UN Minimum

The governments of Britain and Norway have already come forward to provide necessary assistance in the reintegration process, something the Nepal army is still resisting. Army Chief Rookmangad Katawal has been saying that he will not welcome the politically indoctrinated cadre in the army. But with the prospect of Maoists heading the new government and with the party8217;s total control over the proposed security council, Gen Katawal8217;s options are limited: to fall in line or quit. But so far his stand does carry weight.

A Department of Foreign Investment Development DFID-funded workshop scheduled in Bangkok last week on the subject was called off following objections by Prime Minister G.P. Koirala that the issue of reintegration should best be left to the Nepalis. Moreover, there are some faint voices that the British who face the charge of discriminating against the 8216;Gorkhas8217; should not be involved in the process which calls for inclusivity and reforms. Britain8217;s reputation on the issue has remained dubious as it is yet to recover from the findings of a high level probe body Sir MacPherson that claimed 8216;institutional racism8217; was rampant in the country, including in government agencies.

But the Nepal army was abandoned by all, including India. After the Royal takeover in Feb 2005, India and Britain, the two countries with whom Nepal8217;s military has had a long history of fraternity and dependence, cut off all supplies of arms and ammunitions, which is yet to resume. The US was however, still sympathetic to it. In August 2006, with the arrival of UNMIN, the 93,000-strong army was confined to the barrack and treated at par with the PLA.

Even after the army was brought under parliament with the prime minister as the supreme commander, it continued to be vilified as the king8217;s private army. It was projected as the sole violator of human rights all through the years of insurgency which began in 1996, although it deployed against the Maoists only since November 2001 onwards. Both UNMIN and the special office of the UN Human Rights OHCHR that was set up in Nepal during the king8217;s regime to oversee the human rights situation are the target of quiet fury from section of the army and the government, who claim that they are less sensitive to violations committed by the Maoists during the years of conflict.

They see it as an attempt by the UN bodies to secure term extensions. UNMIN has already succeeded while OHCHR8217;s term expires in September. OHCHR used Maina Sunwar8217;s case 8212; a 16-year old school girl and suspected Maoist who was arrested, tortured and murdered in army custody8212;as an emblematic case and gave it worldwide publicity. But it gave no such attention to violations committed by the Maoist side. Moreover, the OHCHR which had come out strongly against the royal commission of inquiry, set up to frame the leaders opposed to the king, kept silent when a similar probe body, packed with anti-monarchy civil society leader and politicians, conducted investigations in an arbitrary manner. In short, UN bodies are fast losing their credibility.

A powerful nexus of NGOs, their donors and some civil society leaders are perhaps more powerful than the government of the day. In fact, in the past 15 years, they have successfully eroded government authority. If Finance Minister Ram Sharan Mahat is to be believed, NGO funds in Nepal far exceed the government8217;s annual budget. Nepal8217;s political uncertainty has meant that political parties have not been able to form a government, ten weeks after the results to the constituent assembly were declared. One reason of the delay is clear: political parties have lost the power and right to decide independently.

ghimire.yubarajgmail.com