Carter adds to confusion

Koirala is my hero: Carter

The security situation is unacceptable: Carter

Since the Maoists are partially disarmed, the US must communicate with them: Carter

Kathmandu: A close look at what the ex-President of the United States said of Koirala, the security situation prevailing in the country and of the Maoists, if woven in a single thread, what become clear is that Carter himself got confused looking at the overall political situation of this country and thus prior to his departure he appears to have decided that he should add more confusion in a country whose population are already confused as to what would happen the next moment. He exhibited his sheer dilemma while talking to the press and thus made self-contradictory statements. Analysts say that personalities at this eighty-plus age can do function no better than what did Carter, though all in his modesty.

For Carter or for that matter for any outsider, Koirala is definitely a hero who has, as it appears to be in effect, no parallel in contemporary world, but the same Koirala is a burden for the countrymen-more so for the Maoists- for a variety of political reasons.

First, the Indian proxy prime minister Dr. Man Mohan Singh and now Jimmy Carter are all praise of Koirala who in effect is a defunct political personality who neither could attend the parliament nor could stay full time in the cabinet under him nor even he could well remember as to what he said the previous day.

Now coming back to carter and his brief sojourn in Kathmandu.

Admittedly, he came, saw and left the Nepali population to guess as to what he was up to.

In one word, ex-President of the United States confused the Nepali people more than what was expected of him on the contrary. An already confused people have had to gulp yet another chunk of confusion.

But even then a sober Jimmy Carter appears to have agreed to disagree with his own country’s Ambassador, James F. Moriarty over the Young Communist League activities.

Jimmy Carter in a subtle manner appreciated the recent activities of the Communist League cadres which are in sharp contrast with what the general population and some countries posted in Kathmandu possess fore the Maoists affiliate. Is it because he is a democrat and hence he might have taken for granted what the Maoists leaders’ told him of the YCL that the latter are allowed to “reform”? If so then Carter must be very close to the European Union countries who also view the entire Maoists paraphernalia as a party that would take some time to “reform”.  However, the YCL is still creating panic and horror in the western region of the country says Sher bahadur Deuba.

It is at this point Ambassador Moriarty appears to have miserably failed in convincing his ex-president on the conducts of the Maoists cadres.

This was the one point where the current American Administration might “differ” with Carter’s report when he submits it to the perusal of the US authority back in Washington. President Bush will have tough time on whom to believe? His own representative who has thoroughly studied the Maoists or his ex-president-a fatherly figure indeed?

What was surprising of it all, as to why President Carter preferred to talk to Indian Ambassador Shiv Shanker Mukherjee? What could have been the connection? Is it that Carter being himself a democrat preferred to listen to Indian Ambassador Mukherjee version over the unfolding Nepal events because India was a democratic country which it is not?   

Then why this preference?

Analysts bluntly say that Carter did commit a blunder of Himalayan dimension for he should have equally provided importance and significance to the Chinese Ambassador. The reason is simple: If Carter presumed that any political turmoil in Nepal primarily affected India and India alone then he is simply mistaken. The said political turmoil inside Nepali territory also would have its negative impact on Chinese security in the adjoining borders. Carter ignored this reality and hence committed a blunder, speaking on political terms.

Or is it that Carter wanted to expose India for having a “greater say” in Nepali affairs and hence what has been described as a “thorough” meet between the two. This is a fact perhaps Carter knew in advance or even if he did not, then Ambassador Moriarty must have briefed him at his private residence the next morning of his arrival in Kathmandu.

Analysts here conclude that Carter’s one to one meet with Indian envoy now thoroughly exposes India for it more ways than one tells the sorry tale as to how much Indian political influence this country has to endure coming as it does from across the border. The Indian influence and political penetration in Nepal thus stands out in the open.

However, what Ambassador Mukherjee told Carter is any body’s guess. He can’t differ with the current line acquired by the South Block which is to strengthen the unity in between the Seven Party Alliances but not the Eight Party Alliances. The Indian authorities want to corner India hundred percent.

Carter may have disagreed with his own country’s Ambassador on so many topics but then where they both stood in common was the question of “deteriorating law and order situation” in this country of late.

“The present law and order situation is unacceptable and that a safe and secure environment is a core requirement for progress in the transition process”.

Carter goes on to say, “Every democratic country in the world has a strong police force as part of its civil administration and that the role of the police is to protect the people and make them feel safe”.

He adds, “The Nepal police force do not appear to have the adequate political support nor the confidence of the Nepali people and this is of critical concern to me”.

More or less, the US Ambassador Moriarty had said so in Pokhara a day ahead of Carter’s presence in Nepal.

Should this mean that Carter’s statement as regards the Nepal police will be taken well by the Koirala government?  Koirala appears to have become sensitive but he can do little to improve the law and order situation. His man  handling the internal security machinery is simply a proven duffer.

Intelligent brains are quick enough to compare the assurances made by Prachanda to Carter as regards the erratic activities of the YCL activists with what the former told of the Madhesi outfits around the same time in Kirtipur, from where he proceeded towards the Hotel to meet President Carter.

Prachanda has said openly that “Enough has become enough and that his party can now not remain silent when its cadres are being killed by the Madhesi outfits in Terai”.

But Prachanda also made it clear that he would for this purpose will have both: carrot and stick.

Prachanda’s assurances to Carter for opting non-violence have coincided with the same criterion pushed by the Madhesi Janadhikar Forum members who met with President Carter.

However, given the ground reality and the reality has been that the Maoists definitely have lost some of their cadres, how the assurances made by both the arch rivals will translate into action will have to be watched.

What was adjudged as the best of the Carter’s meet with the press was that this American dignitary talked of transforming Nepal into an all pervasive inclusive society.

Talking of the Janajatis and the marginalized groups, Carter says, “Their concerns are legitimate and I support them”.

Posted on : 2007-06-20 08:04:56

Comments (0)