Musings on the April 10 election ‘shock’ in Nepal

‘Nepal election a nightmare for India’ says the Economist London



Washington, D.C., Wednesday, April 16, 2008 - The unexpected victory for the Maoists (Communist Party of Nepal) in the April 10 elections in Nepal is going to be a nightmare for India, writes the Economist London. How true!

Before the situation in Nepal and the above prescient comment, by the Economist, is discussed here in detail it is important that the ‘where’, ‘what’ and ‘when’ of NEPAL, the land-locked Himalayan, largely mountainous, buffer state is explored. The kingdom of NEPAL is sandwiched between China and India with a narrow strip of Indian land – 13 miles wide called the ‘chicken neck’– separating it from Bangladesh. The erstwhile Kingdom of Sikkim (which became a part of India under a May 1975 putsch) separates Nepal from Bhutan. Nepal is a land-locked, rectangle-shaped country (500 miles long and 125 miles wide) which has an area of 56, 827 Sq. miles with a population of  28, 901, 790 -  81% Hindu, 11% Buddhist, 4% Muslim and 4% others. Nepal exports mainly carpets, clothing, leather goods, jute goods, timber, grain, etc., – totaling about $822 million annually. It also exports Gurkha soldiers to the U.K. & India, labor to Malaysia and the Persian Gulf who send remittances back to Nepal.

There are just over 8,500 km of paved roads in Nepal, (including an all-weather road built in the 1960’s by the Chinese, which connects Nepal’s capital city, Khatmandu to Lhasa in Tibet, China. Nepal has a short 37 km long railway line in the south connecting it to India’s railway system in Bihar. China and Nepal share a 1,111-kilometer border, (which has five separate open crossings) demarcated under the Nepal-China Boundary Treaty of 1961. Astride this northern border lies Mount Everest, (called Mount Qomolangma in China and Sagarmatha in Nepal) and at an altitude of 29,035 feet (8850 m) is the highest mountain in the world shared by Nepal and China. Both these countries have enjoyed friendly relations ever since diplomatic ties were first established on Aug. 1, 1955. Nepal also has an open 1, 778 kilometer long problematic border with India. As a result there is the Kalapani border dispute, over 372 sq. km. of land which has been encroached by India. In fact India has encroached into Nepalese territory in 53 places, a total of 589 sq. km. approximately.

In 1950, Nepal signed the Indo-Nepal Treaty of Peace and Friendship? that provides for agreement about movement of people between the two countries and some other aspects of bilateral relations like bilateral trade and trade transiting Indian soil etc. Recently Communist Party of Nepal - Maoists - has been raising questions regarding some provisions of the 1950 treaty. In accordance with that ‘unequal’ long standing treaty, Indian and Nepalese citizens may travel to each others' countries without a passport or visa. Nepalese and Indian citizens may work in India and Nepal without legal restriction. Although Nepal and India typically have close ties, from time to time Nepal becomes caught up in the problematic Sino-Indian relationship when India pulls out accompanying letters to the Indo-Nepal 1950 treaty, which define security relations, whenever Nepal seeks to improve its relations with China. Tensions came to a head in the mid-1970s, when Nepal pressed for substantial amendments in its favor in the trade and transit treaty and openly criticized India's 1975 annexation of Sikkim as an Indian state.

In 1975 the then King, Birendra Bir Bikram Shah Dev proposed that Nepal be recognized internationally as a zone of peace; he received support from China and Pakistan. India rejected the proposal.  Saying that if the king's proposal did not contradict the 1950 treaty and was merely an extension of nonalignment, it was unnecessary; if it was a repudiation of the special relationship, it represented a possible threat to India's security and could not be endorsed. In 1984 Nepal repeated the proposal, but there was no reaction from India. Nepal continually promoted the proposal in international forums, with Chinese support; and by 1990 it had won the support of 112 countries. Although economic issues were a major factor in the two countries' confrontation over the Treaty, Indian dissatisfaction with Nepal's 1988 acquisition of Chinese weaponry played an important role. There after India imposed an economic blockade on Nepal which was not lifted until late April 1990 when Nepal backed down.

