Professor Durga D. Poudel, USA
King Gyanendra and CA’s Declaration:
King Gyanendra ascended to the throne in 2001 AD. In his proclamation, King Gyanendra had said “…deshma utpanna bhayeka yi ashya shok ka ghadi ma hami sabai Nepaliharu marmahat bhayeka chhaun. Hamro mulukmathi yek pachhi arko gari aai pareka dukhha daiparisthiti harulai hami sabai Nepalile shanhadai dhairya purbak aafno kartbya ra daitwo lai bahan garnu parne bela aayeko chha. Nepalko itihas ma aai pareko yes aaklapaniya aabastha ko anuchit phaida leyi hamro rastriya ekta, sowtantrata, ra rastriyatalai samet kamjor parna sakne pryas huna sakne bhayekale hami sabai Nepali sachet hundai ekjut hunu pareko chha. Kastai bipatti aai parda pani nahadbadai samana garna ek hune Nepali ko parampara kayamai rakhnu aajako aabaskata bhayeko chha.”
While Nepal had undergone through the Maoist war for the past 10 years, the immediate task for King Gyanendra was establishing law and order in the nation and restoring peace. As the political complexity worsened, King Gyanendra dismissed the parliament that was elected in 1999, and supported Sher Bahadur Deuba as the Prime Minister on 26 July, 2001.
With rising political complexities, on May 2002, Prime Minister Deuba requested the King for dissolving the parliament and holding fresh elections.
Accordingly, King Gyanendra dissolved the parliament on Wednesday May 22, 2002 and declared fresh elections to be held on November 13th, 2002. On October 4, 2002, King Gyanendra dismissed the Deuba government because PM Deuba could not hold the election scheduled on November 13th 2002 and requested for the postponement of the general elections. A new government was formed under the premiership of Mr. Lokendra Bahadur Chand.
On June 4, 2004, Mr. Deuba was again reappointed as a Prime Minister (this is the third time Mr. Deuba being the PM of the country) by King Gyanendra.
However, the nation continued going through an extremely fluid political situation.
On February 1, 2005, King Gyanendra dismissed the Deuba government for the second time, and took the nation under his direct rule.
Widespread protest against the King’s direct rule continued both in domestic as well as in international arenas.
The 12-point agreement reached in New Delhi and Jana Andolan II:
Direct involvement of India on signing the historic 12-point agreement between the Maoists and the Seven Party Alliance (SPA) on 22 November, 2005, in New Delhi, India, clearly raises doubts and questions on Nepalese nationalism, sovereignty, national integrity, and on her independence.
It shows an extreme submissiveness of Nepalese political leaders to foreign powers compromising Nepalese national pride, integrity, and identity.
The heavy and direct involvement of India on Nepalese internal matters becomes clear from a news report from India News Online on November 14, 2005. According to this news report, the Indian Prime Minister Dr. Manamohan Singh and King Gyanendra met on the sideline of the Dhaka SAARC summit, and the Indian PM was “…set to convey a hard message arguing that the King has not delivered on key “democracy promises” he made at their last meeting in Jakarta in May.” And, it further stated that “Political parties in Nepal have forged an alliance and plan to launch a nationwide campaign within the next couple of weeks. India has been in touch with these leaders. Close on the heels of the visit by the General Secretary of the Communist Party of Nepal (UML), Madhav Kumar Nepal, the Nepali Congress leader, Girija Prasad Koirala, will be coming to Delhi this week.”
The 12-point agreement in New Delhi was the result of a number of visits of New Delhi by Nepalese political leaders. Mr. Madhav Nepal went to Delhi on October 23, 2005 for medical check-up and stayed in Delhi until November 11, 2005. Mr. G.P. Koirala reached Delhi for medical check-up on November 10, 2005, and Mr. Madhav Nepal met Mr. G.P. in Delhi before he left for Kathmandu on November the 11th. The 12-point agreement in New Delhi was signed for:
1) Ending of the autocratic monarchy,
2) Reinstatement of the parliament,
3) Election to Constituent Assembly by having UN or a dependable international body for arm monitoring of Maoists and RNA and to ensure free and fair CA election,
4) CPN-M accepting multiparty democracy, returning seized lands and properties by the Maoists, not repeating the past mistakes by both the political parties and the Maoists, respect for human rights and freedom of press, boycotting the Municipal and the Parliamentary Polls set by the Nepal Government, launching people’s movement, and taking actions for guilty.
