualifies as a breach of the CPA (Comprehensive Peace Agreement). Monitoring the implementation of various agreements is most certainly a part of UNMIN’s mandate; informing the public regarding violations by parties to signed agreements is equally a part of UNMIN’s mandate.
The corollary of the above example would be a situation where new Maoist recruits have attempted to backfill slots for combatants who joined the ranks of the YCL. Although this may not be in UNMIN’s mandate, it would certainly be helpful for the Nepali people to know how many formerly documented combatants have left Maoist camps.
Once again, passing judgment on the information collected may not be a part of UNMIN’s mandate but providing the Nepali people full disclosure (so that Nepalis may make up their own minds), is part of UNMIN’s mandate. Withholding information that has been collected (or massaging the information for whatever reason) is unacceptable; such practices dangerously border on fraud.
Last but not least, if Maoist pressure is the chief instigator behind UNMIN’s inability to disclose pertinent information to the public (or t0 execute its mandate), the countermeasure that should be taken (based on assumed integrity) is straightforward – UNMIN personnel in charge of verification should make clear to the Maoists their desire to resign on moral and professional grounds.
If current UNMIN staff are incapable of effectively executing on their most basic mandate, they should be replaced with more dedicated and capable staff. After all, the peace making industry has an “army” (no pun intended) of consultants waiting on the sidelines for their share of Nepal’s peace dividend.
The manner in which UNMIN disclosed documented Maoist arms (during the first phase of verification) intentionally left out information provided to UNMIN on stolen state weapons. This is not a “best practice” that UNMIN should permit to percolate into phase-II of arms verification. This time around, the Nepali people deserve better. The Nepali nation deserves the opportunity to pass judgment based on an “apples-to-apples” comparison – not data points that deliberately allow no basis for comparison.
In the very least, the Nepali people expect reciprocation from UNMIN based on the respect our people have for the overall UN system. The Nepali people expect to be treated by UNMIN with the same level of intellect and sophistication that UNMIN personnel expect to be treated themselves.
UNMIN needs to get on with the verification process and it needs to do so in a transparent manner. UNMIN officials also need to demonstrate more sensitivity to the notion of independence. For example, Ian Martin smiling over a glass of beer while Baburam Bhattarai (one of the chief architects of Nepal’s 12 year blood bath) shakes Kofi Annan’s hand, does not help UNMIN’s image as an independent party to Nepal’s peace process.
Equally amusing is Norway’s foreign minister rubbing shoulders with Baburam Bhattarai but this is a topic for another time. One would only hope that Norway’s “shining” record of peace making in Sri Lanka does not become UNMIN’s record, in Nepal.
Related Posts:
The UN and Maoist Arms Controversy: Overkill or Negligence?
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/02/un-and-maoist-arms-controversy-overkill.html
Discrepancies in Maoist Weapons Inventoried by UNMIN – Do the Math
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/02/discrepancies-in-maoist-weapons.html
PEACE IN OUR TIME: Munich in the Himalayas
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2006/11/peace-in-our-time-munich-in-himalayas.html
Words for the Wise on the Management of Insurgent Arms
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2006/11/words-for-wise-on-management-of.html
An Analysis of Photos of Nepali Maoist Weapons - September 14, 2006
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2006/09/analysis-of-photos-of-nepali-maoist.html
UN Fast Losing Credibility in Nepal
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/03/un-fast-losing-credibility-in-nepal.html
19 comments:
A very timely piece taking to task the United Nation's performance regarding the peace process in Nepal. Indeed, UNMIN needs to provide the same respect to the Nepali people that the latter gives to the UN. If any aspect of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement has been breached because of the personal interests of any of the parties concerned, UNMIN needs to be the first to declare this to the Nepali people. The 'neutrality' of the UN is often extolled. But let us not forget how 'neutral' the UN was, regarding the internal affairs of Nepal, during the period 1 Feb 2005 - April 2006!
The UN deserves to be monitored just like any other group... they are taking our peace process very lightly because we are a poor country.
If in any other part of the world, Ian Martin would not have dared to be seen in public with an antagonist to a conflict his team is supposedly negotiating. He would have been sent straight home.
But because this is Nepal, Ian Martin can get away with it.
I am glad at least one blog on Nepal refrains from kissing UNMIN and Ian Martin's a**, at every possible opportunity.
Keep up the vigilance!
Baburam with the Norweigan FM and the Sri Lankan FM in Nepal... what a perfect timing!
So jokes aside, truly what is going on with the second phase of verifications? Does anyone have information about this?
There has been no news about the results of the second phase to the public. UN is keeping very secretive about the results because Maoists had protested. They were waiting for Babu and Prach to return to Nepal. Now they are bargaining. Process is on hold and no one in the media wants to break this news because they do not want to expose the UN.
There need be no qualms in the Nepali media, if it has any journalistic integrity, about 'exposing the UN'. The UN has been 'exposed' time and again all over the world and can live with that. It is not an infallible organization; and its clout is directly proportional to the political authority given to it by the Security Council. The question is whether the Nepali media has any integrity, professional pride and just plain guts!
