A Most Sinister Proposal Against Nepal

[Guest guest]

A Most Sinister Proposal Against Nepal

By M.R. Josse

 

Without doubt, one of the most objectionable aspects of the pact

between the Seven Party Alliance and the Maoists of November 22 is

the proposal that the weapons of the Maoist militia, as well as that

possessed by the Royal Nepal Army, should be kept under the

supervision of the UN or some such "international body" prior to

elections for a constituent assembly.

 

EQUATION UNTENABLE

To focus here only on the arms supervision aspect of that dubious

deal, executed away from the light of public transparency, what must

be rejected outright is the attempt to equate Maoist rebels with

State security forces.

 

Or, what must be denounced is the sinister move to place the legally

constituted State on par with a ruthless, foreign-inspired insurgency

that has launched a 10-year "people's war" for the proclaimed purpose

of its overthrow by force of arms.

 

Clearly, formal acceptance of such an egregious proposal would

legitimise the blatant, widespread use of force and terror for ten

long years not only against the State's security apparatus. It would,

besides, condone the mindless violence that the rebels have cynically

perpetrated against innocent civilians in that time span.

 

Furthermore, it would overlook the cruel disruption to family life

for hundreds of thousands through displacement, and the wanton

destruction of precious public property, including developmental

infrastructure.

 

The attempt to acquire through backdoor means what the Maoists have

not been able to secure on the battlefield also flies in the face of

both history and common sense.

 

That aside, acceptance of deals such as that cut and solemnised

between the SPA and the Maoists would set a grave precedent for the

future. It would, for example, encourage other groups of disgruntled

people, or those ever eager to dance to the tune of extraneous

forces, to take up arms for this or that cause.

 

When would such a never-ending viscous cycle of violence against the

legally constituted State come to an end? Is Nepal's future cursed to

be a Sysyphean tale of unending civil strife and turmoil?

 

Moreover, how can anyone in one breath talk of democracy and human

rights and, in another, consciously encourage a climate of

lawlessness and violence or seek to reward violence and terror

against a State based on the rule of law?

 

UNDERMINING SOVEREIGNTY

Coming, now, to the issue of placing the weapons in the possession of

the Royal Nepal Army under the supervision of the UN or other

such "international organisation", that would be tantamount to

undermining the sovereignty of the State.

 

Such a proposal is thus totally abhorrent to those who value Nepal's

independence and sovereignty. For a national Army that has had a

glorious history, including in defence of the motherland and in the

consolidation of Nepal as a nation-state, such a proposal is thus

nothing short of a preposterous insult to Nepali nationhood itself.

 

Given the Indian context to the 12-point contract between the

dissenting parties and the Maoists, I must ask: would a proposal to

place the arms possessed by the Indian Army under UN supervision or

that of an "international organisation", along side that of the ULFA

force or militants in Jammu and Kashmir that have been fighting for

decades for their respective causes against the Indian State, be

considered legitimate?

 

Finally, in the context of arms supervision mentioned above, I must

admit to great unease to the reference to some other "international

organisation." Could it be that such a formulation is designed to

pave the way for foreign forces of countries that have, in one way or

another, sought to undermine this nation, including the Royal Nepal

Army?

 

http://newsblaze.com/story/20051208132138nnnn.nb/newsblaze/OPINIONS/Op

inions.html

2005, NewsBlaze, Daily News

 

--- End forwarded message ---