Prof. Sushil Raj Pandey has stated on TelegraphNepal.com on September 3, 2009, that “And if, we were to believe Mr. Narayan Man Bijukche then the original draft of the 12-point agreement was prepared in Hindi language.”
In April 2006, Jana Andolan II started and eventually the King reinstated the 1999 parliament through a televised national address on April 24, 2006.
On May 18, 2006, the reinstated parliamentary government severely stripped the King’s power and, to the surprise of most Nepalese citizens, Nepal was declared a secular state.
Through the amendments of interim constitution, again to the surprise of most Nepalese, the Seven Party Alliance (SPA) and the Maoists declared Nepal a federal nation.
After completing the CA election on April 10, 2008, the parliament voted against the Monarchy and declared Nepal a republican state on May 28, 2008.
On June 11, 2008, King Gyanendra briefed the press and stated that he accepted the CA’s decision.
King Gyanendra declared that he had no property outside Nepal, asserted that he loved Nepal and Nepalese people, and did not want to leave Nepal. He left the Narayanhiti palace for his temporary residence in Nagarjun palace.
Granting Nepalese citizenship without thorough investigation to more than four million people by the interim government was a very hasty and unexpected decision from the government that emerged out of the 12-point Delhi agreement. While an estimated over 4 million people living in Terai reportedly had citizenship problem, the citizenship bill approved on November 24, 2006 by the interim government promised granting citizenship to these people before the CA election.
Reportedly, many people from Indian origin were also living in Nepal, complicating the citizenship issue. The political parties were found keen on granting citizenships to consolidate their vote banks in this region.
Any major error in the process may prove to be fatal for Nepalese nationalism. This issue of citizenship was halted at least twice by King Birendra.
The Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), 2006, and the United Nations Mission in Nepal (UNMIN):
The “Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), 2006” signed by the Prime Minister G.P. Koirala and the Maoist Chairman Prachanda on 21 November, 2006, following the re-instatement of the 7-year old parliament by the King, defines the two conflicting parties as “the government” which was led by G.P. Koirala, one of the political leaders from the SPA-Maoists pact, and Maoists, another member of the same pact in post-conflict Nepal.
With respect to the Monarchy, the peace agreement reads “3.3 No rights of state administration shall remain with the King.
Bring the properties of late King Birendra, late Queen Aishwarya and their family members under the control of the Nepal government and use it for the welfare purposes through a trust.
All properties acquired by King Gyanendra by the virtue of him being the King (like palaces of various places, forests and conservation areas, heritage having historical and archaeological importance) shall be nationalized.
Determine the fate of the institution of monarchy by the first meeting of the Constituent Assembly through simple majority vote.”
This stipulation completely ignores the people’s right on the determination of the fate of 240-years old institution of the monarchy in Nepal. No referendum was considered necessary to abolish monarchy.
Another point in the peace agreement states that “3.5 End the existing centralized and unitary state system and restructure it into an inclusive, democratic progressive system to address various problems including that of women, Dalits, indigenous community, Madhesis, oppressed, ignored and minority communities, backward regions by ending prevailing class, ethnic, linguistic, gender, cultural, religious and regional discrimination.”
This is the stipulation for federalism in Nepal. GP government and the Maoists party did not bother the rights of common citizens in deciding the system of governance the Unitary vs. the Federal system.
In relation to secularism, the Comprehensive Peace Agreement states that “7.1.5. On the basis of secularism, both the sides shall respect social, cultural and religious sensitivity, and shall respect the religious conscience of a religious place or an individual.”
Again, Mr. G.P. Koirala and the Maoists did not see any need for referendum on deciding the fate of the only Hindu nation in the world!