Roop, that's a very good point.
I think right now, the number one priority for the nepali media is to focus on the king's birthday celebration. They are preoccupied fulfilling populist, tabloid-like role.
I agree, Anon 6:44. The impending clash of views (to put it mildly) between the monarchists and the SPAM youth wings 'party-poopers' is something the Nepali media must focus on. This is a litmus test of free expression. The King has every right in his personal capacity to invite whoever he likes to celebrate his birthday. If the media still supports freedom and democracy in Nepal, let it speak up now or stay silent forever!!
On a related note, I abhor the term 'monarchists' though I use it above for purposes of clarity. These people are not supporting monarchy per se. They are supporting national sovereignty and national unity. They need to be termed "Nationalists".
Roop - As long as the king and his supporters do not use public tax monies to have a birthday celebration, I do not see any reason for confrontation.
Monarchists, Bahunists, Maoists, Populists, Royalists.. it's all the same. Just different extremes that form a single equation.
I really wish there would be less fanfare on a stupid birthday party and more attention on issues like Prachanda saying that DDR doesn't apply to his gang of thugs.
Anon 7:15 and Dani above, I do not like to place comments in response to specific names; but this time I have no choice.
What "public tax monies"? What "stupid birthday party"? Let's take both allegations one at a time.
If by public tax monies, you mean the allowance given to the King by the State, that becomes his personal funds and he has the right to do with it as he wishes. Dani, how many "stupid" birthday parties have you had? When a man reaches the age of 60, it is a milestone and he deserves the opportunity to celebrate it as he wishes. At a more relevant level, every Nepali King from King Prithivi Bir Bikram onwards has died before the age of 60. So for this King to make it to that age is a novelty; it deserves recognition.
Just leave the man alone and let him celebrate his being 60 as he pleases! Over the past year, he has been relegated from absolute monarch to almost a non-entity. How many more pounds of flesh do you hound dogs want?!
Why cannot- what they (gang of 8) term "common citizen King" celebrate his birthday anyway he likes? If the yardstick shifts according to flavor of the day then why genocide propogator Prachande travel on government expense to Europe on first class ticket.
Anyways- way these mothers politcize each and every aspect of our lives- we are unwillingly becoming a victim of politics run amuck which will rob our freedom to be , do and think as we want. Nepal will be a nation which will killed off because of too much politics rather than development and common sense.
Why have we lost our sense to see the real thing rather than grapple with imagined or get sold on few radicals who believe themselves to preacher and henchmen. Birthday is birthday not some conspiracy or some political move. We are getting tuned to see what is not there, similar to "utopia" which never exists. So be forwarned. Learn to see black as black, white as white not something in between. It only cause misery and few Banarishi babu to sell you down the river along with your motherland.
Banana Republic is what Nepal is heading for. The future of Nepal will disintegrate right before our eyes. YCL & SPA are nothing but facade and farce of design inked in India that has nor the brain or the best interest of the country.
The way the things are each and every aspect of lives are being politicalized whereby no person with independent mind or pursuit will be free. CA is one example where rather than unifying on the strength of diversity, schism will widen to an extent where only option would be to band under political flag, caste, and community. This is where we are heading.
When wolf pack of 8 does not have any idea of what is next and needs to fed by foreign powers to state this, do that, and say this- we are heading towards unmitigated disaster from where no person called NEPALI will come out unscathed.
I don't mind taking names at all... so here we go.
Roop: You seem like an eduated person. So let me spell this out to you. When citizens pay taxes, the government collects revenue. When the government allocates these monies for various programs, the source of it still doesn't change. It is still tax money.
All I was saying is I don't give a rats ass who is celebrating his birthday in what style. As long as the celebration is not being done using tax money, I have no problems.
Dani, you too appear to be educated. Since you attempt to teach me Econ 101, let me spell it out for you. Once the government funds (raised from taxes partially but mostly from foreign assistance in the case of Nepal) are handed over to the King, they become his PERSONAL funds - to do with as he pleases. That is my point, and I don't give a 'rat's ass' either (since we're into crude figures of speech) if people have issues with personal property.
Roop, how do you feel about the Lauda air scandal? Does your logic work there too? It was money that the government gave to Girija's daughter's company. So was it her's to do with it what she wanted to do?
What you're writing doesn't make sense. Think about it. You're saying that Nepalis owe something to Gyanendra so that instead of doing development in the country with the taxes the government raises, the people should pay gyanendra? Exactly what do we owe Gyane?
Girija's daughter's company is not the institution of monarchy. I have nothing to add to your blinded republicanism. Can't beat a dead horse, Dani.
Roop. Just relax. Don't get so excited.
For an ordinary Nepali like me, there is no difference between one institution or another. If they take tax money and use it for their own things (that do not benefit society), it's a waste.
You have to live with this fact.
Does anyone have updates on where this process is? Prachanda said that DDR does not apply to the Maoists. And there is no word on where second round verification is at. There is definitely something fishy going on here...
Post a Comment