Since 1990, when the late King Birendra yielded to pro-democracy protests, Nepal’s experiment with democracy has been disastrous. The multi-party parliament produced incompatible coalitions and inefficient governments. Matters became worse in June 2001 when Nepal's crown prince massacred much of the royal family. Gyanendra, the murdered king’s brother, assumed the throne and Nepal's Maoist insurgency intensified. When a ceasefire with the Maoists ended in 2003, Nepalis began protesting against the monarchy. King Gyanendra responded by assuming direct rule in February 2005, which led the Maoists and mainstream political parties to ally together. A farcical election in February 2006 was followed by mass demonstrations against King Gyanendra's regime. The unrest ended when Nepal's generals asked the opposition to form a government. The king restored the parliament, and in November 2006 the Maoists and the interim government signed a peace deal. An election to a constituent assembly was set for April 10th, 2008.

The above background on Nepal will help the readers appreciate the presciently comments by the Economist, London, in it’s report, headlined, “Nepal’s Elections - Maoists Take The Lead-surprising early election results,” that, “an outright victory (in Nepal) for the Maoists would be a    (>  http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11039582  <) nightmare for India. Plagued by a Maoist insurgency of its own, India until recently backed Nepal’s blundering King Gyanendra, who tried to crush the Maoists in the field. India forsook the king after he seized power in 2005. And it played an important part in brokering the peace process after his withdrawal from power following street protests the next year. In February, for example, India persuaded autonomy-seeking southerners (mostly Hindi/Bhojpuri-speaking) of the Terai plain, not to boycott and derail the election as they were threatening to do. India said then that the election was a crucial part of the peace process—no matter what the result. But it certainly did not predict these results.  NEPAL'S Maoists, who until two years ago were a vicious rebel party to a decade-long civil war, look likely to have won a general election. Of 186 seats declared on Monday April 14th the Maoists had won 103. A complicated electoral system mixing direct elections with proportional representation makes the overall complexion of the impending 601-seat assembly still hard to predict. But the Maoists may have won an outright majority… How they would respond to Nepal’s many other problems is hard to judge. Yet it seems that they are not intent on wrecking the means of production. Promising a ‘bourgeois democratic revolution’, Prachanda, the Maoist chief, said he would dismantle Nepal’s vestiges of feudalism, not capitalism. How Nepal’s allies, especially India, would respond to a Maoist-dominated government is almost as important. Foreign aid accounts for most government spending on development, including health-care and education. Moreover India, Nepal’s biggest trading partner by far, has a stranglehold on its economy. And with an eye to China, it’s traditional rival for influence in Nepal, India jealously guards its sway over the country.”

A report in the Mumbai-based TIMES OF INDIA newspaper reveals that, “There's no doubt: there's collective shock in the Indian government about the Maoists' sweep to power in Nepal. Of course, India is making a virtue of a necessity, considering it read the tea leaves so desperately wrong. Sure, so did everybody else but India should have had a better feel of the Nepali pulse. As South Block (Ministry of External Affairs) scrambles to make sense of the election results in the Himalayan state, there is one dominant thought running through the Indian government at present - the government in Nepal should be as inclusive as possible. With the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist-Leninist or UML) already deciding to stay out of the government, South Block will redouble its efforts to ensure that the Nepali Congress does not make the same mistake. The Indian government's view is that as opposition, the Nepali Congress and UML will merely serve to make the task of constitution drafting or governance much more fractious, and intensely politicized, which would negate the verdict. Apart from drafting a constitution, the new government's main task would be to work on the country's economic development, which has taken a backseat as politics has held sway. This is where India believes it can make the most difference. China will be India's natural competitor for the new Nepal government's heart and mind. But for the time being, Beijing's main interest in the new government is to ensure the Tibetans are kept firmly under control, certainly before the Olympics. (>  http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India_assessing_Nepal_poll_results/articleshow/2951670.cms  <)

The Chennai-based HINDU newspaper wrote that, even partial results make it clear that the Maoists will be the single largest party in Nepal’s newly elected Constituent Assembly (CA). Results or leads for 200 of the 240 first-past-the-post (FPTP) seats are available and the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) has won or is ahead in more than 100. The erstwhile ‘ruling’ parties — the Nepali Congress (NC) and Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist-Leninist) — have been badly mauled and will be lucky to end up with more than 40 seats each. The newly established Madhesi parties, especially the Madhesi Janadhikar Forum, have done well and are likely to bag about 40 seats. The Royalist parties have been wiped out. For the new arrangement to work smoothly, all the major political players in Nepal need to accept the new power balance. Official India, which erroneously worked on the assumption of a Maoist defeat in the elections, also needs to accept the reality of Maoist ascendancy. In practical terms, this means not standing in the way of the Maoists heading the multi-party coalition that will rule Nepal until the new constitution is finalized and fresh elections are held. The Maoists have won the democratic right to lead now. Their spectacular victory seals the fate of the monarchy.” (>   http://www.thehindu.com/2008/04/14/stories/2008041454901000.htm      <) 