With respect to Nepal Army, the CPA stipulates that “4.6 The Nepal Army would be confined to the barracks as per the commitments expressed in the letter sent to the United Nations.
Guarantee that its arms would not be used for or against any side.
Keep similar quantity of arms of the Nepal Army in the store, seal it with single-lock system and give the key to the concerned side.
For the UN to monitor it, a device with siren as well as recording facility will be installed. When there is need to examine the stored arms, the UN would do so in the presence of the concerned side.
Prepare the details of technological arrangement including camera for monitoring as per the agreement among the Nepal government, the Maoists and the United Nations.”
On November 28, 2006, the government and the CPN(Maoists) signed another agreement “Agreement on Monitoring of the Management of Arms and Armies, 28 November 2006” and declared that “The parties agree to seek UN assistance in monitoring the management of the arms and armies of both sides by the deployment of qualified UN civilian personnel to monitor, according to international norms, the confinement of Maoist army combatants and their weapons within designated cantonment areas and monitor the Nepal Army (NA) to ensure that it remains in its barracks and its weapons are not used against any side.”
It is worthy of mentioning here the incidence of sending three separate but similar letters, coming from Prime minister Mr. Girija Prasad Koirala, dated 9 August, 2006, another letter from Maoists Chairman Mr. Pushpa Kamal Dahal, dated 9 August, 2006, and yet, another letter dated 16 November, 2006, coming from Deputy Prime Minister K.P. Oli, requesting UN’s involvement in Nepal’s peace processes prior to signing the CPA on November 21, 2006. What a clear example of the lack of coordination and confidence among Nepalese political leaders!
The UN Secretary General, Mr. Kofi Annan, presented the Nepalese request for peace process to the Security Council on November 27, 2006, after signing the Comprehensive Peace agreement by the Seven Party Alliance (SPA) in the Government and the Maoists on 21 November, 2006.
Then beginning 2007, through the UNMIN, the UN officially enters into Nepal’s peace process based on the Comprehensive Peace Agreement. In relation to the UN’s involvement, it is noteworthy to mention here that the 12-point agreement reached between the CPN (Maoists) and the Seven Party Alliance in New Delhi on November 22, 2005, also mentions about UN’s possible involvement on monitoring CA election, thus officially inviting an international agency for the first time in history of Nepal in solving her domestic matters.
Will Nepalese history forgive our political leaders?
Just by going through the available quarterly Reports of the Secretary-General to the Security Council from January 2007 to October 2009, it is obvious that the progress on the peace process in Nepal was not satisfactory.
The 9 January 2007 Report of the Secretary-General hailed the 12-point agreement that was reached between the Seven Party Alliance (SPA) and Maoists on November 22, 2005 as “The ground-breaking understanding” and further stated that “In April 2006, mass demonstrations across the country, with strong participation by women and marginalized groups, brought the end to the King’s direct rule, led to the restoration of Parliament and a mutual ceasefire, and opened the way for further negotiations between the Alliance and CPN(M).”
Various media and interviews from the UNMIN chief as well the report to the Security Council by secretary-general clearly indicates that the progress on the peace process was extremely unsatisfactory.
Major issues such as integration and rehabilitation of 19,200 Maoists combatants living in the cantonment, and discharge and rehabilitation of 4,008 unqualified Maoists combatants were very challenging.
Fragmented Nepalese Nationalism:
It is obvious that due to irrational political atmosphere, conflicting political interests, lack of a clear definition on national agendas and issues for political stability, communal harmony, and national integrity and sovereignty, Nepal’s nationalist force is highly fragmented, scattered, and fragile.
Giving nation the first priority, Nepalese must jointly oppose any sort of direct or indirect intervention from foreign powers in relation to the formation or a collapse of a government, signing international agreements, making decisions on national interests such as monarchy, secularism, and federalism, or safeguarding national interest and sovereignty.
There should be no excuse for any compromise with regard to Nepalese pride, national integrity, sovereignty, and nationalism when dealing with the foreign powers.
