Politics and terror in Nepal

THE INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENT seems to have encouraged the Nepalese Government to take a stern view of the Maoist rebels of the Himalayan kingdom at the present moment. With the U.S.-led `campaign' against international terror dominating the global political discourse, the Nepalese authorities have hardly had to worry about defining terrorism at home in a sweeping manner that would cover the communist insurgents. To say this is not to belittle the troubles that Nepal's fragile democratic order and civil society have had to endure on account of the activities of the self-styled Maoists for several years now. Yet, the current international mood may explain why Nepal's latest moves against the Maoists appear to have been viewed quite positively by some major powers. In promulgating a state of emergency at this time, Nepal's monarch has followed the letter and spirit of the country's Constitution by acting on the advice of the Prime Minister, Mr. Sherbahadur Deuba, and his Council of Ministers. The emergency order has been rendered more effective by the exhaustive conceptualisation of terrorism in a parallel exercise. The latest Terrorism and Disruptive Activities Control and Punishment Ordinance leaves little to the imagination or the interpretative skills of the authorities. This does not damage Nepal's case for peace and stability at home. These new legal measures, if implemented with a measurable degree of empathy for the poor people's ``causes'', may in fact enhance the welfare- oriented course of politics in Nepal. For about a decade now, the kingdom has been struggling valiantly to sustain a people- friendly democracy in the context of the abolition of absolute monarchy as a revolutionary event of contemporary history.

For the first time since the Maoists began their campaign against the conventional-style politics of Nepal's lively democracy, these anti-establishment forces are reported to have taken their `war' directly into the camp of the country's army itself. This aspect, amplified by the conspicuously violent strikes against the symbols of authority at this time, is widely recognised as the immediate justification for not only the latest nationwide emergency but also the related anti-terror focus. The traditional concepts of anti-state subversion and threats to an established order have now been virtually equated with terrorism. While this will lend itself to a general debate that is germane to political science and the practice of statecraft, the Nepalese context is not without instances of civil disorder that subjects the people to hardship.

Official India has shown no hesitation while endorsing the steps that Mr. Deuba has now taken. It is arguable that the Nepalese Prime Minister deserves the benefit of the doubt because of his recent efforts to engage the Maoist rebels in a dialogue over the future of Nepal. Yet, New Delhi will be well advised to guard its own steps as it considers helping the Nepalese military forces in combating the kingdom's Maoists in their new identity as terrorists. India's geopolitical interest is to convert Nepal into a terror-free zone in every sense of the term. The suspected links between Nepal's communist extremists and the people's-war groups and others of their ilk in India, or for that matter China, constitute only one facet of the Himalayan kingdom's worries. Moreover, New Delhi wants to see that one or more powers `hostile' to it cannot have an easy access to Nepal as a staging post for any anti-India terrorist activities such as the plane hijack at Kathmandu nearly two years ago. In all, however, prudence and political transparency must govern India's moves to help Nepal at this juncture.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Opinion
Previous : Laloo's gimmicks
Next     : Anti-political politics