A report in the Khatmandu-based NEPALNEWS today says that “The Maoists have won 116 of the 212 constituencies in which the vote counting has completed till Tuesday morning. Nepali Congress (NC)  is a distant second with 33 seats followed by Unified Marxist Leninist (UML) at 29 seats. (>  http://www.nepalnews.com/archive/2008/apr/apr15/news02.php   <) The Madhesi Janadhikar Forum (MJF) has won 21 seats while Terai Madhes Loktantrik Party (TMLP) bagged 7 seats. Nepal Sadbhavana Party (NSP) led by Rajendra Mahato and Nepal Workers and Peasants Party (NWPP) have won 2 seats each. An independent candidate and a People's Front candidate have also won the election. Now, the counting needs to be conducted in 27 constituencies of which in 21 constituencies, re-polling have to be first carried out in certain polling centers. Of the total 240 constituencies in the First-Past-The-Post system, the Maoists are very close to garnering simple majority.”

India’s nightmare, as predicted by the Economist, may have already begun! According to a BBC report, dated April 14, 2008, headlined, ‘India hit by two Maoist attacks,’ Maoist rebels, in the Indian state of Bihar, (which borders Nepal) surrounded and attacked Jhajha railway station in Jamui district, (>  http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/south_asia/7345850.stm <) last Sunday, killing five policemen and a porter, as if their action was synchronized with the Maoist victory at the polls  in Nepal. India’s Maoist (read Naxalite) armed rebellion, which is spreading fast, like a prairie fire, has a strong presence in about 22 districts of Bihar as well as in the neighboring state of Jharkhand. The BBC quoting Analysts, reports that India’s Maoists operate in 182 districts (actually they operate in 265 districts) in India, mainly in the states of West Bengal, Bihar, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, Orissa, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh. These states provide a land corridor (covered with dense jungles) for the Maoists in Nepal and the Indian Naxalites in each of the above states and in areas beyond like Tamil Nadu. See map of Indian states at: >  http://www.mapsofindia.com/maps/india/india-political-map.htm   <

The other nightmare for oligarchic India will unfold when Nepal’s Maoists, led by Chairman Parchanda, decide to do what he has promised to do, to place Nepal at an equal distance from both China and India thus ending India’s 60-years long hegemony over the small buffer state of Nepal. Another nightmare for caste-ridden India will begin when, under ‘Parchandaism’, Nepal’s Maoists implement their declared social policies, which besides scrapping a discredited Nepalese monarchy, will include a fight not only against caste-based discrimination, but a campaign to end the deprivation of tribal groups and the exploitation of landless laborers. For poor Nepalese (and their first ‘cousins’ the ‘unwashed’ muscular Naxalites in India), all this makes a popular message.

Nearly two years ago, this column carried a presciently headline, on August 30, 2006, which predicted that, “All is not well for India in Nepal where the shadow of China (and Indian Naxalites) looms - Interesting times ahead as China is extending Railway line from Lhasa to the Nepal border,” while reporting that, “The Indian rulers are in a tizzy over an interview, given to BBC's Nepali service program, by Nepal's powerful Maoist supremo Parchanda, in which he has said, that the people of Kashmir and India’s North Eastern states (like Nagaland) should be given the right to self-determination to resolve the problem. To read the August 20, 2006, Khalistan Calling click at >  http://www.khalistan-affairs.org/home/khalistancalling/2006/august30.aspx  <

One must never forget, that the India’s Naxalites (and their ‘cousins’ the Maoists of Nepal) believe that they are fighting a just war against the ruthless, suffocating, and morally repugnant  Hindu caste system for the rights of poor peasants and landless workers. In sharp contrast, the insecure Indian rulers – an evil nexus of the minority Brahmin and the Bania castes - are trying to obtain security by buying second hand Russian Aircraft Carriers, American Tank landing ships and Brahmo missiles et al., all, ineffective against the Naxalites, who move on two legs and whose writ rules supreme in over 265 Districts of India to-date. Indeed interesting times are coming!