Unfortunately, Nepalese are so seriously politically opinionated and divided that personal interests, gains, ethnic agendas, regional issues, and family and clan’s betterment override national issues and causes.
This kind of mindset and attitude is extremely counterproductive to nationalism as well as nation’s independence and sovereignty.
Nepalese political leaders, political parties, and all stakeholders must sit together and clearly define appropriate political discourse that is most suited for Nepal and Nepalese society, and strive for its establishment and cultivation. Nepalese nationalists must be united, define their common agendas in the interest of the nation, and rescue this glorious nation from falling into a complete disaster.
Future generations will be happy and admire us if they inherit a peaceful, culturally sound, prosperous, harmonious, independent, and sovereign nation.
Nepalese People’s Concern:
Despite all these political developments, the Nepalese are seriously worried with respect to various issues and concerns. These issues and concerns can be listed as followings:
(1) The declaration of republican state, secularism, and federalism by the reinstated parliament and the CA without bringing these vital issues of national importance in discussions and debate to the general public,
(2) Deteriorating law and order conditions,
(3) Vanishing national identity,
(4) Worsening economic conditions, and food shortage,
(5) Increasingly irresponsible and unpatriotic leadership,
(6) Rising ethnic, linguistic, racial, and regional conflicts,
(7) Excessive nepotism and misuse of national resources,
(8) Luxurious living styles and corrupt mentality of the party leaders,
(9) Lack of leadership qualities such as trustworthiness, honesty, loyalty to the public, calmness, intelligence, patriotism, and vision among the political leaders, and
(10) Eroding national integrity, independence, and sovereignty.
Foreign intervention:
The issue of regular foreign interventions in Nepal’s internal affairs is evident.
However, a few examples here may further add to this issue. After his coronation, according to available literature in an interview with Newsweek magazine, King Birendra stated that the basic problems of Nepal “…are development and preservation of our identity as a nation.”
How much foreign pressure is involved in the governance of Nepal can simply be gauged by the statements of various leaders at different times.
Mr. Pushpa Kamal Dahal resigned from the PM post citing the presence of tremendous and unjust foreign pressures in the governance of Nepal.
It is a well-established fact that when a nation is plunged into ethnic, political, and religious conflicts, and is in the grip of foreign powers, sooner or later, it will eventually succumb to a civil war and then into national disintegration.
Unfortunately, Nepal is exactly passing through this phase.
Therefore, it is urgent for Nepal to solidify its national integrity, and preserve its national independence and sovereignty without any further delay.
National Identity, Nationalism, and Future Political Discourse:
Considering the geopolitical situation of the nation, we should expect continuous foreign pressures, often challenging our national identity and integrity.
In addition, due to globalization, global climate change, and an international emphasis on regional programs and policies for resource development and utilization, the foreign pressures in Nepal’s governance will further increase.
Nepal must build its capacity to tackle these pressures effectively.
Historically, Nepal had gone through the cycle of national unification, disintegration, and then re-unification.
There is a real danger of national disintegration if the current socio-economic and the political situations are not handled wisely and correctly.
It is extremely important for Nepal to develop a political system that restricts or discourages foreign intervention in the domestic affairs of the nation.
The new political system must be able to preserve and to develop national identity.
The time has come for every Nepalese and friends of Nepal to rise above their difference on politics, ideologies, ethnicities, cultures, languages, religions, genders, races, etc., and develop a robust and genuine political system that preserves and develops Nepal’s national identity, and ensures the national integrity, independence, sovereignty, prosperity, and peace.
###################
Source: Devi Prasad Sharma: Aadhunik Nepalko Itihas; Surya Thapa: Nepalma Rajtantra ra
dalharu bichko sangharsa; Siddhi B. Ranjitkar: Nepal-India Treaties; and Several Internet
Sites.
# This is an excerpt of the author’s presentation as a featured speaker to the Lafayette Chapter of the Phi Beta Delta International Honor Society at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette, Lafayette, Louisiana, U.S.A., on October 13, 2009).
# The third part and the concluding of this article will appear in December, 2021: Ed.