Where’s Nepal heading?

(Courtesy: Shirish Ranabhat)

The agony of Nepal did not end with the end of absolute monarchy. A new phase of conflict related with ethnicity, sectarianism, religious extremism and external intervention has arisen, which has become more dangerous than the Maoists’ guerrilla war or the absolute monarchy. The structure and dynamics of these new conflicts can be very difficult to resolve, if not timely and wisely addressed. Many of these dynamics have their roots in the political, ideological and ethnic polarization.

The rise of the Maoists, an ultra-communist group, has added complexity to the peace, harmony, and the political structure of Nepal . Their intentions of imposing a harsh federal republic system under an authoritarian rule, and use of war as an instrument of political consolidation have served to widen the gap among various political parties and hence hindered the quest for the peace process.

Nepal is ethnically a very diverse country. However, ethnicity was never a very strong factor in Nepali politics until the popular movement of 1990, when democracy in the country was restored. A sort of political balance evolved among the various groups and all of them were allocated spaces within the political system. Unfortunately, Maoists rebel started a political-cum-sectarian war involving various ethnic groups. The war ended after a decade with a heavy toll of approximately 15,000 lives.

For the first time in post-1990 history of Nepal , after a decade long anarchy and rebellion, the Maoists exercised full administrative and political privileges. After overthrowing the King’s direct rule, a coalition government including Maoists was formed. A new constitution was promulgated, and a consensus on Constituent Assembly elections was reached.

The political wind of Nepal began to change its direction with the Maoists’ demand to abolish the monarchy immediately. Several political parties changed their policies of supporting constitutional monarchy to a federal republicanism. Among all these drastic political changes, ethnic conflicts and sectarianism surfaced. Different ethnic groups built their own local political institutions and started demanding their own territories. These ethnic groups started raising separate militias, who primarily support the general political objectives of the populations they come from. At present, the ethnic factor in Nepal has become more pronounced. The southern minorities have become vocal about their demands to have a separate southern state, to the extent of dividing the country.

With the recent withdrawal of Maoists from the coalition government, the Constituent Assembly elections have been postponed indefinitely. Apart from the political instability, rise of ethnic conflicts, sectarianism, and religious extremism have made the situation more complex than before. External intervention has become more apparent. Various groups in Nepal share ethnic and religious bonds with similar groups in India , which invites a natural interest in their well being. Besides ethnic and religious factors, India has interests over its political and security agendas. Moreover, there is the history and pattern of Indian intervention in Nepal .

Nepal is yet to count the thousands of people who have been killed during Maoists’ war, ethnic and sectarian conflicts. Nepal has yet to assess the cost of damage to the infrastructure. The responsibility to restore peace in the country lies primarily with the Nepali people and political parties, which represent them. An understanding on distribution of power, and form of government should be the foundations of a stable government. It is tragic that all Nepali political parties start with the demand for a share of power and leave the central issue out of the debate. Prospects for peace will remain bleak until the political parties in the conflict evolve a common framework for reordering the Nepal polity.

With the Maoists becoming irrational and unreasonably demanding, and Nepali politicians’ inability and lack of vision to lead the country, Nepal ’s future for democracy has become uncertain. In last one-and-a-half-year, after overthrowing the King’s direct rule, Nepal has experienced deadly impacts of ethnic conflicts, sectarianism, religious extremism and external intervention. Nepal seems on the verge of losing her identity. The reality in Nepal , which has to be clearly grasped and understood, is that all the responsible political parties must compromise on reasonably rational grounds.

Related Posts:

Hedging Against Nepal's Leadership Crisis
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2006/09/hedging-against-nepals-leadership.html

Rudderless Diplomacy
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2006/11/rudderless-diplomacy.html

Continued Manipulation of Nepal’s Political Mainstream
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2006/12/continued-manipulation-of-nepals.html

UN Fast Losing Credibility in Nepal
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/03/un-fast-losing-credibility-in-nepal.html