Asia-Pacific, Civil Society, Headlines | Analysis

NEPAL: Deal Done or Just Discussed in Delhi?

Analysis by Marty Logan

KATHMANDU, Nov 10 2006 (IPS) - “Back off!” Nepal’s civil society told the international community after diplomats appeared on the doorsteps of senior politicians Apr. 22 urging them to accept the embattled king’s first offer to end his direct rule by naming a new prime minister.

This week, part two in the return to political normality played out in the new prime minister’s residence. But the largest foreign presence was a sprinkling of international journalists among the dozens of Nepali reporters waiting for word of a deal between the government and former Maoist rebels.

And while the United States, the strongest critic of a possible pact, continued to sound warnings in the media about the risks of letting an armed force join the government, Nepal’s giant southern neighbour India suddenly appeared out of the shadows.

On Oct. 31, Indian Ambassador to Nepal Shiv Shankar Mukherjee met Maoist leaders Prachanda and Baburam Bhattarai at the Indian embassy. Two days later, the diplomat travelled to the office of Deputy Prime Minister Amik Sherchan.

Nepal’s Foreign Minister KP Oli flew to New Delhi on Sunday but cut short his visit after the deal was announced late Tuesday night. The agreement creates an interim government that will include the Maoists, to be sworn in Dec. 1, followed by elections to a constituent assembly. Until those polls, all Maoist soldiers and their weapons will be housed in camps as will an equal number of weapons and troops of the Nepal Army.

Whether Indian intervention is a good thing depends on who one talks with. Two weeks ago senior politician Narayan Man Bijukchhe announced, “The key is stuck in Delhi”, as it became clear that the peace talks between the government and Maoists were stuck.

According to Bijukchhe, general secretary of the left-wing Nepal Workers and Peasants’ Party, India created Nepal’s Maoist problem more than a decade ago, so only its leaders could fix it.

“The Maoists trained in India and then came to Nepal. Our Nepali leaders have often gone to India (for discussions). India had great knowledge about everything the Maoists were doing – that’s why the key was in New Delhi,” he added in an interview Friday..

India’s scheme was to destabilise Nepal so that it could step in and play the role of “big brother,” fix the problems, and in the process grab control of much-needed resources, particularly water. Nepal’s large political parties have a long history of acquiescing to New Delhi’s demands in treaties and other agreements, argued Bijukchhe.

“By 2025 the population of India will double. They’ll need a lot of grain to feed those people but they can’t expand their farmland without water. Forty percent of India’s water resources come from Nepal – by 2012 they should control all of those resources,” he predicted, adding, “Now India has the upper hand.”

But others contend that New Delhi played a more positive role in Nepal’s politics than might have been expected just a year ago. “The shift of India has been just extraordinary,” says one member of the international community close to the peace process.

“It’s to the point where we might see in the next little while a Security Council mandate here – India never would have allowed even (a UN monitoring mission in Nepal) before that,” he added, requesting anonymity. That is because leaders in New Delhi were scared of setting a precedent that might be followed in Kashmir, the long disputed territory on the India-Pakistan border, or in hotspots in its northeast region, he added.

But after monitoring the operations of the UN’s human rights office in Kathmandu over the last 18 months, Indian officials appear to be more comfortable with a multilateral presence in the region, said the source. “I think that’s largely because of the experience of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights – it wasn’t bad and much of it has been good.”

“The Government of India continues to have a very positive view of the role that the UN can play,” Ian Martin, personal representative to UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, told reporters Thursday.

Martin also travelled to New Delhi for talks in recent weeks, later reporting that fighting a serious Maoist insurgency of their own, leaders there were anxious that a deal in their northern neighbour could tie them to the same solution.

They signalled their pleasure in a statement hours after Tuesday’s late-night deal. “The decisions taken by Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala on behalf of the alliance and the Maoists in the early hours of Wednesday is a victory for the Nepali people,” said Indian External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee.

But Martin cautioned Thursday that much more detailed information is needed before a comprehensive deal is complete, including the exact number of Maoist soldiers. “The first question is: when do we have sufficient clarity to do the necessary planning…that’s the responsibility of the parties.”